#(rhetorically or physically?)

[twig-tea]

Saw the director of Addicted Heroin Thailand had posted this on his Facebook account:

This man looked at the show that was the tipping point of the first big anti-gay censorship wave in China in the 2010s, and decided to remake it and intentionally self-censor, just to see if he could attract the "Chinese BL is superior because it doesn't rely on kisses or NC scenes to show the emotions" audience to Thai BL?

I am so mad about this.

[thecrabbybarista]

Is this anything

[phospadparadscha]

A little late but here's my gift for the @palestaticexchange for @delphionix of their prompt, Harry interacting with the Pale / the Skills! It was hard to decide what to do for this piece but I think i'm very proud of how it turned out in the end. The wonderful @presentablemichael helped me with making this piece happen finally. Happy gift exchange!

[kitsvragi]

RHETORIC - You need to change the topic *now*. Or there will be another shot.

PHYSICAL INSTRUMENT - What TOPIC? Shots have been fired -- act before it's too late. This was a close call!

[teapocolypse]

Other physically disabled people, can you please recommend me non-fiction books about physical disability? Because trying to find them myself is only getting me autism moms and inspiration porn.

[disco-archetypes]

RHETORIC - Why are you even trying to open a door with rhetoric?

SAVOIR FAIRE - That's a very good question considering you have Savvy around -- the ultimate VIP.

YOU - "Because getting physical wasn't an option!"

PHYSICAL INSTRUMENT - Have I been summoned?

RHETORIC - No one needs you. Go away.

[charmingradiobelle]

I can’t believe I have to say this but am I the only one who absolutely despises mpreg

[revalition]

New banner!

I finally have finished both the WIPs I have been working on on-and-off since september! (and throwing pieces of into some of the skilltober posts) and was planning to wait until we're done to post them but. restraining from posting one is bad enough. so!

this is *way* too long to all fit in the banner, as you can probably tell (because I was dumb and trusted the first search result that said banners should be 3000x1055 :D ) but oh well. And many of these guys have old designs I have since changed, and some of it looks weird but TOO BAD. sending it out into the world anyway cause I need it off my computer.

version without the red tint and close ups under the cut

the red colour is to go with our blog theme lol. without the tint:

yes I just crammed shivers in there for the sake of including her

[tmbatcat]

passed out for a couple of hours and when i woke up this was on my canvas

like I said "I will not explain myself". hope you guys injoy the brainrot on display

if it's not evident, I did not plan this at all

This started more like a sketch for logic to understand how to draw them and then i got bored and I started to doodle the other skills and this is what ended up

I want to learn how to simplify all of them in a cartoony style... it's not really working

these are 100% just for me but whatever

also thinking to draw some of the skills in cool clothing becourse I think that would be awesome

I put all the skills in the tags cuz I'm insaneeee >:}c

[memoriesofthingspast]

🎃

[kataraavatara]

while I’m reposting my acotar tiktoks on tumblr because they’re more appreciated here, have this one:

what they actually had done to them (bed rest vs forced physical activity) was different but the similarities in how they were treated are very striking and eerie to me. locking up difficult women.

[aristocrating]

hey girl have you seen that canon kentparse timeline post? I swear I saw it floating around but now I can’t find it

this is the old guide we usually refer to but kvp90 did a recent version here:

[hauntingofhouses]

guys cmon. be ffr please. akemi did Not love taigen. the only reason why she was desperate to search for him to the point of putting herself in danger is because she didn't want to get married to an abusive man (which she believed at the time that takayoshi was). when seki tried to dissuade her from running off, her reason was not "but i love taigen and wanna be with him 🥺" it was because she refused to be controlled and have her autonomy taken from her; she literally says "i won't be locked away in edo married to a stranger." and when seki still tries to argue that getting married to the heir of the shogun would be better than getting caught by brigands, she then says "that kind of man"—referring to takayoshi—"treats women like animals. they say he's a tyrant." and when seki chuckles and says "what man isn't?" her response is "you." she doesn't even talk about taigen. she is using him as much as he was using her. they both see—or, well, saw—each other as means to an end. for taigen he saw that marrying into the tokunobu clan would elevate his status and wealth. for akemi she wanted the right to choose who she married, and she wanted that person to be someone kind. that's it! neither of them loved each other. but since they were courting of course they acted sweet to each other, and they do still care for one another, especially due to their romantic history. but let's be real! akemi is a boss bitch who dropped taigen and forgot all about his ass as soon as she saw takayoshi was a nice guy. because duh? not only is takayoshi a better lover (it's implied their lovemaking lasted a long time) but he's also kinder towards her and presents her with an opportunity to claim power and freedom, which she would not have if she had married taigen, as she would have still been stuck under her father's thumb. so literally why should she settle for taigen's stupid ass! she may be a little naive at times but she's still incredibly intelligent. she would not do something stupid for the sake of "love." you know who would though? taigen.

[frank-olivier]

The Battle for the Truth: Science, Rhetoric, and the Public Sphere

Reality is nothing but a collective hunch. — Lily Tomlin

The pursuit of knowledge is marked by a paradoxical dynamic where systems embodying the principles of scientific inquiry, acknowledging their own incompleteness and embracing the provisional nature of truth, are frequently attacked by counterparts that proclaim absolute certainty yet often lack a foundation in empirical evidence. This phenomenon raises a profound question about why rigorously scientific systems, aware of their limitations, incur criticism from unscientific systems that claim completeness. The underlying reasons for this critique are rooted in epistemological, psychological, and sociological factors that drive this seemingly counterintuitive conflict.

At the heart of scientific systems lies an inherent humility, an acknowledgment of the complexity of the subject matter, and a willingness to revise or even overturn existing theories based on new evidence. This openness is not a sign of weakness but a hallmark of the scientific method, which thrives on skepticism, peer review, and empirical validation. However, this selfsame openness can be misconstrued by critics from closed systems as indecisiveness or uncertainty, providing a perceived foothold for attack. In contrast, closed systems often present themselves as comprehensive and definitive, eschewing the nuanced uncertainties of scientific inquiry for the comforting simplicity of absolute truths. This appeal to certainty resonates deeply with a public frequently overwhelmed by the intricacies of modern life, seeking clear, uncomplicated answers to complex questions.

A significant portion of the critique stems from a fundamental misunderstanding or deliberate misrepresentation of the scientific process. The iterative nature of scientific inquiry, where theories are refined or revised based on new evidence, is often portrayed as flip-flopping or lack of conviction. Critics from closed systems may fail to grasp or choose to obscure the distinction between the provisional nature of scientific knowledge and the method's robustness in approaching truth. Beneath the surface of these critiques often lie power dynamics and ideological differences. Closed systems may perceive scientific findings as a threat to their influence, audience, or worldview, prompting a defensive stance that manifests as attacks on the scientific system's legitimacy. Philosophical disagreements over the nature of truth, the role of empiricism, or the balance between consensus and dissent also fuel these conflicts, highlighting the deeply entrenched nature of these disputes.

To address this paradox, education and awareness are crucial. Enhancing public understanding of the scientific method can foster a broader appreciation for its strengths and the inherent value of acknowledging complexity. Scientists and science communicators must effectively convey the provisional nature of scientific knowledge, highlighting its adaptive and refining aspects as strengths rather than weaknesses. Encouraging respectful, open dialogue between proponents of different systems, while challenging, can facilitate mutual understanding and, in some instances, reconciliation of viewpoints. Strengthening science education and promoting clear communication are key strategies to navigate this paradox, ultimately fostering a more informed, critically thinking society.

The critique of scientific systems by unscientific counterparts underscores a profound misunderstanding of the scientific endeavor. Rather than a vulnerability, the acknowledgment of incompleteness is a badge of honor, reflecting the scientific community's unwavering commitment to the pursuit of truth, no matter how complex or provisional. Embracing education, clear communication, and engaged dialogue becomes paramount, not only for the integrity of scientific knowledge but for the fostering of a society that values critical thinking and the pursuit of knowledge. By navigating this paradox with awareness and strategies aimed at enhancing public understanding and dialogue, we can work towards a future where the scientific method is valued for its strengths, and the provisional nature of truth is seen as a catalyst for continuous learning and improvement.

Marjorie Shapiro: Supersymmetry, Extra Dimensions and the Origin of Mass - Exploring the Nature of the Universe Using PetaScale Data Analysis (Google Tech Talks, June 2007)

String Theory isn‘t Dead (Sabine Hossenfelder, December 2024)

The Problem With Sabine Hossenfelder (Professor Dave Explains, October 2024)

No, Sabine, Science is Not Failing (Professor Dave Explains, November 2024)

Lawrence Krauss: God, String Theory, and the State of Physics (Robinson Erhardt, March 2024)

Sabine Hossenfelder Can’t Stop Acting Like a Complete Fraud (Professor Dave Explains, February 2025)

Wednesday, February 26, 2025

[disco-archetypes]

YOU - Persuade the door to open.

SAVOIR FAIRE - Step aside, rank and file, Savvy's at the top of the VIP list here. That's right -- out of the way!

RHETORIC - Whoa! Watch it!

PHYSICAL INSTRUMENT - How'd he get in front? Little slimeball...

SAVOIR FAIRE - Thank you, thank you. Now, are you ready? It's time to *make our entrance*.

YOU - "Khm-khm..." (Clear your throat, knock on the door.) "Hi, it's Savvy here, Savvy with two v's, I'm on the list. The guest list."

[swordsonnet]

sorry but saying that the accessibility needs of mentally disabled people are just preferences or about "comfort" is blatantly incorrect. if i can't enter a building because the bright lights and loud noises would send me into a meltdown, then i can't enter the building, and that's not less important than me not being able to enter a building because it's not wheelchair accessible. if you genuinely think that mentally disabled people aren't really struggling, and that it's okay to mock their very real concerns, then that just shows that you've been refusing to listen to their experiences. do better or shut the fuck up.