When I was watching TV this morning I saw an advert from the RSPCA appealing for donations to prevent animal cruelty, and the video clips they played all showed these tiny, shrunken, abused animals; cats and dogs with sad eyes and rib cages jutting out and their bony legs trembling under their small weight because they were so weak and starved. As soon as I saw this I immediately remembered some ‘thinspo’ I’d seen reblogged on my dashboard a few weeks ago, and it suddenly dawned on me just how strange thinspo seems when you really think about it. The top image in undoubtedly cruel, inhumane, and wrong, because the animal has been starved against it’s will, and yet the second image is something thousands and thousands of girls aspire to look like. For many, the second image is beautiful and desirable. But what is the difference really? The same bones are showing, they are both ill and weak. If the girl in the picture was given the dog to take care of, she would undoubtedly feed it up slowly and nurse it back to health, but she could not do the same for herself. It’s so strange how humans are going against the instinct to eat, despite living a privileged life where food is available at all times, they are forcing themselves to become an unnatural and twisted shape. A sick shape. I compare these two pictures, I see their similarities, but I also see the differences in how they are received by people who see them, it confuses me, but most of all it breaks my heart.
I hope this gets more notes.
Absolutely the most powerful thing I’ve read in far too long.
Thank you everyone. I just felt quite strongly about this and I’m glad other people seem to agree with me
Changed my mind completely…whoa.
These precious people / they belong to me. :)
Sometimes I can’t handle all of them wanting or needing me at one time and sometimes I’m so exhausted that I let them have a cookie in the morning because it will make them happy, but I really do love them more than they could imagine. I know I’m not the best mom and I make a LOT of mistakes but I sincerely hope I am at least a good mom and that they love me as much as I love them. I want to give them the best life possible. It’s so hard a lot of times but I won’t ever stop trying.
I love my little posse.
I’m reblogging this because I want everyone to know that my kids are great and my wife is absolutely incredible. She’s the best mother I’ve ever known and I’m grateful that she has chosen to stay with me while she works her magic with our kids. Seeing her interact with our children is one of the best feelings I have ever felt. Yes, you’re a terrific mom and even when I get mad and don’t like you, I still end up talking to everyone I know about how wonderful you are as both a wife and a mother. I’m so damn proud of you. Thank you for the life you’ve given me.
This is an enormous chain and I’m sorry, but I need to say this:
The laws in the Old Testament were set forth by god as the rules the Hebrews needed to follow in order to be righteous, to atone for the sin of Adam and Eve and to be able to get into Heaven. That is also why they were required to make sacrifices, because it was part of the appeasement for Original Sin.
According to Christian theology, when Jesus came from Heaven, it was for the express purpose of sacrificing himself on the cross so that our sins may be forgiven. His sacrifice was supposed to be the ultimate act that would free us from the former laws and regulations and allow us to enter Heaven by acting in his image. That is why he said “it is finished” when he died on the cross. That is why Christians don’t have to circumcise their sons (god’s covenant with Jacob), that is why they don’t have to perform animal sacrifice, or grow out their forelocks, or follow any of the other laws of Leviticus.
When you quote Leviticus as god’s law and say they are rules we must follow because they are what god or Jesus wants us to do, what you are really saying, as a Christian, is that Christ’s sacrifice on the cross was invalid. He died in vain because you believe we are still beholden to the old laws. That is what you, a self-professed good Christian, are saying to your god and his son, that their plan for your salvation wasn’t good enough for you.
So maybe actually read the thing before you start quoting it, because the implications of your actions go a lot deeper than you think.
This is a theological point that doesn’t come up often enough.
"Stop objectifying me!!"
OHHOHOOOOO MY GOD BECAUSE WOMEN WEAR CLOTHES PURELY FOR OTHER PEOPLE AND NOT FOR THEMSELVES RIGHT??
Because all men have the brains of peas and if they have breasts in front of them THEY HAVE NO CHOICE BUT TO STOP EVERYTHING AND LOOK. AND NOT STOP LOOKING. AND FORGET THAT THE WOMAN EVEN EXISTS.
Thanks for clearing it up. You see, I thought men were competent human beings ^_____^
Why do you wear a shirt that low cut, or a tube top, or shortshorts with “juicy” written across the ass, if you don’t want men to look at it?
Maybe because I like dressing like that. Maybe its hot outside and I want to let everything out.
Or maybe im a LESBIAN and want WOMEN to look at me ^_____^
fucking hell is it really that foreign a concept that maybe women wear things for THEMSELVES
EVEN IF SHE’S WEARING THE SHIRT IN ORDER TO BE LOOKED AT AND FOUND SEXUALLY APPEALING
THAT DOESN’T MEAN SHE WANTS TO HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH A PERSON WHO IS NOT ACKNOWLEDGING HER WORDS AND IS SOLELY ACKNOWLEDGING HER BREASTS
holy shit i don’t know why this is such a difficult concept to grasp
do women ever dress sexy because they want people to look at them? YES OF COURSE THEY DO
but that doesn’t mean they ONLY want to be found sexy
you might not have noticed, but women are multi-faceted people
it’s not too much to ask for someone to admire my cleavage and then have a conversation with me in which they treat me like a human being and look me in the eyes while i speak
I agree that women should be allowed to wear whatever they want without being objectified by men. I do, however, think it’s absurd if they get angry when men stare or look at their cleavage. To me, a woman’s body is a work of art by the great Creator. If I’m walking on the sidewalk and through a window I see an amazing piece of art or something crafty with Christmas lights in someone’s home, I’ll stop and look. That’s all. Just to admire. I suppose some may say that is offensive since it’s not my window in my own house. What can I say? I LOVE art…….and boobs.
What We Know About Sandy Hook.
The official police investigation into the killer behind the Sandy Hook massacre has closed and the final report offer frustratingly few answers. Authorities found no evidence that he’d ever spoken about any plans to commit the crime to anyone else, but that this crime was committed for reasons we’ll never know. He’d had no contact with anyone at the school, so it couldn’t have been some argument or feud. And the “violent video games” theory? Adam Lanza seemed obsessed with only one video game in particular, according to CNN.But while many of his video games were violent, others were not. For months before the killings at Sandy Hook, he would go to a movie theater on weekends to play the dance game “Dance Dance Revolution” for hours, the report recounts.
Maybe he was playing violent video games at home. But so do plenty of other people. Only one went out and committed an unimaginably horrific crime. If a video game drove him to a murderous state of mind, there’s more evidence that video game was “Dance Dance Revolution” than “Call of Duty.”
However, much of what we do know is damning. Lanza was isolated by his own mental health issues. And those issues could not have been helped by the fact that his mother was a gun-obsessed survivalist. For a young man with mental health issues, having the only person who was really in his day to day life be so far removed in her world view from anything resembling reality can’t possibly have been helpful. And the presence of an arsenal of real guns proved far more deadly than any games involving imaginary ones. CNN again:On December 14, 2012, the morning after Nancy Lanza had returned from a trip to New Hampshire, her son shot her four times in the head with a .22-caliber rifle. Then it was off to the school where he once had been a relatively happy child, packing four other guns and nearly 500 rounds of ammunition. He fired more than 150 shots from a .223-caliber Bushmaster rifle before turning a 10mm Glock pistol on himself once police arrived, according to the report.
That’s what we know. Anything about video games or mental illness or parenting is speculation. The one thing we know about the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School is that it was carried out by someone with more ammo than any responsible person could possibly need, fired from the barrel of a gun designed to shoot that ammunition into human bodies at the fastest rate possible without being fully automatic. Lanza’s ability to fire bullets into kids and teachers was limited only by the speed at which he could pull the trigger and the capacity of his magazine. Those meager limitations proved to be no impediment.
That’s what we know. When Lanza went from classroom to classroom, gunning down kids, we know he didn’t use a video game. He used a .223-caliber Bushmaster assault rifle. That’s what we know. That’s pretty much all we know.
You’d think that this knowledge would be enough to do drive us to something. But that would be discounting the bottomless cowardice of people like Lanza’s mother who collect ridiculously dangerous guns under the impression —now tragically proven inaccurate— that each one she owned enhanced her safety. And it would be discounting the tremendous evil of gun manufacturers and lobbyists who, like Big Tobacco before them, are completely comfortable with profit margins being inflated by death tolls. And it would be discounting the mendacity of rightwing media trolls, whose only real argument is “liberals are always wrong,” which forces them to oppose even the most common sense solutions to gun violence — or anything else, for that matter.
That’s what we know. We know Adam Lanza was able to carry out the massacre because he was able to gain access to weapons which, by no stretch of even the most inventive spinmeister’s imagination, enhanced anyone’s safety that day. And we know that there are people, whether through greed or cowardice or plain stupidity, who are more than willing to leave that as the status quo. And because of them, something like this will happen again.
That’s what we know.
[photo via Wikimedia Commons]
This guy has a point. Guns have the ability to kill things. But his mental illness is speculation???
FUCK YOU, YOU LEFT WING DUMB FUCK.
Quit trying to make this just about gun control. YOU’RE PART OF THE PROBLEM. Does anyone need an assault rifle without a background check? No. But to blame this on guns? That’s so fucking ignorant. This could have been avoided if the teachers and people who were around him had been educated on mental illness. The signs were there, no doubt. Yet once again, people point blame at guns. Guess what? I play GTA Online everyday. I have a rifle. There’s not a single chance I’ll ever kill anyone with it unless my or my family’s life was in immediate danger. I could own a fully automatic AK-47, a bunch of grenades, and a missle launcher and I’d still be no more of a threat to the people around me. This kid could have had a bunch of sporks and he would have found a way to hurt people with them….BECAUSE OF HIS MENTAL ILLNESS. If you keep using horrible occurrences like this to push the liberal agenda, YOU are what’s wrong with this world.
The Supreme Court will consider an appeal regarding companies’ objections to President Barack Obama’s health care law, which has a birth-control mandate that some claimants say violates religious rights. The case could have widespread ramifications on corporations’ rights.
The Obama administration is defending a provision that requires most employers that offer their workers health insurance to provide a range of preventivehealth benefits, including contraception. A number of companies have sued, arguing that they should not be forced to cover some or all forms of birth control because doing so would violate their religious beliefs.
Both sides want the justices to settlean issue that has divided lower courts. The high court could announce its decision on whether to take up the topic as early as Tuesday, following a closed-door meeting.
Photo: AP Photo/Tony Gutierrez
if your a company you cant go to a church.
I am reblogging this for the comment. COMPANIES CAN’T GO TO CHURCH. A company is not an individual. You have no right to decide what medical help is ok for your employees as defined by YOUR religion.
Dear Mom and Dad,
This is what happiness looks like. Sorry you were so miserable in your own lives that you couldn’t allow me a chance at my own. I went out and found it anyway. I miss you, and will miss you even more this holiday season since you won’t allow me to come back home unless I have a woman on my arm. Oh by the way, we’ll still be using the family recipe for the stuffing, I’m sure it’ll be a hit with our friends.
Your son, his boyfriend, and our spoiled cat
This. Is. Awesome.
As long as ‘We Got That Tow Yo’ plays on TruTV, I refuse to allow that show to ever be on my tv. The most annoying song EVER.
reblogging because I just noticed HE’S NOT EVEN THROWING THE KNIVES
HE’S USING A PINGPONG PADDLE TOO
how did we win the cold war
We didn’t really win, the soviet union collapsed in on itself because its economy eventually gave out. Literally the only thing that saved us is the fact that our economy lasted longer.
Well, that…..and this is all done with computers. If our economy doesn’t kill us, our naïveté will.