pick-any-card

[pick-any-card]

Me: why the fuck is Shakespeare trending in Britain

Britain:

[pick-any-card]

[pick-any-card]

The Outbursts of Everett True was a comic strip that ran in papers from 1905 to 1927, wherein the aforementioned Everett True regularly beat the everliving shit out of rude people as a warning to anyone else who might consider being rude. Men have not only been taking up too much room on public transport for about as long as public transport has existed, but the people around them have been irritated about it for at least a hundred years. The next time someone tries to claim that manspreading is a false phenomenon, please direct them to this strip so that Everett True can correct their misconceptions with an umbrella upside the head.

[pick-any-card]

found this at goodwill the other day. thought i should add 🥬

cabbage boy..

[pick-any-card]

achilles’ heelys

[pick-any-card]

This was literally the prompted Essay topic of my SAT last year? So yeah, it’s very real and very recent. it’s not “fake news” or some shit. the article the SAT gave us was about how Bernie Sanders has been trying to save the USPS for years but the current administration keeps shooting him down

Trump will deliver killing blow to the USPS

The USPS is about to declare bankruptcy. It’s at the center of the longstanding plans for disaster recover and has been since the Cold War. It’s the only institution that could (for example) deliver covid meds to every home in America in one day.

https://pluralistic.net/2020/03/25/national-emergency-library/#going-postal

But Congress has decided not to bail out the postal service, despite Art 1, Sec 8 of the US Constitution: “To establish Post Offices and post Roads.”

Maybe it’s because without a USPS we couldn’t have a postal vote in 2020?

https://pluralistic.net/2020/03/27/just-asking-questions/#save-usps

The proximate cause of the post office’s bankruptcy is the pandemic, but that is merely the finishing blow. The USPS was murdered in 2006, when Congress passed the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act.

https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2020/04/will-the-united-states-post-office-become-a-victim-of-covid19.html

The Act gave the USPS a mere 10 years to “prefund its future health care benefit payments to retirees for the next 75 years.” That is, to set aside cash to pay medical bills for future employees who hadn’t been born yet.

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h109-6407

The Act gave the USPS a mere 10 years to “prefund its future health care benefit payments to retirees for the next 75 years.” That is, to set aside cash to pay medical bills for future employees who hadn’t been born yet.

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h109-6407

The USPS’s murder is straight out of the neoliberal playbook: “1 Defund, 2 claim crisis, 3 call for privatizatization, 4 profit!”

As Lambert Strether points out, it was a bipartisan act of murder, cosponored by the “centrist” Democrat Henry Waxman.

Killing the USPS looms large in the Trump admin’s (nonmetaphorical, actual) privatization playbook, “Delivering Government Solutions in the 21st Century Reform Plan and Reorganization Recommendations”:

https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Government-Reform-and-Reorg-Plan.pdf

The proposals are for USPS to become a Wework clone or franchisee, but not to become a publicly owned bank - a common line of business for other nations’ postal services, natural based on the amounts of cash they handle.

The USPS is the nation’s second largest employer of veterans, with 630,000 employees. Trump is about to allow it to collapse so that UPS, Fedex and other private firms can skim off the most profitable parts of its business and leave rural Americans totally isolated.

The loss of the USPS would mean the loss of the last truly universal federal program in America and would unduly hammer the people whom Trump claims to love – veterans and rural voters.

https://twitter.com/lildipshit3/status/1248741868440940544

[pick-any-card]

us government be like

[pick-any-card]

Bernadette Banner is freaking amazing! She shows her research and (mostly) historical drafting techniques in her videos and notes whenever she deviates from historically accurate methods. Her whole channel is awesome

This British 25-Year-Old Doesn’t Own Or Wear Any Modern Clothing

IG: @pinsent_tailoring

[pick-any-card]

“a bit of scenery”? this is gorgeous!!!

Geralt, Jaskier and Roach on the road

I went for a bit of scenery for once

[pick-any-card]

go off i guess

“Castle Orgeval”, 2 Rue de la Mare-Tambour, Villemoisson, Paris 1904-05. Arch. H. Guimard.

[pick-any-card]

aesthetic af

Capsule Hotel & Bookstore, Qinglongwu, Zhejiang province, China,

Atelier Tao+C

[pick-any-card]

This chair is for the Gays only and yall know it

[pick-any-card]

From the mouth of a One Percenter -

Abigail Disney

[pick-any-card]

happy hanukkah!!!!

[pick-any-card]

hey folks, I’m gonna introduce you to two very important fandom terms and they are watsonian and doylist 

they come (obviously) from the sherlock holmes fandom, and they are two different ways of explaining something in a story. say I’m a fan and I notice that, in the original books, watson’s war wound is sometimes in his leg and sometimes in his shoulder. the watsonian explanation is how watson (that is, a person within the story) might explain it; the doylist explanation is how sir arthur conan doyle (a person in real life) would have explained it. 

sherlock explains the migrating war wound by making the shoulder wound real and the limp psychosomatic. the guy ritchie films explain it by having the leg wound sustained in battle before the events of the film and the shoulder wound happen onscreen. the doylist explanation, of course, is that acd forgot where the wound was.

this is very important when we’re discussing stuff like headcanons and word-of-god. I see this when people offer watsonian explanations for something, and then a doylist will say something like “it’s just because the author wrote it that way,” and I see it when a person is criticizing bad writing/storytelling (for example, the fact that quiet in metal gear solid v is running around the whole game in a bikini and ripped tights) and someone comes back with “but there’s an in-story reason why that happens!” (that reason being she breathes through her skin).

there’s nothing wrong with either explanation, and really I think you need both to understand and analyze a text. a person coming up with a watsonian explanation has likely not forgotten that the author had real-life reasons for writing something that way, and a person with a doylist interpretation is likely not ignoring the in-universe justification for that thing. 

but it’s very difficult (and imo often useless, though there are exceptions) to try to argue one kind of explanation with the other kind. wetblanketing someone’s headcanon with “or it could just be bad writing” is obnoxious; dismissing someone’s criticism with “but have you considered this in-universe explanation” is ignoring the point of the criticism. understanding where someone is coming from is important when making an argument; acting like your argument is better because you’re being doylist when they’re being watsonian or vice versa is not.

[pick-any-card]

You can just say SJMaas its okay

YA titles must contain one of the following words or you have to pay a fine:

blood crow queen ice crown fire bone true academy magic glass shade kingdom world shadow song sun ember secret legend star raven thief

[pick-any-card]

we have the technology to turn salt water into potable water and we don’t use it

we have the technology to have unlimited solar energy and we don’t use it

we have the technology to turn the Sahara desert into farm land and we don’t use it

capitalism get on my damn nerves