Flower
Flower

Flower

beautiful
beautiful

beautiful

photos
photos

photos

Nature
Nature

Nature

Unsplash
Unsplash

Unsplash

Bilder
Bilder

Bilder

jpg
jpg

jpg

Wallpapers
Wallpapers

Wallpapers

Love
Love

Love

leaf
leaf

leaf

🔥 | Latest

Blessed, Image, and Images: Blessed Image We all know how wholesome this guy is, but to bright your day here is some blessed images.
Blessed, Image, and Images: Blessed Image
We all know how wholesome this guy is, but to bright your day here is some blessed images.

We all know how wholesome this guy is, but to bright your day here is some blessed images.

Tumblr, Blog, and Images: thecutestcatever: @cursed-kat-images Are they okay should we contact the vet
Tumblr, Blog, and Images: thecutestcatever:

@cursed-kat-images 

Are they okay should we contact the vet

thecutestcatever: @cursed-kat-images Are they okay should we contact the vet

Tumblr, Blog, and Images: thecutestcatever: cutecatpics: Mega blep Source: mjb5022 on catpictures. @cursed-kat-images Call the mechanic, they’re broken again.
Tumblr, Blog, and Images: thecutestcatever:

cutecatpics:

Mega blep Source: mjb5022 on catpictures.

@cursed-kat-images 

Call the mechanic, they’re broken again.

thecutestcatever: cutecatpics: Mega blep Source: mjb5022 on catpictures. @cursed-kat-images Call the mechanic, they’re broken again.

Tumblr, Blog, and Images: lunna-uwu: @cursed-kat-images Another virus, I see
Tumblr, Blog, and Images: lunna-uwu:

@cursed-kat-images 

Another virus, I see

lunna-uwu: @cursed-kat-images Another virus, I see

Facebook, Tumblr, and Shark: oceansoftheworld: (Photos by Sean Scott)Bronze whaler sharks at Red Bluff on Quobba Station in Western Australia.
Facebook, Tumblr, and Shark: oceansoftheworld:

(Photos by Sean Scott)Bronze whaler sharks at 

Red Bluff on Quobba Station in Western Australia.

oceansoftheworld: (Photos by Sean Scott)Bronze whaler sharks at Red Bluff on Quobba Station in Western Australia.

Clothes, Dad, and Feminism: Frank Cho added 2 new photos with Frank D Cho. 2 hrs Well, this just happened. Milo Manara, master artist and storyteller, came in at the last ten minutes of my Art and Women panel and handed me a special gift in appreciation for fighting censorship- an original watercolor painting of Spider-Woman. The packed auditorium went wild. Wow. I'm just speechless CHO! NERT SE prasLE THE caMERa 2G CRap! IG a stock N HEET CRP SERNG P 1RT ENTM FR MA RA thewickedverkaiking: aglassroseneverfades: pmastamonkmonk: schnerp: feminism-is-radical: auntiewanda: brithwyr: auntiewanda: brithwyr: auntiewanda: houroftheanarchistwolf: aawb: starsapphire: is it time for frank cho and milo manara to die or what That’s basically a naked woman I’m YELLING What a pervert. What the FUCK does he not know how clothes work? What the hypothetical fuck is she wearing then if we can see all that? It’s like how bath towels in comics miraculously wrap completely around breasts. Or how even when injured and dead on the ground women in comics have to be twisted into “sexy” poses. Or how women in comics walk like they’re in high heels even barefoot.  It’s the only way men know how to draw women, because to them female characters are only there to be sexy. They only think of “women” as exploitative costumes and camera angles, high heels and titillation. Sex objects to ogle, plot objects to further male heroes’ narratives and drama, not heroes to cheer for.  I’m sorry, I was labouring under the impression that this was the crowd that thought women should wear what they want..? And that applies to fictional women who are depicted by men how? You can’t apply agency in the plot to something metatextual when it comes to fictional characters.  Come on, let’s not pretend this is a male exclusive thing. We’re going to have this argument are we? Not to mention you’re deviating from the original point that attributing agency to fictional characters’ clothing is asinine.  What you have here are images of power, and do you really believe these characters are designed with titillating heterosexual women and bisexual and homosexual men in mind? Because I don’t think you do. This is why the Hawkeye Initiative exists. Take common female poses in comics, put a man in the role, and see how “empowering” and “strong” it actually looks:  Also:  He got the painting for fighting against ‘censorship.’ Note that they handed him a gross design of a female being objectified, because at the end of the day, that is all they really want, to be allowed to objectify women. They don’t care about censorship in general it is about their ability to sexualise and degrade women without consequence. You can see her butthole for chrissakes I think the best imagery I’ve seen to explain the difference between what men think male objectification is vs what women actually want to see is the Hugh Jackman magazine covers. Hugh Jackman on a men’s magazine. He’s shirtless and buff and angry. He’s imposing and aggressive. This is a male power fantasy, it’s what men want to be and aspire to - intense masculinity. Hugh Jackman on a women’s magazine.  He looks like a dad. He looks like he’s going to bake me a quiche and sit and watch Game of Thrones with me. He looks like he gives really good hugs. Men think women want big hulking naked men in loin cloths which is why they always quote He-Man as male objectification - without realizing that He Man is naked and buff in a loin cloth because MEN WANT HIM TO BE. More women would be happy to see him in a pink apron cutting vegetables and singing off-key to 70s rock. Men want objects. Women want PEOPLE. This is the first time I have EVER seen this false equivalence articulated so well. Thank you. MEN WANT OBJECTS WOMEN WANT PEOPLE
Clothes, Dad, and Feminism: Frank Cho added 2 new photos with Frank D Cho.
 2 hrs
 Well, this just happened.
 Milo Manara, master artist and storyteller, came in at the last ten minutes of
 my Art and Women panel and handed me a special gift in appreciation for
 fighting censorship- an original watercolor painting of Spider-Woman. The
 packed auditorium went wild.
 Wow. I'm just speechless
 CHO!
 NERT SE
 prasLE THE
 caMERa 2G
 CRap! IG a
 stock N HEET
 CRP SERNG P
 1RT
 ENTM
 FR
 MA
 RA
thewickedverkaiking:
aglassroseneverfades:

pmastamonkmonk:

schnerp:

feminism-is-radical:

auntiewanda:

brithwyr:

auntiewanda:

brithwyr:

auntiewanda:

houroftheanarchistwolf:

aawb:

starsapphire:

is it time for frank cho and milo manara to die or what

That’s basically a naked woman I’m YELLING

What a pervert. What the FUCK does he not know how clothes work? What the hypothetical fuck is she wearing then if we can see all that?

It’s like how bath towels in comics miraculously wrap completely around breasts. Or how even when injured and dead on the ground women in comics have to be twisted into “sexy” poses. Or how women in comics walk like they’re in high heels even barefoot. 
It’s the only way men know how to draw women, because to them female characters are only there to be sexy. They only think of “women” as exploitative costumes and camera angles, high heels and titillation. Sex objects to ogle, plot objects to further male heroes’ narratives and drama, not heroes to cheer for. 

I’m sorry, I was labouring under the impression that this was the crowd that thought women should wear what they want..?

And that applies to fictional women who are depicted by men how? You can’t apply agency in the plot to something metatextual when it comes to fictional characters. 

Come on, let’s not pretend this is a male exclusive thing.

We’re going to have this argument are we? Not to mention you’re deviating from the original point that attributing agency to fictional characters’ clothing is asinine. 
What you have here are images of power, and do you really believe these characters are designed with titillating heterosexual women and bisexual and homosexual men in mind? Because I don’t think you do.
This is why the Hawkeye Initiative exists. Take common female poses in comics, put a man in the role, and see how “empowering” and “strong” it actually looks: 
Also: 

He got the painting for fighting against ‘censorship.’ Note that they handed him a gross design of a female being objectified, because at the end of the day, that is all they really want, to be allowed to objectify women. They don’t care about censorship in general it is about their ability to sexualise and degrade women without consequence.


You can see her butthole for chrissakes

I think the best imagery I’ve seen to explain the difference between what men think male objectification is vs what women actually want to see is the Hugh Jackman magazine covers.
Hugh Jackman on a men’s magazine. He’s shirtless and buff and angry. He’s imposing and aggressive. This is a male power fantasy, it’s what men want to be and aspire to - intense masculinity.
Hugh Jackman on a women’s magazine.  He looks like a dad. He looks like he’s going to bake me a quiche and sit and watch Game of Thrones with me. He looks like he gives really good hugs.
Men think women want big hulking naked men in loin cloths which is why they always quote He-Man as male objectification - without realizing that He Man is naked and buff in a loin cloth because MEN WANT HIM TO BE. More women would be happy to see him in a pink apron cutting vegetables and singing off-key to 70s rock.
Men want objects. Women want PEOPLE. 

This is the first time I have EVER seen this false equivalence articulated so well. Thank you.

MEN WANT OBJECTS WOMEN WANT PEOPLE

thewickedverkaiking: aglassroseneverfades: pmastamonkmonk: schnerp: feminism-is-radical: auntiewanda: brithwyr: auntiewanda: brithwyr...

Drugs, Jail, and Monopoly: Business An HIV treatment cost taxpavers millions. The government patented it But a pharma giant is making billions Antiretroviral pills Truvada sit on a tray at Jack's Drug Store on Nov. 23, 2010, in San Anselmo, Calif. (Justin Sullivan/Getty Images) By Christopher Rowland March 26 at 7:26 PM Thomas Folks spent vears in his U.S Centers for Disease Control and Prevention lab developing a treatment to block deadly HI co AIDS V in monkeys. Then San Francis researcher Robert Grant, using $50 million in federal grants, proved the treatment worked in people who engaged in risky sex Their work-almost fully funded by U.S toxic-spill: socialistexan: whyyoustabbedme: https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/pharma-giant-profits-from-hiv-treatment-funded-by-taxpayers-and-patented-by-the-government 1. Taxpayer-funded research discovers new use for HIV drug; 2. Company w/ monopoly on drug says gov cant patent it; 3. Company makes $3B on drug/year; 4. Taxpayers get no return on investment, ~80% who need treatment dont get it Our capitalist aristocratic elites commit mass murder and treason against the people, and make billions, some black guy gets caught with a joint and goes to jail for years… “American justice” sure is a joke This is incredibly common with pharmaceuticals in the US. Drugs are researched with public funds, patented by the government, but then they are given directly to a private corporation for billions (if not trillions) in profit for that corporation. 210 drugs from 2010 to 2016 benefited from this process. Kill capitalism before it kills humanity.
Drugs, Jail, and Monopoly: Business
 An HIV treatment cost
 taxpavers millions. The
 government patented it
 But a pharma giant is
 making billions
 Antiretroviral pills Truvada sit on a tray at Jack's Drug
 Store on Nov. 23, 2010, in San Anselmo, Calif. (Justin
 Sullivan/Getty Images)
 By Christopher Rowland
 March 26 at 7:26 PM
 Thomas Folks spent vears in his U.S
 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
 lab developing a treatment to block deadly
 HI co AIDS
 V in monkeys. Then San Francis
 researcher Robert Grant, using $50 million
 in federal grants, proved the treatment
 worked in people who engaged in risky sex
 Their work-almost fully funded by U.S
toxic-spill:
socialistexan:

whyyoustabbedme:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/pharma-giant-profits-from-hiv-treatment-funded-by-taxpayers-and-patented-by-the-government
1. Taxpayer-funded research discovers new use for HIV drug; 
2. Company w/ monopoly on drug says gov cant patent it; 
3. Company makes $3B on drug/year; 
4. Taxpayers get no return on investment, ~80% who need treatment dont get it



Our capitalist aristocratic elites commit mass murder and treason 
against the people, and make billions, some black guy gets caught with a
 joint and goes to jail for years… “American justice” sure is 
a joke 


This is incredibly common with pharmaceuticals in the US. Drugs are researched with public funds, patented by the government, but then they are given directly to a private corporation for billions (if not trillions) in profit for that corporation. 
210 drugs from 2010 to 2016 benefited from this process. 

Kill capitalism before it kills humanity.

toxic-spill: socialistexan: whyyoustabbedme: https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/pharma-giant-profits-from-hiv-treatment-funde...