somehavegonemissing

[somehavegonemissing]

love seeing revisionism in the wild “free the nipple never meant you can walk around topless every where that’s still sexual harassment it just meant for like breastfeeding and stuff”no it literally means you should be able to walk around topless anywhere because get this. breasts aren’t fucking sexual organs.

[somehavegonemissing]

Hooray! Yay! Dykes!

[somehavegonemissing]

problematic bed time gap

[somehavegonemissing]

Heterosexual relationship culture is so alien to me and I don’t know if it’s the fact I’m not cishet or the fact I’m autistic but I hear so many things that make me go “Am I insane or are they?”

There’s a lot of hate on widowers and I saw a woman say “You cannot compete with a dead woman.” which is perhaps a reasonable statement to say if he’s constantly comparing you to his dead partner but that wasn’t what the post was about. And I realized “Oh my God, these people genuinely feel like they’re constantly in competition with their spouse’s exes and the ex being dead makes them feel insecure that they cannot best her.”

There’s also been an uptick in the ‘men and women cannot be ‘just’ friends’ rhetoric which I feel like is extremely dangerous and reflects the rise of fascism and sexism. Some of these stories of women feeling threatened by their husband’s female best friend have some merit and others are like “I feel angry that my husband still talks to the girl he grew up next door to and she and her wife are invited to family gatherings and included in family photos sometimes. Am I right to be suspicious?” No. No you’re not. I cannot imagine being you and living with that high level of stress and paranoia and constant torment and jealousy about your husband having a positive relationship with anyone who isn’t you.

[somehavegonemissing]

Im sorry the whole "scandal" around Harris spending her own money on luxury cookware is just reminding me so much of fucking. Donutgate.

[somehavegonemissing]

VISA REPS ARE LOSING IT.

They're accessing people of being "rapists" and "predators" Complain complain complain. Don't let up.

[somehavegonemissing]

Wikipedia is lost to our friends across the waters.

[somehavegonemissing]

So the Youtube boycott starts tomorrow, and the biggest issue people have (including me) is a YouTube addiction.

Now, maybe addiction ain’t quite the right word, I don’t think I’m gonna get any YouTube Withdrawls or anything, but I watch a lot of YouTube and it’s gonna be hard to stop so suddenly.

SO HERE’S SOME TIPS !!!!!

Find YouTube alternatives! There are indeed other video sharing platforms you can use. (Glomble!!)

If you have a streaming service, start watching a really long show. I use YouTube for background noise, but a TV show could do the same thing.

Listen to music somewhere else! Spotify and Pandora and Audiomack are all nice. Spotify kind of sucks actually, but it’s there if you need it, y’know?

Use your newfound free time to invest in a hobby! Start learning to cook! Go to the library! Start sewing or crocheting!

Use your newfound free time to get a workout routine (if you are able to work out.) Go on walks! Get a gym membership if you want!

Play more video games. Obviously many people can’t afford the Cool Games, but there’s always Roblox !!! Or like. Candy Crush !!! Idk !!!!

Yeah, boycotting YouTube is gonna be hard, but it’s absolutely worth it in the name of anti-censorship-ness. People might try to tell you “it won’t do anything��� but that is STUPID! Don’t give up! Boycott for as long as you can! It may be hard to stop watching YouTube when you feel so dependent on it, but you have the power to do it.

Even if the boycott doesn’t work, I don’t want to support a company that makes decisions like this, and I definitely don’t want to have a mental dependency on a social media platform. This is your chance to stop.

[somehavegonemissing]

There is genuinely no such thing as an inappropriate book for a child.

[somehavegonemissing]

time + work = healing (a soft sequel to this comic)

(Boulet is a phenomenal French writer and artist who will draw his friends as recognizable fictional characters in his autobio comics for their privacy.)

[somehavegonemissing]

genuinely puzzled by people who do not enjoy training their animals and/or think it’s ‘mean’ to have trained them to respect boundaries and rules. like yeah your dog would probably prefer to jump up on the table and eat your food but that’s how you get Poisoning bro. sometimes humans do know what’s best even if that’s mildly annoying to your dog

[somehavegonemissing]

Paywall Free

"The protected land includes a one-acre fish hatchery at Unicorn Lake in eastern Maryland and the sprawling Green Ridge State Forest in the west. It includes shorelines, farms and woods around Naval Air Station Patuxent River, and the Chesapeake Forest Lands, some 75,000 wooded acres that are home to species like bald eagles and the once-endangered Delmarva fox squirrel.

None of it can be developed, and all of it has helped Maryland reach a landmark conservation goal six years ahead of schedule, before any other state that’s joined an effort known as “30 by 30.”

The program is part of a global initiative to protect 30 percent of the Earth’s land and waters by 2030. In 2023, Maryland joined the effort and a year later, Gov. Wes Moore, a Democrat, announced that the goal had already been met. Nearly 1.9 million acres of land has been permanently protected from development, and the state has set a new target, to conserve 40 percent of its land by 2040...

Officials, land trustees and environmentalists said a unique set of factors led to Maryland’s success.

Since 1969, Maryland has levied a 0.5 percent transfer tax on real estate sales and used it for Program Open Space, which enables the state to acquire green spaces from voluntary sellers and purchase conservation easements from private landowners.

Owners like farmers and forest managers can still work the land, but agree that it can never be developed, even if the land changes hands.

Crucially, conservation has bipartisan support at the state level, said Elizabeth Carter, a land protection director at The Nature Conservancy. She said federal and state agencies, nonprofit groups and land trusts have worked together with shared goals, which helped the state meet its target sooner than many expected.

“That’s something we celebrate, and it’s exciting,” she said...

Josh Kurtz, Maryland’s secretary of the Department of Natural Resources, said that while the state had to balance conservation needs with development pressures and housing demand, natural spaces were crucial to offsetting planet-heating greenhouse gas emissions and to protecting the Chesapeake Bay.

“Being able to sequester carbon and mitigate climate impacts makes us more resilient in the face of climate change,” Mr. Kurtz said. “It’s also one of our key water quality strategies.” ...

According to Mr. Kurtz’s office, land conservation measures have prevented about 85,000 pounds of nitrogen and 6,000 pounds of phosphorus, which fuel algae blooms and starve water of oxygen, from flowing into the bay each year. The University of Maryland calculated that the state’s trees and forests absorbed and locked away 6.5 million metric tons of carbon dioxide in 2023...

While the state is still pushing toward its 40 by 40 target, there’s been a setback. Facing a $3.3 billion budget shortfall, the Maryland General Assembly recently voted to take $100 million from Program Open Space and other state conservation programs over the next four years. But A.J. Metcalf, a spokesman for the state’s natural resources department, said the programs were projected to generate $468 million through fiscal year 2029, enough to continue to acquire land for conservation “at a normal pace.”

Mr. Kline said he hoped that the state surpassed its next goal. “I would certainly hate to see our foot come off the pedal after 40 percent,” he said. “We feel like we’ve got something pretty special that’s worth protecting.”"

-via The New York Times, April 21, 2025

[somehavegonemissing]

[somehavegonemissing]

the worst part of the classic defense of "its to crack down on CSEM!" defense for giving parents more power over every aspect of their kids lives is like

WHO DO YOU THINK IS MAKING THE FUCKING CSEM. nowadays it is usually either a) directly made by a parent or b) done with a parent's knowledge (a pimping out their child for money type deal)

if the legal system was actually trying to stamp out CSA and CSEM, it would be seeking to disempower and scrutinize parents as much as humanly possible

[somehavegonemissing]

The kindergarten-ification of society

[somehavegonemissing]

I'm sure I'm probably not the first to send an ask about this, but did you see where a Danish zoo asked for people to donate animals they'd otherwise be euthanizing in order to feed their animals? I see a lot of people reacting really negatively to that and on an emotional/gut reaction level I understand why, but I also don't see an actual issue with this, and was curious about your thoughts on it.

I got a second ask on this topic, I'm going to paste it below and answer both at one.

"What is your take on the Danish Zoo asking people to donate unwanted pets to feed their animals? I’m in Australia and this is something unthinkable to me, no zoo here would ask for pets to feed lions so I wanted your perspective."

For anyone who missed it, here's what I think is one of the earliest pieces of reporting in English.

I can't get google translate to work on the text of the zoo's original IG post, but as interpreted by the media: the zoo is asking people to donate domestic and/or livestock animals in order to feed them out as (pre-killed) whole prey.

There's three things to discuss here, really. The practical/operations aspect of why they're asking, the emotional aspect, and the cultural differences involved. I can only really speak to the first two, so I'm hoping Danish readers will chime in about the latter.

The first thing to know is that feeding out whole prey or partial carcasses is really normal. It's important enrichment for carnivores, and it also has impacts on their jaw strength and the bone development in their skulls. In the US (which is the only country I can speak to knowledgeably), they're obtained different ways. Many whole prey animals are purchased from companies specifically breeding feeder animals - think like mice and rats and chicks. Larger animals are a little more complicated because they're expensive to buy. In many cases, especially for smaller facilities and sanctuaries, livestock that's going to be euthanized or culled is often donated to be used as food. I've seen it with cows, horses, and turkeys, and I think it happens with other species. To be clear, these donations are pretty closely vetted and are not sick with something that would be unhealthy for the carnivores: often they're old animals reaching end of life, or animals that have been injured and need to be let go. I don't know how larger urban zoos do it, but I know of smaller zoos and sanctuaries that will have the animals transported to them live and then butcher them themselves. So what the Aalborg zoo is doing is saying hey, we would like to feed out more whole prey, if you have an animal that you no longer want to keep (euthanasia in this sense seems implied, someone who is Dutch please check me), please consider donating it to us.

The problem is, right, that's a really hard thing to hear for the public. Especially if you're in another country and not looking at the original post in the original cultural context, instead encountering it through the Western media lens. I'm kind of surprised that's the way they decided to solicit donations - it makes me wonder what else is going on that they didn't to make the request privately to farmers or such, since that would be the US approach. Part of what makes the post so shocking is that it they asked for "pets" and not "livestock" or "farm animals", insofar as we know from the translation of the post. The idea of a pet has a level of emotional meaning that farm animals generally don't to many American (and probably other Western) readers. It's a very emotional thing to consider for anyone who has a close emotional bond with an animal.

Now, the aspect I can't comment well on is the cultural context of animal death and use in Denmark. I know that European zoos are much more casual about euthanasia for population management reasons, and that maybe there is less public distress over it compared to the US? Marius, the giraffe euthanized in 2014 who was then necropsied in front of the public for educational purposes, was at the Copenhagen Zoo. There seems to be different mentality in parts of Europe than in the US around animal management - and this is not an implication that it's ethically worse or anything - but I don't know how it manifests. I'd guess, though, it's part of why the zoo felt comfortable making a public request of their audience.

To follow up, I did find this article about a woman who donated a pony to the zoo in 2020, and it's in line with my interpretation of the situation. Here's a quote from the article:

"A 44-year-old Danish woman revealed that she once decided to donate her daughter's 22-year-old pony to Aalborg Zoo to be euthanised and fed to lions due to the pet's severe eczema and excruciating pain. Her comments came amid recent backlash against Aalborg Zoo after it asked people to donate small and healthy pets to be used as food for captive predators. The woman, named Pernille Sohl, told The Times that in 2020, she decided that Chicago 57, a German riding pony, had to be put down. While speaking to the outlet, she said she understood how the decision may sound "very dramatic and bizarre". However, the animals being sent to the zoo were "going to be put down anyway". "But they are going to be put down anyway, and it is not like they are alive when they are given to the predators," Sohl added.

The article also adds that so far in 2025, the Aalborg Zoo received "22 horses, 53 chickens, 137 rabbits, and 18 guinea pigs as donations." So clearly this isn't a new program (those can't have all been donated in the week since the Instagram post) and it's something a decent number of people are contributing to. I would guess it's almost, if not entirely, animals that are at end of life for various reasons, and their owners would prefer they have value in death. I don't find that shocking or extremely upsetting.

But, of course, the media doesn't understand how the field operates and can't really be bothered to take the time to find and provide that context. So they portray it through a lends of "how weird" and "scandal" and it ends up represented as something that's understandably distressing to a lay reader.