agentwashingtublovescats
rosefire:

gaywitch-practisingabortion:

situationalstudent:

purplespacecats:

professorbutterscotch:

kiskolee:

THIS.

I have never thought about it in this context
that’s actually really, really creepy.

I… fuck.

Yeah, basically.

I once pointed this out to my mother and she just stared at me, in stunned silence for ages. 

There will always be a girl who is less sober, less secure, with less friends walking in a darker part of town. I want her safe just as much as I want me safe.

rosefire:

gaywitch-practisingabortion:

situationalstudent:

purplespacecats:

professorbutterscotch:

kiskolee:

THIS.

I have never thought about it in this context

that’s actually really, really creepy.

I… fuck.

Yeah, basically.

I once pointed this out to my mother and she just stared at me, in stunned silence for ages. 

There will always be a girl who is less sober, less secure, with less friends walking in a darker part of town. I want her safe just as much as I want me safe.

isidewiththeangels-butiamnotone

aviculor:

savvymavvy:

legitknits:

mcguirkthejerk:

kristinethequeen:

jimmysnowvakk:

This is what pisses me off about Tumblr. You all say you’re so accepting and you don’t want to offend anyone, but then thousands of people reblog something like this because Christians aren’t the minority. You wouldn’t want to offend a Muslim, and if this were offensive to them or another minority, there’d be so many comments about it. But everyone is completely fine with offending a non minority. “You’re not oppressed, you can’t talk!” You know what? I’m a Christian and this offends me and my faith, but nobody’s going to care about that because I’m not oppressed. Tumblr is hypocritical and that needs to stop.

Amen to the comment

Oh my precious lambs:

Examine why you are being offended. Because this is literally how a sunset works. There is not room for debate on this question. There is less room for debate on this than there is on just about any other thing. We are not reblogging because Christians aren’t the minority, dear ones. We are reblogging because after the debate a few days ago, creationists were given the opportunity to pose a question for non-creationists. One of these questions was:

"How can you explain a sunset if their is no god?" (sp.)

Questions, we assume, are posed so that someone might answer them. And yes, there is an answer of how exactly one can explain a sunset given the absence of a divine force. Now, you can certainly posit that God is the creator of all things and so all things came from him including the sun and light refraction and anthrax and kittens and famine and all that jazz.

But you don’t get to deny that THIS IS HOW A SUNSET WORKS, and of the necessary elements of this equation (Sun + Atmosphere + Angle = Sunset), God is not one of them. That’s because everything else is an observable phenomenon, and God is not. You can explain a sunset without God. You can go ahead and believe that God’s part of it all. That’s cool. Lots of people believe stuff like that, and I encourage you to delve into the ways that people make science and their faith jive. But if you are offended by being shown the basic scientific principals behind a sunset, you must be offended by damn near everything. And that seems exhausting. 

In short:

People getting butthurt over science, fucking love it.

"Stop teaching science, it offends me" 

azureskylights996

ilyone:

kismesister:

friendlytroll:

mamasam:

stopthatimp:

nani was NINETEEN and such a fucking badass who was so protective of lilo and just ROLLED with aliens being a thing towards the end of the movie. #1 Disney relative of all time.

I have honestly been waiting AGES for the right gifset to express the wonderful perfection that is Nani. She is not only protective of Lilo, she respects the way Lilo’s imagination and quirkiness works.

Pudge the fish got a peanut butter sandwich every Thursday. Nani does not argue the logic of feeding him, only suggests an alternative sandwich when they are out of peanut butter. Lilo was allowed to take as many photos of whatever mundane or odd subjects as she wanted and Nani would get them developed. Nani recognized what were important habits for Lilo.

When Lilo asks for a pet lobster, Nani does not tell her that lobsters are not pets. She tells her, “We don’t have a lobster door, we have a dog door.” She makes sure the woman at the pound does not tell Lilo that “Stitch is not a real name”.

NANI SPENDS THE ENTIRE MOVIE MAKING SURE THAT LILO NEVER FEELS LIKE HER IDEAS ARE WRONG.

The only time we truly see Nani get angry with Lilo is when she is scared of Lilo being taken away. Nani spends the entire movie stressed out over taking care of her sister, trying to find a job, trying to make sure her sister has a friend, and yet she is always willing to put that extra effort, over and over again, to make sure that Lilo always believes that anything is possible.

This is a great moment because she probably *remembered* that Lilo said this once. And you know what? Shes not ending this day by letting her little sister think this is her fault. She’s not having an easy time trying to be a parent, but she knows none of this is her sisters fault, and shes not going to let her think it is. 

And half of her terror of losing Lilo isnt even just losing her family; its knowing that wherever Lilo goes, they won’t know how to do these things. They won’t understand her. 

What a good movie. 

Casual reminder that the reason Lilo obsessively feeds the fish is because her parents died in a rainstorm and she firmly believes Pudge controls the weather. If you pay attention to the feeding sequence you will notice that storm clouds recede and dissipate, a visual narrative that confirms this.

It’s not just a habit. It’s a very real part of Lilo’s healing process and Nani understands that.

Also if you pay attention to Nani’s room you’ll notice she had surfing posters and trophies. She was very much on her way to being a pro surfer but had to give it up to become the adult Lilo needed her to be.

And not ONCE does Nani show her sister any resentment. It’s worth it to keep her family together. This is a young woman who is willing to sacrifice all of her dreams and make incredibly grown up decisions.

What I am saying is Nani is the best disney princess of all time. Disney Queen even.

Dean De Blois, ladies and gentlemen, genius director and writer of friggin’ amazing nonnormative characters, family and relationships. I may worship that man, a little bit. From Lilo and Stitch to HHTTYD, he really gives us amazing movies. 

offinneverneverland

fabulouslyfreespirited:

If you deliberately seek out any of these images, you are directly participating in the violation not just of numerous women’s privacy but also of their bodies.
In what’s being called the biggest celebrity hacking incident in internet history, more than 100 female celebrities have had their private nude images stolen and published online. The bulk of the images posted have been officially confirmed as belonging to Jennifer Lawrence, but a complete list of victims’ names - including Krysten Ritter, Kate Upton, Mary Elizabeth Winstead, Rihanna, Brie Larson and Kirsten Dunst - has been subsequently published. (Link does not contain pictures, only names.)
The images were first uploaded by an anonymous member of the underground internet sewer known as 4chan and have since been enthusiastically shared across platforms like Reddit and Twitter. A representative for Lawrence has confirmed the images are real, condemning the theft of them as a “flagrant violation of privacy” and adding that “The authorities have been contacted and will prosecute anyone who posts the stolen photos.”
There are a few different issues that a criminal act like this brings up, but before I get into them it’s necessary to make one thing clear: If you deliberately seek out any of these images, you are directly participating in the violation not just of numerous women’s privacy but also of their bodies. These images - which I have not seen and which I will not look for - are intimate, private moments belonging only to the people who appear in them and who they have invited to see them. To have those moments stolen and broadcast to the world is an egregious act of psychic violence which constitutes a form of assault.
The people sharing these images are perpetuating an ongoing assault. The people gleefully looking at them are witnessing and enjoying an ongoing assault. When you have been asked by victims of a crime like this not to exacerbate the pain of that crime and you continue to do so anyway, you are consciously deciding that your enjoyment, your rights and perhaps even just your curiosity are more important than the safety and dignity of the people you’re exploiting.
That out of the way, let’s get a few other things straight.
1. This is not a ‘scandal’
It’s a crime, and we should be discussing it as such. Some media outlets are salaciously reporting it otherwise, as if the illegal violation of privacy involving intimate images is little more than subject for gossip. When associated with sex, the word ‘scandal’ has been typically interpreted as something that assigns responsibility to all parties involved, a consensual act unfortunately discovered and for which everyone owes an explanation or apology. Remember when private nude photos of Vanessa Hudgens (whose name also appears on the list of victims) were leaked online and Disney forced her to publicly apologise for her “lapse in judgment” and hoped she had “learned a valuable lesson”? Never mind that Hudgens was an adult and a victim of privacy violation - the ‘scandal’ was painted as something for which she owed her fans an apology. Which leads us to:
2. These women do not ‘only have themselves to blame’
While depressing, it’s sadly unsurprising to see some people arguing that Lawrence et al brought this on themselves. Part of living in a rape culture is the ongoing expectation that women are responsible for protecting themselves from abuse, and that means avoiding behaviour which might be later ‘exploited’ by the people who are conveniently never held to account for their actions. But women are entitled to consensually engage in their sexuality any way they see fit. If that involves taking nude self portraits for the enjoyment of themselves or consciously selected others, that’s their prerogative.
Victims of crime do not have an obligation to accept dual responsibility for that crime. Women who take nude photographs of themselves are not committing a criminal act, and they shouldn’t ‘expect’ to become victims to one, as actress Mary E. Winstead pointed out on Twitter. 
Sending a photograph of your breasts to one person isn’t consenting to having the whole world see those breasts, just as consenting to sex with one person isn’t the same as giving permission for everyone else to fu*k you. Victim blaming isn’t okay, even if it does give you a private thrill to humiliate the female victims of sexual exploitation.
3. It doesn’t matter that ‘damn, she looks good and should own it!’
Stealing and sharing the private photographs of women doesn’t become less of a crime just because you approve them for fapping activity. I’m sure many of the women on this list are confident of their sexual attractiveness. It doesn’t mean they don’t value their privacy or shouldn’t expect to enjoy the same rights to it as everyone else. It also doesn’t mean they want strangers sweating over their images. That line of thinking comes from the same school which instructs women to either ignore of welcome sexual harassment when it’s seemingly ‘positive’ in its sentiments.
None of these women are likely to give a shit that you think their bodies are ‘tight, damn’. Despite what society reinforces to us about the public ownership of women’s bodies, we are not entitled to co-opt and objectify them just because we think we can defend it as a compliment.
I will not be seeking out these images out and I urge everyone else to avoid doing the same. I hope that all the women who have been victimised here are being appropriately supported by the authorities and their network of friends. And I hope sincerely that more people take a stand against this kind of behaviour.
Because this incident aside, it strikes me as deeply ironic that we will vehemently protest a free Facebook messenger app because we’re outraged at reports that it can access our phone’s numbers, and yet turn around and excuse the serving up of women’s bodies for our own pleasure. Our appreciation is no less disgusting just because it’s accompanied by the sound of one hand clapping.
offinneverneverland
thisistheverge:

Say hello to men who hate the NSA but love invading the privacy of women
Over the weekend someone released hundreds of revealing photos of celebrities that appear to have been stolen from private storage. In response to this, a bunch of anonymous guys on the internet copied them and posted them all over the town square, because the internet is written in ink and if you are ever a victim once in your life the internet will remind you of it forever. These men are the detritus of human society for whom the internet provides a warm blanket, so let’s remove the warm blanket for a minute.

thisistheverge:

Say hello to men who hate the NSA but love invading the privacy of women
Over the weekend someone released hundreds of revealing photos of celebrities that appear to have been stolen from private storage. In response to this, a bunch of anonymous guys on the internet copied them and posted them all over the town square, because the internet is written in ink and if you are ever a victim once in your life the internet will remind you of it forever. These men are the detritus of human society for whom the internet provides a warm blanket, so let’s remove the warm blanket for a minute.

consulting-schnazzleberry
miradori:

insidiouschris:

fatbodypolitics:

atomic-glitter:

wocinsolidarity:

allahyil3analsohyouniyeh:

Omg look at petas response Holy shit what the fuck burn them omg

so when we say fuck PETA you know where we’re coming from

When it comes down to it, considering the fact that they kill most of the animals they’re “saving”, they objectify women in most of their ads, and they don’t give a shit about POCs being harmed for their food, the only population PETA cares about is white American vegan men. That’s funny - sounds like almost everyone else.

Not surprised.


Sad

PETA are awful people

miradori:

insidiouschris:

fatbodypolitics:

atomic-glitter:

wocinsolidarity:

allahyil3analsohyouniyeh:

Omg look at petas response
Holy shit what the fuck burn them omg

so when we say fuck PETA you know where we’re coming from

When it comes down to it, considering the fact that they kill most of the animals they’re “saving”, they objectify women in most of their ads, and they don’t give a shit about POCs being harmed for their food, the only population PETA cares about is white American vegan men. That’s funny - sounds like almost everyone else.

Not surprised.

Sad

PETA are awful people