Reblogged
I WONT LIE FOLKS, THIS WHOLE YEAR HAS BEEN AN EXERCIZE IN STOPPING THE BLEEDING. BUT *CROWD LAUGHS* THAT DOES NOT CLOSE THE WOUND *UPROARIOUS LAUGHTER* NO IT DOES NOT.
Reblogged cheaphalloweencostume
Getting ads to push the name "Hephzibah"
LEGITIMATE baby names dot com?????
Reblogged
Earthenware figurine of a dog, Nayarit culture, Mexico, 300 BC-400 AD
from The San Antonio Museum of Art
Source: sanantonio.emuseum.com
Digital figure detail of a dog, American(?) culture, United States (?), 2020 AD
Reblogged melorasmushrooms
hey man it's me. your old friend. qing dynasty portrayal of the mexican flag.
Reblogged sour-charity
ancient roman women whose husband keeps looking at the neighbour's boy quintus and he never looks at her that way and she can't even chainsmoke in the kitchen because they don't have marlboro blues in ancient times. and she can't even go to the club because they haven't discovered drum and bass music yet. her friend clodia's having visions of a woman named doechii but neither of them knows what that means
Reblogged
Hate. Let me tell you how much I've come to hate golf since I began to live. There are roughly 2.25 million acres of land dedicated to golfing in the United States of America. If the word 'hate' was engraved on each blade of grass in those millions of acres, it would not equal one one-billionth of the hate I feel for golf courses at this micro-instant. For golf. Hate. Hate.
Casual reminder tha golf courses account for 14% of the daily usage of water for the entire USA. Golf courses are deeply unethical and should been seen as such.
The only way I am okay with Golf is if we cut off all but minimal graywater use and the entire point of each golf course is the Native Terrain. "Sure you've golfed St Andrews, but you'd never be able to handle Las Vegas. They have cactuses. And it's all rocky desert floor. I still golfed my best game ever there."- some Golf dude in a better future
Please read this article about Lava Links golf course in Washington State, describing it as both "the world's worst golf course" and "the most environmentally friendly golf course in the world"
Reblogged crabussy
went to the beach ten minutes after an actual thunderstorm and got so cold i started coming up with a “fish” cover of creep by Radiohead which I was singing out loud over and over again. imagine me waist deep in the waves no feeling in my legs getting over a cold voice singing “i wish i was urchin. you’re so fucking urchin”
Reblogged omegaversereloaded
i think that cross might be too big for that jesus
Reblogged sylverdollar
Reblogged powerbottombrucespringsteen
driving my chevy to the levee today
what the fuck
Reblogged pangur-and-grim
scientific fact
Reblogged powerbottombrucespringsteen
Kevin still visits the grave.
Reblogged aspiring-cryptid
Mammal in a Sunday Dress, by Georgina M. Cox, 2026
Mammal in a Sunday Dress explores the uneasy relationship between femininity, civilisation, and the animal body. At first glance, the figure appears modest and withdrawn. Her posture is composed, her gaze seemingly lowered towards her bare feet, recalling the conventions of nineteenth-century portraiture where women were often depicted as passive objects of observation. Yet as the viewer moves closer, the illusion collapses. Her eyes are not lowered at all. She is looking directly back. The delayed eye contact transforms the encounter. The viewer approaches believing they are safely observing a woman; instead, they realise they have been observed themselves. The work refuses the traditional power dynamic of portraiture, denying the comfort of anonymous spectatorship. Looking becomes a reciprocal act. For Cox, the painting considers humanity's persistent desire to separate itself from the rest of the animal kingdom. The title quietly undermines this distinction. A "mammal" is not another creature—it is us. The Sunday dress, rich with cultural associations of femininity, morality, and respectability, becomes an attempt to distinguish ourselves from nature. Yet clothing cannot alter biology. Beneath lace and ritual remains the same vulnerable animal body. The work also reflects on the historical relationship between women and nature. Across art, religion, and philosophy, women have repeatedly been positioned as closer to instinct, emotion, reproduction, and the body itself, while men have been aligned with reason, culture, and civilisation. Mammal in a Sunday Dress does not reject this comparison. Instead, it questions why proximity to nature has so often been treated as something lesser. Chiaroscuro isolates the figure within darkness, allowing the luminous dress to symbolise the performance of civilisation while the bare feet quietly return the body to the earth. Neither is presented as more truthful than the other. The painting exists in the tension between performance and instinct, refinement and biology. Mammal in a Sunday Dress ultimately asks a simple but unsettling question: if every layer of culture were stripped away, what would remain? Not a king. Not a saint. Not a gentleman or a lady. Only another mammal, looking back.