shirokusookami:

shit9gagsays:

elytra:

stfufauxminists:

mohandasgandhi:

face-down-asgard-up:

tehsunshine:

stfubelievers:

“He met some chick and rushed into marriage (so they could fuck, obviously).  Then he posted this picture to prove that, while he isn’t ‘pure’, she is…. Yes.  Yes.  This is what you think it is.”
OH. NO. (Thanks Bitch From Philly)

Congratulations!!! You’ve expended your one and only valuable aspect: your hymen! Now Jesus can only use you as a breeding machine.

This is like gross on gross on so many levels. I’m not even talking about bodily fluids here. How gross to have such an intimate moment destroyed by some asshole dude? How gross to have your worth be determined by the state of a thin piece of tissue inside your body? How gross to be deemed unworthy or of no value if you, as a woman, if you do not have this thin piece of tissue in tact when some dudebro decides he’ll marry you just so he can fuck you? It ain’t about love or commitment. It’s about domination. It’s about some jackass rushing you into marriage so he could be the one to break that tissue. Why is this important? Why does this matter?
I am so disgusted and all I have to say to that woman is “GIRL RUN! GO! GET OUT!”

This is so beyond the bounds of what’s even remotely decent or acceptable human behavior. I’d like to emphasize everything already stated above and mention that a hymen, that thin useless piece of skin, can break extremely easily, long before one’s “virginity is lost.” So, if a hymen were to be broken prior to becoming sexually active, would one attribute as much of this perverted Christian celebration and idea of purity as seen above to one’s first sexual experience? Or is an in tact piece of skin all that matters?
This is inherently demeaning to all women and placing value on a woman based upon not only her previous sexual experiences but a thin piece of skin is beyond the bounds of reasonable or acceptable human conduct. To go so far as to make such a personal event public is depraved and it is quite evident that the individual who posted this image does not fully respect their partner. This gross power play that many men engage in needs to stop.
I’m so disgusted by this I can barely focus enough to form even one coherent thought.

Yeeeeah. I flipped my shit when a guy I knew did something like this in high school. He decided to take a picture and show it to all his buddies. I was outraged, wrote a blog post about it (on my babby feminist blog, I thought I was the coolest and edgiest evar), and most of my guy friends at the time were sort of puzzled as to why I was so incredibly offended. 
It’s like “Hey look, I did physical damage to my partner when I stuck my dick in them! Isn’t that awesome?”. Or “Hey, she might be embarassed by this but who cares letting everyone know I had sex is way more important than her feelings”. Or “My woman is super pure unlike your dirty and slovenly women”.
It is all intensely degrading and humiliating. Like, seriously, guys who are all scared of feminists because they supposedly hate men, when dudes do shit like this and then other dudes don’t really call them out on it, I really see no reason why I shouldn’t hate you. 

The last sentence. The bolding is mine. And I stand by that. Always.

Reblogging especially for the bolded part at the end. 

Are we NOT going to talk about the fact that a woman SHOULD NOT BE BLEEDING if she is properly aroused, nor should the first time “hurt”, and the only reason this shit is common is because we make women nervous by telling them there will be blood and pain during their first time, and their partners don’t spend enough time getting them relaxed and aroused? Are we not going to talk about the fact that by posting this picture, this man is showing off how he DIDN’T get this woman aroused enough or comfortable enough with him first before he decided to stick it in? Are we not going to talk about the fact that she may bleed for several days depending on how bad the tear is, and if she has issues with healing, will have to go to the doctor because of it? Are we not going to talk about the fact that the praising of hymen-having women is a centuries old tradition of perpetuating that a male does not have to make sure their partner is comfortable and aroused? 
dysfunctionalqueer:

fahrlight:

as-an-expression-of-love:

azgunguy:

***ATTENTION*** This is the latest anti-Semitic/ racist salute. It was first claimed to be anti Zionist but has escalated to anti-Jewry and anti-semitism all around. If you see anyone doing this salute called the/a “Quenelle” swiftly punch them in the face, scold them, whatever you feel like, just recognize that this is a symbol of hatred!

Please be careful guys (esp. Jewish, queer, or disabled people, or people of color.) I’ve seen Neo-Nazis do this, and they can be really dangerous groups of people to be around.

actually DON’T punch them if you are not able to handle a reaction, better run for your life. -___- *People nower days are AGAIN capable of everything*

If you’re in the uk and have the ability to contact the police quickly and be listened to and actually have something done about this, the Racial and Religious Hatred Act bans “threatening words or behaviour, or displays any written material which is threatening, is guilty of an offence if he intends thereby to stir up religious hatred.” So this is technically illigal if they intend to stir up religious hatred, which they clearly do.
wheniwasachild:

Please stop funding the animal agriculture industry, it wastes more water than anything. Please stop funding the depletion and destruction of resources. Here is a link describing the way that animal agriculture in general pollutes the Earth/wastes resources: http://www.onegreenplanet.org/animalsandnature/facts-on-animal-farming-and-the-environment/Here is a link that describes, in depth, the water footprint of animal agriculture compared to vegetables:http://www.waterfootprint.org/Reports/Mekonnen-Hoekstra-2012-WaterFootprintFarmAnimalProducts.pdfIt is obvious that animal agriculture is literally drying up the Earth and destroying it in other ways as well. Please do not fund this. 

shirokusookami:

aquarius—moon:

emotional manipulation is abuse

emotional manipulation is abuse 

EMOTIONAL MANIPULATION IS ABUSE

EMOTIONAL MANIPULATION IS ABUSE


schwirl
Lolita is sexual. Literally. The definition of lolita is a sexually attractive adolescent girl. It's not just a cute 'kawaii' fashion statement. You can't sexualise something that is already sexual by default.


p0kemina:

petitepasserine:

Wrong, wrong, and wrong. Literally. If I got a dollar for every person who thought this because they couldn’t be assed to do their research, I’d be a happy girl indeed.

Lolita is a book written by Vladimir Nabokov about a girl named Dolores Haze, but her nickname is Lolita. The protagonist of Lolita falls in love with Dolores despite him being 42 and her being 12. He is a pedophile who abuses, rapes and takes sexual advantage of her after becoming her stepfather.

Lolita FASHION is something else entirely. Lolita FASHION is a fashion trend that started in Harajuku, inspired by victorian fashion, victorian dolls, sailor dresses and femininity, and most of all, self-expression. It has NOTHING to do with the book by the same name. The only thing they share is their name. Lolita FASHION has nothing to do with sex, because it’s just that; A FASHION. 

Lolita is a term misguided and misinformed people (such as yourself) use about attractive girls when, in truth, it stems from a book about a pedophile rapist.

Do your research before you try to start a discussion on something you have no clue about. There is absolutely no reason for you to be this much of an arrogant know-it-all when you haven’t even done the research to back up your arguments. Don’t be overconfident before you’re 100% certain that you’re right. 

Can I just add a thing here

When my mum heard about / discovered that this weird fashion I started trying to wear at 16 was called “lolita,” she had a miniature heart attack. She thought I didn’t understand that that word was used in the wrong context often. She thought that the fashion was intended to be sexual and that I was too naive to understand that, and that I just took it to be a cute fashion. Here’s the thing tho: it IS just a cute fashion. And after explaining this, she was then worried that other gross people would sexualise me against my will or target me and therefore I shouldn’t be wearing it.

Wrong. It is other people’s fault for sexualising me, not mine. It is never my fault, if I am sexualised against my will. It is never anybody’s fault.

Especially when, personally, I liked the idea of lolita because it was so darn sweet and elegant, and in my opinion, so not-sexually-charged in a world that shoved sex in my face every day. It was a breath of fresh air. I’ve had more sexual connotations associated with me when I was fucking 12 and wore a tank top and shorts to grade 7 orientation on a hot summers day and everyone who didn’t know my name called me ~the girl with the boobs~ for two years straight. Like ????

And then we fast forward to when I met my dad’s partner and she heard about lolita and had a minature heart attack because, in juxtaposition to my mum, it was so adorable, she couldn’t believe it. In her native culture, Lolita was a nickname for Dolores and had little-to-no sexual connotations with it. She even, if my memory serves me right, mentioned that lolita or dolly was just something you called sweet young girls. So the word was really fitting and it was all just so sweet and cute. She even pronounces it with a Spanish accent despite having an Australian accent because that’s what you do with totally native words.

So I’m emphasising a cultural difference here.

And here’s my thing, here’s a bit of TL;DR:

Have pedophiles and misogynist pigs who sexualise young girls seriously infiltrated every aspect of our society that it is somehow more fucking plausible that girls who want to dress in cute and feminine fashion are doing so because they want to be sexualised? Or that they should expect to be sexualised? Is that what people are saying now? That girls cannot take charge over their lives and their aesthetic for one god damned second before being, yet again, sexualised in every aspect of their being?

I don’t want to use ‘you’re damned if you do, and damned if you don’t’ but hey, that’s all I can muster up right now because I feel like I’m on a different fricking planet.

And, as a not-so-subtle side note, if you don’t think mainstream porn and it’s culture has something to do with this, you are dead wrong.

Amazing new concept: If girls want to be sexual, they can be sexual. If they don’t, they don’t. Either fucking way it is impossible to win when mainstream society oversexualises young girls and their fashion in an ~adult way~ and if you somehow take a different path you’re fetishised as an ~innocent sex nymph doll~ like where the fuck do we draw the line?

I will tell you where we draw the god damned line: where ever the fuck the girl in question draws her own m o t h er fricking line.

WOW.

ghostlygamtav:

"yeah you’ll grow out of enjoying anime eventually"

image

(Source: blondnepeta)

cringing:

tHIS IS MY FAVE POS T