chinese college girls slay (cr: 哭天喊地六仙女）

It hasn't happened (fortunately) but my plan were anyone to enquire if I was going to do anything about my weight before my wedding - I am fat - was to say 'yeah I've just got to gain a little bit more now and I'll be at my goal :)'

Lilo & Stitch is a great example of a story that has no villains. It has antagonists, sure, but most of them are well-meaning. The worst person in the film is that little shit Myrtle, but she’s not in the film that much anyway.

Since this post is getting traction I want to clarify how not-villainous the antagonists are:

The "villain" of Lilo and Stitch is, rather directly, societies and social systems that write people off and do not provide support and care.

It is obvious to the audience -- and deliberately presented this way by the film -- that it is better for Lilo to stay with her sister, even if her sister is a bit of a mess and not financially stable. Mr. Bubbles is not evil. He is there because he wants what's best for Lilo, and he is not unreasonable to think that the sister without a job who leaves the stove on and whose house nearly burned down two days later is not it. The solution is not to "defeat" Mr. Bubbles; the solution would be for society to help Nani succeed, rather than watch as she fails.

Similarly, no one provided any help to Stitch when he was created and discovered. They wrote him off as an abomination, something too dangerous to be destroyed. They weren't evil, and it wasn't unreasonable to think that the experiment created to be an agent of destruction would be better off scrapped. But what would have happened if they had at least tried?

Lilo and Stitch are two characters who were caught in systems that were cold, uncaring, and unsupportive, even if the people in them were not evil and were, in fact, just doing their best.

It's a movie about people who have been written off finding one another and building a found family where they can get and give the support and care they didn't get from the people with authority and I love it so much.

yefim ladyzhensky, wedding under chestnut trees, odesa series

Praying in front of the Ark of the Law in a synagogue in Ankara, Turkey, 1964.

attention this is your captain speaking chag sameach pesach to all celebrating and a reminder do not open the airlock to greet elijah the vulcan rabbinic council ruled that opening the door to the room where the seder is occurring is sufficient elijah can get on a starship just fine himself he just likes to be personally invited in to your seder we dont need another incident like last year thank you

Devotional Wall Plaque, 1859, Czechia. From the collections of the Jewish Museum in Prague.

has anybody seen my pet piece of paper. his name is walter he is very fragile but very adventurous. i should never have left the window open in my tenth story apartment

just saw a single piece of paper drift past 50 feet in the air over buildings like a beautiful white bird

The human body lacks a built-in emergency invisible mode or cloaking device for when you’re (I’m) naked and need to run downstairs in front of several windows to retrieve an item in a hurry. I consider this a serious design flaw.

really enjoying this series

To reiterate

Not enough of you know about the Birds Head Haggadah, and that

is a damn

shame

To those asking questions, humans were supposedly crafted in god’s image, and since it’s forbidden to create images of god, sects of Jews in long-ago history (and some sects now) wouldn’t draw straightforward humans. I believe a lot of classical Islamic art also had this rule. In the case of the Bird’s Head Haggadah: a Haggadah contains the prayers, stories, and so forth necessary to conduct a Passover Seder. Rather than illustrating humans (in the form of god!) taking part in the seder, they illustrated bird-human hybrids doing so.

Based on the expressions in these pictures, I have to assume some sense of humor was involved.

Read this in “stats & curiosities from HBR”

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: Showing very feminine women in typical "male domains" does not teach girls that women can achieve anything they want. It teaches them that women have to be feminine to achieve anything at all. That way, femininity and beauty become preconditions for success in fields that have absolutely nothing to do with how you look or how your dress.

it tells them that they can never escape.