Photo

markdoesstuff:

fytortall:

The Queen’s Readers: A Collection of Essays on the Words and Worlds of Tamora Pierce is now available!!!!

We can’t wait for you all to see everyone’s hard work and we hope you’ll love it as much as we do.

The Queen’s Readers contains 33 essays from 28 contributors, covering a myriad of topics ranging from personal reflections, literary critiques, and character studies. The Forward was written by Mark Oshiro of Mark Reads / Mark Watches. The Cover Art was designed by minuiko.

It’s available at the following locations:

For the purposes of transparency, we’d like to let you all know that we are collecting no profit from this. The books are being sold at cost. We will be collecting a small royalty (literally less than 40 cents) from the Kindle copies, but that will be donated to a charity. 

So run and definitely don’t walk to Amazon and start the celebration with us! We’re beyond ecstatic that we finally get to share this with you!

(This gif shows just a fraction of how excited we are.)

Here’s to the Queen’s Readers!

Here’s a thing I did in secret that I can now talk about, y’all. I wrote the forward to this fine collection. Please pick up a copy! <3

Source: fytortall
Quote

"

WHO WROTE WHAT BIT?
Ah. Another tricky one. As the official Keeper of the One True Copy, Terry physically wrote more of Draft 1 than Neil. But if 2,000 words are written down after a lot of excited shouting, it’s a moot point whose words they are. And, in any case, as a matter of honor both of them rewrote and footnoted the other guy’s stuff, and both can write passably in the other guy’s style. The Agnes Nutter scenes and the kids mostly originated with Terry, the Four Horsemen and anything with maggots started with Neil. Neil had the most influence on the opening, Terry on the ending. Apart from that, they just shouted excitedly a lot.

The point they both realised the text had wandered into its own world was in the basement of the old Gollancz books, where they’d got together to proofread the final copy, and Neil congratulated Terry on a line that Terry knew he hadn’t written, and Neil was certain that he hadn’t written either. They both privately suspect that at some point the book had started to generate text on its own, but neither of them will actually admit this publicly for fear of being thought odd.

"

- Good Omens: The Nice and Accurate Prophecies of Agnes Nutter, Witch (2006 edition) - appendix by Terry Pratchett and Neil Gaiman (via horriblybookish)

(via waxjism)

Source: hapfairy
Photo Set
Photo

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m6r8xyHlPB1rnf5opo3_500.gif

Photo
Text

shingworks:

magnoliapearl:

Dear Aaron Diaz,

Over the past few days we’ve already exchanged some words about this. I reblogged Mary’s comic lampooning your comic (and others like it), expressing my approval of its message. I also subtweeted your work fairly obviously. We are friendly acquaintances and my behavior was inappropriate and rude. I apologized to you via email for being passive-aggressive and thoughtless, and you graciously accepted my apology. I admit: what I did was hurtful, and the wrong way to go about it. With that in mind, I want to try to address the problems I have with your work in a direct, honest, and hopefully respectful way. No passive-aggression, no rudeness, no vague-tweeting. 

Aaron, I have a real problem with the way you write and draw female characters. It is sexually objectifying and sexist.

I do not have a problem with artists writing and drawing objectified female characters. I do have a problem with characters I consider sexist, but ultimately it’s something I can ignore. There’s a place for everything, and an artist has the right to create whatever they want to create, for whatever ends they choose. What I have a problem with is that your comic is not presented as a science fiction comic with a dash of sexy thrills, but rather as a feminist narrative in support of powerful independent women. You’ve made it clear on many occasions that you don’t consider your work to be objectifying or sexist. I have a problem with cheesecake-style art being presented as something feminist, empowering, enlightened- something made “for women”, when it’s clearly made for men.

You’re allowed to make art with male gaze. But please call a spade a spade.

I think you are a nice person who does good things. I think you’re a good artist and a good writer. But I consider writing and drawing women to be one of your weaknesses, and it’s hard to imagine that you don’t know that. If you do, I haven’t heard you say so.

I know Mary’s comic stung. I’m not going to deny there was meanness there, although I saw it more as humorously exaggerated satire than a personal attack.  I understand that it sucks to see your work roasted in such a way. But the criticism it made of your work resonated with a lot of people. They can’t all be idiots, crazy people, or “SJWs”, or people with a personal grudge against you. To paraphrase a saying, “If lots of people are telling you it’s raining, get an umbrella.” Aaron, many people have this problem with your work. The problem exists. And since you seem to be very much invested in feminism and positive, non-sexualized portrayals of women in media, you need to take a long hard look at your own output. You need to get an umbrella.

I don’t think I’ve seen a single page of Dresden Codak that doesn’t feature a woman posed in a male-gazey way, with loving focus on her ass or cleavage, or wearing a sexual costume, or in some situation that puts her in a compromising position (like the most recent page in which Kimiko’s clothing is burned off of her body, which has happened at least twice in the series’ run.) I have a very hard time believing that these details are accidental. Not to mention the pinups you posted a few days ago. Instead of saying something like, “Here’s some sexy drawings of Kimiko I did” you said they were about “agency” and “celebration of the female form”. It’s hard not to see language like that as dishonest and sort of insulting.

The following images are a few examples of what I’m referring to. I tried to only find examples from the current arc in the comic, or from merchandise you currently sell. I understand that there is a larger context to these images, but the fact that you continually write situations in which these presentations of women would be contextually appropriate is part of the problem. For the sake of fairness, there is ONE female character in Dresden Codak who is not presented sexually, but to me, that doesn’t do much to make up for the rest of it, especially since she is the only female character with a speaking role in the history of the comic who is not presented this way.

imageimage

Aaron, you can do whatever you want with your own comic. However, if you really do care about female characters in media, or care to know why so many people seem to be angry with you about it, I would do one of two things. If you don’t want your comic to present its female characters in a borderline-erotic light, then stop doing that. If you don’t mind that, then by all means continue, but please just admit that you like drawing t&a and that it’s not particularly empowering, or feminist, or a celebration of personal agency. As a woman, I resent being told that men’s eye candy is actually meant to uplift me and that I should celebrate it.

I’m not trying to attack you or slander you. I’m certainly not doing this to stir up drama. I think you are a good person. And I think that you make a good comic. It’s obvious that a lot of people really love it and support it, and will continue to love and support it no matter what. There’s a lot you are doing right. But your work is not perfect, and I want to talk about it directly, honestly, and respectfully.

Thank you for listening.

-Magnolia Porter

This is an important subject to me, despite not being directly involved, so I feel that I should add to this.

When you have an audience, the things that you say and do matter. Diaz’s work has unsettled me for years. I have learned to avoid it because his unspoken message seems to be that, no matter how strong or smart a woman is, and no matter how far in the future you go, showing her tits and panties in every page should be a high priority. It makes me angry. I have heard the same reaction to his work from a lot of people. And in all my years of drawing The Meek, I have almost never had that reaction from a reader about the nudity of my own characters. It is possible to show non-sexualized nudity, and it is ALSO okay to show sexualized nudity. But, speaking as one human to another, it is harmful to pretend that consistently sexualizing a woman’s body in non-sexual situations is empowering her simply because you demand that it should be that way.

I believe strongly that everyone makes mistakes, and everyone has the ability to learn from them. I also think people are deserving of complete forgiveness if they make an effort to understand and change their harmful views. Diaz is an unquestionably talented artist and, from the times we’ve spoken, is a super nice guy, so I’m really hoping to see a positive resolution to all of this.

Source: magnoliapearl
Text

jean-luc-gohard:

castiels-weenie:

jean-luc-gohard:

What fucks me up about the Darren Wilson fundraiser is that he hasn’t been charged with a crime. He doesn’t have to hire a lawyer. He’s on paid leave, so he’s not losing wages. This is not covering his expenses, because he doesn’t have any additional expenses. This is a reward. He’s getting a $250,000 reward for murdering an unarmed black kid.

HE HAD TO GO TO THE HOSPITAL. MIKE REACHED FOR HIS GUN. HIS FRIEND THAT WAS WITH HIM EVEN ADMITTED THAT HE LIED ABOUT THE COP JUST RANDOMLY SHOOTING HIM AND CONFIRMED THAT THEY ROBBED THE STORE. SELF DEFESE.

None of this is true. This is how good the Ferguson PD’s smear campaign has been. Not one sentence here is accurate. Let’s break this down:

  1. "HE HAD TO GO TO THE HOSPITAL." Michael Brown’s autopsy showed no sign of struggle.The picture of the CT scan that’s being passed around to show that Wilson had an orbital blowout fracture is actually from 2008 from the University of Iowa, and a right-wing pundit photoshopped out the date and hospital info.
  2. "MIKE REACHED FOR HIS GUN." Officer Wilson’s story is that the first shot that went off was an accidental discharge while they were fighting over the gun. However. there was no gunpowder residue on Mike Brown, meaning that he was absolutely not holding the gun when it went off and furthermore that he was not even that close. He was fired on from a distance.
  3. "HIS FRIEND THAT WAS WITH HIM EVEN ADMITTED THAT HE LIED ABOUT THE COP JUST RANDOMLY SHOOTING HIM AND CONFIRMED THAT THEY ROBBED THE STORE." This is actually a compound lie, which is kind of impressive. His friend, Dorian Johnson, did not say that. His lawyer said they were together in the convenience store, the police said there was a robbery, and the media put those two statements next to each other to imply a statement was made that never was. Johnson isn’t being charged with anything because the Ferguson PD “determined he committed no crime." The Ferguson PD also admitted Officer Wilson didn’t know about the scuffle at the convenience store before he stopped Brown and Johnson. You may be wondering why I say scuffle instead of robbery. That’s because there wasn’t one: the owners of the store didn’t call the police and video shows Brown paying for the cigarillos! The clerk confronted Brown about reaching across the counter instead of waiting for him to hand over the cigarillos, he put his hand on Brown, and Brown pushed him. Yes, he pushed him too hard, but the clerk apparently didn’t care enough to call the police. The police were called by another customer in the store, who apparently didn’t know what was actually happening.
  4. "SELF DEFESE." The autopsy shows that he was shot on the inside of his arm, meaning his hands were up, and the top of his head, meaning that, since Brown was 6’4”, either he was on his knees or the officer was 8’ tall. The officer was not 8’ tall.

The evidence clearly shows that Officer Wilson, who had no idea of the not-actually-a-robbery, executed the unarmed Mike Brown while he was on his knees with his hands in the air. Just like all of the eyewitnesses said (except for “Josie,” who turned out not to be real).

But the Ferguson PD’s already tainted public opinion. They’ve spread so many lies so effectively that no amount of evidence will bring justice. Your ignorance here is proof of just how effective it’s been.

(via thepaperlady)

Source: jean-luc-gohard
Photo

Because of this: http://hellotailor.tumblr.com/post/89447758767/ok-so-i-kept-seeing-stuff-about-what-if-steve-had-a

hellotailor

Ok, this took way longer than I planned, so I cut some corners just to FINISH THE DARN THING. All this for a stupid joke. YES.

Text

lydiabutz:

jeanndarc:

jeanndarc:

i am attracted to all versions of chris evans but i cannot decide which one is hotter??? he’s just so good looking??

closely shaved head and dark bearded evans?? extremely cleanshaven blonde steve rogers evans?? young and freckly evans? scruff with hipster glasses evans??? normal brown hair and full beard evans?? 

look i’m having a chrisis 

image

image

image

image

image

image

image

(via thepaperlady)

Source: jeanndarc
Photo

qalaba:

miscegene:

summertimelovegirl:

blue-author:

gallifrey-feels:

awkwardsmilememe:

THIS CROW FUCKING UNDERSTANDS WATER DISPLACEMENT. WHY THE FUCK DO I HAVE TO BE TOLD EVERY YEAR BY A TEACHER HOW WATER DISPLACEMENT WORKS. DO THEY THINK I’M LESS INTELLIGENT THAN A FUCKING CROW? FUCKING DONE.

Crows discovered the principle of displacement in the third century BC, when the philosopher Awkimedes, upon noticing the level of his bird bath rose in proportion with the amount of his body that was submerged, reportedly exclaimed “EURECAW!” and flew through the streets of Athens shouting his discovery.

EURECAW

Tumblr will believe anything smfh. The law that’s being described is Archimedes’ Principle and Archimedes of Syracuse(the guy who discovered this) said Eureka, not Eurecaw.

(via thepaperlady)

Source: 4gifs