damnitxavi:

rifa:

check-your-privilege-feminists:

Tumblr: spreading the world apart, one group at a time.

THIS is the shit that bothers me with tumblr

image

I’m just going to leave this here.

57,441 notes

syndromestore:

New Giveaway!
Prize: $100 store credit to spend on syndromestore.com
Rules:
☆ Must follow syndromestore
☆ Reblog this (1 reblog = 1 entry) we will keep count by looking at the activity so every reblog counts
☆ Likes and giveaway blogs do not count
☆ Do not delete the text
1 winner will be selected via random.org
ENDS Nov 1st
The winner will be given 24 hours to reply. If there’s no reply, a new winner will be chosen.
This is open to all countries
Please do not delete the text here
☆ Good luck ! ☆

syndromestore:

New Giveaway!

Prize: $100 store credit to spend on syndromestore.com

Rules:

☆ Must follow syndromestore

☆ Reblog this (1 reblog = 1 entry) we will keep count by looking at the activity so every reblog counts

☆ Likes and giveaway blogs do not count

☆ Do not delete the text

1 winner will be selected via random.org

ENDS Nov 1st

The winner will be given 24 hours to reply. If there’s no reply, a new winner will be chosen.

This is open to all countries

Please do not delete the text here

☆ Good luck ! ☆

4,918 notes

bakasara:

littlehollyleaf:

kingedmundsroyalmurder:

ofgeography:

honestys-easy:

milenab:

unlockaflockofwords:

Yes, I know I reblogged it before; I’m reblogging it again.
This image epitomises the delight I get from transformative works, and it’s a beautifully eloquent response to Robin Hobb’s misguided rant about fanfiction:
“The intent of the author is ignored. A writer puts a great deal of thought into what goes into the story and what doesn’t. If a particular scene doesn’t happen ‘on stage’ before the reader’s eyes, there is probably a reason for it. If something is left nebulous, it is because the author intends for it to be nebulous. To use an analogy, we look at the Mona Lisa and wonder. Each of us draws his own conclusions about her elusive smile. We don’t draw eyebrows on her to make her look surprised, or put a balloon caption over her head. Yet much fan fiction does just that. Fan fiction closes up the space that I have engineered into the story, and the reader is told what he must think rather than being allowed to observe the characters and draw his own conclusions.”  Robin Hobb on fanfiction
http://web.archive.org/web/20050630015105/http://www.robinhobb.com/rant.html
And she’s wrong, she’s SO wrong. Granted, drawing a mustache onto the Mona Lisa would be a bad thing, a final thing, a change-the-source thing, but there are COUNTLESS images that mess with the Mona Lisa without ever actually damaging the source image, without ever preventing a viewer from engaging with the pristine source image and interpreting it as they see fit. The Mona Lisa remains inviolate, regardless of weed-smoking iterations or The Da Vinci Code, and the audience are free to interpret her as they will. Transformative works based upon her are examples of people sharing one possible interpretation, or addressing problems they perceive, or bringing a marxist/feminist/whateverist reading to the fore, or just making their friends giggle.
This, though, this is so much better than anything I’ve seen that transforms the Mona Lisa. This takes that gorgeous, familiar image of Vermeer’s Girl With A Pearl Earring (an image that the book and movie of the same name have made familiar to people outwith Art History students [who might know it as the ‘Mona Lisa of the North’]) and reworks it with brilliant and elegant simplicity.
Manet’s painting ‘Olympia’ does something similar with Titian’s ‘Venus of Urbino’ (which is itself a reworking of Giorgione’s ‘Sleeping Venus’); Georgione dresses up his objectifying & titillating high class porn as an image of a goddess, and has her eyes closed - she doesn’t know we’re ogling her. She’s helpless before our (male) voyeuristic gaze. Titian’s nude knows we’re ogling her, but she’s still putatively a goddess, and despite that she’s glancing coyly away as she consciously provokes the viewer, offering herself up to him. Manet’s nude, however, is unambiguously presented as a human and a prostitute, and she looks straight out at the viewer, her hand on her thigh making it clear that she alone chooses who gets access to her sex. The painting was received with shock and disgust and had to be protected from those who wanted to destroy it for its obscenity - not for showing naked flesh, but for making the naked woman into a subject, rather than an object.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympia_%28Manet%29
God, I’m rambling. Anyway, point being - transformative work, intratextual work, is most emphatically not a new thing, nor a creatively barren thing. It’s awesome. And this image here is delicious, because it takes that lovely painting, in which the model is mysterious, alluring, her parted lips gleaming and her eyes wide as she looks out at the viewer, objectified - and it drags it straight into the 21st century by adding the camera, making it into that recognisable MySpace pose, making her the CREATOR of the image not just the object. She is looking at herself, not at us, and this careful composition becomes an ephemeral snapshot, a fleeting moment in her day.

This.

Reblogging for all the commentary. There has been so much transformative work that has elevated the original, turned it on its head, made us all think, and yes, hangs in museums today. When the author of that quote thumbs her nose at fanfiction, she turns her head away from Warhol, from Ovid, from motherfucking Shakespeare.These are the creators who have transformed their world and placed their own indelible marks on society as we know it, with their “fanworks”.

there is this idea in the world that the author is somehow infallible. that they can’t make mistakes when it comes to their text. and to a certain extent, yes, that’s true; what happens in the canon is canon and that is that. no amount of it being stupid or poorly thought-out or narratively problematic will make it not so.
but the idea that this somehow translates into “everything the author does is perfect STOP TOUCHING THE THING I MADE” isn’t based on some kind of high-minded artiness. it’s territorial.
and look, i get it. this is a thing that you made, that you put your heart in soul into, and i understand not wanting other people messing it up. you love those characters, you don’t want some dumbshit thirteen year old writing them in a poorly-imagined porno with that background character you secretly think is a little shit.
but you know what? that’s too damn bad.
because the very act of engineering

the space … into the story, [where the reader is] allowed to observe the characters and draw his own conclusions

is what fanfiction is for.
what is it, exactly, that you think fanfiction is? it is the act of drawing conclusions. a fanfiction writer is the most active, engaged, hungry reader you’re ever going to get. so if you want someone who is going to sit back and drool mindlessly over how pretty your words are, yeah, you know what? fanfiction writers are not for you. 
but if you want to talk about it, if you want people to actually engage with your art, have it affect them, then you’ve got to be willing to let your intent give up the ghost a little. 
ps. i’ve said it once and i’ve said it again, shakespeare wrote fanfiction. he literally wrote ovid fanfiction. and what exactly do you think adapted movies are? what do you think “she’s the man” is? what do you think “the lion king” is? they’re AUs. 
i can just see Walt Disney with his own blog being like, “oHMYGDO i just tripped and wrote a hamlet au except their lions wHAt am I DOING” and amanda bynes like, “i did a highschool soccer au for 12th night and i’m not even sorry about it” and way back in the late 1500s/early 1600s shakespeare wrote a letter to ann and he was like, “i just did a retelling of philomel but with a lady it’s AWESOME ps say hi to the kids for me xoxo billy.”
spoiler alert: those things didn’t happen. but like. metaphorically they did.

“Fan fiction closes up the space that I have engineered into the story, and the reader is told what he must think rather than being allowed to observe the characters and draw his own conclusions.”
Fanfiction is the drawing of those conclusions. That’s the point. It just takes it a step further and writes them down as opposed to keeping them purely mental. Just because someone writes a fic about a missing scene doesn’t mean everyone else has to accept it. It just means that people are engaging with the material and with each other. And frankly, I cannot understand how that could in any way be considered a bad thing. Do you not want your readers to engage with your text? Do you not want them to get attached to the characters, to want to know as much about them as possible, to view them as real people? Do you not want them to connect with each other out of love for the text you have created? That seems like a profoundly selfish attitude and an insulting one at that.

Everything above about fanfic. My opinion of an author has started seriously going DOWN if I find out they have a vocal negative opinion on fanfic of their works. 
My favourite author opinion on fanfic is Jasper Fforde’s - he came to our bookshop for a signing and talk and the topic came up and he explained, while he was bemused and a little negative about the concept when he first discovered it as a phenomenon (via someone emailing him a fic set in his Thursday Next series and asking for an opinion on their writing - so NOT the best introduction), he has come to consider it a CELEBRATION of the stories and characters the fic is based on. Which I think is a great and pretty accurate description :)
All that said, about the painting/picture above - isn’t she pointing the camera at US though, as opposed to taking a picture of herself?

All of this. Fanfiction can be a fan trying to fis in their own headspace something that they didn’t like in the original piece, and then sharing it, or it can be a great celebration of the work that inspired it. Either way, it means they are attached to your work and that it got them thinking, that what you did has some meaning for them and has allowed them to grow.
Fanfiction (and fanart, for that matter) is one of the most fascinating phenomenon there is. It’s people absorbing a given artwork, making it theirs, criticizing it, discussing it, interpreting it, contributing to it with their experience and what they are without actually changing the original in any way. As a mass phenomenon, it get further than that, because it’s people sharing that transformative work, deciding to give it as a gift to the world, to whomever feels like welcoming it, without money or any other interests than personal pleasure involved.
We willingly put our works in common and let other people anjoy them for free, with no harm done to anyone, no resouces wasted, no significative limitations, asking for nothing in return. Just because we want to. Writer or not, as a person I could never consider such an activity something negative.

bakasara:

littlehollyleaf:

kingedmundsroyalmurder:

ofgeography:

honestys-easy:

milenab:

unlockaflockofwords:

Yes, I know I reblogged it before; I’m reblogging it again.

This image epitomises the delight I get from transformative works, and it’s a beautifully eloquent response to Robin Hobb’s misguided rant about fanfiction:

“The intent of the author is ignored. A writer puts a great deal of thought into what goes into the story and what doesn’t. If a particular scene doesn’t happen ‘on stage’ before the reader’s eyes, there is probably a reason for it. If something is left nebulous, it is because the author intends for it to be nebulous. To use an analogy, we look at the Mona Lisa and wonder. Each of us draws his own conclusions about her elusive smile. We don’t draw eyebrows on her to make her look surprised, or put a balloon caption over her head. Yet much fan fiction does just that. Fan fiction closes up the space that I have engineered into the story, and the reader is told what he must think rather than being allowed to observe the characters and draw his own conclusions.”  Robin Hobb on fanfiction

http://web.archive.org/web/20050630015105/http://www.robinhobb.com/rant.html

And she’s wrong, she’s SO wrong. Granted, drawing a mustache onto the Mona Lisa would be a bad thing, a final thing, a change-the-source thing, but there are COUNTLESS images that mess with the Mona Lisa without ever actually damaging the source image, without ever preventing a viewer from engaging with the pristine source image and interpreting it as they see fit. The Mona Lisa remains inviolate, regardless of weed-smoking iterations or The Da Vinci Code, and the audience are free to interpret her as they will. Transformative works based upon her are examples of people sharing one possible interpretation, or addressing problems they perceive, or bringing a marxist/feminist/whateverist reading to the fore, or just making their friends giggle.

This, though, this is so much better than anything I’ve seen that transforms the Mona Lisa. This takes that gorgeous, familiar image of Vermeer’s Girl With A Pearl Earring (an image that the book and movie of the same name have made familiar to people outwith Art History students [who might know it as the ‘Mona Lisa of the North’]) and reworks it with brilliant and elegant simplicity.

Manet’s painting ‘Olympia’ does something similar with Titian’s ‘Venus of Urbino’ (which is itself a reworking of Giorgione’s ‘Sleeping Venus’); Georgione dresses up his objectifying & titillating high class porn as an image of a goddess, and has her eyes closed - she doesn’t know we’re ogling her. She’s helpless before our (male) voyeuristic gaze. Titian’s nude knows we’re ogling her, but she’s still putatively a goddess, and despite that she’s glancing coyly away as she consciously provokes the viewer, offering herself up to him. Manet’s nude, however, is unambiguously presented as a human and a prostitute, and she looks straight out at the viewer, her hand on her thigh making it clear that she alone chooses who gets access to her sex. The painting was received with shock and disgust and had to be protected from those who wanted to destroy it for its obscenity - not for showing naked flesh, but for making the naked woman into a subject, rather than an object.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympia_%28Manet%29

God, I’m rambling. Anyway, point being - transformative work, intratextual work, is most emphatically not a new thing, nor a creatively barren thing. It’s awesome. And this image here is delicious, because it takes that lovely painting, in which the model is mysterious, alluring, her parted lips gleaming and her eyes wide as she looks out at the viewer, objectified - and it drags it straight into the 21st century by adding the camera, making it into that recognisable MySpace pose, making her the CREATOR of the image not just the object. She is looking at herself, not at us, and this careful composition becomes an ephemeral snapshot, a fleeting moment in her day.

This.

Reblogging for all the commentary. There has been so much transformative work that has elevated the original, turned it on its head, made us all think, and yes, hangs in museums today. When the author of that quote thumbs her nose at fanfiction, she turns her head away from Warhol, from Ovid, from motherfucking Shakespeare.
These are the creators who have transformed their world and placed their own indelible marks on society as we know it, with their “fanworks”.

there is this idea in the world that the author is somehow infallible. that they can’t make mistakes when it comes to their text. and to a certain extent, yes, that’s true; what happens in the canon is canon and that is that. no amount of it being stupid or poorly thought-out or narratively problematic will make it not so.

but the idea that this somehow translates into “everything the author does is perfect STOP TOUCHING THE THING I MADE” isn’t based on some kind of high-minded artiness. it’s territorial.

and look, i get it. this is a thing that you made, that you put your heart in soul into, and i understand not wanting other people messing it up. you love those characters, you don’t want some dumbshit thirteen year old writing them in a poorly-imagined porno with that background character you secretly think is a little shit.

but you know what? that’s too damn bad.

because the very act of engineering

the space … into the story, [where the reader is] allowed to observe the characters and draw his own conclusions

is what fanfiction is for.


what is it, exactly, that you think fanfiction is? it is the act of drawing conclusions. a fanfiction writer is the most active, engaged, hungry reader you’re ever going to get. so if you want someone who is going to sit back and drool mindlessly over how pretty your words are, yeah, you know what? fanfiction writers are not for you. 

but if you want to talk about it, if you want people to actually engage with your art, have it affect them, then you’ve got to be willing to let your intent give up the ghost a little. 

ps. i’ve said it once and i’ve said it again, shakespeare wrote fanfiction. he literally wrote ovid fanfiction. and what exactly do you think adapted movies are? what do you think “she’s the man” is? what do you think “the lion king” is? they’re AUs. 

i can just see Walt Disney with his own blog being like, “oHMYGDO i just tripped and wrote a hamlet au except their lions wHAt am I DOING” and amanda bynes like, “i did a highschool soccer au for 12th night and i’m not even sorry about it” and way back in the late 1500s/early 1600s shakespeare wrote a letter to ann and he was like, “i just did a retelling of philomel but with a lady it’s AWESOME ps say hi to the kids for me xoxo billy.”

spoiler alert: those things didn’t happen. but like. metaphorically they did.

Fan fiction closes up the space that I have engineered into the story, and the reader is told what he must think rather than being allowed to observe the characters and draw his own conclusions.”

Fanfiction is the drawing of those conclusions. That’s the point. It just takes it a step further and writes them down as opposed to keeping them purely mental. Just because someone writes a fic about a missing scene doesn’t mean everyone else has to accept it. It just means that people are engaging with the material and with each other. And frankly, I cannot understand how that could in any way be considered a bad thing. Do you not want your readers to engage with your text? Do you not want them to get attached to the characters, to want to know as much about them as possible, to view them as real people? Do you not want them to connect with each other out of love for the text you have created? That seems like a profoundly selfish attitude and an insulting one at that.

Everything above about fanfic. My opinion of an author has started seriously going DOWN if I find out they have a vocal negative opinion on fanfic of their works. 

My favourite author opinion on fanfic is Jasper Fforde’s - he came to our bookshop for a signing and talk and the topic came up and he explained, while he was bemused and a little negative about the concept when he first discovered it as a phenomenon (via someone emailing him a fic set in his Thursday Next series and asking for an opinion on their writing - so NOT the best introduction), he has come to consider it a CELEBRATION of the stories and characters the fic is based on. Which I think is a great and pretty accurate description :)

All that said, about the painting/picture above - isn’t she pointing the camera at US though, as opposed to taking a picture of herself?

All of this. Fanfiction can be a fan trying to fis in their own headspace something that they didn’t like in the original piece, and then sharing it, or it can be a great celebration of the work that inspired it. Either way, it means they are attached to your work and that it got them thinking, that what you did has some meaning for them and has allowed them to grow.

Fanfiction (and fanart, for that matter) is one of the most fascinating phenomenon there is. It’s people absorbing a given artwork, making it theirs, criticizing it, discussing it, interpreting it, contributing to it with their experience and what they are without actually changing the original in any way. As a mass phenomenon, it get further than that, because it’s people sharing that transformative work, deciding to give it as a gift to the world, to whomever feels like welcoming it, without money or any other interests than personal pleasure involved.

We willingly put our works in common and let other people anjoy them for free, with no harm done to anyone, no resouces wasted, no significative limitations, asking for nothing in return. Just because we want to. Writer or not, as a person I could never consider such an activity something negative.

6,469 notes

I will admit it. I have read all three books in the Fifty Shades of Grey series.

I am not admitting this because I am ashamed of my sexual desires or even because I feel the need to rant and rave about the poor writing quality of these books. (And it is extremely poor. I set my Kindle to count how many times the word “gasp” is used in the third book and the total was more than 70). I am admitting this because I feel the need to share my opinions about what I consider to be the incredibly — and dangerously — abusive relationship portrayed in the books.

When I first heard about Fifty Shades of Grey and learned they began as Twilight fanfiction, I swore I would not read them. I have read all of the Twilight books and I did not enjoy them. I found the relationships between Edward and Bella and Bella and Jacob to be patronizing and emotionally abusive, and I also thought the writing was pedestrian at best and boring to read. Why would I devote the limited amount of time I have for reading for pleasure to a series like this?

But as the dialogue about Fifty Shades of Grey increased, both in the media and amongst my friends, my curiosity was piqued. I attended a talk titled “Fifty Shades of Grey - Bad for Women, Bad for Sex” and decided that I should see what all the fuss was about.

To quote the book, I gasped. I rolled my eyes. I even bit my lip a few times. But not for the reasons Anastasia, the protagonist, did. I did out of exasperation, boredom and disgust, but also out of fear. After reading this book series, I am deeply afraid that this type of relationship will be viewed as the romantic ideal for women. And I consider that to be extremely dangerous — much more so than anything that takes place between Christian and Anastasia in the Red Room of Pain.

Could the character of Anastasia Steele be any more of a stereotype? She is an introvert, has low self-esteem, has abandonment issues from her father, apparently has only one close friend who bullies her and even though she works in a hardware store, she doesn’t seem to possess any self-sufficiency aside from cooking for her roommate and herself. She seems to have no sexual identity until Christian Grey enters her life and requests that she become his Submissive in a sexual relationship.

In order to be Christian’s submissive, Anastasia is expected to sign a lengthy and detailed contract that, amongst other requirements, requires that she exercise four days a week with a trainer that Christian provides (and who will report to Christian on her progress), eat only from a list of foods Christian supplies her with, get eight hours of sleep a night and begin taking a form of birth control so Christian will not have to wear condoms. Anastasia negotiates a few terms of the contract with Christian (she only wants to work out three days a week, not four), but all of her negotiations are only within his framework — none of the terms are hers independently. Nothing in their relationship is hers as an independent.

The character of Christian Grey is a rich, superpowered businessman who was abused as a child. He is in therapy, and Anastasia frequently references his therapist, but based on how he treats Anastasia, he doesn’t seem to be making much progress. As Anastasia’s relationship with Christian progresses, his controlling tendencies affect her life more and more. When her friend takes portraits of her for his photography exhibit, Christian buys all of them, because he does not want anyone else looking at Anastasia. (They weren’t even in a relationship when he did this.) When she is hired as an assistant at a publishing company, he buys the company — to make sure she’s “safe” working there. When she goes out to a bar with her one friend, against his wishes, he flies from New York to Washington State that same night, just to express his anger — and exercise his control over her. When she does not immediately change her name at her office (in hopes of maintaining some professional autonomy, given that he bought the company she works at), he shows up, unannounced, at her office, in the middle of her workday, to pick a fight with her. When she asks why it is so important to him that she change her name, he says he wants everyone to know she is his.

Christian’s possession of Anastasia is the cause of much of my disgust and fear of the book’s influence on people and how they view romantic relationships. After they exchange their wedding vows, the first words he says to her are, “Finally, you’re mine.” The control he exercises over her does not reflect his love for her; it reflects his objectifying of her. Christian never views Anastasia as a person, let alone an independent woman. He wants her to obey him, and even though she refuses to include that in her wedding vows, it is exactly what she does. When her mother questions her choice to keep her wedding dress on rather than change before traveling for her honeymoon, she says, “Christian likes this dress, and I want to please him.” Her desire to try some of the “kinky fuckery” in his Red Room of Pain comes from wanting to demonstrate her love for him, not her own sexual desires.

Wanting to please Christian apparently includes subjecting herself to verbal and emotional abuse from him ‘til death do them part, because any time she tries to stand up to him — which isn’t often — he berates her, guilt trips her and beats her down verbally until she apologizes and submits to him. After she uses the “safe word” in the Red Room of Pain so he will stop, he bemoans his sad state of mind later, mentioning that his “wife fucking safe worded him.” He is not concerned with her well-being or why she felt the need to use the safe word. He only cares about how it affects him.

The question that I kept asking myself as I read the books was why Anastasia stayed with Christian, and the answer I found was that she has absolutely no sense of self worth. She only feels sexy when he says she is, and when he insults or patronizes her, she accepts what he says as the truth. One of the passages that disgusted me the most was when Anastasia was at a club with Christian, dancing and thinking to herself that she never felt sexy before she met him and that he had given her confidence in her body. Yes, being with a partner who frequently compliments you can increase your confidence, but Anastasia went from zero to one hundred thanks to Christian. None of that came from within herself. Because of his influence on her, nothing in her life came from herself — her job, her home, her way of life, or even her self-esteem.

The co-dependency between Anastasia and Christian is alarming to read and even more to contemplate. When she breaks up with him at the end of the first book, the second book finds her starving herself and wasting away to nothing until he contacts her again. When she thinks his helicopter has crashed in the second book, she thinks to herself that she can’t live without him. Their marriage only comes about because he is scared she will leave him, and when she asks what she can do to prove to him she isn’t going anywhere, he says she can marry him. Yes, origins of insecurity and desperation are a great start to a healthy marriage.

When Anastasia finds herself unexpectedly pregnant and shares the news with Christian, he rages at her, asking if she did it on purpose and storming out of the house, disappearing for hours. Even though Anastasia thinks to herself that the pregnancy happened too soon in their marriage, she never considers terminating it.

The themes of the novel — that love alone can make someone change, that abuse from a spouse is acceptable as long as he’s great in bed, that pregnancies should always be carried to term even if the parents are not ready to be parents, and the ridiculously antiquated, Victorian idea that the love of a pure virgin can save a wayward man from himself — are irrational, unbelievable and dangerous.

Our culture has seen a radical shift of ideals moving towards traditional gender roles and Fifty Shades of Grey is a shining example of that. Early marriage to one’s first sexual partner, having a baby even when saying neither of the partners is ready to be a parent, and submission to one’s husband as the head of the household are all aspects of life that feminists and progressive thinkers have worked to move beyond. Anastasia and Christian’s relationship is not romantic. It is abusive. The ways he tries to “keep her safe” are not masculine or sexy. They are stalking. Fearing one’s husband’s reaction to an unexpected pregnancy is not normal, because “boys will be boys.” It is sad and dangerous and should not happen in a healthy relationship.

Fifty Shades of Grey was one of the best-selling books of the year. Sex toy classes have been inspired by it, as have new types of cocktails. The film adaptation is already in the works. I sincerely hope that honest discussion will be had about the book and that the Christian Grey ideal of romance is not one that will be perpetuated throughout our culture. The best way that can happen is through open, honest dialogue that leads to healthy relationships of two equal partners. That, in my opinion, is sexier than anything that can happen in the Red Room of Pain.

20,904 notes

the-goddamazon:

tashabilities:

the-goddamazon:

Yo Nicki is legit fed up with people talking about her ass, though. Look at her face yo. She is genuinely INSULTED and not having it.

Like this is a woman who just likes what she does and all anyone can ever focus on is her fucking ass and the fact she got ass shots or whatever. She’s not stupid. Give it a fucking rest.

James Franco ain’t shit. 

When did he do this to her? 

I found it. [x]

OK, people realize this is a joke, right?
Cause I haven’t even watched it, and I can tell.
SMH.

(Source: theontheruntour)

105,192 notes

lady-redrum:

wasthatnotsideblog:

just gonna say this: if someone has social anxiety and they ask you something akin to ‘are you mad at me’ or ‘do you hate me’, it isn’t because they don’t trust you, it’s because their brain literally tells them that all the time

it’s not a personal slight, it’s insecurity caused by mental illness

thanks

TAKE NOTE.

280,701 notes

borderlands-confessions:

“I think Scooter’s “Smokin’ Jesus titty cinnamon!” is one of the greatest lines uttered in video game history.”

borderlands-confessions:

I think Scooter’s “Smokin’ Jesus titty cinnamon!” is one of the greatest lines uttered in video game history.”

160 notes

syndromestore:

New Giveaway!
Prize: $100 store credit to spend on syndromestore.com
Rules:
☆ Must follow syndromestore
☆ Reblog this (1 reblog = 1 entry) we will keep count by looking at the activity so every reblog counts
☆ Likes and giveaway blogs do not count
☆ Do not delete the text
1 winner will be selected via random.org
ENDS Nov 1st
The winner will be given 24 hours to reply. If there’s no reply, a new winner will be chosen.
This is open to all countries
Please do not delete the text here
☆ Good luck ! ☆

syndromestore:

New Giveaway!

Prize: $100 store credit to spend on syndromestore.com

Rules:

☆ Must follow syndromestore

☆ Reblog this (1 reblog = 1 entry) we will keep count by looking at the activity so every reblog counts

☆ Likes and giveaway blogs do not count

☆ Do not delete the text

1 winner will be selected via random.org

ENDS Nov 1st

The winner will be given 24 hours to reply. If there’s no reply, a new winner will be chosen.

This is open to all countries

Please do not delete the text here

☆ Good luck ! ☆

4,918 notes

ave-aria:

borl2008:

Yup

okay, storytime. At a group sleepover, there’s this girl, the most innocent thing you’ve ever met, k? She nods off on the couch early on in the night. As everyone’s getting ready to play cards, one of my friends lean back and hears her mumbling in her sleep.

My friend motions for everyone to be quiet. The girl snuggles her blanket, smiles, and in the sweetest voice, says, “Go on, Brandon. You can jump. It’s only 30 stories.”

(Source: best-of-memes)

171,961 notes