the-goddamazon:

dilfgod:

I hate when people say money doesn’t buy you happiness. it does. it buys you financial stability, a nice house, nice cars, nice vacations and trips, healthier food, a better education, etc. like wearing burberry while driving around in an audi would probably make me pretty happy too. but it’s just that rich people often take their comfortable lives for granted and end up being spoiled and ungrateful for what they have 

Exactly.

false. studies show that money has no correlation with happiness after basic needs have been met. In the US, that’s the equivalent of making about 50k a year. 

I read several dozen stories a year from miserable, lonely guys who insist that women won’t come near them despite the fact that they are just the nicest guys in the world.

..I’m asking what do you offer? Are you smart? Funny? Interesting? Talented? Ambitious? Creative? OK, now what do you do to demonstrate those attributes to the world? Don’t say that you’re a nice guy — that’s the bare minimum.

“Well, I’m not sexist or racist or greedy or shallow or abusive! Not like those other douchebags!”

I’m sorry, I know that this is hard to hear, but if all you can do is list a bunch of faults you don’t have, then back the fuck away..

..Don’t complain about how girls fall for jerks; they fall for those jerks because those jerks have other things they can offer. “But I’m a great listener!” Are you? Because you’re willing to sit quietly in exchange for the chance to be in the proximity of a pretty girl (and spend every second imagining how soft her skin must be)? Well guess what, there’s another guy in her life who also knows how to do that, and he can play the guitar. Saying that you’re a nice guy is like a restaurant whose only selling point is that the food doesn’t make you sick. You’re like a new movie whose title is This Movie Is in English, and its tagline is “The actors are clearly visible”.

David Wong, 6 Harsh Truths That Will Make You a Better Person

This never gets old. 

(via denasynesthesia)

(Source: violetmaps)

thrashturbate:

10/10 would bang.

But also:

10/10 would care for you
10/10 would tuck you in
10/10 would cuddle
10/10 would make sure you get to sleep okay
10/10 would make you breakfast in the morning

stuffertystuffstuff:

"River Song, Amy Pond and Clara Oswald are exactly the same sexy, sassy female character Moffat loves."

I think you mean

"River Song, Amy Pond and Clara Oswald -despite having vastly different story arcs, personalities, jobs, hobbies, lifestyles, relationships and personal philosophies- are all represented as being body positive. We have very little representation in the media of women who think they are attractive, and the ones who do are more often than not villains and antagonists. Therefore I have chosen to amplify that single shared trait River, Amy and Clara have and reduce all their other characteristics, so I can make them into the perfect strawmen for my argument that Moffat can’t write women. In reality it proves I have little to no textual analysation skills, and can’t overcome my societal programming in regards to the dominant discourse of women who hate their appearance are not only good and kind, but secretly beautiful all along, while women who actually like their appearance must be shallow and self absorbed and therefore not worthy of consideration as legitimate individuals in their own right."

bookishandi:

padfootstolemycrumpet:


fuckyeahteddylupin:


Same mirror - same place - different orphan by *button-bird


*strangled cry*


NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO.
 
But also YES.
 
Because for me this is a pretty important part of the final battle. A lot of folks accused JKR of just wanting to kill people off, and Lupin and Tonks were one of the major “sins” in that category. But for me, one of the major themes of her books is vicious cycle of violence, and another is the ways ordinary people can break that cycle. It’s important that we know that Harry doesn’t stop all the pain, that he’s not the last war orphan. Just like the first War, parents and adults have to make choices, choices with consequences. 
 
Like James and Lily, Lupin and Tonks didn’t risk their lives to defeat Voldemort. They gave their lives for each other, because no one person should bear the weight of the sacrifice. They gave their lives for their son, who deserved a better world. They gave their lives for love, not for victory.
 
I think it’s important to see the ways Voldemort’s evil creates these cycles, children taken from their parents and parents taken from their children, again and again. I think it’s an important sobering note in the victory—yes, this time Voldemort is really dead, but there’s another baby this time, another infant who will never know his beautiful, wonderful parents because of Voldemort and his message of hate and violence. Another child who will grow up wondering where he came from, what his parents were like, what would be different if they were alive.
 
But it’s also beautiful that Teddy will have such a different experience. And his experience will not be different because Voldemort is “really gone.” His experience will be different because his grandmother will tell him about his brilliant mom. Because Harry will tell him about his wonderful dad. Because Harry will help him deal with his pain and loss, be a sympathetic ear who understands what it’s like to grow up without your parents. Because the Weasleys will welcome him as another grandchild, and he’ll grow up with Victoire to throw dirt at, and James as a little brother. His experience won’t be different because Harry won a war, it will be different because of love.
 
That’s the whole story of Harry Potter. Sometimes we have to fight for what’s right, but what really makes life worth living and what really changes the world isn’t magic or power or moral superiority. It’s love.

bookishandi:

padfootstolemycrumpet:

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO.
 
But also YES.
 
Because for me this is a pretty important part of the final battle. A lot of folks accused JKR of just wanting to kill people off, and Lupin and Tonks were one of the major “sins” in that category. But for me, one of the major themes of her books is vicious cycle of violence, and another is the ways ordinary people can break that cycle. It’s important that we know that Harry doesn’t stop all the pain, that he’s not the last war orphan. Just like the first War, parents and adults have to make choices, choices with consequences.
 
Like James and Lily, Lupin and Tonks didn’t risk their lives to defeat Voldemort. They gave their lives for each other, because no one person should bear the weight of the sacrifice. They gave their lives for their son, who deserved a better world. They gave their lives for love, not for victory.
 
I think it’s important to see the ways Voldemort’s evil creates these cycles, children taken from their parents and parents taken from their children, again and again. I think it’s an important sobering note in the victory—yes, this time Voldemort is really dead, but there’s another baby this time, another infant who will never know his beautiful, wonderful parents because of Voldemort and his message of hate and violence. Another child who will grow up wondering where he came from, what his parents were like, what would be different if they were alive.
 
But it’s also beautiful that Teddy will have such a different experience. And his experience will not be different because Voldemort is “really gone.” His experience will be different because his grandmother will tell him about his brilliant mom. Because Harry will tell him about his wonderful dad. Because Harry will help him deal with his pain and loss, be a sympathetic ear who understands what it’s like to grow up without your parents. Because the Weasleys will welcome him as another grandchild, and he’ll grow up with Victoire to throw dirt at, and James as a little brother. His experience won’t be different because Harry won a war, it will be different because of love.
 
That’s the whole story of Harry Potter. Sometimes we have to fight for what’s right, but what really makes life worth living and what really changes the world isn’t magic or power or moral superiority. It’s love.

My Least Favorite Trope (and this post will include spoilers for The Lego Movie, Guardians of the Galaxy, The Matrix, Western Civilization, and—cod help me—Bulletproof Monk*.) is the thing where there’s an awesome, smart, wonderful, powerful female character who by all rights ought to be the Chosen One and the hero of the movie, who is tasked with taking care of some generally ineffectual male character who is, for reasons of wish fulfillment, actually the person the film focuses on. She mentors him, she teaches him, and she inevitably becomes his girlfriend… and he gets the job she wanted: he gets to be the Chosen One even though she’s obviously far more qualified. And all he has to do to get it and deserve it is Man Up and Take Responsibility.

And that’s it. Every god-damned time. The mere fact of naming the films above and naming the trope gives away the entire plot and character arc of every single movie.

Elizabeth Bear - My Least Favorite Trope (via feministquotes)