norsegays:

astrolope:

People being angry about ~dem gays~ on Target’s Facebook.

I just want to give my two cents on this and tell you a story.

A couple weeks ago, I was hired at Target. I have a job at Target. Not a big deal right?

It is a big deal because i’m a transman

It doesn’t take a genius to conclude that it’s hard for me, my brothers, and sisters to get a job. There are legal restraints regarding the job and if you don’t pass, it’s hard to be taken seriously at a job interview.

Right on the application, it asks what your preferred name is. It also asks if there is anything that target should know. I put the fact that I am a transman, expecting not to get a call because usually when you put that down, people will throw out the application. I got TWO interviews.

At the interview, they asked me about it. I told them I am on hormones and they told me that they didn’t care. Not in the sense that they don’t emotionally care, but that it didn’t matter. I was male and that’s all that mattered. They also told me that they give sex same couples benefits in states that do not recognize them as a married couple.

At my job orientation, I was not misgendered once. Even my supervisors who weren’t sure of my gender avoided pronoun use, which I found only happens when you’ve had pronoun training. They gave me a name tag with my preferred name and didn’t ask questions. I felt safe and respected, which is huge for a trans* person.

TLDR: Target is amazing not just for the LGB, but also the T. Shop there for the rest of your life.

Target is great at some things, for sure. You go, Target.

(via ganjacologist)

314,693 notes

elluvias:

heterophobicgoat:

stupidandreckless:

NOOOO NO NO NONO FUCK FUCK  FUCKIG CBS IS TELLING WOMEN NOT TO REPORT SEXUAL HARASSMENT BECAUSE IT WILL “DAMAGE THEIR CAREERS” and “HARASSMENT IS AN UNFORTUNATE PART OF CLIMBING THE LADDER” I AM SO ANGRY THEY ARE LITERALLY TURNING SEXUAL HARASSMENT INTO A NORM THIS IS NOT OKAY

This is an actual article and I’m still having a hard time believing it’s real.

IF YOU ARE SEXUALLY HARRASSED YOU REPORT THAT SHIT

Report it. Report it every single time.

(via warmskin)

107,250 notes

(Source: lacrimosaaaa, via warmskin)

110,639 notes

(Source: negritaaa, via ganjacologist)

4,273 notes

upallnightogetloki:

i-was-a-dragon:

candycoatedracism:

An angsty post about cultural appropriation towards pagans

No it is not.  Not even close.  

Up top: The Ouija board is a board game that was invented in 1890, not a religious or cultural matter of any kind.  It is so new, that it is actually currently patented by Hasbro, which is why most versions you see don’t actually say Ouija on them.  The mystical history of the ouija board was pretty much invented out of whole cloth by its creators, and even if they were true, their version of events is actually cultural appropriation from the chinese, so no, there is literally nothing that a white pagan could legitimately be upset about in the use of the Ouija board in jewelry and nailart.  

The five-pointed-star is a symbol that has been so widely used in history, it’s current ‘wicca’ meaning is actually the odd man out, here.  Using it as a protective symbol is within it’s historical uses, and if it were in fact being misused in these images it is not being used in a way that is causing you harm.  

But the biggest difference is that the pictures on the bottom?  They’re part of an ongoing problem in american culture.  Seeing a pagan symbol used in a way you don’t agree with may be upsetting, but native people are so marginalized and fetishized that some people believe they are imaginary.  Native women suffer outrageous statistics or rape, violence, and murder.  The projected lifespan of a native person is drastically shorter than that of a white person due to outside factors.  Asian women in the US are seen as a fetish and ‘geisha dolls’, while the men are considered a joke.  Blacks in the US are unjustly incarcerated, murdered with impunity, and suffer levels of violence and discrimination I’m only just beginning to understand.

So unless the Ouija board and Supernatural are causing genocide and rape, do not compare the two.  It’s okay to be upset about something, but do not claim that misplaced anger is even close to the legitimate anger the bottom images should cause.

That rebuttal was on point

(Source: narwhal-noir, via dangercupcakemurdericing)

2,231 notes

steverogersisavirgin:

Ever have so much to do you say fuck it and make cookies instead?

steverogersisavirgin:

Ever have so much to do you say fuck it and make cookies instead?

1 note

marypussypoppins:

looks like this cat just witnessed a sick burn

marypussypoppins:

looks like this cat just witnessed a sick burn

(Source: littleanimalgifs, via 1000-rat-corpses)

112,784 notes

(Source: floricawild, via worldpeaces)

61,233 notes

thehowlingwolf:

i-come-by-it-honestly:

John Scalzi gets it.

JFC YES!

(via 1000-rat-corpses)

30,708 notes

three29am:

Even when I think Urban Outfitters couldn’t possibly disappoint me any further, boy do they prove me wrong (time and time again)."Face Gems"? Really? I believe you mean “bindi”. Did you not learn your lesson after the Navajo lawsuit? ~Keep your hands off things that aren’t yours, culture vulture~(The models don’t even appear to be South Asian, you aren’t even TRYING to be slightly sensitive.)This same company has made headlines numerous times within the past couple years for having an “Obama/black” t-shirt color option, t-shirts reading “Eat Less”, and shirts displaying patches that clearly resemble the patches worn on the clothing of Jewish people during the Holocaust. All the while, a simple shirt proclaiming “Legalize gay marriage” got pulled from stores. Additionally, they steal ideas from independent designers who have fought tooth and nail to have their products produced and sold, only to get ripped off.***Please, please, please do not give this company your money. Literally everything they sell can be found in other stores, and usually for half the price.***

three29am:

Even when I think Urban Outfitters couldn’t possibly disappoint me any further, boy do they prove me wrong (time and time again).
"Face Gems"? Really? I believe you mean “bindi”. Did you not learn your lesson after the Navajo lawsuit? ~Keep your hands off things that aren’t yours, culture vulture~
(The models don’t even appear to be South Asian, you aren’t even TRYING to be slightly sensitive.)

This same company has made headlines numerous times within the past couple years for having an “Obama/black” t-shirt color option, t-shirts reading “Eat Less”, and shirts displaying patches that clearly resemble the patches worn on the clothing of Jewish people during the Holocaust. All the while, a simple shirt proclaiming “Legalize gay marriage” got pulled from stores. Additionally, they steal ideas from independent designers who have fought tooth and nail to have their products produced and sold, only to get ripped off.

***Please, please, please do not give this company your money. Literally everything they sell can be found in other stores, and usually for half the price.***

(via warmskin)

11,150 notes

note-a-bear:

geekbap:

pewresearch:

Our data finds that on weekends, dads find more time for leisure than moms.


Dad’s “find” more leisure time, eh?  Like, it was hidden under the rug and the mom’s didn’t look hard for it?
"Fathers take full advantage of the weekends." 
“With moms scaling back their time for child care..”
Ugh. I want people to pay attention to how these discussions are framed.  Men don’t magically “find” more time for leisure; this implies that if women take less time for leisure, they are doing something wrong.  It also ignores the fact that part of the reason dads can have more leisure time is that the mom’s are watching the children. Does no one realize if the dad’s watched the kids more, the moms would have more leisure time?  
No because it’s too busy implying that if mothers do just that, they are somehow neglecting their children.  How does one “scale back their time” for parenting anyway? When fathers go play golf for 8 hours on a Saturday, is that “scaling back” too? Oh wait, it’s called “taking advantage of the weekends”!  ::eye-roll::
This whole article is massively irritating.



Once again proving that if you’re asking questions a certain way, and only that way, you’re gonna get the answers you expect.Of course dads find more time for leisure, they have moms to take care of the kids….see also: dads babysit, mothers raise.

If anyone refers to caring for their own child as babysitting, they should have their parental rights revoked and be handed a babysitting fee… then fired. Take equal responsibility for raising your damn children, that shit is hard work if you do it right and it shouldn’t fall on one person if there’s more than one parent/guardian in the picture.

note-a-bear:

geekbap:

pewresearch:

Our data finds that on weekends, dads find more time for leisure than moms.

Dad’s “find” more leisure time, eh?  Like, it was hidden under the rug and the mom’s didn’t look hard for it?

"Fathers take full advantage of the weekends." 

With moms scaling back their time for child care..”

Ugh. I want people to pay attention to how these discussions are framed.  Men don’t magically “find” more time for leisure; this implies that if women take less time for leisure, they are doing something wrong.  It also ignores the fact that part of the reason dads can have more leisure time is that the mom’s are watching the children. Does no one realize if the dad’s watched the kids more, the moms would have more leisure time?  

No because it’s too busy implying that if mothers do just that, they are somehow neglecting their children.  How does one “scale back their time” for parenting anyway? When fathers go play golf for 8 hours on a Saturday, is that “scaling back” too? Oh wait, it’s called “taking advantage of the weekends”!  ::eye-roll::

This whole article is massively irritating.

Once again proving that if you’re asking questions a certain way, and only that way, you’re gonna get the answers you expect.

Of course dads find more time for leisure, they have moms to take care of the kids….

see also: dads babysit, mothers raise.

If anyone refers to caring for their own child as babysitting, they should have their parental rights revoked and be handed a babysitting fee… then fired. Take equal responsibility for raising your damn children, that shit is hard work if you do it right and it shouldn’t fall on one person if there’s more than one parent/guardian in the picture.

(via dangercupcakemurdericing)

870 notes

chuabaka:

textpostsandcats:

being a pizza delivery driver is great because literally no one is disappointed to see you

image

(via ruinedchildhood)

383,943 notes

blackpowerisforblackmen:

Lupita was recently named the most beautiful by People’s Magazine, and some of their readers expressed their dissatisfaction with this decision  in the comment section. One reader even commented that Lupita didn’t deserve this title because she’s 100% black(she finds women unattractive if they’re 100% black). These comments made me think of the brilliant post made by radicalrebellion: 
White women (non-black women of color included in this as well) become offended and angry when a black woman (especially a dark skinned black woman like Lupita) is depicted as beautiful and worthy of appreciation because it jeopardizes their position as the epitome of beauty and womanhood. Black women are viewed as the antithesis of White beauty and womanhood, these white women are completely apathetic and silent when dark skinned Black women are portrayed as “ugly” and “unlovable” by the mainstream media because they benefit from this oppression. That’s why you never see white supermodels discussing racism and colorism in the fashion industry. However, these readers wouldn’t complain if it were light skinned black women like Halle Berry, Beyonce, or Rihanna (we all know why, hint: colorism). Anyway, congratulations to the ***flawless Lupita for being named the most beautiful!  

blackpowerisforblackmen:

Lupita was recently named the most beautiful by People’s Magazine, and some of their readers expressed their dissatisfaction with this decision  in the comment section. One reader even commented that Lupita didn’t deserve this title because she’s 100% black(she finds women unattractive if they’re 100% black). These comments made me think of the brilliant post made by radicalrebellion

White women (non-black women of color included in this as well) become offended and angry when a black woman (especially a dark skinned black woman like Lupita) is depicted as beautiful and worthy of appreciation because it jeopardizes their position as the epitome of beauty and womanhood. Black women are viewed as the antithesis of White beauty and womanhood, these white women are completely apathetic and silent when dark skinned Black women are portrayed as “ugly” and “unlovable” by the mainstream media because they benefit from this oppression. That’s why you never see white supermodels discussing racism and colorism in the fashion industry. However, these readers wouldn’t complain if it were light skinned black women like Halle Berry, Beyonce, or Rihanna (we all know why, hint: colorism). Anyway, congratulations to the ***flawless Lupita for being named the most beautiful!  

(via howtobeafuckinglady)

15,630 notes

"We are announcing today that we have reverted back to our prior legal terms, which contain no mention of arbitration."

A statement from General Mills • Walking back a much-criticized policy that would have essentially replaced the consumer’s right to sue the company with an online arbitration process. The move drew much heat after The New York Times wrote an article on the practice last week.

By the way, they’re not the only ones that do this.

(via shortformblog)

Most people pay no attention to terms of service. Maybe they heard somewhere that they probably weren’t enforceable. Or something. Most of us aren’t worth suing anyway, even if they were. And frankly, you can’t even exist if you read every one of the click-throughs that pops up. If you use a Windows Surface 2 for the purpose it is advertised, you violate the EULA. I saw an agreement earlier today that said that the terms could change without notice so you should review it every time you visit the site. Nobody does this.

If you want to unleash a bit of chaos on the world, try pulling this sort of stunt yourself. Send a letter to General Mills saying that by accepting a coupon tendered by you they agree to donate $50 to your favorite nonprofit. Or make it a bit different. Or maybe your IP address in it and say that by sending data from their website to that IP address they agree that any future contracts of adhesion between you and the company must be negotiated in Klingon. Or perhaps that by continuing to send data to your IP address will replace the obligations of both parties with those used in standard industry practice.

(Or maybe don’t. There’s a very real chance you’d end up with some sort of blacklisted IP address and a letter from an anxious lawyer.)

The existence of “contracts” that nobody reads, nobody understands, and nobody expects to be enforceable does a real violence to contract law.

(via squashed)

(via truth-has-a-liberal-bias)

89 notes

msjenai:

LMFAOOOO

msjenai:

LMFAOOOO

(via joykathleenshealy)

13,747 notes