some text

The Latest

girlannachronism:

Frida Gustavsson by Lachlan Bailey for “Seeing Stars,” Vogue UK December 2010
Apr 18, 2014 / 565 notes

girlannachronism:

Frida Gustavsson by Lachlan Bailey for “Seeing Stars,” Vogue UK December 2010

(via gothgirlsgotogivenchy)

misandry-mermaid:

ellestanger:

cumber-hiddles:

scorpswimmer:

This is why you cant trust women, even when theyre mouth is closed theyre still lying to you

you do realize that this is really hurtful right?
i did not do this to show how i am ‘lying’ to men or anyone, it’s not about how you, as a man, should feel about it - it’s about myself. 
to me your statement sounds as if the left side of this picture is something awful or horrible. and no, it’s not. it is my face - with and without makeup. and whether i chose to wear it or not is MY AND JUST MY decision. and when i do, i do it for myself - so that i feel good about myself - not for you.

Women aren’t born with makeup on, guy. Just like penises don’t circumcise themselves, and air conditioning isn’t ‘natural’. Makeup is no different than brushing your hair, or bubblegum. It’s elective. Although I have a sneaking suspicion that you’re not very loved by the ladies.

Male logic:
Treat makeup-less women like shit for looking “less attractive”
Pressure women to wear makeup in order to receive basic respect
Treat women like malicious liars for wearing the makeup they were told they HAD to wear
Apr 18, 2014 / 260,214 notes

misandry-mermaid:

ellestanger:

cumber-hiddles:

scorpswimmer:

This is why you cant trust women, even when theyre mouth is closed theyre still lying to you

you do realize that this is really hurtful right?

i did not do this to show how i am ‘lying’ to men or anyone, it’s not about how you, as a man, should feel about it - it’s about myself. 

to me your statement sounds as if the left side of this picture is something awful or horrible. and no, it’s not. it is my face - with and without makeup. and whether i chose to wear it or not is MY AND JUST MY decision. and when i do, i do it for myself - so that i feel good about myself - not for you.

Women aren’t born with makeup on, guy. Just like penises don’t circumcise themselves, and air conditioning isn’t ‘natural’. Makeup is no different than brushing your hair, or bubblegum. It’s elective. Although I have a sneaking suspicion that you’re not very loved by the ladies.

Male logic:

  1. Treat makeup-less women like shit for looking “less attractive”
  2. Pressure women to wear makeup in order to receive basic respect
  3. Treat women like malicious liars for wearing the makeup they were told they HAD to wear

(via weight-a-second)

misandry-mermaid:

ellestanger:

cumber-hiddles:

scorpswimmer:

This is why you cant trust women, even when theyre mouth is closed theyre still lying to you

you do realize that this is really hurtful right?
i did not do this to show how i am ‘lying’ to men or anyone, it’s not about how you, as a man, should feel about it - it’s about myself. 
to me your statement sounds as if the left side of this picture is something awful or horrible. and no, it’s not. it is my face - with and without makeup. and whether i chose to wear it or not is MY AND JUST MY decision. and when i do, i do it for myself - so that i feel good about myself - not for you.

Women aren’t born with makeup on, guy. Just like penises don’t circumcise themselves, and air conditioning isn’t ‘natural’. Makeup is no different than brushing your hair, or bubblegum. It’s elective. Although I have a sneaking suspicion that you’re not very loved by the ladies.

Male logic:
Treat makeup-less women like shit for looking “less attractive”
Pressure women to wear makeup in order to receive basic respect
Treat women like malicious liars for wearing the makeup they were told they HAD to wear
Apr 18, 2014 / 260,214 notes

misandry-mermaid:

ellestanger:

cumber-hiddles:

scorpswimmer:

This is why you cant trust women, even when theyre mouth is closed theyre still lying to you

you do realize that this is really hurtful right?

i did not do this to show how i am ‘lying’ to men or anyone, it’s not about how you, as a man, should feel about it - it’s about myself. 

to me your statement sounds as if the left side of this picture is something awful or horrible. and no, it’s not. it is my face - with and without makeup. and whether i chose to wear it or not is MY AND JUST MY decision. and when i do, i do it for myself - so that i feel good about myself - not for you.

Women aren’t born with makeup on, guy. Just like penises don’t circumcise themselves, and air conditioning isn’t ‘natural’. Makeup is no different than brushing your hair, or bubblegum. It’s elective. Although I have a sneaking suspicion that you’re not very loved by the ladies.

Male logic:

  1. Treat makeup-less women like shit for looking “less attractive”
  2. Pressure women to wear makeup in order to receive basic respect
  3. Treat women like malicious liars for wearing the makeup they were told they HAD to wear

(via weight-a-second)

fierrrrrrce:

http://fierrrrrrce.tumblr.com/
Apr 18, 2014 / 12,377 notes
Apr 18, 2014 / 109,889 notes
theatlantic:

This Is Big: Scientists Just Found Earth’s First-Cousin

Right now, 500 light years away from Earth, there’s a planet that looks a lot like our own. It is bathed in dim orangeish light, which at high noon is only as bright as the golden hour before sunset back home. 
NASA scientists are calling the planet Kepler-186f, and it’s unlike anything they’ve found. The big news: Kepler-186f is the closest relative to the Earth that researchers have discovered. 
It’s the first Earth-sized planet in the habitable zone of another star—the sweet spot between too-hot Mercury-like planets and too-cold Neptunes— and it is likely to give scientists their first real opportunity to seek life elsewhere in the universe. “It’s no longer in the realm of science fiction,” said Elisa Quintana, a researcher at the SETI Institute. 
But if there is indeed life on Kepler-186f, it may not look like what we have here. Given the redder wavelengths of light on the planet, vegetation there would sprout in hues of yellow and orange instead of green.
Read more. [Image: NASA Ames/SETI Institute/JPL-Caltech]
Apr 18, 2014 / 51,307 notes

theatlantic:

This Is Big: Scientists Just Found Earth’s First-Cousin

Right now, 500 light years away from Earth, there’s a planet that looks a lot like our own. It is bathed in dim orangeish light, which at high noon is only as bright as the golden hour before sunset back home. 

NASA scientists are calling the planet Kepler-186f, and it’s unlike anything they’ve found. The big news: Kepler-186f is the closest relative to the Earth that researchers have discovered. 

It’s the first Earth-sized planet in the habitable zone of another star—the sweet spot between too-hot Mercury-like planets and too-cold Neptunes— and it is likely to give scientists their first real opportunity to seek life elsewhere in the universe. “It’s no longer in the realm of science fiction,” said Elisa Quintana, a researcher at the SETI Institute. 

But if there is indeed life on Kepler-186f, it may not look like what we have here. Given the redder wavelengths of light on the planet, vegetation there would sprout in hues of yellow and orange instead of green.

Read more. [Image: NASA Ames/SETI Institute/JPL-Caltech]

(via trance-owls)

Apr 17, 2014 / 23,428 notes

(via 1mizutan)

Apr 17, 2014 / 137,384 notes
hexgoddess:

aka14kgold:

arbitrary-mask:

thepeoplesrecord:
The 1% wants to ban sleeping in cars - it hurts their ‘quality of life’April 16, 2014
Across the United States, many local governments are responding to skyrocketing levels of inequality and the now decades-long crisis of homelessness among the very poor … by passing laws making it a crime to sleep in a parked car.
This happened most recently in Palo Alto, in California’s Silicon Valley, where new billionaires are seemingly minted every month – and where 92% of homeless people lack shelter of any kind. Dozens of cities have passed similar anti-homeless laws. The largest of them is Los Angeles, the longtime unofficial “homeless capital of America”, where lawyers are currently defending a similar vehicle-sleeping law before a skeptical federal appellate court. Laws against sleeping on sidewalks or in cars are called “quality of life” laws. But they certainly don’t protect the quality of life of the poor.
To be sure, people living in cars cannot be the best neighbors. Some people are able to acquire old and ugly – but still functioning – recreational vehicles with bathrooms; others do the best they can. These same cities have resisted efforts to provide more public toilet facilities, often on the grounds that this will make their city a “magnet” for homeless people from other cities. As a result, anti-homeless ordinances often spread to adjacent cities, leaving entire regions without public facilities of any kind.
Their hope, of course, is that homeless people will go elsewhere, despite the fact that the great majority of homeless people are trying to survive in the same communities in which they were last housed – and where they still maintain connections. Americans sleeping in their own cars literally have nowhere to go.
Indeed, nearly all homelessness in the US begins with a loss of income and an eviction for nonpayment of rent – a rent set entirely by market forces. The waiting lists are years long for the tiny fraction of housing with government subsidies. And rents have risen dramatically in the past two years, in part because long-time tenants must now compete with the millions of former homeowners who lost their homes in the Great Recession.
The paths from eviction to homelessness follow familiar patterns. For the completely destitute without family or friends able to help, that path leads more or less directly to the streets. For those slightly better off, unemployment and the exhaustion of meager savings – along with the good graces of family and friends – eventually leaves people with only two alternatives: a shelter cot or their old automobile.
However, in places like Los Angeles, the shelters are pretty much always full. Between 2011 and 2013, the number of unsheltered homeless people increased by 67%. In Palo Alto last year, there were 12 shelter beds for 157 homeless individuals. Homeless people in these cities do have choices: they can choose to sleep in a doorway, on a sidewalk, in a park, under a bridge or overpass, or – if they are relatively lucky – in a car. But these cities have ordinances that make all of those choices a criminal offense. The car is the best of bad options, now common enough that local bureaucrats have devised a new, if oxymoronic, term – the “vehicularly housed”.
People sleeping in cars try to find legal, nighttime parking places, where they will be less apparent and arouse the least hostility. But cities like Palo Alto and Los Angeles often forbid parking between 2am and 5am in commercial areas, where police write expensive tickets and arrest and impound the vehicles of repeat offenders. That leaves residential areas, where overnight street parking cannot, as a practical matter, be prohibited.
One finds the “vehicularly housed” in virtually every neighborhood, including my own. But the animus that drives anti-homeless laws seems to be greatest in the wealthiest cities, like Palo Alto, which has probably spawned more per-capita fortunes than any city on Earth, and in the more recently gentrified areas like Los Angeles’ Venice. These places are ruled by majorities of “liberals” who decry, with increasing fervor, the rapid rise in economic inequality. Nationally, 90% of Democrats (and 45% of Republicans) believe the government should act to reduce the rich-poor gap.
It is easy to be opposed to inequality in the abstract. So why are Los Angeles and Palo Alto spending virtually none of their budgets on efforts to provide housing for the very poor and homeless? When the most obvious evidence of inequality parks on their street, it appears, even liberals would rather just call the police. The word from the car: if you’re not going to do anything to help, please don’t make things worse.
Source

“Their hope, of course, is that homeless people will go elsewhere…”
HOW? WITH WHAT FUNDS? FOR WHOSE BENEFIT? TO WHERE?
Our society’s approach to its most vulnerable members: I don’t want to see them suffer—so get them out of my sight!

For these sacks of shit, “elsewhere” means the land of the dead. They want homeless people dead. It’s as simple as that.
Apr 17, 2014 / 7,857 notes

hexgoddess:

aka14kgold:

arbitrary-mask:

thepeoplesrecord:

The 1% wants to ban sleeping in cars - it hurts their ‘quality of life’
April 16, 2014

Across the United States, many local governments are responding to skyrocketing levels of inequality and the now decades-long crisis of homelessness among the very poor … by passing laws making it a crime to sleep in a parked car.

This happened most recently in Palo Alto, in California’s Silicon Valley, where new billionaires are seemingly minted every month – and where 92% of homeless people lack shelter of any kind. Dozens of cities have passed similar anti-homeless laws. The largest of them is Los Angeles, the longtime unofficial “homeless capital of America”, where lawyers are currently defending a similar vehicle-sleeping law before a skeptical federal appellate court. Laws against sleeping on sidewalks or in cars are called “quality of life” laws. But they certainly don’t protect the quality of life of the poor.

To be sure, people living in cars cannot be the best neighbors. Some people are able to acquire old and ugly – but still functioning – recreational vehicles with bathrooms; others do the best they can. These same cities have resisted efforts to provide more public toilet facilities, often on the grounds that this will make their city a “magnet” for homeless people from other cities. As a result, anti-homeless ordinances often spread to adjacent cities, leaving entire regions without public facilities of any kind.

Their hope, of course, is that homeless people will go elsewhere, despite the fact that the great majority of homeless people are trying to survive in the same communities in which they were last housed – and where they still maintain connections. Americans sleeping in their own cars literally have nowhere to go.

Indeed, nearly all homelessness in the US begins with a loss of income and an eviction for nonpayment of rent – a rent set entirely by market forces. The waiting lists are years long for the tiny fraction of housing with government subsidies. And rents have risen dramatically in the past two years, in part because long-time tenants must now compete with the millions of former homeowners who lost their homes in the Great Recession.

The paths from eviction to homelessness follow familiar patterns. For the completely destitute without family or friends able to help, that path leads more or less directly to the streets. For those slightly better off, unemployment and the exhaustion of meager savings – along with the good graces of family and friends – eventually leaves people with only two alternatives: a shelter cot or their old automobile.

However, in places like Los Angeles, the shelters are pretty much always full. Between 2011 and 2013, the number of unsheltered homeless people increased by 67%. In Palo Alto last year, there were 12 shelter beds for 157 homeless individuals. Homeless people in these cities do have choices: they can choose to sleep in a doorway, on a sidewalk, in a park, under a bridge or overpass, or – if they are relatively lucky – in a car. But these cities have ordinances that make all of those choices a criminal offense. The car is the best of bad options, now common enough that local bureaucrats have devised a new, if oxymoronic, term – the “vehicularly housed”.

People sleeping in cars try to find legal, nighttime parking places, where they will be less apparent and arouse the least hostility. But cities like Palo Alto and Los Angeles often forbid parking between 2am and 5am in commercial areas, where police write expensive tickets and arrest and impound the vehicles of repeat offenders. That leaves residential areas, where overnight street parking cannot, as a practical matter, be prohibited.

One finds the “vehicularly housed” in virtually every neighborhood, including my own. But the animus that drives anti-homeless laws seems to be greatest in the wealthiest cities, like Palo Alto, which has probably spawned more per-capita fortunes than any city on Earth, and in the more recently gentrified areas like Los Angeles’ Venice. These places are ruled by majorities of “liberals” who decry, with increasing fervor, the rapid rise in economic inequality. Nationally, 90% of Democrats (and 45% of Republicans) believe the government should act to reduce the rich-poor gap.

It is easy to be opposed to inequality in the abstract. So why are Los Angeles and Palo Alto spending virtually none of their budgets on efforts to provide housing for the very poor and homeless? When the most obvious evidence of inequality parks on their street, it appears, even liberals would rather just call the police. The word from the car: if you’re not going to do anything to help, please don’t make things worse.

Source

Their hope, of course, is that homeless people will go elsewhere…”

HOW? WITH WHAT FUNDS? FOR WHOSE BENEFIT? TO WHERE?

Our society’s approach to its most vulnerable members: I don’t want to see them suffer—so get them out of my sight!

For these sacks of shit, “elsewhere” means the land of the dead. They want homeless people dead. It’s as simple as that.

(via dapperdannykrutko)

I thought I saw Khloe at the @hautelifeplus fashion show ^.^ #funzandshit #plussize #khloekardashian  #plussizefashion #fatandcute #fatshion #hautelifeplus #hautelifeplusfashionsoiree
Apr 16, 2014 / 1 note

I thought I saw Khloe at the @hautelifeplus fashion show ^.^ #funzandshit #plussize #khloekardashian #plussizefashion #fatandcute #fatshion #hautelifeplus #hautelifeplusfashionsoiree

androgynous-minds:

somethingtoseeorhear:

H.R. of Bad Brains!

Fuck yes
Apr 16, 2014 / 8,926 notes

androgynous-minds:

somethingtoseeorhear:

H.R. of Bad Brains!

Fuck yes

(via fuckinsick)

Apr 16, 2014 / 58,000 notes

PAUL MARCUS FUOG

(via fuckinsick)

kushandwizdom:

Good Vibes HERE
Apr 16, 2014 / 11,210 notes
Apr 16, 2014 / 56,809 notes

tiny-vessels:

weloveshortvideos:

I feel your pain

OMG.

(via satelliteshowers)

Apr 16, 2014 / 4,987 notes