NASA Boeing 747 with Space Shuttle Endeavour on her back
The mid-air mating of a space shuttle with a 747.
Though their offspring will be sterile like a mule, Space Shuttles and 747s are close enough genetically to reproduce together, leading some scientists to believe they have a very recent common ancestor, possibly the Bell X-1.
Rudimentary social characteristics in both Shuttle and 747 groupings however make the mating a sort of taboo. If caught, the shuttle will face ostracization from its herd. The 747 my actually be dismantled by others of its kind. And the offspring not only faces social isolation, but runs a high risk of deformity:
Of course these risks are nothing compared to the recorded instance of a biplane mating with a tank:
That’s an Antonov A-40 Krylya Tanka btw and it’s real.
Tags:
#pretty things #proud citizen of The Future #(and for the addition:) #storytime
“Re-imagining four common products from 2010 as if they were designed in 1977: an mp3 player, a laptop, a mobile phone and a handheld video game system. I then created a series of fictitious but stylistically accurate print ads to market them.”
I called Les Mis “Les Mis” today and this fuckin kid sitting near me was like “I hate when people call Les Misebrlebelseses ‘les mis’ it’s so lazy”
boy I read a 1,463-page book I will call it whatever the fuck I want, I will call it “Marius Pontmercy and Those Other Guys: A Novel” go back to your underclassman French course
Tags:
#Les Miserables #anything that makes me laugh this much deserves a reblog
This was a fun one! The concise history of vibrators; how they started as scary medical devices and shameful secrets, became a feminist statement, and are now a massively profitable industry that employs the same guys who used to design iPhones.
I, for one, welcome our new tech overlords. Thank you, tech overlords, for helping me maintain my long distance relationship!
From a 1908 vibrator ad: “Bebout is ‘gentle, soothing, invigorating and refreshing. Invented by a woman who knows a woman’s needs. All nature pulsates and vibrates with life.’” It does indeed.
My reactions are torn between “ooh, knowledge! neat!” and “*fumes at normativity*”.
So, followers, here is some neat knowledge. Try to look past the bits like “women who used vibrators were actually more likely to take care of their sexual health by going to the gynecologist for regular exams”, as if there were no reasons other than “failure to take care of one’s sexual health” why one might avoid both vibrators and gynecologists.
(Hint: my GP told me that, as someone too young for disorders of age and too virginal for disorders of the sexually active (emphasis added), I should not have gynecological checkups because I wouldn’t get anything out of them.)
(Hint 2: some people just aren’t into genitals, sometimes including their own.)
You know, that part flew right by me without my even thinking twice about it. This is why privilege checks are important- when you are normative it’s hard to notice when you are being exclusionary or offensive, Thanks @brin-bellway!
You’re welcome!
Like I said in the tags, though, it’s impossible not to be exclusionary when talking about sexuality: people are just too diverse to be able to account for everyone. While I would definitely like people writing for small audiences that they know I’m in to be inclusive of me, I don’t seriously expect inclusivity of general-audience material (even if part of me is always disappointed when they fail to measure up). I do respect people whohave considered these things, thrown up their hands at the impossibility of going much beyond the top few most common options, and knowingly sacrifice the visibility of people with very unusual sexualities to the altar of the greatest good for the greatest number: it’s not like I can come up with a better plan.
(Stuff that’s specifically about sex ed does need to be careful to acknowledge when it’s throwing up its hands, though. Some of the ““inclusive”” sex ed I got was worse-than-useless misinformation when applied to myself, and maybe if it had stated up front that it couldn’t cover everyone and “none of the above” was an option, I wouldn’t have had to learn that the hard way.)
(Whether “women* who are ineligible for gynecological checkups” is a common enough group to be worth accounting for is another matter. I reacted to this particular issue as an instance of the general case.)
*I’m not even getting into gender issues here, as I’m focusing on my own personal area of relevance.
Tags:
#reply via reblog #sexuality and lack thereof #nsfw?
This was a fun one! The concise history of vibrators; how they started as scary medical devices and shameful secrets, became a feminist statement, and are now a massively profitable industry that employs the same guys who used to design iPhones.
I, for one, welcome our new tech overlords. Thank you, tech overlords, for helping me maintain my long distance relationship!
From a 1908 vibrator ad: “Bebout is ‘gentle, soothing, invigorating and refreshing. Invented by a woman who knows a woman’s needs. All nature pulsates and vibrates with life.’” It does indeed.
My reactions are torn between “ooh, knowledge! neat!” and “*fumes at normativity*”.
So, followers, here is some neat knowledge. Try to look past the bits like “women who used vibrators were actually more likely to take care of their sexual health by going to the gynecologist for regular exams”, as if there were no reasons other than “failure to take care of one’s sexual health” why one might avoid both vibrators and gynecologists.
(Hint: my GP told me that, as someone too young for disorders of age and too virginal for disorders of the sexually active (emphasis added), I should not have gynecological checkups because I wouldn’t get anything out of them.)
(Hint 2: some people just aren’t into genitals, sometimes including their own.)
Tags:
#I am not *failing* to take care of my sexual health #I am *recognising* that my sexual health doesn’t look like that #sexuality and lack thereof #the more you know #don’t mind me #it’s pretty much impossible for me to read educational things about sexuality *without* fuming at normativity #one time I was listening to a podcast about How Sexuality Works #and the interviewee denied my existence three times in the first five minutes #I gave up in disgust #(I don’t remember now specifically which denials they used) #(just that I kept a running tally in my head and incremented it #each time they said something the implication of which was that my existence was impossible) #anyway neat knowledge #…it occurs to me that this post has a single-digit number of notes #and the OP is the person who wrote the article #which means she’s almost certainly going to see this #okay look true inclusivity is impossible #and even acknowledgement of one’s inevitable exclusivity is pretty difficult #I have very high standards and I don’t want you to feel too bad about failing to meet them #I just get bitter sometimes about navigating life with an extremely unusual sexuality
I find it really, really weird how many people I know on Tumblr who introduce asides with “FYI:”
In the linguistic environment I grew up in, the phrase “for your information” was incredibly rude. It indicated that you were talking down to your interlocutor, whom you considered stupid and contemptible. Imagine if I said to you “For your education…” or “To cure your ignorance…” or something like that. This is basically what “FYI” sounds like in my ears.
I’ve never said it, and made a habit of avoiding people who used it in arguments. Anyone who said “for your information” while angry was probably not going to be pleasant to speak to while calm, either. I have never once heard that phrase said out loud in a tone other than smug mockery; and usually the speaker’s assholeness was a persistent personality trait.
But, presumably, it means something else in America, or something? Because, like, sometimes I’ll be speaking to someone, and they’ll say something like “FYI: I’ll be going to see Star Wars this evening” and I’ll be So Confused. I mean, why would they be calling me stupid to tell me they’re going to watch a movie? What???
I’ve found that things make much more sense when I mentally substitute “FYI” with “BTW” everywhere I see it. This leads me to believe that there is some fundamental difference of meaning here, so I don’t hold a grudge against Tumblr people who say it to me. However, it still takes me a second to get my knee-jerk “I need to slap this asshole” reaction under control.
So, Tumblr: Does “for your information” mean the same thing as “by the way” for you? Also, while it’s by no means required, could people who speak to me please try to avoid saying “FYI” while doing so? Even though S2 knows what’s going on, I still end up feeling like I’m under attack, and that’s no fun.
“For your information” is often rude, but not always. “FYI” seems to translate more into “just so you know.”
Yeah, “eff-why-eye” seems to be diverging from its origin and becoming its own word. I occasionally encounter people spelling out the acronym in speech.
Tags:
#language #reply via reblog #rumour has it something similar happened with ‘OK’ #so I suppose there’s precedent
