Latest on twitter:
Stephen Colbert salutes UVA’s Class of 2013 Followed by this.
FUCKING THANK YOU.
(via callbrad)
If Earth Had Rings
First off, they would be really pretty to look at. They would also dominate the sky in both night and day at exactly the same place as they would never rise nor set. And at night you would see the Earth’s shadow swing across the rings, like in the 4th photo here.
However, life would be very different on Earth if this were the case. Nocturnal animals would have a hard time being nocturnal, as the light reflecting from the rings would illuminate the night.
Because we are closer to the Sun than Saturn is, the rings would be more rocky than ice, making them less bright but still pretty bright. In fact, you would see far less stars at night (living anywhere other than the equator or the arctic circle) because of the light pollution and not to mention ruin most meteor showers because of that.
During the day the rings would block sunlight in certain regions of the planet creating wild weather cycles and effecting plant life as well. So basically, they would be definitely pretty to look at but they would also make a whole lot of things screwy.
Illustrations by Ron Miller // io9
— Click the photos for captions
(via keganbrendan)
![raccooneyedbitch:
bombarrows:
quadrangledreality:
lightningsshadow:
paranoidandroid42:
yes i’m a boy
yes i play videogames ;]
don’t hit on me silly girls xoxoxo
wft boys don’t play videogames
get back in the garage and fix my car.
another fucking “gamer boy” They all just want attention they cant even play well!
He’s just a slut with a controller.
That console isn’t even plugged in you fucking whore.](http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lzk61g0hKW1rpj5z4o1_r1_500.jpg)
yes i’m a boy
yes i play videogames ;]
don’t hit on me silly girls xoxoxo
wft boys don’t play videogames
get back in the garage and fix my car.
another fucking “gamer boy” They all just want attention they cant even play well!
He’s just a slut with a controller.
That console isn’t even plugged in you fucking whore.
(via prguitarman)
Portland, Maine
Email: trustyourself@trustwatson.com
Earlier today this one girl was talking about how racism only happens if you’re too sensitive and that words are just words and that rather than being offended by how dismissive of the experiences of people who deal with racism she was being, you should just be like her and not let it affect you. Then she announced that she was going to smoke a bowl and watch this week’s Game of Thrones and not care about any of this
Having just started A Feast For Crows earlier last week I went ahead and spoiled the next two seasons of Game of Thrones for her but don’t worry! It’s okay, words only have the meaning you give them so she can just conveniently forget who any of the characters are forever and it’ll be fine
(Source: confusedtree)
My boss is the best.
no see lesbians are not more accepted than gay men they’re more sexualized please do not get those 2 things confused
(via callbrad)
“Lilo and Stitch” 2002
Deleted Scene
Lilo plays a trick on the tourists.
IF YOU LIVED HERE YOU’D UNDERSTAND
I desperately need to understand
WHY
WHY WHY WHY WHY WHY WHY
Was this scene cut from the movie??!!
Fucking christ, do you know what this would have done? What this would have meant to SO MANY people?? The truth of this is devastating. And to think it almost found it’s way into a DISNEY film??
The inclusion of this scene alone would have made it the greatest animated feature the company ever produced. Easily. And if you think that’s hyperbolic clearly you don’t understand.
No, really, if anyone knows why this was cut PLEASE let me know.
oh man WHY WOULD they cut this, this is so great, holy MOLY
It was clearly something the crew was very reluctant to get rid of if it made it all the way to rough-clean (and in a few scenes clean!), fully inbetweened animation. That is like, thousands and thousands of dollars and weeks (months?!) of labour. Maybe a reluctant producer decided they would alienate their white middle-class American audiences by making them feel “too guilty” and pressed them to drop it? It’s unfortunate, it’s one of the most honest accounts of racism in a Disney movie (which is why it’s believable that someone got uncomfortable and made a case to get it chopped)
Designing entertainment by committee for maximum marketability is probably the most heartbreaking process in Hollywood.
I’ve been seeing this around my dash and think it deserves some more recognition!
This shit is hilarious, too.
NO WAIT SHIT
I GET IT NOW
I GET WHY SHE WAS PHOTOGRAPHING TOURISTS AS A HOBBY
SHE WAS BEING FUCKING SATIRICAL AND OBJECTIFYING
IT’S NOT BECAUSE SHE’S A DUMB KID WITH A WEIRD HOBBY IT’S BECAUSE THEY DO THAT TO HER AND HER FRIENDS AND FAMILY LIKE SHE’S SOME KIND OF FUCKING THEME PARK CHARACTER AND SHE WANTS THEM TO KNOW HOW IT FEELS
HOLY FUCKING DICKS DISNEY WHY WOULD YOU CUT THIS
(via callbrad)
![andreistrizek:
ryanjdavis:
I was trying to figure out how to word this earlier, but Ngoc beat me to it and said it more forcefully than I would have.
tranqualizer:
[photo: image of a Black homeless man wearing a white t shirt and holding a white Abercrombie and fitch branded t shirt in front of him.]
Why Fitch the Homeless is a Really Bad Idea
In response to some comments made by Abercrombie & Fitch CEO Michael Jeffries about not wanting large people in A&F clothes because he prefers “attractive…cool kids” in A&F clothes, there’s been a pretty big backlash, which is understandable. Most recently, I’ve learned about some “activism” aimed at giving Abercrombie and Fitch a “brand readjustment’” by giving Abercrombie and Fitch clothing to the homeless.
Because wouldn’t it be so awful for Abercrombie and Fitch clothing to be associated with homelessness and homeless people, because homeless people are so gross and disgusting, amirite? The video above says that it is striving to make Abercrombie and Fitch “the #1 brand of homeless apparel”. Maybe you’re thinking there’s no issue here because at least homeless people are getting some new duds and they were purchased from Goodwill, so what’s the big deal?
The big deal comes in when homeless people are being exploited to prove a point. Many homeless people are already widely disenfranchised and lacking a platform to be heard or to get access to the resources they need. By attempting to make a brand look bad by associating it with homelessness, the message is that homeless people are so gross, dirty, shameful (insert negative attribute here) that by associating the brand with these types of people, we are really making the brand look shitty, because these people are so shitty! get it? It’s all such a laugh! This type of “activism” is a farce. It contributes to and propagates a culture wherein homeless people can be used as props to further an agenda. This isn’t how you treat people. This is how you treat disposable objects. It isn’t funny, noble, or helpful to try and stick it to Abercrombie and Fitch by using homeless people as the medium for your message. Would the American population at large be comfortable with any other minority group being used to make a brand look “bad” by associating their clothing with that group? Sub out “homeless” for any other minority group and see how that sounds and feels. Pretty shitty, right?
Giving clothing, food, needed sundries, time, and other resources to the homeless or people who are in need is an awesome thing. But this isn’t about giving to the homeless. I don’t see any real or actual concern for homeless people in this “movement”. I see homeless people being used as the butt of a joke. The punchline? “Hahaha Abercrombie! You want cool and attractive people in your clothes and you claim to be exclusionary, so we’re going to give your clothes to homeless people because you would hate that!” The implication here is that homeless people are not cool or attractive and the brand can’t be exclusionary when worn by an already excluded group. This only “works” because homeless people are already part of an othered and excluded group, often left out of mainstream society, denied access to basic resources and the ability to have their needs met. Can’t.Stop.Laughing.
People who want to give to the homeless can do so at any time. Do it today! But giving a certain brand of clothing to the homeless in an attempt to make that brand of clothing look bad or unsavory or less-than-desirable is only possible when the population or group receiving the clothing carries the stigma you are trying to attach to that label. This doesn’t make Abercrombie and Fitch look bad. This makes Greg Karber and everybody supporting this “activism” look like an insensitive douche canoe who thinks homeless people are disposable props to be used to further an agenda, and that’s pretty sad and disappointing. Wanna help the homeless? Try not furthering the stigma surrounding homelessness by insisting that a brand being associated with homelessness would surely be less desirable or wanted. Wanna stick it to Abercrombie and Fitch? Easy Peasy! Don’t give them your money! It’s a simple solution that doesn’t involve stepping on the backs of the homeless in place of a soapbox.
(click through the link to watch the youtube video)
^^^
Thank you](http://25.media.tumblr.com/628909cc9130c02a391b3aafd94f302c/tumblr_mmuzajzwGl1qb18gbo1_500.jpg)
I was trying to figure out how to word this earlier, but Ngoc beat me to it and said it more forcefully than I would have.
[photo: image of a Black homeless man wearing a white t shirt and holding a white Abercrombie and fitch branded t shirt in front of him.]
Why Fitch the Homeless is a Really Bad Idea
In response to some comments made by Abercrombie & Fitch CEO Michael Jeffries about not wanting large people in A&F clothes because he prefers “attractive…cool kids” in A&F clothes, there’s been a pretty big backlash, which is understandable. Most recently, I’ve learned about some “activism” aimed at giving Abercrombie and Fitch a “brand readjustment’” by giving Abercrombie and Fitch clothing to the homeless.
Because wouldn’t it be so awful for Abercrombie and Fitch clothing to be associated with homelessness and homeless people, because homeless people are so gross and disgusting, amirite? The video above says that it is striving to make Abercrombie and Fitch “the #1 brand of homeless apparel”. Maybe you’re thinking there’s no issue here because at least homeless people are getting some new duds and they were purchased from Goodwill, so what’s the big deal?
The big deal comes in when homeless people are being exploited to prove a point. Many homeless people are already widely disenfranchised and lacking a platform to be heard or to get access to the resources they need. By attempting to make a brand look bad by associating it with homelessness, the message is that homeless people are so gross, dirty, shameful (insert negative attribute here) that by associating the brand with these types of people, we are really making the brand look shitty, because these people are so shitty! get it? It’s all such a laugh! This type of “activism” is a farce. It contributes to and propagates a culture wherein homeless people can be used as props to further an agenda. This isn’t how you treat people. This is how you treat disposable objects. It isn’t funny, noble, or helpful to try and stick it to Abercrombie and Fitch by using homeless people as the medium for your message. Would the American population at large be comfortable with any other minority group being used to make a brand look “bad” by associating their clothing with that group? Sub out “homeless” for any other minority group and see how that sounds and feels. Pretty shitty, right?
Giving clothing, food, needed sundries, time, and other resources to the homeless or people who are in need is an awesome thing. But this isn’t about giving to the homeless. I don’t see any real or actual concern for homeless people in this “movement”. I see homeless people being used as the butt of a joke. The punchline? “Hahaha Abercrombie! You want cool and attractive people in your clothes and you claim to be exclusionary, so we’re going to give your clothes to homeless people because you would hate that!” The implication here is that homeless people are not cool or attractive and the brand can’t be exclusionary when worn by an already excluded group. This only “works” because homeless people are already part of an othered and excluded group, often left out of mainstream society, denied access to basic resources and the ability to have their needs met. Can’t.Stop.Laughing.
People who want to give to the homeless can do so at any time. Do it today! But giving a certain brand of clothing to the homeless in an attempt to make that brand of clothing look bad or unsavory or less-than-desirable is only possible when the population or group receiving the clothing carries the stigma you are trying to attach to that label. This doesn’t make Abercrombie and Fitch look bad. This makes Greg Karber and everybody supporting this “activism” look like an insensitive douche canoe who thinks homeless people are disposable props to be used to further an agenda, and that’s pretty sad and disappointing. Wanna help the homeless? Try not furthering the stigma surrounding homelessness by insisting that a brand being associated with homelessness would surely be less desirable or wanted. Wanna stick it to Abercrombie and Fitch? Easy Peasy! Don’t give them your money! It’s a simple solution that doesn’t involve stepping on the backs of the homeless in place of a soapbox.
(click through the link to watch the youtube video)
^^^
Thank you
(via niggawitdreadz)
A large percentage of white people have convinced themselves they’re from here and it’s hilariously pathetic.
(Source: sandandglass, via niggawitdreadz)
Raid Wives Club (sans one J Buc)
Tokyo Layers # 8, 2011. Digital c-print/diasec framing, 60 x 90 cm, 100 x 150 cm.
Tokyo Layers # 15, 2011. Digital c-print/diasec framing, 60 x 90 cm, 100 x 150 cm.
(via carolsroom)
