rvya:

that’s it. that’s the show.

anti-leyna:

do we need more young queer characters? yes.

do we need more young queer characters that hate themselves and keep wishing they were straight and/or cis? no. we really don’t.

millionfish:

smo-chi:

I had to do a dramatic reading of millionfish's amazing art.

IM YELLING

mydisneysoul:

super-who-locked-in:

everytanglehasastory:

Notice how Gothel checks Rapunzel’s hair first, not Rapunzel.

notice how Gothel’s a huge bitch

More like mother awful

mydisneysoul:

super-who-locked-in:

everytanglehasastory:

Notice how Gothel checks Rapunzel’s hair first, not Rapunzel.

notice how Gothel’s a huge bitch

More like mother awful

girlsbydaylight:

つきにかわって! by yukke on pixiv

girlsbydaylight:

つきにかわって! by yukke on pixiv

ghostdrama:

i love old science fiction because it’s all like “IT’S THE DISTANT YEAR TWO THOUSAND AND THREE AND MAN IS EXPLORING THE DEEP CORNERS OF THE UNIVERSE” like god bless you old sci-fi you had such high hopes for us

a-little-melancholy:

chaz-gelf:

sixmilliondeadinternets:

Gandhi has been historically the most aggressive character in Civilization due to an original bug in the first game that caused him to go all-out once he reaches democracy. They just kept the thing going ever since.


To further explain this bug, because I was chatting with mothmonarch about Civilization and other strategy games last night and I never got around to explaining this fully, but I love this story:
Gandhi’s AI in the original game had its aggression set to the absolute minimum (0 on a scale of 0 to 10, I believe, I may have this wrong but the basic idea I’m about to explain is accurate, as far as I can tell). Adopting democracy lowers an AI civ’s aggression by 2 points, so when someone who is fully peaceful loses two points of aggression, they should still be nice and polite, right?
Except this is an old DOS game, and so computer math is in place. What actually happened was that Gandhi’s aggression level ticked backwards two steps, from 0 to 255. On a scale of 0 to 10, Gandhi is now 255 points of pure nuclear rage.
And that’s the story as I recall it, but again I may have gotten some details wrong, so feel free to correct me! After that, as the original poster said, the devs loved the bug so much that they just kept it in as a running joke!

“On a scale of 0 to 10, Gandhi is now 255 points of pure nuclear rage.”I about pissed myself laughing at this.

a-little-melancholy:

chaz-gelf:

sixmilliondeadinternets:

Gandhi has been historically the most aggressive character in Civilization due to an original bug in the first game that caused him to go all-out once he reaches democracy. They just kept the thing going ever since.

To further explain this bug, because I was chatting with mothmonarch about Civilization and other strategy games last night and I never got around to explaining this fully, but I love this story:

Gandhi’s AI in the original game had its aggression set to the absolute minimum (0 on a scale of 0 to 10, I believe, I may have this wrong but the basic idea I’m about to explain is accurate, as far as I can tell). Adopting democracy lowers an AI civ’s aggression by 2 points, so when someone who is fully peaceful loses two points of aggression, they should still be nice and polite, right?

Except this is an old DOS game, and so computer math is in place. What actually happened was that Gandhi’s aggression level ticked backwards two steps, from 0 to 255On a scale of 0 to 10, Gandhi is now 255 points of pure nuclear rage.

And that’s the story as I recall it, but again I may have gotten some details wrong, so feel free to correct me! After that, as the original poster said, the devs loved the bug so much that they just kept it in as a running joke!

On a scale of 0 to 10, Gandhi is now 255 points of pure nuclear rage.”

I about pissed myself laughing at this.

iamlittlei:

lightspeedsound:

all-the-fangirl-feels:

#remember how this movie took female stereotypes and crushed them into a million pieces

casual reminder that Elle Woods scored a 179 on the LSAT, which is one point shy of a perfect score.

Casual reminder that Whatshisface here had family connections and was a legacy and shit, whereas Elle Woods came out of nowhere.

casual reminder that Elle Woods actually had an amazing background in real life issues that people dismissed as unimportant but managed to not only learn the law, but learned how to apply the law.

Casual reminder that Elle Woods used her lawyer skills to save a woman from an abusive relationship and also save another woman from trumped up murder charges and basically what I’m saying is you go, girl, go get ‘em Elle Woods, thank you for this movie.

I love this movie

marshmallowviscera:

people talkin like “I thought this was supposed to be the future where are my flying cars”

yall do know that surgeons recently 3D printed a new skull for a woman and that we have machines who learn and recognize themselves in mirrors and recently we found a galaxy that SHOULDN’T EXIST

like

fuck flying cars, guys

caelas:

saying feminism is unnecessary because you don’t feel oppressed is like saying fire extinguishers are unnecessary because your house isn’t on fire

You Cannot Rest Here

meeplol:

Have you ever played a video game where you have to sleep to recover? They only let you do it if everything is safe. Otherwise they won’t let you sleep. You’ll get a message, saying “You cannot sleep now, there are monsters nearby.”

Now, remember the last time you just couldn’t get to sleep?

I do.

pichiinyan:

love-theysay:

So the trending tag today on twitter is #womenagainstfeminism

I would like to start off by saying everyone has their right to believe what they want to believe and be apart or not be a part of something. However when it’s clear how wrong and uneducated someone is on said topic to the point of outright ridicule!?! I don’t understand.

It’s honestly so sad that these women believe in nasty stereotypes of what feminism is.

Feminism does not mean you hate men, want to kill men or never want to get married or have a boyfriend. It doesn’t mean you don’t shave or wear a bra. Feminists come in all types of women and people of gender and sexuality.

And I wanted to highlight the top image in this photo set because it perfectly illustrates the white female privilege also involved in the rejection of feminism. This woman will never and has never experienced the shit that other women white and of color may have experienced. And because of that she doesn’t believe real issues exist and that women who do have them are just whining or playing a victim.

It’s just sad and awful. And there’s so much more I can say but this honestly speaks for it self A LOT.

You be the judge. You have a brain and are capable of making your own personal judgements of right and wrong. So is this right?

"for ugly girls who rather have rights than a husband" oh yes… penis > human rights. 

brb setting stuff on fire

shappeyhappy:

"never apply logic to Doctor Wh-"

nO MOTHERFUCKER I WANT A CERTAIN SOMEONE TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR HIS SHITTY WRITING AND FOR TURNING MY FAVORITE SHOW INTO AN ILLOGICAL MASS FILLED WITH “IMPOSSIBLE GIRLS” AND “BLOCKBUSTER PLOTS”