🔥 | Latest

Bad, Books, and Clothes: he Swiss are voting on a plan to end poverty forever. Step one: give every adult $33,600 a year, no strings attached. There is no step two. Photo: Flickr/twicepix tank-grrl: hello-missmayhem: cptprocrastination: doomhamster: belcanta: nikkidubs: attentiondeficitaptitude: belcanta: Guaranteed basic income to every citizen, whether or not they are employed to ensure their survival and that they live in a dignified, humane way, preventing poverty, illness, homelessness, reducing crime, encouraging higher education and learning vocations as well as helping society become more prosperous as a whole.  Wow. Forget raising the minimum wage. This is much much better idea. The minimum wage could actually drop if we had basic income. But Americans would never go for it. Miserably slogging through 12 hour days and having businesses open 24/7 is too engrained in our culture. “BUT WHERE WILL THE GOVERNMENT GET THE MONEY?” screamed Joe Schmoe, slamming a meaty fist onto the table and getting mouth-froth all over the front of his greying tank top. “You libt*rds all think money grows on TREES!! HAHA!”“But where will people get the incentive to work?!” Mindy Bindy cried, flapping her hands in front of her face. She’d had a fear of the unemployed lollygagging about ever since she was a child and her mother told her to be afraid of the unemployed lollygagging about. “You think people should get paid for nothing? I work hard for my money!” “But who will serve me?” grumbled Marty McMoneybags. “Who will make me feel important? Who will do my laundry and cook my food and stand in front of me wearing a plastic smile while I take out all my stress—because I do have a lot of stress, you know, being this rich is stressful—on them?” He paused and straightened out the piles of hundred dollar bills on the desk in front of him, then raised his two watery, outraged eyes up to the Heavens. “Lord, if there are no poor people, how will I know that I’m rich??” I laughed. This is perfect! Well said! The thing is, while I’m sure you could scrape up a few people who’d be willing to just float by on a guaranteed minimum income? For most people the choice to work would be a no-brainer. “Hmmm. I can get by on 33k a year, or I can take that part time job and make 48k… enough to move to a better apartment, maybe take the family on vacation. Sold.” Hell, most people would want to work simply because it gives one a sense of dignity and something to do with one’s time. (Speaking as someone who’s been unemployed, on extended sick leave, etc. in her time, the boredom and sense of isolation that comes with not having a job is almost as bad as the humiliation of having to depend on other people for one’s survival.) And with this system, part-time jobs and “non-skilled” jobs would be much more readily available because nobody would need to work two or three jobs just to stay afloat! Which would ALSO mean that employers and customers couldn’t shamelessly exploit employees the way they can today, because if losing a job weren’t necessarily a financial disaster, more people would be willing to walk out on jobs where they weren’t being treated with dignity. And if this also applies to students (and it should) then student loans would become much less of a problem, and fewer people would flunk out of school because of having to juggle studies and work. Far fewer people would be forced to stay with abusive partners, parents or roommates because they couldn’t afford to move out. And the thing is, all those people who suddenly had money? They’d be spending it. They’d be getting all the stuff they can’t afford now - new clothes, books, toys, locally-produced food, car repairs - and with each purchase money would flow BACK to the government, because VAT, also income tax. The unemployed and/or disabled wouldn’t need special support any more - which would also mean the government could fire however many admins who are currently engaged in humiliating - *cough* making sure those people aren’t getting money they don’t deserve. Same for medical benefits and pensions. And I’m no legal scholar, but I somehow imagine less financial desperation would lead to less petty crime, and hence less need for police and security everywhere? TL;DR Doomie thinks this is a good idea, laughs at those who protest. reblogging for more top commentary They tried something like this out in Canada as a sort of social experiment, called Mincome. What they found was that, on the whole, people continued to work about as much as they did before. Only new mothers and teenagers worked substantially less hours.  But wait, there’s more. Because parents were spending just a little more time at home and involved with their families, test scores increased. Because teens didn’t have to work to support their families, drop-out rates decreased. Crime rates, hospital visits, psychiatric hospitalizations and domestic abuse rates all dropped, as well. More adults pursued higher education. Those who continued to work reported more job flexibility and more opportunity to choose employment they preferred. Basically, now you can go prove to your asshole family members that society won’t collapse without poor people for you to feel better than. The picture is awesome, but read the commentary, that’s what I’m reblogging for.
Bad, Books, and Clothes: he Swiss are voting on a plan to end poverty forever.
 Step one: give every adult $33,600
 a year, no strings attached.
 There is no step two.
 Photo: Flickr/twicepix
tank-grrl:
hello-missmayhem:

cptprocrastination:

doomhamster:

belcanta:

nikkidubs:

attentiondeficitaptitude:

belcanta:

Guaranteed basic income to every citizen, whether or not they are employed to ensure their survival and that they live in a dignified, humane way, preventing poverty, illness, homelessness, reducing crime, encouraging higher education and learning vocations as well as helping society become more prosperous as a whole. 

Wow. Forget raising the minimum wage. This is much much better idea.
The minimum wage could actually drop if we had basic income.
But Americans would never go for it. Miserably slogging through 12 hour days and having businesses open 24/7 is too engrained in our culture.

“BUT WHERE WILL THE GOVERNMENT GET THE MONEY?” screamed Joe Schmoe, slamming a meaty fist onto the table and getting mouth-froth all over the front of his greying tank top. “You libt*rds all think money grows on TREES!! HAHA!”“But where will people get the incentive to work?!” Mindy Bindy cried, flapping her hands in front of her face. She’d had a fear of the unemployed lollygagging about ever since she was a child and her mother told her to be afraid of the unemployed lollygagging about. “You think people should get paid for nothing? I work hard for my money!”
“But who will serve me?” grumbled Marty McMoneybags. “Who will make me feel important? Who will do my laundry and cook my food and stand in front of me wearing a plastic smile while I take out all my stress—because I do have a lot of stress, you know, being this rich is stressful—on them?” He paused and straightened out the piles of hundred dollar bills on the desk in front of him, then raised his two watery, outraged eyes up to the Heavens. “Lord, if there are no poor people, how will I know that I’m rich??”

I laughed. This is perfect! Well said!

The thing is, while I’m sure you could scrape up a few people who’d be willing to just float by on a guaranteed minimum income? For most people the choice to work would be a no-brainer. “Hmmm. I can get by on 33k a year, or I can take that part time job and make 48k… enough to move to a better apartment, maybe take the family on vacation. Sold.” Hell, most people would want to work simply because it gives one a sense of dignity and something to do with one’s time. (Speaking as someone who’s been unemployed, on extended sick leave, etc. in her time, the boredom and sense of isolation that comes with not having a job is almost as bad as the humiliation of having to depend on other people for one’s survival.)
And with this system, part-time jobs and “non-skilled” jobs would be much more readily available because nobody would need to work two or three jobs just to stay afloat!
Which would ALSO mean that employers and customers couldn’t shamelessly exploit employees the way they can today, because if losing a job weren’t necessarily a financial disaster, more people would be willing to walk out on jobs where they weren’t being treated with dignity.
And if this also applies to students (and it should) then student loans would become much less of a problem, and fewer people would flunk out of school because of having to juggle studies and work.
Far fewer people would be forced to stay with abusive partners, parents or roommates because they couldn’t afford to move out.
And the thing is, all those people who suddenly had money? They’d be spending it. They’d be getting all the stuff they can’t afford now - new clothes, books, toys, locally-produced food, car repairs - and with each purchase money would flow BACK to the government, because VAT, also income tax.
The unemployed and/or disabled wouldn’t need special support any more - which would also mean the government could fire however many admins who are currently engaged in humiliating - *cough* making sure those people aren’t getting money they don’t deserve. Same for medical benefits and pensions. And I’m no legal scholar, but I somehow imagine less financial desperation would lead to less petty crime, and hence less need for police and security everywhere?
TL;DR Doomie thinks this is a good idea, laughs at those who protest.

reblogging for more top commentary

They tried something like this out in Canada as a sort of social experiment, called Mincome. What they found was that, on the whole, people continued to work about as much as they did before. Only new mothers and teenagers worked substantially less hours. 
But wait, there’s more. Because parents were spending just a little more time at home and involved with their families, test scores increased. Because teens didn’t have to work to support their families, drop-out rates decreased. Crime rates, hospital visits, psychiatric hospitalizations and domestic abuse rates all dropped, as well. More adults pursued higher education. Those who continued to work reported more job flexibility and more opportunity to choose employment they preferred.
Basically, now you can go prove to your asshole family members that society won’t collapse without poor people for you to feel better than.

The picture is awesome, but read the commentary, that’s what I’m reblogging for.

tank-grrl: hello-missmayhem: cptprocrastination: doomhamster: belcanta: nikkidubs: attentiondeficitaptitude: belcanta: Guaranteed bas...

America, Bad, and Books: he Swiss are voting on a plan to end poverty forever. Step one: give every adult $33,600 a year, no strings attached. There is no step two. Photo: Flickr/twicepix lazorsandparadox: tank-grrl: hello-missmayhem: cptprocrastination: doomhamster: belcanta: nikkidubs: attentiondeficitaptitude: belcanta: Guaranteed basic income to every citizen, whether or not they are employed to ensure their survival and that they live in a dignified, humane way, preventing poverty, illness, homelessness, reducing crime, encouraging higher education and learning vocations as well as helping society become more prosperous as a whole.  Wow. Forget raising the minimum wage. This is much much better idea. The minimum wage could actually drop if we had basic income. But Americans would never go for it. Miserably slogging through 12 hour days and having businesses open 24/7 is too engrained in our culture. “BUT WHERE WILL THE GOVERNMENT GET THE MONEY?” screamed Joe Schmoe, slamming a meaty fist onto the table and getting mouth-froth all over the front of his greying tank top. “You libt*rds all think money grows on TREES!! HAHA!”“But where will people get the incentive to work?!” Mindy Bindy cried, flapping her hands in front of her face. She’d had a fear of the unemployed lollygagging about ever since she was a child and her mother told her to be afraid of the unemployed lollygagging about. “You think people should get paid for nothing? I work hard for my money!” “But who will serve me?” grumbled Marty McMoneybags. “Who will make me feel important? Who will do my laundry and cook my food and stand in front of me wearing a plastic smile while I take out all my stress—because I do have a lot of stress, you know, being this rich is stressful—on them?” He paused and straightened out the piles of hundred dollar bills on the desk in front of him, then raised his two watery, outraged eyes up to the Heavens. “Lord, if there are no poor people, how will I know that I’m rich??” I laughed. This is perfect! Well said! The thing is, while I’m sure you could scrape up a few people who’d be willing to just float by on a guaranteed minimum income? For most people the choice to work would be a no-brainer. “Hmmm. I can get by on 33k a year, or I can take that part time job and make 48k… enough to move to a better apartment, maybe take the family on vacation. Sold.” Hell, most people would want to work simply because it gives one a sense of dignity and something to do with one’s time. (Speaking as someone who’s been unemployed, on extended sick leave, etc. in her time, the boredom and sense of isolation that comes with not having a job is almost as bad as the humiliation of having to depend on other people for one’s survival.) And with this system, part-time jobs and “non-skilled” jobs would be much more readily available because nobody would need to work two or three jobs just to stay afloat! Which would ALSO mean that employers and customers couldn’t shamelessly exploit employees the way they can today, because if losing a job weren’t necessarily a financial disaster, more people would be willing to walk out on jobs where they weren’t being treated with dignity. And if this also applies to students (and it should) then student loans would become much less of a problem, and fewer people would flunk out of school because of having to juggle studies and work. Far fewer people would be forced to stay with abusive partners, parents or roommates because they couldn’t afford to move out. And the thing is, all those people who suddenly had money? They’d be spending it. They’d be getting all the stuff they can’t afford now - new clothes, books, toys, locally-produced food, car repairs - and with each purchase money would flow BACK to the government, because VAT, also income tax. The unemployed and/or disabled wouldn’t need special support any more - which would also mean the government could fire however many admins who are currently engaged in humiliating - *cough* making sure those people aren’t getting money they don’t deserve. Same for medical benefits and pensions. And I’m no legal scholar, but I somehow imagine less financial desperation would lead to less petty crime, and hence less need for police and security everywhere? TL;DR Doomie thinks this is a good idea, laughs at those who protest. reblogging for more top commentary They tried something like this out in Canada as a sort of social experiment, called Mincome. What they found was that, on the whole, people continued to work about as much as they did before. Only new mothers and teenagers worked substantially less hours.  But wait, there’s more. Because parents were spending just a little more time at home and involved with their families, test scores increased. Because teens didn’t have to work to support their families, drop-out rates decreased. Crime rates, hospital visits, psychiatric hospitalizations and domestic abuse rates all dropped, as well. More adults pursued higher education. Those who continued to work reported more job flexibility and more opportunity to choose employment they preferred. Basically, now you can go prove to your asshole family members that society won’t collapse without poor people for you to feel better than. The picture is awesome, but read the commentary, that’s what I’m reblogging for. With debt levels spiraling out of control as they are, america might have to do this in the near future, in order to prevent economic collapse from people just not having money to spend. The only problem i forsee with this is that, in order to get the money to distribute, taxes on rich people would have to increase by a lot, and if taxes raise too high, they just fucking move to another country to avoid paying them. If there was a way to prevent this, or if the whole world implemented a standard like this at the same time thereby removing the incentive to flee tax hikes, then this would absolutely work out great
America, Bad, and Books: he Swiss are voting on a plan to end poverty forever.
 Step one: give every adult $33,600
 a year, no strings attached.
 There is no step two.
 Photo: Flickr/twicepix
lazorsandparadox:
tank-grrl:

hello-missmayhem:

cptprocrastination:

doomhamster:

belcanta:

nikkidubs:

attentiondeficitaptitude:

belcanta:

Guaranteed basic income to every citizen, whether or not they are employed to ensure their survival and that they live in a dignified, humane way, preventing poverty, illness, homelessness, reducing crime, encouraging higher education and learning vocations as well as helping society become more prosperous as a whole. 

Wow. Forget raising the minimum wage. This is much much better idea.
The minimum wage could actually drop if we had basic income.
But Americans would never go for it. Miserably slogging through 12 hour days and having businesses open 24/7 is too engrained in our culture.

“BUT WHERE WILL THE GOVERNMENT GET THE MONEY?” screamed Joe Schmoe, slamming a meaty fist onto the table and getting mouth-froth all over the front of his greying tank top. “You libt*rds all think money grows on TREES!! HAHA!”“But where will people get the incentive to work?!” Mindy Bindy cried, flapping her hands in front of her face. She’d had a fear of the unemployed lollygagging about ever since she was a child and her mother told her to be afraid of the unemployed lollygagging about. “You think people should get paid for nothing? I work hard for my money!”
“But who will serve me?” grumbled Marty McMoneybags. “Who will make me feel important? Who will do my laundry and cook my food and stand in front of me wearing a plastic smile while I take out all my stress—because I do have a lot of stress, you know, being this rich is stressful—on them?” He paused and straightened out the piles of hundred dollar bills on the desk in front of him, then raised his two watery, outraged eyes up to the Heavens. “Lord, if there are no poor people, how will I know that I’m rich??”

I laughed. This is perfect! Well said!

The thing is, while I’m sure you could scrape up a few people who’d be willing to just float by on a guaranteed minimum income? For most people the choice to work would be a no-brainer. “Hmmm. I can get by on 33k a year, or I can take that part time job and make 48k… enough to move to a better apartment, maybe take the family on vacation. Sold.” Hell, most people would want to work simply because it gives one a sense of dignity and something to do with one’s time. (Speaking as someone who’s been unemployed, on extended sick leave, etc. in her time, the boredom and sense of isolation that comes with not having a job is almost as bad as the humiliation of having to depend on other people for one’s survival.)
And with this system, part-time jobs and “non-skilled” jobs would be much more readily available because nobody would need to work two or three jobs just to stay afloat!
Which would ALSO mean that employers and customers couldn’t shamelessly exploit employees the way they can today, because if losing a job weren’t necessarily a financial disaster, more people would be willing to walk out on jobs where they weren’t being treated with dignity.
And if this also applies to students (and it should) then student loans would become much less of a problem, and fewer people would flunk out of school because of having to juggle studies and work.
Far fewer people would be forced to stay with abusive partners, parents or roommates because they couldn’t afford to move out.
And the thing is, all those people who suddenly had money? They’d be spending it. They’d be getting all the stuff they can’t afford now - new clothes, books, toys, locally-produced food, car repairs - and with each purchase money would flow BACK to the government, because VAT, also income tax.
The unemployed and/or disabled wouldn’t need special support any more - which would also mean the government could fire however many admins who are currently engaged in humiliating - *cough* making sure those people aren’t getting money they don’t deserve. Same for medical benefits and pensions. And I’m no legal scholar, but I somehow imagine less financial desperation would lead to less petty crime, and hence less need for police and security everywhere?
TL;DR Doomie thinks this is a good idea, laughs at those who protest.

reblogging for more top commentary

They tried something like this out in Canada as a sort of social experiment, called Mincome. What they found was that, on the whole, people continued to work about as much as they did before. Only new mothers and teenagers worked substantially less hours. 
But wait, there’s more. Because parents were spending just a little more time at home and involved with their families, test scores increased. Because teens didn’t have to work to support their families, drop-out rates decreased. Crime rates, hospital visits, psychiatric hospitalizations and domestic abuse rates all dropped, as well. More adults pursued higher education. Those who continued to work reported more job flexibility and more opportunity to choose employment they preferred.
Basically, now you can go prove to your asshole family members that society won’t collapse without poor people for you to feel better than.

The picture is awesome, but read the commentary, that’s what I’m reblogging for.


With debt levels spiraling out of control as they are, america might have to do this in the near future, in order to prevent economic collapse from people just not having money to spend. The only problem i forsee with this is that, in order to get the money to distribute, taxes on rich people would have to increase by a lot, and if taxes raise too high, they just fucking move to another country to avoid paying them. If there was a way to prevent this, or if the whole world implemented a standard like this at the same time thereby removing the incentive to flee tax hikes, then this would absolutely work out great

lazorsandparadox: tank-grrl: hello-missmayhem: cptprocrastination: doomhamster: belcanta: nikkidubs: attentiondeficitaptitude: belcan...

Life, Saw, and Steam: fandomsandfeminism There is a phrase used to describe people, often strangers, as "ships passing in the night." The phrase is meant to describe how fleeting the intersection of two lives can be, how briefly people we don't know can flicker in and out of our lives. But when I read about the Titanic, I think we can push the phrase further. Because sometimes, as you pass another ship in the night, you may hear a cry in the dark. A person in danger. A shout for help. Distress rockets and SOS signals wailing into the night. A stranger in crisis. And in those fleeting moments as your ship passes theirs, you get to make the choice- are you the Californian, the closest ship to the Titanic, which saw the distress rockets and saw the lights on the horizon and sat and did nothing; or are you the Carpathia, turning on a dime, pushing all steam to the engines, racing to help? We can not say for sure what caused the Californian to not help the Titanic in that night of crisis. Whether is was apathy or incompetence or fear, we don't knovw But we know that every single soul who survived the Titanic survived because of the Carpathia. Because the crew and the passengers of that ship raced nearly 60 miles through ice fields above their maximum speed in the dead of night, readying life boats, readying triage, to pull them from the water. So, yes, we are ships passing in the night, and when given the chance to turn away or do good, always err on the side of reckless compassion. concept: bystanders should be called californians.
Life, Saw, and Steam: fandomsandfeminism
 There is a phrase used to describe people,
 often strangers, as "ships passing in the night."
 The phrase is meant to describe how fleeting
 the intersection of two lives can be, how briefly
 people we don't know can flicker in and out of
 our lives.
 But when I read about the Titanic, I think we
 can push the phrase further. Because
 sometimes, as you pass another ship in the
 night, you may hear a cry in the dark. A person
 in danger. A shout for help. Distress rockets
 and SOS signals wailing into the night. A
 stranger in crisis.
 And in those fleeting moments as your ship
 passes theirs, you get to make the choice- are
 you the Californian, the closest ship to the
 Titanic, which saw the distress rockets and saw
 the lights on the horizon and sat and did
 nothing; or are you the Carpathia, turning on a
 dime, pushing all steam to the engines, racing
 to help?
 We can not say for sure what caused the
 Californian to not help the Titanic in that night
 of crisis. Whether is was apathy or
 incompetence or fear, we don't knovw
 But we know that every single soul who
 survived the Titanic survived because of the
 Carpathia. Because the crew and the
 passengers of that ship raced nearly 60 miles
 through ice fields above their maximum speed
 in the dead of night, readying life boats,
 readying triage, to pull them from the water.
 So, yes, we are ships passing in the night, and
 when given the chance to turn away or do
 good, always err on the side of reckless
 compassion.
concept: bystanders should be called californians.

concept: bystanders should be called californians.

Alive, Ass, and Friends: whotheeffisbucky: fantastic-fantasy-fanfics: whotheeffisbucky: angryschnauzer: comicbookfilms: Justice League (2017) dir. Zack Snyder Only a male director would put an upskirt shot into a movie and hope no one mentions it. @angryschnauzer RIGHT? RIGHT?!  The huge difference between the way she’s shot in the Patty Jenkins film compared to this is ridiculous. It’s framed in such a way that we could be viewing her actual vagina, but the shadowing leaves a little more to the imagination. The male gaze is alive and kicking, my friends.  I could write an entire essay about this, but this is one of the most clear cut examples I can think of.  You can’t see up her skirt? And it’s to make her look taller? More intimidating? If it was an up-skirt shot you’d see her bare ass cheeks or an implication of her vag. You can’t. Not to mention, JOSS WHEDON re-shot a lot of the scenes in Justice league (and made them worse), AND was in charge of overseeing editing while Zach was mourning his daughter. So if you’re going to blame someone, don’t blame Zach for this, blame Joss Whedon. Zach’s cut if Justice League ACTUALLY respected Diana If it was an up-skirt shot you’d see her bare ass cheeks or an implication of her vag. You can’t. Not to mention, JOSS WHEDON re-shot a lot of the scenes in Justice league (and made them worse), AND was in charge of overseeing editing while Zach was mourning his daughter. @fantastic-fantasy-fanfics That’s not the point I was making. Neither director has been mentioned at all in this post. There are alternative ways to make an individual look taller. The Dutch Shot has many uses. Example:The camera is tilted and keeps both actors in frame, whilst achieving the desired effect. What I’m arguing is wrong is the choice of angle that deliberately places Wonder Woman in a position to be looked at in a sexual manner. Moreover, an upskirt shot does not have to include any bare flesh at all. If anything, it’s designed to imply, rather than simply show. It’s not an issue with Zach Snyder, there was never any mention of him. But the issue still stands: the shot was clearly done to appease the male gaze and is needlessly oversexualised. It’s a standing problem in popular film and looks very obvious here when you compare it to how Patty Jenkins shot the Wonder Woman film.
Alive, Ass, and Friends: whotheeffisbucky:

fantastic-fantasy-fanfics:
whotheeffisbucky:

angryschnauzer:

comicbookfilms:
Justice League (2017) dir. Zack Snyder

Only a male director would put an upskirt shot into a movie and hope no one mentions it. 

@angryschnauzer RIGHT? RIGHT?! 
The huge difference between the way she’s shot in the Patty Jenkins film compared to this is ridiculous. It’s framed in such a way that we could be viewing her actual vagina, but the shadowing leaves a little more to the imagination. The male gaze is alive and kicking, my friends. 
I could write an entire essay about this, but this is one of the most clear cut examples I can think of. 

You can’t see up her skirt?  And it’s to make her look taller?  More intimidating? If it was an up-skirt shot you’d see her bare ass cheeks or an implication of her vag.  You can’t.  Not to mention, JOSS WHEDON re-shot a lot of the scenes in Justice league (and made them worse), AND was in charge of overseeing editing while Zach was mourning his daughter.  So if you’re going to blame someone, don’t blame Zach for this, blame Joss Whedon.  Zach’s cut if Justice League ACTUALLY respected Diana 
If it was an up-skirt shot you’d see her bare ass cheeks or an implication of her vag.  You can’t.
Not to mention, JOSS WHEDON re-shot a lot of the scenes in Justice league (and made them worse), AND was in charge of overseeing editing while Zach was mourning his daughter.

@fantastic-fantasy-fanfics That’s not the point I was making. Neither director has been mentioned at all in this post. There are alternative ways to make an individual look taller. The Dutch Shot has many uses. Example:The camera is tilted and keeps both actors in frame, whilst achieving the desired effect. What I’m arguing is wrong is the choice of angle that deliberately places Wonder Woman in a position to be looked at in a sexual manner. Moreover, an upskirt shot does not have to include any bare flesh at all. If anything, it’s designed to imply, rather than simply show. It’s not an issue with Zach Snyder, there was never any mention of him. But the issue still stands: the shot was clearly done to appease the male gaze and is needlessly oversexualised. It’s a standing problem in popular film and looks very obvious here when you compare it to how Patty Jenkins shot the Wonder Woman film.

whotheeffisbucky: fantastic-fantasy-fanfics: whotheeffisbucky: angryschnauzer: comicbookfilms: Justice League (2017) dir. Zack Snyder On...

Advice, Confused, and Disappointed: alexaloraetheris: Reasons I believe my friend is secretly some kind of deity 1) First time we spoke was a week after the beggining of freshman year she summed up my entire character and most of the events of my life Sherlock style. I asked her how the hell she knew all that. She just shrugged and said she figured out our entire class already 1 2) The one time we had religion class instead of ethics she listened to the teacher for a few minutes, laughed and told me "Humans have wished to be gods so much they've forgotten they have to ability to create them. Imagination has truly suffered from this monotheism stuff." I was confused and asked her if she was an atheist. She rolled her eyes and said Oh I believe in god alright. I just don't think the bastard deserves to be worshipped." 3) Out of nowhere she gave me this advice The only truth a liar ever told was that lies weren't going to save you. Don't become the liar who has to pass that wisdom on, because they speak from experience 4) To this day, she has one of those old-timey phones with buttons she only uses to ocassionally call someone. When I asked her why she never got a smartphone she got pouty: "I hate social media. On Facebook they talk a lot but never say anything. If I wanted to listen to people moan about their problems and ask for help they don't expect l'd listen to their prayers." (Notice the choice of words) 5) I noticed she was stiff and I offered her a massage since I'm really good at it but when i started kneading her back I swear to this day those were not muscles I felt. I asked her what she did to turn her muscles into rocks covered with a thin layer of skin and she kinda froze then shrugged and said she was just really, really stiff. My hands hurt after ten minutes when I can usually go for an hour. Next time I offered she seemed surprised and laughed. She still has rocks for muscles 6) We were having a debate over the way neural pathways are formed (I study biology and she forensics) and I jokingly asked if I could have her brain for study when she dies. She laughed Sure, if you find a way to kill me you can have it. I'm actually curious what you're gonna find." 7) One time she was tired and miserable and I tried to comfort her. We both have really dark sense of humor so I told her she could scare the dead out of their graves with that glare. She told me the dead can't come back and I rolled my eyes and said 'obviously' but she continued When you die you descend to the underworld with nothing to lose. To keep you, they give you something to lose. When you want to return, they will demand it back. That's why nobody ever leaves. The only way out is to never enter." 8) One day she just came up to me with a disappointed look on her face When I asked her what was wrong she was quiet for a few seconds and then just told me "Betrayals committed in good intentions are still damning. Just... keep that in mind." Then she left and didn't speak to me for three days. I still don't know what she meant but even three years later I haven't forgotten it. 9) We were casually sitting on a bench when, out of nowhere, she asked me Is it just me or have humans gotten dumber? Or have they always been this stupid and I just haven't been paying attention?" 10) She asked me if I ever wondered what it was like to die. I said no but told her I would tell her when I found out. I meant it as a ghost joke but she smiled at me and said Great. I'll wait for you to come back. Maybe you'll even remember me In conclusion, she is some kind of low-key god and she lost her faith in humanity even before we lost our faith in her but she's stuck with us because immortality is a bitclh P.S. I just remembered her name is a variation on 'Eve'. Maybe l should reconsider my atheist status?! What if God was one of us?
Advice, Confused, and Disappointed: alexaloraetheris:
 Reasons I believe my friend is secretly some kind of deity
 1) First time we spoke was a week after the beggining of freshman year she
 summed up my entire character and most of the events of my life Sherlock
 style. I asked her how the hell she knew all that. She just shrugged and said
 she figured out our entire class already
 1
 2) The one time we had religion class instead of ethics she listened to the
 teacher for a few minutes, laughed and told me
 "Humans have wished to be gods so much they've forgotten they have to
 ability to create them. Imagination has truly suffered from this monotheism
 stuff."
 I was confused and asked her if she was an atheist. She rolled her eyes and
 said
 Oh I believe in god alright. I just don't think the bastard deserves to be
 worshipped."
 3) Out of nowhere she gave me this advice
 The only truth a liar ever told was that lies weren't going to save you. Don't
 become the liar who has to pass that wisdom on, because they speak from
 experience
 4) To this day, she has one of those old-timey phones with buttons she only
 uses to ocassionally call someone. When I asked her why she never got a
 smartphone she got pouty:
 "I hate social media. On Facebook they talk a lot but never say anything. If I
 wanted to listen to people moan about their problems and ask for help they
 don't expect l'd listen to their prayers." (Notice the choice of words)
 5) I noticed she was stiff and I offered her a massage since I'm really good at
 it but when i started kneading her back I swear to this day those were not
 muscles I felt. I asked her what she did to turn her muscles into rocks
 covered with a thin layer of skin and she kinda froze then shrugged and said
 she was just really, really stiff. My hands hurt after ten minutes when I can
 usually go for an hour. Next time I offered she seemed surprised and
 laughed. She still has rocks for muscles
 6) We were having a debate over the way neural pathways are formed (I
 study biology and she forensics) and I jokingly asked if I could have her brain
 for study when she dies. She laughed
 Sure, if you find a way to kill me you can have it. I'm actually curious what
 you're gonna find."
 7) One time she was tired and miserable and I tried to comfort her. We both
 have really dark sense of humor so I told her she could scare the dead out of
 their graves with that glare. She told me the dead can't come back and I
 rolled my eyes and said 'obviously' but she continued
 When you die you descend to the underworld with nothing to lose. To keep
 you, they give you something to lose. When you want to return, they will
 demand it back. That's why nobody ever leaves. The only way out is to never
 enter."
 8) One day she just came up to me with a disappointed look on her face
 When I asked her what was wrong she was quiet for a few seconds and then
 just told me
 "Betrayals committed in good intentions are still damning. Just... keep that in
 mind." Then she left and didn't speak to me for three days. I still don't know
 what she meant but even three years later I haven't forgotten it.
 9) We were casually sitting on a bench when, out of nowhere, she asked me
 Is it just me or have humans gotten dumber? Or have they always been this
 stupid and I just haven't been paying attention?"
 10) She asked me if I ever wondered what it was like to die. I said no but told
 her I would tell her when I found out. I meant it as a ghost joke but she smiled
 at me and said
 Great. I'll wait for you to come back. Maybe you'll even remember me
 In conclusion, she is some kind of low-key god and she lost her faith in
 humanity even before we lost our faith in her but she's stuck with us because
 immortality is a bitclh
 P.S. I just remembered her name is a variation on 'Eve'. Maybe l should
 reconsider my atheist status?!
What if God was one of us?

What if God was one of us?

Alive, Bodies , and Facebook: IS IT REALLY JuST YOUR BODY? Facebook.com/OnlineForLife truckyousasha: thekaraokeninja: fandomsandfeminism: generalmaluga: albinwonderland: fandomsandfeminism: betterthanabortion: “My body, my choice” only makes sense when someone else’s life isn’t at stake. Fun fact: If my younger sister was in a car accident and desperately needed a blood transfusion to live, and I was the only person on Earth who could donate blood to save her, and even though donating blood is a relatively easy, safe, and quick procedure no one can force me to give blood. Yes, even to save the life of a fully grown person, it would be ILLEGAL to FORCE me to donate blood if I didn’t want to. See, we have this concept called “bodily autonomy.” It’s this….cultural notion that a person’s control over their own body is above all important and must not be infringed upon.  Like, we can’t even take LIFE SAVING organs from CORPSES unless the person whose corpse it is gave consent before their death. Even corpses get bodily autonomy.  To tell people that they MUST sacrifice their bodily autonomy for 9 months against their will in an incredibly expensive, invasive, difficult process to save what YOU view as another human life (a debatable claim in the early stages of pregnancy when the VAST majority of abortions are performed) is desperately unethical. You can’t even ask people to sacrifice bodily autonomy to give up organs they aren’t using anymore after they have died.  You’re asking people who can become pregnant to accept less bodily autonomy than we grant to dead bodies.  reblogging for commentary  But, assuming the mother wasn’t raped, the choice to HAVE a baby and risk sacrificing their “bodily autonomy” is a choice that the mother made. YOu don’t have to have sex with someone. Cases of rape aside, it isn’t ethical to say abortion is justified. The unborn baby has rights, too.  First point: Bodily autonomy can be preserved, even if another life is dependent on it. See again the example about the blood donation.  And here’s another point: When you say that “rape is the exception” you betray something FUNDAMENTALLY BROKEN about your own argument. Because a fetus produced from sexual assault is biologically NO DIFFERENT than a fetus produced from consensual sex. No difference at all. If one is alive, so is the other. If one is a person, so is the other. If one has a soul, then so does the other. If one is a little blessing that happened for a reason and must be protected, then so is the other.  When you say that “Rape is the exception” what you betray is this: It isn’t about a life. This isn’t about the little soul sitting inside some person’s womb, because if it was you wouldn’t care about HOW it got there, only that it is a little life that needs protecting. When you say “rape is the exception” what you say is this: You are treating pregnancy as a punishment. You are PUNISHING people who have had CONSENSUAL SEX but don’t want to go through a pregnancy. People who DARED to have consensual sex without the goal of procreation in mind, and this is their “consequence.”  And that is gross.  ^ THIS. This is this this THIS THIS THIS. THIS!!!!! This is probably the strongest and well worded/supported argument for abortion that I have ever read.
Alive, Bodies , and Facebook: IS IT REALLY JuST
 YOUR BODY?
 Facebook.com/OnlineForLife
truckyousasha:
thekaraokeninja:

fandomsandfeminism:

generalmaluga:

albinwonderland:

fandomsandfeminism:

betterthanabortion:

“My body, my choice” only makes sense when someone else’s life isn’t at stake.

Fun fact: If my younger sister was in a car accident and desperately needed a blood transfusion to live, and I was the only person on Earth who could donate blood to save her, and even though donating blood is a relatively easy, safe, and quick procedure no one can force me to give blood. Yes, even to save the life of a fully grown person, it would be ILLEGAL to FORCE me to donate blood if I didn’t want to.
See, we have this concept called “bodily autonomy.” It’s this….cultural notion that a person’s control over their own body is above all important and must not be infringed upon. 
Like, we can’t even take LIFE SAVING organs from CORPSES unless the person whose corpse it is gave consent before their death. Even corpses get bodily autonomy. 
To tell people that they MUST sacrifice their bodily autonomy for 9 months against their will in an incredibly expensive, invasive, difficult process to save what YOU view as another human life (a debatable claim in the early stages of pregnancy when the VAST majority of abortions are performed) is desperately unethical. You can’t even ask people to sacrifice bodily autonomy to give up organs they aren’t using anymore after they have died. 
You’re asking people who can become pregnant to accept less bodily autonomy than we grant to dead bodies. 

reblogging for commentary 

But, assuming the mother wasn’t raped, the choice to HAVE a baby and risk sacrificing their “bodily autonomy” is a choice that the mother made. YOu don’t have to have sex with someone. Cases of rape aside, it isn’t ethical to say abortion is justified. The unborn baby has rights, too. 

First point: Bodily autonomy can be preserved, even if another life is dependent on it. See again the example about the blood donation. 
And here’s another point: When you say that “rape is the exception” you betray something FUNDAMENTALLY BROKEN about your own argument.
Because a fetus produced from sexual assault is biologically NO DIFFERENT than a fetus produced from consensual sex. No difference at all.
If one is alive, so is the other. If one is a person, so is the other. If one has a soul, then so does the other. If one is a little blessing that happened for a reason and must be protected, then so is the other. 
When you say that “Rape is the exception” what you betray is this: It isn’t about a life. This isn’t about the little soul sitting inside some person’s womb, because if it was you wouldn’t care about HOW it got there, only that it is a little life that needs protecting.
When you say “rape is the exception” what you say is this: You are treating pregnancy as a punishment. You are PUNISHING people who have had CONSENSUAL SEX but don’t want to go through a pregnancy. People who DARED to have consensual sex without the goal of procreation in mind, and this is their “consequence.” 
And that is gross. 

^ THIS. This is this this THIS THIS THIS. THIS!!!!!

This is probably the strongest and well worded/supported argument for abortion that I have ever read.

truckyousasha: thekaraokeninja: fandomsandfeminism: generalmaluga: albinwonderland: fandomsandfeminism: betterthanabortion: “My body, ...

Alive, Bodies , and Facebook: IS IT REALLY JuST YOUR BODY? Facebook.com/OnlineForLife truckyousasha: thekaraokeninja: fandomsandfeminism: generalmaluga: albinwonderland: fandomsandfeminism: betterthanabortion: “My body, my choice” only makes sense when someone else’s life isn’t at stake. Fun fact: If my younger sister was in a car accident and desperately needed a blood transfusion to live, and I was the only person on Earth who could donate blood to save her, and even though donating blood is a relatively easy, safe, and quick procedure no one can force me to give blood. Yes, even to save the life of a fully grown person, it would be ILLEGAL to FORCE me to donate blood if I didn’t want to. See, we have this concept called “bodily autonomy.” It’s this….cultural notion that a person’s control over their own body is above all important and must not be infringed upon.  Like, we can’t even take LIFE SAVING organs from CORPSES unless the person whose corpse it is gave consent before their death. Even corpses get bodily autonomy.  To tell people that they MUST sacrifice their bodily autonomy for 9 months against their will in an incredibly expensive, invasive, difficult process to save what YOU view as another human life (a debatable claim in the early stages of pregnancy when the VAST majority of abortions are performed) is desperately unethical. You can’t even ask people to sacrifice bodily autonomy to give up organs they aren’t using anymore after they have died.  You’re asking people who can become pregnant to accept less bodily autonomy than we grant to dead bodies.  reblogging for commentary  But, assuming the mother wasn’t raped, the choice to HAVE a baby and risk sacrificing their “bodily autonomy” is a choice that the mother made. YOu don’t have to have sex with someone. Cases of rape aside, it isn’t ethical to say abortion is justified. The unborn baby has rights, too.  First point: Bodily autonomy can be preserved, even if another life is dependent on it. See again the example about the blood donation.  And here’s another point: When you say that “rape is the exception” you betray something FUNDAMENTALLY BROKEN about your own argument. Because a fetus produced from sexual assault is biologically NO DIFFERENT than a fetus produced from consensual sex. No difference at all. If one is alive, so is the other. If one is a person, so is the other. If one has a soul, then so does the other. If one is a little blessing that happened for a reason and must be protected, then so is the other.  When you say that “Rape is the exception” what you betray is this: It isn’t about a life. This isn’t about the little soul sitting inside some person’s womb, because if it was you wouldn’t care about HOW it got there, only that it is a little life that needs protecting. When you say “rape is the exception” what you say is this: You are treating pregnancy as a punishment. You are PUNISHING people who have had CONSENSUAL SEX but don’t want to go through a pregnancy. People who DARED to have consensual sex without the goal of procreation in mind, and this is their “consequence.”  And that is gross.  ^ THIS. This is this this THIS THIS THIS. THIS!!!!! This is probably the strongest and well worded/supported argument for abortion that I have ever read.
Alive, Bodies , and Facebook: IS IT REALLY JuST
 YOUR BODY?
 Facebook.com/OnlineForLife
truckyousasha:
thekaraokeninja:

fandomsandfeminism:

generalmaluga:

albinwonderland:

fandomsandfeminism:

betterthanabortion:

“My body, my choice” only makes sense when someone else’s life isn’t at stake.

Fun fact: If my younger sister was in a car accident and desperately needed a blood transfusion to live, and I was the only person on Earth who could donate blood to save her, and even though donating blood is a relatively easy, safe, and quick procedure no one can force me to give blood. Yes, even to save the life of a fully grown person, it would be ILLEGAL to FORCE me to donate blood if I didn’t want to.
See, we have this concept called “bodily autonomy.” It’s this….cultural notion that a person’s control over their own body is above all important and must not be infringed upon. 
Like, we can’t even take LIFE SAVING organs from CORPSES unless the person whose corpse it is gave consent before their death. Even corpses get bodily autonomy. 
To tell people that they MUST sacrifice their bodily autonomy for 9 months against their will in an incredibly expensive, invasive, difficult process to save what YOU view as another human life (a debatable claim in the early stages of pregnancy when the VAST majority of abortions are performed) is desperately unethical. You can’t even ask people to sacrifice bodily autonomy to give up organs they aren’t using anymore after they have died. 
You’re asking people who can become pregnant to accept less bodily autonomy than we grant to dead bodies. 

reblogging for commentary 

But, assuming the mother wasn’t raped, the choice to HAVE a baby and risk sacrificing their “bodily autonomy” is a choice that the mother made. YOu don’t have to have sex with someone. Cases of rape aside, it isn’t ethical to say abortion is justified. The unborn baby has rights, too. 

First point: Bodily autonomy can be preserved, even if another life is dependent on it. See again the example about the blood donation. 
And here’s another point: When you say that “rape is the exception” you betray something FUNDAMENTALLY BROKEN about your own argument.
Because a fetus produced from sexual assault is biologically NO DIFFERENT than a fetus produced from consensual sex. No difference at all.
If one is alive, so is the other. If one is a person, so is the other. If one has a soul, then so does the other. If one is a little blessing that happened for a reason and must be protected, then so is the other. 
When you say that “Rape is the exception” what you betray is this: It isn’t about a life. This isn’t about the little soul sitting inside some person’s womb, because if it was you wouldn’t care about HOW it got there, only that it is a little life that needs protecting.
When you say “rape is the exception” what you say is this: You are treating pregnancy as a punishment. You are PUNISHING people who have had CONSENSUAL SEX but don’t want to go through a pregnancy. People who DARED to have consensual sex without the goal of procreation in mind, and this is their “consequence.” 
And that is gross. 

^ THIS. This is this this THIS THIS THIS. THIS!!!!!

This is probably the strongest and well worded/supported argument for abortion that I have ever read.

truckyousasha: thekaraokeninja: fandomsandfeminism: generalmaluga: albinwonderland: fandomsandfeminism: betterthanabortion: “My body, ...

Energy, Memes, and Money: When you are on your way to vote and your friend shows you that officials are selected not elected @truth society If voting could truly change the world it would be illegal. - Even if your vote does count, you are given the choice between two candidates who are heavily funded by corporations and individuals with specific agendas. The politicians are further bought with lobbying. - “You can’t take a congressman to lunch for $25 and buy him a steak. But you can take him to a fundraising lunch and not only buy him that steak, but give him $25,000 extra and call it a fundraiser.” – Former lobbyist Jack Abramoff - The people who really run the show, the puppet masters, derive their power from the private banking system. - “Give me control of a nation's money and I care not who makes it's laws" — Mayer Amschel Rothschild - Real change starts with YOU. Voting with your actions to support local, sustainable, and healthy businesses and ideas. Being the change you wish to see in the world. That is where the real revolution is happening. - “The secret of change is to focus all of your energy, not on fighting the old, but on building the new.” -Socrates - To change the current reality you don’t work within its rules but instead make the existing system obsolete by creating something better. - “Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” -Einstein - “Presidents are selected not elected.” -President Roosevelt
Energy, Memes, and Money: When you are on your way
 to vote and your friend
 shows you that officials are
 selected not elected
 @truth society
If voting could truly change the world it would be illegal. - Even if your vote does count, you are given the choice between two candidates who are heavily funded by corporations and individuals with specific agendas. The politicians are further bought with lobbying. - “You can’t take a congressman to lunch for $25 and buy him a steak. But you can take him to a fundraising lunch and not only buy him that steak, but give him $25,000 extra and call it a fundraiser.” – Former lobbyist Jack Abramoff - The people who really run the show, the puppet masters, derive their power from the private banking system. - “Give me control of a nation's money and I care not who makes it's laws" — Mayer Amschel Rothschild - Real change starts with YOU. Voting with your actions to support local, sustainable, and healthy businesses and ideas. Being the change you wish to see in the world. That is where the real revolution is happening. - “The secret of change is to focus all of your energy, not on fighting the old, but on building the new.” -Socrates - To change the current reality you don’t work within its rules but instead make the existing system obsolete by creating something better. - “Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” -Einstein - “Presidents are selected not elected.” -President Roosevelt

If voting could truly change the world it would be illegal. - Even if your vote does count, you are given the choice between two candidates ...