basinke:

radioactive-dingo:

madamehearthwitch:

auntiewanda:

unified-multiversal-theory:

socialistexan:

ginger-ale-official:

Oh they’re going to need salvation.

Not just making it illegal, but making being gay punishable with death.

This is one of the many reasons why I walk by every single red bucket in the run-up to Christmas. They’re not getting my money, I don’t care how nice the people ringing bells are.

Ever since the time they threatened to close all their soup kitchens in NYC if a law that did something as simple as allow companies to extend spousal benefits to their employee’s same-sex domestic partners I have refused to buy from them or donate to them. 

It’s that time of year again! In case people don’t know… the Salvation Army is shitty peoples.

Also, the married women are not paid (and therefore can’t qualify for assistance if they should ever divorce, etc). And worth “of course” less than a man.

In the Army’s case, the agreement for compensation is that the officer allowance be paid jointly to the husband—the check is written in his name. Officially, the wife is a “worker without expectation of remuneration,” and her husband receives 40 percent more of an allowance as a married man than he would as a single man.

source

hey since that season is coming up again!

Don’t abuse the bell ringers unless they get aggressive, but don’t give them a bent penny.

bitchesgetriches:

crumplelush:

purplelittlemermaid:

imjustjason:

thefandomdropout:

glam-alien:

afronerdism:

not-your-babe-fuckboy:

seeker-murmuration:

rodimeme:

xiki-muffin:

creativelycultivated:

respect-thetrillogy:

creativelycultivated:

im-me-all-day-every-day:

micdotcom:

Watch: The “pink tax” is secretly costing women thousands — and not just at the drug store

Yooooooooooo

Women pay more for products. Men pay more for clothing.

Do men really pay more for clothes?

Yea, seriously. Shirts, sneakers, jeans, socks…etc. Ask your male friends how much they pay for a pair of descent jeans. It’ll blow your mind. 

At least their pants have fucking pockets tho

Men pay more for clothing.”

(Target)

image

Are you sure?

image

Are you

(Walmart)

image

ABSOLUTELY SURE??

image

BECAUSE I’M NOT ENTIRELY CONVINCED

image

LIKE AT ALL

image

THAT MEN HAVE IT HARDER

(Victoria’s Secret)

image

OH AND SHOULD I BRING UP PANTIES WHILE I’M AT IT? I am a firm believer of the “fuck you, I’ll wear briefs that don’t give me a wedgie, I don’t care if they’re not sexy” policy, but a lot of women are expected to wear panties and thongs because GASP WOMEN MUST BE BEAUTIFUL AT ALL TIMES. Here’s a screenshot of some Victoria’s secret panties!

image

Wow. It’s almost as if there’s a pattern here.

Women are expected to buy more clothing, and literally all of it is more expensive, so fuck all of you.

*HAMMERS THE REBLOG BUTTON*

Fucking infuriating.
And, NO ONE pays more for clothes than fat women. Tired of it.

Have you ever stepped on a Torrid? $50-$80 for a blouse.

^^^^^

Yup it totally gets more costly when you’re not model thin.

Woah

I’m here to confirm the fat girl comment…. decent fitting, CUTE plus size shit is just expensive as fuck.

As a trans person who has shopped for both mens and womens clothes, I can confirm that womens clothes are A LOT more expensive than mens – and women are expected to buy more as well. I don’t mean that women are expected to love shopping and want loads of outfits (although that expectation certainly contributes), I mean that womens shirts are sheer and they are expected to wear stuff underneath them, while mens shirts are opaque. Womens tops are flimsy so they have to wear cardigans or jumpers, mens tops are thicker and they can get away without. Womens clothes don’t have pockets so they’re forced to buy bags to carry stuff.

There is only one single exception to this that I can found. And that is underwear. I don’t mean lingerie like the Victoria’s Secret stuff above, I mean basic knickers vs basic boxers. A multipack of 7 knickers from Primark costs about £4. A multipack of 3 boxers from Primark costs £7. That is literally the only exception that I’ve found.

Of course, considering that a lot of women also wear bras that tiny concession ceases to be a factor once you add in the cost of a bra. Even a basic Primark one costs about £6 for one. That basic bras aren’t supportive, comfortable, long lasting, or anything else you need from a bra.

So yeah, men might pay a lot for their clothes. But women pay a lot more.

If you’re skeptical about the Pink Tax, you can do your own test at a local store. That’s literally what I did here, complete with photographic evidence of the pricing: 

The Pink Tax, Or: How I Learned to Love Smelling Like “Bearglove” 

The Secret to Love Is Just Kindness

oscar-and-endear:

“Throughout the day, partners would make requests for connection, what Gottman calls “bids.” For example, say that the husband is a bird enthusiast and notices a goldfinch fly across the yard. He might say to his wife, “Look at that beautiful bird outside!” He’s not just commenting on the bird here: he’s requesting a response from his wife—a sign of interest or support—hoping they’ll connect, however momentarily, over the bird.

The wife now has a choice. She can respond by either “turning toward” or “turning away” from her husband, as Gottman puts it. Though the bird-bid might seem minor and silly, it can actually reveal a lot about the health of the relationship. The husband thought the bird was important enough to bring it up in conversation and the question is whether his wife recognizes and respects that.

People who turned toward their partners in the study responded by engaging the bidder, showing interest and support in the bid. Those who didn’t—those who turned away—would not respond or respond minimally and continue doing whatever they were doing, like watching TV or reading the paper. Sometimes they would respond with overt hostility, saying something like, “Stop interrupting me, I’m reading.”

These bidding interactions had profound effects on marital well-being. Couples who had divorced after a six-year follow up had “turn-toward bids” 33 percent of the time. Only three in ten of their bids for emotional connection were met with intimacy. The couples who were still together after six years had “turn-toward bids” 87 percent of the time. Nine times out of ten, they were meeting their partner’s emotional needs.”

“Kindness… glues couples together. Research independent from theirs has shown that kindness (along with emotional stability) is the most important predictor of satisfaction and stability in a marriage. Kindness makes each partner feel cared for, understood, and validated—feel loved. “My bounty is as boundless as the sea,” says Shakespeare’s Juliet. “My love as deep; the more I give to thee, / The more I have, for both are infinite.” That’s how kindness works too: there’s a great deal of evidence showing the more someone receives or witnesses kindness, the more they will be kind themselves, which leads to upward spirals of love and generosity in a relationship.

There are two ways to think about kindness. You can think about it as a fixed trait: either you have it or you don’t. Or you could think of kindness as a muscle. In some people, that muscle is naturally stronger than in others, but it can grow stronger in everyone with exercise. Masters tend to think about kindness as a muscle. They know that they have to exercise it to keep it in shape. They know, in other words, that a good relationship requires sustained hard work.

“If your partner expresses a need,” explained Julie Gottman, “and you are tired, stressed, or distracted, then the generous spirit comes in when a partner makes a bid, and you still turn toward your partner.”

The Secret to Love Is Just Kindness

sharpestscalpel:

naamahdarling:

reno-dakota:

auntiewanda:

epoxyconfetti:

codex-fawkes:

unified-multiversal-theory:

stained-glass-rose:

hyggehaven:

profeminist:

Source

I want men to try and imagine going about your day–working, running, hiking, whatever–and not being allowed to wear pants under threats of violence or total social and economic exclusion.

That’s the kind of irrationally violent and controlling behaviour women have been up against.

Also for anyone who thinks it’s easy for women to be gender non conforming because we can wear pants.

The only reason we can is because we fought tooth and nail for the right to! Any rights we take for granted today we’re the result of a prolonged, bitter battle fought by our predecessors for every inch of territory gained. Never forget that.

Title IX (1972) declared that girls could not be required to wear skirts to school.

Women who were United States senators were not allowed to wear trousers on the Senate floor until 1993, after senators Barbara Mikulski and Carol Moseley Braun wore them in protest, which encouraged female staff members to do likewise.

This was never given to us. Women have had to fight just to be able to wear pants. Women who are still alive remember having to wear skirts to school, even in the dead of winter, when it was so cold that just having a layer of tights between them and the elements was downright dangerous. Women who remember not even being allowed to wear pants under their skirts, for no other reason than they were female.

So don’t talk about women wearing pants being gender nonconforming like it’s easy. It’s only less difficult now because your foremothers refused to comply.

My mother spent her entire school career up until high school having to wear skirts, no matter how horrible the New England winters got, because she was forbidden to do otherwise. There were times when the weather was bad where my grandmother kept her home rather than make her walk to and from the bus in a skirt. 

They rebroadcast a few old interviews with Mary Tyler Moore, and in them she addressed the pants issue. There was a strict limit on what kind of pants she could wear (hence, always Capri pants, nothing masculine), and to use her words, how much cupping the pants could show. A censor would look at every outfit when she came out on stage, and if the pants cupped her buttocks too much, defining them rather than hiding them, then she had to get another pair.

A prime example of how gender is socially enforced.

I remember a prolonged battle at primary school, with petitions and numerous near riotous PTA meetings before girls were allowed to wear trousers. In the late 1990s/early 2000s. In Scotland. A country which now (rightly, for the most part) prides itself on its progressiveness. Please don’t ever take these things for granted, and don’t assume that it’s only far flung places that you have nothing in common with that took so long to catch up. We’re all still fighting, little by little, for every apparently trivial victory that mounts up until we can reach the non-trivial ones. And we can’t afford to stop.

At my private Catholic high school, girls were only given the green light to wear pants the year before I began attending.

In 1992.

This is for every man who says “well, men aren’t allowed to wear skirts” as though that proves something about how men have it so hard.

YOU HAVENT EARNED IT, DUDES.

You’re the ones who have made those rules, and now you are stuck playing by them.

naamahdarling:

bunnywith:

naamahdarling:

If you run a pro-MAP bog, unfollow me now. You aren’t welcome here and I don’t want my words on your blog.

HEY WHY DO WE KEEP USING MAP INSTEAD OF PEDO

WHY ARE WE ALLOWING KIDDIE DIDDLERS TO REBRAND THEMSELVES LIKE NAZIS DID

IF YOU’RE PRO PEDO OR A PEDO FUCK OFF PLS

You make a very good point.

P.S. Nazis unfollow too.

spankzilla85:

noodlehorsecomics:

Greyhounds are lanky, sweet, kinda-dumb couch-potatoes/tiny horses made out of elbows and snoots. They love a good run every now and then but are mostly content to flop around in awkward sleeping positions and stand silently in the middle of the room hoping for food.

They aren’t super compatible with small animals but they can be trained out of it.

I have one and she’s my little dummy ❤️

Greyhounds. “Consider us!”

hatey-mchaterson:

timemachineyeah:

a-spoon-is-born:

funoftheday:

You don’t say.

For the record, she actually abandoned the movement BEFORE they all got whooping cough, but abandoned it too late. There’d been a breakout of measles in her area that caused her to reassess, and she and her doctor had already drafted and started a catch-up vaccination schedule, but her kids caught whooping cough just before it could be started. Then she wrote a blog post for The Scientific Parent explaining how she and her husband had come to wrong decisions in the first place, how they changed their mind, the consequences they suffered as a result, and asking other parents to please vaccinate their kids. And now she’s an activist for destroying the misinformation of anti-vaxxers, and reaching out to anti-vaxxers because she’s understands their fears but knows their kids deserve better. 

She was trying to the best for her kids and just didn’t know how to interpret the validity of information or its sources, an actual skill that can be actually difficult and that is under-taught and a necessary first step to being able to trust vaccination research, so chose no action over taking an action she wasn’t sure of. She kept looking into it with family and friends and even eventually came to the right conclusion before her kids became sick, but it was still too late.

Honestly it was pretty brave of her to publicly admit she was wrong. She could have just quietly vaccinated her kids and not become a national news story, but instead she spoke out, even saying “I’m writing this from quarantine, the irony of which isn’t lost on me.” and also “I am not looking forward to any gloating or shame as this ‘defection’ from the antivaxx camp goes public, but, this isn’t a popularity contest.  Right now my family is living the consequences of misinformation and fear.  I understand that families in our community may be mad at us for putting their kids at risk.”

She understood the consequences and still put herself and her story out there. 

You know what, it does take a big person to admit they were wrong so publicly and work to undo the harm. I believe I made fun of her in the past, but timemachineyeah changed my mind.

slythwolf:

hollowedskin:

And speaking of gross bros thinking of nerd girls like fucking unicorns…

I was actually talking to a female client once about cannon-fannon and how much I love listening to her talk comics, and had a male client interupt us to tell me he has never met a chick that is into comics before, he’s never even heard of a girl being into comics before,  and he has always wanted a nerdy girlfriend and that i absolutely MUST give him her number.

I actually had to explain to him that I wasn’t joking when I said she was out of his league.
Yes, she is incredible, she is beautiful, she is intelligent, successful, highly knowledgeable and enthusiastic about comics, and she’s also not even going to look twice at you because literally all you got is that she fulfills a fantasy of yours.

Yes bro i get it, she’s your ideal girl.
Trust me, she’s a lot of people’s ideal girl. And you’re not even on her radar. You’re not special because you’re into comics. She has a very wide range of potential partners to choose from and ‘never having met a nerdy girl before’ isn’t a good character trait, because it means you know zero women. Or zero women have trusted your creepy ass with the knowledge that they are into comics.

The most concerning part of that entire conversation was his complete inability to grasp the concept that she wouldn’t date him and his insistence that she would.

He insisted that I give her name/number/fb/actually call her and ask her to come to the studio (wtffff???) because he needed to meet her.
And then just could not fathom that I refused.
He seemed to be running on this idea that if she met him, she would like him. For no other reason than that he was into comics and he wanted a nerd girlfriend.

And I was somehow out of line for refusing to give my best freinds deets to this creepy nerdbro because I couldn’t possibly know that she wouldn’t be into him.

He got really upset. 

He was in my studio for 45 mins arguing with me on and off about this and trying to push me into giving her number.

Out. Of. Your. League. Not on your level. Too fucking good for you. Not a possibility. You’ve got nothing she wants. You’re one of literally thousands who would want her. You have nothing to offer her. You tick zero of her boxes. You do not even meet the minimum requirements for me to even ask her.  

NOT 

HAPPENING 

MATE.

This is why women don’t say they’re women in WoW, this is why women don’t say they’re into games irl. This is why women don’t hang out in comics stores. This is why nerd women hide one of these two aspects of themselves when interacting with nerd men.

Because you creepy as FUCK about us.

‘never having met a nerdy girl before’ isn’t a good character trait, because it means you know zero women. 

truuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuth