Asking For
Asking For

Asking For

Degrasse
Degrasse

Degrasse

Atheistism
Atheistism

Atheistism

too
too

too

literate
literate

literate

yours
yours

yours

literal
literal

literal

ons
ons

ons

their
their

their

goodness
goodness

goodness

🔥 | Latest

Cars, Fire, and God: Jared 2 hrs please tell me someone got a video of the fire truck moving swiftly and safely through thousands of protestors tonight you know, for all of the "concerned citizens" at home You, Rick d 20 others 2 Comments 1 Share Like Share Comment THROWBACK NIGHT OLD SCHOOLAPROV Speak Out Against Adam Iverson Muslim Ban! 17 mins For the people who complain about emergency vehicles being blocked: GVE MEY AdamlversonPhotography captain-snark: ohdionne: So Minnesotans showed the fuck up tonight (like we do) - thousands in the street protesting tr*mp’s latest executive disorders. And guess what happened? The old proverb “What if an emergency vehicle needs to get where it’s going” came to life, and the sea went silent and parted to allow it through (swiftly…literally the truck was going about as fast as, if not faster than, it would have been if there had been cars it needed to go around). Please share this. This was a rare occurrence where an emergency vehicle needed to go through the route of a protest, when usually they have predetermined alternative routes, and it went completely fine. Also for the love of god, have more respect for firefighters/EMTs…they know how to do their jobs. They’re ready for anything, including working around protests. So folks can stop using that tired old argument now (not that it was ever backed up by sources anyway). It’s almost as though these protesters who are protesting for human rights are decent human people.
Cars, Fire, and God: Jared
 2 hrs
 please tell me someone got a video of the fire truck
 moving swiftly and safely through thousands of
 protestors tonight
 you know, for all of the "concerned citizens" at home
 You, Rick
 d 20 others
 2 Comments 1 Share
 Like
 Share
 Comment

 THROWBACK NIGHT
 OLD SCHOOLAPROV
 Speak Out Against
 Adam Iverson
 Muslim Ban!
 17 mins
 For the people who complain about emergency
 vehicles being blocked:
 GVE MEY
 AdamlversonPhotography
captain-snark:

ohdionne:

So Minnesotans showed the fuck up tonight (like we do) - thousands in the street protesting tr*mp’s latest executive disorders. And guess what happened? The old proverb “What if an emergency vehicle needs to get where it’s going” came to life, and the sea went silent and parted to allow it through (swiftly…literally the truck was going about as fast as, if not faster than, it would have been if there had been cars it needed to go around).

Please share this. This was a rare occurrence where an emergency vehicle needed to go through the route of a protest, when usually they have predetermined alternative routes, and it went completely fine. Also for the love of god, have more respect for firefighters/EMTs…they know how to do their jobs. They’re ready for anything, including working around protests. 

So folks can stop using that tired old argument now (not that it was ever backed up by sources anyway).

It’s almost as though these protesters who are protesting for human rights are decent human people.

captain-snark: ohdionne: So Minnesotans showed the fuck up tonight (like we do) - thousands in the street protesting tr*mp’s latest execut...

Being Alone, Arguing, and Bad: Alyssa Milano @Alyssa_Milano Follow Ns NEWS MARIJU 4:14 PM 18 Apr 2018 MAKEMAT 1,593 Retweets 4.735 Likes 主与玉丰丰 -- libertarirynn: vaporwavevocap: cheshireinthemiddle: napoleonbonerfarte: cheshireinthemiddle: pseudopupil: cheshireinthemiddle: hardboiledoldman: cheshireinthemiddle: hardboiledoldman: cheshireinthemiddle: But you knowingly broke the law. You could sleep with a 17 year old and the age of consent of your state can lower the next year. You still broke the law. You’re an unfathomably dumb cunt. At least I have a good argument. And since i’ve already gone into great detail proving my point, unless you have something constructive to add, move along. A sound argument is not a good argument, you dummy. Making a sound argument isn’t the same thing as making a good one, and you’ve made a bad argument cause you’re a dumb as fuck bootlicker. We all know breaking the law has consequences, doesn’t mean we have to think it’s morally good, you brain-worm-riddled moron. Something being normal and the accepted reality doesn’t make it reasonable or good. You’re not smart and your rhetoric is garbage-tier. Eat shit. A sound argument is one that is well thought out and covers its bases. Which is what I gave. Your counterargument is…insults. You personally not agreeing with a law doesnt mean that you can just break it. If youre an immigrant coming from a country with a liwer legal drinking age or age of consent, you can see breaking those laws in the US as harmless. You can think they are stupid laws. They might even change in the future. But if you break them in the US, you will be punished. “I personally dont find an. Issue with this law” is not a defense. If you want to do something illegal and think it is unfair, work to have the law changed. Advocate for its change. And abide by the new rules (in this case, get a license, sell only to specific people, and dont sell to children). And this isnt slavery. This isnt criminalized homosexuality. This isnt infringing on your right to live. You can wait to get high in this particular method or sell it to others after it has been legalized. It isnt that hard. You are such an idiot and coward. “Breaking the law is illegal” is the entirety of what you’re saying (congrats on your basic baby brain logic) but its still fucking pathetic you’re defending a heinous prison system simply because you are pussy who loves authority and pointless contrarianism. Like it IS a stupid law and the point of this comic is that no one should lose years (or any time!) of their life over it.  If the government made a law that jaywalking is a felony you’d defend people being locked away only because they “broke the law”. Thats stupid and says more about you than anything. Grow a spine you slug. Another person who just insults and doesnt read. The argument isnt “breaking the law is illegal”, but that knowingly breaking the law comes with predictable punishments. If you dont agree with a law, you advocate for its change. You dont personally get to decide what is and isnt a stupid law. The age of consent in France is 15. And if you live in France, that could seem harmless. But if you immigrated to Japan or the US and started sleeping with 15 year olds, you can argue that it is harmless all you want, but it is still illegal. The government has made leaving your preteen or lower child home alone as a form child abuse. You can have your children taken away if you do it too much. I was left alone at 8 years old. All the time. I was fine. The other little kids left alone were fine. We could handle ourselves. We and Our parents saw it as “harmless”. That doesnt mean the parents cant be pubished for it. “I will break this law because i personally dont like it/think it’s harmless” is acceptable to you until it is used on a law that you actually support. “maybe if those jews didn’t want to get sent to concentration camps they shouldn’t have been jewish in poland.” that’s exactly what you sound like lmao. I’m really not sure what argument you’re trying to go for right now? Oh, i’m sorry, I guess you getting high is comparable to persecution now. Your argument can be used to justify breaking literally any law. There is a HUGE difference between laws that violate your right to live and laws that you just dont feel like following. If you cant see the difference then i feel very sorry for you. It is persecution, if there is no victim there is no crime, therefore treating people like criminals without a crime is persecution. What she said ^ Also forcing people into legal slavery by arresting and imprisoning them for victimless crimes sure as shit sounds like persecution to me.
Being Alone, Arguing, and Bad: Alyssa Milano
 @Alyssa_Milano
 Follow
 Ns
 NEWS
 MARIJU
 4:14 PM 18 Apr 2018
 MAKEMAT
 1,593 Retweets 4.735 Likes
 主与玉丰丰
 --
libertarirynn:

vaporwavevocap:

cheshireinthemiddle:
napoleonbonerfarte:


cheshireinthemiddle:

pseudopupil:


cheshireinthemiddle:

hardboiledoldman:


cheshireinthemiddle:


hardboiledoldman:


cheshireinthemiddle:
But you knowingly broke the law. You could sleep with a 17 year old and the age of consent of your state can lower the next year. You still broke the law. 
You’re an unfathomably dumb cunt.


At least I have a good argument. 
And since i’ve already gone into great detail proving my point, unless you have something constructive to add, move along. 


A sound argument is not a good argument, you dummy. Making a sound argument isn’t the same thing as making a good one, and you’ve made a bad argument cause you’re a dumb as fuck bootlicker.
We all know breaking the law has consequences, doesn’t mean we have to think it’s morally good, you brain-worm-riddled moron. Something being normal and the accepted reality doesn’t make it reasonable or good. You’re not smart and your rhetoric is garbage-tier. Eat shit.


A sound argument is one that is well thought out and covers its bases. Which is what I gave. 
Your counterargument is…insults. 
You personally not agreeing with a law doesnt mean that you can just break it. If youre an immigrant coming from a country with a liwer legal drinking age or age of consent, you can see breaking those laws in the US as harmless. You can think they are stupid laws. They might even change in the future. But if you break them in the US, you will be punished. “I personally dont find an. Issue with this law” is not a defense. 
If you want to do something illegal and think it is unfair, work to have the law changed. Advocate for its change. And abide by the new rules (in this case, get a license, sell only to specific people, and dont sell to children). 
And this isnt slavery. This isnt criminalized homosexuality. This isnt infringing on your right to live. You can wait to get high in this particular method or sell it to others after it has been legalized. It isnt that hard. 

You are such an idiot and coward. “Breaking the law is illegal” is the entirety of what you’re saying (congrats on your basic baby brain logic) but its still fucking pathetic you’re defending a heinous prison system simply because you are pussy who loves authority and pointless contrarianism. Like it IS a stupid law and the point of this comic is that no one should lose years (or any time!) of their life over it.
 If the government made a law that jaywalking is a felony you’d defend people being locked away only because they “broke the law”. Thats stupid and says more about you than anything. Grow a spine you slug.


Another person who just insults and doesnt read. 
The argument isnt “breaking the law is illegal”, but that knowingly breaking the law comes with predictable punishments. 
If you dont agree with a law, you advocate for its change. 
You dont personally get to decide what is and isnt a stupid law. The age of consent in France is 15. And if you live in France, that could seem harmless. But if you immigrated to Japan or the US and started sleeping with 15 year olds, you can argue that it is harmless all you want, but it is still illegal. 
The government has made leaving your preteen or lower child home alone as a form child abuse. You can have your children taken away if you do it too much. I was left alone at 8 years old. All the time. I was fine. The other little kids left alone were fine. We could handle ourselves. We and Our parents saw it as “harmless”. That doesnt mean the parents cant be pubished for it. 
“I will break this law because i personally dont like it/think it’s harmless” is acceptable to you until it is used on a law that you actually support. 

“maybe if those jews didn’t want to get sent to concentration camps they shouldn’t have been jewish in poland.” that’s exactly what you sound like lmao. I’m really not sure what argument you’re trying to go for right now?


Oh, i’m sorry, I guess you getting high is comparable to persecution now. Your argument can be used to justify breaking literally any law. 
There is a HUGE difference between laws that violate your right to live and laws that you just dont feel like following. 
If you cant see the difference then i feel very sorry for you. 

It is persecution, if there is no victim there is no crime, therefore treating people like criminals without a crime is persecution.

What she said ^

Also forcing people into legal slavery by arresting and imprisoning them for victimless crimes sure as shit sounds like persecution to me.

libertarirynn: vaporwavevocap: cheshireinthemiddle: napoleonbonerfarte: cheshireinthemiddle: pseudopupil: cheshireinthemiddle: hardb...

Being Alone, Arguing, and Bad: Alyssa Milano @Alyssa_Milano Follow Ns NEWS MARIJU 4:14 PM 18 Apr 2018 MAKEMAT 1,593 Retweets 4.735 Likes 主与玉丰丰 -- vaporwavevocap: cheshireinthemiddle: napoleonbonerfarte: cheshireinthemiddle: pseudopupil: cheshireinthemiddle: hardboiledoldman: cheshireinthemiddle: hardboiledoldman: cheshireinthemiddle: But you knowingly broke the law. You could sleep with a 17 year old and the age of consent of your state can lower the next year. You still broke the law. You’re an unfathomably dumb cunt. At least I have a good argument. And since i’ve already gone into great detail proving my point, unless you have something constructive to add, move along. A sound argument is not a good argument, you dummy. Making a sound argument isn’t the same thing as making a good one, and you’ve made a bad argument cause you’re a dumb as fuck bootlicker. We all know breaking the law has consequences, doesn’t mean we have to think it’s morally good, you brain-worm-riddled moron. Something being normal and the accepted reality doesn’t make it reasonable or good. You’re not smart and your rhetoric is garbage-tier. Eat shit. A sound argument is one that is well thought out and covers its bases. Which is what I gave. Your counterargument is…insults. You personally not agreeing with a law doesnt mean that you can just break it. If youre an immigrant coming from a country with a liwer legal drinking age or age of consent, you can see breaking those laws in the US as harmless. You can think they are stupid laws. They might even change in the future. But if you break them in the US, you will be punished. “I personally dont find an. Issue with this law” is not a defense. If you want to do something illegal and think it is unfair, work to have the law changed. Advocate for its change. And abide by the new rules (in this case, get a license, sell only to specific people, and dont sell to children). And this isnt slavery. This isnt criminalized homosexuality. This isnt infringing on your right to live. You can wait to get high in this particular method or sell it to others after it has been legalized. It isnt that hard. You are such an idiot and coward. “Breaking the law is illegal” is the entirety of what you’re saying (congrats on your basic baby brain logic) but its still fucking pathetic you’re defending a heinous prison system simply because you are pussy who loves authority and pointless contrarianism. Like it IS a stupid law and the point of this comic is that no one should lose years (or any time!) of their life over it.  If the government made a law that jaywalking is a felony you’d defend people being locked away only because they “broke the law”. Thats stupid and says more about you than anything. Grow a spine you slug. Another person who just insults and doesnt read. The argument isnt “breaking the law is illegal”, but that knowingly breaking the law comes with predictable punishments. If you dont agree with a law, you advocate for its change. You dont personally get to decide what is and isnt a stupid law. The age of consent in France is 15. And if you live in France, that could seem harmless. But if you immigrated to Japan or the US and started sleeping with 15 year olds, you can argue that it is harmless all you want, but it is still illegal. The government has made leaving your preteen or lower child home alone as a form child abuse. You can have your children taken away if you do it too much. I was left alone at 8 years old. All the time. I was fine. The other little kids left alone were fine. We could handle ourselves. We and Our parents saw it as “harmless”. That doesnt mean the parents cant be pubished for it. “I will break this law because i personally dont like it/think it’s harmless” is acceptable to you until it is used on a law that you actually support. “maybe if those jews didn’t want to get sent to concentration camps they shouldn’t have been jewish in poland.” that’s exactly what you sound like lmao. I’m really not sure what argument you’re trying to go for right now? Oh, i’m sorry, I guess you getting high is comparable to persecution now. Your argument can be used to justify breaking literally any law. There is a HUGE difference between laws that violate your right to live and laws that you just dont feel like following. If you cant see the difference then i feel very sorry for you. It is persecution, if there is no victim there is no crime, therefore treating people like criminals without a crime is persecution. What she said ^
Being Alone, Arguing, and Bad: Alyssa Milano
 @Alyssa_Milano
 Follow
 Ns
 NEWS
 MARIJU
 4:14 PM 18 Apr 2018
 MAKEMAT
 1,593 Retweets 4.735 Likes
 主与玉丰丰
 --
vaporwavevocap:

cheshireinthemiddle:
napoleonbonerfarte:


cheshireinthemiddle:

pseudopupil:


cheshireinthemiddle:

hardboiledoldman:


cheshireinthemiddle:


hardboiledoldman:


cheshireinthemiddle:
But you knowingly broke the law. You could sleep with a 17 year old and the age of consent of your state can lower the next year. You still broke the law. 
You’re an unfathomably dumb cunt.


At least I have a good argument. 
And since i’ve already gone into great detail proving my point, unless you have something constructive to add, move along. 


A sound argument is not a good argument, you dummy. Making a sound argument isn’t the same thing as making a good one, and you’ve made a bad argument cause you’re a dumb as fuck bootlicker.
We all know breaking the law has consequences, doesn’t mean we have to think it’s morally good, you brain-worm-riddled moron. Something being normal and the accepted reality doesn’t make it reasonable or good. You’re not smart and your rhetoric is garbage-tier. Eat shit.


A sound argument is one that is well thought out and covers its bases. Which is what I gave. 
Your counterargument is…insults. 
You personally not agreeing with a law doesnt mean that you can just break it. If youre an immigrant coming from a country with a liwer legal drinking age or age of consent, you can see breaking those laws in the US as harmless. You can think they are stupid laws. They might even change in the future. But if you break them in the US, you will be punished. “I personally dont find an. Issue with this law” is not a defense. 
If you want to do something illegal and think it is unfair, work to have the law changed. Advocate for its change. And abide by the new rules (in this case, get a license, sell only to specific people, and dont sell to children). 
And this isnt slavery. This isnt criminalized homosexuality. This isnt infringing on your right to live. You can wait to get high in this particular method or sell it to others after it has been legalized. It isnt that hard. 

You are such an idiot and coward. “Breaking the law is illegal” is the entirety of what you’re saying (congrats on your basic baby brain logic) but its still fucking pathetic you’re defending a heinous prison system simply because you are pussy who loves authority and pointless contrarianism. Like it IS a stupid law and the point of this comic is that no one should lose years (or any time!) of their life over it.
 If the government made a law that jaywalking is a felony you’d defend people being locked away only because they “broke the law”. Thats stupid and says more about you than anything. Grow a spine you slug.


Another person who just insults and doesnt read. 
The argument isnt “breaking the law is illegal”, but that knowingly breaking the law comes with predictable punishments. 
If you dont agree with a law, you advocate for its change. 
You dont personally get to decide what is and isnt a stupid law. The age of consent in France is 15. And if you live in France, that could seem harmless. But if you immigrated to Japan or the US and started sleeping with 15 year olds, you can argue that it is harmless all you want, but it is still illegal. 
The government has made leaving your preteen or lower child home alone as a form child abuse. You can have your children taken away if you do it too much. I was left alone at 8 years old. All the time. I was fine. The other little kids left alone were fine. We could handle ourselves. We and Our parents saw it as “harmless”. That doesnt mean the parents cant be pubished for it. 
“I will break this law because i personally dont like it/think it’s harmless” is acceptable to you until it is used on a law that you actually support. 

“maybe if those jews didn’t want to get sent to concentration camps they shouldn’t have been jewish in poland.” that’s exactly what you sound like lmao. I’m really not sure what argument you’re trying to go for right now?


Oh, i’m sorry, I guess you getting high is comparable to persecution now. Your argument can be used to justify breaking literally any law. 
There is a HUGE difference between laws that violate your right to live and laws that you just dont feel like following. 
If you cant see the difference then i feel very sorry for you. 

It is persecution, if there is no victim there is no crime, therefore treating people like criminals without a crime is persecution.

What she said ^

vaporwavevocap: cheshireinthemiddle: napoleonbonerfarte: cheshireinthemiddle: pseudopupil: cheshireinthemiddle: hardboiledoldman: c...

Apparently, Crime, and Dating: writing-prompt-s A dating service where matching is based on people's search history exists. You're a serial killer. You go on a date with a writer. endreams-s Serial Killer: metaphorically, if you were to kill someone, how would you do it? Writer: Air shot between the toes, it'll look like a heart attack Serial Killer who is obviously in love already: "sucks in a breath ok fangoddess817 Writer: how long would it take to die if you were to potentially stab someone in the guts Serial killer: anywhere from 2 to 30 minutes Writer, already bringing a ring out: "shaking thanks infinityonthot A++ addition tetsuskitten Writer: "shows the serial killer the murder scene they're writing actually work? babe, i'm not sure if this would Serial killer: "kisses writer on the forehead and leaves, comes back later, a suspicious scent of blood coming off them* it works baby, you're doing great tigerliliesandcherryblossoms ILOVE THIS vmohlere Oh no, murder comedy is my jam laziestofthedreamers Ilove this, I love all of this, but quick question, does the author know? Like are they aware that their significant other is a serial killer or do they just think that they have a morbid sense of humor? It'd be even funnier if the author had no fucking clue, like how Aurthur Conan Doyle was apparently stupidly gulible, and on top of it they're a horror or crime novelist. Like the serial killer works at a butcher shop or something so it's completely normal for them to come home smelling like blood, no murders going on here, no sirey. Just my darling coming back home from a long day at work. Now fast forward a bit and the author has managed to get their first book published, with loving support from the serial killer who helped them fine tune all the murder scenes, and it's a big hit. Enough so that a detective with the local police department has noticed some disturbing similarities to several active cases, including details that were never released to the press. Obviously he brings this up to his superior and convinces him that there's something to the theory, but it's all circumstantial right now. He stakes out the author's home and is super convinced that the author is the murderer, but they don't seem to do anything??? Like they literally are at the house all day, that's it. Most they do is leave for groceries. So you get this dynamic of the serial killer mining the author for creative murder schemes, the author being lovingly encouraged by the serial killer, and finally the detective who is just so sure that the author is the killer and that if he sticks it out long enough he'll FINALLY have proof. annieutimagines Plot twist, The serial killer and detective use to go out so it gets sub what personal. "You need to stop seeing them. I think they are a serial killer." Serial killer breaths in. "Look-" ladyhavilliard ..perfect theskystealerthebookthief I need 4 seasons and a movie on this I would watch the hell out of this
Apparently, Crime, and Dating: writing-prompt-s
 A dating service where matching is based on
 people's search history exists. You're a serial killer.
 You go on a date with a writer.
 endreams-s
 Serial Killer: metaphorically, if you were to kill
 someone, how would you do it?
 Writer: Air shot between the toes, it'll look like a heart
 attack
 Serial Killer who is obviously in love already: "sucks in
 a breath ok
 fangoddess817
 Writer: how long would it take to die if you were to
 potentially stab someone in the guts
 Serial killer: anywhere from 2 to 30 minutes
 Writer, already bringing a ring out: "shaking thanks
 infinityonthot
 A++ addition
 tetsuskitten
 Writer: "shows the serial killer the murder scene
 they're writing
 actually work?
 babe, i'm not sure if this would
 Serial killer: "kisses writer on the forehead and
 leaves, comes back later, a suspicious scent of blood
 coming off them* it works baby, you're doing great
 tigerliliesandcherryblossoms
 ILOVE THIS
 vmohlere
 Oh no, murder comedy is my jam
 laziestofthedreamers
 Ilove this, I love all of this, but quick question, does
 the author know? Like are they aware that their
 significant other is a serial killer or do they just think
 that they have a morbid sense of humor? It'd be even
 funnier if the author had no fucking clue, like how
 Aurthur Conan Doyle was apparently stupidly
 gulible, and on top of it they're a horror or crime
 novelist. Like the serial killer works at a butcher shop
 or something so it's completely normal for them to
 come home smelling like blood, no murders going on
 here, no sirey. Just my darling coming back home
 from a long day at work.
 Now fast forward a bit and the author has managed
 to get their first book published, with loving support
 from the serial killer who helped them fine tune all
 the murder scenes, and it's a big hit. Enough so that
 a detective with the local police department has
 noticed some disturbing similarities to several active
 cases, including details that were never released to
 the press. Obviously he brings this up to his superior
 and convinces him that there's something to the
 theory, but it's all circumstantial right now. He stakes
 out the author's home and is super convinced that
 the author is the murderer, but they don't seem to do
 anything??? Like they literally are at the house all
 day, that's it. Most they do is leave for groceries.
 So you get this dynamic of the serial killer mining the
 author for creative murder schemes, the author
 being lovingly encouraged by the serial killer, and
 finally the detective who is just so sure that the
 author is the killer and that if he sticks it out long
 enough he'll FINALLY have proof.
 annieutimagines
 Plot twist, The serial killer and detective use to go
 out so it gets sub what personal.
 "You need to stop seeing them. I think they are a
 serial killer."
 Serial killer breaths in. "Look-"
 ladyhavilliard
 ..perfect
 theskystealerthebookthief
 I need 4 seasons and a movie on this
I would watch the hell out of this

I would watch the hell out of this

Funny, God, and Head: jumpingjacktrash: arrghigiveup: cimness: China's netizens are all in a twitter over the account of a carpenter who was commissioned to make a cinnabar red high-backed chair with the finials at the top to be "in the shape of dragons' heads" (chéng lóngtóu Unfortunately, he misinterpreted the directions to mean "lin the shape ofl Jackie Chan's head" ("Chénglóng tóu ) (via Language Log Reanalysis, Jackie Chan edition) LMAO ok so to elaborate on this absolute gem, notice how the characters provided for "in the shape of dragons' heads" and "lin the shape of Jackie Chan's head" are identical? That wasn't a typo The thing you need to understand about Chinese names is that they all have meaning. And I don't mean that in the sense of "if you trace the etymology back through two languages it has its roots in a Hebrew phrase that means "God is my " that many Western names have. I mean that in the sense of "almost all of these words are still in regular use today and my parents very literally named me "pretty [and] wise" in Chinese. (Sidenote: This is why we get annoyed at made up 'Chinese' names that just pull two random vaguely Chinese-sounding syllables together. It is blindingly obvious when it's not a real name). (chéng) means "to become", "to turn into" L (lóng) is "dragon". Thus, Jackie Chan's Chinese stage name, (Chénglóng), literally means "become dragon". ((tóu), of course, means "head") (Further sidenote: This is actually a bit of a pun/reference. Specifically, it is a reference to Bruce Lee, whose stage name was (Xiãolóng), or, "Little dragon". So Jackie's chosen stage name means both "become dragon", and "become [like] Bruce Lee") The other thing you need to know about Chinese is that we don't put spaces between terms in written text. What all this means is that the way you'd write "Icarvel into dragon heads" can be identical to the way you'd write "Icarvel Jackie Chan's head", and literally the only difference would be where you pause when you vocalise it: before lóngtóu, or after chénglóng. XD i think the chair turned out great 25 Funny Tumblr Posts to Make You Laughing Today
Funny, God, and Head: jumpingjacktrash:
 arrghigiveup:
 cimness:
 China's netizens are all in a twitter over the
 account of a carpenter who was
 commissioned to make a cinnabar red
 high-backed chair with the finials at the
 top to be "in the shape of dragons' heads"
 (chéng lóngtóu Unfortunately, he
 misinterpreted the directions to mean "lin
 the shape ofl Jackie Chan's head"
 ("Chénglóng tóu )
 (via Language Log
 Reanalysis, Jackie Chan
 edition)
 LMAO ok so to elaborate on this absolute gem,
 notice how the characters provided for "in the
 shape of dragons' heads" and "lin the shape of
 Jackie Chan's head" are identical? That wasn't a
 typo
 The thing you need to understand about
 Chinese names is that they all have meaning.
 And I don't mean that in the sense of "if you
 trace the etymology back through two
 languages it has its roots in a Hebrew phrase
 that means "God is my " that many
 Western names have. I mean that in the sense
 of "almost all of these words are still in regular
 use today and my parents very literally named
 me "pretty [and] wise" in Chinese.
 (Sidenote: This is why we get annoyed at made
 up 'Chinese' names that just pull two random
 vaguely Chinese-sounding syllables together. It
 is blindingly obvious when it's not a real name).
 (chéng) means "to become", "to turn into"
 L (lóng) is "dragon". Thus, Jackie Chan's
 Chinese stage name, (Chénglóng),
 literally means "become dragon". ((tóu), of
 course, means "head")
 (Further sidenote: This is actually a bit of a
 pun/reference. Specifically, it is a reference to
 Bruce Lee, whose stage name was
 (Xiãolóng), or, "Little dragon". So Jackie's
 chosen stage name means both "become
 dragon", and "become [like] Bruce Lee")
 The other thing you need to know about
 Chinese is that we don't put spaces between
 terms in written text.
 What all this means is that the way you'd
 write "Icarvel into dragon heads" can
 be identical to the way you'd write "Icarvel
 Jackie Chan's head", and literally the only
 difference would be where you pause when
 you vocalise it: before lóngtóu, or after
 chénglóng. XD
 i think the chair turned out great
25 Funny Tumblr Posts to Make You Laughing Today

25 Funny Tumblr Posts to Make You Laughing Today

God, Monster, and Movies: INTERNATIONAL INTERNATIONAL SAN DIEGO AN DIE ECON CONCON CON INTERNA INTER INTERNATIONAL 1N DIEG0 OIEGO SAN DIEGO CON OUG NO CON DIEGO CON INTERNATIONAL ONAL INTERNATIONAL IN E WATIONAL TERNATIONA SAN DIEGO CON SAN OIEG0 0 93 eONCON CO SAN OIEG N OIEG CO INTERNATIO COMICE CO OM feministscoundrel: This photo means a lot to me. And I’ll tell you why.  Natalie Portman, as we know, was shut out of Marvel. She chose not to sign any new contract not just because of the way her character was treated (though there is that) but because Thor: The Dark World was slated to be the first Marvel movie directed by a woman, her friend (and eventual Wonder Woman director) Patty Jenkins. Portman hadn’t planned on being in The Dark World, but lept at the chance to be a part of feminist history and to be directed in what would have beenJenkin’s first film since her 2003 Oscar-winning Monster. Portman signed a new contract with Marvel. They fired Jenkins soon after. Portman was crushed because she essentially had been duped into a contract for a film that would keep her away from her young son and force her back into a one-dimensional role under yet another male director. And we all remember how awful that movie was.  When it came time for the third Thor movie, they tried to get Portman under contract again. And she said no. Marvel decided to spin the story to make it seem like it was all their idea. At first, they went for the lame and nonsensical:  When Marvel Studios President Kevin Feige was asked about why she wouldn’t be in the third film, and said there were “many reasons, many of which are in the film, so you will see that” continuing with “There are only a couple of scenes on Earth in this movie. The majority, 95 percent of the movie, takes place in the cosmos.” (x) Seeing as The Dark World also took place in space, this answer didn’t have a lot of credibility. When Portman said she was “done” with the Marvel Universe, Feige got vicious in interviews, telling reporters that Valkyrie was in Ragnorak to be better than Jane Foster and a better match for Thor.  “We wanted Thor to encounter somebody that was near his equal and that his relationship with Jane may have evolved in unexpected ways in between The Dark World and Ragnarok, and we wanted to pit him against a character who was much more his equal and in many ways his superior.” (x) Feige implies that A) Valkyrie was in Ragnorak to be a romantic interest for Thor, B) Valkyrie is better and more powerful than Jane Foster, and C) Jane Foster was always Thor’s inferior.  What’s ridiculous is that Ragnorak had a “sorry Jane dumped you” throwaway line to explain Portman’s absence. And instead of saying that Jane and Thor broke up in interviews, a line that does not spoil literally anything about the film, Feige chose to attack Jane’s strength and capability, which would have been a very special dig at Portman.  Do you want to know what none of this sounds like? Taika Waititi’s opinion. Waititi is a master storyteller who does not sacrifice his feminist views for laughs. You can bet that Feige’s ridiculous slams on Portman and her character Jane– disguised as “promotion” for WAITITI’S FILM– would have troubled him immensely. This is a man with a Māori father, who had to use his mother’s maiden name– Cohen– for earlier work because an indigenous last name kept him away from opportunity. This man does NOT fuck around with entertainment that gets its power off of sexism and inequality. He knows from experience just how infuriating it is when it comes to directors missing out on opportunities because they aren’t a white man.  So how does he fix this? How does he fix the idea that Jane Foster can’t go to space, or that she’s not powerful enough for Thor, the god of thunder?  He makes her Thor.  Waititi saw Portman / Jane Foster’s name dragged through the mud by Kevin Feige in order to promote his movie, and when he got hired to direct again, he decided to right those wrongs. This picture means everything. He is on his knee, handing her Thor’s hammer, essentially saying, you will never have to go through that shit with me. With me, you’re a god. And the expression on her face, after Marvel attempted to break her, doesn’t need words.  What a photo. What a film. What a man. 
God, Monster, and Movies: INTERNATIONAL
 INTERNATIONAL
 SAN DIEGO
 AN DIE
 ECON CONCON CON
 INTERNA
 INTER
 INTERNATIONAL
 1N DIEG0
 OIEGO
 SAN DIEGO
 CON
 OUG NO
 CON
 DIEGO
 CON
 INTERNATIONAL
 ONAL
 INTERNATIONAL
 IN E WATIONAL
 TERNATIONA
 SAN DIEGO
 CON
 SAN OIEG0
 0 93
 eONCON CO
 SAN OIEG
 N OIEG
 CO
 INTERNATIO
 COMICE
 CO
 OM
feministscoundrel:
This photo means a lot to me. And I’ll tell you why. 
Natalie Portman, as we know, was shut out of Marvel. She chose not to sign any new contract not just because of the way her character was treated (though there is that) but because Thor: The Dark World was slated to be the first Marvel movie directed by a woman, her friend (and eventual Wonder Woman director) Patty Jenkins. Portman hadn’t planned on being in The Dark World, but lept at the chance to be a part of feminist history and to be directed in what would have beenJenkin’s first film since her 2003 Oscar-winning Monster. Portman signed a new contract with Marvel. They fired Jenkins soon after. Portman was crushed because she essentially had been duped into a contract for a film that would keep her away from her young son and force her back into a one-dimensional role under yet another male director. And we all remember how awful that movie was. 
When it came time for the third Thor movie, they tried to get Portman under contract again. And she said no. Marvel decided to spin the story to make it seem like it was all their idea. At first, they went for the lame and nonsensical: 
When Marvel Studios President Kevin Feige was asked about why she wouldn’t be in the third film, and said there were “many reasons, many of which are in the film, so you will see that” continuing with “There are only a couple of scenes on Earth in this movie. The majority, 95 percent of the movie, takes place in the cosmos.” (x)
Seeing as The Dark World also took place in space, this answer didn’t have a lot of credibility. When Portman said she was “done” with the Marvel Universe, Feige got vicious in interviews, telling reporters that Valkyrie was in Ragnorak to be better than Jane Foster and a better match for Thor. 
“We wanted Thor to encounter somebody that was near his equal and that his relationship with Jane may have evolved in unexpected ways in between The Dark World and Ragnarok, and we wanted to pit him against a character who was much more his equal and in many ways his superior.” (x)
Feige implies that A) Valkyrie was in Ragnorak to be a romantic interest for Thor, B) Valkyrie is better and more powerful than Jane Foster, and C) Jane Foster was always Thor’s inferior. 
What’s ridiculous is that Ragnorak had a “sorry Jane dumped you” throwaway line to explain Portman’s absence. And instead of saying that Jane and Thor broke up in interviews, a line that does not spoil literally anything about the film, Feige chose to attack Jane’s strength and capability, which would have been a very special dig at Portman. 
Do you want to know what none of this sounds like? Taika Waititi’s opinion. Waititi is a master storyteller who does not sacrifice his feminist views for laughs. You can bet that Feige’s ridiculous slams on Portman and her character Jane– disguised as “promotion” for WAITITI’S FILM– would have troubled him immensely. This is a man with a Māori father, who had to use his mother’s maiden name– Cohen– for earlier work because an indigenous last name kept him away from opportunity. This man does NOT fuck around with entertainment that gets its power off of sexism and inequality. He knows from experience just how infuriating it is when it comes to directors missing out on opportunities because they aren’t a white man. 
So how does he fix this? How does he fix the idea that Jane Foster can’t go to space, or that she’s not powerful enough for Thor, the god of thunder? 
He makes her Thor. 
Waititi saw Portman / Jane Foster’s name dragged through the mud by Kevin Feige in order to promote his movie, and when he got hired to direct again, he decided to right those wrongs. This picture means everything. He is on his knee, handing her Thor’s hammer, essentially saying, you will never have to go through that shit with me. With me, you’re a god. And the expression on her face, after Marvel attempted to break her, doesn’t need words. 
What a photo. What a film. What a man. 

feministscoundrel: This photo means a lot to me. And I’ll tell you why.  Natalie Portman, as we know, was shut out of Marvel. She chose not ...