3:58pm August 30, 2014

"And I’ve seen into eternity, Manwë. Eternity.”

"And I’ve seen into eternity, Manwë. Eternity.”

3:39pm August 30, 2014

At some point we stopped thinking of the future as Utopia and began thinking of it as apocalytpic.


Humanities and Political Science, Carleton University. 

"The Evolution of Public Thought from Utopia to Distopia, and the Effect on Public Policy"

What, no link?

3:01pm August 30, 2014

"I want to be a pilot.""What will be the hardest part about being a pilot?""When the plane crashes."(Nairobi, Kenya)


"I want to be a pilot."
"What will be the hardest part about being a pilot?"
"When the plane crashes."

(Nairobi, Kenya)

3:07am August 30, 2014

(via CarFreiTag)


(via CarFreiTag)

2:54am August 30, 2014




why are parents allowed to yell and scream at their children and call them names and just make them feel like shit in general…

but when kids try to defend themselves…. its disrespectful?

what kind of fucking shit parents do you have

is this a new thing to you

It was a new thing to my sociology profs too.

2:50am August 30, 2014

 Republicans Court Female Voters By Carefully Explaining That Women Are Wrong






Oh yeah, you gotta read this. 

Yesterday, Politico published a leaked report commissioned by two Republican lobbying groups on how the party can better attract female voters. The report, based on a recent poll of 800 female registered voters as well as a series of focus groups, is titled “Republicans and Women Voters: Huge Challenges, Real Opportunities.” The central challenge facing the Republican party is that women—particularly single women and women who have graduated from college—are “barely receptive” to its policies, and are likely to consider the party “intolerant,” “lacking in compassion,” and “stuck in the past.”

Here’s where the “real opportunity” comes in: If only the Republicans could explain to these women that they are wrong, their votes would come flooding in. The report says that it is a “lack of understanding” between women and Republicans that “closes many minds to Republican policy solutions.” Republicans can attract the female vote by attacking the Democratic claim that GOP policies do not promote “fairness” for women and dealing “honestly with any disagreement on abortion” before moving on to “other issues.”

Today, R.R. Reno, editor of First Things (a journal that promotes “economic freedom” and a “morally serious culture”), published a very helpful essay illustrating how this fresh new strategy might work in practice. Reno begins his piece with a richly-drawn portrait of a hypothetical female Democratic voter: She is a “single, 35-year-old McKinsey consultant living in suburban Chicago who thinks of herself as vulnerable and votes for enhanced social programs designed to protect against the dangers and uncertainties of life.” (Reno does not specify the number of cats she owns, but for the purposes of this discussion, let’s assume the answer is “several.”) Reno speculates that this woman (whom he has invented and preprogrammed with opinions) feels “judged” by a Republican platform that opposes gay marriage, because “she intuitively senses that being pro-traditional marriage involves asserting male-female marriage as the norm—and therefore that her life isn’t on the right path.” So she votes for the Democrat, who does not appear to be “intolerant” of her lifestyle.

Here comes the part of the exercise where Reno carefully instructs this fantasy lady liberal that she has chosen poorly, and that the Republican party is the logical choice for a woman in her circumstance. This woman is suffering from “various kinds of personal unhappiness related to the lack of clear norms for how to live,” Reno writes. She secretly “wants to get married and feels vulnerable because she isn’t and vulnerable because she’s not confident she can.” And so, actually, she should support the party that wants to force people into traditional marriages, thus improving her chances of getting married herself. (Perhaps she can marry a gay man?) If only our hypothetical cat lady could get on board, she would get a husband, the Republicans would get another married woman to add to their key demographic, and gay people would get totally screwed. (Yay?)

In short, Republicans understand women plenty—it’s women who don’t understand themselves. Sounds like a promising strategy that will work with many, many sad single ladies that Republicans have invented in their brains. Next step: Finally granting imaginary women the right to vote.

A woman can’t object to legally mandating “traditional marriage” because it’s a homophobic, misogynistic airless room from hell and/or she’s queer, no, it must be that she hasn’t had the right dicking yet/found the right man. It’s not possible for a woman to have an actual, like, ideological objection to anything.

Please ignore the long history of intellectual and ideological work done by women throughout history and all the thoughtful women talking about their diverse needs and advocating for themselves today. That’s all just hysteria!

Women are only capable of being bitter, sad, Miss Havishams with a hole in their soul only marriage to a man can fill.


Suddenly I understand very clearly how Republicans can think same-sex marriage is a threat to traditional marriage. I mean, if traditional marriage is something women have to get lured into and might break away from at any instant…’cause they’re hysterical, of course…


2:37am August 30, 2014


Probably the weirdest Sil headcanon I have is that in my head, Eöl looks like a younger version of Snape.

Hey I saw this and thought of your post (which I fortunately tagged back when I first reblogged it).