tomibunny:

If cisgender people REALLY thought “biological sex” was important and weren’t just using it to police trans people who complain about health forms, they would 

  • ask why there’s no intersex option on health forms 
  • ask why there isn’t a different column where you denote if you’re trans and whether you plan on getting surgery (you know, since that affects your HEALTH) 
  • use their cis privilege to point out the flaws in running health on a male/female system 
  • stop saying “biological sex” while ignoring the existence of intersex people, as well as people with hormonal imbalances that put them at risk for disorders that typically don’t apply to their “biological sex”

basically it’s really obvious that cis people only say “they NEED to ask male or female on health forms its for your HEALTH” to get trans people to shut up, because cis people are scared of change

(via bemusedlybespectacled)

deducecanoe:

forthenexttenminutesago:

carolinedhavernass:

yo if u dont like musical theatre thats cool but if u actually insult musical theatre in my presence dude i wont even argue with you i’ll just kill and eat you

these are probably the best pies in london

Zing

(Source: winterrowan, via bemusedlybespectacled)

Anonymous Asked:
I worked my way through college when I was a kid in the 70s I only made minimum wage and I made it I don't know why you kids complain so much about how hard it is to pay for schooling.

shitrichcollegekidssay:

shitrichcollegekidssay:

Okay lets work through this ask, because I’m not sure when in school you were in school I’m using 1970 in the USA I’m using 2013 for inflation comparison bullshit.

Minimum today in 2014 on average is: $7.25 an hour

Minimum wage on average in the 70s was between: $1.60 and $2.90

Lets convert this amount for what it would be worth today: 

In 1970: $1.60 an hour would be about $7.70 today, welp that’s already more than our minimum wage so..

in 1979: $2.90 an hour would be about $9.16 well holy shit that’s way above our national average. 

Average cost of university today in 2014According to the College Board, the average cost of tuition and fees for the 2013–2014 school year [ONE FUCKING SCHOOL YEAR] was $30,094 at private colleges, $8,893 for state residents at public colleges, and $22,203 for out-of-state residents attending public universities. 


So a four year degree would costs at a public university:
in-state: $35,572 Out of State: $88,812

Average costs of a public university 4 year degree in 19704,828 which when converted for today would be about $28,580.66 [compare to 35,572, with our smaller minimum wage]

I’m not even fuckin with 1979, cause if you do your own research you find the same fucking information university was cheaper in the 70s across the board compared today, and minimum wage was higher.

conclusion?

It is literally impossible to work your way through university today

if ur gonna be a dickhead and argue with me go through the facts first jfc.

BECAUSE I APPARENTLY NEED TO FUCKING SPECIFY AGAIN FOR CERTAIN LITTLE SHITS, THIS ENTIRE THING USES ONLY NATIONAL AVERAGES BECAUSE THATS HOW YOU COMPARE SHIT. GOD FUCKING DAMMIT.

DEBUNKING THE MEN’S RIGHTS MOVEMENT

plansfornigel:

DEBUNKING THE MEN’S RIGHTS MOVEMENT

POSTED BY
DEBUNKINGMRAS

POSTED ON
MARCH 12, 2014

What follows is a response to a popular list of claims and arguments made by men’s rights activists.

1. SUICIDE: Men’s suicide rate is 4.6 times higher than that of women’s. [Dept. Health & Human Services — 26,710 males vs 5,700 females]

Not for lack of trying: women attempt it three times as often. [1] Men are more likely to succeed because we are trained for violence, trained for emotional detachment, and trained to deal with problems ourselves rather than seeking help from others. Moreover, we are socialized with a sense of self-importance that can lead men to believe family members would be better off dead without them or to use suicide as a form of revenge against people close to them. The statistic given here also masks that many of these “suicides” were actually murder-suicides. In the United States, an estimated 1,000 to 1,500 people died in suicide attacks each year. [2] More than ninety percent of the offenders are men; nearly all the victims are female. [3]

2. LIFE EXPECTANCY: Men’s life expectancy is seven (7) years shorter than women’s [National Center for Health Statistics — males 72.3 yrs vs females 79 yrs] yet receive only 35% of government expenditures for health care and medical costs.

This is a curious statement. If women live seven years longer than men, it should be obvious why they receive more health support: because the oldest people in society are those that most need subsidized health support, and the oldest people are predominantly women. Furthermore, the insurance industry charges $1 billion a year more to women in health insurance each year for the same coverage plans men receive [4], and up to 53% more for the same individual coverage plan [5], despite women’s overall better health and despite receiving 23% less income then men. [6]

3. WAR: Men are almost exclusively the only victims of war [Dept. Defense — Vietnam Casualties 47,369 men vs 74 women]

The first thing to say is that if trained soldiers sent to engage in imperial wars of aggression can be called “victims” at all, then they are victims of those responsible for the wars in which they fought. And those responsible are men. All Presidents and Vice Presidents have been men. All members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff have been men. Both branches of Congress have always been dominated by men. Polls since Vietnam show that men have been the ones to support going to war, and the ones most likely to support wars currently in progress. [7] On every level of analysis it is men who are responsible for war, and to somehow blame male combat deaths on women is not only absurd, but insane. If we want to stop these deaths, we need to stop those who are responsible for them: the male politicians, male military personnel, male war contractors, and male warmongers who perpetuate them.

The second thing to say is that this is simply a lie. A study by researchers at the Harvard Medical School looking at wars in 13 countries, including the Vietnam War, found that of the 5.4 million people violently killed, more than 1 million were female. [8] This figure does not account for those women killed less directly through aerial spraying, inflicted poverty, or as the result of sexual torture by men. This also ignores male sexual violence during wartime. In Vietnam, for instance, it was common and accepted practice for soldiers to gang rape women and young girls, as well to kill a female following a rape. [9] Such was the frequency of the latter that the term “double veteran” was coined to refer to such perpetrators. [10]

4. WORKPLACE FATALITIES: Men account for more than 95% of all workplace fatalities.

The figure is 92% as of 2012. One important reason for this discrepancy is that men are inclined to select work that is dangerous in order to prove their masculinity to women, to other men, and to themselves. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the most dangerous professions in the United States are construction, transportation, and warehousing, all of which are male-dominated professions. [11] Men’s relative risk of danger is further increased through a relative lack of safety compliance. [12] Tellingly, the most common way for a woman to die in the workplace is to be murdered. [11]

5. MURDER: Men are murdered at a rate almost 5 times that of women. [Dept. Health & Human Services — 26,710 men vs 5,700 women]

Men also murder at a rate more than 9 times that of women. That men are often killed by other men is not a problem that women are responsible for. I can hardly imagine why that even needs to be said. In the United States in 2010, 1,095 women were killed by husbands or boyfriends, accounting for 37.5% of female murders. By contrast, only 241 men were killed by their female partners. [13] The smallness of this figure is particularly striking when we consider that 200,000 women in the United States suffer serious violence from male partners each year. [14]

6. CHILD CUSTODY: Women receive physical custody of 92% of all children of separation, and men only 4%. [Department of Health & Human Services]

91% of the time, custody is agreed upon or settled by parents themselves, usually without outside mediation. Mothers are more likely to receive custody because both parents usually understand that it is in the best interests of their children. In married two-partner households, women spend nearly twice as much time doing child care as their male partners. [15] Only 4% of custody cases go to trial and only 1.5% are resolved there. [16] In disputed custody cases, fathers win custody 70% of the time, [17] despite abusive men being among those most likely to fight for custody. [18]

7. JURY BIAS: Women are acquitted of spousal murder at a rate 9 times that of men [Bureau Justice Statistics — 1.4% of men vs 12.9% of women]

This is not a matter of “bias”: women are sometimes acquitted of murdering their husbands because their husbands abused them or their children. It is estimated that 1.3 million women are beaten by male partners in the United States every year, putting them in fear for their lives. [18] Every one of these women would be justified in killing her spouse or partner and receiving an acquittal. It is exceptionally rare for any man to experience a comparable level of terroristic threat from his wife.

8. COURT BIAS: Men are sentenced 2.8 times longer than women for spousal murder [Bureau Justice Statistics — men at 17 years vs women at 6 years]

As per above, many women receive lighter sentences for killing their husbands because their purpose in doing so was to stop physical abuse against themselves or their children.

9. JUSTICE SYSTEM BIAS: Women are assessed for Child Support on average at half the rate of men, yet are twice as likely to default on Child Support payments. Ninety Seven (97%) of all child support prosecutions are against fathers. [Census Bureau]

Women are assessed less often than men and default more often because women aged 18-35 have on average $0 in net worth. Many mothers simply have no means to pay child support. By comparison, white men of the same age have a median wealth of $5,600, and men of color have $1,000. [20] This wealth discrepancy also pressures young mothers who care for the welfare of their children to prosecute men for child support.

10. DOMESTIC VIOLENCE: Numerous credible studies from independent researchers report that women are the initiators of domestic violence in 58% of all cases, and cause physical abuse in almost 50% of all cases, yet women only account for 6% of all criminal proceedings in such matters.

It’s telling that you speak of “numerous credible studies” and carefully avoid citing any of them. I tried to find studies from any source making such claims, with no success. What I did find is the most recent report by the US Department of Justice, which found women suffer 805,700 physical injuries at the hands of partners each year, compared to 173,960 men. Moreover, the injuries suffered by women were more than twice as likely to be considered “serious”, defined as including sexual violence, gunshot and knife wounds, internal injuries, unconsciousness, and broken bones. To put that another way, partners inflicted 104,741 serious injuries on women, compared with less than 9,400 inflicted on men, a greater than 11:1 ratio. [14] Even those men who have been subject to partner violence have usually not taken it seriously. According to a study by researchers at the Medical College of Wisconsin, they were “significantly more likely than were women to laugh at partner-initiated violence”, while women “reported more fear, anger, and insult and less amusement when their partners were violent.” [21] It’s also worth noting that a number of these male injuries were incurred by male rather than female partners; according to a 2000 Department of Justice report, men living with male partners are at nearly twice the risk of “serious” violence as those living with women. [22] If women really are criminally prosecuted in 6% of domestic violence cases, then that figure sounds eminently reasonable.

11. CHILD VIOLENCE: Mothers commit 55% of all child murders and biological fathers commit 6%. NIS-3 indicates that Mother-only households are 3 times more fatal to children than Father-only households. Despite these compelling figures, children are systematically removed from the natural fathers who are their most effective protectors.

The first sentence is unsourced and not credible. According to one group of filicide [child murder] researchers:

Although some studies have noted that mothers commit filicide more often than fathers, other research has shown that paternal filicide is as common or more common than maternal filicide.

Reports of a higher proportion of maternal filicides most likely reflect the inclusion of neonaticides in some studies. [23]

In other words, there is no agreement as to whether mothers or fathers are more likely to kill their own children, but when mothers are seen as more likely, it is likely because infanticides are included in the results. According to the above researchers, the main motivation “may be the undesirability of the child,” and mothers under the age of 20 with a previous child are among those most likely to engage in such a murder. Young mothers without sufficient economic, family, or medical support may find there are no better options for themselves or for their other children. By contrast, fathers who kill their children are “often perpetrators of fatal-abuse filicide”, meaning that they batter their children to death. Some of the most common motivations for father filicide are “attempts to control the child’s behavior, and misinterpretation of the child’s behavior”. [23]

I’ve recently obtained a copy of the NIS-3 study, and while Table 5-4 does indeed provide data indicating that “Mother-only households are 3 times more fatal to children than Father-only households,” the provided footnote also says explicitly that the difference is either statistically insignificant or marginal, with p-values above 0.10. What that means is that the numbers, while provided, are statistically worthless and cannot be used to even hint at inferences. Meanwhile, the data from the NIS-3 regarding parental households that is statistically valid paints a very different picture. In every category, father-only households put children at a higher risk of harm than mother-only households. Risk of abuse is 71% higher, including a 68% greater chance of physical abuse. Risk of neglect is 28% higher, including a 32% rise for physical neglect, 67% rise for emotional neglect, and 14% rise for educational neglect. Risk of both moderate or serious injury is 40% higher.

That this is true is particularly exceptional when we pair this with data from the more recent NIS-4 study which found that households with a lower socioeconomic status were nearly 7 times more likely to involve neglect, including a nearly ninefold risk of physical neglect. Overally the safety of children in these households was classified as 5.7 times more severe than those of a higher socioeconomic background. [24] Single women with children are far more likely than men to live under conditions of severe poverty: both black and Hispanic women with children under age 18 have an average median wealth of $0, compared to $10,960 for black men and $2,400 for Hispanic men; white women with children have an average median wealth of $7,970, compared to an average of $56,100 for white men. [20] If economic justice for women was sufficiently advanced, we would expect the safety of mother-only households illustrated by the NIS-3 to increase still further. Given this information, to call fathers the “most effective protectors” of children is a hateful turn of phrase, suggesting that mothers wish harm on their children and only fathers can protect them. This in spite of the reality that children are far safer in the custody of their mothers than their fathers.

12. WEALTH: Women hold 65% of the total wealth in the USA [Fortune Magazine]

This is a ridiculous lie, and to their credit I can find no evidence that Fortune Magazine ever made such a claim.

Contrary to this claim, one Harvard University researcher found that men have an average net worth of $26,850, compared to an average of $12,900 for women. [25] That is to say, men on average hold more than twice the wealth of women.

References

[1] http://www.afsp.org/understanding-suicide/facts-and-figures
[2] http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/07/21/murder-suicides-are-in-a-class-by-themselves/2572133/
[3] http://www.jaapl.org/content/37/3/371.long
[4] http://www.nwlc.org/press-release/new-nwlc-report-discriminatory-health-insurance-practices-cost-women-1-billion-year
[5] http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/19/health/policy/women-still-pay-more-for-health-insurance-data-shows.html?scp=1&sq=women%20insurance%20costs&st=cse
[6] http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/03/07/the-wage-gap-between-men-and-women-has-grown-during-the-recovery/
[7] http://www.gallup.com/poll/7243/gender-gap-varies-support-war.aspx
[8] http://www.bmj.com/content/336/7659/1482
[9] Nick Turse, Kill Anything That Moves: The Real American War in Vietnam, pages 164-171
[10] http://www.waywordradio.org/double_veteran_1/
[11] http://pro.sagepub.com/content/41/2/1283.short
[12] http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfoi/cfch0011.pdf
[13] http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/expanded/expandhomicidemain
[14] http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/ipvav9311.pdf
[15] http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2011/06/15/a-tale-of-two-fathers/
[16] http://www.divorcepeers.com/stats18.htm#fn%201
[17] Joan Zorza, “Batterer manipulation and retaliation compounded by denial and complicity in the family courts” In M.T. Hannah & B. Goldstein (editors), Domestic violence, abuse and child custody: Legal strategies and policy issues
[18] http://www.nnflp.org/apa/issue5.html
[19] http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/ipvbook-a.pdf
[20] http://www.insightcced.org/uploads/CRWG/LiftingAsWeClimb-WomenWealth-Report-InsightCenter-Spring2010.pdf
[21] http://vaw.sagepub.com/content/8/11/1301.short
[22] https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/181867.pdf
[23] http://www.jaapl.org/content/35/1/74.full.pdf+html
[24] http://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/opre/nis4_report_congress_full_pdf_jan2010.pdf
[25] http://citation.allacademic.com//meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/1/0/9/2/6/pages109260/p109260-1.php

This synopsis was written by Owen Lloyd, a stay-at-home dad living on the Oregon coast. Hate mail can be addressed to him at owen.lloyd@gmail.com.

http://debunkingmras.wordpress.com/2014/03/12/debunking-the-mens-rights-movement-x/

(via thesummerbuddhist)

clientsfromhell:

This video gets submitted every now and then, but it’s been years since we last showed it off. 

via (x)

juneketsu:

Ayy look P3 villagers
i’ll run them through redbubble

juneketsu:

Ayy look P3 villagers

i’ll run them through redbubble

(via mejackel)

"

I told Miyazaki I love the “gratuitous motion” in his films; instead of every movement being dictated by the story, sometimes people will just sit for a moment, or they will sigh, or look in a running stream, or do something extra, not to advance the story but only to give the sense of time and place and who they are.

"We have a word for that in Japanese," he said. "It’s called ma. Emptiness. It’s there intentionally."

Is that like the “pillow words” that separate phrases in Japanese poetry?

"I don’t think it’s like the pillow word." He clapped his hands three or four times. "The time in between my clapping is ma. If you just have non-stop action with no breathing space at all, it’s just busyness, But if you take a moment, then the tension building in the film can grow into a wider dimension. If you just have constant tension at 80 degrees all the time you just get numb."

"

Rogert Ebert, on Hayao Miyazaki (via metalbiceps)

(Source: improv-is-easy, via bemusedlybespectacled)

coelasquid:

The last one made me laugh out loud for real

(Source: princeofgrebes)

acceber74:

pardonmewhileipanic:

chocohawlic:

empty-venus:

Breaking news: White fuckboys on twitter bitching how funny it is that Beyoncé is a feminist when she and her dancers were provocative and half naked. Despite feminism being about empowerment and a woman’s right to do whatever the hell she pleases with it, they just don’t seem to be able to grasp this concept.

In other news, men still don’t know what feminism is, still bitter that they aren’t Beyoncé and still making themselves look like asses on the internet.

And now the weather.

I bet 5 minutes later they slid up in some DM’s asking for nudes

you know these assholes had NO PROBLEM with anything in her show until that word popped up

it’s not nudity they have a problem with

it’s a woman who is empowered and in control of how when and why she dresses and dances how she wants

when their precious male gaze is questioned or dismissed, suddenly she’s a terrible feminist, and they try and shame her for the very thing that was turning them on seconds before

(via becna)

Adult women are now the largest demographic in gaming

dailydot:

Congratulations, gamer girls—you’re officially at the top of the food chain when it comes to games. A new study released by the Entertainment Software Association has revealed that adult women now occupy the largest demographic in the gaming industry. Women over 18 made up a whopping 36 percent of the gaming population, followed by adult men at 35 percent. 

(via juliedillon)