Actually Fuck This Im Gonna Walk Into The Deep Sea And Never Come Back. Bye

okay so @sevdrag asked for neat things and here is mine:

I FOUND A FOSSIL FOSSILS!

me back in september, driving across the Mojave Desert and camping under the stars to avoid all humans, meeting my parents at their condo in St George, Utah: I wonder if my poking around on geology and paleontology blogs and websites and documentaries and books and online courses has taught me anything yet.

*stumbles across the street in 100 degree heat and peers at some Rocks.*

Huh.

Well now THAT's fuckin odd. It's not like an intrusion of molten something or other; parts of it are just a crust on the surface, but parts are embedded. And it's PARTS.

And that's sandstone behind it. But not dunes, because there's no crossbedding. I think maybe water put it here. There's flowy bits.

Horseshoe crab tails? But some are too big. Plant stems? Again, some seem a little large. Or just some weird rust discoloration from ore, or a very odd sort of mineral that grows like a crystal without being quite regular in shape? But growing in sand/silt? instead of a fluid-filled cavity? Can that happen?

And then there's this. Small tracks on either side of a tail drag? Or a rolling pebble with water ripples on either side?

Fas t forward to May 2021. Vaccinated. Return to St George to meet parents. Visit St. George Dinosaur Discovery museum, which has some of the best-preserved dinosaur tracks in the world on ancient silty mudflats, including a bona-fide dino butt print where a dino sat down on its haunches and then wandered off.

I show my photos to a paleontologist working the desk, and she says, "Oh, that's just petrified wood."

Just. Because it's common in this part of the southwest.

So we go home and I show Mom the rock face. While we're standing back, she points out they're part of an entire fucking TREE lying on its side, branches fanning to the right, partly embedded in the cliff, partly eroded out of it leaving a light imprint in the siltstone.

That dark horizontal bit above the right side of the yardstick is the petrified skin of a treebranch (debarked, I think; there's other places that show a bumpy bark imprint whereas the brown petrified wood bits are smooth.) I think the "tail drag" mark might be a conifer twig with needles.

So I posted THESE to Twitter's #fossilFriday, and the curator of the museum spotted it and said he'd come by to document it, although I don't think he has yet because it's not in a very good state of preservation. Quoth he:

I agree with your identification as a portion of a tree with branches, and trees are very common in the Late Triassic Shinarump Member of the Chinle Formation buried in braided river systems some 230-225 million years ago. Unfortunately, from what I can see from your photos, most of the fossil is missing and I can't make out anything identifiable.

— Dr. Andrew Milner

Which means it just barely postdates the last survivors of the Permian die-off, my buddy Lystrosaurus, but not by much! (wrong part of the world, anyway; this isn't Gondwanaland.)

And after that email exchange I kept searching the cliff and found at least one more tree fossil as well. It's very definitely fossil treeroots from a tree that's lying on its side, but unless the top broke off and is not lying quite at the same angle, it's probably a second tree. It's behind the edge of my parents' neighbors' yard, so hopefully it's well-protected.

More bits of petrified wood from the first tree.

[Most photos May 8-9 2021]

And I'm just stoked, you know? I'm not a geologist, although there's lots of scientists in my family, and my maternal grandfather taught geology at a junior college. I've just gotten interested in this as a hobby of the past 10 years.

And there it is. An honest to gosh fossil tree, maybe one of the first to grow tall again after the end Permian extinction, shading the silty flats of a wide river down to what became lakes or the inland seaway. The first dinosaurs trotted past it, leaving tracks in the silt. That's a real tree that lived for decades or hundreds of years, and it moved in the wind and felt the rain, hundreds of millions of years ago, when the animals and insects that scurried on its bark were almost entirely different from today.

Fossils are amazing.

executive dysfunction be like *wants to do something* *doesnt do it* *feels bad* *wants to do something* *doesnt do it* *feels bad* *wants to do something* *doesnt do it* *feels ba

the zelda that you know

whatever our souls are made of, you and me are going to end up stuck in the same ice hole

oh my fucking god can we kill the whole thing of “platonic friends don’t DO that!” shut UP oh my god. fuck offfff pleaseeee <33333 platonic friends can be the most important people in the world to each other, platonic friends can think about each other a lot and be inspired by each other and choose to live for each other and be possessive in life or death situations and be intense i’m so tired of people acting like platonic friendships can’t be that i’m tired of them being viewed as less as!! this is exactly what i mean when i say platonic relationships are not less than romantic ones!!!!!!!! and i’m so so tired of people misinterpreting that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! fuck!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

one of the top ten Aro Experiences ™: being very touch-starved while also feeling like a small, bitey animal that’s been poorly socialized and has like a 50/50 chance of reacting badly to physical affection

part 1

what i’d really like is for someone to objectively watch me for a week or so and then just sit down with me for a few hours and explain to me what i am like and how i look to others and what my personality is in detail and how i need to improve where do i sign up for that

I was explaining this to a friend recently and I think it's an important distinction to make: not all queerplatonic relationships look the same.

A good way I've found to illustrate what exactly a qpr is, is to say "a qpr is to relationships what nonbinary is to gender". While both of these traditionally function on a binary (male/female, platonic/romantic), by defining our personal outlooks and experiences of the concepts of gender and relationships with new terms, we challenge the boundaries that society has put in place.

And yes, whilst redefining what actually constitutes romantic or platonic relationships, or male and female identities, and what makes them different (and acknowledging where they overlap, or where they can expand past what we traditionally expect) is important to increasing our understanding, so is providing options entirely outside of those two boxes.

And that's what it is - options. It's very easy to trivialise the concept of nonbinary and simply make gender into a trinary, rather than a binary. Male/female/nonbinary, which goes against the very purpose of the nonbinary label. This further erases the spectrum of gender. It's the same with relationships - by giving a strict set of instructions on how a qpr must look and act, you are simply creating a trinary. The point of the concept of qprs is to acknowledge that there are relationships between people that may overlap platonic and romantic, or fall partially within one and partially outside, or ones that are entirely separate from either category.

There are an infinite amount of ways a relationship can manifest, and if the people in the relationship feel that queerplatonic best describes their partnership without romance, or their affection without commitment, or their feelings towards each other that aren't quite what romantic or platonic is to them, or any other reason that rebels against amatonormativity, then they can choose to use that term. Queerplatonic covers the widest range of relationships that come in all shapes and sizes.

I think it's so important when discussing topics like relationships and gender to consciously make the effort to keep queering our ideas of the concepts - to remember that a spectrum is a spectrum. Labels can be useful for finding community, identifying your experiences and validating your struggles, but as soon as you try to start hyper-defining them, you lose the radical nature of queering our understanding of ourselves and our relationships. We name these concepts in order to give a voice to our subversion of society's arbitrary rules and expectations, not to police each other into conforming to a particular understanding of how a person (with a certain label) "should" act or be.

Aromanticism often goes hand-in-hand with:

Low self-esteem, self-loathing, and/or feelings of inferiority

Feeling lonely, isolated, or like you’re an “other”

Shame

Anxiety

Fear of abandonment, distrust of friends and family

Constant second-guessing one’s own identity

Fear of the future or an inability to imagine oneself with a “happy ending”

Disassociation in the form of feeling “unreal” or “inhuman”

This is a huge problem that can really destroy a person, and the root cause is the way our society treats relationships. But the thing is, nobody ever tries to address this problem. People outside of the aro community (which is small and disjointed as it is) don’t discuss aro issues, and don’t try to think critically about the messages they put out, and then when aros talk about how much they’re hurting, we just get told that we don’t have it as bad as other people, so we don’t have any right to complain, and our feelings aren’t real.

God knows it’s hard to heal yourself without help from others, and aros aren’t getting that help. And sure, sometimes we can talk to each other, but that can only get you so far- it’s the emotional equivalent of two people simultaneously trying to save each other from drowning. The aromantic community needs outside support, but nobody is trying to help us aside from saying that we’re Valid™ every now and then. That’s a big problem.