#So innovative!

[nando161mando]

So innovative!

[antisisyphus]

if you could pick the met gala theme what would you choose??

[mjulmjul]

Castiel’s creation

[venompinks]

JENNIE ୨ৎ COCO CRUSH SEOUL

[ilovedthestars]

A thought I’ve been having: While it's important to recognize the long history of many current queer identities (and the even longer history of people who lived outside of the straight, cis, allo “norm”) I think it's also important to remember that a label or identity doesn't have to be old to be, for lack of a better word, real.

This post that i reblogged a little while ago about asexuality and its history in the LGBTQ+ rights movement and before is really good and really important. As i've thought about it more, though, it makes me wonder why we need to prove that our labels have "always existed." In the case of asexuality, that post is pushing back against exclusionists who say that asexuality was “made up on the internet” and is therefore invalid. The post proves that untrue, which is important, because it takes away a tool for exclusionists.

But aromanticism, a label & community with a lot of overlap & solidarity with asexuality, was not a label that existed during Stonewall and the subsequent movement. It was coined a couple decades ago, on internet forums. While the phrasing is dismissive, it would be technically accurate to say that it was “made up on the internet.” To be very clear, I’m not agreeing with the exclusionists here—I’m aromantic myself. What I’m asking is, why does being a relatively recently coined label make it any less real or valid for people to identify with?

I think this emphasis on historical precedent is what leads to some of the attempts to label historical figures with modern terminology. If we can say someone who lived 100 or 1000 years ago was gay, or nonbinary, or asexual, or whatever, then that grants the identity legitimacy. but that's not the terminology they would have used then, and we have no way of knowing how, or if, any historical person's experiences would fit into modern terminology.

There's an element of "the map is not the territory" here, you know? Like this really good post says, labels are social technologies. There's a tendency in the modern Western queer community to act like in the last few decades the "truth" about how genders and orientations work has become more widespread and accepted. But that leaves out all the cultures, both historical and modern, that use a model of gender and sexuality that doesn't map neatly to LGBTQ+ identities but is nonetheless far more nuanced than "there are two genders, man and woman, and everyone is allo and straight." Those systems aren’t any more or less “true” than the system of gay/bi/pan/etc and straight, cis and trans, aro/ace and allo.

I guess what I’m saying is, and please bear with me here, “gay” people have not always existed. “Nonbinary” people have not always existed. “Asexual” people have not always existed. But people who fell in love with and had sex with others of the same gender have always existed. People who would not have identified themselves as either men or women have always existed. People who didn’t prioritize sex (and/or romance) as important parts of their lives have always existed. In the grand scheme of human existence, all our labels are new, and that’s okay. In another hundred or thousand years we’ll have completely different ways of thinking about gender and sexuality, and that’ll be okay too. Our labels can still be meaningful to us and our experiences right now, and that makes them real and important no matter how new they are.

We have a history, and we should not let it be erased. But we don’t need a history for our experiences and ways of describing ourselves to be real, right now.

[communist-hatsunemiku]

I actually think that snow Miku design is kind of, uninspired. She's really cute but it's like the most basic route they could have gone. It's basically just a palette swap with added gloves and a scarf, She doesn't even look cozy! She looks like She would be freezing!

Tbh Snow Mikus have never stood out to me(there are a couple I really loke), but there is one that is like triple S-rated, knocked it out of the park everyone else go home type shit.

This design is so incredible, like She's warmth personified. She would feed you the best stew of your life after you trudged through a blizzard to visit Her remote cabin. It would be so fucking worth almost dying of frostbite to get some of that Miku Miku stew....

[colorisbyshe]

Carly Rae Jepsen rly is the perfect pop star to me.

I know almost nothing about her personal life besides sweet anecdotes like her failed attempt to quit sugar and her engagement. And it’s exceedingly hard to know much more than that because she doesn’t do much press and her music is mostly just vaguely personal but largely just universal and broad.

Her music caters to that perfectly—it’s pop but constantly evolving. Covers a wide emotional spectrum but never goes too deep, aware of exactly what it’s meant to be. It’s a treat, it’s a bop, it’s pop! Her music ages with her but doesn’t age, if that makes sense. It has youth but isn’t juvenile. The music comes out regularly, with great and full b sides that justify their existence and don’t feel of chart manipulation or attempts to stay relevant.

She performs energetically on stage, does good crowd work, plays along with some fan stuff (blow up swords, the gays, the wig guy) without leaning too much into it, and she’s great about touring regularly at reasonable venues (not booking too large or two small). When my show got canceled due to weather, she performed a free show at a bar that night, AND rescheduled a free, full show the next after noon.

And she does all of this balancing to be the perfect level of famous—decent sized, loyal fandom that isn’t obsessive but will go to shows and buy her music—without coming off as manufactured or withholding. Like she feels like The Girl Next Door without it seeming forced, pathetic, or without it getting in the way of putting on a spectacular show either.

She’s accessible. But can’t be accessed.

I love it.

[tangramkey]

i love my Basketbot Portal AU

[thoodleoo]

cicero was out there saying that the catilinarian conspirators had been unalived all the way back in 63 BCE

[feligayzed]

Work scribbles upon ya 🤲

[achillesleftheel]

STOP IT WYLAN USES MUSIC NOTATION FOR HIS CHEMICALS

[lastoneout]

"[New Farming Sim] is copying Stardew Valley!!" Harvest Moon came out for the Nintendo 64 in 1999

Edit: My apologies, Harvest Moon came out for the SNES in 1996

[foldingfittedsheets]

I had either the pleasure or misfortune of walking into a Purple mattress store with my friend today for funsies, both of us broke as hell and neither looking for a new mattress but wanting to pretend for a little while that we had money in this big touristy outlet mall. And I need you to tell me something awful about these beds because the only thing I could say as we left was "I need to win the lottery." The salesman had us lay on the soft bed (per my preference) and then showed us the adjustable settings and the vibration mode. The pillows alone are like 250 but I don't think I have ever been so comfortable in my life. Please ruin this picture perfect out of budget bed for me. Or at least give me hope that I can find something just as comfy at a better cost once I look to replace my mattress with a new one.

Do you want to know a secret? When your bed is old and broken down almost every bed should feel amazing to you. Because it is new and still functioning as a bed.

Purple is not remotely in the ballpark of what I consider good bang for buck in general terms. For one major reason: they come in a box. Why?? Why compress a luxury bed into a box!? It just degrades the support.

I’ve made my peace with selling Purple and if it were not compressed with the gel grid I’d say they’re a top contender but as it stands I have reservations about their longevity.

[degenerateshinji]

crazy gay crossover

side by sides w the refs

[what-is-my-aesthetic]

[ansjsla]

Don’t let your Gojo overheat!!!