tyleroakley:

all you could ever need in a book

(via stupid-lemon-eater)

soulpunchftw:

I find it oddly flattering that the Anti-Vaccination crowd thinks that I— an actual Autistic— am some kind of monster that was created in a lab. There’s a ’50s B-movie in this, is what I’m getting at.

'My God, Doctor! It's alive! What does it want with us?'

*the creature lumbers forward, inciting obligatory screams*

LET ME TELL YOU ABOUT TRAAAAAAAIIIIIIIINSSSS

(via carry-on-my-wayward-butt)

preciousegg:

reblogging your own selfie

image

(via australiansanta)

proletarianprincess:

underwatercavess:

proletarianprincess:

whenever i get an essay assignment i immediately go “how can i work a feminist and anti capitalist rant into this”

How about focus on the fucking essay and not make everything about your passions? You don’t see me making a rant about whales in every fucking essay I get.

i study sociology and politics, its always relevant you fucking weirdo. go fuck a whale or something.

(via australiansanta)

nintendo-blisters:

It’s finally happening.
Donald Glover is Miles Morales as Spider-Man.

(via exxclusivepants)

whitegirlsaintshit:

nedahoyin:

toneyspeaksloud:

Nicki Minaj shining a light on the differences on acceptable sexuality from white women and black women.

While it has a good deal to do with color, it also has to do with the fact of how her sexuality is used.

The women above her could arguably be said to be catering to the sexual needs/wants/fantasies of men (Sports Illustrated is ESPECIALLY known for catering to a male gaze.)  While Nicki Minaj has continuously used her sexuality to empower herself.  Her sexuality isn’t for men, it’s for her own self.  And THAT is a huge problem.  Sexuality that isn’t designed for male consumption is deemed unacceptable and threatening.  She is powerful, demanding, uncompromising, and men are weak, so that scares them.

And it’s also because she’s of Indian/Black background, no doubt about it.  It’s not just racist, it’s also sexist.

#reblog again

*Lemongrab voice* UNACCEPTABLE

(via tinypottedgroot)

wtttl:

collababortion:

kittydoom:

salon:

We dare you to say we don’t live in a rape culture.

Amazingly, not The Onion:

“[W]e now have young men telling Bloomberg News that they basically view their female peers as rape bombs just waiting to explode and ruin their lives.”

I REPEAT: THIS IS NOT THE ONION

PLANET IS READY FOR MANDOWN CULTURE

MANDOWN MANDOWN MANDOWN MANDOWN

(via tinypottedgroot)

fish-dinner-connoisseur:

all yall keep callin katt williams crazy but he the only one been makin sense for a long damn time

(via tinypottedgroot)

  • Them: I don't think kids should be exposed to gay relationships.
  • You: Why not?
  • Them: It's introducing children to sexuality! They're too young for that!
  • You: So when a prince and princess kiss in a Disney movie, are they introduced to sexuality? When the prince and the princess get married and have a child, is that introducing your child to sexuality?
  • Them: NO! But if they see a man and a man, or a woman and a woman together... they're going to start asking questions! Like how a man and a man can... you know, do anything together.
  • You: You think the only thing people think when they see a gay couple is "I wonder how they have sex"? Furthermore, you think a CHILD is going to even know what that means? When the prince and the princess kiss, does your 4 year old daughter ask, "mommy, how do people have intercourse"? No. She just sees two people in love. If you remember when you were a kid, you probably didn't think about sex every time you saw two people happy together.
  • Them: But it'll bring up all kinds of questions, it'll confuse my child!
  • You: Then be a fucking parent and explain it to your child. The only question that might be brought up is "mom, why don't you want gay people to be happy?". And when you don't have a good answer for that question, you can look your child in the eye and say "It's because I'm a bigot".

(via knot-all-men)

yungterra:

You want my phone number? It’s useless. The best way to contact me is to fill a human skull with acorns and vigorously shake it into the night. I will hear you eventually.

(via candypinkcocks)

evelynvincible:

realmisandrists:

steelfemme:

misandry-mermaid:

conservativeatheist:

What are men supposed to do? Shut off the part of them that makes them human? She knows what she’s doing wearing what she’s wearing by posing like that. She knows the cause and effect with those sultry looks she’s showing. She’s sexually objectifying herself and she’s doing it on purpose so we’ll look. She’s fishing. However men are shammed when they take this bait. We’re pigs for checking her out. It could be an 18 year old or a 21 year old, 25 year old, 35 year old, etc dressed while posing like this.That’s sexism against men because you want us to repress our sexuality while teasing us in the process. 

Today’s repugnant opinion of the day is brought to you by professional whiner and potential rapist “conservativeatheist”.

"You’re making me feel bad for not seeing a 16 yr old girl as a human… Sexism against men!!!" - anti-fem logic

"All men objectify women and are physically incapable of respecting women who don’t obey the modesty police. It’s what makes them human."

- conservativeatheist

"Men can’t tell the difference between a child performing sexuality (i.e., trying to look "like a grown up"/"more adult") and actual adult women performing sexuality. Asking men to please not objectify children is sexism against men, because children are more responsible for adult men’s sexuality than actual adult men are."

Hi OP, I’m cute, smart, beautiful, vaginal, and funny, however, I am 21, which means I could be 35 or 50, I could even be an octogenarian and that is just much too old for you! Perhaps my staggering age means I am not your type, and this won’t be the love match I so hoped it would be. However, we must face the facts! I am a woman denied the majesty that produced such a compelling argument, so I must, if possible, attempt to respond with equal vigour and loquaciousness. It’s important to devote as many words as possible to your similarly overworked beating around the bush, if I am ever to hope to prove myself to such a misogynist bag of sweaty protective sport cups and jockstraps (they lie in that bag intertwined still, unclean and rancid, poor hygiene and resulting inconsistency in the protection of men and masculinity, cultivating the beautiful dick infection of love. The smell will precede us, your fellow sexually repressed gentlemen will descend, noting our love as the mirror to their organisation, kicking each other down in an attempt to see the swelling metaphor of our deep affection, that so resembles the puffy groin of their activism; the white fleshy sea of them will stand before us, and they will bow to your masculinity as you have wrangled a woman who has put more thought into your words than you’ve ever expressed in total, and I shall be a symbol of what they wish womankind to be).
I will start my devotion by helping you more than you are willing to help yourself, as it is the manic pixie dream girl’s right, duty and pleasure (and I have been to your blog, good sir, there is so much manic pixie dream fixing upon which to found our abiding love). I will do this by telling you that you are wrong; you are wrong initially, you are wrong at the end and in the middle, and curiously, considering that you are such a fine specimen of logic and concern, you exude an entire aura of wrongness, that is almost manifests as a literal miasma that fogs up the lungs and leaves a spectacularly wrong taste in the mouth.

In fact, you’re pretty consistently wrong, which I like; I congratulate you on your consistency. It’s neat and I like neatness; we are obviously MFEO. Neatness is restful to me. An almost tangible sense of peace descended over me while I was reading your very neat diatribe as I’m so utterly calmed and reassured by predictability.
The knowledge that no matter what task a human being takes up, be that educating themselves about gender studies before they speak or, as in your case, being so neatly, entirely and relentlessly incorrect, is incredibly reassuring in my fast paced life of actually studying what I talk about.

You know, I bet you felt pretty liberal/kind/pc/lenient because you didn’t say the word slut and just implied it instead; this is your first case of being wrong, in a tidy string of many. In fact, it’s almost a marvel in itself how far you’ve taken this effort to calm me (sweetheart). As I sit and meditate on the nature of the intrinsic reassurance I find in your devotion to even the most limited of concepts, and the calm that follows the utter lack of surprising content I find in your argument and blog, it occurs to me that perhaps I can possibly devote myself in that self-same veracity to ridding you of your misconceptions.


In regards to your meticulously unselected language, I will begin with asking you if you might consider how you built an entire argument that consists quite solidly of avoiding the word “slut” while desperately attempting to make it clear that you mean the word “slut”, without it once occurring to you that the message you wished to share was “slut” and therefore speaking accordingly? (You might not consider this, in fact, your previous devotions suggest you will pretend I didn’t say anything and continue down the path of pure satisfying ignorance of truth, but I will continue just valiantly, as a counterpart to your wonderfully persistent floundering.)
Were you looking to spare yourself attack for slurs that obviously sit comfortably in your mind and heart, or were you looking to lend legitimacy to your argument, by pretending a kindness and politeness that don’t match your intent?
I’m not sure if matters which of these strategies you were pursuing, as you have failed in both aspects. You have managed to be cruel and invalidate your argument entirely. You are wrong about the former; perhaps it hasn’t occurred to you if I were to call you an asshole in 50 words other than asshole that I am still calling you an asshole?
It probably hasn’t; precedent suggests your inability to grasp the obvious extends as far as your range for uninformed bullshitting. In a similar way, by avoiding the word “slut” and cowering under a cover of externalisation and misplaced blame, you are still calling a 16 year old girl a slut. Congrats on being an asshat, and being caught in your pre-emptive attempt to hide like a toddler from the consequences of your words. The predictability has not ebbed, the sea of my contempt is calm and clear, and the tide is rising in the sunlight like a cat curling up in a patch of a summer’s day filtering through a window.

The next wrong thing is how you think that your perception that she has sultry poses and looks (oh you wordsmith, you!) matters! It doesn’t, because you don’t actually mean shit, especially not to her; she didn’t think of you when she was looking at the camera (she knows you and I have a bond and she wouldn’t do that to our friendship), it’s not a message to you in the least. The only way this is related to you is a potential consideration of the vague concept of male cash consuming her media, and letting her do her job (breaking news: adapting to a misogynistic world in this way doesn’t make her a bad person or some kind of viper tempress liar, just to let you know, in case you thought you’d be wrong about that too).
She’s probably more concerned about what the women that make up the media she’s participating in, and the young girls and 16 year old boys that are her target audience. Is there a clearer way of saying this is not about you? Because baby, I talked to her about it and she promised me she wasn’t into you; she told me that she wants nothing to come between us and will protect our jockstrap romance with every ounce of her being. So you can stop worrying about her hurting us. Our clear understanding of a man’s right to objectify little girls makes women everywhere envious and protective of our future love (the age thing is going to be a stumbling block I’m so sorry, I could be like 90 years old, and you gross me out too much already, after 69 more years of being aware of your dumbass views that’s just gonna be so much worse)

Continuing on our quest, now that you are reassured that my devotion to your majesty is shared amongst a vanguard of amazed and stunned women, I want to draw your attention to how you are attempting to police someone else’s treatment of their body and using it to justify your male right to treat her like meat! The part about your male right was sarcastic by the way, it’s my way of quelling the attraction to you, so that we may continue this discussion without my unbridled lust overwhelming me; I know how you feel about women above 16 displaying their sexuality. You are, in fact, wrong about how entitled you feel towards her body, and wrong about how entitled you feel about telling her what to do with it.

Actually, you don’t have a single right to her body, not even the right too oogle her cute little butt, and contrary to yet another spectacularly incorrect belief of yours, you still wouldn’t have that right, even if she were 35. You, in fact, will never have that right unless you’re engaging in a legal healthy mutual and consensual relationship with her at some point in the future, which you wont, conservativeatheist, because I am here forever to fix you; I am your manic pixie dream girl and I will consume your vapid bullshit ideas, starting by revealing that she’s out of your league, continuing on to point out how the thought of a man like you looking at her probably feels like a cheesegrater to the soul (it would feel like that to me, but hell I could be 106 so thankfully you won’t look), and ending by reiterating my position as perfect woman by wasting my time and effort trying to explain something to you that any person with dignity and decency knows intrinsically. That’s a dream woman for you, right? Tolerating overwhelming stupidity and working diligently to compensate for the faults you bring to a relationship?
Here is a list of things that will not change your rights to a woman’s body:

  • ·         Age
  • ·         Unintentional Sultriness (You’re a regular J.K. Shakespeare bb)
  • ·         Intentional Sultriness (Mm yes talk dirty to me)
  • ·         Dress
  • ·         Income
  • ·         Victim blaming bottom feeders
  • ·         Transcending this plane of existence because it’s just really really mean about how women get autonomy what is even with that anyway. Why cant you just put your dick in the things without all this consent and asking BULLSHIT
  • ·         You somehow becoming convincing at playing “decent human being”
  • ·         Your misconception that somehow men are a gender of repressed sexuality.
  • ·         Crying about the above.
  • ·         Conservative views
  • ·         Athiesm
  • ·         You getting super-hot and buff and becoming a pickup artist and learning super cool card tricks to pull in the ladies. This is a dumb idea; card tricks don’t really contribute one way or another to how much women want to sleep with you, and you’ll probably do it wrong anyway.
  • ·         Everything else about you or about a woman, or women in general or men in general that isn’t a woman explicitly and freely choosing to let you do the frick frack, or asking you to be a judgemental asshat, or saying to you “conservativeathiest, oogle my cute little underaged butt you skeevy, victim blaming, nightmare fuel.”
  • ·         Actually a woman’s explicit and free consent is pretty much the only factors, out of everything in the whole world that would change your right to touch or objectify her, so in the context of this list, all things that are not the specific scenario I outlined at the beginning of this sentence.

I’d say it was cute that you tried, but it’s not, so I won’t, because that would be wrong and I am not wrong (my correctness is cute though, ‘because it’s a match to your own insistence on saying things that are not correct, and matching is adorable).

The wrong following the previous wrong; you have asked the wrong questions because you asked really dumb ones, with very simple answers that have somehow eluded you, a human being implying he is at least above the legal age of consent. That is enough years to know the answers to these questions, in fact five years is probably adequate. I’m sorry kindergarten let you down.
“What are men supposed to do?” Not be horrifying. It’s not hard, in fact, a lot of men manage this quite comfortably. It actually should take little to no effort to not be terrible.
“Shut off the part of them that makes them human?” NO! TURN IT BACK ON RIGHT NOW CONSERVATIVEATHEIST. IF YOU TURN YOUR HUMANITY ON YOU WILL UNDERSTAND HOW WRONG YOU’RE BEING AND ATTEMPT TO MAKE AMMENDS FOR YOUR BULLSHIT BEHAVIOUR SO PLEASE IMMEDIATELY RE-INGAGE WITH A SPECTRUM OF EMOTIONS AND EMPATHY THAT HAS MOVED BEYOND INFANCY.
Here’s a quick lesson that has somehow passed by you your whole life; the element of humanity in men is not the fuck button. Your ball sack, dick and associated urges do not make you human; they make you a biological machine capable of reproducing sexually.
Let me fix this misconception with an example; Dogs like to fuck, bulls like to fuck, cats like to fuck, and ducks like to fuck. Flora are driven to reproduce by their sheer natures as well. Ducks, by the way, have corkscrew penises, roses are not sentient and my neighbour’s cat eats its own vomit. Please tell me how sharing reproductive urges with all of creations sexually reproducing creatures is what makes a man human.
You cannot because they don’t; you are wrong.
Humanity lies in empathy, and your lazy reasoning lies deeply entrenched in the male entitlement that rape culture is built upon. It is perhaps one of the many elements that caused tumblr user misandry-mermaid to think you’re a rapist waiting to happen, and one of the many things that add up to give girls and women world-wide an eery feeling that they should cross the street so they can avoid coming within grabbing distance of you.

In answer to the question you’re wrong for not asking bc you’re too busy being a misogynist dirtbag; YOU KNOW SHE’S 16. YOU ARE FULLY AWARE THAT SHE’S BEEN ALIVE FOR ONLY 16 YEARS.

I KNOW THAT BECAUSE YOU YOURSELF GAVE ME THAT INFORMATION.

ONCE YOU MAKE A FUCKING GRAPHIC SAYING “THIS IS BELLA THORN AND SHE IS 16 YEARS OF AGE” YOU NO LONGER HAVE THE ABILITY TO USE THE EXCUSE OF SHE COULD BE 18 OR 21 OR 25 OR 35.
WHEN YOU HAVE MADE A GRAPHIC SAYING “THIS IS BELLA THORNE AND SHE IS 16 YEARS OF AGE” AND YOU SAY SHE COULD BE OLDER THAN 16 THEN YOU’RE JUST MAKING NOISE, PATHETIC NOISES THAT SOUND UNSTABLE AND ADD TO YOUR TERRIFYING “DON’T SPEND TIME WITH ME ALONE” AURA.
It’s like saying you could be right, when we both know you are wrong. Do you see what I’m saying? I am saying that I could be using Morse code to send this message into the future from the past and that a droid in the future is receiving it and sending it back to you in order to convince you of your worth and give the confidence you need to become future ruler of the universe and logic, but i am typing this on my laptop right now to point out your stupidity in a manner that entertains me.
I’m saying i could have a pet monkey or a pet fish or a pet cat but the pets i do have are two dogs.
Saying that my laptop is really futuristic does not make it a droid from the future, and it doesn’t change my belief and knowledge that it’s not a droid from the future so accordingly i do not look at like it is  and will break Asimov’s roboty laws if i take it for granted.
What I’m saying here, is that sure some guys can be wrong about how old a girl is, but only idiots and jackasses complain that a girl has the audacity to not be legal yet when they find that out.

Just in case you weren’t following; it doesn’t matter how she’s dressed, posed, made-up or looking at the camera. You know that she’s 16, so she could not be 18, 21, 25, or 35, unless she ages 2, 5, 9, or 19 years. She has at least two years before you can unzip your dumb face flaps about her potentially being 18 years old. In the meantime, sweatheart (bc jockstrap love, geddit I’m so funny), shut the fuck up on that line of reasoning, there’s no alternative theory, there’s no gentle correction, though I live to spare your feelings babe. There is only shutting your god damn mouth and praying no one you love/respect realises you ever said that sentence.

Another way you are wrong is that shame is spelt shame, not shamme, and if you did mean past tense of sham, then I’m afraid you are calling men liars, not embarrassing, when they look at preteen girls and blame them for their own gross entitled BS. I thought you’d know this one, though. Honestly, shame seems to be an integral side effect of you existing; it seems odd that you wouldn’t know how to spell a word you must encounter every morning when you wake up, and you acknowledge long enough to cover up with bluster and angry ranting about religion and ladies and communism.

You are also wrong because she is not fishing. She’s on the red carpet at the TMNT premier and is too busy being successful and on a red carpet to go fishing. She’s not even dressed for fishing; she’s dressed for the red carpet. You are dually wrong here, because fishing is a poor metaphor, and implies her intent to catch you and people similar to you; but we’ve been over that part.

You are also wrong because I would not call you a pig. First, pigs are actually very smart and ingenious, and I would not imply that about you, and secondly I’m more creative with language than that.

Conservativeathiest, do you want the devil to hate you so much he eats your firstborn or will you mend your ways? Trick question. Whatever answer you have is wrong because women don’t generally have firstborns with men who don’t respect them, and are so inflamed by a 16 year they’ve never met wearing some clothes (oh god someone call her mother) that they create a graphic calling her a slut, and start showing all the signs of poor reasoning and of never accepting women as anything but decorated novelty dickslots.

You are interesting in your sheer commitment to BS but you are hardly a new breed of human to me. You are not unique. I have met boys like you before, and I will continue to. This is the last wrong I’m pointing out today as I’m getting bored; you are wrong to think you are special or that you are saying anything new that hasn’t been said in satire comedies based on the bigots that came before you. You are not a special atheist, nor a special conservative, and conservative atheist have existed and will continue to exist as pimples on the pasty white ass of the country that privileges you forever.
In fact, I tend to take the appearance of boys exactly like you as proof that the world keeps turning, the sky is blue, whales are sizeable, and your misogyny is so ingrained that you are blissfully unaware that 16 year old girls worldwide are followed by a shadowy swelling nightmare, and that you are a nothing but a cog in that disgusting, putrid and intangible machine.

(via the-winchester-initiative)

(via stupid-lemon-eater)

asmilinggoddess:

"sir you named your son ‘wolfy mcwolf’ and then pissed off a werewolf. i really dont know what you expected to happen" said the doctors at st mungo’s to lupin’s dad, probably 

(via stupid-lemon-eater)

leassvengers:

so I bought my mom this cup with a hot dude having coffee because my mom is fun and i thought this might like her.

image

BUT THEN I SERVE MYSELF COFFEE IN IT AND TURNS OUT THAT WHEN THE CUP GETS HOT

image

THE DUDE LOSES HIS PANTS AND THAT’S COFFEE AND PORN AND I DONT KNOW WHAT KIND OF SORCERY THIS IS!

(via bitchh-101)