Avatar

I Love My Cat And Fanfic

@sugardoll22

The collective space for some vaguely random posts that I agree with and whatever fandom has managed to ensnare me with pretty gifs and gay people
Avatar
Avatar
wingkink

How to read comic

  1. Pick character
  2. Read every comic with that character
  3. Ignore other comics
  4. If you don’t like the way the character was written in a series ignore that too
  5. Get into fights online
Avatar
Avatar
appleswan

The glory of the batfamily is not that they fit into a neat little box of family dynamics, it's that their family is messy. It's because Damian thinks of both Dick and Bruce as his dad, and Tim is technically emancipated but still buys Bruce a card on fathers day. They all chip in together to buy something for Alfred on fathers day too because he's a butler but he's part of their family.

Jason is both their brother, and the uncle with a criminal record in the same breath. Kate is a wine aunt but also a mom for some of the kids. Steph is their neighbor friend but also sometimes their sister.

They'll try to kill each other, they try to hurt each other, but at the end of the day they're down to get something from batburger. They're vigilantes in one of the worst cities in America, they are not a perfect family but that's the joy of it

Avatar
Avatar
catchymemes

ok so people are making fun of this but adding this with other anti-global warming tactics will work

This isn’t adding ice just for the sake of denial, it’s adding to the Earth’s albedo. This in turn actually makes the Earth’s climate cooler, and then more ice will be produced naturally because of this.

It isn’t a process we need to continue forever, in fact it’s one that needs to be calculated so that we don’t do it TOO MUCH. The only worry would be cooling down too much.

So yes, this is a good idea. It simply isn’t the only thing we should do because we still have gross pollution.

For the love of god do it . anything just do it. Give us hope.

Here’s the thing: Most environmental catastrophes humans have ever or are currently creating can be fixed. It’s not just a matter of “oh no, things are ruined, and maybe we can stop the degradation so that things don’t get any worse, but we’re stuck with how things are.” There are some things we can’t do, like bringing back extinct species. But there are a lot of other things we can definitely do, many of which are being done right now. The problem is that most of our willpower and effort is spent on bullshit tiny things that won’t solve the problem (individual recycling, etc.) and not on the large-scale things that can and will make a large-scale difference.

Ice caps are melting? Guess what! We know how to make ice. It’s not that hard. Designing mostly-automated robot ships to go to the poles and rebuild the ice caps is well within our current technical capabilities. We just need to fund it.

Deforestation on a massive scale? Destruction of other biomes? Guess what! We know how to plant trees. We know how to plant grasslands. We know how to take barren, lifeless land and turn it back into a viable biome. It’s not that hard. In a lot of cases, if there’s neighboring areas where that biome still exists, all you have to do is dump a few tons of biomass (plant clippings, food waste, etc.) on the barren land and stand back and wait. The biomass will provide nutrients and keep the topsoil from blowing away, and the plants and animals from the neighboring biome will move in. In two decades, even if you don’t do anything besides dumping the biomass on it, you won’t be able to tell what was the barren area and what was the still-existing biome.

Coral reefs dying? Now, coral reefs are a bit more fragile than most biomes, but guess what! We still know how to replant/rebuild them, and in fact are working on that in places affected by coral reef die-off! And we’re learning how to do it better every day.

Desertification? Guess what! We know how to turn desert back into green space. They’re doing it on a large scale in China and sub-Saharan Africa. There are several different techniques, none of which are even very technology-intensive. It takes money and time and labor, but it’s perfectly doable. We know this because we’ve done it.

Plastic in the ecosystem, particularly in the ocean? Guess what! There’s a lot of people working on this, both on “how to remove plastic from the ocean” and “how to reuse/recycle it more efficiently.” And the techniques are improving by leaps and bounds every year. This is a solvable problem. These are all solvable problems.

So if you’re crushed by the weight of the coming environmental catastrophe … don’t be. These are all solvable problems! We can stop things from getting worse, and we can fix the things we’ve broken. The issue is political, not practical.

On the political side, of course, is the need to tighten up environmental regulations across the globe. (What’s the statistic, that 90% of pollution is caused by 100 corporations?) And then of course, we need to fund these programs on a large enough scale.

In some ways the political aspect is the hardest, but consider this: we are at a tipping point. Things are changing about the way politicians talk about climate change and ecological degradation. More ordinary people are concerned about this, which means more pressure on politicians. One of the ways that things are changing is that people–even conservatives–are starting to talk about “job opportunities in new green fields” and switching the conversation so that it’s not “rainforest vs. jobs” makes political action a lot more possible. And no, it’s not going to happen on its own, but it can happen.

This is a solvable problem.

Avatar
izze-bizzle

I *needed* this. Climate change has had me feeling SO helpless, having a list of things that can actually potentially be done is beautiful

Climate change is a technological problem. This statement does not exclude social problems, but the core of the matter is that the fastest most effective way to solving this crisis is through technology.

The corporate bastards WANT you to despair because if we all give up, we stop being a thorn in their side. If people know it’s not hopeless and there’s actually specific things that can be done & will make a huge difference? We’ll keep giving them shit.

Don’t despair. Don’t give up.

(Remember the hole in the ozone layer? And how it’s shrinking now? YEAH!)

Avatar
Avatar
surlifen

NO ONE knows how to use thou/thee/thy/thine and i need to see that change if ur going to keep making “talking like a medieval peasant” jokes. /lh

They play the same roles as I/me/my/mine. In modern english, we use “you” for both the subject and the direct object/object of preposition/etc, so it’s difficult to compare “thou” to “you”.

So the trick is this: if you are trying to turn something Olde, first turn every “you” into first-person and then replace it like so:

“I” →  “thou”

“Me” →  “thee”

“My” →  “thy”

“Mine” →  “thine”

Let’s suppose we had the sentences “You have a cow. He gave it to you. It is your cow. The cow is yours”.

We could first imagine it in the first person-

I have a cow. He gave it to me. It is my cow. The cow is mine”.

And then replace it-

Thou hast a cow. He gave it to thee. It is thy cow. The cow is thine.”

Avatar
some-stars

This is perfect and the only thing missing is that when “thy” comes before a vowel it’s replaced by “thine”, i.e. “thy nose” but “thine eyes.” English used to do this with my and mine too (and still does with a and an).

Avatar
fremedon

The second person singular verb ending is -(e)st. In the present tense, it works more or less like the third person singular ending, -s: 

  • I sleep in the attic. Thou sleepest in the attic. He sleeps in the attic.
  • I love pickles. Thou lovest pickles. He loves pickles.
  • I go to school. Thou goest to school. He goes to school.

The -(e)st ending is only added to one word in a compound verb. This is where a lot of people make mistakes:

  • I will believe it when I see it. Thou wilt believe it when thou seest it. He will believe it when he sees it.

NOT

  • *thou willst believest it! NOPE! This is wrong

If you’re not sure, try saying it in the third person and replacing the -(e)st with -s:

  • *He will believes it when he sees it. ALSO NOPE! 

In general, if there’s one auxiliary, it takes the -(e)st ending) and the main verb does not. If there are multiple auxiliaries, only one of them takes -(e)st:

  • I could eat a horse. Thou couldst eat a horse. He could eat a horse.
  • I should go. Thou shouldst go. He should go.
  • I would have gone. Thou wouldst have gone. He wouldst have gone. 

You can reduce the full -est ending to -st in poetry, if you need to drop a syllable:

  • thou sleepst, thou lov'st.

In some common words–mostly auxiliary verbs, or what you might have learned as “helping verbs”–the ending is always reduced:

  • I can swim. Thou canst swim. He can swim.

Sometimes this reduction takes the last consonant of the stem with it:

  • I have a cow. Thou hast a cow. He has a cow. 

Or reduces the -st down to -t:

  • I must believe her. Thou must believe her. He must believe her.
  • I shall not kill. Thou shalt not kill. He shall not kill.

However! UNLIKE the third-person singular -s, the second person -(e)st is ALSO added to PAST TENSE words, either to the past stem in strong (irregular) verbs or AFTER THE -ed in weak (regular) verbs: 

  • I gave her the horse. Thou gavest her the horse. He gave her the horse.
  • I made a pie. Thou mad’st a pie. He made a pie.
  • I wanted to go. Thou wantedst to go. He wanted to go.

This is different from the third person!

  • *He gaves her the horse. He mades a pie. He wanteds to go. SO MUCH NOPE!

It’s not wrong to add -(e)st to a long Latinate verb in the past tense, but it’s unusual; it’s much more common to use a helping verb instead:

  • I delivered the letter. (Great!)
  • Thou deliveredst the letter. (Not wrong, but weird)
  • He delivered the letter. (Great!)
  • I did deliver the letter. (Normal if emphatic, or an answer to a question; otherwise, a little weird.)
  • Thou didst deliver the letter. (Great!) 

And a couple last things:

1.) Third-person -(e)th is mostly equivalent to and interchangeable with third-person -s:

  • I have a cow. Thou hast a cow. He hath a cow.
  • I love her. Thou lovest her. He loveth her.
  • I do not understand. Thou dost not understand. He doth not understand.

HOWEVER! Third-person -(e)th, unlike -s but like -(e)st, can, sometimes, go on STRONG past-tense verbs:

  • I gave her the cow. Thou gavest her the cow. He gaveth her the cow.

This never happens with weak verbs:

  • *He lovedeth her. NOPE NOPE NOPE!

And even with strong verbs, from Early Modern (e.g., Shakespearean) English onward, it’s quite rare. But you will see it from time to time.

2.) In contemporary Modern English, we invert the order of subjects and auxiliary verbs in questions:

  • Will I die? I will die. 
  • Has she eaten? She has eaten.

If there’s no auxiliary, we add one–do–and invert that:

  • Do you hear the people sing? You (do) hear the people sing.

In Early Modern English, this process was optional, and mostly used for emphasis; all verbs could be and were moved to the front of the sentence in questions:

  • Hear ye the people sing? (Or singen, if we’re early enough to still be inflecting infinitives.)

Do-support was also optional for negatives:

  • I don’t like him. I like him not.
  • Thou dost not care. Thou carest not.
  • She does not love thee. She loves thee not.

3.) Imperative verbs never take endings:

  • Hear ye, hear ye!
  • Go thou and do likewise!
  • Give me thy hand. Take thou this sword. 

4.) Singular ‘you’–that is, calling a singular person by a plural pronoun–arose as a politeness marker; and ‘thou’ fell out of use because it eventually came to be seen as impolite in almost all contexts. In general, once singular ‘you’ comes into use, it is used for addressing

  • people of higher social status than the speaker
  • or of equivalent status, if both speakers are high-status
  • strangers
  • anyone the speaker wants to flatter

‘Thou’ is used for

  • people of lower social status than the speaker
  • family and intimate friends
  • children
  • anyone the speaker wants to insult

It is safer to ‘you’ someone who doesn’t necessarily warrant ‘you’ than to ‘thou’ someone who does.

5.) And finally, that ‘ye’? That’s the nominative form of you–the one that’s equivalent to ‘I’ or ‘we.’ 

  • I  → thou → he/she/it  → we → ye → they
  • Me → thee → him/her/it → us → you → them
  • My → thy → his/her/its → our → your → their
  • Mine → thine → his/hers/its → ours → yours → theirs

Any time you’re using ‘thou’ for the singular, the second person plural– ‘y’all’– declines like this:

  • ye:  Ye are all a bunch of weirdos.
  • you: And I love you very much.
  • your: This has been your grammar lesson.
  • yours: This grammar lesson is yours. 
Avatar
Avatar
d6b-onion

this video has been going around for a while but the English subtitles didn't match the energy of the spoken French at all. i had to fix it.

reblog to spread this version

REBLOG

😭😭😭😭😭😭😭🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️ he got fucking destroyed with such finality 😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭

Source: youtube.com
Avatar

That gazebo is so fucked

Are you sure gazebo is the correct word?

Are

you 

sure?

Avatar
awkwardarbor

idk why you’re confused, that poor gazebo needs help

Avatar
thebobblehat

This has hit my dash three times… that final reblog made it worthy.

I only liked this for the gif

You cannot call for help, you must face the gazebo alone

Source: forgifs.com
Avatar
Avatar
sew-birb

My friend takes this one step further and refers completely accurately to his girlfriend Danielle as "My partner, Dan"

Also i hate to say it but for some people, boyfriend/girlfriend feels a bit juvenile, say, if youre over 30, or perhaps youve been with someone for a very long time and are committed life partners but not married for whatever reason. Maybe husband/wife feels a little watered down to you and you want to establish the equal nature of your relationship.

Partner is a wonderful word and it should be normalized.

Also makes you sound like a cowboy which is cool I think

Fun side effect to this: Someone thought I was queer because I mentioned MY LAB PARTNER as "my partner." Are you gay? Are you a scientist? Do you just like the term partner? Are you a gay scientist who just likes the term partner? The world won't find out until a year later apparently.

Avatar
Avatar
ot3

i don't smoke for the obvious reasons of not wanting to develop an addiction to nicotine but god do i so often feel the emotion 'i need a cigarette'.

You are using an unsupported browser and things might not work as intended. Please make sure you're using the latest version of Chrome, Firefox, Safari, or Edge.