soudcloud:

soudcloud:

WHAT DID PEOPLE DO BEFORE GOOGLE 

image

image

afternoonsnoozebutton:

Seen in Cambridge, MA

ABUSIVE MEN COME in every personality type, arise from good childhoods and bad ones, are macho men or gentle, “liberated” men. No psychological test can distinguish an abusive man from a respectful one. Abusiveness is not a product of a man’s emotional injuries or of deficits in his skills. In reality, abuse springs from a man’s early cultural training, his key male role models, and his peer influences. In other words, abuse is a problem of values, not of psychology. —Lundy Bancroft, “Why does He Do That? Inside the Minds of Angry and Controlling Men.” (via womentoadmire)

starweilder:

trying to figure out someone else’s shower

image

lindsaylohoean:

me when i know a person is adding stuff that didn’t happen into a story just so they look cooler in front of a group of people

image

claudiagray:

Sometimes the greatest sarcasm is wasted. 

therealzackmerrick:

if i was amy poehler every time my kids invited friends over i would reenact the scene from mean girls and be a cool mom

nurdsite:

My buddy Tom baked a cake for his Argentinian friend to cheer her up after the world cup loss.

…they are no longer friends.

thestolencaryatid:

passive aggressive family members

"guess i’ll never be a grandma"

"guess i’ll never be an aunt"

"guess i’ll never be able to dress a niece/nephew"

stop feeling so entitled to my hypothetical offspring. it is not yours. it is mine. i will grow it if i grow it. and it will be mine. not yours. i am not an incubator which grants you familial titles. jesus. go away. this “have a baby i can play with” thing is so impersonal and insensitive and annoying.

opalhonors:

mermaidsdream:

nathanael-platier:

noshamejustlove:

zorobro:

shota-purinsu:

zorobro:

linzthenerd:

theguilteaparty:

crippledcuriosity:

itsfondue:

Isn’t it nice how people twist their religious scripture to suit their weds but when it’s used against them it’s suddenly not okay

I talked to a monk about this quote once (we have mutual friends, and he came to a New Year’s Eve party at my shared art studio). He said this isn’t even talking about homosexuality. That the bible never actually says homosexuality is wrong. What that passage means is this:

Women were treated as subservient and it that you shouldn’t treat other men as subservient, like they are beneath you. It is not talking about homosexuality. If it was, it would say it outright since the bible lists other things outright.

I take the word of a monk who have studied the bible extensively more than a self proclaimed Christian.

The above text, I would like to point out is from the point of view of this translation of the original Hebrew. I spoke with my cousin’s rabbi on the matter and his response was different, saying that it was a mistranslation. See, the true translation says that a man shall not lie with another in the bed of a woman, which is to say, the Hebrews had a shit ton of rules about when a man was or was not allowed in a woman’s bed and private quarters (including, if she didn’t want you there, you weren’t allowed there. Hebrew women were also allowed to divorce their husbands and the image of the ‘oppressive Hebrew people’ is an image that was propogated by Christianity which, historically speaking, doesn’t treat the Jewish people too well and liked to paint them as being rather barbaric and backwards and cultish with their traditions, which, another piece of fun info, their traditions were one of the main reasons why the Jewish people were less likely, in medieval times, to die of the plague. Because washing your hands and avoiding the dead and vermin and the like was a lot of help. Of course the Christians persecuted them for not dying but that’s another matter. I’m sidetracked). So the verse is literally saying ‘Don’t fuck in some lady’s bed because that’s just goddamn rude’

Also, whenever a Christian brings the book of Leviticus up, you should feel free to point out that these are rules that were given to make the Hebrew people prepared for when the son of God came to earth. In Christianity, it’s believed the son of God was Jesus. So by following the rules set in Leviticus or pushing them as things we should follow, they’re saying that Jesus was not the son of God, and that Jesus did not, in fact, die for our sins. Jewish people believe, in their faith, that the son of God hasn’t yet been born, so many choose to follow these rules.

Most people of course roll their eyes when I explain the translation of the verse (full breakdown found here) but it’s always fun to point out the nature of the rules in Leviticus and the implications of following them. 

I’m a theology student and I am on the verge of crying because of how accurate this commentary is. Historical context is simultaneously the most interesting and most important part of interpreting any texts. 

Most religious people seem to base their beliefs on things that are severely mistranslated. I wish they would do their research before using the bible for hate.

I studied theology extensively and was going to become a theologist until I switched majors. The above commentary is 100% accurate and what I try to stress in a lot if conversations with Bible Thumpers.

Jesus also affirms the homosexual relationship between the Roman Centurion and his “slave”. The particular Greek word used to refer to this special slave was “pais”. Greek language studies and contexts show that a “pais” was a male love slave. Regular slaves were called “dolos”. The Centurion makes this distinction clearly when he asks Jesus to heal his slave (pais), and then to prove his status he tells Jesus that his slaves (dolos) go when he tells them to. But this slave (pais) was special. He was the Centurion’s lover.

Hearing this, Jesus was so amazed he says he had not found ANYONE ELSE who had such great faith. He then blesses the Centurion and heals his male lover.

Matthew 8:5-13

THIS IS WHAT THE BIBLE REALLY TEACHES ABOUT SAME SEX COUPLES.

In short, the English adaptation is a mistranslated farce.

^^^^this

reblogging for the comments ^^^^^^

Saving for later, in case parents ever bring this up or I need to come out again and “for good”.

Reblogging for the history most people want to ignore.

SIGNAL BOOST!

zanetehaiden:

myrandaroyces:

bowtiesandscarvesandmagic:

myrandaroyces:

basically i want a crime show that’s dedicated to exploring the ways gender, race, class, disability, and sexually are dealt with by the police force and the media. and is also interesting and has pretty cinematography and vampires maybe. 

did you mean BBC Sherlock?

no i absolutely did not

thats like the exact opposite

Literally the exact opposite?

punkgender:

one of the worst things about becoming educated on social issues is when people are like ‘you used to have a sense of humor’

no i used to have internalized prejudices which i’ve worked really hard to overcome and i realize now that your jokes are shitty

HW