ealperin:

thefingerfuckingfemalefury:

ealperin:

image

image

image

image

image

Unless this turns out to be a show in which they realise that they actually ARE lesbians and become a couple, I have zero interest in this…

Because this looks like a load of boring shit created so that they can show girls kissing while going ‘DON’T WORRY THEY’RE NOT LESBIANS THEY TOTALLY LIKE DUDES’ so that the basement dwelling virgins watching this crap can still masturbate away to sad pathetic fantasies of getting with them

I don’t want shows about girls ‘Pretending’ to be lesbians

I want shows about girls who ARE lesbians, openly and proudly lesbian and have actual romantic and sexual relationships with other women

Not this shit

image

(via jacqueleefrell)

feminishblog:

The absence of an enthusiastic yes, is a no.

The absence of an informed yes, is a no.

The absence of a sober yes, is a no.

The absence of a response, is a no.

The existence of coercion, is a not a yes.

The existence of manipulation, is a not a yes.

The existence of guilt, is a not a yes.

A no is always a no. A yes is only a yes if it stands up by itself, without force or persuasion of any kind.

(via jacqueleefrell)

cocoavalentines:

lowkeywalker:

marfmellow:

THIS. DOLL. CAN. DO. TWIST. OUTS!!????

if you dont think this is the coolest shit you a damn lie

where  might i reserve this for my future children

slash 

ya’ll know this doubles as a way to teach children how to do they own hair right 

ya’ll realize the revolution that is happening right

(Source: wendidarling, via jacqueleefrell)

softoogami:

i cant believe you thought my racist joke was racist .. and then told me it was racist?? i cant believe it. this is just as bad as racism and this hurt maybe 2 of my feelings

(Source: mangacartaholygrail, via evolutia)

(Source: mymojosodopeme1, via gordivah)

"non binary" is binarism

never-obey:

People are inventing labels that are always between masculinity and femininity. There is no outside of the gender hierarchy (or as they call it “spectrum”).

What’s so “non binary” about this? These gender labels are still related to both harmful gender roles. The only thing that changes is the the distance between the labels and the top/the bottom of the gender hierarchy (or both sides of the “spectrum”).

That’s still binarism. Even all those agender/neutrois etc labels still depend on masculinity or feminity. Because without the gender hierarchy (or “spectrum”) these labels would be meaningless.

(via jacqueleefrell)

fashinpirate:

madmaudlingoes:

bropakpro:

touch-my-cuboner:

zecretary:

zecretary:

the stereotype that women talk more than men is infinitely amusing to me because men are literally incapable of shutting the fuck up

i hope this post gets popular enough that i hurt a man’s feelings

It’s not a stereotype it’s a proven fact you femanazi piece of shit.

lmao there it is 

You wanna talk proven facts? This shit’s been done, son: researcher Dale Spencer in Australia used audio and video tape to independently evaluate who talked the most in mixed-gender university classroom discussions. Regardless of the gender ratio of the students, whether the instructor was deliberately trying to encourage female participation or not, men always talked more—whether the metric was minutes of talking or number of words spoken. 

Moreover, men literally have no clue how much they talk. When Spencer asked students to evaluate their perception of who talked more in a given discussion, women were pretty accurate; but men perceived the discussion as being “equal” when women talked only 15% of the time, and the discussion as being dominated by women if they talked only 30% of the time.

Spencer’s conclusion, if I may parahprase: you only think we talk too much because you’d rather we were silent.

Don’t fuck with me, asshole, I’m a scientist.

 image

(via jacqueleefrell)

ashypinky:

underunderstood:

nowyoukno:

Now You Know (Source)

This is an important event in history, especially Canadian and feminist history. So I’m going to tell you more about it.

1) The shooter had been rejected from Ecole Polytechnique prior to the shooting. He blamed this on these female students, claiming that they were feminists who ruined his life.

2) In the first classroom he entered, he demanded the men leave before shooting at the women. No man attempted to stop him as they left. Take that as you will. (Later on, several men did get injured trying to stop him in the hallways.)

3) In his suicide letter, he believed that feminists were attempting to be more powerful than men, and were trying to take men’s rights away.
4) Feminists were actually blamed by some for the massacre. The line of logic was “if feminists didn’t make women’s rights an issue, Levine wouldn’t have wanted to kill feminists!” Victim blaming at its finest.

5) The mainstream news media often did not publicize the outrage from women’s groups, and often preferred those who took a calm approach. Ironic, that.

6) Despite him literally having a hit list of feminist icons in his final letter, several newscasters questioned whether or not the shooting was a sexist act, some even denying the idea outright.

8) Many memorials for the victims have been created, and rightly so; however, some prominent ones were erected in poor neighbourhoods where many Native women were killed every day in the same time period as the shooting (see: Marker of Change, Vancouver) (see: Missing Women, Vancouver). Basically, white feminism happened. 

The entire event was nothing short of a tragedy, and I recommend that everyone read up on it and the resulting aftermath. It’s… interesting to see how the media tried to turn it into a random act of psychopathy instead of what it was (we know better now, luckily). The reactions (memorials, etc) to the deaths of these 14 White, middle class women as compared to the deaths of 60+ Native, lower class women are also “interesting” to compare. (By interesting, I mean infuriating.)

Interesting to note - his suicide note listed 19 feminists he wished he had also killed. He wrote:

"Nearly died today. The lack of time (because I started too late) has allowed these radical feminists to survive.
Alea Jacta Est.”

So people who say “kill all radfems,” that’s quite some company you keep.

(via jacqueleefrell)

meowoofau:

Image credits: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10.

(Source: meowoof.com.au, via jacqueleefrell)

gwydtheunusual:

miritamoku:

cactus-princess:

too—weird-to-live:

exploringplaces:

zafojones:

Circus Tree: Six individual sycamore trees were shaped, bent, and braided to form this.

Wauwwww

how the hell do you bend and braid a tree

nature posts here ✿

Actually pretty easy. Trees don’t reject tissue from other trees in the same family. You bend the tree to another tree when it is a sapling, scrape off the bark on both trees where they touch, add some damp sphagnum moss around them to keep everything slightly moist and bind them together. 
Then wait a few years- The trees will have grown together. 

You can use a similar technique to graft a lemon branch or a lime branch or even both- onto an orange tree and have one tree that has all three fruits.

Frankentrees.

(via jacqueleefrell)

but you know what? I am good.

(Source: properdoctormarthajones, via jacqueleefrell)

too-smacked:

condoms are doing it right

(Source: kradify, via jacqueleefrell)

dontyouauntkathyme:

Happy Torres Thursday!

(Who could look at this face and not love it?)

(via jacqueleefrell)