plenty ok boy
405 stories

This Photo Shows a 65-Foot-Tall Lava Dome


Here’s a strange and beautiful photo of a lava dome during a volcanic eruption. It’s not just any bubble, though: the dome pictured is rising a whopping 65 feet (20m) into the air.

The United States Geological Survey writes that the photo was captured between October 10 and 13 in 1969 during the eruption of the Kilauea Volcano. The formation is called a “dome fountain.” This type of bubbling may not be unusual, but symmetrical dome fountains like this one are rare, the USGS says.

And in case you’re not sure how high 65 feet is, this is roughly what it might look like for an adult human to be standing next to the dome:

Another view of this dome on the USGS website notes that this dome may have reached over 245 feet (75m) tall at one point during the eruption.

Image credits: Photographs by J.B. Judd/USGS. Human silhouette by Linda Salzman Sagan and licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.

Read the whole story
8 hours ago
seattle, wa
Share this story

alexander-lamington: gallusrostromegalus: jhaernyl: botanyshit...

1 Share














I just don’t understand how this happened. But here’s a picture of a lemon from my backyard


when life gives yoǘ̻̬͓͎̣̟̩̦͢ ͪ̂̀̆҉̳̘̝̺̀l͇̬̹̞̻̥͕̥̗̒̎ͩ̋ͥ͆e͙̭̭̠̣̠̊́ͩ̂̓̀ṃ̛̍̂͛̈̏o̠̪̪ͤ͗͘n̵͉̣ͭͧ̿ͧ͛̀s̷̠͑ͬͫͦ̅͡ ̸͐ͤ͘҉̦̺M̰̹͙͇ͮ̉ͫͅȦ̻̔̅̇̑ͭ͛͋͘K̠̻̫̤̇̀ͥE͂ͪ͏̱̤͚͕ ̞͔̜̬̑ͯ͑͢ͅŞ͔̦̩̳̣̖ͮ͊ͨA͈̓͂̈́̀̀̚͘C̡̠̟͉ͪ͆̔ͤ͂ͪR̬͙͕ͪ̀͠Ĩ̵̖͚̑̊̓́F͎͕̄Iͬͧ̀̂̑ͪ͟͏̴̪̤ͅC̢̰̝͓̗͛ͬ̔̍̓́́̚̚Ḙ̶̠̰̳̩̳̊ͭͮ̇̇̚̕S̻͖̣̰̒̈͟

it’s back

Satan lemon

every villain is lemons

And finally, dear listeners, a reminder; several concerned citizens have brought to the city’s attention an irregularity surrounding this summer’s citrus harvest. City council would like to remind all enterprising fruit pickers to exercise reasonable caution when acquiring these fruits. Grasp the fruit firmly around its circumference, pull slowly but steadily to avoid damaging the tree, and under no circumstances heed its demands of you. Do not acknowledge or obey the depraved whisperings of the demon fruit.

And now: The Weather.

This kind of looks like a Buddha’s hand to me

they’re a type of Citron, a citrus closely related to lemons. I wonder if whatever causes that twistedness in Buddha’s hands is present but dormant/recessive in other citruses?

@botanyshitposts do you know about this?

a lot of people having been messaging me about this, and honestly i had no idea that Buddha’s hands existed and it totally seems likely to me??? like honestly that seems like a really plausible explanation, especially because when we look at the demon fruit, the twisty ‘arms’ are going off in all different directions when the only place i can see a twisty arm happening on a lemon is on the top. like if the fruit is developing from the original growth point into a body then why are the offshoots developing the opposite way, from a body into a twisty thing? when in a Buddha’s hand, it totally makes sense because the twisty things are growing outward anyway. 

im no pomologist but the similarities in the growth patterns really do reflect in The Demon Fruit. 



The short version is that Citrus is a slutty, slutty genus of plants that can knock up pretty much any other member of the genus and uh… it’s mots recent relative as of 7 million years ago, becuase why not. Usually that makes for tasty children like tangerines and whatnot, but sometimes Weird Shit happens.

All modern citrus are descended from Mandrin oranges, Pumelos and Etrogs, the latter being closest to lemons and which looks like this:

It’s big and lumpy and mostly pith but also tasty as hell so Ye Ancient Malay Archipeligo Orchard Guy gets to breeding these for more tasty innards, presumable inventing lemonade in the process.  YAMAOG also finds out that it’s REALLY easy to seriously mess with the overall appearence of the fruit of these very inbred etrogs, and starts breeding all kinds of nonsense, like Bhudda’s palms, Modern Lemons and Grapefruit.

YAMAOG also noticed that in addition to the occasional ugly inbred mule child, you can also get really strange looking fruit if the tree gets sick, is malnourished, if any part of the flower is damaged, or if the weather just sucks that year.  In addition to being a Major Slut, Citrus is also a Fussy Bitch.

Looking at the Demon Fruit, my best guesses are

  1. If you’ve had weird-shaped fruits off that tree before, you might have a very strange hybrid tree like the dachsund-pitbull one of my neighbors owns.
  2. If it’s only the one fruit, and your tree is producing otherwise normal lemons, that particular flower or branch took some kind of damage or had a viral infection, which fucked up all the hormones and hence your lemon has gone all Ending-Of-Akira on you.

GOOD NEWS FOR BOTH SCENARIOS: unless the fruit looks like it’s actually rotting, it’s safe to eat!  weird fruit shapes in lemons pretty much never makes them dangerous, just maybe a bit more tart than usual.

Enjoy a nice glass of demonfruit juice!

Read the whole story
19 hours ago
seattle, wa
Share this story

one brother has gotten several games and the other brother knows, in his tall lanky beautiful heart, that the world isn't ready for him yet

2 Comments and 4 Shares
archive - contact - sexy exciting merchandise - search - about
April 13th, 2018next


– Ryan

Read the whole story
21 hours ago
seattle, wa
Share this story
2 public comments
9 days ago
One brother lies and the other tells the truth, and when they're done answering your questions a demon comes into the room to torture them for a thousand years SO THINK CAREFULLY ABOUT HOW INVESTED YOU ARE IN THIS RIDDLE.
Atlanta, Georgia
9 days ago
[rss title] one brother has gotten several games and the other brother knows, in his tall lanky beautiful heart, that the world isn't ready for him yet

[img title] waugh

[mailto subject] one bro is tired of talking about his teeth, THANKS

Retro Birdhouse Camper Kit Makes the Perfect Backyard Outpost

1 Comment and 2 Shares

In a charming sendup of the current camper van resurgence, Marcus Williams and Sj Stone of the Nashville-based design studio One Man, One Garage have created a set of vintage camper birdhouse kits that are the perfect backyard outpost for a family of birds. The design was inspired by a 1974 Serro Scotty Hilander that once belonged to Williams, complete with decorative window shades and accessories such as flowers, a grill, and a few lawn flamingos. The wooden models each come in a 40-piece set, which are flat-packed for easy construction. You can purchase a painted or customizable kit from the duo’s Etsy shop, and see more of their wood-based designs on their website and Instagram. (via Laughing Squid)


Read the whole story
21 hours ago
seattle, wa
Share this story
1 public comment
9 days ago
Atlanta, GA

queer is a slur, grow up

1 Comment and 2 Shares

‘Queer’ was reclaimed as an umbrella term for people identifying as not-heterosexual and/or not-cisgender in the early 1980s, but being queer is more than just being non-straight/non-cis; it’s a political and ideological statement, a label asserting an identity distinct from gay and/or traditional gender identities. People identifying as queer are typically not cis gays or cis lesbians, but bi, pan, ace, trans, nonbinary, intersex, etc.: we’re the silent/ced letters. We’re the marginalised majority within the LGBTQIA+ community, and ‘queer’ is our rallying cry.

And that’s equally pissing off and terrifying terfs and cis LGs.

There’s absolutely no historical or sociolinguistic reason why ‘queer’ should be a worse slur than ‘gay.’ Remember how we had all those campaigns to make people stop using ‘gay’ as a synonym for ‘bad’?

Yet nobody is suggesting we should abolish ‘gay’ as a label. We accept that even though ‘gay’ sometimes is and historically frequently was used in a derogatory manner, mlm individuals have the right to use that word. We have ad campaigns, twitter hashtags, and viral Facebook posts defending ‘gay’ as an identity label and asking people to stop using it as a slur.

Whereas ‘queer’ is treated exactly opposite: a small but vocal group of people within feminist and LGBTQIA+ circles insists that it’s a slur and demands that others to stop using it as a personal, self-chosen identity label.


Because “queer is a slur” was invented by terfs specifically to exclude trans, nonbinary, and intersex people from feminist and non-heterosexual discourse, and was subsequently adopted by cis gays and cis lesbians to exclude bi/pan and ace people.

It’s classic divide-and-conquer tactics: when our umbrella term is redefined as a slur and we’re harassed into silence for using it, we no longer have a word for what we are allowing us to organise for social/political/economic support; we are denied the opportunity to influence or shape the spaces we inhabit; we can’t challenge existing community power structures; we’re erased from our own history.

I’m not kidding. Cis LGs have literally taken historical evidence of queer people’s involvement in the LGBT rights struggle and photoshopped it to erase us:


Pro tip: when you alter historical evidence to deny a marginalised group empowerment, you’re one of the bad guys.

“Queer is a slur” is used by terfs and cis gays/lesbians to silence the voices of trans/nonbinary/intersex/bi/pan/ace people in society and even within our own communities, to isolate us and shame us for existing.

“Queer is a slur” is saying “I am offended by people who do not conform to traditional gender or sexual identities because they are not sexually available to me or validate my personal identity.”

“Queer is a slur” is defending heteronormativity.

“Queer is a slur” is frankly embarrassing. It’s an admission of ignorance and prejudice. It’s an insidious discriminatory discourse parroted uncritically in support of a divisive us-vs-them mentality targeting the most vulnerable members of the LGBTQIA+ community for lack of courage to confront the white cis straight men who pose an actual danger to us as individuals and as a community.


I’m here, I’m queer, and I’m too old for this shit.

Read the whole story
21 hours ago
Was worried by the title but I figured it out
seattle, wa
Share this story

We’re Ready

2 Comments and 5 Shares


I was presenting an assembly for kids grades 3-8 while on book tour for the third PRINCESS ACADEMY book.

Me: “So many teachers have told me the same thing. They say, ‘When I told my students we were reading a book called PRINCESS ACADEMY, the girls said—’”

I gesture to the kids and wait. They anticipate what I’m expecting, and in unison, the girls scream, “YAY!”

Me: “'And the boys said—”

I gesture and wait. The boys know just what to do. They always do, no matter their age or the state they live in.

In unison, the boys shout, “BOOOOO!”

Me: “And then the teachers tell me that after reading the book, the boys like it as much or sometimes even more than the girls do.”

Audible gasp. They weren’t expecting that.

Me: “So it’s not the story itself boys don’t like, it’s what?”
The kids shout, “The name! The title!”

Me: “And why don’t they like the title?”

As usual, kids call out, “Princess!”

But this time, a smallish 3rd grade boy on the first row, who I find out later is named Logan, shouts at me, “Because it’s GIRLY!”

The way Logan said “girly"…so much hatred from someone so small. So much distain. This is my 200-300th assembly, I’ve asked these same questions dozens of times with the same answers, but the way he says “girly” literally makes me take a step back. I am briefly speechless, chilled by his hostility.

Then I pull it together and continue as I usually do.

“Boys, I have to ask you a question. Why are you so afraid of princesses? Did a princess steal your dog? Did a princess kidnap your parents? Does a princess live under your bed and sneak out at night to try to suck your eyeballs out of your skull?”

The kids laugh and shout “No!” and laugh some more. We talk about how girls get to read any book they want but some people try to tell boys that they can only read half the books. I say that this isn’t fair. I can see that they’re thinking about it in their own way.

But little Logan is skeptical. He’s sure he knows why boys won’t read a book about a princess. Because a princess is a girl—a girl to the extreme. And girls are bad. Shameful. A boy should be embarrassed to read a book about a girl. To care about a girl. To empathize with a girl.

Where did Logan learn that? What does believing that do to him? And how will that belief affect all the girls and women he will deal with for the rest of his life?

At the end of my presentation, I read aloud the first few chapters of THE PRINCESS IN BLACK. After, Logan was the only boy who stayed behind while I signed books. He didn’t have a book for me to sign, he had a question, but he didn’t want to ask me in front of others. He waited till everyone but a couple of adults had left. Then, trembling with nervousness, he whispered in my ear, “Do you have a copy of that black princess book?”

He wanted to know what happened next in her story. But he was ashamed to want to know.

Who did this to him? How will this affect how he feels about himself? How will this affect how he treats fellow humans his entire life?

We already know that misogyny is toxic and damaging to women and girls, but often we assume it doesn’t harm boys or mens a lick. We think we’re asking them to go against their best interest in the name of fairness or love. But that hatred, that animosity, that fear in little Logan, that isn’t in his best interest. The oppressor is always damaged by believing and treating others as less than fully human. Always. Nobody wins. Everybody loses. 

We humans have a peculiar tendency to assume either/or scenarios despite all logic. Obviously it’s NOT “either men matter OR women do.” It’s NOT “we can give boys books about boys OR books about girls.” It’s NOT “men are important to this industry OR women are.“ 

It’s not either/or. It’s AND.

We can celebrate boys AND girls. We can read about boys AND girls. We can listen to women AND men. We can honor and respect women AND men. And And And. I know this seems obvious and simplistic, but how often have you assumed that a boy reader would only read a book about boys? I have. Have you preselected books for a boy and only offered him books about boys? I’ve done that in the past. And if not, I’ve caught myself and others kind of apologizing about it. “I think you’ll enjoy this book EVEN THOUGH it’s about a girl!” They hear that even though. They know what we mean. And they absorb it as truth.

I met little Logan at the same assembly where I noticed that all the 7th and 8th graders were girls. Later, a teacher told me that the administration only invited the middle school girls to my assembly. Because I’m a woman. I asked, and when they’d had a male author, all the kids were invited. Again reinforcing the falsehood that what men say is universally important but what women say only applies to girls.

One 8th grade boy was a big fan of one of my books and had wanted to come, so the teacher had gotten special permission for him to attend, but by then he was too embarrassed. Ashamed to want to hear a woman speak. Ashamed to care about the thoughts of a girl.

A few days later, I tweeted about how the school didn’t invite the middle school boys. And to my surprise, twitter responded. Twitter was outraged. I was blown away. I’ve been talking about these issues for over a decade, and to be honest, after a while you feel like no one cares. 

But for whatever reason, this time people were ready. I wrote a post explaining what happened, and tens of thousands of people read it. National media outlets interviewed me. People who hadn’t thought about gendered reading before were talking, comparing notes, questioning what had seemed normal. Finally, finally, finally.

And that’s the other thing that stood out to me about Logan—he was so ready to change. Eager for it. So open that he’d started the hour expressing disgust at all things “girly” and ended it by whispering an anxious hope to be a part of that story after all. 

The girls are ready. Boy howdy, we’ve been ready for a painful long time. But the boys, they’re ready too. Are you?

I’ve spoken with many groups about gendered reading in the last few years. Here are some things that I hear:

A librarian, introducing me before my presentation: “Girls, you’re in for a real treat. You’re going to love Shannon Hale’s books. Boys, I expect you to behave anyway.”

A book festival committee member: “Last week we met to choose a keynote speaker for next year. I suggested you, but another member said, ‘What about the boys?’ so we chose a male author instead.”

A parent: “My son read your book and he ACTUALLY liked it!”

A teacher: “I never noticed before, but for read aloud I tend to choose books about boys because I assume those are the only books the boys will like.”

A mom: “My son asked me to read him The Princess in Black, and I said, ‘No, that’s for your sister,’ without even thinking about it.”

A bookseller: “I’ve stopped asking people if they’re shopping for a boy or a girl and instead asking them what kind of story the child likes.”

Like the bookseller, when I do signings, I frequently ask each kid, “What kind of books do you like?” I hear what you’d expect: funny books, adventure stories, fantasy, graphic novels. I’ve never, ever, EVER had a kid say, “I only like books about boys.” Adults are the ones with the weird bias. We’re the ones with the hangups, because we were raised to believe thinking that way is normal. And we pass it along to the kids in sometimes  overt (“Put that back! That’s a girl book!”) but usually in subtle ways we barely notice ourselves.

But we are ready now. We’re ready to notice and to analyze. We’re ready to be thoughtful. We’re ready for change. The girls are ready, the boys are ready, the non-binary kids are ready. The parents, librarians, booksellers, authors, readers are ready. Time’s up. Let’s make a change.

Read the whole story
21 hours ago
seattle, wa
Share this story
2 public comments
6 days ago
Wow! Can’t wait to read those books to the kids, no matter their reproductive place in the world if they choose to do so in a chromosome (un-)defined way!
Atlanta, GA
6 days ago
Long. Worth reading.
Next Page of Stories