why-animals-do-the-thing:

little-miss-mash:

ordinaryredtail:

candiikismet:

cats-and-company:

Queen.

I always have to reboot this.

For anyone wondering, this is amazing enrichment for the animal and a great way to involve guests! The lions aren’t forced to play with the rope if they don’t want to, and these guys (and anyone else who tries this out) have an awesome close up and hands on experience, all without having to come in direct contact with the cat!

@why-animals-do-the-thing

This definitely counts as #actually cute. This video is from the San Antonio Zoo, and the lioness’ name is Axelle. As @ordinaryredtail said above, the tug of war interaction is entirely voluntary on her part.

My guess is that the zoo staff did use some positive reinforcement training to teach her how to pick up and pull on the rope at first, because that’s not necessary something a lion would just do on their own. While it’s also probable that she’s rewarded with something tasty did choosing to engage with the members of the public like this, Axelle wouldn’t be engaging if it was a negative experience for her (there aren’t enough snacks in the world to coerce a lion into doing something they find actively distressing). If she didn’t want to participate, she could just walk away.

Some sanctuary and animal rights groups have taken issue with this interaction because they consider it unethical to ask a lion to engage in any “unnatural behavior” “for the benefit of the public,” calling it exploitation. It is worth keeping in mind, however, that learning and engaging in novel behaviors is hugely enriching for animals in human care, and that lions have no concept of exploitation. As long as the lion is not bothered by the presence or noise of the crowd, is not injured or harmed, and is engaging on an entirely voluntary basis, this sort of thing is entirely ethical. It is far safer than any type of interaction where a member of the public is coming into direct context with a big cat, but still allows people to directly experience the sheer strength of a lion up close.

libertarirynn:

thewugtest:

sad-gay-potato:

thewugtest:

if youve never physically been in the presence of like, a real live wolf, and you probably wont get the chance to, heres some stuff about them you should know

  • a wolf’s fur is so unbelievably thick that you can get like, your whole hand into it while petting. and then you can keep going
  • wolves are a lot bigger than you think they are. think about how big you think a wolf is then just like double that
  • they dont really smell like dog but they DO smell and youre not going to be able to figure out if its a good smell or not
  • a wolf really wants to lick the inside of your mouth. he will not stop trying to lick the inside of your mouth at any cost, and generally speaking you need to press your lips together kind of tightly when he approaches your face so that he doesnt worm his damn tongue in there to give you what he thinks is an appropriate greeting
  • a wolf doesnt really want to look at you while you pet him but he wants you to pet him. hes embarrassed
  • if a grown ass wolf decides to lay down on you, you just have to deal with it and thats your life now
  • young wolves, much like young dogs, are overwhelmingly goofy and stupid. a teenage wolf will see your very fragile, very human shoulder and go “i can probably step on that with my full weight” and then he will do it
  • letting a wolf eat out of your hand is actually not remotely frightening, and youll want to do it all day

I wanna know who did this research.

well, i did!

Lorge wild doggo

Could you elaborate more about the relationship between Hamilton and Madison? Like what was Madison’s reaction to Hamilton’s death etc cause I read a letter from Madison to someone in which he says all this good stuff about hams financial plan etc

aswithasunbeam:

Ah, I love the drama between these two! Hamilton met Madison in 1782 when he went to Philadelphia as a delegate to the Continental Congress. They worked together trying (unsuccessfully) to strengthen the central government under the Articles of Confederation. Then in 1786 they teamed up again for the Annapolis Convention, which was the run-up to the Constitutional Convention in 1787. Their friendship reached it’s height in 1788, while they were working on the Federalist. They were constantly together, writing and plotting to get the Constitution ratified. This is the period when Hamilton’s issuing dinner invitations to Madison, people were writing to them as if they were one person, and, according to John Church Hamilton, they once played with a monkey climbing a tree in a neighbor’s yard (aka the Golden Days).

As late as 1789, Hamilton was still reaching out to Madison as a friend for advice as he began his work in the Treasury. On October 12, 1789, Hamilton wrote, “As I lost the opportunity of a personal communication May I ask of your
friendship to put to paper and send me your thoughts on such objects as
may have occurred to you for an addition to our revenue; and also as to
any modifications of the public debt which could be made consistent with
good faith the interest of the Public and of its Creditors?” By November 24, 1791, things seem to be taking a turn between them. Hamilton forwarded his Report on Manufactures and said he’d like to call on Madison to discuss it, but added, “It will not be disagreeable to me if after perusal you hand it over to Mr. Jefferson.”

The letter to read if you’d like a lengthy, thorough account of their relationship falling apart is Hamilton’s to Edward Carrington, dated May 26, 1792. After 1789, Hamilton reported, “repeated intimations were given to me that Mr. Madison, from a spirit of rivalship or some other cause had become personally unfriendly to me.” He goes on to detail their fights over the Report on Public Credit, and how Madison made insinuations that Hamilton was mismanaging public funds. “The whole manner of this transaction left no doubt in any ones mind that Mr. Madison was actuated by personal & political animosity.”

Madison and Jefferson were genuinely cruel when speaking about Hamilton at times in the 1790s. One letter in particular has always bothered me. Hamilton contracted Yellow Fever on September 5, 1793. On September 8, 1793, Jefferson reported to Madison, who had already returned to Virginia:

“Hamilton is ill of the fever as is said. He had two physicians out at
his house the night before last. His family think him in danger, &
he puts himself so by his excessive alarm. He had been miserable several
days before from a firm persuasion he should catch it. A man as timid
as he is on the water, as timid on horseback, as timid in sickness,
would be a phænomenon if the courage of which he has the reputation in
military occasions were genuine. His friends, who have not seen him,
suspect it is only an autumnal fever he has.”

Jefferson’s cruelty here is awful, but somewhat expected. What’s always gotten to me is that he thought Madison was a sympathetic ear to which to spew this vitriol.

They grew distant in the coming years. The last extant correspondence between them is from May 1801. Hamilton reported an account he’d received that Spain had transfered the Louisiana Territory to France. Madison responded with cool formality on May 26, 1801: “The Cession of Louisiana by Spain to the French Republic, referred to in
the letter, had been previously signified to this Department from
several sources, as an event believed to have taken place. Supposing you
might wish to repossess the letter from Mr. C I herein return it.”

Hamilton’s death in 1804 didn’t prompt any kind of emotional outpouring from Madison. Most of his mentions of Hamilton are very calculating and political. For example, he wrote to Noah Webster on October 12, 1804 to correct certain accounts of the constitutional convention that were arising “on the late occasion which so strongly excited the effusions of party & personal zeal for the fame of Genl. Hamilton.”

However, Madison does seem to have thawed towards Hamilton in his later years. Neither Jefferson or Madison tried to dismantle his financial system, mostly because doing so would have injured the American economy. Even Albert Gallatin, Jefferson’s Treasury Secretary, could find no flaw in Hamilton’s plan. After a thorough investigation of all the documents at Treasury, Gallatin reported to Jefferson that he had found, “the most perfect system ever formed–any change that should be made to it would injure it–Hamilton made no blunders–committed no frauds. He did nothing wrong.” (Or so he later reported to James A. Hamilton). The charter lapsed on the Bank of the United States not so much because Madison wanted to see it ended, but more because no one fought particularly hard to keep it. However, after the War of 1812 and before the end of his presidency, Madison had rechartered the bank. Madison was also instrumental in acquiring Hamilton’s military back-pay for Eliza and the children. This is likely the period where you found Madison speaking positively about Hamilton’s financial plan. His overall tone towards Hamilton became much more civil and respectful.

As an interesting side-note, when Alexander Hamilton, Jr. went to Europe to fight in the Napoleonic Wars, he sent a few letters to Madison reporting intelligence he’d gathered on his travels. (See, for example, Alexander Hamilton to James Madison, June 12, 1811.) In 1831, they exchanged letters again, this time because Alex Hamilton wanted to report James Monroe’s fast failing health to Madison. Madison responded a week after Monroe’s passing: “With my thanks for the kind attention manifested by your letter, I pray you to accept assurances of my friendly esteem, and my good wishes.”

libertarirynn:

takingbackmyfirstamendmentrights:

melonmemes:

Srsly tho

I was looking at this post again, and I was like, “That man has the Hapsburg jaw. I just know it.”

So I looked him up and

I’ll be damned if I didn’t recognize the most prominent birth defect from the incestuous Habsburg family.

The sad thing is he *is* almost kind of normal looking compared to his relatives. And think about it, a Royal Portrait supposed to make you look as good as possible, so they probably looked even worse in reality. Yeah… the moral here is don’t fuck your cousins and siblings, kids.

Words to describe someone’s voice

arendellious:

adenoidal: if someone’s voice is adenoidal, some of the sound seems to come through their nose

appealing: an appealing look, voice etc shows that you want help, approval, or agreement

breathy: with loud breathing noises

brittle: if you speak in a brittle voice, you sound as if you are about to cry

croaky: if someone’s voice sounds croaky, they speak in a low rough voice that sounds as if they have a sore throat

dead: if someone’s eyes are dead, or if their voice is dead, they feel or show no emotion

disembodied: a disembodied voice comes from someone who you cannot see

flat: spoken in a voice that does not go up and down. This word is often used for describing the speech of people from a particular region.

fruity: a fruity voice or laugh is deep and strong in a pleasant way

grating: a grating voice, laugh, or sound is unpleasant and annoying

gravelly: a gravelly voice sounds low and rough

gruff: a gruff voice has a rough low sound

guttural: a guttural sound is deep and made at the back of your throat

high-pitched: a high-pitched voice or sound is very high

hoarse: someone who is hoarse or has a hoarse voice speaks in a low rough voice, usually because their throat is sore

honeyed: honeyed words or a honeyed voice sound very nice but you cannot trust the person who is speaking

husky: a husky voice is deep and sounds hoarse (=as if you have a sore throat), often in an attractive way

low adjective: a low voice or sound is quiet and difficult to hear

low adverb: in a deep voice, or with a deep sound

matter-of-fact: used about someone’s behaviour or voice

modulated: a modulated voice is controlled and pleasant to listen to

monotonous: a monotonous sound or voice is boring and unpleasant because it does not change in loudness or become higher or lower

nasal: someone with a nasal voice sounds as if they are speaking through their nose

orotund: an orotund voice is loud and clear

penetrating: a penetrating voice or sound is so high or loud that it makes you slightly uncomfortable

plummy: a plummy voice or way of speaking is considered to be typical of an English person of a high social class. This word shows that you dislike people who speak like this.

quietly: in a quiet voice

raucous: a raucous voice or noise is loud and sounds rough

ringing: a ringing sound or voice is very loud and clear

rough: a rough voice is not soft and is unpleasant to listen to

shrill: a shrill noise or voice is very loud, high, and unpleasant

silvery: a silvery voice or sound is clear, light, and pleasant

singsong: if you speak in a singsong voice, your voice rises and falls in a musical way

small: a small voice or sound is quiet

smoky: a smoky voice or smoky eyes are sexually attractive in a slightly mysterious way

softly spoken: someone who is softly spoken has a quiet gentle voice

sotto voce adjective, adverb: in a very quiet voice

stentorian: a stentorian voice sounds very loud and severe

strangled: a strangled sound is one that someone stops before they finish making it

strangulated: strangled

strident: a strident voice or sound is loud and unpleasant

taut: used about something such as a voice or expression that shows someone is nervous or angry

thick: if your voice is thick with an emotion, it sounds less clear than usual because of the emotion

thickly: with a low voice that comes mostly from your throat

thin: a thin voice or sound is high and unpleasant to listen to

throaty: a throaty sound is low and seems to come from deep in your throat

tight: a tight voice or expression shows that you are nervous or annoyed

toneless: a toneless voice does not express any emotion

tremulous: if something such as your voice or smile is tremulous, it is not steady, for example because you are afraid or excited

wheezy: a wheezy noise sounds as if it is made by someone who has difficulty breathing

wobbly: if your voice is wobbly, it goes up and down, usually because you are frightened, not confident, or are going to cry

what is your otp?

wantstobelieve:

uhhhh right now? i have kind of a sextp (is that a thing? it should be a thing) and an otp and they’re on similar tiers i guess.

the sextp is sladexdick as i think they look amazing together and have superb sexual chemistry, but

to me it’s more of a ‘frenemies with really excellent benefits’ situation.

the otp is brucexdick and i really can’t put it into words how i love how this pairing is just filled with delicious, painful pining and torturous, self-destructive longing.

boy have i got a lot of feelings about these two relationships as they kind of blend into each other, so if the above is enough to answer your Q then cool and i hope you have a nice day. BUT if you wanna read some LENGTHY (& irresponsible) headcanons buckle up cause im just gonna have at it after the jump. 

(bonus little something i’ve been working on since forever and will never finish *laughcries*)

Keep reading

theaustinstollhaus:

When people go off about how English is the worst language, I just wanna point out a few things:

– Our future tense requires only one word (looking at you, Spanish)

– Words don’t change meanings depending on tone (Cantonese)

– We don’t live in some bizarre Beauty And The Beast world where we give inanimate objects genders (romance languages, German)

– Likewise, we don’t have have two different words for “they” because we don’t care whether “they” were male or female (Spanish, French)

– There’s no formal “you” because we don’t play mind games about whether or not we respect you (Spanish, German)

– We don’t alter the whole fucking language based on how much we respect you (Japanese)

– The letters and sounds might not be consistent, but at least we have letters, not just pictures (Mandarin)

– We don’t have a fucking stupid tense specifically for talking to two people because some idiot decided that a two-person tense was necessary (Arabic)

So yeah, I think we’re doing okay as a language

The quickest show not tell tip ever.

itstartswithablankpage:

‘Always show, not tell,’ is a big fat lie. If you always show, you’ll have half a novel of descriptive words and flowy sentences that will be hard to read.

Here is a quick tip:

Show emotion.

Tell feelings.

Don’t tell us ‘she was sad.’ Show us- ‘Her lip trembled, and her eyes burned as she tried to keep her tears at bay.’

Don’t show us ‘her eyelids were heavy- too heavy. Her limbs could barely function and she couldn’t stop yawning.’ Tell us – ‘she felt tired that morning.’

Showing emotion will bring the reader closer to the characters, to understand their reactions better. But I don’t need to read about how slow she was moving due to tiredness.

Likewise, when you do show, keep it to a max three sentences. Two paragraphs of ‘how she was sad,’ with no dialogue or inner thought is just as boring.