Mlcly-bloo - I Eat Berries

knitting tutorial made by a twenty-something knitting influencer: 18 min long, 12 of those minutes being the intro and a sponsor plug, they show the first few steps of the tutorial at the slowest speed known to man, they show the most important steps at a neck-break speed, they stop every five seconds to talk about what they just did, 40,000 comments filled with questions ranging from insightful to “how do i knit”, filmed with a camera that costs more than a car, the tutorial is incorrect.

knitting tutorial made by a seventy-something grandmother: two min long, filmed 17 years ago, shows you what you want with the skilled patient hands of a beloved deity, made with the world’s shittiest camera, the best video on the fucking internet, four comments and 30 views, you lose the video and never find it again.

the "in another universe" "in another life" posts are funny cause you only get one, this one, and you've already resigned to losing it too. try fighting in this one

How people in the USA loved nature and knew the ways of the plants in the past vs. nowadays

I have been in the stacks at the library, reading a lot of magazine and journal articles, selecting those that are from over fifty years ago.

I do this because I want to see how people thought and the tools they had to come up with their ideas, and see if I can get perspective on the thoughts and ideas of nowadays

I've been looking at the journals and magazines about nature, gardening, plants, and wildlife, focusing on those from 1950-1970 or thereabouts. These are some unstructured observations.

The discourse about spraying poisons on everything in your garden/lawn has been virtually unchanged for the past 70 years; the main thing that's changed is the specific chemicals used, which in the past were chemicals now known to be horribly dangerous and toxic. In many cases, just as today, the people who opposed the poisons were considered as whackos overreacting to something mostly safe with a few risks that could be easily minimized. In short, history is not on the pesticides' side.

Compared with 50-70 years ago, today the "wilderness" areas of the USA are doing much better nowadays, but it actually appears that the areas with lots of human habitation are doing much worse nowadays.

I am especially stricken by references to wildflowers. There has definitely been a MASSIVE disappearance of flowers in the Eastern United States. I can tell this because of what flowers the old magazines reference as common or familiar wildflowers. Many of them are flowers that seem rare to me, which I have only seen in designated preserves.

There are a lot more lepidopterans (butterflies and moths) presumed to be familiar to the reader. And birds.

Yes, land ownership in the USA originated with colonization, but it appears that the preoccupation with who owns every little piece of land on a very nitpicking level has emerged more recently? In the magazines there is a sense of natural places as an unacknowledged commons. It is assumed that a person has access to "The creek," "The woods," "The field," "The pond" for simple rambling or enjoyment without personally owning property or directly asking permission to go onto another person's property.

There is very little talk of hiking and backpacking. I don't think I saw anything in the magazines about hiking or going on hikes, which is strange because nowadays hiking is the main outdoor activity people think of. Nature lovers 50-70 years ago described many more activities that were not very physically active, simply watching the birds or tending to one's garden or going on a nice walk. I feel this HAS to do with the immediately above point.

Gardening seems like it was more common, like in general. The discussion is about gardening without poisons or unsustainable practices, instead of trying to convince people to garden at all.

Overall, the range of animals and plants culturally considered to be common or familiar "backyard" creatures has narrowed significantly, even as the overall conservation status of animals and plants has improved.

This, to me, suggests two things that each may be possible: first, that the soils and environments of our suburbs and houses have sustained such a high level of cumulative damage that the life forms they once supported are no longer able to live, or second, that our way of managing our yards and inhabited areas has become steadily more destructive. Perhaps it may be the case that the minimum "acceptable" standard of lawn management has become more fastidious.

In conclusion, I feel that our relationship with nature has become more distant, even as the number of people who abstractly support the preservation of "wilderness" has increased. In the past, these wilderness preservation initiatives were a harder sell, but somehow, more people were in more direct contact with the more mundane parts of nature like flowers and birds, and had a personal relationship with those things.

And somehow, even with all the DDT and arsenic, the everyday outdoor spaces surrounding people's homes were not as broadly hostile to life even though the people might have FELT more hostile towards life. In 1960, a person hates woodpeckers, snakes and moths and his yard is constantly plagued by them: in 2024, a person enjoys the concept of woodpeckers, snakes and moths but rarely sees them, and is more likely to think of parks and preserves as the place they live and need to be protected. Large animals are mostly doing better in 2024, but the littlest ones, the wildflowers and bugs and birds, have declined steeply. It's not because "wilderness" is less; it seems more because non-wilderness has declined in quality.

i wanna try an experiment

reblog for sample size pls thx

Ohh, so I was looking at my storage and found these! I originally shared them on twitter before yeeting the platform. Anyway, feel free to use! Art memes for your oc :D

Re: this ask (I accidentally deleted it but had taken a screenshot, thankfully ^^;;)

I don't know historically how they tied their skirts, but currently there are multiple ways people tie their skirts :D

Most Hanfu shops sell 2 types of skirts when it comes to the waist ties:

1) With a hole provided for the tie to slide through (this one seems more common nowadays) 2) Without the hole provided

Skirts with the waist-tie hole provided are a bit easier as it allows the tie to wrap around your waist and stay in place nicely:

(Video src: 一对小玉镯)

If you have a skirt without the hole provided, I find this method the easiest to make it look nice:

(Video srcs: 子月儿- )

As for ways to actually tie the tie, here area a few common methods (the last 3 aren't very common, but they add a bit of a flare). I'm lazy, so I usually just do a simple butterfly tie (nowhere near as neatly as this video shows), and I tend to slide it to the side so it's not clearly seen. Some people put the knot front-and-centre so it's part of the outfit, all up to you how to wear it :D

(Video src: 零青子 , ENG subs by me but it's easier to just watch the video xD)

OP: Xiaotianquan哮天犬(The Howling Celestial Dog) suited up today I'm dead

𖦹 Fantasy and literature in Artemis Fowl 𖦹

sources:

The Eternity Code- Eoin Colfer • The Last Guardian- Eoin Colfer • The Atlantis Complex- Eoin Colfer x 3 • The Last Guardian- Eoin Colfer • The Time Paradox- Eoin Colfer • The Atlantis Complex- Eoin Colfer

subjectdolly on Instagram • Punch and Judy- Jan Švankmajer • thehobbitchronicles on Tumblr • Hamlet- William Shakespeare (1915 W.G Simmonds Edition) • dawnpatrolkat on Pinterest • Love Among the Ruins- Edward Burne-Jones • vampyrdancer on Pinterest • mossabul on Pinterest