"i only wanna eat things with ingredients i can pronounce" has always been one of the funniest moral positions of all time. literally just learn how to pronounce more ingredients then? truly undefeated in its celebration of ignorance
I’m going to Constantinople, that shit better not be Istanbul
Real shit
Even Weird Al has had that™ experience with Tony Hawk
Tony Hawk IS Forrest Gump
So I looked up why and how this happened, and it turns out Weird Al hired a company called Birdhouse Skateboards to provide some “skate/punk” extras for the video. Birdhouse Skateboards is a company started by Tony Hawk, so not only did Weird Al end up putting Tony Hawk in his video without realizing it, he actually hired Tony Hawk’s company without realizing it! And then Tony Hawk just decided to go along as one of the extras himself.
BTW, he’d already won like 40 contests already, some of them international skateboarding contests. So it’s not like Weird Al cast some unknown skateboarder who ended up becoming World Famous Skateboarder, he was already well known and was running his own Skateboarding company.
Think of it this way. This wasn’t ‘Weird Al got Tony Hawk to be in his video’, this was ‘Tony Hawk found a way to be in a Weird Al Video.’
The chance that Tony Hawk has infiltrated your location or piece of media is low
BUT NEVER ZERO.
hold the fuck on. you can have animated GIF pfps now?????????
DOES EVERYONE SEE THIS SHIT???
HIS TIME HAS RETURNED
Mark the electrician has been here for five minutes and he’s already said “well that’s…weird” twice from the other room and frankly I’m afraid to ask.
It’s not good when skilled tradesman are standing in the middle of your room pinching the bridge if their nose, is it?
Mark just referred to the wiring in our bedroom as “creative” and “interesting”.
This is fine.
And now he’s taking apart the ceiling. I’m not worried, are any of you worried? I’m not, haha, it’s not like this house was previously owned by someone who would do something stupid like try to wire their house themselves…or store tins of varnish under the furnace behind a secret alcove…
Ha ha…
Ha.
Hm.
Fuck.
WHAT DO YOU MEAN THERE’S NO NEUTRAL WIRES??!?
WHAT DO YOU MEAN IT’S GROUNDED INTO THE SCREWS HOLDING UP THE CEILING LIGHT???!?!!
This post crosses my dashboard every so often and every time, I’m reminded of when I discovered that my whole house was grounded to a gas line.
Good times.
shinylesbianeevee
IT WAS WHAT?
Anonymous asked:
to clarify- the writer of tlt didn’t write homestuck fan fiction, she read it but she said she was actually more into the fandom for some video game i forget the name of and that was what she wrote fanfic (like a lot of fanfic) of back in the day. i’m telling you this bc i’m a pedant. if tlt is a fanfic of something it’s that video game, probably. idk i never read(played?) homestuck or that video game. people just kinda hooked onto her having read homestuck bc it’s funny and it spiraled from there. anyway i’m sorry ur asks are like this.
I do want to note though, like, having just read the entire series, I feel like the Homestuck-y-ness was greatly overexaggerated? I don’t think there was even a single “Abscond”! The most ‘Homestuck’ thing in my opinion was the aviators. More than anything what stood out as Homestuck inspired would be the general fanfic-ness of like...how loose the writing was to be fun? Like there were clear meme references that got a good laugh out of me but would probably read weirdly to people not familiar with them. Like it knew it’s audience and was willing to vibe specifically with them which is fun. The Homestuck seems like more of a fun fact than anything actually relevant to the books.
Like, I'm not gonna say that the X-Men and their various imitators are anything like a perfect allegory, but "it's a bad allegory because super powers really are dangerous" has never held water for me. Like, are we really just gonna uncritically accept the implicit assumption lurking in that argument that bigotry is only wrong to the extent that its targets lack the ability to threaten the status quo? Hand-wringing over whether certain minorities are inherently dangerous is – and, critically, always has been – a smoke-screen for the real conversation about who has the right to possess the capacity for violence, and you can't engage with that conversation if your opening move is to concede that the only legitimate victim is a powerless one.
To underline what I mean about "the right to possess the capacity for violence", let's peel back the allegory and bring it back to the real-world issues that are allegedly being allegorised.
Every time the cops roll up and shoot some poor guy thirty-seven times in the back because the cell phone in his pocket looked kind of like it might be a gun, the public conversation always centres around questions like "are the police telling the truth about thinking it was a gun?" and "were the police reasonable to assume it was a gun?"
These are not the right questions to be asking.
The right question to be asking is "so what if it was a gun?"
Would the public execution of a guy who was literally just walking down the street have been justified then?
It's not accidental that stories of this type are most popular in America, where the people who can be counted on to argue that cops are behaving correctly when they kill on sight every time they see a member of a visible minority who looks like they might be packing are the exact same people who argue that carrying concealed automatic weapons without a permit is the God-given right of every red-blooded American man, woman and child.
This is not hypocrisy. They know exactly what they're doing. It's not about who is and is not dangerous: it's about who has the right to be dangerous.
"I hate reality just as much as the next guy, but it's still the only place to get a decent meal"
- Groucho Marx
Sharing the secrets of your hearth with strangers who will never be able to meet or thank you. Honoring the dead through learning their traditions of the home; emulation and exaltation. A good carrot cake.
