i feel like im lsoing my fucking mind i got scared and said "hear it hurgling" while playing a roblox game and my friends mom heard and repeated it and i couldnt remember the context of the sentence and every meme ive seen with the phrase isnt the one i saw does anyone know what im talking about i swear to god i saw a meme that looked like this
7 notes
·
View notes
losing my actual mind rn
i had this interaction in the dropout discord (i am the first and third person). short. simple. i only got the first year bc of a discount + a gift card i had, so i was planning on using this person's suggestion.
then, i got this.
oh my god!! how nice!! how sweet!!! how thoughtful!! i gave them my email and they sent over a subscription, i thanked them profusely. i was very grateful, very touched.
hours and hours later i was still thinking about it and i recalled how, in the email id gotten about it, it said "tao yang sent you a subscription" and id seen that and thought "oh haha like the tao yang" and then moved on
but now, thinking back, i was like.... theres no way, so i googled tao yang.
......
TAO YANG BOUGHT ME A FUCKING ANNUAL DROPOUT SUBSCRIPTION
7K notes
·
View notes
okay so since the dbda soundtrack is out now, i can finally be insufferable about the things i've noticed by putting names and timestamps to them rather than just shouting nonsensically about them. this is excellent :D
as i already saw someone else point out, there is a section of running from hell / i'm in love with you beginning at roughly the 3:40 mark that has also played two other times in the show...
first, very quietly, at the end of episode 6 when edwin tried to confess the first time, and...
again in episode 8, when charles and edwin hugged (it's included in esther's origin / a new deal on the soundtrack)
i am Looking At This with very big eyes rn. blake neely and murat selçuk i am in your walls what does this mean
BUT ALSO. there is another section. that drives me just about insane. the only place i can find it in the SOUNDTRACK is in accepting being dead at the 3:10 mark... and it plays over the scene of charles dying/becoming a ghost in charles' flashback to edwin saving him at the start of episode 7. but it actually plays one other time in the show...
over edwin comforting charles and them hugging for the first time at the end of episode 5.
what does it MEANNNNNNNNN
165 notes
·
View notes
a very unserious list of other things they could announce (created in a desperate bid to temper my expectations):
they’re changing the cover of the anniversary version from the sad empty room
Liam v. Noel cage match
very belated 20th anniversary versions of SOTSOG and Heathen Chemistry
Step Out (Liam’s version)
new b-side compilation
actual recording of Take Me
Loch Lomond footage
reunion but it’s Noel and Tony who reconciled and Liam is uninvolved
nothing they just wanted to see how we’d react
14 notes
·
View notes
I think the worst thing about having very vague/spotty memories because I was so young when it happened is feeling like I can’t ever fully accept that it DID happen. I will always second guess myself—even though the evidence is always with me (the body keeps the score, as they say). I will probably never tell anyone who knows him about it because what if I’m wrong?? What if I’m making up these flashes of “memory”, and seeing “signs” in my present self where there are none just because I want an easy answer that would explain the way that I am???
It would be such a horrible thing to accuse someone of if it wasn’t true. Especially family. Even just thinking it feels cruel and unfair to him sometimes. And there’s no way for me to get the truth unless he were to confess it to me himself.
I fantasize about that sometimes—I like to picture him apologizing to me at some kind of reunion, scared out of his mind that I’ll tell someone about it and ruin his life. Or even unapologetic, making jokes about it. At least then I would have confirmation. At least then I would have validation for the last twenty years of my life.
Anyway if anyone else feels like this, you’re not alone.
13 notes
·
View notes
The weird thing about the debate on Israeli's indigenousness is that "indigenous" doesn't mean... you're From somewhere. You can stop being indigenous; you can stop being indigenous while still existing in the place your ancestors were born. "Indigenous" isn't that you have the memory of belonging to a place or notice little cultural things in your family that tie into your ancestral homeland. I mean, there's a reason we don't call British people in Britan indigenous.
Indigenousness is about perpetual opposition to settler colonialism, which is about the complete uprooting of a pre-existing culture and forcing that land to accommodate an extractivist, export economy. That's what it is. It's not about being from a place or even having a """tie to the land.""" (The "tie to the land" is definitely an element of indigenousness but it's really just a romanticized simplification of indigenousness — a simple answer for why indigenous people are at the frontline of environmental movements.)
When the Spanish came to Mexico, they worked with the noble Nahua people to de-indigenize them. They did this by converting them to Catholicism, teaching them European writing (Latin) and academics, and relying on the Nahua nobility to help enforce the new political system. Fransicans are usually credited with converting Mexico to Christianity, but the ones who did most of the work were the young, Nahua "niños del monasterio" who marched into the villages and burned the idols of the gods — of both their own and other indigenous communities. (Nahua soldiers are credited with being the ones who helped the Spanish conquer the rest of Mexico's native people).
Indigenous/mestizo scholar Chimalpahin wrote about the history of the "Aztecs" by calling every Nahua god a demon, by positioning the Spanish like a good development and by arguing his specific Nahua city was better than the other by appealing to Spanish sentiments. ("But maybe he was just speaking to the Spanish!!!" He wrote in Nahuatl for presumably a Nahua audience.) (Academics don't agree on whether to call him indigenous).
"Chimalpahin and the noble Nahuas were violently forced into assimilating into Spanish nobility; you are sick for trying to argue that they weren't indigenous anymore." I'm not arguing that they weren't, but they were players in de-indigenizing Mexico, and it's important that it was forced.
De-tribalization and de-indigenization are always violent and ugly; you don't lose your indigenousness, usually, because you're evil. Chimalpahin and the noble Nahuas were still victims and horribly traumatized. They were also enforcers of de-indigenization.
Anyway, I'm mestizo and have ties to central Mexico and feel a sense of belonging there, at times. I'm not indigenous to it though. The memory of any indigenousness in my family is just a memory now. We visit, and I eat so so many poblano peppers. But we've detribalized, become borderline settlers by participating in capitalism, lightened our skin through generations, probably intentionally (many Mexicans have heard the phrase that we have to "better our race"). If I wanted to actually reconnect, it would be a lot of work; any reconnecting indigenous person can tell you how much work it is.
I know people get really prissy about how "You can't compare Israelis to white European settlers in America because we actually have a connection to the land!!!! We are actually from there!! >:/ some of us are not even white!"
Well let's think of the majority brown mestizo (mixed) population of Mexico. Are they indigenous because they might have "ties to the land" and because they have lineage from it?? Maybe they were once, but for the majority now — no. Without a mass effort to oppose settler colonialism and reconnect, mestizos are not indigenous and might never be again, no matter how much of their pre-colombian culture persists in our quieter traditions and language. And the Mexican state is happy to co-opt aesthetic representations of indigenousness, to talk about our glorious "Aztec" ancestry, while actively hurting indigenous populations.
So assume some, or lets say all!, Israelis have every possible connection to the land (lets say they love the olive trees and cry over the murder of all the Nile crocodiles), maybe they're visibly non-white, maybe they can trace their lineage to the exact spot where they stand. But if they're on the side of a settler colonial, capitalist state (say it was even forced on them!! say they were even made to move there!!! say they are like the Nahua nobles) — how indigenous are you?
How much longer will you remain " indigenous " ???
31 notes
·
View notes