nothing is more important than my egomania

heidyiam:

Café de flore


livelifeonlegendary:

This got even funnier when I realized that to shoot it, essentially someone had to hurl a massive rat puppet at Cary Elwes.




roxasreturns:

sailorxsass:

cupcaketerminal:

dearnonacepeople:

dearnonacepeople:

Any one else terrified that this has more notes than almost anything else in the asexual tag, and most of them are supporting this statement.
-coulson-fangirl

Can we possibly get more notes on this than they did because this is one of the highest notes ive seen on the tags and it shows ace people a really depressing idea that there will always be more ignorant and intolerant people than allies and that would’ve been so damaging to me when first realizing I was ace.
-Ezzy

It’s also not scientifically sound. They’re speaking here of asexual reproduction. That’s not something we’ve claimed to be able to do. By saying we’re asexual, we’re not referring to our genetic/biological abilities or even our physical attributes. We’re talking about something we feel is inherent to us as people. Sexuality is fluid and personal, and I don’t think anyone has the right to define or dismiss someone else’s sexual identity. 
I agree with Ezzy. This could have been a horribly damaging thought, not only to someone identifying as asexual, but to a friend or acquaintance of an asexual person. People need to be aware that this is a seriously false image of what we are and how we’re labeling ourselves. 
If you want correct information, here is a great resource.

Asexual reproduction and asexuality as a sexual orientation are two completely fucking different things, therefore this person’s argument is illogical (especially since homosexuals won’t reproduce unless they engage in artificial insemination or engage in sex they don’t really want to) Before it was even really considered as a sexual orientation, Kinsey studies reported roughly 1% of participants indicating a lack of sexual attraction. Recent studies replicate this. Furthermore, even among sexually reproducing animals, asexuality or lack of sexual attraction occurs, just like homosexuality. In a recent experience examining sheep, it was found that a consistent percentage of sheep (who were hormonally and physically FINE) would not have sex with neither the same or opposite sex. Furthermore, some of the rams would not engage in sex or exhibit arousal even when faced with a female in heat.
WHEN ARE PEOPLE GOING TO REALIZE THAT ASEXUALITY IN HUMANS IS AN ORIENTATION, NOT A REPRODUCTIVE STRATEGY, AND THAT IT’S ABOUT ATTRACTION, NOT ABOUT SEXUAL ACTS. SOME ASEXUALS HAVE SEX, BUT THAT DOESN’T MEAN THEY FEEL ATTRACTION, WHICH IS WHAT ASEXUALITY IS. JUST LIKE SOME SEXUAL PEOPLE DON’T HAVE SEX, BECAUSE THEY WANT TO REMAIN ABSTINENT FOR ONE REASON OR ANOTHER, BUT THEY MIGHT FEEL ATTRACTION - THEY JUST DON’T DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT.
REPEAT AFTER ME: ASEXUALITY IS THE LACK OF SEXUAL ATTRACTION. IT IS NOT A REPRODUCTIVE STRATEGY. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH REPRODUCTION OR SEXUAL ACTS. IT IS THE LACK OF SEXUAL ATTRACTION.

roxasreturns:

sailorxsass:

cupcaketerminal:

dearnonacepeople:

dearnonacepeople:

Any one else terrified that this has more notes than almost anything else in the asexual tag, and most of them are supporting this statement.

-coulson-fangirl

Can we possibly get more notes on this than they did because this is one of the highest notes ive seen on the tags and it shows ace people a really depressing idea that there will always be more ignorant and intolerant people than allies and that would’ve been so damaging to me when first realizing I was ace.

-Ezzy

It’s also not scientifically sound. They’re speaking here of asexual reproduction. That’s not something we’ve claimed to be able to do. By saying we’re asexual, we’re not referring to our genetic/biological abilities or even our physical attributes. We’re talking about something we feel is inherent to us as people. Sexuality is fluid and personal, and I don’t think anyone has the right to define or dismiss someone else’s sexual identity. 

I agree with Ezzy. This could have been a horribly damaging thought, not only to someone identifying as asexual, but to a friend or acquaintance of an asexual person. People need to be aware that this is a seriously false image of what we are and how we’re labeling ourselves. 

If you want correct information, here is a great resource.

Asexual reproduction and asexuality as a sexual orientation are two completely fucking different things, therefore this person’s argument is illogical (especially since homosexuals won’t reproduce unless they engage in artificial insemination or engage in sex they don’t really want to) Before it was even really considered as a sexual orientation, Kinsey studies reported roughly 1% of participants indicating a lack of sexual attraction. Recent studies replicate this. Furthermore, even among sexually reproducing animals, asexuality or lack of sexual attraction occurs, just like homosexuality. In a recent experience examining sheep, it was found that a consistent percentage of sheep (who were hormonally and physically FINE) would not have sex with neither the same or opposite sex. Furthermore, some of the rams would not engage in sex or exhibit arousal even when faced with a female in heat.

WHEN ARE PEOPLE GOING TO REALIZE THAT ASEXUALITY IN HUMANS IS AN ORIENTATION, NOT A REPRODUCTIVE STRATEGY, AND THAT IT’S ABOUT ATTRACTION, NOT ABOUT SEXUAL ACTS. SOME ASEXUALS HAVE SEX, BUT THAT DOESN’T MEAN THEY FEEL ATTRACTION, WHICH IS WHAT ASEXUALITY IS. JUST LIKE SOME SEXUAL PEOPLE DON’T HAVE SEX, BECAUSE THEY WANT TO REMAIN ABSTINENT FOR ONE REASON OR ANOTHER, BUT THEY MIGHT FEEL ATTRACTION - THEY JUST DON’T DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT.

REPEAT AFTER ME: ASEXUALITY IS THE LACK OF SEXUAL ATTRACTION. IT IS NOT A REPRODUCTIVE STRATEGY. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH REPRODUCTION OR SEXUAL ACTS. IT IS THE LACK OF SEXUAL ATTRACTION.



sixpenceee:

Another way to present the 9 types of intelligence as exemplified by my How Do We Measure Intelligence post.

The basic idea is that different people are good at different things. These 9 probably don’t cover the wide range of smarts we all possess, but it’s a start.

As Albert Einstein said, ”Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”

there’s no stupid; just different kinds of smart


joelmclaurie:

Joel McHale being Joel McHale.


posted 9 hours ago with 41 notes via joelmclaurie

It takes less than 30 seconds and less than 10 clicks to do all 4 links…PLEASE help dogs and cats in shelters!! 

do-not-touch-my-food:

1 - gives kibble to dogs in shelters with a single click

2 - gives 10 pieces of kibble to dogs in shelters, whether you get the question right or not

3 - gives 10 pieces of kibble to cats in shelters, whether you get the question right or not

4 - gives cat litter to cats in shelters with a single click