Now Playing Tracks

I’ve said this before and I’ll point it out again -

Menstruation is caused by change in hormonal levels to stop the creation of a uterine lining and encourage the body to flush the lining out. The body does this by lowering estrogen levels and raising testosterone.

Or, to put it more plainly “That time of the month” is when female hormones most closely resemble male hormones. So if (cis) women aren’t suited to office at “That time of the month” then (cis) men are NEVER suited to office.

If you are a dude and don’t dig the ladies around you at their time of the month, just think! That is you all of the time.

And, on a final note, post-menopausal (cis) women are the most hormonally stable of all human demographics. They have fewer hormonal fluctuations of anyone, meaning older women like Hilary Clinton and Elizabeth Warren would theoretically be among the least likely candidates to make an irrational decision due to hormonal fluctuations, and if we were basing our leadership decisions on hormone levels, then only women over fifty should ever be allowed to hold office.

timemachineyeah (via ask-pauli-amorous)

Eat THAT, hormone-snipers!

(via tamorapierce)

fuzzykitty01:

nothingbutthedreams:

i-freakin-love-disney:

killerdraco:

memewhore:

disneyworldwonders:

Can I just say that I think this is the way Mulan should appear int the parks. In the beginning of the movie they make it very clear that the dress she wears to meet the matchmaker is not comfortable nor does it represent her personality. She spends the whole of the film proving that she is not a prize to be won or just a pawn to be married off at earliest convenience. She proves her worth in this outfit. She saves China in this outfit. She falls in love in this outfit. She risks her life, makes her strongest friendships, and changes the entire country IN THIS OUTFIT. Then they have her walk around the park in the same outfit she wore in the first scene of the movie and I think it is really negative toward her character. That is not who she is.

image

I’ve seen this post pop up on my dash time and time again, and it’s never quite sat right with me. I agree 120% with the idea that the pink “matchmaker dress” is a poor way to represent Mulan in the theme parks, but… so is her soldier armor. It’s just as much not who she is as the pink dress. It represents her pretending to be Ping, and her deceiving everyone around her. It is her pretending to be a man, to be someone else entirely. Honestly, if you want to talk about the outfit that best represents her, I’d suggest this one:

image

The outfit she wore when she defeated Shan Yu. That is who Mulan is; a warrior, but still a woman. It displays all of the strength that she truly has, yet still manages to be true to who she truly is. This it the outfit that she changed the entire country in; would anything have changed if she was still pretending to be a man? I doubt it. This proves that a woman can be strong, but still be feminine. Given that many people tend to equate being feminine with weakness, I think portraying that the two are not mutually exclusive is a damn powerful message to be portraying to kids in theme parks.

Just my two cents.

THANK YOU

Yes, thank you.

Either way, can we just appreciate how raw this cosplay is?

(Source: Flickr / klingon65)

brsis:

achievementhugger:

thebabbagepatch:

ilacktact:

mycosmicreality:

adeyami:

US students will be able to shield themselves during school shootings with the latest in body armour, the Bodyguard Blanket

http://goo.gl/WwvECT

Are fucking kidding me? I have been sitting at home and constantly watching the news after the events of yesterday. For those of you who are wondering, I am a junior at REYNOLDS HIGH SCHOOL! I was there when the shooter kept running in the halls trying to open the doors and get in. I was there in the dark praying and crying while my librarian kept saying ” they’ll have to kill me before they touch my kids” I have known her for three years, her determination to keep us safe broke her heart. Seeing this, that little children need protection in school. Are we sending kids to a battlefield? I have three little brothers ranging from 5-10, and still people have the nerve to speak about the second amendment? Really? I can’t even type anymore. I’m so disgusted and frustrated. When will you realize that it’s important to have gun control? When a shooter is pointing a gun at your child? Is that when you’ll realize that guns aren’t something to be kept around. People say it’s a free country but honesty, this country is more oppressed and diseased than any other country.

Show me ONE instance where gun control and gun free zones prevented school shootings.

image

Let me tell you guys a story.
In 1996, in a little town in Australia called Port Arthur, a gunman killed 35 and injured 23. This place was a tourist attraction, with plenty of visitors and locals going about their business. 
35 people died.That’s 35 marriages, anniversaries, birthdays or uni degrees. 35 people left Port Arthur in body bags.
At the time, we had a pretty conservative government, and the Prime Minister at the time (in hindsight) was kind of a dick. But within two weeks of the shooting, Howard instituted a massive reform and buyback of all firearms. 

But it must be a statistical flaw, you say, there weren’t that many massacres before 1996, right? No, WRONG. 
In the eighteen years leading up to Port Arthur, there had been 13 mass shootings. 

But April, you ask, this couldn’t possibly have worked could it? Wouldn’t it only have reduced the mass shootings? WRONG.
Since 1996, there have been ZERO mass shootings. That’s right, ZERO. FUCKING ZILCH. There have been scattered homicides, however:

How many schools have been raided and children murdered? NONE.
How many film buffs have been murdered in their seats? NONE.
How many innocent lives have been lost to the barrel of a gun? NONE.

On top of this, homicides involving the use of guns, and youth suicide involving the use of guns has declined dramatically, by up to 60%

Australia, however much the environment tries to kill you, is a safe haven, and you can walk the streets with 99% assurance that you won’t fall victim to a drive by shooting.

Your move, America.

in 1987 a lone gunman killed 16 people, wounded 15 and then committed suicide. within six months the uk government passed an amendment to the firearms act effectively outlawing all high calibre, high frequency, high capacity rifles and shotguns.

in 1996 another lone gunman killed 16 children and their teacher, and then committed suicide. again within six months the uk government outlawed all handguns. special dispensation had to be issued in order to hold shooting competition as part of the 2012 olympic games, and british hopefuls had to train overseas.

you can legally own certain types of shotgun, .22 calibre rifles over a certain barrel length, and antiques. that’s it.

in the nigh-on twenty years since the uk has had one mass shooting. one. and we’re down to about 30 gun-related deaths annually.

there is not one example of gun control laws reducing mass shootings and gun-related homicide. there are dozens. it literally works every time. the usa is the anomaly not because it didn’t work but because it hasn’t tried.

The internet just changed: Net Neutrality is dead.

nerdfaceangst:

nerdfaceangst:

cthulhu:

chairhiro:

feigenbaumsworld:

image

Last Wednesday, FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler announced a proposal for new rules that would allow for a “ fast lane” of Internet traffic for content providers who are willing (and able) to pay a fee. [1] The proposal reverses the FCC’s previous commitment to net neutrality and open internet and allows ISP’s like Comcast or Verizon to slow down and censor services that don’t pay the toll.

We have to be totally honest, this situation is seriously grim. But there is still hope. The FCC already knows that the Internet community wants net neutrality, but they think they can put their spin on these new rules and sneak them through. If we can prove them wrong right now with a massive public outcry, we can literally save the Internet once again.

We need to stop the FCC now. Big business groups are already ramping up lobbying efforts with the FCC in swarms since Wednesday’s announcement in support of censoring the open Internet and to ensure this dangerous proposal moves forward. [2]

This is a critical moment. In the last few weeks more than 65,000 people have taken action with us. Can you help us get to 80,000 by the end of the day today?

[1] Gautham Nagesh. “FCC to Propose New ‘Net Neutrality’ Rules”.
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304518704579519963416350296

[2] Edward Wyatt. Edward Wyatt. “Lobbying Efforts Intensify After F.C.C. Tries 3rd Time on Net Neutrality” http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/25/business/lobbying-efforts-intensify-after-fcc-tries-3rd-time-on-net-neutrality.html?hpw&rref=politics

 

we’re almost 3/4 of the way there!! c’mon guys, every bit counts!

will it ever stop

fucking signal boost

IF YOU ARE NOT SIGNAL BOOSTING THIS YOU ARE NOT PAYING ATTENTION.

IF THE U.S. FALLS TO THIS IT WILL OPEN OTHER DANGEROUS DOORS INTERNATIONALLY.

We make Tumblr themes