Latest Tweets:

sexualthorientation:

This is so hard because you know this isn’t the first time they’ve had this conversation. They probably have it every time he visits her. He squares his shoulders before he goes in there, and hopes for the best, relatively speaking. You can see it in his face in that second gif - the way he literally crumples when he sees that he’s lost her again.

This movie covered patriotism and Alzheimers and ptsd and the difference between america back then and now and watching what’s left of your past completely dissapear and can we just

best movie of the year, no one can tell me otherwise

(Source: avatarwinchester, via allthingsfangirlish)

thedustyleaves:

thedustyleaves:

Some poorly edited sketches omfg I need a scanner. This is the ‘mostly Danny Phantom stuff’ batch. More to come *___* 

oh boy this old thing is making the rounds again haha, let’s say it’s throwback tuesday and bring it back p: ! 

Holy cow them facial expressions!

(via ectolime)

reblogging in case I ever find a copy of Speed, I want to remember this.

(Source: cultmasterflash, via mr-radical)

crackedbrain321:

crackonthebarriersoftimeandspace:

instigatinglittleshit:

little-missandry:

legion-of-leijon:

Being a nice guy and being a “nice guy”: Know the difference.

There is LITERALLY no difference.

Women don’t owe you shit. We are not sex objects. Too bad if you’re sad about it. You don’t deserve anybody. You are not entitled to another human being.

That’s just how it works.

HOLY SHIT WHAT

IT’S PERFECTLY NATURAL TO BE SAD WHEN SOMEONE YOU’RE INTERESTED IN DOESN’T WANT TO BE WITH YOU

Jesus fucking Christ that’s not entitlement, that’s totally normal disappointment. 

There’s a difference between the first and second pictures and if you can’t see it then holy fuck, I’m sorry about your failing vision. 

It’s pretty simple:

Picture 1 scenario:

"Hi can I have a muffin?"

"no."

"ok ):"

Picture 2:

"Hi can I have a muffin?"

"No."

"WELL FUCK YOU YOU SLUT, I DESERVE THAT MUFFIN, I ASKED NICELY, WHY DOES NO GIRL GIVE ME FUCKING MUFFINS. GUESS WHAT I’M GOING TO TELL EVERYONE HOW SUPERFICIAL YOU ARE BECAUSE YOU WONT GIVE ME THE GODDAMN MUFFIN."

it’s kinda funny that muffin is a slang term for vagina

I think situation 1 only could have been more different than situation 2 if in situation 1 he was shown eventually moving on.

BECAUSE. YOU KNOW. THAT HAPPENS.

(via checkmateyourprivilege)

glowly:

truly-extraordinary-specimen:

ectolime:

glowly:

if ur ever in a bad mood just watch markiplier play octodad

u will not regret it at all

a+ advice from tumblr user glowly

HE HAS THE VOICE OF A SEX GOD HOLY SHIT

this was the best possible reaction

I have never watched a grown man fall that quickly into madness before.

(via ectolime)

chelle-the-zbornak-queen:

anarcho-queer:

Women Prisoners Sterilized To Cut Welfare Cost In California
In California, prison doctors have sterilized at least 148 women, mainly Mexicans, from 2006 to 2010. Why? They don’t want to have to provide welfare funding for any children they may have in the future and to eliminate ‘defectives’ from the gene pool.
The sterilization procedures cost California taxpayers $147,460 between 1997 and 2010. The doctors at the prison argue it is money well-spent.
Dr. James Heinrich, an OB-GYN at Valley State Prison for Women, said, “Over a 10-year period, that isn’t a huge amount of money compared to what you save in welfare paying for these unwanted children – as they procreated more.”
In 1909, California passed the country’s third sterilization law, authorizing reproductive surgeries of patients committed to state institutions for the “feebleminded” and “insane” that were deemed suffering from a “mental disease which may have been inherited and is likely to be transmitted to descendants.” Based on this eugenic logic, 20,000 patients in more than ten institutions were sterilized in California from 1909 to 1979. Worried about charges of “cruel and unusual punishment,” legislators attached significant provisions to sterilization in state prisons. Despite these restrictions, about 600 men received vasectomies at San Quentin in the 1930s when the superintendent flaunted the law.
Moreover, there was a discernible racial bias in the state’s sterilization and eugenics programs. Preliminary research on a subset of 15,000 sterilization orders in institutions (conducted by Stern and Natalie Lira) suggests that Spanish-surnamed patients, predominantly of Mexican origin, were sterilized at rates ranging from 20 to 30 percent from 1922 to 1952, far surpassing their proportion of the general population.
In her recent book, Miroslava Chávez-García shows, through exhaustively researched stories of youth of color who were institutionalized in state reformatories, and sometimes subsequently sterilized, how eugenic racism harmed California’s youngest generation in patterns all too reminiscent of detention and incarceration today. California was the most zealous sterilizer, carrying out one-third of the approximately 60,000 operations performed in the 32 states that passed eugenic sterilization laws from 1907 to 1937.
Although such procedures may seem harsh, they are not illegal. The Supreme Court ruled in 1927 that women can be forcibly sterilized in jail in Buck vs Bell. Writing for the majority, Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. said, “Three generations of imbeciles are enough.”
Credit

this is horrifying

WHAT THE HECK

chelle-the-zbornak-queen:

anarcho-queer:

Women Prisoners Sterilized To Cut Welfare Cost In California

In California, prison doctors have sterilized at least 148 women, mainly Mexicans, from 2006 to 2010. Why? They don’t want to have to provide welfare funding for any children they may have in the future and to eliminate ‘defectives’ from the gene pool.

The sterilization procedures cost California taxpayers $147,460 between 1997 and 2010. The doctors at the prison argue it is money well-spent.

Dr. James Heinrich, an OB-GYN at Valley State Prison for Women, said, “Over a 10-year period, that isn’t a huge amount of money compared to what you save in welfare paying for these unwanted children – as they procreated more.

In 1909, California passed the country’s third sterilization law, authorizing reproductive surgeries of patients committed to state institutions for the “feebleminded” and “insane” that were deemed suffering from a “mental disease which may have been inherited and is likely to be transmitted to descendants.” Based on this eugenic logic, 20,000 patients in more than ten institutions were sterilized in California from 1909 to 1979. Worried about charges of “cruel and unusual punishment,” legislators attached significant provisions to sterilization in state prisons. Despite these restrictions, about 600 men received vasectomies at San Quentin in the 1930s when the superintendent flaunted the law.

Moreover, there was a discernible racial bias in the state’s sterilization and eugenics programs. Preliminary research on a subset of 15,000 sterilization orders in institutions (conducted by Stern and Natalie Lira) suggests that Spanish-surnamed patients, predominantly of Mexican origin, were sterilized at rates ranging from 20 to 30 percent from 1922 to 1952, far surpassing their proportion of the general population.

In her recent book, Miroslava Chávez-García shows, through exhaustively researched stories of youth of color who were institutionalized in state reformatories, and sometimes subsequently sterilized, how eugenic racism harmed California’s youngest generation in patterns all too reminiscent of detention and incarceration today.

California was the most zealous sterilizer, carrying out one-third of the approximately 60,000 operations performed in the 32 states that passed eugenic sterilization laws from 1907 to 1937.

Although such procedures may seem harsh, they are not illegal. The Supreme Court ruled in 1927 that women can be forcibly sterilized in jail in Buck vs Bell. Writing for the majority, Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. said, “Three generations of imbeciles are enough.

Credit

this is horrifying

WHAT THE HECK

(via fucknointernetignorance)

*30
checkmateyourprivilege:

overreaction much?

Good Lord, the elitism is spread thick. I’d fake an accent around this idiot and see if they noticed.

checkmateyourprivilege:

overreaction much?

Good Lord, the elitism is spread thick. I’d fake an accent around this idiot and see if they noticed.

rubywhiterabbit:

tyleroakley:

poorprovincialtown:

editingatwork:

musical-treasures:

So a boyband walked onto the Britain’s Got Talent stage and everyone thought they were going to sing One Direction or something typical…and then they sung Stars from Les Miserables.

This is the best thing ever. Just listen to those harmonies <3

Simon’s face says “I like it against my will.”

IT’S EVERYTHING I EVER DREAMED

YES TO MORE ACTUAL TALENT IN SINGING COMPETITIONS.

when they all sang together I got full body chills

THERE IS SO MUCH EMOTION OH WOW

gloomyteens:

CHINESE GIRL PRETENDS TO BE A GHOST TO AVOID PARKING CHARGE

Got to love those horror movie instincts though.

(via mr-radical)

rubywhiterabbit:

timelady-of-221b:

joeeatspeople:

yesidolikecoatsbigtime:

Types of people who romanticize small town life:

  1. People who didn’t grow up in small towns

#THE LOCALS AREN’T QUIRKY#THEY’RE RACIST

#THERE’S NOTHING TO DO
#EVERYONE’S ON DRUGS

#Everyone is probably related

#the most exciting thing is the flipping candy factory

(Source: thatssoproblematic)