Rise Up, Oh Heart, For There is Another Battle to Win

taahko:

taahko:

chirrut makes a bad joke and baze pretends he doesnt think its funny. “yes it is i can tell youre smiling” says chirrut. “no i am most certainly not” says baze, while smiling

chirrut with his hands on bazes face: “i can literally feel you laughing just admit im funny”

baze, laughing: “no”

(via windbladess)

mydadisindianajones:

Alright nerds, today we are going to discuss headphone etiquette.

You walk into your favorite hang out joint and you see a dear friend. How grand! However, you see their headphones are in use and you have not the slightest clue how to approach them. Here is a helpful guide on how to decipher the code.

Both headphones on/earbuds in: Leave them alone, especially if they are hunched over a laptop, a book or their phone. This means they do not want to be disturbed. It is okay to give a small wave, head tilt or smile as acknowledgement.

One earbud is out: This means said person is listening out for something and not fully engaged with what is being listened to. You may approach, but watch for body language that says ‘leave me alone’. Examples are: crossed arms, little to no eye contact, short one word answers.

Headphones/earbuds out: You may approach! This one is not enjoying music/audio books on their device currently, and it is deemed okay to talk to said person.

Note: If someone sees you, and takes off their music delivering device from their head, that means they desire to talk to you! Smile, and enjoy a lovely conversation.

You taking off my headphones/earbuds: Run. Because no jury will convict me.

(via windbladess)

kelssiel:

systlin:

shitrichcollegekidssay:

them: SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST MEANS HUMANS MUST BE INDIVIDUALLY SELF-SUFFICIENT AND COMPLETELY INDEPENDENT

biologist:

Like literally the only reason we didn’t go extinct is because we are aggressively social creatures who community organized and helped each other when faced with disasters that drove other species over the brink. 

 (Like we’re so aggressively social that we looked at APEX PREDATORS and went ‘they look soft! Friend????’)

(The answer was yes because wolves are also aggressively social and they adopted the strange tall not-wolves just as eagerly.)

humans @ wolves: holy shit these things are so cute i wonder if they’ll let us pet them?

wolves @ humans: holy shit these things are so cute i wonder if they’ll pet us?

(Source: justsomeantifas, via ifeelbetterer)

pilenopilepile:

pilenopilepile:

Being up at 4-5 am is like loading in a level but the textures haven’t loaded all the way through yet.

(Source: xcom2, via patroclvss)

destinationtoast:

lierdumoa:

slitthelizardking:

ainedubh:

observethewalrus:

prokopetz:

ibelieveinthelittletreetopper:

veteratorianvillainy:

prokopetz:

It just kills me when writers create franchises where like 95% of the speaking roles are male, then get morally offended that all of the popular ships are gay. It’s like, what did they expect?

#friendly reminder that I once put my statistics degree to good use and did some calculations about ship ratios#and yes considering the gender ratios of characters#the prevalence of gay ships is completely predictable (via sarahtonin42)

I feel this is something that does often get overlooked in slash shipping, especially in articles that try to ‘explain’ the phenomena. No matter the show, movie or book, people are going to ship. When everyone is a dude and the well written relationships are all dudes, of course we’re gonna go for romance among the dudes because we have no other options.

Totally.

A lot of analyses propose that the overwhelming predominance of male/male ships over female/female and female/male ships in fandom reflects an unhealthy fetishisation of male homosexuality and a deep-seated self-hatred on the part of women in fandom. While it’s true that many fandoms certainly have issues gender-wise, that sort of analysis willfully overlooks a rather more obvious culprit.

Suppose, for the sake of argument, that we have a hypothetical media franchise with twelve recurring speaking roles, nine of which are male and three of which are female.

(Note that this is actually a bit better than average representaton-wise - female representation in popular media franchises is typicaly well below the 25% contemplated here.)

Assuming that any character can be shipped with any other without regard for age, gender, social position or prior relationship - and for simplicity excluding cloning, time travel and other “selfcest”-enabling scenarios - this yields the following (non-polyamorous) possibilities:

Possible F/F ships: 3
Possible F/M ships: 27
Possible M/M ships: 36

TOTAL POSSIBLE SHIPS: 66

Thus, assuming - again, for the sake of simplicity - that every possible ship is about equally likely to appeal to any given fan, we’d reasonably expect about (36/66) = 55% of all shipping-related media to feature M/M pairings. No particular prejudice in favour of male characters and/or against female characters is necessary for us to get there.

The point is this: before we can conclude that representation in shipping is being skewed by fan prejudice, we have to ask how skewed it would be even in the absence of any particular prejudice on the part of the fans. Or, to put it another way, we have to ask ourselves: are we criticising women in fandom - and let’s be honest here, this type of criticism is almost exclusively directed at women - for creating a representation problem, or are we merely criticising them for failing to correct an existing one?

YES YES YES HOLY SHIT YES FUCKING THANK YOU!

Also food for thought: the obvious correction to a lack of non-male representation in a story is to add more non-males. Female Original Characters are often decried as self-insertion or Mary Sues, particular if romance or sex is a primary focus.

I really appreciate when tumblr commentary is of the quality I might see at an academic conference. No joke.

This doesn’t even account  for the disparity in the amount of screen time/dialogue male characters to get in comparison to female characters, and how much time other characters spend talking about male characters even when they aren’t onscreen. This all leads to male characters ending up more fully developed, and more nuanced than female characters. The more an audience feels like they know a character, the more likely an audience is to care about a character. More network television writers are men. Male writers tend to understand men better than women, statistically speaking. Female characters are more likely to be written by men who don’t understand women vary well. 

But it’s easier to blame the collateral damage than solve the root problem.

Yay, mathy arguments. :)

This is certainly one large factor in the amount of M/M slash out there, and the first reason that occurred to me when I first got into fandom (I don’t think it’s the sole reason, but I think it’s a bigger one than some people in the Why So Much Slash debate give our credit for). And nice point about adding female OCs.

In some of my shipping-related stats, I found that shows with more major female characters lead to more femslash (also more het).  (e.g. femslash in female-heavy media; femslash deep dive) I’ve never actually tried to do an analysis to pin down how much of fandom’s M/M preference is explained by the predominance of male characters in the source media, but I’m periodically tempted to try to do so.

(via johanirae)