#time no changes

[savagegood]

literally who is doing it like gritty, icône de l'extrême gauche américaine?

[rileyclaw]

bunch of silly doodles of these guys from the past week or so

[zephyrine-gale]

Kazuscara | A Ghost of a Memory

Part 1/?

Also hbday to scara ♡

[reineydraws]

rip the bat boys 💀

[knowlesian]

“why do i believe this” and “who benefits from me believing it” are the first steps to decolonization and we should all be doing this more

[pocketabed]

i love drawing these

[singing-robot]

he missed it 

[ladysantos]

who cares 💥

[luxlightly]

I don't know how to break it to you all but a bad parent will parent badly with books and a good parent will parent well with an iPad.

Ipads don't make the "ipad kid". What upsets you is a child who is being given something distracting and potentially obnoxious to those around them so that the parent doesn't have to deal with engaging with their child. And it's not new.

I grew up before the invention of the ipad and the complaints were the same. It was "tv kids" and "Gameboy kids". And it was book kids too, though people rarely complained about those kids because it didn't make noise and bother them personally so they no longer cared. Because the "it's for the good of the child!" argument dried up real fast as soon as it was something that didn't affect them.

A good parent who is engaging with their child's interests can do so with an iPad or television. A bad parent can say "take this and leave me alone" with a book or a toy. The problem is that some kids were raised by objects. By whatever kept them busy and entertained and away from their parents. Sure, there are parents who need to realize that's what they're doing and would benefit from changing their parenting style by limiting electronics use, but "if you give your kid an electronic toy, it means you're a bad parent" is not the same thing and largely misses the actual source of the problem.

Your arbitrary standards of what "good children" doing "good child activities" is as restricting.

[umanta]

Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, S3E12 Past Tense, Part II

this episode is about an anti-governmental revolution in 2024 btw. just in case anyone was looking for ideas

[lizzibennet]

per anon’s request, i present to you THE best version of beatrice’s monologue in much ado about nothing. i thought about cropping this but decided this scene must be watched in its full glory

[hillhomed]

your place or mine? 

[the-nerdy-fangirl]

[nonpoppie]

drawin the scum villain duo again

[maddymoreau]

Thinking about how Diavolo’s feelings transcend time and how in the Nightbringer UR+ card Demon Lord’s Castle Tour this conversation happens.

When asked, “Do you wish to see your father?”

Diavolo responds:

“I suppose I do . . .” isn’t the typical reaction to how a child would feel about wanting to see their parent. Especially when said parent has essentially been in a coma for a year.

Along with how Diavolo describe his father.

It makes more sense why when you learn in Lesson 56 how Diavolo was treated by him growing up.

Diavolo can tell when others are lying but is unable to understand his father’s intentions.

Diavolo mentions that he lived a very sheltered life growing up. That from a young age his father never allowed him a chance to talk to anyone outside the castle.

His childhood friend was Mephistopheles. A demon literally RAISED to be his friend. Putting a barrier between the two because Mephistopheles would put Diavolo on a pedestal.

The isolating childhood he experienced riddled with his strict father constantly scolding him.

Despite everything MC is so important to him he wants to see his father again so we can meet.

[arunneronthird]

ur blatant favoritism is showing dude