lukespillane:

There must be no regrets, no tears, no anxieties. Just go forward in all your beliefs and prove to me that I am not mistaken in mine. 

Perfect in every way.

(Source: vastrasjenny, via liamdryden)

amittediem:

victorfuentass:

sarbrez:

f-e-f-e-t-a-c-a-k-e-s:

the-unpopular-opinions:

I think that the USA needs to move on from September 11th.
Now before all you pseudo-patriots come attempting to sway my opinion with your “unwavering loyalty to the country”, let me just take a minute to explain things. I am an American. I’m a female. And I was a young girl when the events took place.
The events are tragic. I’m not saying that they aren’t. But the US government and the media make it out to be some worldwide catastrophe that claimed the lives of millions of people around the world, when really, the event only killed about 2,600 people, which in the grand scheme of things for a large country like the United States isn’t a huge number.
Also, we’re Americans. Not only are we extremely self-absorbed with our ignorance, fueled by the liberally biased media, we’re hardly sympathetic for our victims. We forced unspeakable violence upon the natives when we came here, we killed almost 150,000 people in dropping the atomic bomb in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and we’ve pointlessly murdered innocent people in the Middle East.
I understand that a lot of people died, and I should be respecting them. But while we honor the dead, we can’t have these extravagant 2-hour TV specials reading the names of all these people who died 12 years after the disaster. You don’t see Japan having these insane specials reading off the names of people who died in their terrorist attacks. Yes, that qualifies as a terrorist attack.
I honestly don’t care anymore. Terrorist attacks happen all the time in other countries every day. Just because this one happened in America doesn’t make it any different. It was a terrible thing that happened, but it’s been 12 years. We killed Osama. Why we are still in Iraq, I will never know, but that’s a story for another time. The USA is comparable to a person who still clings to their ex-spouse or significant other years after they broke up.
We have to move on with our lives. Not forget about it completely, but just move on and keep in it the back of our thoughts.

Finally.
Finally someone says it.
Kudos.

im Canadian and I even felt gulty saying it. but this post is true as fuck.

god i am so happy someone finally said this

I’ve thought this for years, and I always get yelled at for saying it. Same with Pearl Harbor. Why do we make basically holidays out if tragedies? Things like this happen all the time all around the world, and it’s nice to honor those who have died but it’s really time to move forward.

amittediem:

victorfuentass:

sarbrez:

f-e-f-e-t-a-c-a-k-e-s:

the-unpopular-opinions:

I think that the USA needs to move on from September 11th.

Now before all you pseudo-patriots come attempting to sway my opinion with your “unwavering loyalty to the country”, let me just take a minute to explain things. I am an American. I’m a female. And I was a young girl when the events took place.

The events are tragic. I’m not saying that they aren’t. But the US government and the media make it out to be some worldwide catastrophe that claimed the lives of millions of people around the world, when really, the event only killed about 2,600 people, which in the grand scheme of things for a large country like the United States isn’t a huge number.

Also, we’re Americans. Not only are we extremely self-absorbed with our ignorance, fueled by the liberally biased media, we’re hardly sympathetic for our victims. We forced unspeakable violence upon the natives when we came here, we killed almost 150,000 people in dropping the atomic bomb in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and we’ve pointlessly murdered innocent people in the Middle East.

I understand that a lot of people died, and I should be respecting them. But while we honor the dead, we can’t have these extravagant 2-hour TV specials reading the names of all these people who died 12 years after the disaster. You don’t see Japan having these insane specials reading off the names of people who died in their terrorist attacks. Yes, that qualifies as a terrorist attack.

I honestly don’t care anymore. Terrorist attacks happen all the time in other countries every day. Just because this one happened in America doesn’t make it any different. It was a terrible thing that happened, but it’s been 12 years. We killed Osama. Why we are still in Iraq, I will never know, but that’s a story for another time. The USA is comparable to a person who still clings to their ex-spouse or significant other years after they broke up.

We have to move on with our lives. Not forget about it completely, but just move on and keep in it the back of our thoughts.

Finally.

Finally someone says it.

Kudos.

im Canadian and I even felt gulty saying it. but this post is true as fuck.

god i am so happy someone finally said this

I’ve thought this for years, and I always get yelled at for saying it. Same with Pearl Harbor. Why do we make basically holidays out if tragedies? Things like this happen all the time all around the world, and it’s nice to honor those who have died but it’s really time to move forward.

(via shinondraws)

waitingforthet:

Coincidence or sinister conspiracy involving actors and studios conspiring to encourage more Spider-Man/Human Torch? Probably coincidence.
I’d imagine Johnny is the sort of person who stays up late reading fan fic about himself.

waitingforthet:

Coincidence or sinister conspiracy involving actors and studios conspiring to encourage more Spider-Man/Human Torch? Probably coincidence.

I’d imagine Johnny is the sort of person who stays up late reading fan fic about himself.

aneternalscoutandabrownie:

bellecs:

This is literally a Tumblr classroom.

Bonus!

And:

(via liamdryden)

brothertedd:

Behind the Scenes Movie Photos - Part 4

(via faetrash)

shoomlah:

Oh, Elsa.  What are we going to do with you.

Frozen is purportedly set in the 1830’s-40’s, but I’ve been obsessed with finding a style that could marry her coronation gown with her ice gown more seamlessly; the open robes you see during the Regency era, including those being worn by Scandinavian royalty at the time, seemed a particularly apt analog for her… weird underarm-cape.  Thing.  You also see her mom wearing something very similar for something like ten years, so it’s not a huge stretch to think it could be a popular look in Arendelle.  THAT’S MY EXCUSE.

I initially designed this for her coronation, but I figured it wouldn’t hurt to explore how that same silhouette might work with her ice gown as well.  Someday, theoretically, I would love to do a more literally iced-up version of her gown, but I figured the alternate colour way would be a nice middle ground to strike.

-C

( See the rest of the series HERE , and check out the FAQ HERE 

(via hella-bara)

house-of-princess-anna:

arbor-golddigger:

I don’t understand how book readers are saying this scene was 100% consensual or loving in the books, because it really wasn’t.
Things that point to the scene being rape:
Cersei refuses Jaime initially.
He ignores her and kisses her so she can’t really speak.
She is physically resisting him.
He never heard her.
I repeat: He never heard her. Cersei is protesting verbally, giving Jaime reasons why she does not want to have sex with him at that time in that place and He never heard her.
Does that sound like enthusiastic consent to y’all, cause it sure as hell doesn’t to me.
Not to mention this scene feeds into the whole “Ignore her if she says no because she’ll be totally into it once you slip her the D” bullshit, which, imo at least, is actually sending a more fucked up message than the message sent by depicting the scene as pretty unambiguous rape—at least from the viewer’s perspective.  I’d seriously doubt that Jaime considered it “real” rape, just like many people IRL don’t consider it rape if it’s with someone they’ve previously had consensual sex with.  Not saying it’s right, just saying I don’t think Jaime meant to hurt Cersei, but he did, because their relationship is ultimately destructive and unhealthy and I really don’t know how book readers or show watchers could read it as anything but.

… oh

oh..

house-of-princess-anna:

arbor-golddigger:

I don’t understand how book readers are saying this scene was 100% consensual or loving in the books, because it really wasn’t.

Things that point to the scene being rape:

Cersei refuses Jaime initially.

He ignores her and kisses her so she can’t really speak.

She is physically resisting him.

He never heard her.

I repeat: He never heard her. Cersei is protesting verbally, giving Jaime reasons why she does not want to have sex with him at that time in that place and He never heard her.

Does that sound like enthusiastic consent to y’all, cause it sure as hell doesn’t to me.

Not to mention this scene feeds into the whole “Ignore her if she says no because she’ll be totally into it once you slip her the D” bullshit, which, imo at least, is actually sending a more fucked up message than the message sent by depicting the scene as pretty unambiguous rape—at least from the viewer’s perspective.  I’d seriously doubt that Jaime considered it “real” rape, just like many people IRL don’t consider it rape if it’s with someone they’ve previously had consensual sex with.  Not saying it’s right, just saying I don’t think Jaime meant to hurt Cersei, but he did, because their relationship is ultimately destructive and unhealthy and I really don’t know how book readers or show watchers could read it as anything but.

… oh

oh..

(via luikasalois)

tywin: what did all of these kings lack

tommen: kittens

tommen: a good king needs kittens

tywin: no that's not --

tommen: bring me a kitten

The Targaryen girl has three dragons. Before long she will turn her eyes to Westeros. 

(Source: cerseilannasster, via inmyextrasmallwhitet)

Horses are faster than men. Horses are dumber than men.

(Source: rubyredwisp, via inmyextrasmallwhitet)