Seebs

If I were rich here’s what I’d do with my free time okay Mermaid pranks Let me explain. So, I’d get one of those super fancy mermaid tails, like those sick as hell silicone ones that has the super long thick tail that uses like, toe pullies and stuff to make the fins move in cool and impossible ways. like this

(source)

And I would go all fucking out on this fit okay. We’re talking diving lessons until I can hold my breath for 7 minutes and go deep as fuck. Long hair, starfish, scales up to my tits, those funky contacts that make it so you can see under water, all of it- everything I could to make myself look as “thing of the deep but hot” as possible.  Then, I’d go get some shiny valuable rocks. Pearls, Uncut gems, like super fuck’n nice ones like diamonds and shit, and ofc some gold coins. Then I’d dawn my mermaid fit and hit public waterways. Rivers, beys, lakes, places where people are around and might be swimming, but where I’m not gonna die via boat propeller, and not super crowded areas where a lot of people are swimming.  Then I just prank people by poking my head out of the water and surprising them, then I motion them closer and reach into my hair or satchel or something and give them a fucking emerald, smiling all big the whole time then I just- swim the fuck away.  What the fuck they  gonna do now!? Keep it as a fun memory of that time a fuck’n mermaid larper gave them a shiny rock? Never know it’s actually valuable? Or do they take it to a jeweler and find out it’s real? How the fuck are they gonna explain that. They gonna tell the jeweler a fuck’n mermaid gave it to them?! I think the fuck not.  Gonna pop up at the peir and smile at people and give gold coins to whoever stops. Kids are gonna freak. Put a little wonder back in the world. Flirt with pretty girls. Swim down rivers, pop up and surprise some old lady sitting by the water and give her an uncut diamond then swim away without a word. 

Get a reputation as the weird lesbian mermaid who gives out precious gems and never speaks then suddenly stop without warning for like three years to give people time to forget me then do it all again. 

the temptation here is to respond "yeah, you're not special, basically everyone would do that" but i guess empirically approximately zero people who are currently really rich would do this, which is very disappointing and suggests that our current population of rich people is sorely lacking in some essential human quality.

because i, for one, would totally do things like this. or possibly hire younger people to do them for me.

I was trying to write that two things were "sides of the same coin" but somehow I typed "two sides of the same corn"

both city and country girls make do

terfs be like. i am going to tell you how to spot a trans woman. okay so if you think a woman is ugly you should harass them. this is beneficial to women

Okay, so this is really cool! You have this phenomenon where some plants grow edible appendages to their seeds to entice ants to carry them underground where they can safely sprout. And then you have wasps which lay their eggs on the leaves, stems, and other parts of plants and trigger the growth of galls (swellings) which both feed and protect the wasp larvae until they reach maturity.

The boy who was watching the ants noticed they were taking wasp galls underground, too. Further exploration found that the wasp larvae were unharmed inside the galls; the only thing the ants had eaten were edible appendages similar to those on the seeds they collected. The wasp larvae stayed safe inside the ant nest, feeding on their galls, until it was time to emerge and head back out to the surface.

So it turns out that the edible portions of the galls have the same sorts of fatty acids as the edible parts of the seeds. And those fatty acids are also found in dead insects. Scientists think that the wasps evolved a way to make the galls they created mimic the edible portions of the seeds to get the ants to collect the galls. This isn't the only example of wasps making use of ants as caretakers for their young, but it's a really fascinating example thereof--especially if you consider ants evolved from wasps at least 100 million years ago.

for the last fucking time stop policing the bodies and sexualities of real living breathing short women who like “cute” shit

it’s not pedophilia to be a short adult woman and wear hello kitty underwear. it’s not pedophilia to be a short adult woman who collects plushes. it’s not pedophilia to wear things or to collect things at all.

pedophilia is when an adult sexually preys upon a child, end of.

nothing a woman does with her own self will be “pedophilia” or “pedobait”. pedophiles do not pursue adult women who wear striped thigh highs. they prey upon children. 

pedophilia is not wrong because children look a certain way, it’s wrong because they are children and children cannot meaningfully consent. there is not a single child on the planet who can meaningfully consent to sexual activity with an adult.

blaming women who are short and like certain things is misogyny, plain and simple. and I see a lot of you fuckers going after Asian women in particular, which is also actually really fucking racist lmao

donating a toothbrush to a child’s shelter would be more helpful to combat child abuse than anything you keyboard warriors are doing

guess I gotta bring this back because we’re still making takes like “it doesn’t matter if it’s a consenting adult, if you’re attracted to an adult that looks like a minor that’s still pedophilia” in the year of our lord twenty twenty-three

what do these people expect short women to do? remain chaste for all eternity? no really I want to hear the solution. what’s the solution. what do we do about short women who “look like a minor”. what do we do. what do you think we should actually DO.

when people say things like this they do not, for a single moment, consider the woman in this situation. all they’re thinking about is the remote possibility that someone’s getting a boner they’re not supposed to get. 

this is the problem with basically any and all relationship and sex “discourse”. the question asked is never “is someone being harmed? is someone’s boundaries being violated? is someone’s agency being denied?” but rather “is someone getting a boner I personally believe they’re not supposed to get?”

and I am goddamn tired of it.

oh no!!!

my ribcage split open, revealing a grotesque, vertical maw, slavering and bleeding, with uneven rows of jagged and splintered ribs for teeth!!!

and prom is TOMORROW!!!

i feel like the real issue here is that, a week earlier, they could still have won the vote for prom queen, but because the poster's maw hadn't come in yet, the crown went to someone named Kirsten who has, like, a normal-sized vagina dentata and isn't even all that scary really.

every mother's day there's always "remember moms are everything" posts and every father's day there's always "it's okay if you're traumatized, you don't have to celebrate it" posts and that's fine of course, I just never see the opposite. so reminder you don't have to celebrate your mother. you have your reasons. be proud of yourself and don't let the holiday get you down.

the idea is that you do this so you can go visit someone and drop off a card if you missed them, and this roughly balances the emotional effort of "prepare for social interaction" and "initiate social interaction".

the idealist view of religion is v. v. popular and leads to a lot of putting the cart before the horse and other nonsensical positions and interpretations of history, even from people who are otherwise 'leftists'. a major one is the idea that the 'protestant work ethic' is somehow responsible for capitalism, as if it did not develop concurrently with the epoch of primitive accumulation, as if it was not informed and conditioned by the development of capitalism itself! or similarly, the idea that christianity is somehow responsible for colonialism rather than an instrument of it--that the kingdoms of europe said 'well, god has willed us to go and do some colonizing' and sent off the conquistadors rather than being in a material position to economically exploit other peoples & developing a rationalization within the frameworks available to them for why doing so was morally permissible

it's a trick question, these are actually the same thing, the clubs share a venue and they just picked a day together.

If you were wondering: the thing that the studio doesn’t want depicted are unsafe activities a young child whose impulse control hasn’t grown in yet watching the show could feasibility imitate- not wearing a seatbelt, jumping off the garage roof with a pair of cardboard wings, throwing a proper punch at a peer etc. Because kids do imitate what they see around them as part of learning, so you don’t want to teach them something that could hurt someone or themselves until a bit more brain grows in.

Unsafe activities that are not within the scope of an elementary school student are fine- where’s a six year old going to get a missle launcher?

That genuinely answers a lot of questions I had about why kid-friendly media is as wonky as it is, and I love it.

Yeah, it's actually not as stupid as it might seem at first.

Getting hrt is so annoying why is it normal procedure for this otherwise regular ass doctor to ask me what my relationship with my parents is and stuff about my childhood and shit. I finally got an appointment with the informed consent place to restart hrt and they even asked me about my hobbies? Deranged behaviour. Give me the medicine to treat my symptoms like anything else.

“Not use collective punishment as it is not fair on the many people who did nothing and under the 1949 Geneva Conventions it is a war crime.”

Wait it’s a fucking WAR CRIME?!?! I mean that might not be 100% accurate but now I gotta know

holy crap, collective punishment is a war crime.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Geneva_Convention#Collective_punishments

and according to the exact legal phrasing-

No protected person may be punished for an offense he or she has not personally committed. Collective penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation or of terrorism are prohibited.

This technically counts, as students are civilians, and thus considered a “protected person”. So yes, collective classroom punishment breaks the fourth Geneva Convention, and she should be rewarded for standing up for human rights and doing her research.

Power-move: accuse your teacher of a war crime using knowledge they supplied you with

Gotta be worth a couple extra points in history at least

Unfortunately

it doesn’t apply to governments’ actions to their own people.

I am okay with calling a thing a “war crime” even if it’s technically only a war crime to do it to someone who was actively trying to kill you.

Like, “it isn’t a war crime because this person was not trying to kill me, it would only be illegal to treat them badly if they’d actively been working to bring about my death previously” is actually just a really shitty defense and I would personally suggest that even so, you just not do things like that to people.

I agree in terms of “what you’re not allowed to do to your enemies you definitely shouldn’t do to your own people, morally and ethically”. …Which possibly is the only takeaway others are getting from this anyway?

I’m just pointing out “the Geneva Convention does not provide legal recourse against elementary school teachers” — they aren’t actually literally violating international treaties.

Yeah. As an argument that the teacher will end up with a surprise vacation to the Hague, it's bad. As an argument that the teacher should stop and think really hard about their choices and whether this is the legacy they want to leave, it's actually really fucking solid!

Like, yeah, when you frame it like that, maybe it's worth thinking why that's a war crime, and whether the moral standard involved still applies even when it's kids who weren't shooting at you.

“Not use collective punishment as it is not fair on the many people who did nothing and under the 1949 Geneva Conventions it is a war crime.”

Wait it’s a fucking WAR CRIME?!?! I mean that might not be 100% accurate but now I gotta know

holy crap, collective punishment is a war crime.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Geneva_Convention#Collective_punishments

and according to the exact legal phrasing-

No protected person may be punished for an offense he or she has not personally committed. Collective penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation or of terrorism are prohibited.

This technically counts, as students are civilians, and thus considered a “protected person”. So yes, collective classroom punishment breaks the fourth Geneva Convention, and she should be rewarded for standing up for human rights and doing her research.

Power-move: accuse your teacher of a war crime using knowledge they supplied you with

Gotta be worth a couple extra points in history at least

Unfortunately

it doesn’t apply to governments’ actions to their own people.

I am okay with calling a thing a "war crime" even if it's technically only a war crime to do it to someone who was actively trying to kill you.

Like, "it isn't a war crime because this person was not trying to kill me, it would only be illegal to treat them badly if they'd actively been working to bring about my death previously" is actually just a really shitty defense and I would personally suggest that even so, you just not do things like that to people.