murder-in-my-veins:

For never was a story of more woe, than this of Professor X, and his Magneto. 

(via chainsandshipsexciteme)


(via joshpeck)


godotal:

hkirkh:

Confused husky pup

He’s not expressing confusion, he’s tilting his head for better sound localization. While having an ear on each side of the head is good for lateral echolocation, tilting the head so that the ears are offset gives it vertical depth.

godotal:

hkirkh:

Confused husky pup

He’s not expressing confusion, he’s tilting his head for better sound localization. While having an ear on each side of the head is good for lateral echolocation, tilting the head so that the ears are offset gives it vertical depth.

(via humanistrambles)


honeybooboolovescheetos5ever:

What does this even mean or say

honeybooboolovescheetos5ever:

What does this even mean or say

(via schoolgorl)


departured:

pepsimaxing:

mornings are gross and i want no part in them

(via shrekjpeg)


jawnthebaptiste:

kingjaffejoffer:

Michael Brown’s dad before the burial. 
The emotion and all of the sweat…. shit is hard to look at, even if its only a picture

I didn’t want to reblog this because it’s hard to look at, but people SHOULD see it.
We SHOULD see a father mourning his teenage son.
We SHOULD see how a killing like Mike’s can take a toll on not only a community, but a family.
It’s as easy for young black men to become martyrs as it is for them to become victims. They can never just be humans. 
We can never just be.

jawnthebaptiste:

kingjaffejoffer:

Michael Brown’s dad before the burial. 

The emotion and all of the sweat…. shit is hard to look at, even if its only a picture

I didn’t want to reblog this because it’s hard to look at, but people SHOULD see it.

We SHOULD see a father mourning his teenage son.

We SHOULD see how a killing like Mike’s can take a toll on not only a community, but a family.

It’s as easy for young black men to become martyrs as it is for them to become victims. They can never just be humans. 

We can never just be.

(via kettugasm)


theshoutingendoflife:

piratefaafy:

elevensies-:

they said it couldn’t be done

venn piagram

THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT VISUAL PUN TO HAVE EVER BEEN POSTED ON THE INTERNET.

theshoutingendoflife:

piratefaafy:

elevensies-:

they said it couldn’t be done

venn piagram

THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT VISUAL PUN TO HAVE EVER BEEN POSTED ON THE INTERNET.

(via kettugasm)


afrofilipino:

vulturesintrees:

cumgirl1:

that pelvic thrust is so vicious


I’m deleting

go off

afrofilipino:

vulturesintrees:

cumgirl1:

that pelvic thrust is so vicious

I’m deleting

go off

(via continueplease)


eschergirls:


maplepoutine submitted:






This is not really an Escher Girl, but the LoL cinematic trailer submission on this page made me think of this screencap of an FF XV trailer.  Notice how every male character have textured, realist skin while the two female characters have perfect pale skin with makeup on.

This reminds me of a previous post where somebody brought up the lack of wrinkles or facial creases of any kind on a woman character in a League of Legends trailer, and I also posted a picture of the male and female faces in Batman: Arkham City as another example where female faces must be devoid of any lines (even expression lines) while male faces can have all sorts of interesting features and details, and can be exaggerated to give more character to the faces.

This isn’t just about women having to be portrayed as eternally young, or how women’s standards for beauty are so tied with having no lines on our faces, but it’s also incredibly limiting when designing and portraying female characters.  If all your female characters always have to have smooth round faces, no wrinkles, etc (and often big eyes and pouty lips too), then it’s going to be that much harder to try to make them look different than each other.  And if they also aren’t allowed to show lines on their faces for expressions, then it’s going to limit the range of their expression too, or they’re going to end up with a weird doll look when you do have them emote.  The point is, it can end up creating a very limited box for female character visuals, and creating characters that all look very similarly, even if you really don’t mean to. And that in turn limits how much information you can convey about those characters, visually.

eschergirls:

This is not really an Escher Girl, but the LoL cinematic trailer submission on this page made me think of this screencap of an FF XV trailer.  Notice how every male character have textured, realist skin while the two female characters have perfect pale skin with makeup on.

This reminds me of a previous post where somebody brought up the lack of wrinkles or facial creases of any kind on a woman character in a League of Legends trailer, and I also posted a picture of the male and female faces in Batman: Arkham City as another example where female faces must be devoid of any lines (even expression lines) while male faces can have all sorts of interesting features and details, and can be exaggerated to give more character to the faces.

This isn’t just about women having to be portrayed as eternally young, or how women’s standards for beauty are so tied with having no lines on our faces, but it’s also incredibly limiting when designing and portraying female characters.  If all your female characters always have to have smooth round faces, no wrinkles, etc (and often big eyes and pouty lips too), then it’s going to be that much harder to try to make them look different than each other.  And if they also aren’t allowed to show lines on their faces for expressions, then it’s going to limit the range of their expression too, or they’re going to end up with a weird doll look when you do have them emote.  The point is, it can end up creating a very limited box for female character visuals, and creating characters that all look very similarly, even if you really don’t mean to. And that in turn limits how much information you can convey about those characters, visually.

(via kettugasm)


sweaterkittensahoy:

alliartist:

rifa:

prokopetz:

nebcondist1:

prokopetz:

I’ve seen this image going around, and I feel compelled to point out that it’s only half-right. It’s true that high heels were originally a masculine fashion, but they weren’t originally worn by butchers - nor for any other utilitarian purpose, for that matter.
High heels were worn by men for exactly the same reason they’re worn by women today: to display one’s legs to best effect. Until quite recently, shapely, well-toned calves and thighs were regarded as an absolute prerequisite for male attractiveness. That’s why you see so many paintings of famous men framed to show off their legs - like this one of George Washington displaying his fantastic calves:

… or this one of Louis XIV of France rocking a fabulous pair of red platform heels (check out those thighs!):

… or even this one of Charles I of England showing off his high-heeled riding boots - note, again, the visual emphasis on his well-formed calves:

In summary: were high heels originally worn by men? Yes. Were they worn to keep blood off their feet? No at all - they were worn for the same reason they’re worn today: to look fabulous.

so then how did they become a solo feminine item of attire?

A variety of reasons. In France, for example, high heels fell out out of favour in the court of Napoleon due to their association with aristocratic decadence, while in England, the more conservative fashions of the Victorian era regarded it as indecent for a man to openly display his calves.
But then, fashions come and go. The real question is why heels never came back into fashion for men - and that can be laid squarely at the feet of institutionalised homophobia. Essentially, heels for men were never revived because, by the early 20th Century, sexually provocative attire for men had come to be associated with homosexuality; the resulting moral panic ushered in an era of drab, blocky, fully concealing menswear in which a well-turned calf simply had no place - a setback from which men’s fashion has yet to fully recover.

FASHION HISTORY IS HUMAN HISTORY OK

Thank you, history side of tumblr. That “stay out of blood” thing has been driving me mad.


I love how basically the bullshit is, “Well, yeah, MEN wore heels, but it was for PRACTICAL reasons.”No, men wore heels because it made them look pretty.

sweaterkittensahoy:

alliartist:

rifa:

prokopetz:

nebcondist1:

prokopetz:

I’ve seen this image going around, and I feel compelled to point out that it’s only half-right. It’s true that high heels were originally a masculine fashion, but they weren’t originally worn by butchers - nor for any other utilitarian purpose, for that matter.

High heels were worn by men for exactly the same reason they’re worn by women today: to display one’s legs to best effect. Until quite recently, shapely, well-toned calves and thighs were regarded as an absolute prerequisite for male attractiveness. That’s why you see so many paintings of famous men framed to show off their legs - like this one of George Washington displaying his fantastic calves:

… or this one of Louis XIV of France rocking a fabulous pair of red platform heels (check out those thighs!):

… or even this one of Charles I of England showing off his high-heeled riding boots - note, again, the visual emphasis on his well-formed calves:

In summary: were high heels originally worn by men? Yes. Were they worn to keep blood off their feet? No at all - they were worn for the same reason they’re worn today: to look fabulous.

so then how did they become a solo feminine item of attire?

A variety of reasons. In France, for example, high heels fell out out of favour in the court of Napoleon due to their association with aristocratic decadence, while in England, the more conservative fashions of the Victorian era regarded it as indecent for a man to openly display his calves.

But then, fashions come and go. The real question is why heels never came back into fashion for men - and that can be laid squarely at the feet of institutionalised homophobia. Essentially, heels for men were never revived because, by the early 20th Century, sexually provocative attire for men had come to be associated with homosexuality; the resulting moral panic ushered in an era of drab, blocky, fully concealing menswear in which a well-turned calf simply had no place - a setback from which men’s fashion has yet to fully recover.

FASHION HISTORY IS HUMAN HISTORY OK

Thank you, history side of tumblr. That “stay out of blood” thing has been driving me mad.

I love how basically the bullshit is, “Well, yeah, MEN wore heels, but it was for PRACTICAL reasons.”

No, men wore heels because it made them look pretty.


sweaterkittensahoy:

hugealienpie:

Y’all, I’m so sick of stories where a white, middle class, able-bodied, neurotypical cishet dude meets a Manic Pixie Revolutionary Girl who shows him genteel, sterilized scenes of poverty and oppression to “wake his consciousness” and then falls in love with him, becoming a reward for his “enlightenment.” Who’s with me?

YOU HAVE MY AXE.


dameferre:

orestesblasting-pyladesfunk:

i realise this AU has been done to death but all i care about is courferre soulmate tattoos

(via punkrogers)


are children small, or just far away?

(via bewbin)


swolizard:

lylaha:

Lil Egyptian Gods by Silverfox5213

IM SOBBING ABT THESE

these are adorable

(via kettugasm)


(via bigbootyhood)