Thats
Thats

Thats

Murderize
Murderize

Murderize

Illegal Immigrants
Illegal Immigrants

Illegal Immigrants

Pineapples On Pizza
Pineapples On Pizza

Pineapples On Pizza

Age
Age

Age

Kinkshame
Kinkshame

Kinkshame

Pineapple On Pizza
Pineapple On Pizza

Pineapple On Pizza

Posts
Posts

Posts

Max
Max

Max

Textposts
Textposts

Textposts

🔥 | Latest

discourse: my-discourse-blog: ryrythescienceguy: Children being naturally exposed to a variety of germs from a very young age (from dirt, pets, playplaces, sandboxes, other kids, etc) is actually really good for the immune system and can even prevent the development of allergies. The reason food allergies are so common these days is precisely because parents are avoiding exposing their kids to possible trigger foods and not letting them get dirty (also the overuse of antibacterial soaps/hand santitizers and antibiotics!). Source: grew up on a farm, played in the dirt and with germy animals and germy siblings/cousins/friends all the time, and very rarely took antibiotics… today I’m 24, have zero allergies, and a great immune system (even my little sister is the same, and she wasn’t vaccinated until she was a teenager). This is also why oldest siblings and only children tend to have more allergies in my anecdotal experience; the parents often get overprepared and don’t let their kid get exposed to ANY germs/allergens—by the time other children come along the parents are jaded enough to not care about it as much, and thus the kids afterwards are exposed to more germs from birth! If this sounds weird and backwards, it’s because for a long time doctors used to teach the exact opposite. Keep your child clean and away from germs and potenial allergy triggers. Until they saw the long-term side effects of this and are now starting to tell new parents how to do it better. NOTE: I AM EXTREMELY PRO-VAX! DO NOT MISTAKE THIS COMMENT AS ANTI-VAX. VACCINATE YOUR FUCKING CHILDREN AND EXPOSE THEM TO GERMS IN A CONTROLLED WAY. THE HUMAN IMMUNE SYSTEM IS CAPABLE OF MANY THINGS BUT IT’S NOT A MIRACLE WORKER AND IT NEEDS HELP!!! Can confirm this is true. I’ve studied food science for 5 years and have 3 qualifications in food safety.
discourse: my-discourse-blog:

ryrythescienceguy:

Children being naturally exposed to a variety of germs from a very young age (from dirt, pets, playplaces, sandboxes, other kids, etc) is actually really good for the immune system and can even prevent the development of allergies. The reason food allergies are so common these days is precisely because parents are avoiding exposing their kids to possible trigger foods and not letting them get dirty (also the overuse of antibacterial soaps/hand santitizers and antibiotics!).
Source: grew up on a farm, played in the dirt and with germy animals and germy siblings/cousins/friends all the time, and very rarely took antibiotics… today I’m 24, have zero allergies, and a great immune system (even my little sister is the same, and she wasn’t vaccinated until she was a teenager).
This is also why oldest siblings and only children tend to have more allergies in my anecdotal experience; the parents often get overprepared and don’t let their kid get exposed to ANY germs/allergens—by the time other children come along the parents are jaded enough to not care about it as much, and thus the kids afterwards are exposed to more germs from birth!
If this sounds weird and backwards, it’s because for a long time doctors used to teach the exact opposite. Keep your child clean and away from germs and potenial allergy triggers. Until they saw the long-term side effects of this and are now starting to tell new parents how to do it better.
NOTE: I AM EXTREMELY PRO-VAX! DO NOT MISTAKE THIS COMMENT AS ANTI-VAX. VACCINATE YOUR FUCKING CHILDREN AND EXPOSE THEM TO GERMS IN A CONTROLLED WAY. THE HUMAN IMMUNE SYSTEM IS CAPABLE OF MANY THINGS BUT IT’S NOT A MIRACLE WORKER AND IT NEEDS HELP!!!


Can confirm this is true. I’ve studied food science for 5 years and have 3 qualifications in food safety.

my-discourse-blog: ryrythescienceguy: Children being naturally exposed to a variety of germs from a very young age (from dirt, pets, pl...

discourse: jasper-rolls:this exchange is like a microcosm of all internet discourse
discourse: jasper-rolls:this exchange is like a microcosm of all internet discourse

jasper-rolls:this exchange is like a microcosm of all internet discourse

discourse: derryderrydown: thecringeandwincefactory: meowren: malchay: So, I looked in the comments, expecting to see discourse or historical background etc, but I found none. Therefore, I decided to learn more and add background. Apparently this machine was used because of polio because polio paralyzes your lungs. According to the wiki article on this bad boy, patients would spend two weeks in there sometimes. They still have these machines, though much, much more modern but they’re barely used at all anymore: “In 1959, there were 1,200 people using tank respirators in the United States, but by 2004 there were only 39. By 2014, there were only 10 people left with an iron lung.” (x) I’ve read about one man who still lives in an iron lung. He taught himself how to breathe again by gulping down air, but it’s quite laborious because of the paralysis. His name is Paul Alexander, and he’s a lawyer. He’s 71 years old and has spent 65 years in an iron lung. Wild, right? He’s been working on a memoir that he was inspired to write by the recent resurgence of cases of polio caused by anti-vaccers. Source: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.4414081 (can’t hyperlink because I’m on mobile, apologies) It’s amazing to me to recognize that we only defeated polio in this past century - that my mother’s father had it (he got lucky, it only deformed his feet and thereby kept him out of a couple wars); my mother got the big vaccination that left her upper arm scarred; and by the time I was vaccinated, polio basically didn’t exist. My grandfather must have been born like around 1900, so - in the space of less than 75 years, this was no longer something that parents dreaded the possibility of every summer. In the 1950s, my mother would go to the corner shop. The owners had a daughter a few years older than my mum. She lived in an iron lung in the back of the shop.Vaccinate your fucking kids.
discourse: derryderrydown:
thecringeandwincefactory:

meowren:

malchay:

So, I looked in the comments, expecting to see discourse or historical background etc, but I found none. Therefore, I decided to learn more and add background. Apparently this machine was used because of polio because polio paralyzes your lungs. According to the wiki article on this bad boy, patients would spend two weeks in there sometimes. They still have these machines, though much, much more modern but they’re barely used at all anymore: “In 1959, there were 1,200 people using tank respirators in the United States, but by 2004 there were only 39. By 2014, there were only 10 people left with an iron lung.” (x)

I’ve read about one man who still lives in an iron lung. He taught himself how to breathe again by gulping down air, but it’s quite laborious because of the paralysis. His name is Paul Alexander, and he’s a lawyer. He’s 71 years old and has spent 65 years in an iron lung. Wild, right? He’s been working on a memoir that he was inspired to write by the recent resurgence of cases of polio caused by anti-vaccers.
Source: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.4414081 (can’t hyperlink because I’m on mobile, apologies)

It’s amazing to me to recognize that we only defeated polio in this past century - that my mother’s father had it (he got lucky, it only deformed his feet and thereby kept him out of a couple wars); my mother got the big vaccination that left her upper arm scarred; and by the time I was vaccinated, polio basically didn’t exist. My grandfather must have been born like around 1900, so - in the space of less than 75 years, this was no longer something that parents dreaded the possibility of every summer.

In the 1950s, my mother would go to the corner shop. The owners had a daughter a few years older than my mum. She lived in an iron lung in the back of the shop.Vaccinate your fucking kids.

derryderrydown: thecringeandwincefactory: meowren: malchay: So, I looked in the comments, expecting to see discourse or historical bac...

discourse: The Trevor Moore O @itrevormoore Tmes TREDOR moORE Remember. Kevin McCallister could have phoned the police at any time. He was a child who had accidentally been left alone. One call and he would have been safe. But it was never about safety. He was hunting those men. He wanted them to die. It was fun for him. He enjoyed it. bisexualhennessy: foxyclock: orgyporgy: shittymoviedetails: Kevin is the real villian in Home Alone The movie establishes that the phone lines to the house are down, that’s also why nobody is able to call Kevin at home. The movie also establishes that all of his neighbors are out of town which is why he couldn’t borrow their phones. The movie ALSO BEGINS by introducing the main antagonist as a “police officer” which is why Kevin doesn’t trust the cops. I’m so tired of the ignorance. The slander. FINALLY we’ve reached the time of year for home alone discourse #he did what he needed to do to survive. then he did a bunch of other stuff he felt like doing (via @hotcrossedfangs)  Also the police in that movie are hilariously inept. Kevin‘s mom contacts them to do a wellness check on her eight-year-old son who is home alone and for them that consists of casually wandering down to the house, knocking once, and then when nobody answers instead of considering the very real possibility that a frightened young boy might not open the door right away, they just assume everything‘s fine and the mom is just crazy and they fuck right off.
discourse: The
 Trevor Moore O
 @itrevormoore
 Tmes
 TREDOR
 moORE
 Remember. Kevin McCallister could
 have phoned the police at any time. He
 was a child who had accidentally been
 left alone. One call and he would have
 been safe. But it was never about safety.
 He was hunting those men. He wanted
 them to die. It was fun for him. He
 enjoyed it.
bisexualhennessy:

foxyclock:

orgyporgy:

shittymoviedetails:
Kevin is the real villian in Home Alone
The movie establishes that the phone lines to the house are down, that’s also why nobody is able to call Kevin at home. The movie also establishes that all of his neighbors are out of town which is why he couldn’t borrow their phones. The movie ALSO BEGINS by introducing the main antagonist as a “police officer” which is why Kevin doesn’t trust the cops. I’m so tired of the ignorance. The slander. 


FINALLY we’ve reached the time of year for home alone discourse

#he did what he needed to do to survive. then he did a bunch of other stuff he felt like doing (via @hotcrossedfangs) 

Also the police in that movie are hilariously inept. Kevin‘s mom contacts them to do a wellness check on her eight-year-old son who is home alone and for them that consists of casually wandering down to the house, knocking once, and then when nobody answers instead of considering the very real possibility that a frightened young boy might not open the door right away, they just assume everything‘s fine and the mom is just crazy and they fuck right off.

bisexualhennessy: foxyclock: orgyporgy: shittymoviedetails: Kevin is the real villian in Home Alone The movie establishes that the pho...

discourse: Hey guys, I've been seeing these memes where muscular men at laptops explain elementary concepts in some topic or other to a nerdy-looking, curious kid. They really make me laugh, but I can't quite put my finger on why. It's not like there's any real jokes in there or anything First of all, I think this format makes excellent use of a comedic technique called incongruity, whereby viewers' preconceived notions are upended by unexpected juxtapositions. In this case, many people don't think of musclebound, traditionally masculine men as kind, intelligent and eager to advise. While not a joke in any conventional sense, this produces a humorous effect King, I want to echo what you're saying and also suggest that there's an even broader employment of incongruity here.. Viewers expect earnest requests for basic information to be met with vitriol due to a sense that discourse on web forums is generally noxious. The conviviality of the buff men's responses runs totally counter to viewer's expectations. It's not just muscular men that we presume to be hotheaded and condescending this kind of unacceptable behavior is endemic to the medium as a whole, and viewers are tickled to see that dynamic inverted. I really think Chief hit on something with that last response, and I want to add that part of the appeal of the format lies in its warmth those of us who spend a lot of time online find ourselves bathing in a sea of toxic discourse but, for a cohort so frequently described as overwhelmingly self-absorbed, I think that the millennials making and consuming these genuinely value humility a lack of ego and self-importance and empathy the ability to understand others. The men in these memes display these in spades and, through the experience of incogruity, viewers are given theopportunity to deepen their own humility and extend their sense of empathy. Here you go
discourse: Hey guys, I've been seeing these memes
 where muscular men at laptops explain
 elementary concepts in some topic or other
 to a nerdy-looking, curious kid. They really
 make me laugh, but I can't quite put my
 finger on why. It's not like there's any real
 jokes in there or anything
 First of all, I think this format makes excellent
 use of a comedic technique called incongruity,
 whereby viewers' preconceived notions are
 upended by unexpected juxtapositions. In this
 case, many people don't think of musclebound,
 traditionally masculine men as kind, intelligent
 and eager to advise. While not a joke in any
 conventional sense, this produces a humorous
 effect
 King, I want to echo what you're saying and
 also suggest that there's an even broader
 employment of incongruity here.. Viewers
 expect earnest requests for basic information
 to be met with vitriol due to a sense that
 discourse on web forums is generally noxious.
 The conviviality of the buff men's responses
 runs totally counter to viewer's expectations.
 It's not just muscular men that we presume to
 be hotheaded and condescending this kind
 of unacceptable behavior is endemic to the
 medium as a whole, and viewers are tickled to
 see that dynamic inverted.
 I really think Chief hit on something with that
 last response, and I want to add that part of
 the appeal of the format lies in its warmth
 those of us who spend a lot of time online find
 ourselves bathing in a sea of toxic discourse
 but, for a cohort so frequently described as
 overwhelmingly self-absorbed, I think that the
 millennials making and consuming these
 genuinely value humility a lack of ego and
 self-importance and empathy the ability
 to understand others. The men in these
 memes display these in spades and, through
 the experience of incogruity, viewers are given
 theopportunity to deepen their own humility
 and extend their sense of empathy.
Here you go

Here you go

discourse: tash @yeahstyles * Follow my uber driver just threatened to drive the car off a cliff help me Uber Support e @Uber Support Follow UBER @yeahstyles That is absolutely not okay. Please DM us your email address associated to your Uber account so we can follow up. RETWEETS LIKES 2,780 1,945 2:14 AM-20 Mar 2016 calis-discourse: kirsty-not-kristy: amoxli: ok so I don’t usu reblog this stuff here but last year I had a horrible experience with an Airbnb host who threatened to bust my kneecaps, stalk me and murder me right? And not only did I GO TO THE POLICE before cancelling the reservation, but I also provided copies of that documentation to Airbnb customer service (I should mention after hunting down that number in the depths of the stupid internet and being on hold for an hour). Did they give me a refund for the months I’d paid in advance? No - they accused me of lying! A few weeks later in a fit of desperation, a coworker suggested I tweet to Airbnb. Ok. I have maybe 30 followers on Twitter, and didn’t really use it at the time, but I thought, fuck it. Nothing to lose now. I made a half assed attempt at an overly indignant tweet with plenty of capitalization, and you know what happened? Within the HOUR. It was taken down. I was DMed by a CSR. And I was given a FULL. REFUND. $1500 like THAT. I don’t know what kind of dystopic fucking reality we live in where police reports mean nothing and the PR value from a half assed tweet to 30 followers outweighs the safety of my kneecaps, but. Social media… Lesson learned, I guess. Rebooting this addition because holy shit??? Okay what the frick
discourse: tash
 @yeahstyles
 *
 Follow
 my uber driver just threatened to drive the car
 off a cliff help me

 Uber Support e
 @Uber Support
 Follow
 UBER
 @yeahstyles That is absolutely not okay. Please
 DM us your email address associated to your
 Uber account so we can follow up.
 RETWEETS LIKES
 2,780 1,945
 2:14 AM-20 Mar 2016
calis-discourse:

kirsty-not-kristy:

amoxli:


ok so I don’t usu reblog this stuff here but last year I had a horrible experience with an Airbnb host who threatened to bust my kneecaps, stalk me and murder me right? And not only did I GO TO THE POLICE before cancelling the reservation, but I also provided copies of that documentation to Airbnb customer service (I should mention after hunting down that number in the depths of the stupid internet and being on hold for an hour). Did they give me a refund for the months I’d paid in advance? No - they accused me of lying! 
A few weeks later in a fit of desperation, a coworker suggested I tweet to Airbnb. Ok. I have maybe 30 followers on Twitter, and didn’t really use it at the time, but I thought, fuck it. Nothing to lose now. I made a half assed attempt at an overly indignant tweet with plenty of capitalization, and you know what happened? 
Within the HOUR. It was taken down. I was DMed by a CSR. And I was given a FULL. REFUND. 
$1500 like THAT. 
I don’t know what kind of dystopic fucking reality we live in where police reports mean nothing and the PR value from a half assed tweet to 30 followers outweighs the safety of my kneecaps, but. Social media… Lesson learned, I guess.


Rebooting this addition because holy shit???


Okay what the frick

calis-discourse: kirsty-not-kristy: amoxli: ok so I don’t usu reblog this stuff here but last year I had a horrible experience with a...

discourse: Side Effects Follow ECTS @SideEffectsNews Why aren't millennials giving blood? bit.ly/2fRZG5i 5:14 PM 28 Sep 2017 Belinda Blumenthal @philomenapunk Follow because we all gay ide Effects @SideEffectsNews Why aren't millennials giving blood? bit.ly/2fRZG5i 11:29 AM 3 Oct 2017 3,199 Retweets 11,051 Likes agapantoblu: somecunttookmyurl: creaturethatcries: dr-dendritic-trees: karnythia: voidbat: genderfuckt: optimysticals: the-fury-of-a-time-lord: luidilovins: the-modern-satyr: seedydemigod: captainfunkpunkandroll: the-real-eye-to-see: Didn’t even know people are not allowed to give blood if they are gay That’s been the thing for years. The HIV scare of the ‘80s prohibited us from donating blood. And they still hold that against us despite the fact that that claim has been debunked over and over again. the wording on the paperwork is “Are you a man who has had sexual intercourse with a man after 1980” or “Are you a woman who has had sexual intercourse with a man who has had sexual intercourse with another man since 1980” (this was a blood drive at my college where majority of the students werent Alive in 1980.) I donated all the time back when I was a virgin, because o- , but now I’m not allowed to. So a better question for this article is “Why won’t baby boomers let queer people donate blood, even though all the blood gets screened for HIV and aids anyway?” though, theres a lot of room for loopholes in the wording of it This fucking matters. Bias in medicine is bias that should not exist. Fucking fix it. This is disgusting hey trans people can’t give blood either. was banned from a plasma place for having the nerve to show up and be trans. “we don’t serve you people”. This is one of the reasons why it was painful for a LOT of Queer people after the Pulse shooting. We kept seeing messages calling for blood donations but so many of us can’t donate. We couldn’t even help our own community.  !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! as someone who has received money and/or drugs in exchange for sex, i have a lifetime ban on giving blood. FURTHERMORE, my whore blood is so filthy that if you’ve had sex with me in the past year, YOU can’t give blood! and that’s a federal goddamn guideline, folks! If you lived in Europe for 3 months between 1980 and 1996 you can’t donate blood which basically takes out everyone who ever served in the military and was stationed overseas, anyone who studied abroad or anyone who had a job overseas during that period. The Red Cross is always announcing they have a shortage of blood donors but they create the shortage with the byzantine array of restrictions that they refuse to revisit.  Okay, the above stuff is stigma and total crap, we have efficient screens for HIV and things now, the blood will be screened anyway, banning people for their sexual history is completely prejudice and its wasteful, and those rules really need to go. But the last one, the ban on donation for people living in Europe, is actually done for a reason. Its an attempt to limit the spread of vCJD, which we don’t have a way of screening for right now. Last i went you could donate blood if trans, I was openly trans at my blood clinic and they took me. So its probably just that particular clinic, which I say so that other trans people arent discouraged from trying to donate. Also… as long as its the only question you lie on… if theres a blood shortage emergency I really dont see why not lie on that one question. Like its terrible to have to do that and im not trying to make you feel bad if you avoiding donating because of it, but since we know its not scientifically founded it seems perfectly moral to me to lie on that one question if you want to donate. There’s not really a way for them to fact check that. I really never understood why people don’t just LIE “Heartbroken they couldn’t-“ JUST LIE ON THE FORM I’m an openly queer woman in Italy and I’ve never lied on my form, but also, my form doesn’t even ask the gender of my partner. All the questions are phrased “have you had any heterosexual or homosexual intercourse in the past six months?”, “have you changed partner in the past six months?” They are willingly phrased to work for all people because there’s literally no scientific reason as to why straight blood would be safer than gay blood.It’s just a formality. Honestly, you could write you just had an orgy and as long as you claim you’ve practiced safe sex they’ll give you the green card to donate. At most, they mark your sack for a more thorough venereal diseases screening in case you couldn’t affirm for sure that you’re 100% clean.The whole “but after the AIDS scare” discourse is bullcrap. They give AIDS informative flyers to all donors once a year and they screen for HIV all the sacks. Whenever you donate, you get the analysis results back and if you check, straight or gay, there’s always the results for the HIV test. Because medicine knows that straights and gays are all equally likely to be affected, it’s how it is.If you’re gay, you can donate. If you’re trans, the most that can happen is that your doctor allows you two yearly donations, roughly six months apart, if you are having your period; otherwise you’re allowed three yearly donations, roughly four months apart. That’s it.If the forms are like those provided in Italy, you won’t have even have to lie. If you live in some dumbass country that thinks you cannot donate if you’re queer, though, yeah, just fucking lie about it because there is no valid reason that says you cannot give blood.It’s an whole different matter if we’re talking about restrictions based on where you were at X date.These questions are common worldwide because they refer to viruses and infections that cannot be screened. This is not made because the Red Cross is mean and cruel and whatever the fuck; it’s because they cannot be sure your blood is not contaminated and since the blood is going to someone who, it stands to reason, is already compromised on their own, they cannot fight their own battle and add more. That’s why you cannot donate. My uncle died because he was fighting leukemia and was injected a transfusion of infected blood. DO NOT LIE ON THE FORM ABOUT ILLNESSES YOU HAD OR PLACES YOU’VE BEEN TO. YOUR WISH TO DONATE IS WORTH JACK SHIT IF YOU CONTAMINATE SOMEONE BECAUSE YOU WEREN’T HONEST.
discourse: Side Effects
 Follow
 ECTS @SideEffectsNews
 Why aren't millennials giving blood?
 bit.ly/2fRZG5i
 5:14 PM 28 Sep 2017

 Belinda Blumenthal
 @philomenapunk
 Follow
 because we all gay
 ide Effects @SideEffectsNews
 Why aren't millennials giving blood? bit.ly/2fRZG5i
 11:29 AM 3 Oct 2017
 3,199 Retweets 11,051 Likes
agapantoblu:

somecunttookmyurl:
creaturethatcries:


dr-dendritic-trees:

karnythia:

voidbat:

genderfuckt:


optimysticals:

the-fury-of-a-time-lord:

luidilovins:

the-modern-satyr:

seedydemigod:

captainfunkpunkandroll:

the-real-eye-to-see:
Didn’t even know people are not allowed to give blood if they are gay


That’s been the thing for years. The HIV scare of the ‘80s prohibited us from donating blood. And they still hold that against us despite the fact that that claim has been debunked over and over again.

the wording on the paperwork is “Are you a man who has had sexual intercourse with a man after 1980” or “Are you a woman who has had sexual intercourse with a man who has had sexual intercourse with another man since 1980” (this was a blood drive at my college  where majority of the students werent Alive in 1980.) I donated all the time back when I was a virgin, because o- , but now I’m not allowed to. So a better question for this article is “Why won’t baby boomers let queer people donate blood, even though all the blood gets screened for HIV and aids anyway?” though, theres a lot of room for loopholes in the wording of it   


This fucking matters. Bias in medicine is bias that should not exist. Fucking fix it.


This is disgusting 

hey trans people can’t give blood either. was banned from a plasma place for having the nerve to show up and be trans. “we don’t serve you people”.

This is one of the reasons why it was painful for a LOT of Queer people after the Pulse shooting. We kept seeing messages calling for blood donations but so many of us can’t donate. We couldn’t even help our own community. 


!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


as someone who has received money and/or drugs in exchange for sex, i have a lifetime ban on giving blood. FURTHERMORE, my whore blood is so filthy that if you’ve had sex with me in the past year, YOU can’t give blood!
and that’s a federal goddamn guideline, folks! 

If you lived in Europe for 3 months between 1980 and 1996 you can’t donate blood which basically takes out everyone who ever served in the military and was stationed overseas, anyone who studied abroad or anyone who had a job overseas during that period. The Red Cross is always announcing they have a shortage of blood donors but they create the shortage with the byzantine array of restrictions that they refuse to revisit. 

Okay, the above stuff is stigma and total crap, we have efficient screens for HIV and things now, the blood will be screened anyway, banning people for their sexual history is completely prejudice and its wasteful, and those rules really need to go.
But the last one, the ban on donation for people living in Europe, is actually done for a reason. Its an attempt to limit the spread of vCJD, which we don’t have a way of screening for right now.


Last i went you could donate blood if trans, I was openly trans at my blood clinic and they took me. So its probably just that particular clinic, which I say so that other trans people arent discouraged from trying to donate.
Also… as long as its the only question you lie on… if theres a blood shortage emergency I really dont see why not lie on that one question. Like its terrible to have to do that and im not trying to make you feel bad if you avoiding donating because of it, but since we know its not scientifically founded it seems perfectly moral to me to lie on that one question if you want to donate. There’s not really a way for them to fact check that.


I really never understood why people don’t just LIE
“Heartbroken they couldn’t-“ JUST LIE ON THE FORM

I’m an openly queer woman in Italy and I’ve never lied on my form, but also, my form doesn’t even ask the gender of my partner. All the questions are phrased “have you had any heterosexual or homosexual intercourse in the past six months?”, “have you changed partner in the past six months?” They are willingly phrased to work for all people because there’s literally no scientific reason as to why straight blood would be safer than gay blood.It’s just a formality. Honestly, you could write you just had an orgy and as long as you claim you’ve practiced safe sex they’ll give you the green card to donate. At most, they mark your sack for a more thorough venereal diseases screening in case you couldn’t affirm for sure that you’re 100% clean.The whole “but after the AIDS scare” discourse is bullcrap. They give AIDS informative flyers to all donors once a year and they screen for HIV all the sacks. Whenever you donate, you get the analysis results back and if you check, straight or gay, there’s always the results for the HIV test. Because medicine knows that straights and gays are all equally likely to be affected, it’s how it is.If you’re gay, you can donate. If you’re trans, the most that can happen is that your doctor allows you two yearly donations, roughly six months apart, if you are having your period; otherwise you’re allowed three yearly donations, roughly four months apart. That’s it.If the forms are like those provided in Italy, you won’t have even have to lie. If you live in some dumbass country that thinks you cannot donate if you’re queer, though, yeah, just fucking lie about it because there is no valid reason that says you cannot give blood.It’s an whole different matter if we’re talking about restrictions based on where you were at X date.These questions are common worldwide because they refer to viruses and infections that cannot be screened. This is not made because the Red Cross is mean and cruel and whatever the fuck; it’s because they cannot be sure your blood is not contaminated and since the blood is going to someone who, it stands to reason, is already compromised on their own, they cannot fight their own battle and add more. That’s why you cannot donate. My uncle died because he was fighting leukemia and was injected a transfusion of infected blood. DO NOT LIE ON THE FORM ABOUT ILLNESSES YOU HAD OR PLACES YOU’VE BEEN TO. YOUR WISH TO DONATE IS WORTH JACK SHIT IF YOU CONTAMINATE SOMEONE BECAUSE YOU WEREN’T HONEST.

agapantoblu: somecunttookmyurl: creaturethatcries: dr-dendritic-trees: karnythia: voidbat: genderfuckt: optimysticals: the-fury-...

discourse: normal-horoscopes: pooraurora: postmarxed: inkandcayenne: wilfulwayfarer: rasec-wizzlbang: dalaisa-katili: local-emo-mom: anarcho-individualist: explanatorypower: i dont understand this at all and america scares the fuck out of me This is the america they don’t want you to see i love america This is what you call Waffle House at 2 am when the bars close and everyone is drunk and hungry *group of people having fun*this site: wtf this is so scary People having safe fun at a waffle house is scary for most Tumblr bloggers, reports say. Some context for those not familiar with Waffle House Culture:  Waffle House is one of the few chains in America that’s open 24/7/365, and where you can get both breakfast and lunch/dinner options at any time (I have had so many Breakfast Cheeseburgers at Waffle Houses). The food is really good, and people eat there at all times of the day or night, but it’s particularly popular as a late-night post-drinking spot because it’s all that’s open and it’s the kind of food that tastes especially good when you’re hammered. Part of Waffle House Protocol is that all the servers and cooks greet every single customer as they come through the door. It sounds lame, but I’ve never been to a Waffle House where that greeting didn’t feel completely heartfelt. My mom is a health nut who could barely find anything on the menu she was willing to eat and yet she describes the Christmas Day lunch we had there one year as one of the nicest meals she’s ever had because everyone was so warm and welcoming. That sense of camaraderie gets turned up to 11, of course, at 2 a.m. when everyone’s shitfaced. The jukeboxes have Waffle-House-themed songs on them (once you have heard “Raisins in my Toast” you will be earwormed forever) and there is an arcane system of hash brown ordering: scattered, smothered, covered, chunked, topped, diced, peppered, and/or capped. The hot sauce bottles say “Casa de Waffle.”  Once, in Oxford (UK), my husband and I walked past a kebab van very late one night and he said “why do I smell Waffle House” The location of most Waffle Houses means there’s some… classism that tends to get tied up with Anti-Waffle House Discourse, which is probably lending itself, in part, to this being such a fraught topic. (I’m looking at a map and apparently I was born and raised right in the middle of the Peak Waffle House Density Zone) It is, in the words of chef Anthony Bourdain, “indeed marvelous— an irony-free zone where everything is beautiful and nothing hurts; where everybody regardless of race, creed, color or degree of inebriation is welcomed.” We’re not even gonna mention FEMA’s Waffle House Index where they determine how bad a natural disaster is by calling the local Waffle House to see if they’re open? #and wafflehouse is one of those spiritual places#2am friendships#its the same hazy feel#of cicadas and front porches with your friends Waffle House is physical and spiritual neutral territory. Starting shit in a Waffle House isn’t just bad form, it tips the entire natural balance of the universe against you.
discourse: normal-horoscopes:

pooraurora:

postmarxed:
inkandcayenne:

wilfulwayfarer:

rasec-wizzlbang:

dalaisa-katili:

local-emo-mom:

anarcho-individualist:

explanatorypower:
i dont understand this at all and america scares the fuck out of me

This is the america they don’t want you to see

i love america

This is what you call Waffle House at 2 am when the bars close and everyone is drunk and hungry

*group of people having fun*this site: wtf this is so scary


People having safe fun at a waffle house is scary for most Tumblr bloggers, reports say.

Some context for those not familiar with Waffle House Culture: 
Waffle House is one of the few chains in America that’s open 24/7/365, and where you can get both breakfast and lunch/dinner options at any time (I have had so many Breakfast Cheeseburgers at Waffle Houses). The food is really good, and people eat there at all times of the day or night, but it’s particularly popular as a late-night post-drinking spot because it’s all that’s open and it’s the kind of food that tastes especially good when you’re hammered.
Part of Waffle House Protocol is that all the servers and cooks greet every single customer as they come through the door. It sounds lame, but I’ve never been to a Waffle House where that greeting didn’t feel completely heartfelt. My mom is a health nut who could barely find anything on the menu she was willing to eat and yet she describes the Christmas Day lunch we had there one year as one of the nicest meals she’s ever had because everyone was so warm and welcoming. That sense of camaraderie gets turned up to 11, of course, at 2 a.m. when everyone’s shitfaced.
The jukeboxes have Waffle-House-themed songs on them (once you have heard “Raisins in my Toast” you will be earwormed forever) and there is an arcane system of hash brown ordering: scattered, smothered, covered, chunked, topped, diced, peppered, and/or capped. The hot sauce bottles say “Casa de Waffle.” 
Once, in Oxford (UK), my husband and I walked past a kebab van very late one night and he said “why do I smell Waffle House”
The location of most Waffle Houses means there’s some… classism that tends to get tied up with Anti-Waffle House Discourse, which is probably lending itself, in part, to this being such a fraught topic. (I’m looking at a map and apparently I was born and raised right in the middle of the Peak Waffle House Density Zone)
It is, in the words of chef Anthony Bourdain, “indeed marvelous— an irony-free zone where everything is beautiful and nothing hurts; where everybody regardless of race, creed, color or degree of inebriation is welcomed.”


We’re not even gonna mention FEMA’s Waffle House Index where they determine how bad a natural disaster is by calling the local Waffle House to see if they’re open? 



#and wafflehouse is one of those spiritual places#2am friendships#its the same hazy feel#of cicadas and front porches with your friends



Waffle House is physical and spiritual neutral territory. Starting shit in a Waffle House isn’t just bad form, it tips the entire natural balance of the universe against you.

normal-horoscopes: pooraurora: postmarxed: inkandcayenne: wilfulwayfarer: rasec-wizzlbang: dalaisa-katili: local-emo-mom: anarcho-...

discourse: kitfisto sandy cheeks would've voted trump that evil southern rat ass bitch thecouchwitch Sandy Cheeks is a pro-science feminist who lives in a foreign land that she respects the customs of and she would be offended you would even accuse her of this. varkarrus mr krabs would've voted trump lishadra Mr Krabs absolutely would've voted trump Mr. Krabs would not have voted for Trump because Mr. Krabs earned most of his money through hard work (and being a cheapskate and get rich quick schemes but those still require some effort on his part) whereas Trump inherited most of his wealth and thinks a million dollars is a small loan, Mr. Krabs would consider him an insult to richness for which he could not stand Plankton would've voted Trump You think he needs competition taking over the world? Face it folks. No one on Spongebob would vote for Trump. None of them. Face it. arcon Bubble Bass Shit. Dammit. Goddammit. Shit. God. Dammit. Fuck the-collecting-turnip Squilliam Fancyson would vote for Trump fgsshinyhoard okay im just gonna put down my things here Plankton would not want competition, he would not vote for him Krabs would never respect a guy who bankrupted himself four times, he would not vote for him Sandy Cheeks is an independent scientist receiving grants from academies to further her research in foreign lands, so she would never vote for him. Also, she would never respect a man who made such sexist comments since Spongebob did that once (to motivate his pet snail like a traditional sports coach) and she kicked HIS ass over a fucking field Patrick can't spell so he couldn't vote for anyone Spongebob is too nice and would never vote for anyone who used such inappropriate "bad words" during their campaign. Squidward is too lazy and defeatist to even vote because he thinks there would be no point. Pearl is a teenager and therefore too young to vote Larry Lobster is a trained medic and custodian and would not vote for anyone that crippled such services Bubble Bass WOULD vote for him because Bass is an arrogant self-entitled prick who enjoys deceiving others just for the sake of humiliating them, and would approve of such a person. Squilliam Fancyson would also vote for him because he's a wealthy narcissist. Mrs. Puff has a criminal record and is therefore not eligible to vote ohdebt Squidward is a full time minimum wage retail worker who is pro-union and anti-capitalist, and also a firm supporter and member of the fine arts community. He would actively vote against Trump, defeatist or not, and you can't convince me otherwise Things are heating up in the spongebob fandom (no political discourse allowed in the comments)
discourse: kitfisto
 sandy cheeks would've voted trump that evil
 southern rat ass bitch
 thecouchwitch
 Sandy Cheeks is a pro-science feminist who
 lives in a foreign land that she respects the
 customs of and she would be offended you
 would even accuse her of this.
 varkarrus
 mr krabs would've voted trump
 lishadra
 Mr Krabs absolutely would've voted trump
 Mr. Krabs would not have voted for Trump
 because Mr. Krabs earned most of his money
 through hard work (and being a cheapskate and
 get rich quick schemes but those still require
 some effort on his part) whereas Trump
 inherited most of his wealth and thinks a million
 dollars is a small loan, Mr. Krabs would
 consider him an insult to richness for which he
 could not stand
 Plankton would've voted Trump
 You think he needs competition taking over the
 world? Face it folks. No one on Spongebob
 would vote for Trump. None of them. Face it.
 arcon
 Bubble Bass
 Shit. Dammit. Goddammit. Shit. God. Dammit.
 Fuck
 the-collecting-turnip
 Squilliam Fancyson would vote for Trump
 fgsshinyhoard
 okay im just gonna put down my things here
 Plankton would not want competition, he
 would not vote for him
 Krabs would never respect a guy who
 bankrupted himself four times, he would not
 vote for him
 Sandy Cheeks is an independent scientist
 receiving grants from academies to further her
 research in foreign lands, so she would never
 vote for him. Also, she would never respect a
 man who made such sexist comments since
 Spongebob did that once (to motivate his pet
 snail like a traditional sports coach) and she
 kicked HIS ass over a fucking field
 Patrick can't spell so he couldn't vote for
 anyone
 Spongebob is too nice and would never vote
 for anyone who used such inappropriate "bad
 words" during their campaign.
 Squidward is too lazy and defeatist to even
 vote because he thinks there would be no point.
 Pearl is a teenager and therefore too young to
 vote
 Larry Lobster is a trained medic and custodian
 and would not vote for anyone that crippled
 such services
 Bubble Bass WOULD vote for him because
 Bass is an arrogant self-entitled prick who
 enjoys deceiving others just for the sake of
 humiliating them, and would approve of such a
 person.
 Squilliam Fancyson would also vote for him
 because he's a wealthy narcissist.
 Mrs. Puff has a criminal record and is
 therefore not eligible to vote
 ohdebt
 Squidward is a full time minimum wage retail
 worker who is pro-union and anti-capitalist, and
 also a firm supporter and member of the fine
 arts community. He would actively vote against
 Trump, defeatist or not, and you can't convince
 me otherwise
Things are heating up in the spongebob fandom (no political discourse allowed in the comments)

Things are heating up in the spongebob fandom (no political discourse allowed in the comments)

discourse: emilysidhe Baby It's Cold Outside discourse is the same as Macbeth discourse dont-spoop-yourself Explain? emilysidhe OK, so one of the big debates in Macbeth involves the scene in which Lady Macbeth talks Macbeth into killing King Duncan. People debate strenuously over whether it's a scene of Lady M pressuring her reluctant husband into it, or whether it's a scene of her sensing, due to their emotional intimacy, that this murder is something her husband secretly wants and has partially internally decided to do, and is arguing him into it in order to help him give himself permission to do it, in the same way that people see their loved ones wavering over the dessert menu and jump in with things like, "Go on, get the cheesecake, it's your birthday!" Readers and scholars disagree strenuously about this - we even studied an incident in college in which two 18th century illustrators attended the same performance and happened to draw the scene the day after, producing two images that advanced opposite interpretations even though they'd seen the exact same actors do the exact same performance. It's a big deal In the same way, the Baby, It's Cold Outside discourse is about whether this is a song about sexual harassment, or whether it's a woman singing about how she wishes she could spend the night with the guy she just had an excellent date with if only the neighbors wouldn't talk, and him responding, "Stay, baby, it's cold out! No one could expect you to go home in this!" ms-demeanor I really don't know (baby stab his side) King Duncan's a bro (baby cut through his hide) I like him a lot (That decrepit old sot?) This plan ain't so great (But what a king you'd make!) The guards might worry (Darling, do it in a hurry!) His sons will rush the door (So knock them on the floor.) I'm not such a knave (Bash his head with a stave) But l'd be a good king (Now you're starting to think) The dukes might all talk (But their chatter means naught) Say, love, what do you mean (You'd make such a king) I simply must go (baby cut through his hide) There's a war on you know (baby cut through his hide) But what of his wife? (And what of his life?) It feels like bad luck (But that don't mean much) l've got a bad premonition (And l've got a mission) But that's just superstition (My love, you're a vision) The witches said l'd rule (If they lied they were cruel) So babv let's stab Stab his siiiide! I figure someone mightve posted this before, but its still appropriate for Christmas.
discourse: emilysidhe
 Baby It's Cold Outside discourse is the same as Macbeth discourse
 dont-spoop-yourself
 Explain?
 emilysidhe
 OK, so one of the big debates in Macbeth involves the scene in
 which Lady Macbeth talks Macbeth into killing King Duncan. People
 debate strenuously over whether it's a scene of Lady M pressuring
 her reluctant husband into it, or whether it's a scene of her sensing,
 due to their emotional intimacy, that this murder is something her
 husband secretly wants and has partially internally decided to do,
 and is arguing him into it in order to help him give himself permission
 to do it, in the same way that people see their loved ones wavering
 over the dessert menu and jump in with things like, "Go on, get the
 cheesecake, it's your birthday!" Readers and scholars disagree
 strenuously about this - we even studied an incident in college in
 which two 18th century illustrators attended the same performance
 and happened to draw the scene the day after, producing two images
 that advanced opposite interpretations even though they'd seen the
 exact same actors do the exact same performance. It's a big deal
 In the same way, the Baby, It's Cold Outside discourse is about
 whether this is a song about sexual harassment, or whether it's a
 woman singing about how she wishes she could spend the night with
 the guy she just had an excellent date with if only the neighbors
 wouldn't talk, and him responding, "Stay, baby, it's cold out! No one
 could expect you to go home in this!"
 ms-demeanor
 I really don't know (baby stab his side)
 King Duncan's a bro (baby cut through his hide)
 I like him a lot (That decrepit old sot?)
 This plan ain't so great (But what a king you'd make!)
 The guards might worry (Darling, do it in a hurry!)
 His sons will rush the door (So knock them on the floor.)
 I'm not such a knave (Bash his head with a stave)
 But l'd be a good king (Now you're starting to think)
 The dukes might all talk (But their chatter means naught)
 Say, love, what do you mean (You'd make such a king)
 I simply must go (baby cut through his hide)
 There's a war on you know (baby cut through his hide)
 But what of his wife? (And what of his life?)
 It feels like bad luck (But that don't mean much)
 l've got a bad premonition (And l've got a mission)
 But that's just superstition (My love, you're a vision)
 The witches said l'd rule (If they lied they were cruel)
 So babv let's stab
 Stab his siiiide!
I figure someone mightve posted this before, but its still appropriate for Christmas.

I figure someone mightve posted this before, but its still appropriate for Christmas.

discourse: hobbit-hole if i had to get in a fistfight with any member of the fellowship it would be Frodo because i would easily win hobbit-hole all i am saying is that he would ostensibly be the easiest one to take on in a fight given that he's like three feet tall and has led a life of (physical) leisure compared to all of the others due to his standing as a gentlehobbit legolas, aragorn, and gimli are all used to combat, sam works as a gardener merry and pippin often gallivant off and get into mischief so they have the advantage of experience in whatever it is they've gotten up to/would possibly fight dirty, gandalf is gandalf so while weapons are out of the question i suppose that depends on if magic is involved. i don't think i could take him without magic even if he is old because he's a very large guy, but maybe it would be my knuckles against Frodo's baby soft poet hands, plus rve got the additional height and fighting experience. i just think that he would be the easiest to win against in hand-to-hand combat out of the rest of them. also he isn't real so he can't offer a rebuttal to my claim penny-anna you're absolutely correct BUT wanting to fight Frodo makes you a monster D hobbit-hole this has nothing to do with WANTING to fight Frodo, i just think he would be easiest for me to beat in a fight with no weapons. unless he utilized his very large feet, but i think he's too polite to do that because it's a fist fight and that would be considered playing dirty penny anna for someone who doesn't want to fight Frodo you sure have put a lot of thought into fighting Frodo. animate-mush OP is wrong though: you fight Pippin. First off, Pippin has it coming, so you won't be fighting your conscience at the same time Secondly, Pippin is a spoiled rich kid. He's no less gentry than Frodo is, but Frodo works out and is shown to have better stamina, at least at the outset. Pippin is also both the stupidest and the slowest of the hobbits. They both nearly beat one (1) troll, so that's comparable, but Pippin appears not to have got a single hit in against the orcs that captured them while Merry was cutting off hands like a boss. Pippin also straight-up tell Bergil that he's not a fighter Also there's a nonzero chance that Frodo will just straight up curse you (if the guilt of fighting Frodo isn't enough if a curse by itself) And, of course, if you try to fight Frodo, you will 100% end up fighting Sam, and he will wreck you (and you'll deserve it, you penny-anna Also: if you fight Frodo you'll have a very angry Sam & possibly also the entire Fellowship to deal with BUT if you fight Pippin they will probably cheer you on ainurs Bold of you to assume one could attempt to fight Pippin and NOT instantly be killed by Boromir feynites So here's the thing - you absolutely DO NOT want to try and fight Frodo or Pippin because they are going to be protected by the rest of the Fellowship which basically exists to stop asshole Big People from picking on the hobbits. Folk might talk a big game but when the chips are down, you are not going to lay a single hand on any of the hobbits. Either you'll find yourself immediately fighting all four of them or else you'll move to land your first hit and suddenly Aragorn will side-tackle you into the trees. And he probably hits like a freight train tbh. So here's what you do You fight Legolas. The thing about fist-fighting Legolas of course is that you will lose. This is not a fight you're gonna win no matter what. But Legolas has his standing competition with Gimili, so once the challenge is issued, he's not gonna let anyone else step in and fight you either. No one is liable to volunteer on his behalf, either, so you will only end up fighting the one member of the fellowship. If you are lucky he might also take his shirt off. Bonus! Anyway Legolas will mop the floor with you, but he's also already convinced you're weaker than him anyway because you're not an elf, so he's gonna go kind of easy on you And when you lose he will be all snide and superior about it, which means everyone in the fellowship is gonna sympathize with you, and Gimli will probably challenge him on your behalf afterwards, but here's the key thing You will have lost a fist-fight to an immortal warrior prince That's a way better loss to cop to than that time you tried to fistfight a pudgy gentlehobbit and got beaten to the point of unconsciousness by his gardener yeah? icescrabblerjerky okay so tolkien tumblr is fast becoming my fave tumblr community thank you thank you all you are the true fellowship here. Source:hobbit-hole #mmmmmmmmmmhmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm 32,148 notes The Tolkien discourse is getting violent
discourse: hobbit-hole
 if i had to get in a fistfight with any member of the fellowship it would be Frodo
 because i would easily win
 hobbit-hole
 all i am saying is that he would ostensibly be the easiest one to take on in a fight
 given that he's like three feet tall and has led a life of (physical) leisure
 compared to all of the others due to his standing as a gentlehobbit
 legolas, aragorn, and gimli are all used to combat, sam works as a gardener
 merry and pippin often gallivant off and get into mischief so they have the
 advantage of experience in whatever it is they've gotten up to/would possibly
 fight dirty, gandalf is gandalf so while weapons are out of the question i suppose
 that depends on if magic is involved. i don't think i could take him without magic
 even if he is old because he's a very large guy, but maybe
 it would be my knuckles against Frodo's baby soft poet hands, plus rve got the
 additional height and fighting experience. i just think that he would be the easiest
 to win against in hand-to-hand combat out of the rest of them. also he isn't real
 so he can't offer a rebuttal to my claim
 penny-anna
 you're absolutely correct BUT wanting to fight Frodo makes you a monster D
 hobbit-hole
 this has nothing to do with WANTING to fight Frodo, i just think he would be
 easiest for me to beat in a fight with no weapons. unless he utilized his very
 large feet, but i think he's too polite to do that because it's a fist fight and that
 would be considered playing dirty
 penny anna
 for someone who doesn't want to fight Frodo you sure have put a lot of thought
 into fighting Frodo.
 animate-mush
 OP is wrong though: you fight Pippin.
 First off, Pippin has it coming, so you won't be fighting your conscience at the
 same time
 Secondly, Pippin is a spoiled rich kid. He's no less gentry than Frodo is, but
 Frodo works out and is shown to have better stamina, at least at the outset.
 Pippin is also both the stupidest and the slowest of the hobbits. They both nearly
 beat one (1) troll, so that's comparable, but Pippin appears not to have got a
 single hit in against the orcs that captured them while Merry was cutting off
 hands like a boss. Pippin also straight-up tell Bergil that he's not a fighter
 Also there's a nonzero chance that Frodo will just straight up curse you (if the
 guilt of fighting Frodo isn't enough if a curse by itself)
 And, of course, if you try to fight Frodo, you will 100% end up fighting Sam, and
 he will wreck you (and you'll deserve it, you
 penny-anna
 Also: if you fight Frodo you'll have a very angry Sam & possibly also the entire
 Fellowship to deal with BUT if you fight Pippin they will probably cheer you on
 ainurs
 Bold of you to assume one could attempt to fight Pippin and NOT instantly be
 killed by Boromir
 feynites
 So here's the thing - you absolutely DO NOT want to try and fight Frodo or
 Pippin because they are going to be protected by the rest of the Fellowship
 which basically exists to stop asshole Big People from picking on the hobbits.
 Folk might talk a big game but when the chips are down, you are not going to lay
 a single hand on any of the hobbits. Either you'll find yourself immediately
 fighting all four of them or else you'll move to land your first hit and suddenly
 Aragorn will side-tackle you into the trees. And he probably hits like a freight
 train tbh.
 So here's what you do
 You fight Legolas.
 The thing about fist-fighting Legolas of course is that you will lose. This is not a
 fight you're gonna win no matter what. But Legolas has his standing competition
 with Gimili, so once the challenge is issued, he's not gonna let anyone else step
 in and fight you either. No one is liable to volunteer on his behalf, either, so you
 will only end up fighting the one member of the fellowship. If you are lucky he
 might also take his shirt off. Bonus!
 Anyway
 Legolas will mop the floor with you, but he's also already convinced you're
 weaker than him anyway because you're not an elf, so he's gonna go kind of
 easy on you And when you lose he will be all snide and superior about it, which
 means everyone in the fellowship is gonna sympathize with you, and Gimli will
 probably challenge him on your behalf afterwards, but here's the key thing
 You will have lost a fist-fight to an immortal warrior prince
 That's a way better loss to cop to than that time you tried to fistfight a pudgy
 gentlehobbit and got beaten to the point of unconsciousness by his gardener
 yeah?
 icescrabblerjerky
 okay so tolkien tumblr is fast becoming my fave tumblr community thank you
 thank you all you are the true fellowship here.
 Source:hobbit-hole #mmmmmmmmmmhmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
 32,148 notes
The Tolkien discourse is getting violent

The Tolkien discourse is getting violent