Advertisement · 728 × 90

Posts by Beans[C O M M S C L O S E D]

Post image

Gabbi brushes hair

3 days ago 49 9 0 0
Post image

Practice doodle for a buddy
Also cuz I wanted to see my cat as a dog

4 days ago 38 9 2 0
Post image

Pyrodent

1 week ago 47 12 3 0

Oh? Tell me more?

1 week ago 0 0 0 0
Post image

Blu Moon Bunni

1 month ago 94 18 1 0
Post image

Gabbi is a great roomate!

1 week ago 24 8 2 0
Post image

ALV SHE GONNA WHACK EM

1 week ago 6 2 0 0
Post image

Crazy bunny

2 weeks ago 10 1 0 0
Post image

Tiny Mouse that lives in your walls and cooks for you

2 weeks ago 19 5 2 0
Advertisement

I keep saying fighting games are punk rock, and now with the Saudi hands grabbing more, we need to double down on that punk side.

2 weeks ago 96 49 0 0

Bambi and @nargacujoh.bsky.social 's Ming-Ming

2 weeks ago 1 0 0 0
Post image

Bunny Day Bunny Girls

2 weeks ago 286 76 2 0
Post image

Hello everyone! Check out @IrohCards
New Easter Set 2026! Available until April 30, 2026!!
You can scan the QR code or click the link below:

3 weeks ago 14 5 1 0
Post image

Blu Moon Bunni

1 month ago 94 18 1 0
Post image

sketch I keep forgetting to post

1 month ago 117 21 1 0
Post image Post image Post image

Eppy Demon bit with
@mehllow.bsky.social

1 month ago 41 5 1 0
Advertisement

The markup meeting in the house is today.

Continue to stress to your reps that these bills/policies are unacceptable.

1 month ago 370 453 4 2
Post image

We're down to the wire with only one week remaining.
So I'm adding some extra milestones! Went rogue on the rewards myself if you can tell 😂
Spread this around wherever you can and grab your plush before the chance is gone forever!

1 month ago 209 60 3 1
Post image Post image Post image

heh yea

1 month ago 2 0 0 0

For @hailstrom.bsky.social

2 months ago 2 0 0 0
Post image

Big Pupper

2 months ago 102 26 4 0
Post image

I wonder who might that be?

2 months ago 11 4 0 0
Post image

Old ass pikachu has joined the daycare

2 months ago 214 44 2 0
Post image

wow an actual exclusive post whoooa
you can find it on the P-site Discord for 1 buck
www.patreon.com/c/beancat

2 months ago 6 1 0 0
Advertisement
Post image Post image

the hat gave him the confidence

2 months ago 11 1 0 0
I write to you today to STRONGLY OPPOSE House Bill 2112 (2026) and urge you to vote against this measure in your assembly. While I appreciate the impetus behind the Bill, it will not accomplish its goals and will only serve to criminalize speech which is protected by the United States Constitution.

Firstly, and foremost, it is the responsibility of parents to police the actions of their children, to prevent them from accessing objectionable content online, and protect them from harm. This is a PARENTING PROBLEM and nearly every internet enabled hardware device comes with built-in content controls ("Parental Controls") designed to accomplish this level of content filtering and control. The legislature should not be imposing regulation on private individuals—the adults legally accessing the "objectionable content" defined in HB2112—to address a parenting problem. Encourage parents to be more involved and engaged in their children's lives, to employ the tools available to them, and to restrict access to devices and internet access inappropriate for their children.

Secondly, imposing compliance with age verification software on all Internet sites that display images defined within the Bill is a fundamental invasion of privacy. While Section 2.2 states that identifying information may not be retained, that simply isn't practical and, if audited by the State, presents logistical challenges for said verifiers. The verification process would also create a "paper trail" through computer log data with which the State could potentially link verification queries with individuals and sites, building profiles on individuals, which is inappropriate and grotesque!

I write to you today to STRONGLY OPPOSE House Bill 2112 (2026) and urge you to vote against this measure in your assembly. While I appreciate the impetus behind the Bill, it will not accomplish its goals and will only serve to criminalize speech which is protected by the United States Constitution. Firstly, and foremost, it is the responsibility of parents to police the actions of their children, to prevent them from accessing objectionable content online, and protect them from harm. This is a PARENTING PROBLEM and nearly every internet enabled hardware device comes with built-in content controls ("Parental Controls") designed to accomplish this level of content filtering and control. The legislature should not be imposing regulation on private individuals—the adults legally accessing the "objectionable content" defined in HB2112—to address a parenting problem. Encourage parents to be more involved and engaged in their children's lives, to employ the tools available to them, and to restrict access to devices and internet access inappropriate for their children. Secondly, imposing compliance with age verification software on all Internet sites that display images defined within the Bill is a fundamental invasion of privacy. While Section 2.2 states that identifying information may not be retained, that simply isn't practical and, if audited by the State, presents logistical challenges for said verifiers. The verification process would also create a "paper trail" through computer log data with which the State could potentially link verification queries with individuals and sites, building profiles on individuals, which is inappropriate and grotesque!

Thirdly, Section 1.7(c) of the Bill is ambiguous and subjective, without exception for amateur expression. Who is to say what works of art, by which artists, is of merit? Who will be the arbiter of "serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value"? This is not a sufficient definition of acceptability. It's dangerous, McCarthy-esque language. 

Look, I'm sure you're getting a lot of these messages right now, and I appreciate that your staff is busy and possibly overwhelmed with work. This is a bad bill that will not accomplish its objectives of making the internet safer for children. The reality is that the internet is not a safe place for children to spend time unsupervised and without content restrictions. Parents need to use the tools available to them—on their children's devices, laptops, home wifi routers, etc.—to make the content restrictions necessary to protect their children as they see fit. It is not the place of the Legislature to impose mass content restriction on everyone "for the children" when the solution is far simpler and already exists.

I sincerely urge you to vote against this bill.

Thank you for your service to your communities and the State of Washington.

Thirdly, Section 1.7(c) of the Bill is ambiguous and subjective, without exception for amateur expression. Who is to say what works of art, by which artists, is of merit? Who will be the arbiter of "serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value"? This is not a sufficient definition of acceptability. It's dangerous, McCarthy-esque language.  Look, I'm sure you're getting a lot of these messages right now, and I appreciate that your staff is busy and possibly overwhelmed with work. This is a bad bill that will not accomplish its objectives of making the internet safer for children. The reality is that the internet is not a safe place for children to spend time unsupervised and without content restrictions. Parents need to use the tools available to them—on their children's devices, laptops, home wifi routers, etc.—to make the content restrictions necessary to protect their children as they see fit. It is not the place of the Legislature to impose mass content restriction on everyone "for the children" when the solution is far simpler and already exists. I sincerely urge you to vote against this bill. Thank you for your service to your communities and the State of Washington.

Post image Post image

Do you live in Washington State?

I need you to do two things:

1) Go here (app.leg.wa.gov/billsummary?...) & read HB 2112.
2) Go here (app.leg.wa.gov/pbc/bill/2112) & leave a comment urging your representatives to vote AGAINST the bill.

This is SERIOUS shit. Please!

My comment in the BLUE images.

3 months ago 299 372 6 12
Post image

Red Bean Dragoon

3 months ago 69 15 1 0
Post image

didn't know it was comptitive

3 months ago 39 7 0 0

Watch out for the ONE question where they try to trick you by putting "I want AI" as the bottom option where EVERY other question has "I don't want AI" at the bottom!

3 months ago 6285 4158 109 83
Post image

Peen dog, dog with the peen

3 months ago 17 1 0 0