#color morph discourse

[omg-snakes]

Hello! Apologies if this is a weird question, i'm just genuinely curious. I recently heard someone in a reptile group say "all morphs are inherently unethical and all snakes that make it to 20+ years old are normals, I've never seen a morph live for too long". Personally this kinda baffled me, since I have both normals and morphs and their daily lives at least are virtually no different. My snow corn snake acts exactly like my normal one, and if his vision is impaired due to albinism, it makes such a miniscule difference in his quality of life that I at least can't notice it. What's your take on this? Thanks!

Oooohhh this is a good question and it's something I think about A Lot and have somewhat addressed before.

I think it helps to consider how most of the morphs we see in captivity (including domestic animals like dogs and cats!) become widespread. Generally, an animal displaying an unusual mutation will be bred with another animal of that species, and then the offspring will be bred back to the parent that carries the original mutation to see if any of the resulting inbred babies have that mutation.

There are two parts to this.

Part one: Mutations, in general, affect an animal's fitness in the wild. Snow corns, as you've pointed out, probably have impaired vision as do all pink-eyed morphs. Other mutations make snakes more visible to predators, or less able to protect themselves, or could affect growth rates, metabolism, organ development, or fecundity. By keeping these animals in captivity and choosing mutations that could reduce wild fitness, we're bypassing natural selection. Is that ethical? Is breeding a sphinx cat ethical? What about a German shepherd? A horse with a white (easily sunburnt) nose? An albino parakeet? Ethics is largely a matter of how personal beliefs intersect with current societal moral consensus. What is ethical for us today may be seen as wrong in twenty years.

Part two: Until pretty recently, many less-thoughtful breeders of reptiles didn't believe that continued inbreeding had any consequences. Now, of course, we understand that the more homozygous an animal is, the higher the likelihood of them expressing mutations that are harmful such as lower immune response or bone deformities. Unfortunately, some breeders to this day refuse to learn about ethics, inheritance, or coefficients of inbreeding and continue to inbreed generation after generation of animals. I've seen first-hand that Ice corns (Anery + Lava) have reduced fecundity and lower robustness. Outcrossing from different bloodlines was not successful in improving the quality and hatch size of offspring. I no longer work with that morph.

I think it's very likely that the person you encountered has realized the consequences of irresponsible morph breeding combined with weak old-school husbandry practices. Their knee-jerk rejection of the entire practice is totally understandable and a valid stance. Others have instead decided to work to improve husbandry and encourage more ethical breeding practices. Also understandable, also valid. For my part, I am making efforts to ensure that any snake I breed has the exact same potential life span as any wild-origin corn snake.

As veterinary medicine and captive husbandry continue to improve, we are seeing more corn snakes of all morphs having longer, healthier lives. I really don't care if that person changes their mind or not, but I do hope to continue to see snakes of every color celebrate birthdays well into their twenties!

[ghouljams]

Idk honestly I could probably write a really in depth analysis on the prevalence of the blue/brown eyed Ghost debate, and what it means in terms of fandom politics especially when coupled with whether Ghost is a natural blond or a brunet, but I doubt anyone wants to hear about the political implications of people pushing most popular character in the series as aryan...

well, i for one would absolutely love to hear about it, but to be fair my degree is in media studies so fork found in kitchen

but tbh is it surprising that this kind of discourse (along with the whole Gaz “not being interesting enough” bs) is a prevalent discussion in a military propaganda game fandom? probably not lol

i also agree with your take that his eyes are brown as part of his character development and that it feeds into the complexity of the dynamics between them

anyway, don’t feel pressured to talk more about it if you don’t feel like it, just wanted to let you know that at least one person would read all of it lol

Much love!!

- Morph

Ghoul thoughts under the cut because I love media analysis and rambling

You hit the nail on the head by bringing up the Gaz "not being interesting" bullshit in relation to this entire thing because I absolutely see the crux of the brown vs blue eyed Ghost debate being a debate over which eye color is "better" which has inherently racist roots.

And as an immediate disclaimer: I am not saying that headcanoning Ghost with blue eyes makes you racist, I am not saying that headcanoning Ghost as blond makes you racist. I am simply pointing out that the way we view certain traits has been and will be filtered through a lens which requires an examination of our own values/beliefs.

It is so intensely interesting to me that in a fandom with a history of racial exclusion, for a media property that upholds whiteness as the pinnacle of virtue, that upholds western ideals and values as the height of moral purity, that places the good guys in a position where they can do NO WRONG despite having a higher torture rate than the bad guys, that a faceless character would be arbitrarily assigned blue eyes and blond hair despite textual/in game evidence to the contrary (yes there is evidence).

Now maybe I am just sensitive to certain things because I paid attention in school and know what a dog whistle sounds like, maybe that's all this is. However, within a fandom that seems to cater so hard to white women and has racist bullshit popping up every other week, I think... maybe we should examine why we want Ghost to have blue eyes.

I find that with faceless characters headcanons always exist within the hopes of making them more attractive. The idea that they would be ugly under the mask is antithetical to the wish fulfilment of fandom, so it makes sense that people would come up with a face for them. But then why are so many faceless characters made into skinny white blonds? Surely people would want some diversity- oh no, wait...

So we make Ghost blond. Alright, I mean he was a brunet in the comics and in the one scene where we see him take his mask off he's got dark hair, but I guess there were too many people with dark hair on the 141 already, so we gotta mix in a blond. But then why the blue eyes? He has blue eyes in the '09 comic, but in every cutscene we see in the '22 remake his eyes are brown. There's already two members of the 141 with blue eyes, so we don't need another one for diversity. So then why give Ghost blue eyes? If you want him to be closer to the '09 version why make him blond as well?

It's because people want to make him attractive, and in the dominant racial zeitgeist blue eyes are attractive. Which... I mean do I need to ask why? It's because they're a white european trait and people still hold white features as the attractive ones. Same with the blond hair. That's why WW2 Germany designated Blond hair and Blue eyes as the "true German" traits and created a whole class for them "aryan."

So what are the political implications of creating an aryan character out of the most popular character in the series (one who has minimal voice lines and minimal canon backstory in the reboot) within a fandom that regularly disregards/ignores the main black character? It's the continued upholding of whiteness and a specific kind of whiteness as more valuable than others. I'm not even going to say more valuable than blackness, I would say more valuable than other white traits. Why are blue eyes more attractive than brown eyes? Because they're more "white." Why is blond hair more attractive than brown? Because it's more "white." Why is a blond haired blue eyed Ghost such a popular headcanon despite evidence to the contrary? Because he's more white that way.

Now I like blond haired Ghost. I think it's an interesting addition to the color pallet of the team, and I like that it makes him look more like a ghost to be so washed out. But I think fandom has a habit of following what becomes popular within head canon spaces and making it fandom canon, and so many of us don't examine why a headcanon might pop up. Where did Ghost having blond hair come from? When did we all decide that was what we were going with? Why is it even a debate whether or not he has blue or brown eyes, and why does it matter?

If I said right now that Ghost 100% in canon of the '22 game has brown hair and brown eyes, would people get mad at me? And why? Why would it matter if he had brown hair and brown eyes? Does that make him less attractive? Why? Why does it matter? Why do you want him to have blond hair and blue eyes? Why do you care? What is the difference between blue and brown that makes it so important? For God's sake look at the societal conditioning that you've been put through! Why does it "make more sense" for him to have blue eyes if he's blond? Why?

Every single idea we have of what is and isn't attractive has been designed for us by the society we live in. Consider what ideals are being upheld when deciding that the "hot" character is blond and blue eyed while also discarding the black character. Being anti-racist and dismantling your own racial biases is a long and constant process, but it is so vitally important. And once we start examining those biases all sorts of shit starts popping up.

And before someone comes in and tells me it isn't that deep: maybe you should look at why you need it to not be that deep, does it make you uncomfortable to think that you might be feeding into these biases without realizing? And who does it benefit to have it not be "that deep" is there perhaps a group of people that would want you to not examine your preference for blue eyes and blond hair? Some sort of brotherhood perhaps...

[vulgrados-best]

Intro Post

Hey I'm Miguel. I'm a xenic nonbinary butch dyke, pronouns are they/them + ze/hir. I'm 17. I'm from Vulgrado, an island region off the coast of Paldea. Recently I had to move to Zapapico to take care of my grandparents.

I'm a Cyclizar Racer, and a pioneer of new types of races. I'm best known for my Bodyguard Racing (name subject to change) style. My rival is @yveltalreal so sorry boys I'm taken.

As it turns out I'm probably plural! At the moment you can refer to us as Miguel& when referring to us all. My two notable headmates at this moment are Zacian and Asterion:

Zacian - He/Him, They/Them, Swor/Sword

Fuzztive (Factive + Fictive) of the legendary wolf pokemon, Zacian! Speaks very formally and is passionate about human society, pokemon conservation efforts, and swords.

Asterion - Ze/Hir, He/Him (exclusive to friends and headmates)

Fictive of The Minotaur from mythology! Speaks bluntly with lots of ellipses and is passionate about stories.

Our Pokemon are:

-> Celcity - Cyclizar | Male

-> Nyoom - Eulimmun | Nonbinary (it/its)

-> Terrainity - Excadrill | Male

-> Mãesaur (& Meninosaur) - Kangaskhan | Female & Male

-> Reapwing - Scyther | Female (they/them)

-> Ferravis - Skarmory | Female (she/he/it)

Uh. I tend to swear a lot, yell a lot, and I love the word dyke.

Also I might start religion discourse on accident considerin' Lachrilove is more commonly referred to on Vulgrado than Arceus. So if ya see me say "Lach" its kinda like how you guys say "Arc"

Fuck uuuhhhh. Look at me and my pokemon 👍

And, no, nothing's wrong with my Cyclizar. It's just a color morph.

// Miguel's universe's pokemon are based more heavily on irl animals. Miguel has and will frequently express distress about other universes' being closer to canon (lack of color morphs, lack of variants, biological workings, etc) or generally unlike theirs.

// Miguel loves to talk about their universe's pokemon and will share knowledge from their universe on other people's posts. They will not understand your universe does not work the same as theirs if you don't explicitly state to them that It Does Not Work Like That for your characters.

// The mun will also not realize discomfort with poke-biology arguments unless it is explicitly stated to them. This goes doubly so for poke-biology about Rapidash as the mun works with horses irl.

(ooc under the cut)

Guidelines:

No NSFW (Miguel is a minor.) Keep it PG-13

Any kind of PKMN IRL blog can interact (Miguel is aware of the multiverse)

In Character Anon Hate is acceptable (but at least make it interesting.)

Pelipper Mail/Malice: OFF (unless funny enough)

Musharna Mail/Malice: OFF (unless compelling enough)

Magic Anons: OFF

Tags:

Posts Made By Tags:

#riders diary -> Posts made by Miguel

#howling voice -> Posts made by Zacian

#labyrinth lost -> Posts made by Asterion

#rotating cast -> Posts made by headmates who don't have a tag

#flowering garden -> Posts made by [Information Redacted until 9/18/2025]

Posts About Tags:

#rivals feud -> Posts about Maple

#caveboy tag -> Posts about Nick

#miguel family -> Posts about Miguel's family

#saddle up -> Posts about racing

#vulgrado info -> information about the fan region Miguel is from that is based on the Azores Islands of Portugal

#lachrian info -> Information about the religion Miguel is a part of.

Important Tags:

#festering -> something important.

#unseen watcher -> signifies that post is invisible to blogs linked to this one (@yveltalreal , @espers-n-espurrs, @jaimemes, @aspens-dragons, @victoria-vd, @rock-n-rolycoly @estranger-and-stranger-still) [works the same as blindspot]

Misc. Tags:

#answered best -> ask tag

#sysposting -> System related posts

Story Arcs:

Minor Arcs:

🏇Neighborhood Arc 1: Riders (Finished) -> 4 Cyclizar Riders get territorial when Nick and Miguel explore a junkyard. Nick mentions to Miguel they had previously driven him and his friends out of the Junkyard.

A couple days later Miguel challenges and beats the Riders in a 4 on 1 Capture the Flag Battle Race, and the 4 Riders invite Miguel to join up with them. A week later there is a sort of rematch and Miguel is betrayed and beat up by the Riders.

A revenge plan is made by Miguel and Nick, this involved getting the Rolycoly Racers (who had been pushed out of the junkyard earlier in the year) to play a prank with Paintball Guns on the Cyclizar Riders. This goes badly as Nick is nearly run over and Miguel beats the shit out of the rider who attempted to do so. Miguel is then arrested.

Major Arcs:

🪼Trouble in Paradise (Finished) -> Miguel joins the Alola trip! Miguel joins Flynn and Maple on their Island Challenge, acting as a bodyguard against dogmon for Maple. Over the course of the trip they go through some mishaps (such as getting beaten up by an angry Buneary, and Maple jumping into the ocean to rescue a baby Vulpix) that cause the trio to get closer.

During the Electric Trial, Miguel was hiking and came across a dead Mother Skarmory, killed by a Tinkaton. Miguel rescues the baby Skarmory that is in danger and runs for their life with the little guy in their arms. They decide to keep the Skarmory who is named Santo Ferravis (a name recommended by Nick).

At one point Maple and Aspen break into the Aether Foundation Lab and Aspen gets kidnapped. It turns out that Aspen was taken by Nihilego and the gang, after some deliberation and preparation (such as Miguel being trained by Victoria), goes into an Ultra Wormhole to rescue Aspen. During the rescue, Miguel is injured by Aspen's Kommo-o, Hibiscus, and is left with a scar.

Afterwards things go... mostly smoothly (except for Maple disappearing for a couple days, and Maple getting attacked by a different Kommo-o) and they finish the Island Challenge. The gang returns home in one piece.

☠️Revenant (In Progress) -> Something's not right with Maple.

[all mentions of dyke will be tagged #d slur tw for filtering.

Mun identifies with the label and feels uncomfortable describing their character as simply sapphic.]

Main is @werewolfcave

[localcryptidsteg]

Ranting About South Of Midnight (and its not what you think), or,

An Open Letter To Whom It May Concern:

The reaction to South of Midnight on Youtube is pissing me off.

Everywhere else, I've seen very little negative reaction, but for some goddamn reason Youtube is hung up on Sweet Baby Inc being mildly involved in it. Like sit down and shut the fuck up, it's another retelling of Alice in Wonderland with an american gothic flavor, it's not that deep. This game existing is not a personal slight to you.

What's more, it's not even Sweet Baby mainlining it. Im really beginning to suspect people don't even have issues with the games they make, they have personal beef about a handful of tweets specific staff members made. Go touch grass maybe? They worked on Alan Wake 2 and God of War: Ragnarok, and I'm not seeing ANY of this energy toward those games even retroactively.

That's not to ignore the issues with Sweet Baby Inc! Those tweets were HIGHLY performative and made in terrible taste and the people who posted them really do need to reexamine what put them there in the first place! But chances are they weren't even involved in this game.

So maybe shut the fuck up and enjoy the pretty music, violently American story, and nice art.

This whole game is a love letter to the southeast corner of the US, get the fuck out of my house if you can't see that.

And to the people going "Oh ItS aNtI wHiTe," actually go walk off a cliff Looney Tunes-style you absolute clowns.

Every character they showcase is morally grey AT WORST, and race has jackshit to do with it.

They

Are

Fucking

Human.

They are flawed and nuanced and the story does a FANTASTIC job of delving into how what seems to be a good person can do horrible fucked up things when driven to despair.

It's not antiwhite, it's "hey generational trauma is messy! Learn from the past so you can have empathy for the present, you don't know what people are going through or have been through!"

Now

Yes

The gameplay loop as far as combat goes, from what I've seen so far, is VERY repetitive. That is a FULLY valid complaint. BUT THEY HAVE A WALKING SIM MODE IN THE GAME. YOU CAN TURN COMBAT OFF.

Honestly, if this had released in 2010, you would have heard nothing but praise for it because it's AN EXACT EMULATION OF THAT ERA OF NARRATIVE STORYTELLING.

And that's not to say it's outdated! Rather, it's nostalgic in the best ways!

Anyway. I just wish it was being given a fairer shot on bigger social media platforms, and the people in the comments section would just shut up and give it a chance instead of letting what amounts to a one-sided grudge color their judgement. It's not a perfect game, but it's infinitely less of a corporate, sanitized slog than a lot of modern AAA games have devolved into.

And I really hate that online gaming space discourse has morphed into "it has to cater directly to meeeeeeeee or its bad!!!!1"

No. Shut up. Other people with other experiences are just as allowed to have their stories told as you, if you can't abide by not feeling the main character in a game is a 1:1 representation of you personally, you need to go back to playing MMOs and stay the hell away from narratives. Otherwise, your misery over it is your own fault and it's not mine or anyone else's problem that you're in a tizzy.

[c0rpseductor]

this is so pfeil it’s making me cry. also introduced me to the fascinating striated heron color morph discourse

[vero-niche]

i've found this very interesting MIT article from 2022 that i wanted to share, especially in light of the current discourses happenning:

some highlights (bolding by me):

Anne Fausto-Sterling, the renowned biology and sex/gender expert, succinctly states: “By birth, the baby has five layers of sex.” That’s right: There are fetal layers to the baby’s sex, to put the matter oddly. Even more strikingly, “these layers do not always agree with each other.” Here’s the beginning, one is tempted to say, of our not agreeing with ourselves biologically. Parts of our body disagree with other parts.

To state the obvious, adults who name the baby with a word, “girl” or “boy,” see only one of the five sex-layers.

The others are invisible to the naked eye. Who knows how many discrepancies between and among the layers of sex go undetected.

In the past, should a “problem” — disagreement (!) — arise, steps might well be taken to force the baby to agree with itself. The history of intersex people, with all its profound implications, sits right here. And given the incidence of intersex, which might be as high as one in 60 people, it’s a bigger history and bigger population than is often recognized. Also, a bigger struggle to be accorded human rights, instead of deemed a problem.

All of which takes us to a sixth layer. What is named “gender.” (...) Welcome to the gender fort. The “social response” to a baby is “intense.” So intense, we learn, that our reading of its genitals, to which we pin a word, causes our building of a fort around this reading. It’s no joke. Fausto-Sterling calls this socialization “gender fortification.” The word “boy” or “girl,” however cone-like, however body-sheath-like, is evidently not enough for us. We act as if we have to fortify it at every turn.

Intersex children and transgender children (not yet named as such) held something that would prove quite dear to U.S. science in the 20th century: the capacity to be transformed by medicine. Indeed, these children became “living laboratories,” writes Gill-Peterson. They were deemed “plastic” enough to be changed — first through surgeries, later by hormones — often in the name of “correction.” Their “peculiar” suffering could be studied, treated, and corrected. If they disagreed with their bodies, agreement could be fashioned. Medically, surgically.

If they were white. The children not selected, rarely presented, never sought out for medical treatment (however highly torturous) were children of color.

This is where gender takes center stage. A crisis was brewing. Due to this cadre of certain white children who didn’t fit the measures of binary sex, biology and medicine were facing a cataclysm. Those most knowledgeable understood the plastic nature of the body — along with the possibility of its not matching itself at all levels. (...)

Gender to the rescue. In the most circular but interesting of ways, gender is invented to shore up sex.

There’s your circle. Society, ignorant of medical research, makes a stigma out of something our bodies do quite naturally: not conform to a sexual binary. Thus, society’s enforced binary corrects a problem of its own making. And medicine complies, against its own research.

Biology and medicine, after all, came to realize in their way that the binary of sex was imposed upon a range of human bodies and their lived desires. Fascinating, fraught, and intimate to everyone, gender increasingly has our attention as something newly morphing. Prepare to enter a story that is yours.

[kaedegitsune]

🐾 hello, fellow wanderer!

welcome to my kin blog! i answer to kaz, kazuha, kasper, or whatever else you want to call me besides 'human'. i am 22, pronouns he/him and it/its. transmasc, ace, and gay.

this blog is where i put all of my kin-related posts and reblogs, varying from kin discourse to instincts/kin moods to exomems and noemata. i may also post related experiences here, such as daemonism and soulbonding ^^ main blog is @fox-beyond-the-veil.

i am a physical kitsune nonhuman and kaedehara kazuha (genshin impact) fictionkin.

doubles are ok to interact! minors are allowed, i'd never wanna gatekeep information and i'd be happy to answer questions/give advice, but just know i'm not gonna be your friend for my own comfort.

tags, intros and dni vv

my daemon is sierra, she/her. I talk in the color blue, and with proper sentences. Kazuha types for me. I'm not the most talkative with others, but I am here.

analytic form: (black morph) timber rattlesnake

symbolic form: european pine marten

I like being travel-sized.

my soulbond is heizou! doubles of him interact with caution, he's still on the fence about that.

tags!

- withered autumn leaves: exomems/noemata

- into the wind: art

- key-keeper myobu: nonhuman

- crimson momiji: fictionkin

- chihayaburu: kin discourse

- kitsune no yomeiri: silly shenanigans

- red leaves lifeless lie: misc

- sierra speaks: sierra cameo

- trap em by storm: heizou cameo

- kitsune-tsuki: daemonism, soulbonding, and related

- offering box finds: ask box answers

dni is basic and same as my main. transphobes and other lgbtqia+phobes, zionists, racists, anti-kins and anti-furries, nazis, fascists, pro/neu contact harmful paraphilias, anti-endos, ableists... if you're an asshole, basically, do us both a favor and gtfo :)

also drag me into shipping discourse and i'm chewing on your kidneys.

anyway, that's all ^^

journey safely! 🐾

[talmud-babely]

the idea that white women gain status under white supremacy by leveraging whiteness against people of color morphing into this idea that white women can sidestep patriarchy and misogyny by virtue of being white has deeply wounded all feminist discourse by turning misogyny into some kind of side issue that can be escaped from within a patriarchy as opposed to like one of the oldest and most universal forces of oppression in human culture

like safety for women is always conditional as long as the culture stays faithful to patriarchy and that should be more obvious now than ever yet people acting smug that White Women are getting their Well Deserved Comeuppance by……all women losing yet more bodily autonomy….

[aristocratsbowsnties]

The Cultural Significance of the Bow Tie

The bow tie occupies a unique and powerful position within the cultural and fashion landscape. This sartorial choice, characterized by its looped fabric tied around the neck to form a symmetric bow, transcends its appearance as a mere accessory. It embodies a confluence of intellectualism, nonconformity, and stylistic elegance, asserting itself as a timeless and enduring symbol within fashion's ever-changing arena. The cultural significance of the bow tie is deeply embedded in historical narratives, iconic personalities, and its adaptive journey through fashion trends, marking it as a potent emblem of individual and collective identities.

Historical and Cultural Context

Originating in the 17th century among Croatian mercenaries as a functional garment piece, the bow tie evolved into a fashion statement amongst the French elite, eventually morphing into the contemporary bow tie familiar to us today. This evolution from a practical accessory to a staple of formal wear and a symbol of refined taste underscores its enduring appeal. The bow tie's association with prominent figures such as Winston Churchill, Albert Einstein, and fictional characters like James Bond and Doctor Who, enriches its cultural significance, portraying it as an accessory of complexity and depth.

Symbolism in Academia and Professional Realms

Within academic and professional domains, the bow tie symbolizes a distinctive blend of quirky intellectuality and esteemed professionalism. It is often donned by individuals who embody a non-conformist yet highly respected approach within their fields, representing a balance between serious engagement and a playful deviation from norms. This association with intellectual rigor and distinctive personal style grants the bow tie a special status, enabling wearers to articulate a nuanced personal and professional identity.

Subcultural Relevance and Gender Expression

The bow tie also serves as a meaningful symbol within various subcultures and movements, particularly within the LGBTQ+ community, where it stands as a proud emblem of individuality and non-conformity to traditional gender norms. Its versatility and capacity to challenge conventional gendered fashion norms underscore the bow tie's role as a powerful tool for personal expression and identity affirmation.

Contemporary Adaptations and Stylistic Diversity

Reflecting its adaptability, the bow tie has seamlessly transitioned from formal attire to a component of casual wear, boasting an array of designs, colors, and materials that cater to diverse aesthetic preferences and personalities. This transformation demonstrates the bow tie's ability to evolve while preserving its core identity as an emblem of uniqueness and style. Fashion designers and style innovators continue to explore and reinvent the bow tie, affirming its relevance and appeal in the modern fashion discourse.

Conclusion

The bow tie's cultural significance is multifaceted, encapsulating a rich blend of historical tradition, symbolic rebellion, and stylistic innovation. Its enduring presence in the fashion landscape, coupled with its deep-rooted associations with intellectualism, individualism, and cultural expression, cements its status as a potent symbol of identity. As it continues to adapt to the evolving tastes and sensibilities of fashion, the bow tie stands as a testament to the enduring power of personal expression through style, embodying the profound cultural and symbolic weight of what might otherwise seem a simple accessory.

[viscerism]

all right i don't care about the discourse but as a resident snake enthusiast i would like to add on some propaganda for "iridescent" as well. long-ish post, so snake pics (and facts) under the cut

this beautiful creature is known as simali boeleni, a nonvenomous python endemic to the mountains of new guinea! they are more commonly referred to as the boelen's python or the black python. as you can see in the images, the black portions of this python's striped pattern are often iridescent with "an oil-slick-like sheen", as some may describe it.

this little fella is called the xenopeltis, more commonly known as the sunbeam snake. he is the sole genus of the family xenopeltidae and is found native to southeast asia. they are fairly small compared to the other snakes on this list, but no less beautiful. their scales can range from black to brown to a reddish-brown, and are highly iridescent, which earned them their more common name. these little guys are absolutely beautiful and nonvenomous, but are not often kept as pets because of the high mortality rate in captivity. because they spend most of their time hidden, shipping the snakes or even handling them too often or improperly can cause significant stress and eventual death.

this breathtaking beauty is epicrates cenchria, the rainbow boa. they are renowned for their exquisite appearance. their smooth and glossy, iridescent scales are uniquely patterned with saddle-like shapes, blotches, or speckles. they are found native to lower central america and farther south in south america. fun fact: the heat-sensing pits you can see on their jaws are used to locate prey on the forest floor! they are also excellent swimmers.

last but not least, we have the leiopython albertisii, a.k.a., the d'albertis (water) python or the (northern) white-lipped python. this gorgeous guy is a nonvenomous python endemic to new guinea. the color of its body can be described as "either brownish-violet fading to yellowish ventrally or blackish-blue fading to gray", with the signature white markings around their lips being the source of their more common moniker. while they are kept as pets, this is usually by only experienced snake and/or reptile handlers, as they are known to be very aggressive, though thus can be reduced slightly by being bred in captivity.

it's actually not all that uncommon for snakes to have iridescent scales! even some morphs of ball pythons can produce iridescence in the correct lighting. these are just some of the species in which it is the most common. anyway, sorry for the long post but this is one of the only chances i have to briefly ramble about snakes, so i snatched the opportunity while i could. vote iridescent!

Ultimate Word Tournament!

Season 2

transgender (English) /tɹænzˈd͡ʒɛn.dɚ/ Having a gender identity which is different from one's assigned sex. An umbrella term that includes nonbinary, genderfluid and agender people as well!

iridescent (English) /ˌɪɹ.ɪˈdɛs.ənt/ Producing a display of lustrous, rainbow-like colors; prismatic.

[wandering-wolf23]

Please don’t reblog this. I’m whining about Twitter shit

Me @ the anti animal sanctuary crowd: You do understand that the other options are killing the animal in question or leaving it to suffer, right? And maybe we shouldn't destroy a healthy animal that isn't a behavior problem just because of where it ended up, right?

The sanctuary issue isn't black and white. It pisses me off to see people pretend it is. I've worked rescue before. I can't support killing healthy animals that aren't behavior cases.

Edit: Hi, please don’t reblog this post. As it says in the title, I’m bitching about a twitter thread that stated ALL sanctuaries are evil and if you support a sanctuary, you’re evil, too. There are 110% bad sanctuaries, just like there are bad everything else. I get frustrated when there are people who know jackshit about domestic animals (and even exotics), yet seem to think that their Google Degree means they know more than my years of experience.

Also, I don’t have the stomach to kill something myself or leave it to suffer. You might say I’m a bleeding heart (and you would be right).

[omg-snakes]

I just wanted to check - there are albino corns, right? I know there are Snows and Blizzard morphs. Snake Discovery did a corn snake hatching vid recently and seemed to think there were no albino corn snakes, so I was a little confused. (They also didn't know the difference between Tessera, Motley, and Stripe though so I think they are just generally uninformed)

Hey friend!

I think the source of confusion here is that the term "albino" is a colloquialism developed for humans that doesn't totally work for reptiles.

The root Latin word, albus, just means "white." The term albino was originally coined by Portuguese and Spanish colonizers (boooo!) to refer to the children of Black slaves who were born without melanin. It then went on to describe any animal without pigment, particularly the black pigment melanin, which resulted in white hair, pink skin, and pink or very light blue eyes.

As science marched on and we gained a better understanding of how genetics and pigment work, we came to realize that there are multiple pigments at play in most animals. Even humans, whose main pigment is melanin, have two different kinds of melanin which result in the rich diversity of skin tones across the human species! Albinism works as a descriptor for humans because we only have melanin, but it falls apart fast when we start applying it to other forms of life.

So in corn snakes there are three main pigments: melanin (black), erythrin (red), and xanthin (yellow).

An amelanistic, or Amel, corn snake is by definition an "albino" with no melanin and red eyes. But they look like this:

That doesn't exactly look white...

If we're looking for white snakes to call albino, a Snow corn snake has amelanism and anerythrism in combination, but they still have yellow xanthin pigment. A Blizzard, on the other hand, is a combination of amelanism and a slightly different mutation called Charcoal that removes both erythrin and xanthin. By the original intent of the word, a Blizzard would probably be an "albino" but a Snow might not fit the bill. Or might, depending on who's deciding, since they technically lack melanin!

To bring up another example of pigment mutations, leucism is the absence of all pigment, not just melanin. This mutation is most commonly found in birds and reptiles. Leucism and albinism look similar, and the mutations do similar things from a "looking at animals on the outside" perspective, but they're genetically distinct from each other!

It falls into semantics and discourse, so I think the easiest way to go about it is to think of albinism as a blanket term to describe a range of genetic color morphs found in mammals, but not a scientific description of what's actually happening. We could probably skip using it to describe reptiles because even when it's technically applicable, it's not the whole story.

I'll end this by saying that YouTubers in general are entertainers, not educators, and I don't think I'd take anything any of them say seriously unless they're providing references. Snakes are a huge and diverse group of lifeforms, and even if one were to know every detail there is to know about one species, that knowledge may only tenuously apply to even a similar-looking species.

This is exactly why exotics veterinarians are expensive and why you should treat them very kindly and with a great deal of respect.

[pizzleyanked]

thank you for tagging me @irrewilderer! it’s a sims q&a thingamajig, under the cut! i will be very longwinded bc that’s how i roll

01: what’s your favorite sims death? the one you had when you got cursed by a mummy in ts3 world adventures. there is a lot of skeeviness around that whole pack, but i remember stumbling onto it in gameplay and it being deeply fucked up in a way recent installments refuse to match

02: alpha cc or maxis match? i lean maxis mix-ish but i don’t care about which way people lean ngl

03: do you cheat when your sims gain weight? this is a weird question and as someone who is experiencing a resurgence in [redacted] i think that whoever made this originally should be ashamed of themself.

04: do you use move objects? yes, no default sims grid placement may satisfy my hoarding tendencies.

05: favorite mod? ts2 needs a suite of mods to encourage it to not self-explode, but i am an acr enjoyer. with the right tuning it makes sims not breed like rabbits but have their own autonomy and people of interest that i find very enjoyable

06: first expansion/game/stuff pack you got? i believe that i got ts1 bundled with some expansion pack? so whichever one came after that until dad got tired and learned how to pirate so i could enjoy games hehe

07: do you pronounce “live mode” like aLIVE or LIVing? alive, i don’t care if it’s the wrong way

08: who’s your favorite sim that you’ve made? it has to be jess. it’s silly but writing her at times allows me to work through some shit of my own.

09: have you made a simself? i never cared to until i got me a wife who lives very far away from me hehe

10: what sim traits did you give yourself? no idea tbh, i forgot (i reek of ts3 absent minded trait)

11: what is your favorite EA hair color? the witching hour defaults and addon palette by pyxis my beloved

12: favorite EA hair? no friggin’ idea my dude

13: favorite life stage? this question would only make sense if eaxis put any thought into life stages other than young/adult since the release of the generations ep. but i’ve recently been reminded of how fun the ts2 teens are.

14: are you a builder or are you in it for the gameplay? is build/buy not a gameplay function? i can’t build to save my life but i enjoy decorating and live mode (in ts2 mostly)

15: are you a CC creator? as need and want hit me

16: do you have any simblr friends/a sim squad? LMFAO what kinda question is this!! no i don’t have a simblr avengers squad or anything and i’m over caring about it. there’s people in the community i’m fond of but i’m not trying to join or create a clique

17: what’s your favorite game? listen. i am going to obtusely pretend that this isn’t a sims interrogatory and talk about the games that have my heart right now bc i can’t choose a single game. you have been warned.

now and forever, the games that miyazaki has directed at fromsoftware, particularly the souls series and bloodborne (i haven’t played elden ring yet but i KNOW i will adore it) are very special to me. bloodborne is a masterpiece. and i am sad that discourse has morphed these games into everything that’s wrong with Gamers and Gatekeeping. the games and the 99% of the community aren’t about that. i walked into them as someone who’d mostly played games casually but loved the games that approach storytelling indirectly. i fell in love with the marriage of gameplay and theming. i love how miyazaki approaches storytelling as an act of archaeology. the world was there long before you. you’re a nobody. things are bleak and you can’t get a straight answer out of anything, but you have other people going through it with you. you can imbue meaning and history into things, and that is beautiful. and i am bitter that one can’t say that the games don’t need an easy mode without being deemed a gatekeeper. (the games were designed with multiplayer that allows other players to cooperate with you and help you. there are gameplay styles that make things easier. all out of the box)

i am a known tes lover but morrowind is the apple of my eye. it’s weird listening to essays about modern day open world design and its pitfalls and to see how morrowind largely circumvents these issues, all the way back in 2002. the lore is amazing and once more it places a large chunk of the meaning making on the player’s hands. vvardenfell is a wonderful region of morrowind and i enjoy the diverse landscapes from the humid and mysterious bitter coast, the harsh ashlands, and the welcoming breadbasket which are the ascadian isles (lovely until you stumble upon the plantations). the exploration and navigation are unmatched and nothing will ever match the skill that is navigating the world through in game directions and learning the silt strider, boat, and stronghold routes. not to get into mark/recall/almsivi and divine intervention. you arrive at vvardenfell as a stranger and the world is hostile, but as the character becomes more familiar with the land you the player master the transversal and that’s honestly some sexy marriage of theming and gameplay. some aspects have aged horribly which is why these days i play with the amazing sexual harassment remover mod.

i think everyone owes it to themself to play outer wilds (NOT worlds). it plays into the strengths i mentioned above. i can’t say much because it ruins the purpose of the game. it’s a tender bastard of a game that makes me so happy that i am alive at a time i can play it and makes me cry every time i listen to tracks from its ost. the writing is maybe the best i have ever witnessed in any art form (“the pain of your absence is sharp and haunting, and i would give anything to not know it; anything but never knowing you at all (which would be worse)”). just play it. i wish i could hire someone to bonk me on the head and give me selective amnesia so i could play it for the first time again. just. play. it.

there’s more, like octopath traveler which is quickly climbing through the ranks, darkest dungeon, pillars of eternity, project zomboid, dragon’s dogma, journey, and more

also, it’s ts2.

18: do you have any sims merch? ew, no

19: do you have a youtube for sims? ew, no

20: how has your “sim style” changed throughout your years of playing? it has, but i’m not quite sure i can describe it? it’s been decades of sims so of course it’s changed.

21: what’s your origin id? come back with a warrant

22: who’s your favorite cc creator? i am a known sforzcc simp

23: how long have you had a simblr? wouldn’t you like to know, weather boy (too long)

24: how do you edit your pictures? i use Very Legitimate photoshop. these days i just run a photopeia action that gives it some color aberration and slap some noise on it.

25: what expansion/game/stuff pack is your favorite so far? i love sims 2 freetime? hobbies are such a great addition to the game that just fits in seamlessly with the rest of the game

26: what expansion/game/stuff pack do you want next? the eaxis stop shoving shit into ts4 and fix issues and let the modders have it pack

[greater-than-the-sword]

I don't per se believe in "death of the author", but I do believe that in many cases when an author refuses to specify some detail of their story, they're encouraging you to consider the validity of all possible options that they've left open.

For example, when an author leaves an ambiguous ending, they intend for you to consider the validity of all possible options. Or when the author leaves ambiguous a detail of a character's appearance that may be culturally sensitive, like skin color, they may be willing to let you consider the validity of any race of person in this scenario.

I don't per se believe in "death of the author", but I do believe in "applicability". Kind of like the writers of the First Amendment couldn't foresee the internet, King Solomon couldn't foresee your personal life when he wrote down the Proverbs, but that doesn't mean he didn't intend them to be applied in more ways than he thought of. In the same way you can often reinterpret romantic songs as platonic and platonic songs as romantic because what you're really seeing is that the writer has a good enough understanding of the concept of "love" generally that it can be applied across multiple topics.

It's my general opinion that the author only dies when you kill them (metaphorically) and sometimes you have to kill the author to get any meaning worth having out of their work. Eg. HP Lovecraft, whose stories' animating principle was racism. The important thing though is not to lie about the author's intent, just to admit your own authorship of a creative interpretation. I don't think we'd have half so many fights in Fandom if people could simply own their creative interpretations as their own brainchild while admitting it exists separately from the author's vision [at the time of writing].

Unfortunately Fandom has spawned this concept of "canon". "Canon" isn't really about the actual content of any work (see: works with continually altered or contradictory material, like the MCU). "Canon" is like a shared group interpretation, and fandom created this idea that the "canon" can be morphed or shaped by group concensus or even the opinion of an author who changed their mind, cut certain materials out of the "canon", or had a press conference. Because the actual materials of a work can be self contradictory or contain mistakes, the Fandom has to operate with a group concensus, and unfortunately this often means value judgments, wild interpretive leaps, or simply taking personal creative interpretations and forcing them on others as law. (Just take one look at the discourse on whether Cursed Child is Harry Potter canon.)

Since 'killing the author' is to some extent required to make "canon" a functional concept for fandoms, I don't really think "canon" is a helpful category for analyzing the [actual] intent of media. In fandom, concensus decides the interpretation of the work. But group concensus doesn't actually have any effect on the content of the work itself, and often actually cuts off a range of valid interpretations that the author may even have wished to leave open. I don't know where I'm going with this, but I do think we need to rethink the notion of "canon" as a vehicle for media interpretation not because it's too strict but because it's too manipulable.

[stranger-rants]

This may have been talked about to death—too new to fandom discourse—but I have this theory that the idea for billy’s character stemmed from (valid) criticism/debate that stranger things s1 was too unrealistic/idealized re: its depictions of racism (specifically the lack thereof), and so the duffs got all defensive and were like nay, we SHALL address racism! We shall have a new HUMAN villain who shall embody ALL racism. Racism, thy name is billy hargrove. But then the scene they wrote was apparently so poorly conceived that the actors refused to utter the lines. And so they revised it to strongly IMPLIED racism, thy name is billy hargrove. And then once again one of the actors pushed back and was like but from whence does this toxicity emerge?? And they were like FINE. Strongly implied racism nurtured by an abusive bigoted parent, thy name is billy hargove. And then subsets of fandom either latched onto the original shallowly conceived version of billy or the more nuanced but still pretty botched version of billy. The former have been loudly vilifying him with all the overly simplistic rancor the duffs hoped to evoke so that they could check off the lil racism box on their storytelling to-do list. And the latter have been tirelessly working to weave the knotted strands of potential and the many many details and clues that surely were intentional but maybe were just indigestion into something compelling and pretty amazing. But the rancor was louder, and also they hadn’t actually planned anything for him beyond racism thy name is billy hargrove, and so they dropped anything to do with that for s3, gave billy a demonic lobotomy in the opening, and washed their hands of him in the finale. (…Sorry for the flippant tone—racism is obv something I wish they’d explored with even a modicum of competence. But I also find the depths of their incompetence just… comical?? In that way where you gotta either laugh or scream)

So, this is really interesting because when Stranger Things first aired there was quite a bit of discourse around the lack of racial diversity in the show especially as The Get Down was also airing on Netflix at the same time. On top of that, there was a lot of criticism within fandom on how they handled Lucas’ character who was reasonably distrustful of their protagonist, Eleven. Who knows if that had any influence over their writing going into season 2.

We do know The Duffers wanted a “human antagonist” and that they wanted to “explore interracial relationships” with Lucas and Max. However, they didn’t plan this out very well because to them 80s racism is a movie aesthetic and not a complex issue of it’s own. Sure, they can create a racist bully character but what’s their overall purpose to the narrative if the narrative does not in any way tackle racism as a systemic issue in Hawkins, Indiana.

We’re supposed to believe this abused teenager from California with no real investment in his sister’s life is so concerned about his sister dating a boy who is black, but casually ignore the implications of a boy being black in a predominantly white, conservative, Reagan-voting town that quickly morphed into a lynch mob that evokes systemic racism in America. They’d rather scapegoat another teenage bully than put effort into exploring racism with any authenticity and that’s on them… not Dacre or the character he portrayed.

I think fans of color have every right to be upset by what Billy said and did. At the same time, when fandom as a whole hang on The Duffer’s interpretation of Billy as The Racist and define him entirely based on an early version of him that we never saw on screen (thank goodness) I have to ask… why? Why would anyone want Billy to say racial slurs towards Lucas for their one-note racism plot point they were never going to explore beyond the shock value of hearing the N-word in a mainstream supernatural show.

…and all of this being said, Lucas is still pushed aside in favor of everyone else. His interest in basketball marks him a traitor among his friends who had no intention of supporting him at his games. He still narratively spent most of season 4 in enemy territory. Hell, Jason almost did kill him and people spend a lot of time excusing him because his girlfriend died and blaming Lucas for acting suspicious as if those two things haven’t historically been used to form lynch mobs to hunt down and kill black boys who were in the wrong place.

It’s all really clumsy handling of racism is what it is.

[thebowerypresents]

Yves Tumor Defies Just About Everything at Webster Hall

Yves Tumor – Webster Hall – October 26, 2021

Whoa.

A hot-take reaction to a show like Yves Tumor’s is a visceral one—really, an uncontrollable whoa. And while the music blogger is meant to demonstrate some kind of critical remove—whoa isn’t a traditionally acceptable descriptor, no? We’re here to discourse? Well there’s just no other immediate reaction to confronting the angsty, jerky, psychedelic, full-throttle, assaulting, pillaging, propulsive, innovative and all-out, balls-to-the-wall fun Yves Tumor and crew deliver as a live-concert experience.

Yves Tumor is a force: feral, aggressive, a callback to (and maybe a leap forward from) the best of pop and rock and roll frontpeople. Their show is also a “dancing-about-architecture” experience. You can spend plenty of breathless prose trying to describe what’s going on right there in front of you—as in the classic comparison of writing about music being like dancing about architecture—and you’ve realized you’re wasting copy space on multihyphenate adjectives and pretzel-knotted descriptors, when what you should be doing is absorbing the Yves Tumor experience in brightly-colored-although-slightly-sinister, electrical-current waves. You can reach for some kind of Funkadelic-Prince-shoegaze-pop-R&B-electronica-glam-art-rock mash, and sure, you can hear all of that at times, often in mutant form, and it’s going to help but not going to explain it, beyond being a vaguely useful set of guideposts. Just drink it in. Or more accurately, strap yourself in and feel the G’s.

Back on tour following one of the most-talked-about sets at this year’s Pitchfork Music Festival, Yves Tumor—the stage name and performance identity of artist Sean Bowie—roared into Webster Hall, packed to the gills despite a wet and uncharitable day of weather in NYC. Beginning with “Gospel for a New Century”—and maybe that is the descriptor we’re looking for—the band was almost immediately in the pocket, with songs that would sometimes start slow and then turn into big arena-rock shred-fests, or cannonball headfirst into psychedelic morass, but not just to ambiently vamp or jam—the destination was always certain. Some tunes morphed unchecked into another—“Dream Palette” began before “Romanticist” ended, or maybe was it vice versa—and some hit a steady rolling groove (“Operator”) and stayed there, albeit impatiently, until the statement was made. Yves and band owned the stage—all of it, actually, considering the keys and drums were perched atop seven-foot-tall platforms overlooking the rest of the band below. And they owned the sound, not least for its wall-shaking, carriage-vibrating, ear-splitting volume, at levels that would make Dinosaur Jr. blush.

They had us, that’s for sure, and proceeded to make us boogie. “Jackie,” a newer song, had a woozy delivery, while crowd-favorite “Kerosene” began in a dreamlike trance before cracking its shell and opening into Van Halen–style guitar pyrotechnics. The build-and-then-crack-it-open approach became a familiar pattern. Many songs started as pummelers, or didn’t start as pummelers but eventually became pummelers, or stomped themselves into a noise-rock thicket, or, as in “Crushed Velvet,” had the audience at steady, giddy pogo, or, as in “Licking an Orchid,” started as a Daft Punk–like, spacey-sounding thing with chant-signing before getting gnarlier and funkier, hitting explosive peaks. Later, “The Feeling When You Walk Away” was an oddly compelling choice—spectral, almost trip-hop sounding when it might have otherwise been time to rock out, each musician yielding the stage one by one to give in to a quick guitar-and-drums jam before the set ended.

Yves Tumor is a fascinating study. They barely address the crowd—heaps of charisma, certainly, and also something appealingly confrontational, cold and removed, as if warmth would file down the necessary edges of the music. But it’s not unwelcoming. Wholly present, Yves Tumor jumped into the audience several times—communing, vibing, simmering—and spent a large part of the set holding—no, wielding—a bouquet of flowers, taking small, savory moments to pause among angsty struts around the stage. You’re in their orbit, oh yes. A 16-or-so-song main set and encore went faster than an eyeblink. Really, the energy had been building for hours—the parade of openers was worthy of its own salute, not least the kaleidoscopic dance-pop-rap of Ecco2K—and then came Yves Tumor and crew to completely draw you into their orbit and melt or rip away your resolve. At the heart of this, of course, is pure genre-defying, gender-defying, expectations-defying rock—a line that goes back to at least Little Richard and much farther still. Yves Tumor makes that playbook their own. They’re back at Webster Hall Thursday night. Do what you gotta do to be there. —Chad Berndtson | @Cberndtson

Photos courtesy of Dana (distortion) Yavin | distortionpix.com