ohhiimsam:

taintanthony:

a moment of silence for all of the straight girls

1.  I never fake an orgasm and I’m a straight girl.  So fuck you.

2. YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR OWN ORGASM.  DON’T FAKE THEM.  GUYS WANT TO GET YOU OFF BUT JUST BECAUSE THEY’RE INSIDE YOU DOESN’T MEAN THEY CAN READ YOUR FUCKING MIND YOU STUPID BITCHES.  

HE ISN’T DOING SOMETHING RIGHT?  THEN USE YOUR FUCKING WORDS AND TELL HIM WHAT TO DO.  DON’T MAKE CUNTY PASSIVE AGRESSIVE TUMBLR POSTS

ALSO, HOW CAN HE GET YOU OFF WHEN YOU DON’T KNOW WHAT GETS YOU OFF?  GET YOURSELF OFF AND THEN TELL (OR SHOW) HIM WHAT TO DO.

JESUS FUCKING CHRIST.  NOT EVERYTHING HAS TO BE HANDED TO US ON A SILVER FUCKING PLATTER.  SOMETIMES WE NEED TO FUCKING WORK FOR SHIT.

September 20th 2014   37769 notes   - via / source
  NSFW  sex  honestly

american-fuckin-horror-story:

i got out of bed at 11:30 to make this

September 20th 2014   102539 notes   - via
  nice

mean-cannibals:

nightsblackfalcon:

I love that Mads wears a track jacket under another track jacket.  I don’t think he changes clothes, he simply molts.  

track jacket rainbow

September 20th 2014   140 notes   - via / source

hannibaalecter:

sorry the quality is terrible but look

September 20th 2014   1515 notes   - via / source

onlylolgifs:

My Pet The Giant Snail

September 20th 2014   16924 notes   - via / source

tastefullyoffensive:

[via]

September 20th 2014   230207 notes   - via / source

simply-masters-of-sex:

me-bed-andrew:

oh no, in love i’m just an animal | bill and virginia (made by me)

<3<3<3

September 20th 2014   65 notes   - via / source

foodffs:

How to Make a No-Churn Ice Cream Cake

Really nice recipes. Every hour.

September 20th 2014   2393 notes   - via
  food  recipe

What You Crave vs What You Need

Chocolate: Raw nuts/seeds.
Oily/Fatty Snacks: Kale, leafy greens.
Soda/Carbonated Drinks: Actual, literal bubbles.
Chips/Salty Food: Topsoil.
Cookies: Freudian psychology.
Sweet Tea: A strong Southern gentleman to take care of you.
Pasta/Carbs: Pasta/Carbs.
Ice: The sweet release of death.
September 20th 2014   89080 notes   - via / source

theamazingindi:

okay here’s some of my own personal philosophy (mostly shaped by buddhist and taoist ideas), spiritual belief, and how it ties into my own ethical framework:

constant overwhelming joy is not convenient nor is it possible - accepting existence as something neutral rather than something that has to be ‘solved’ like a problem - it is something that directly ties into eastern philosophy and something i feel the west overlooks. it should also be mentioned that constant overwhelming joy is not possible as a PHYSICAL existence, which is why people spend years meditating to reach that ‘pure’ mental state.

you do not need to be constantly ‘happy’ in your life, but if you are ‘unhappy’ there is an issue. you can be ‘happy’ but not ‘content’, in the same way that losing yourself into doing things that are hurtful to yourself or others will hurt you. a person whose ‘contentment’ comes from hurting others is someone that is, in general, regarded by society as dangerous.

so if we acknowledge happiness not as a neutral state for our existence to constantly be in, we must also acknowledge ourselves when we are truly unhappy to rectify it to go back to netural. but when that neutrality is distrubed, when we are ‘happy’ but not ‘content’, when a person’s calling or spiritual path that has yet to be walked calls them, it calls. people find it in whatever, hobbies, political causes, you have you. it is part of an identity, and you fight for it. if you are not ‘content’ and not ‘happy’ you are probably being oppressed. and you can fight for them both without being the other, because in trying to restore your own ‘content’ you are trying to fight for the ‘content’ of others who feel ‘content’ in the same world you do. it’s when dying for causes starts becoming justifiable.

a servant who serves a lord in battle for example (using archaic imagery b/c these ideas are much older than people give them credit for), is not necessarily ‘happy’, but they are ‘content’, as they can live and they fight for themselves in battle, to serve what they, in their neutral state, believe to be a worthy cause. 

people’s ideas clash when people’s ideas of being ‘content’ clash, rather than their ideas of being ‘happy’, because your idea of being ‘happy’, the idea of joy is too personal to every person. if a person is ‘content’ with their existence using the lives of others to live with it, this in  general, is someone we regard as people in society as untrustworthy, as they are people who WILL use you as a means to an end to make them ‘content/comfortable’. 

so there are two factors by which we can judge someone potentially dangerous to society: someone who takes pleasure and who takes ‘happiness’ from hurting others, and someone who is content and complacent within it’s own structures 

that inner spirituality reaches out in how you interact with people, and how people interact with you

my spiritual ties are a part of my ethical framework, but i would hope without it it stands alone.

that’s why people talk about religion so often in philosophy, it’s because spirituality and a person’s inner intrinsict neutral states are different and if you want to just believe we’re dreaming fleshbags that’s fine, but our existence is a fucking miracle 

September 20th 2014   24 notes   - via / source
© JASONDILAURENTS