I call this look “fat slut wanna be punk astronaut accountant from outer space with thighs the size of the moon”
Please reblog this if you love it to boost my ego.
Omg! This has so many notes n__n
(via nadroleon)
Alabama city destroying ancient Indian mound for Sam’s Club
This is complete bullshit on SO many levels.
1) It belongs to someone else
2) It’s sacred to that someone
3) It’s against the fucking LAW
4) Wrong, just fucking wrong…I have no more words
Please boost
(via nadroleon)
"The sexualization of women is only appealing if it’s nonconsensual. Otherwise it’s “sluttiness,”…."
— Lindy West, “Female ‘Purity’ Is Bullshit” (via jatigi)
(Source: goldenphoenixgirl, via babysbreathflower)
Andrea Gibson…fuck.
Wifey
(Source: 500shadesoflesbian, via crackingthemoonwithaspoon)
Because single Black capable fathers exist too.
me: *reading aloud* Among the 100 highest-grossing movies at the U.S. box office in 2012, the study reported, 28.4% of speaking characters were female. That’s a drop from 32.8% three years ago.
brother: …i wonder if that has anything to do with a lot of movies being historically based?
me: contrary to popular belief, women in the past did talk.
Eight Months
I walk to work every morning day dreaming about cars and those places we used to climb out to in the desert, out past the city.
When the sky was so brilliant, blue above us, above me, stretching into outlines of eternity, ideas of infinity locked up in our veins.
Being sixteen with a cavalier is a lot more freedom then being twenty-three with a good pair of sneakers in a foreign country.
At least, it is when you probably have an untreated anxiety disorder.
Where have all the women gone in movies?
Despite the success of ‘Bridesmaids’ and other female-driven movies, female representation in films is at its lowest level in five years, a USC report says.
There’s one mountain in Hollywood that even “The Hunger Games’” scrappy heroine Katniss Everdeen hasn’t been able to move: the number of roles for women.
Despite the success of recent female-driven movies such as “Bridesmaids” and the “Hunger Games” and “Twilight” series, female representation in popular movies is at its lowest level in five years, according to a study being released Monday by the USC Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism.
Among the 100 highest-grossing movies at the U.S. box office in 2012, the study reported, 28.4% of speaking characters were female. That’s a drop from 32.8% three years ago, and a number that has stayed relatively stagnant despite increased research attention to the topic and several high-profile box-office successes starring women.
“There is notable consistency in the number of females on-screen from year to year,” said USC researcher Marc Choueiti. “The slate of films developed and produced each year is almost formulaic — in the aggregate, female representation hardly changed at all.”
When they are on-screen, 31.6% of women are shown wearing sexually revealing clothing, the highest percentage in the five years the USC researchers have been studying the issue.
For teen girls, the number who are provocatively dressed is even higher: 56.6% of teen girl characters in 2012 movies wore sexy clothes, an increase of 20% since 2009.
The USC researchers said these trends persist because those working in Hollywood believe attracting a male audience is the key ingredient to box office success.
“Industry perceptions of the audience drive much of what we see on-screen,” said study author Stacy L. Smith. “There is a perception that movies that pull male sell. Given that females go to the movies as much as males, the lack of change is likely due to entrenched ways of thinking and doing business that perpetuate the status quo.”
Female characters are more prevalent — and less likely to be sexualized — in movies written and directed by women, according to Smith.
A study USC released in January in conjunction with the Sundance Institute and Women in Film Los Angeles found that women have made more inroads in those kinds of behind-the-camera jobs in independent film and documentaries than they have in big-budget studio movies.
But it’s typically the studio movies that drive the box office — and shape audiences.
“Some depictions of females on-screen can have unintended and negative consequences for viewers,” Smith said. “Every voice deserves a chance to be heard and every story a chance to be told. At the moment … that does not seem to be the case in popular film.”
(via brienneofkobol)
My new goal is to get a coworker who is fluent in Irish to teach me a cuss word in Irish.
/update from Dublin
"Once slavery ended and whites declared that no black woman regardless of her class status or skin color could ever be a “lady,” it was no longer socially acceptable for a white man to have a black mistress. Instead, the institutionalized devaluation of black womanhood encouraged all white men to regard black females as whores or prostitutes. Lower class white men, who had had little sexual contact with black women during slavery, were encouraged to believe they were entitled to access to the bodies of black women. In large cities their lust for black female sex objects led to the formation of numerous houses of prostitution which supplied black bodies to meet the growing demands of white men. The myth perpetuated by white that black women were possessors of a heightened sexuality encouraged white male rapists and sexual exploiters."
— bell hooks in Ain’t I a Woman: Black Women and Feminism (via daniellemertina)
(via rapeculturerealities)
"
Why is there very little utility to women’s clothing? Why don’t we get pockets which actually open? Why do we have to put up with the ‘false pockets’ that are frequently sewn onto women’s jackets and pants to give visual interest without ruining the ‘line’ of the garment? Why, when pockets are actually present, are they so rarely large, stable, or loose enough to accommodate a phone or a wallet? And why, given this is the case, do women go on to cop so much flack for carrying handbags around with them?
Oh wait. Is this one of those double standards which we feminists are always going on about; one of those innocuous little things which everybody just accepts because it is the norm?
Women carry handbags. It is known.
But why? I have watched my male friends get ready to go out. They slip their wallet into one pocket, their keys into another, their phone into a third pocket, and some of them even still have spare pockets large enough to carry a novel for the journey. Those of my friends who wear women’s clothes, though, face an entirely different situation. If they are wearing the right jeans or jacket, they may have up to two usable pockets (not at all guaranteed). However, in most cases they won’t have any pockets at all. Utility and style rarely meet in women’s fashion, so they grab a bag.
Contrary to all the jokes, most women don’t ‘have’ to leave the house with everything they pack in their day-to-day handbag. Most of the items in a woman’s everyday handbag are in there because, if she’s going to have to carry it anyway, she might as well make it worth her while. Excuse us for making use of the one useful item we find in our wardrobes.
"—
Kara, “The Feminist and the Handbag” (via athenasaurus)
Oh lord, don’t get me started on this. This is a little thing that highlights a big equality problem between men and women. We need the same supplies as men to do the same job. When I stocked shelves it was impossible to find pants that would hold my wallet, my box knife, my badge, my keys, my gloves (I worked dairy/frozen) and my phone. I actually ended up not carrying my wallet or keys at all. Fuck if I’m carrying a purse *ever* but that certainly wouldn’t have helped on the job.
My husband? He holds all of that plus his insulin, packets of honey in case his blood sugar drops (or a vial of glucose tablets), glucometer, headphones, markers, and pencils. With plenty of room to spare. I’ve even seen him slip paperback books into empty pockets.
When we bought sweatpants together so we could start working out? I had zero pockets. He had four. Four. When we wanted some boots for added protection working around 1.5-ton pallets and slippery surfaces, he was able to go to the nearest store and buy steel-toed, non-shock, no-slip boots in his size, no problem. I had to look online to find mine. Because women don’t work dangerous jobs. I hate shopping for clothes in general, but when it has to be online it really sucks because you never know if they will actually fit or be decent quality. Especially because, guess what, women’s sizes are far less standardized than men’s.
I’m going to guess this is all some remnant from the “women should be in the kitchen, not out in the world doing practical things” days that has held over and made it harder for us to…you know, do practical things, even nowadays. If I ever end up working a job like that again, I’ll probably just buy men’s pants and hem them for my 5-foot-tall frame, because I deserve the same supplies for my job that men do. And no, I don’t care if the men’s jeans don’t highlight the curve of my ass superbly. Do they hold up under tough conditions? Do they carry what I need carried? Practicality and efficiency only in my wardrobe, please.
(via solluxisms)
I remember watching I think it was Project Runway and the contestants had to design a new uniform for female postal workers. The one designer put utilitarian pockets on her design, and the judges yelled at her for it. They said something about it not being flattering, because you know, the key part of any uniform is not that it works for the job, but that it shows off your body in the best light possible.
(via jetpuffedmarshmallowsandsunburns)
(Source: blonde-cyborg, via isallornothingthebestwecando)
