tom-bombadil-is-transgender
Déagol but he's Russian for some reason
(he/him 19) | transsexual and tom bombadil enthusiast (same thing) | every lotr adaptation you hated I love
1938 posts
Don't wanna be here? Send us removal request.
Last Seen Blogs
bilgiadresin
İsimsiz
florafaunaandeldritchhorrors
a train that likes star wars
stallonsilver
S 1 L V 3 R
thatjuanjoo
Hm
jaxihammer
my brain is a carousel and Sam Reich is in control
Text
Love you science fiction best genre of all time that also sucks so bad
8K notes
·
View notes
Photo
A Constant Hum (found in a derelict factory)
24K notes
·
View notes
Text
My favourite part of House MD is the Autistic ass Kubrick stare that guy is always doing
3K notes
·
View notes
Text
Georges Girardot - Nymphe découvrant une sirène dans les roseaux (n.d.)
320 notes
·
View notes
Text
"We do not have the responsibility of making gay life look good to straights so that they will accept us. I am not at all interested in promoting a cleaned up image to a straight world which is twice as corrupt and ten times as sick."
Vito Russo
Photography by Betty Lane, 1978
6K notes
·
View notes
Text
in case you haven't thought about switching to firefox yet, here's an extension that will...
Notify you if a website you're on has employees that are on strike
Bypass paywalls for major news outlets like the New York Times
Change the browser theme based on the time of day
Directly install third party non-extension scripts
Save individual browser sessions to be reopened at any time
Use the TV format of YouTube in-browser
Make all chrome extensions compatible with Firefox
Turn YouTube dislikes back on
Fix Twitter and make it way less fucked up
Automatically remove trackers from URLs
And many more!
Feel free to add any other firefox extensions you think are slept on.
62K notes
·
View notes
Text
for antifascist reasons I must mythologize and expound upon a more enlightened and virtually unrecorded ancient past from which we have fallen
5K notes
·
View notes
Text
(Coercive) Gender is a power structure that works to produce certain classes of subjects (men, women, and others) that are useful to the broader political system (the nation, civilization, etc), and to structure relations within and between these groups.
While gender presents itself as natural, it is far from stable, rife with tension and contradictions that are necessary to its functions. You *are* a man, fundamentally, (passively, unchangeable part of your essence) if you are camab, but you also must *be* a man (actively, complying with the expectations of masculinity). Even if we only look at relatively normative cis men, it's extremely common to feel alienated from the ideals of manhood (“I don't feel like a real man” is a common refrain).
A certain amount of distance from the ideals of gender is normal, and part of what makes it a useful motivating system. But the system is backed by coercive force, which reveals itself as people deviate more dramatically from gendered expectations.
Everyone has friction with gendered expectations – both as they grow up and in ongoing ways –but the naturalized, path of least resistance is to identify with your assigned gender, strive to live up to its expectations, and to give up on the sides of yourself that would put you into open conflict with it.
While the exact details of masculinity are highly variable (over time, and from group to group), common threads are displaying power/competency/dominance and avoiding weakness/femininity. This is structurally tied to being able to produce soldiers, workers, and for men broadly to serve as a class of enforcers.
The coercion used to produce womanhood as a class has generally been viewed as part of misogyny (and while it’s experienced unevenly, it’s a broad force meaningfully acting on all women and all ppl expected to be women). The coercion that produces manhood forms a core aspect of transmisogyny, and it's primarily focused on a small minority of people, which is part of what leads to the intensity of transmisogyny. Transmisogyny carves away, and what's left is normative manhood.
In this way, transfems can constitute a kind of sacrifice class. Wherein gratuitous violence against small minority gives potency to the implicit threat when others are told to “man up” or “stop being a sissy,” and tries to render it unthinkable to be anything other than a compliant man.
405 notes
·
View notes
Text
kill the shift manager in your brain
165K notes
·
View notes
Text
I know this is basically heresy to the Spock fandom. I know a lot of people will disagree, and fics will continue to do things exactly the way they always have. But I must speak my truth.
Spock is not green.
Spock's blood is green but his skin is best described as sallow. Pale with a yellow undertone.
Likewise humans are not honestly all that pink (no matter what Shran says). But we are more pink than Spock is green. We have a pink undertone, but Spock's undertone is yellow.
I've thought it over: the colors of human blood, with and without oxygen; the colors of copper, oxidized and not; the color of the copper-based blood of horseshoe crabs; the optical qualities of human skin. And I offer an explanation.
If you have a lightish skin tone and you flip your forearm over, you'll see blue veins. Which is why you probably grew up thinking unoxygenated blood is blue. It's actually not; it's purple.
What we're seeing is a scattering effect. You know how the sun shines in the atmosphere, and most of the color comes straight through just fine, but the blue covers the whole sky instead of coming straight down with the rest of the sunlight? That's because our atmosphere lets the other colors straight through (the warm white of the sun as seen from Earth) but scatters blue, making it seem like it's coming from everywhere.
Human skin does the same thing to red. While blue comes straight through, as if the skin were transparent, showing clear-edged veins, red is scattered. You won't see your arteries. Instead you see a pink cast that seems to be coming from everywhere.
Importantly, which colors show through and which are scattered has nothing to do with our blood, and everything to do with the optical properties of our skin.
Back to Spock. Oxidized, his blood is grass green. Which is kind of odd when you think about it. Horseshoe crabs have copper-based blood, and it's blue. When it doesn't have oxygen in it, it's pretty much colorless.
And this is the color of oxidized copper. I wouldn't call it grass green. The proper word is verdigris.
So for Spock's blood to be grass green, there's probably something yellow in it. The plasma, or the white blood cells, or whatever.
Unoxygenated, copper is ... well, copper-colored. Orangey-brown. I'm not sure if it's possible for anyone's blood to ever get fully unoxygenated—cells just aren't that efficient. But if we assume Spock's blood is less green and more orange when unoxygenated, we might expect a yellowish-brown, yellow being the only color in both green and copper.
So we just have to assume Spock's skin has optical qualities which allow yellow through more than green or brown. The yellow is scattered, while visible blood vessels (if Spock has any) might be green or brown.
Yes, I'm arguing that Spock blushes yellowish. His ordinary skin tone would darken. You wouldn't have a whole new color showing up.
None of this implies that Spock's mucus membranes (tongue, gums, internal parts of genitals such as a sheathed penis) wouldn't be green. Without the thick, protective Vulcan skin, a lot more would show through.
I'm just saying, Spock looks pale-to-yellow on the show and I'm okay with that. I think science can justify it. (Alternatively, as SPOCKNALIA argues, Vulcan skin is too thick to show much through it, and the yellow tone is Vulcan melanin.)
However, I may still continue to have Spock blush green just for art's sake, and you can too. The only law of fanfic is that your canon is whatever you say it is.
480 notes
·
View notes
Text
ldpdl princess locked in a tower (x)
11 notes
·
View notes
Text
wanting something you already have
338 notes
·
View notes
Text
The whole "the brain isn't fully mature until age 25" bit is actually a fairly impressive bit of psuedoscience for how incredibly stupid the way it misinterprets the data it's based on is.
Okay, so: there's a part of the human brain called the "prefrontal cortex" which is, among other things, responsible for executive function and impulse control. Like most parts of the brain, it undergoes active "rewiring" over time (i.e., pruning unused neural connections and establishing new ones), and in the case of the prefrontal cortex in particular, this rewiring sharply accelerates during puberty.
Because the pace of rewiring in the prefrontal cortex is linked to specific developmental milestones, it was hypothesised that it would slow down and eventually stop in adulthood. However, the process can't directly be observed; the only way to tell how much neural rewiring is taking place in a particular part of the brain is to compare multiple brain scans of the same individual performed over a period of time.
Thus, something called a "longitudinal study" was commissioned: the same individuals would undergo regular brain scans over a period of mayn years, beginning in early childhood, so that their prefrontal development could accurately be tracked.
The longitudinal study was originally planned to follow its subjects up to age 21. However, when the predicted cessation of prefrontal rewiring was not observed by age 21, additional funding was obtained, and the study period was extended to age 25. The predicted cessation of prefrontal development wasn't observed by age 25, either, at which point the study was terminated.
When the mainstream press got hold of these results, the conclusion that prefrontal rewiring continues at least until age 25 was reported as prefrontal development finishing at age 25. Critically, this is the exact opposite of what the study actually concluded. The study was unable to identify a stopping point for prefrontal development because no such stopping point was observed for any subject during the study period. The only significance of the age 25 is that no subjects were tracked beyond this age because the study ran out of funding!
It gets me when people try to argue against the neuroscience-proves-everybody-under-25-is-a-child talking point by claiming that it's merely an average, or that prefrontal development doesn't tell the whole story. Like, no, it's not an average – it's just bullshit. There's no evidence that the cited phenomenon exists at all. If there is an age where prefrontal rewiring levels off and stops (and it's not clear that there is), we don't know what age that is; we merely know that it must be older than 25.
22K notes
·
View notes
Text
someone hand that man a towel
2K notes
·
View notes