sobbing and crying at the woman who stole a meth addicted kitten from her dealer and then she and the kitten got clean together

thats love baby!!

honestly really sexy of tumblr to keep follower numbers private. how many people are following me? you'll never know unless I tell you. maybe it's a million, or a thousand, or five, or maybe it's just you. maybe you're the only one here, all by yourself, unable to see if there's anyone standing next to you.

and you'd never know, because status here is based on opinion and not numbers; how popular you think someone is is a vibes-only calculation, and besides the chronological algorithms-optional feed, it's genuinely the best thing tumblr's ever done.

Time machine

(Source)

asdfghjkll

Science has gone too far O_O

Recently, while staring far too long at a potato chip, it occurred to me that the ridges could possibly be used to create a lenticular effect. So I got out some chip dip (and the smallest paint brush I have) to test it out. I started with a simple 2-frame illustration of a football and a basketball, then I painted a little sour cream and onion dip bird. 🥔🕊️ - via my new @brockdavisart instagram

i’ll die on the hill that says “sapphic love isn’t inherently more wholesome and pure and saying it does will only hurt lesbian and bi women”

listen. if you go around talking about how much better and moral love between women is because male love is so sexual and bad, you’re not actually doing any good. i know too many lesbians who think they’re predatory just for being sexually attracted to women because #feminism. the idea that love between women is the non-evil sexuality you will only shame wlw for what you claim is evil male sexuality, whether it’s a sex drive or finding women hot or if it’s(god forbit) the masculinity, because these are all traits wlw will have. and you’re not helping.

also just btw- this is introductory TERF rhetoric. the idea that men are inherently evil and are always a threat to women simply by virtue of existence, and that women are inherently purer/safer/more wholesome simply by virtue of being women, is the 'radical feminism' part of the acronym. It's gender essentialism, where "goodness" is given to women, and "badness" to men.

I saw this question posed on tiktok, but I think Tumblr would really enjoy it too.

If a fae creature offered to give one million dollars for a bone chosen at random, how many bones would you allow them to take?

Light clarifications; The fae is not the one choosing the bones. The bone is taken at random. Each bone, no matter the size or importance, is worth a full million dollars. You must also declare the exact number first, you can't go bone-by-bone. You either say 2 or you say 10, you can't work your way up to a higher number. The bones are removed instantaneously, and the money is given immediately as well. You will not get in government trouble for acquiring the money.

Tell me in the tags/replies how many bones you'd let the fae take. And as always, reblog for bigger sample size.

if you want to test your luck, this site lets you choose a random human bone :) https://randomlistgenerator.com/human-bones

Im drawing wings everywere. Someone help me

HE IS HIS STAR, AAAAARRRGH

btw, since the spam comments fiasco, the new default comments setting on ao3 fics is only logged in users can comment. the default used to be anyone can comment. you have to actively allow anon comments now; don't forget to check it if you're like me and prefer to leave your fics totally unregulated 😅

retroactive or when you post new fic?

New fic. I opened up the new work page and edit work page to compare. My older works still have it set to 'Registered users and guests can comment' (the original default) while new fics are set to the new default of 'only registered users can comment'. Previously written fics have, whatever you set them as before.

[image: a screenshot of the AO3 New Work page, showing the "Who can comment on this work" radio buttons; options are both registered users and guests, only registered users, and no one, and the option selected is registered users only.]

i hate this weird trend in fandom where subtext is seen as a Bad Thing and is only done if the creators are too cowardly to commit to showing something. i hate to break it to you but nuance and layers are what make stories interesting, if you have no subtext then you have a very flat story

EVERYONE WISH OUR GOOD FRIEND JONATHAN HARKER SAFE TRAVELS TODAY

this might be because I’m a family law lawyer and also an old crone who remembers when marriage equality wasn’t a thing (as in, marriage equality only became nation-wide two months before I went to law school), but I have Strong Feelings about the right to marry and all the legal benefits that come with it

like I’m all for living in sin until someone says they don’t want to get married because it’s ~too permanent~ and in the same breath start talking about having kids or buying a house with their significant other. then I turn into a 90-year-old passive-aggressive church grandma who keeps pointedly asking when the wedding is. “yes, a divorce is very sad and stressful, but so is BEING HOMELESS BECAUSE YOU’RE NOT ENTITLED TO EQUITABLE DISTRIBUTION OF MARITAL PROPERTY, CAROLINE!”

“oh, he thinks a piece of paper shouldn’t define your relationship? ASK HIM HOW HE FEELS ABOUT BEING ON YOUR BABY’S BIRTH CERTIFICATE, PATRICIA.”

“oh, sure, it’s all fun and games until your estranged parents are making medical decisions for you and inheriting all your property, TIMOTHY.”

so, I’ve gotten this question and similar ones before, and I want to use it to go into what marriage actually is.

so, in law, there are a couple of legal assumptions made when someone is a close family member, like a parent. the assumptions are that this person knows you well enough to make decisions on your behalf in an emergency, supports or is supported by you financially, and, most importantly, that they are emotionally significant to you in a way that makes them different from a total stranger or a good friend. immigration law, for example, prioritizes families over people immigrating for jobs alone, because not getting a job doesn’t have the same emotional weight as never seeing your mom again.

the difference is that you don’t get to choose your family (outside of adoption and, uh, legally that’s not a bilateral decision). you do get to choose your spouse. the fact that you chose them is why they get priority for things like inheritance and immigration, even over your parents or your siblings or your grandma.

how does the government know that this particular person is someone you want to have as part of your family? you fill out a form and you tell them.

what happens if you don’t want them in your family anymore, and don’t want those assumptions made about them? you fill out a different form and you tell the government that.

the thing I think that’s hard for people to wrap their heads around – whether you’re a starry-eyed romantic or a pragmatic bitch like me – is that marriage isn’t an announcement of how much you love someone. that’s what a facebook status update is for. you do not need to be in love, or sexually/romantically monogamous, or be religious, or any of the other things people associate with marriage, in order to be married.

it’s a legal decision. it is choosing to get certain benefits (like taxes, because it’s assumed you’re financially supporting each other) in exchange for certain responsibilities (because it’s assumed you’re supporting each other, it stops mattering exactly who bought what after you got married, so divorce splits the whole pool of stuff even if one person bought like 75% of it).

you don’t get the one without the other, and you don’t get either if you don’t affirmatively say that’s what you want to have happen. it doesn’t happen automatically, or in every romantic relationship no matter how serious, because the choice is the point.

and, to be clear: if you do not want, or do not care about, the legal rights and responsibilities of being married, you should not get married. it’s a fucking legal contract that has serious legal implications! it’s not something you should be doing for funsies!

tl;dr: if you want all the shit that comes with a marriage, good and bad, you need to tell the government that’s what you want. if you don’t want it, then you don’t need to do it, but you need to also be aware of what you’re potentially losing (in exchange for what you’re keeping). that should be an informed decision, not one you make for emotional reasons like “I just want everyone to know I’m only having sex with this person forever” or “our love is so pure it transcends legal boundaries.”

Is there any option other than marriage for telling the government you want this person to be part of your family? Like, can you draw up some kind of homebrew contract?

Short answer: No. If there was, queer people would have done it already.

Long answer: That’s a little like asking “can you become a citizen via contract rather than going through the immigration and naturalization process?” Marriage is a legal status: you either are or you aren’t. Can you cobble together very specific stuff, like advanced healthcare directives and wills and whatnot? Yes, absolutely. But anything that requires you to be legally married as a status cannot be contracted away: you can’t file taxes jointly or sponsor someone for a green card or get someone’s Social Security benefits if they die if you’re not married to that person.

Now, to be clear: some things that often require marriage do not always require marriage. For example, usually you need to be married to have someone unrelated to you be on your health insurance, but my job’s specific health insurance plan allows coverage for domestic partners, which they define as a single person who has cohabitated with you for six months or more and is in a committed relationship with you. So even though my fiancé and I are not married yet, he’s been on my health insurance for the past year and a half, because we hit the six month mark of living together right around when I had to re-enroll in my health insurance for the year.

But if we’d gotten married sooner, he’d have been able to get on my health insurance right away (getting married is a qualifying event that lets someone get on a health insurance plan outside of the enrollment period), but since he’s just a cohabitating partner, we had to wait six months for him to get on my insurance. And if he’d moved in with me a month later, we’d have to wait a whole year before he could enroll with me on my health insurance. Even though it’s allowed, it still doesn’t have the same standing as a marriage.

I guess technically adult adoption is an option, in that it is what queer people did for a while in lieu of marriage, but it’s a bad idea for a lot of reasons (not least of which being that you can divorce a spouse but you can’t undo an adoption).

this, THIS is why QPR make me so fucking nervous. i’m not trying to shit on your beautiful poly aroace love affair, i’m asking you HOW WILL THIS RELATIONSHIP HOLD UP IN COURT. cause, news flash: it won’t.

if you have shared bank accounts and a house and a kid with someone who isn’t married to you, they can wipe you out – legally speaking – and you have no recourse. none. you will never see your kid again, unless you’re lucky and contributed half their DNA.

if they have a car accident and end up in hospital, you don’t have a legal right to see them. if they’re in a coma, their parents can pull the plug and adopt that child and you can do nothing.

queers wanted marriage equality not to Be Like Teh Hets, but because it is the most legal protection you can ever have against that bad stuff that comes (and it comes for everyone).

if you don’t have that stuff, if you’re relying on your partners to do the right thing forever and be perfect people and never have a business collapse or a messy family situation or an accident or even to get sick … you’re being really, really naïve.

Pre-legal-gay-marriage, I saw this happen.  I was on a parenting board and one day a woman we’d posted with for years told us her partner and one of their children had died in a car accident.  And because she wasn’t the biological parent of the surviving child – the child she’d been a parent to since conception – her ex’s parents took custody and took the child away and kept her from seeing that child.  Ever.

Because here’s the thing: children are not property.  Specifically, in estate law, children are not, and cannot be “Real Property.”  You cannot bequeath them like furniture, books, and bank accounts.   

“But my will states who I want as guardian!”  You say. Welp.  That statement is, in law, only a (strong) suggestion.  A judge still still have to rule on guardianship of your minor child, and you cannot, from the grave, dictate where they end up.  

Again: Children are not real property. If you are not their biological or legal parent, the state can remove them from your custody and hand them to someone more closely related, or not related at all but merely less gay, less queer, less “inappropriate” by your state’s legal standards.

The woman I knew back then was on good term with her not-quite-in-laws. Or thought she was.  Because as soon as her partner died, their tune changed 100%, they found anti-gay legal support, and they took that woman’s child from her.  Forever. 

That’s not my only “my outlaws are great and fine with us and its okay we’re not legally married” story, but it’s probably the most heartbreaking.  Though the image of a man who has just lost his partner of 25 years watching his ex-outlaws take ½ of his chairs, ½ of his pillows, ½ of his sheets, ½ of his napkins, ½ of his towels, ½ of his dishes, ½ of his books….. is pretty fucking close.  After they made him sit behind “the family” at his partner’s funeral.

My mother was a lifelong Republican, a very conservative Catholic. The thing that pushed her over on legalizing gay marriage was stories about people being in the hospital and their partner of 20 years not being allowed to see them, because they weren’t legally married. She thought that was wrong and unfair. 

Also a reminder “get married” does not mean “have a wedding.” You can file the paperwork and get married in a courthouse or office. There doesn’t even need to be a ceremony, you just have to sign some papers. (Bonus: you get access to the legal privileges of marriage as well as the protections, AND you get to stick it to the billion dollar “wedding industry” that preys on us all.)

#this is also why marriage equality for disabled people is super important

Going back a few responses, I hate to be the one to break it to you but people in a QPR can get married, too. Its not like illegal

Castiel relaxing in the early morning hours, right when the sun comes up over the horizon. He likes watching humans from up there :D

[my social media links]

Jensen having to come up with new and creative ways to ask to be choked within an inch of his life

Jensen - ‘hey guys it’s been a while since Dean got choked out by a man, I think I - I mean Dean, I think Dean really needs it’

What could have been 😔

I'm a Merlin ride or die, so here's a painting of my best girl Gwen!

Amazing!

To a homophobe, even the most chaste kiss on the cheek between gay people is exactly as disgusting and degenerate as a hardcore BDSM orgy hosted in the town square, so you may as well ally with the BDSM orgy enthusiasts to throw bricks at the cops who are going to try and arrest all of you together anyway.

I once held hands with my husband at an event where my wife was also present, and a concerned parent lectured me about how she didn't want us to "influence" her son. Our icky gay polyam hand holding was such a threat to this woman that she made a point to corner me away from my partners and get me on my own to lecture me about being "indecent." If she had been inclined toward violence, I would have been fucked.

Hand holding. That's all it fucking took.

So catch me at Pride in a leather harness and holding a bat, because if hand holding is all it takes, we owe it to each other to stand together.

We're here. We're queer. Get fucking used to it.

The sheer number of LGBT people who have called me a "degenerate" and a "pedophile" and an "abuse apologist" and a "homophobe" and a "woman-beater" over this post, in the less than 24 hours since I have posted it, is proof that it needs to be said.

Call me a degenerate if you want. I don't care. It has always been the degenerates protecting each other when the cops raid our bars and inspect our clothing and haul us away for being cross-dressing, family-destroying, society-polluting, tranny dyke faggot freaks.

I know who I'd rather have on my side, and it's not the self-loathing pieces of shit who would rather destroy their own people than dismantle systems of oppression.

You will never be wholesome and pure enough for the bigots, no matter how much you distance yourself from the kinksters. Once they've killed all us degenerates, they're coming for you next. And we won't be here to fight for you anymore.

This post has been getting a lot of notes again recently, and there's something I finally feel the need to clear up.

In the last reblog I said that people got nasty on this post and referred to me as a "woman beater." Many people in the notes have apparently been confused by this, because they think the accusations of woman beating are related to the woman who cornered me. I've gotten a lot of questions about how I could be a woman beater if I didn't get into an actual altercation with the woman.

And, y'all, that's not why people call me a woman beater for this post.

They think I'm a woman beater because I'm into BDSM. They think I abuse my wife. They think that consensual kink is the same thing as real violence. They saw that I like women and like BDSM, and instantly assumed I must be a sadist Dom who is violent with women.

Never mind that I never specified what kind of kink I'm into, what my specific kink dynamic with my partners are, or what my preferred roles are. Y'all have no idea whether I'm actually a Dom or not. Maybe I'm actually the one who likes getting flogged. Maybe I don't like flogging at all. Maybe I'm a switch and like both. Maybe I'm not into doing or receiving but I like to watch. Maybe none of these things are true. Maybe several of them are. You have no idea, and I'm not going to tell you.

These people also managed to conveniently ignore the part where I also have a husband, because they are so wrapped up in the idea that "consensual BDSM = men violently abusing women." The idea of three queer trans people in a consensual polyamorous kink dynamic is so fucking confusing to them that they defaulted to "Ren must hit their wife."

And to round it off, I also never specified my gender or pronouns or orientation, prompting several nasty comments on this post about cis men being predatory. I am not a man, cis or trans, nor do I think it's beneficial to treat all men as inherent predators.

Hope that clears up some confusion.