earlier this week Twitter user ppuccin0 tweeted about a fashion article that advised against tops with large floral patterns, saying the wearer was in danger of looking like a “ロマンティックおばさん,” or a “romantic auntie.” the tweet went viral with many agreeing that a “romantic auntie” sounded like a very nice thing to aspire to be, and some even posted illustrations or photos tagged with the trend
illustration by Toyota Yuu (author of Cherry Magic)
illustration by 141shkw/Sora Midori (author of Beautiful Curse)
photos by Takinami Yukari (author of Motokare Mania and Watashi-tachi wa Mutsuu Ren’ai ga Shitai or “We Want A Painless Romance”)
illustration by m:m (mangaka of Matataki no End Roll)
illustration by ooinuai (mangaka of Onikui Kitan)
illustration by ma2 (mangaka of The Reason We Fall In Love)
BONUS:
Twitter user WomeGa55 drew some art of “Romance Auntie x Combat Auntie”
As Law&Crime has previously reported, Trump issued an executive order on March 6 suspending the security clearances and stripping access to government buildings for employees at Perkins Coie, the firm that represented Clinton during her ultimately unsuccessful 2016 presidential campaign, which Trump ultimately won. It was Trumps’ second such executive order targeting his perceived political enemies, having previously signed a similar order naming the law firm of Covington & Burling, which Trump says provided legal services for special prosecutor Jack Smith. A third executive order, naming the law firm Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP as a national security threat, was later withdrawn.
Hey. You know how laws against queer people never really mask off say that they’re for queer persecution? You know how they always have to wrap it in a layer of “saving the children” or “protecting women”, when the goal is actually the destruction of queer groups without actually any improvements to the lives of children or women? You know how the cherry pick examples without context of queer people committing horrible Acts, most of the times in completely false ways, try and make their point?
A bill to destroy biomedical research as we know it just got introduced to Congress with a similar tactic.
The SPARE act would ban all use of vertebrate animals for biomedical research in the United states. It’s dressed in language of animal welfare, into aims to tap into the Publix lack of knowledge about how animal research is used and why is necessary. Not easier, necessary.
I can go into great detail about why this is, but I’m going to put this as simply as possible. There is an inherent paradox to not using animals for biomedical research. If you know enough about a factor or disease or whatever, that you are studying, replicated in a model system and no, for a fact that this model system reflects the reality of how that factor operates in a complete organism, then you know enough about that factor by definition to none use an animal. And therefore, no research is even necessary. If something is being researched, somewhere in the thread of that research, there will be an animal study involved. Maybe not in that particular paper, maybe not in that particular research group, but something that group cites, some continuation of that research, some thing that is necessary to actually provide a meaningful understanding about human or animal biology, must involve a research animal at some point in the process.
Anyone who has done animal research understands this is the case. Anyone who has done animal research also understands that there are great standards put in place by University IACUCs to maintain ethical standards. Are there lapses? Of course. And you’re about to hear about *all* of them, without context, without the thousands of examples of lives that have been saved by disease research. And of course, we already *have* systems of accountability.
Animal testing is a delicate topic across the political spectrum. And for good reason. However, I don’t think very many people outside of the field truly understand how necessary it is to gain literally any understanding about biological systems, nor the systems of accountability that already exist to ensure it’s done ethically and meaningfully.
The goal is destruction of research science in this country. If this bill passes I’m genuinely doubtful that I will ever be able to be employed in this country again.
Please, PLEASE urge your representatives to do something about this.
Oh and by the way- if you needed any indication that this law is bullshit and they don’t care about animal welfare, any testing on military and police animals is a specifically allowed exception.
And remember:
You are not immune to propaganda.
They’re going to talk about the cutest and fluffiest puppies and kittens you can imagine, and portray scientists and butchers.
They’re going to ignore any and all existing scientific practices and ethical standards, and hit you right in your basal emotional reactions.
👆 if you needed any indication that this law is bullshit and they don’t care about animal welfare, any testing on military and police animals is a specifically allowed exception 👆
Don’t use the phrases of your enemies to attack them.
By which I mean, saying a man has a small dick because he’s wrong politically? Saying Elon and Trump and secretly fucking as an attack on them? It’s fucked up, don’t do it. That’s just invoking toxic masculinity and homophobia as an insult, and I don’t care if you think it’s different because you’re “using it ironically” or “just calling out their hypocrisy”- no, you aren’t calling out any hypocrisy. What you’re actually doing is just being a hypocrite.
Ironic bigotry is still bigotry, and just like you shouldn’t call Stacy Dash the n-word and you shouldn’t call Ben Shapiro antisemitic slurs- you aren’t doing either of those, right?- then you shouldn’t be calling the fascists in the oval office homophobic slurs, either.
Hey american tumblruser. Wanna do more about The Moment than harass your representatives (you’re harassing your representatives, right?) but for any/all reasons you’re not up to leaving your house to do it?
Look up your local organizations, pick your favorites. Get familiar, whatever that means in this context. Read over their website, scroll through their facebook page, watch any volunteer orientations, attend a zoom open house.
Once you are, reach out and ask if they need anyone to handle a mundane administrative task. Pick one you’re familiar with, or can get familiar with, either that you can do sustainably or something that’s a one-off, like building or cleaning up a website.
(I picked, “reply to emails asking questions that are already answered by your website.”)
Lots of political/community orgs are getting a surge of activity right now. Good odds they’re run by worn-out retirees. If they get an email saying, “I’m only available 30 minutes a week but do you need any data entry done?” or “Would you like some help line-editing your weekly newsletter?” the odds are very good they might actually physically cry with relief.
It’s not glamorous, but it feels real good and it is important work. You won’t make history but you’ll know where you stood inside it.
This poll is asking about general walkability, not your personal habits– if there is a supermarket nearby but you do not or cannot personally walk there, vote according to what a hypothetical able-bodied person would be able to do.
Is your nearest supermarket/grocery store within reasonable walking distance? Are you from North America or somewhere else?
5 minutes or less by foot; North America
5–10 minutes by foot; North America
10–20 minutes by foot; North America
20 minutes or more by foot, but still what I would consider reasonable; North Am
There is not a supermarket/grocery within reasonable walking distance; North Am
5 minutes or less by foot; NOT North America
5–10 minutes by foot; NOT North America
10–20 minutes by foot; North America
20 minutes or more by foot, but still what I would consider reasonable; NOT N.A.
There is not a supermarket/grocery within reasonable walking distance; NOT N.A.
I don’t know why that affected me so strongly, but I’m watching a youtube video on disasters on Lake Huron, and the first one involves a coal freighter that was lost in the White Hurricane of 1913 called the SS Argus. Everyone on the ship was lost. But it’s mentioned that the captain’s body washed up later, and was found without a life jacket. So they thought, based partly on testimony of another ship that thought they saw them go down, that it just happened too fast for him to have time to get his jacket. But then another body was found, that of the second cook, and she was found wearing the life jacket marked ‘captain’. And that’s …
It didn’t work. It didn’t save her. But it’s so very possible that he spent his last moments alive trying to save someone else, one of his crew, and they probably both knew that it wouldn’t work, that there wasn’t a lot of hope in a blizzard on the lakes in November, but he tried … he tried anyway. Even if it did nothing but maybe make her body easier for her family to find.
You know that Mr Rogers thing of ‘look for the helpers’? How many times has someone, facing the end, done something tiny and fragile and maybe hopeless just to try and help someone else? Whether it works or not. How many people went to their graves at least trying?
That has to say something about us. As a people. As monstrous as we sometimes (perhaps often) are, so many times we were also …
Whoever saves one life, saves the whole world.
And sometimes you can’t save one life, sometimes it doesn’t work, sometimes there’s no getting out of this for anyone, but … try anyway. Because it matters anyway.
And maybe no one will ever know. But maybe also some day more than a century down the line, maybe some idiot will be crying into her coffee because of what you died trying.
amhrancas 