@lorecdronso
That Dragony-Guy Thing

I dunno what the hell I'm doing.

Posts
10498
Last update
2022-01-28 15:25:08
    omega-em-z-02

    Okay but in all honesty?

    “Silence, or you will be held in contempt of this court.” “I have nothing BUT COMTEMPT for this court!” has got to be the greatest exchange of word in human history and it came from the 1986 Transformers Movie.

    ailercee

    op i hope you don’t mind me adding, but “you, who are without mercy, now plead for it?” is also absolutely fucking metal and also comes from the 1986 Transformers movie

    pictures-of-dogs

    Which do you perfer cartoon dogs that wear pants but no shirt, shirt but no pants, shirt and pants, or no clothes at all.

    Also sorry if this brings weirdos i just wanna know your opinion on fictional dog design

    I think I've said this before, but when a cartoon animal is half-clothed, it just draws more attention to the fact that they're half-nude. Like animals don't usually wear clothes at all so it looks normal when they're completely naked, but when they're wearing ONLY a shirt or ONLY pants it just makes you aware of the fact that they're not fully clothed. It almost makes them seem more naked than if they weren't wearing anything.

    But I think only pants is actually worse than only a shirt.

    For example, with Winnie the Pooh here wearing only a shirt, you can still see that he's not, uh.... anatomically correct below the waistline. He has nothing to hide.

    But when you see Smokey wearing only pants, it implies that there is something to hide. It's like he's covering up his lower half because he has to. If you get what I mean.

    That is to say, it would be fine to see Winnie the Pooh take off his shirt, but it would definitely not be fine to see Smokey take off his pants.

    With that said, I think fully clothed and fully nude are equally "safe," if that makes sense. Just a shirt isn't bad either, but just pants is inherently suggestive in my opinion. I wouldn't say any option is "better" design, it just depends what you're going for.

    If you can't tell, I've thought about this a lot.

    scarred-but-still-smiling

    What I'm getting from this post is that Smoky there is, uhh, sexycoded

    ikimowo

    Smokey the bear is is the Forest Service's fursona

    goobra

    my unpopular opinion is that i hate tiktok because now people just publicly watch loud ass videos in public spaces with no regard for anyone else. 100% it was not this bad with youtube, it’s such a different thing with tiktok. put on headphones. you are grown.

    fairypage01

    Girl……

    byjoveimbeinghumble

    This is it! This is what social media/smart tech have done! They’ve rotted away any distinction between private and public.

    Yes, we do have the right to make demands on public behavior. Of course we do. Have you never heard of laws and etiquette? I’m not allowed to grocery shop naked. You can’t rummage through my purse. I can’t have a work meeting in the middle of a movie theatre.

    I remember when it was taboo simply to answer your cell phone in public. The person answering would apologize and try to go to a more private area. Then public calls were normalized. Then putting people on speaker. Then listening to music without headphones. Do you know how many times I have hiked up a mountain or driven to the beach, only to be met with someone blaring shitty top 40 music from their portable speaker, because Heaven forbid you go one hour without noise?

    Old woman yells at cloud and all that, but I can’t believe someone is not only admitting this behavior, but saying it’s a good thing! No one likes you! You’re a menace!

    elidyce

    BEING INCONSIDERATE OF OTHERS IS STILL BAD.

    It was obnoxious when it was youtube.

    It was obnoxious when it was music.

    It was obnoxious when it was the radio. 

    It was obnoxious when it was dudes wanting to talk to you instead of letting you just read your freaking book.

    Do you want to be this guy? Because being obnoxious in shared spaces is how you become this guy. 

    Wear your damn headphones like an adult participant in the social contract.

    frownyalfred

    I love how all of the Batman villains are like “ah he’s not at the manor, it’s defenseless! and then alfred just racks an AK-47 and is like pull up bitch

    thefingerfuckingfemalefury

    Batman’s Villains: The butler will be easy prey!

    He’s just an old man…he doesn’t have any of the Batman’s gadgets or training or fighting skills!

    Alfred: Oh my you’re right

    There’s something else of Master Bruce’s I don’t have as well

    (Cocks a shotgun) A CODE AGAINST KILLING

    welshronin

    Batman’s Villains: Wayne isn’t here to save you old man!

    Alfred:

    dragonpuppies

    Alfred is the original “Call an ambulance — but not for me”

    frownyalfred

    @dragonpuppies I spent way too long on this

    a-boy-too-weird

    Bruce: I have a code.

    Alfred: And I have a gun.

    dadzawa-adopt-dabi

    Bruce: time to remove the guns.

    Alfred: good fucking luck.

    frankenmouse

    I’ve peer reviewed @ebonyheartnet’s addition and found that it deserves a reblog.

    seelcudoom

    batman doesent put supervillains in jail to prevent them from hurting civilians, batman puts them in jail to prevent alfred from hurting them

    aalghul

    This is why Death in the Family is unrealistic. Joker would’ve shown up to kidnap Alfred, and Alfred would’ve put a bullet through his head. Then sent a snapchat to Jason and Barbara complaining about how his wallpaper needs to be changed now because the blood splatter ruined it.

    thisiswhereikeepdcthings

    @aalghul exactly but also your tags

    incorrect-quotes-batfam-edition

    Dumb Villain: Wayne isn’t here to save you, old man!

    Alfred: Correction, Wayne isn’t here to stop me, young man. *cocks shotgun*

    eyetosky

    THROW OFF THE JANGLY YOKE OF OPPRESSION

    thefingerfuckingfemalefury

    “WE ARE THE FUTURE RUDOLPH, NOT THEM”

    dr-archeville

    M: “What’s your name?”

    R: “Rudolph.”

    M: “What’s your real name, Rudolph?”

    R: “… Red-Nose.”

    M: “Quite a talent you have there, Red-Nose.”

    miscreant-side-puffs

    The only holiday post worth the season

    bin-of-gayness

    me, watching rudolph and scrolling through tumblr: …

    the algorithm standing behind me: send in the rudolph posts

    femmefaramir

    older lotr illustrations sometimes depict éowyn wearing ridiculously small armour. apart from the problem general sexualisation of the only female character (who really does anything), there’s another hilarious thought:

    éowyn pretended to be dernhelm, a man. to fit in, she must have worn men’s armor. so the armor in the illustrations is normal for rohirrim.

    therefore, all the rohirrim rode to war just like that:

    hobbit-hole

    there’s a thundering sound in the distance as the rohirrim ride into war but rather than hoofbeats it’s the collective sound of all their cheeks clapping

    delicatelytoobear

    the artist for this particular piece is Frank Frazetta and to be fair to him this is how he drew the orcs armor 

    so the rohirrim comment is probably not that far off

    thelaughingman1

    That’s a man who just straight up had a problem with the concept of wearing pants into battle, and I respect that

    cumaeansibyl

    male or female

    hero or villain

    sea or land

    even in the snow

    I guarantee you Frazetta’s Rohirrim were 100% pants-free

    missmollyetc

    Good Old Frank. That man loved bodies and hated clothes so much

    trist-pkmngal

    Frank Frazetta was the reason He-Man was designed like that; the producers conduct a study to see what art appeal the most to children, and Frank’s work came out on top in popularity. So everyone in He-Man is dressed the way they are directly because of Frazetta.

    snugglebunchesofeyes

    That man gave us the gift of warrior thighs and tits for everyone.

    olderthannetfic

    Ah, it has been too long since I have seen the no pants post on my dash. And yes, this is a rare case where it wasnt some sexist nonsense but an egalitarian No Pants Agenda.