Artsy things on occasions

Reblogged from tiredtief

heroineimages:

theredscreech:

random-oc-questions-fairy:

Oh my gosh. I just found this website that walks you though creating a believable society. It breaks each facet down into individual questions and makes it so simple! It seems really helpful for worldbuilding!

Heads up that this is a very extensive questionnaire and might be daunting to a lot of writers (myself included). That being said, it is also an amazing questionnaire and I will definitely be using it (or at the very least, some of it).

Bookmarking this…

Reblogged from anthropologist-on-the-loose

leebrontide:

myfootyrthroat:

bees-and-mice-and-frogs-and:

myfootyrthroat:

myfootyrthroat:

official-torfmoor:

myfootyrthroat:

myfootyrthroat:

When the health food store unionized, something wild happened that I thought was just a goofy one-off, but makes more sense now.

There was a big push to eliminate “degrading jobs” but the strategy was to eliminate the position, then create a new position outside of the bargaining unit to do the work. So like, we wouldn’t have dishwashers, but we’d have people who washed dishes that weren’t eligible to be in the union.

I was like A) what the actual fuck? Dish washing isn’t “degrading”, it’s fucking vital. B) What the actual fuck? You want to create a union just to exploit different people?

There were enough of us to be like “Absolutely the fuck not,” and put a stop to it, but I was absolutely flummoxed that people involved in a union would say that out loud. Working with more leftists now, it makes sense.

I think it was coming from a background that viewed labor as necessary to accomplish anything, but advocated for the equitable distribution of the gains made by labor… and then being thrown in with people who just thought labor was icky.

The first time someone told me that busing tables was “degrading”, I was like “Oh, uhh, yeah, like it’s very necessary work but under compensated for how vital it is?” and they responded “No, touching plates that other people have eaten off of is disgusting.”

But I want to eat off of clean plates. So somebody is going to have to touch/clean those plates. And I respect that person and want them to be able to afford to live.

Those people sound like a guy I’d make up to be mad at.

I mean, that job definitely had a Truman Show vibe. If they hadn’t been in-person interactions, I’d think I was getting trolled.

Just to put a bow on it:

In bargaining, someone on the Union side suggested that we eliminate all the cashiers and exclusively use self-checkouts (they were a cashier and didn’t like it). The organizer told them that the union wasn’t in the habit of eliminating bargaining unit positions. (This is the same person I’ve talked about how said that “as a prison abolitionist” we just needed to execute most criminals.)

When I explained holiday scheduling (time off requests granted in order of seniority, shifts assigned in reverse order of seniority). Someone was angry and said that time off requests potentially being denied “wasn’t in the spirit of the union”. When I pointed out that our departments made like 30% of our annual revenue between Thanksgiving and New Years and that required production staff to be working, they said that we just needed to create a class of positions ineligible for the bargaining unit that wouldn’t be able to request time off. (Which again, most of us figured we’d just rotate holidays or something, but assumed that some holiday production was mandatory.)

I was on leftie tiktok (as a creator) for a bit and I saw this attitude there as well. I specifically remember one argument around cleaners where someone said that employing a cleaner was, like, ethically bad, and that “after the revolution” we wouldn’t have cleaners.

It got me thinking, along with Ann Russell talking about how to treat cleaners (being a cleaner herself), about how we conceptualise domestic service as particularly degrading in all its forms, when, really, why is that? Why is paying someone to do something intrinsically bad?

Like, even in a moneyless, gift economy society, there would still be people whose primary contribution to their communities would be cleaning. Some people like to clean, and are really rather good at it.

I’ve talked ad nauseam in the past about how British attitudes towards cleaners and other service based positions today are the descendants of Victorian attitudes. That is, both the attitudes of conservatives and many progressives of that time. The trade union movement was particularly exclusionary towards service workers.

I think people on the left thinking about forms of labour can sometimes be worse than people on the right. People who have taken these positions generally just conceptualise them as something you need to do to get by, and there are particular employers where these positions are degrading but in general the jobs themselves aren’t.

Yeah, that really sums it up. There’s stuff that needs to get done, so I’ll never be of the opinion that it’s degrading work. I worked in kitchens for a long time, and every other position is reliant on having clean dishes, so nobody can really be “above” washing dishes. The shitty thing about washing dishes or busing tables is how people treat the people doing it. The work itself is vital.

And some of those jobs are like, sure, you can throw almost any warm body at it and get it done adequately, but you still run into people where you’re like “Holy shit, you’re good at this.”

People doing a job most people don’t want to do should be paid MORE in order to get people to do it. That’s how it would work if we weren’t mired in a schema assuming that less-frequently-desired jobs are the province of people who “can’t do better” and “deserve” poverty because they have less value as people.

Reblogged from historicity-was-already-taken

historicity-was-already-taken:

argyraeus:

chaotic-archaeologist:

jkateel:

(Sound on.) We’re all doomed.

History and related historical professionals straight up not having a good time right now.

@historicity-was-already-taken

Originally posted by allthings-disney-blog

Reblogged from tiredtief

skiplo-wave:

skiplo-wave:

With stroke going on and everyone catching up on shows/movies they couldn’t watch

I highly recommend watching old OLD films

Btw there’s YouTuber that posts film noirs with backgrounds on actors, sets, and directors AND there are zero ads

Full Moon Matinee

Full Moon Matinee

YouTube

Reblogged from plantpalfynn

enbycrip:

enbycrip:

I’m reposting this with a link to some sources from the OP, btw; I’m sorry for not tagging them, but Tumblr won’t let me and I’m guessing it’s a privacy settings thing.

https://www.academuseducation.co.uk/post/ancient-mesopotamian-transgender-and-non-binary-identities

Ancient Mesopotamian Transgender and Non-Binary Identities - by Morg Daniels

There is evidence of complex gender identities in Ancient Mesopotamia, particularly in the cult of the goddess Inanna and her priests.

Academus Education

Reblogged from bane-of-technology

officialbabayaga:

officialbabayaga:

i just invented a cathedral rose window granny square pattern and i feel insane now

Not me writing up an entire granny square pattern instead of studying :)

I hope it makes sense, and other people enjoy!

People who requested the pattern tagged under the cut:

Keep reading

Reblogged from azapofinspiration

ao3commentoftheday:

eggy-tea:

AO3 filters are incredible. The show ended over a decade ago but you’re only getting around to watching it now, and you want to avoid spoilers for later seasons? No worries; you can filter out anything posted/updated after a given air date. Don’t want to see crossovers? Guess what – you don’t have to. Three clicks is all it takes to make them go away. ONLY want crossovers? They’ve got that option, too. In a hurry and only have a few minutes to read? Filter out everything over whatever word count you consider to be “too long.” Absolutely can’t stand this one character/trope/relationship? Exclude, exclude, exclude. And all they ask in return is that you tag your stuff properly. Incredible.

If you haven’t seen the filters before, you might be finding fics via searching. Search is great (and you can get *really* specific with it), but it doesn’t have the quick filter menu.

Tap on a tag you’re interested in reading (just at the top of a fic, for example). That will bring you to a results page that shows every fic that uses that tag. To get rid of the ones you don’t want, look right above the works list to the buttons and tap on Filters. (if you’re on a computer, the filters will already be there, on the right hand side of your screen).

ALT

ALT

ALT

Once you’ve found the filter menu, it’s like the OP said. There are a *lot* of options for you to choose from. You can tap on any of them to open up a sub menu with specifics.

For relationship/character/trope tags, AO3 will automatically show you the top ten most-tagged ones within the tag you’re already looking at. If the one you want to exclude isn’t in that list, you can type it into the “Other tags to exclude” box and AO3 will give you a dropdown to pick from. You can add a theoretically unlimited number of tags to your exclude list, but I think it’s possible to have a list that breaks things eventually. I’ve never personally hit it? But I bet someone out there has.

You can also Include things you want to guarantee are tagged, but be careful with that filter. Include filters stack on top of each other, so if you Include 3 different tags, you’ll only get fics that have all three of them tagged. You won’t get ones that have*any* of them tagged. For more info on how to do an “any of these tags” filter, see this post over here.

Reblogged from lymmea

whilomm:

genderkoolaid:

The little-told story of how the U.S. government poisoned alcohol during Prohibition.

It was Christmas Eve 1926, the streets aglitter with snow and lights, when the man afraid of Santa Claus stumbled into the emergency room a

Slate Magazine

Frustrated that people continued to consume so much alcohol even after it was banned, federal officials had decided to try a different kind of enforcement. They ordered the poisoning of industrial alcohols manufactured in the United States, products regularly stolen by bootleggers and resold as drinkable spirits. The idea was to scare people into giving up illicit drinking. Instead, by the time Prohibition ended in 1933, the federal poisoning program, by some estimates, had killed at least 10,000 people. […]

By mid-1927, the new denaturing formulas included some notable poisons—kerosene and brucine (a plant alkaloid closely related to strychnine), gasoline, benzene, cadmium, iodine, zinc, mercury salts, nicotine, ether, formaldehyde, chloroform, camphor, carbolic acid, quinine, and acetone. The Treasury Department also demanded more methyl alcohol be added—up to 10 percent of total product. It was the last that proved most deadly.

The results were immediate, starting with that horrific holiday body count in the closing days of 1926. Public health officials responded with shock. “The government knows it is not stopping drinking by putting poison in alcohol,” New York City medical examiner Charles Norris said at a hastily organized press conference. “[Y]et it continues its poisoning processes, heedless of the fact that people determined to drink are daily absorbing that poison. Knowing this to be true, the United States government must be charged with the moral responsibility for the deaths that poisoned liquor causes, although it cannot be held legally responsible.”

His department issued warnings to citizens, detailing the dangers in whiskey circulating in the city: “[P]ractically all the liquor that is sold in New York today is toxic,” read one 1928 alert. He publicized every death by alcohol poisoning. He assigned his toxicologist, Alexander Gettler, to analyze confiscated whiskey for poisons—that long list of toxic materials I cited came in part from studies done by the New York City medical examiner’s office.

Norris also condemned the federal program for its disproportionate effect on the country’s poorest residents. Wealthy people, he pointed out, could afford the best whiskey available. Most of those sickened and dying were those “who cannot afford expensive protection and deal in low grade stuff.”

And the numbers were not trivial. In 1926, in New York City, 1,200 were sickened by poisonous alcohol; 400 died. The following year, deaths climbed to 700. These numbers were repeated in cities around the country as public-health officials nationwide joined in the angry clamor. Furious anti-Prohibition legislators pushed for a halt in the use of lethal chemistry. “Only one possessing the instincts of a wild beast would desire to kill or make blind the man who takes a drink of liquor, even if he purchased it from one violating the Prohibition statutes,” proclaimed Sen. James Reed of Missouri.

This isn’t particularly relevant to anything specific. I just wanted to remind everyone this is something the US government did.

oh, i clicked on the article to see if this book was mentioned, and hey its DEBORAH BLUME!! aka the author of the book I was just about to reccomend about this Exact Thing:

if this article is interesting to you, i highly reccomend this book. It doesn’t just discuss prohibition of course, but it goes even more in depth on this stuff.

I would also reccomend her newer book…

this one is about the history of food safety in the united states, and I cannot emphasize enough how disgusting some of this is. wanna find out what embalmed milk is? wanna learn about how much random bullshit from sawdust to coconut shells to dust was put into spices? wanna learn about all the ways food was left to rot and be sold before the FDA? wanna learn how HARD food manufacturers fought regulation, for their right to not be inspected and put borax and formaldehyde and unlabeled ingredients in their products? read this book!

this book takes its name from the IRL poison squad, which was a bunch of healthy young men who were purposefully fed common food additives like borax to see if they were as safe as manufacturers claimed.

This, of course, is also not at all relevant to current events or to claims that deregulation is unneeded because companies will self regulate. nope. not at all.

Reblogged from lymmea

naamahdarling:

cherryhomo:

just wanted to share the National Down Syndrome Society’s message for this year’s World Down Syndrome Day (21st March) 💛💙

Powerful message that lovingly includes multiple disabilities, united. I love this.

Reblogged from theabigailthorn

vonloup:

For the ones that need it today

Reblogged from tiredtief

parafoxicalk:

callmeirony:

petermorwood:

damnbluewires:

you ever heard a lightning fucking scream?

youre about to

A huge improvement on a Wilhelm Scream.

I think it’s a lightning whistler. Incredibly fucking creepy.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2056695143/what-is-the-loud-screeching-sound-during-a-heavy-thunderstorm

Reblogged from ochipi

ladyoftheteaandblood:

middleagedandoutoftouch:

grumpy-gh0st:

what sort of sock sensory issues do you have?

I need to be wearing socks at all times

I would rather die than wear socks

I don’t have sock sensory issues

Different kind of sock sensory issues (explain)

I’m bald

See Results

Barefoot whenever possible, but when I DO sock, the sox MUST be inside out. I can’t stand feeling the toe-seam on my skin.

Barefoot whenever I can. Hate socks or shoes. But have to wear socks on boots in winter.

Reblogged from sud-e-magia

curiositysavesthecat:

How long have you been on Tumblr?

Less than a decade

A decade or more

See Results

*This poll was submitted to us and we simply posted it so people could vote and discuss their opinions on the matter. If you’d like for us to ask the internet a question for you, feel free to drop the poll of your choice in our inbox and we’ll post them anonymously (for more info, please check our pinned post).

Reblogged from craniumsandcrayons

bronwynhillside:

trochaic-mutant-ninja-tetrameter:

a-swarm-of-crabs:

gingergiggles:

sephet:

smaug-official:

trans-mouse:

celticpyro:

arctic-hands:

attackofthebteam:

attackofthebteam:

is it fucking weird to anyone else to think that deer are like, everywhere

like, i tend to think of them as a north american animal, but

I like how they just avoid Mongolia

Mongolia has an anti-deer forcefield.

I like the rat map even better

What is Alberta doing

we are fucking constantly vigilant 

Jesus fucking christ, Alberta

Hey! Albertan here. I thought rats were fictional until I was 9 years old. I have still never seen a rat in person.

🎶Province with a rat quell! Rodent power!🎵

Actually Australia has a feral deer problem in our eastern states.

To go with the world’s largest population of camels. And our feral water buffalo, cats, dogs, foxes, cane toads, rats, rabbits and starlings. We have a damn fence down the centre of the country called “the rabbit proof fence”.

Reblogged from plantpalfynn

thanook:

dorothylarouge:

same guy