mielivalta1

[mielivalta1]

created my very first zine about my personal experiences being in and out of the carceral psychiatric system. printable version under the cut:

[mielivalta1]

Wrote another essay

[mielivalta1]

Just this week I visited Greg Capullo's IG to admire his artwork, and now I get to know that he used to be here to. post. Batman ballsack? This site is a different world

[mielivalta1]

hi i’m greg capullo artist at

Hi I’m Greg Capullo join my capullo army by purchasing $5k in merch I’m Greg Capullo 

[mielivalta1]

How can you deny batjokes is canon when greg capullo and scott snyder exist

[mielivalta1]

[mielivalta1]

[mielivalta1]

Meat-Eating Caterpillars: less than 1% of all known lepidoptera (moths and butterflies) are carnivorous, and even fewer are known to hunt and kill their prey; these are just a few of the exceptions

Above: a carnivorous pug moth caterpillar, Eupithecia orichloris, ambushing a fly

Lepidopteran predators are extremely rare, but they do exist. Some of the most interesting examples include the carnivorous pug moth caterpillars of the genus Eupithecia, the ant-eating casebearer, the Hawaiian snail-eating moth, and the bone-collector caterpillars of the genus Hyposmocoma. Curiously, almost all of the species on this list are endemic to Hawaii.

Above: Eupithecia orichloris

The carnivorous pug moth, Eupithecia orichloris, is probably the most famous predatory caterpillar in the world, thanks to the striking and unusual method by which it captures its prey -- this species is an ambush predator that often disguises itself as a twig and then pops up out of nowhere, violently plucking its prey from the foliage. Eupithecia is the only lepidopteran genus that is known to contain ambush predators, which makes this behavior seem even more striking.

The ant-eating casebearer, Ippa conspersa, is another carnivorous caterpillar that feeds on ants and other insects (both as a predator and as a scavenger). This species uses silk, sand, and other fine debris to build a flat, peanut-shaped "shell" around its body, and the "shell" acts as a kind of camouflage, allowing the caterpillar to sneak into ant nests and hunt.

Above: the ant-eating casebearer and its unique "shell"

As its name implies, the ant-eating casebearer often feeds on ants, but it has also been known to eat cockroaches and other insects.

Above: an ant-eating casebearer feeding on a cockroach

Hyposmocoma molluscivora, commonly known as the Hawaiian snail-eating moth, is a casebearing caterpillar that feeds on live snails. It uses strands of silk to immobilize its prey, tethering the snail in place so that it can climb into the victim's shell and feed on the soft flesh within. The caterpillars of this genus are the only lepidopterans that are known to feed on molluscs; all of the other predatory caterpillars feed on arthropods (insects and arachnids).

Above: this photo shows a Hawaiian snail-eating moth using strands of silk to hold its prey in place

The genus Hyposmocoma also contains the predatory "bone-collector" caterpillars, which cover themselves with the body parts of other insects and arachnids, often scavenging the leftover pieces from spiderwebs. They carefully trim each piece of exoskeleton and then arrange them all together onto a portable silk mesh.

The caterpillars often live side-by-side with spiders, as they opportunistically feed on the insects that they find trapped in spiderwebs, and their macabre body ornaments likely serve as camouflage; they allow the caterpillar to avoid being detected or attacked by spiders.

Above: a bone-collector caterpillar covered in the body parts of other insects, including a large weevil head that is clearly visible near the center, several ant heads, a fly's leg, the abdomen of a bark beetle, a wing, and several pieces of antennae, among other things

Sources & More Info:

Journal of the Lepidopterists' Society: Predatory and Parasitic Lepidoptera

GeoJournal: Behavior, Biogeography, and Conservation of Eupithecia in the Hawaiian Islands

Korean Journal of Applied Entomology: The First Record of the Myrmecophilous Tineid Moths of Genus Ippa in Korea

Nature: Caterpillars Eat Snails Out of House and Home

Science: Web-Spinning Caterpillar Stalks Snails

NBC: Hawaiian Caterpillars Hunt like Spiders

National Geographic: This Camouflaged Critter Wears Severed Insect Body Parts like a Coat

Scientific American: Carnivorous "Bone Collector" Caterpillars Wear Corpses as Camouflage

Science: Hawaiian Caterpillar Patrols Spiderwebs Camouflaged in Insect Prey's Body Parts

[mielivalta1]

we need to legalise learning for adults

[mielivalta1]

wax seal stamp pngs ♡

[mielivalta1]

do me a favor and reblog this and put in the tags what time it is for you and what you're currently doing/thinking about

[mielivalta1]

[mielivalta1]

What I really love about natural sciences is that I get so lost in fucking the numbers and models that it feels like a wonder every time I remember something completely ordinary like... ohh, metals are actually mined and used? In the real world? The metals from The Diagrams? It's like finding out that your favorite actor is living inside a the handle of your front door.

[mielivalta1]

I think a lot of autistic taking-things-literally goes under the radar because what the diagnostic tests and shit ask about is not what that generally looks like in an adult and often not in kids either and much more importantly it’s not what generally actually causes problems in real life instead of being irritating for caretakers or funny to bullies or easy to diagnose

I have absolutely no issues understanding metaphors or idioms. When someone says their heart is on their sleeve they mean they’re emotionally expressive and openly display their feelings, not that they have a chunk of cardiac tissue on their shirt. I very rarely have issues with sarcasm. I sometimes have issues telling when someone who’s said something mean is about to say “just kidding”, but tbh I think that’s more on them than me.

BUT

My grandmother asked me “Do you know when the trash was taken out last?” and I said “I think Eliot took it out yesterday” and a few hours later she yelled at me for “not taking out the trash when I asked you to” and I was like???? You didn’t ask me????

I dread filling out forms and am crap at filling out diagnostic tests or personality quizzes because there are always questions I don’t know the exact answers to (how am I supposed to know what day I got dental surgery seven years ago?) or don’t understand exactly what they’re asking or the wording’s unclear and they could mean this or the wording says this but I’m pretty sure what they actually meant was that and should I answer what they said or what they meant, and how does everyone else just whip through the form? Does everyone else remember the day they got dental surgery seven years ago? Does everyone else somehow understand all these questions?

I get tangled up by bureaucracy because the rules on the website say that for this you need that and for that you need the other and for the other you need something else for which you need the first thing, and I go in circles for hours or days or weeks or months or years because their stated rules say there is no way to get what I need, and when I talk to somebody else they’re like “just call them?” and I’m like “how could that help? the rules say that what I’m trying to do is impossible”

And all of that? That’s how “taking things literally” ACTUALLY affects your life as an adult. It’s not “haha you think ‘getting under your skin’ means parasites”. It’s “you have real difficulty functioning in the world because everyone else is conveying things through implication and assuming that you know that rules are flexible and questions are approximate and you’re supposed to lie on job applications and ‘it’s required’ means ‘it’s preferred’, and you don’t”.

[mielivalta1]

Too Dangerous for Kids

So, recently I had reason to go back and read Jason's post-crisis debut comic Batman (1940) #408 and it clicked really hard that basically the central theme of Jason becoming Robin was that Robin was too dangerous a job for kids. Before he becomes Robin, Dick got injured, badly, by the Joker, and Batman swore to never endanger another child like that, which is the reason Dick stops being Robin at all

Batman (1940) #416

And I'm friggin realizing now that the posing in Death of the Family is straight up a mirror to this scene of Dick having been shot?? I'm losing my mind???

Batman (1940) #408

Like, look at this in universe magazine shot with this talk on the radio compared to Bruce holding Jason and tell me this was not deliberate????

Batman (1940) #408 and Batman (1940) #428

And THIS TALK?????

Batman (1940) #408

I just... HMMMM, idk there's something very fascinating to me that the theme of 'this is too dangerous for kids' has been there in Jason since day zero.

It also makes me sympathize a lot with poor Dick who got fired "cause it's too dangerous for a kiddo out there", when he was no longer a child, and then WHAT DOES BRUCE HAVE WITH HIM NOT EVEN A YEAR LATER?!

Batman (1940) #416

He's devastated by the realization there's a new Robin, then harsh and critical of the new Robin because he's sure they're gonna screw up and get hurt

Batman (1940) #416

Not because he wants his old job back

Batman (1940) #416

Despite his misgiving about the mantel being passed on at all, at the end of it, he still gives Jason his respect and acceptance into the role

Teen Titans (2003) #29

And this has such fascinating parallels to Jason's reaction to finding out there's a new Robin after him!

Red Hood: The Lost Days #4

He is devastated by the realization there's a new Robin, then attempts to brutally dissuade the new Robin from keeping the mantel because he's sure they're gonna screw up and get killed

Teen Titans (2003) #29

Not because he wants his old job back

Teen Titans (2003) #29

Despite his misgiving about the mantel being passed on at all, at the end of it, Tim still has his respect, and perhaps even his acceptance into the role, although he was far too violent about it to actually properly give the role over like Dick did for him.

Teen Titans (2003) #29

Neither of them have a petty, jealous reaction of you replaced me, but instead have a tangled mess of "I was sloppy, I wasn't good enough, I got hurt, and now you put an even less prepared child in the line of fire?!" Jason is wildly more violent about it, but at the core I feel like the sentiments are the same, and it kinda makes sense because really the end of their times as Robin were very similar to each other, just Jason's was wildly more violent!

I can't help but wonder if maybe part of Jason's reasoning somewhere along the line was "Now I finally get why Dick was so harsh on me back then." And... honestly I don't think it is. Cause while it would make sense it just doesn't seem to be a parallel either of them is conscious of.

It's just this fascinating set of reflections neither one seems to see.

[mielivalta1]

No matter what they say about robin jason, his death is always going to be Bruce’s fault. And not in an abstract ‘batman’s greatest failure’ way. I mean you can’t have a kid die, violently, from a threat the parent knew about, and it not be their fault. Its negligence. It’s a failure of care. And yes, Sheila is responsible, the joker is responsible, but Bruce was his legal guardian. If it was a school teacher who told him ‘hey I’m leaving but there’s a serial killer around, so don’t get into trouble’ then came back to a corpse, that teacher would be super duper liable.

Its just funny to me, we cut batman more slack than we would a regular parent who isn’t a genius super ninja.

[mielivalta1]

In a parallel world where we can say "where no woman has gone before" and it sounds as neutral and natural as "where no one has gone before", many male characters are seen as women with no boobs I guess

I have so many complaints about that bit of writing advice that says you need to write women as having fundamentally different brains, experiences, and perspectives compared to men. That you should make them feminine and fashion-aware and highly paranoid and less agentic/more conformist. "Women are not just men with boobs."

First of all, gender is not the same as personality. Women who eat pizza liberally without obsessing over diets are not "men with boobs", and neither are women who like sports or who have an interest in the Roman Empire or whatever the hell you want to unnecessarily gender. These are just types of people who are not even uncommon in real life.

This advice implies that to be a "real woman" a character has to be a sexist stereotype.

Second, there is nothing wrong with those "men with boobs" characters anyway (either literally or figuratively). In fact I'd say that most people don't go far enough with it. Too often there's a compromise where these characters, no matter how cool and capable they are, are given a "hidden feminine side" to make them more palatable and reassure us that their essential nature is still "proper".

Third: How come you can write men who experience the full range of human diversity and people don't invent a whole writing advice trope about how if you make them "too feminine" it's unrealistic or "writing women with penises" or whatever?

Where is the pseudo-progressive writing advice that says things like "Men are socialized not to cry so if you write them crying often or being sensitive you are ignoring the impact of gender roles on your characters"?

Fourth:

Damn, sounds like you are treating your personal experiences as universal and neglecting the fact that not all women have the exact same upbringing to such an extreme degree that it's implying "masculine" women who have much skill/interest overlap with men simply do not exist.