asynchronoustiger:

IT’S A 100% BELGIAN WAFFLE COVEREDD IN NUTELLA WHAT MORE DONYOU WANT

therealkatiewest:

It’s kind of weird. I think of being naked as so normal, so comfortable and natural. It’s rarely sexual unless I make it that way. Everyone may have seen me naked before, but it’s a controlled-naked, it’s not even vulnerable-naked. I’ve always seen it as defiant-naked, strong-naked, dgaf-naked. It can become desirable-naked, or seductive-naked, but it’s still only what I make it. I have agency over the intentions that come from my body; it’s why I take self-portraits, and rarely model unless it’s for someone who understands the importance of this agency.

I love my naked body like few other things in the world. It is mine, to do with as I please. It carries me through this life and has allowed me many things I didn’t expect. It changes and morphs into new versions of itself and I love all of them. I decorate her with tattoos and take her out dancing. I could never be ashamed or embarrassed of her. My naked body is not all I am, but she is an equal part of that whole that makes up the best of me. I can only be what I am, and my body keeps all of that safe and hidden. I’m not exposed or exploited when I am naked. That would be applying someone else’s expectations onto my body, and she hates that. It only makes me more defiant. When I am naked I am not brave or vulnerable or there for you. When I am naked, I am divine.

  1. Camera: Canon EOS REBEL T2i
  2. Aperture: f/22
  3. Exposure: 1/40th
  4. Focal Length: 27mm
wilwheaton:

If you read up from the bottom, you can see what happens when someone has been heavily propagandized by Fox News and the rest of the Right Wing Entertainment Complex.
I think it’s pretty sad, to be honest.

wilwheaton:

If you read up from the bottom, you can see what happens when someone has been heavily propagandized by Fox News and the rest of the Right Wing Entertainment Complex.

I think it’s pretty sad, to be honest.

"Frankly put. I am a FAKE GEEK GUY. I admit it. I like geek stuff, but I don’t love geek stuff. Not the way most geeks do. I’m an interloper on the geek scene. I’ve seen the movies, but I don’t know the canon. I am not a true fan.

All those things about not really loving the source material and “just watching the movies” or only reading the one book that everyone has read. That—all of that—applies to me.

But here are some things that have never happened to me. I have never been quizzed about who Data’s evil brother is to prove I like Star Trek. I have never had to justify my place in a midnight line to see Spider-man II by knowing who took up the mantle of Spider-man after Peter Parker’s death. (Peter Parker dies? Really? That’s so sad!) I have never had to explain who Nightwing is in order to participate in a conversation about Batman. (Nightwing is like….Robin on steroids, right?) I have never been asked how battle meditation works in order to voice my opinion that Enterprise shields would probably make a fight with Star Wars technology one sided. (Battle meditation is something that was in that Jedi role playing game, wasn’t it?) I have never had to beat everybody in the room (twice) at Mario Kart to prove I liked video games. I have never had my gender “honorarily” changed by having enough geek interests to be accepted (“you’re one of the guys now”). No one has ever insisted I tell them the difference between a tank and DPS in an MMORPG before allowing me to discuss raiding Molten Core. I have never been dismissed as a faker at a prequel screening because I didn’t know which admiral came out of light speed too close to the planet’s surface in The Empire Strikes Back. I have never been quizzed about Armor Class in order to get past someone who was blocking my path to the back of a game store where my friends were waiting at the tables. I have never been told I’m not a real fan. I have never been shamed for coming to a convention despite my lack of esoteric knowledge. And I have never, ever, EVER been invited to leave a fandom because I didn’t like [whatever it was] enough.

Every one of the things I have listed, I have personally witnessed happen. To women.

That’s not elitism. That’s sexism."

friendlycloud:

myunclehasabassguitar:

the problem, as i see it:

contrary to popular belief, feminism is not a movement against men, it is a movement for women.

and contrary to popular belief, men’s rights activism is not a movement for men, it is a movement against women.

This.

Perfect summary.

(Source: addictinginfo)

madridtoons:

It’s time to bring back God’s Laws!

What was Aragorn’s tax policy? Did he maintain a standing army? What did he do in times of flood and famine? And what about all these orcs? By the end of the war, Sauron is gone but all of the orcs aren’t gone – they’re in the mountains. Did Aragorn pursue a policy of systematic genocide and kill them? Even the little baby orcs, in their little orc cradles?

Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/movies/news/george-r-r-martin-the-rolling-stone-interview-20140423?print=true#ixzz300vww4TU
Follow us: @rollingstone on Twitter | RollingStone on Facebook

america-wakiewakie:

1. Single moms are the problem. Only 9 percent of low-income, urban moms have been single throughout their child’s first five years. Thirty-five percent were married to, or in a relationship with, the child’s father for that entire time.

2. Absent dads are the problem. Sixty percent of low-income dads see at least one of their children daily. Another 16 percent see their children weekly.

3. Black dads are the problem. Among men who don’t live with their children, black fathers are more likely than white or Hispanic dads to have a daily presence in their kids’ lives.

4. Poor people are lazy. In 2004, there was at least one adult with a job in 60 percent of families on food stamps that had both kids and a nondisabled, working-age adult.

5. If you’re not officially poor, you’re doing okay. The federal poverty line for a family of two parents and two children in 2012 was $23,283. Basic needs cost at least twice that in 615 of America’s cities and regions.

6. Go to college, get out of poverty. In 2012, about 1.1 million people who made less than $25,000 a year, worked full time, and were heads of household had a bachelor’s degree.

7. We’re winning the war on poverty. The number of households with children living on less than $2 a day per person has grown 160 percent since 1996, to 1.65 million families in 2011.

8. The days of old ladies eating cat food are over. The share of elderly single women living in extreme poverty jumped 31 percent from 2011 to 2012.

9. The homeless are drunk street people. One in 45 kids in the United States experiences homelessness each year. In New York City alone, 22,000 children are homeless.

10. Handouts are bankrupting us. In 2012, total welfare funding was 0.47 percent of the federal budget.

wilwheaton:

[I]f the Republicans want to spend the entire next six months or year talking about repealing a bill that provides millions of people health insurance without providing any meaningful alternative, instead of wanting to talk about jobs and the economic situation of families all across the country, that’s their prerogative. At some point I think they’ll make the transition. That’s my hope, anyway. If not, we’re just going to keep on doing what we’re doing, which is making it work for people all across the country.

I’m sorry, I’m going to say one last thing about this, just because this does frustrate me: States that have chosen not to expand Medicaid for no other reason than political spite. You’ve got 5 million people who could be having health insurance right now at no cost to these states—zero cost to these states—other than ideological reasons. They have chosen not to provide health insurance for their citizens. That’s wrong. It should stop. Those folks should be able to get health insurance like everybody else.

- President Obama

Most of the states with Republican governors who have opted out of the Medicaid expansion have very poor people living there, too. These governors are deliberately hurting their own citizens because they don’t like the president. That’s just wrong.

thedoctor-hasmysoul:

night-vale-secretpolice:

night-vale-secretpolice:

When I used to think about Voldemort’s horcruxes I imagined a soul divided in equal portions residing in the different horcruxes and Voldemort himself. I realised that this can’t be true in The Half-Blood Prince Slughorn describes making a horcrux as splitting ones soul in two. This means that when Riddle made his Diary into a horcrux he split his soul in half and physically removed one half from his body and placed it in the diary. This means that he only had half of his soul left when he made his next horcrux, Marvolo’s ring. This half would have been split in half leaving only a quarter in Voldemort’s body. This goes on and on the amount of soul remaining in Voldemort halving each time he makes a horcrux until he had only 1/128 or 0.78125% left in his body.  As shown in the graph above.  So next time you wonder why Voldemort could have done some of things he did, remember how little human he had left in him. I don’t know about you but I think that this is crazy.

Come on guys, I didn’t do maths for 14 notes

So are you telling me that Harry had more Voldemort than Voldemort had Voldemort?