i want to know which one of you is responsible for this
This is hard for me to post but I feel like it is important.
I remember hating my face and hating my skin and looking at all the girls around me in middle school and on TV and in ads and feeling like I was a monstrosity in comparison. But I remember the first time I realized women plucked their eyebrows. And wore concealer. And foundation. And powder. I felt like I had been lied to about what women look like. After modeling and realizing when photographers asked for no makeup, they really meant the photo on the right. I started realizing that the photo on the right was what was in skincare ads and posted by people claiming in the caption to be wearing no makeup some of the time. The photo on the right is the bare minimum of what we expect women to look like when they wake up in the morning.
Thought this would be of interest to some people, especially since the topic of how women’s faces in video games, comics, etc being depicted as smooth with no lines (even for facial expressions) has come up before. Also, how often women will be drawn with default eyeliner, eyeshadow, lipstick, etc even if there should be no reason for them to wear it because they have been living in the wild, or they’re warrior women who have expressed no interest in it, or etc…
It’s part of how society constructs what women look like in people’s minds; that what is supposed to be something we put on to ‘enhance’ appearance end up being part of the default way women are expected to look. Even if the characters are supposed to be “plain” or “practical” in context, they’ll still be drawn as if they’re wearing some base amount of make up, because that’s how we’re conditioned to see women in our imaginations. And stuff like airbrushing, photoshop, and advertisers using made up faces to represent ‘no make up’ can skew how we perceive what the ‘normal’ or ‘average’ woman is supposed to look like.
I love u plastic worm bike man
Quantum physics is a branch of science that deals with discrete, indivisible units of energy called quanta as described by the Quantum Theory. There are five main ideas represented in Quantum Theory:
- Energy is not continuous, but comes in small but discrete units.
- The elementary particles behave both like particles and like waves.
- The movement of these particles is inherently random.
- It is physically impossible to know both the position and the momentum of a particle at the same time. The more precisely one is known, the less precise the measurement of the other is.
- The atomic world is nothing like the world we live in.
While at a glance this may seem like just another strange theory, it contains many clues as to the fundamental nature of the universe and is more important then even relativity in the grand scheme of things (if any one thing at that level could be said to be more important then anything else). Furthermore, it describes the nature of the universe as being much different then the world we see. As Niels Bohr said, “Anyone who is not shocked by quantum theory has not understood it.
So sometimes a particle acts like a particle and other times it acts like a wave. So which is it? According to Niels Bohr, who worked in Copenhagen when he presented what is now known as the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum theory, the particle is what you measure it to be. When it looks like a particle, it is a particle. When it looks like a wave, it is a wave. Furthermore, it is meaningless to ascribe any properties or even existence to anything that has not been measured. Bohr is basically saying that nothing is real unless it is observed.
I’d like to give my Facebook friend a standing ovation
Cats have more notes than this, come on people.