I just walked into my brother’s room at 12:31 AM to tell him about my shift at work
And he was… watching a ten second clip of Herlock Sholmes dancing that he had saved on his computer on repeat
And I got up right behind him before he finally paused, said “I’m doing something really important right now. Stop interrupting me.”, And unpaused it without even looking at me.
42 notes
·
View notes
something something digital footprint
29K notes
·
View notes
This is why I read the reddit comments
123K notes
·
View notes
bruce wayne becoming nightwing reminds me of those mums that are like 'im sooo skinny, i can fit into my preteen daughter's clothes!!!' but like. with vigilante personas
26K notes
·
View notes
REALITY IS AN ILLUSION THE UNIVERSE IS A HOLOGRAM BUY GOLD BYE
19K notes
·
View notes
so, theres a cartoon. but, get this: i've drawn the characters as weird animals. i bet youve never seen me do that before
10K notes
·
View notes
worried that thing you put in your art or writing or game or music is too self-indulgent, too self-referential, too niche for anyone but yourself? fear not! you can do whatever you want forever. and you should.
43K notes
·
View notes
I think we need to get more comfortable with the idea that sometimes shitty, racist, homophobic, bigoted people are still incredibly talented.
I feel like every time I see a post addressing someone’s shitty behavior the post also takes the time to mention that they’re not even good at [x] anyway. And that’s just not always true? Equating being good at a skill as being morally good is just not necessary. Someone can be a fantastic writer, can have a beautiful singing voice, can create breathtaking artwork, and still be a horrible person.
I know part of this is probably just the instinct to dislike everything about a person when you dislike them, but I also think this mindset leads to people defending creatives way past where they should, because if bad people create bad art, then if this person creates art that I like and resonates with me, then they can’t be a bad person!
And you know. That’s just not true. Those two things are simply completely unconnected and I think it’d be healthier if we all started disconnecting them in our heads.
39K notes
·
View notes
but no yeah lets have the conversation:
"the CEO doesnt want to run that kind of website"
Excuse, shouldnt have bought the 'go nuts show nuts whatever' website if thats the case. APPEAL DENIED
"we have to follow the TOS of the appstores we're hosted on"
Excuse item one, no you dont, item two, you have since those days implimented infrastructure that would allow pornography and sex work on this platform Without violating TOS of any applicable app store. APPEAL DENIED
"we own the site we get to make the rules"
Incorrect, this site has only ever made profit when the users willed it. we collectively own the site as a hive mind and no legal change in ownership will change that. APPEAL DENIED
"we have to keep this website safe for the children who use it"
Argument based on fallacy banning pornography and sex workers does not prevent pornography and sex work from occuring on the site, it only forces aforementioned users to hide and avoid labling their content appropriately, which REDUCES the safety for children and sex workers alike instead of increasing it, this has been shown to the point that making this argument at all is tantamount to admiting fascist intent APPEAL DENIED
68K notes
·
View notes