1. allonsyforever:

    artsmermaid:

    ITS A POST!!!!!! WHY HAVENT I SEEN THIS IN POST FORM BEFORE!!!!

    David Tennant keeping a straight face in this scene is the best acting that has ever happened in history and no one can convince me otherwise

    Reblogged from: living-for-fiction
  2. Reblogged from: notyrsweetheart
  3. evilsupplyco:

    If you look at the calendar and it isn’t October, did you really look at the calendar?

    Does it matter?

    Does anything exist?

    What is time anyway?

    My birthday is october first and halloween is obvs the 31st so this is how I feel 11 months of the year tbh

    Reblogged from: nauarcha
  4. p0kemina:

    petitepasserine:

    Wrong, wrong, and wrong. Literally. If I got a dollar for every person who thought this because they couldn’t be assed to do their research, I’d be a happy girl indeed.

    Lolita is a book written by Vladimir Nabokov about a girl named Dolores Haze, but her nickname is Lolita. The protagonist of Lolita falls in love with Dolores despite him being 42 and her being 12. He is a pedophile who abuses, rapes and takes sexual advantage of her after becoming her stepfather.

    Lolita FASHION is something else entirely. Lolita FASHION is a fashion trend that started in Harajuku, inspired by victorian fashion, victorian dolls, sailor dresses and femininity, and most of all, self-expression. It has NOTHING to do with the book by the same name. The only thing they share is their name. Lolita FASHION has nothing to do with sex, because it’s just that; A FASHION. 

    Lolita is a term misguided and misinformed people (such as yourself) use about attractive girls when, in truth, it stems from a book about a pedophile rapist.

    Do your research before you try to start a discussion on something you have no clue about. There is absolutely no reason for you to be this much of an arrogant know-it-all when you haven’t even done the research to back up your arguments. Don’t be overconfident before you’re 100% certain that you’re right. 

    Can I just add a thing here

    When my mum heard about / discovered that this weird fashion I started trying to wear at 16 was called “lolita,” she had a miniature heart attack. She thought I didn’t understand that that word was used in the wrong context often. She thought that the fashion was intended to be sexual and that I was too naive to understand that, and that I just took it to be a cute fashion. Here’s the thing tho: it IS just a cute fashion. And after explaining this, she was then worried that other gross people would sexualise me against my will or target me and therefore I shouldn’t be wearing it.

    Wrong. It is other people’s fault for sexualising me, not mine. It is never my fault, if I am sexualised against my will. It is never anybody’s fault.

    Especially when, personally, I liked the idea of lolita because it was so darn sweet and elegant, and in my opinion, so not-sexually-charged in a world that shoved sex in my face every day. It was a breath of fresh air. I’ve had more sexual connotations associated with me when I was fucking 12 and wore a tank top and shorts to grade 7 orientation on a hot summers day and everyone who didn’t know my name called me ~the girl with the boobs~ for two years straight. Like ????

    And then we fast forward to when I met my dad’s partner and she heard about lolita and had a minature heart attack because, in juxtaposition to my mum, it was so adorable, she couldn’t believe it. In her native culture, Lolita was a nickname for Dolores and had little-to-no sexual connotations with it. She even, if my memory serves me right, mentioned that lolita or dolly was just something you called sweet young girls. So the word was really fitting and it was all just so sweet and cute. She even pronounces it with a Spanish accent despite having an Australian accent because that’s what you do with totally native words.

    So I’m emphasising a cultural difference here.

    And here’s my thing, here’s a bit of TL;DR:

    Have pedophiles and misogynist pigs who sexualise young girls seriously infiltrated every aspect of our society that it is somehow more fucking plausible that girls who want to dress in cute and feminine fashion are doing so because they want to be sexualised? Or that they should expect to be sexualised? Is that what people are saying now? That girls cannot take charge over their lives and their aesthetic for one god damned second before being, yet again, sexualised in every aspect of their being?

    I don’t want to use ‘you’re damned if you do, and damned if you don’t’ but hey, that’s all I can muster up right now because I feel like I’m on a different fricking planet.

    And, as a not-so-subtle side note, if you don’t think mainstream porn and it’s culture has something to do with this, you are dead wrong.

    Amazing new concept: If girls want to be sexual, they can be sexual. If they don’t, they don’t. Either fucking way it is impossible to win when mainstream society oversexualises young girls and their fashion in an ~adult way~ and if you somehow take a different path you’re fetishised as an ~innocent sex nymph doll~ like where the fuck do we draw the line?

    I will tell you where we draw the god damned line: where ever the fuck the girl in question draws her own m o t h er fricking line.

    WOW.

    Thank you for writing this. I thought they were the same thing and I was really disturbed so I’m REALLY glad to learn that the fashion and the book are not related at all, whew. Also gross men stop it and go away.

    Reblogged from: living-for-fiction
  5. thestarlingscalling:

    Benedict Cumberbatch’s name

    I needed that laugh so much

    Reblogged from: living-for-fiction
  6. inanorderlyfashion:

blackqueerbravado:

mewtwoofficial:

yappanese:

I love this

lil fairy queen’s wings got tired so she took the subway

hope this child knew yall took they pic tho
hope they parents let it be posted tho

Fear not blackqueerbravado. The child in this picture is my niece. She knew I was taking her picture and her mother, my sister, let me post it. The person you reblogged it from or the person they reblogged it from removed the caption I originally put on it, which was:
The Queen as a Fairy Princess, Halloween NYC 2013
photographed by ©Channon Simmons

    inanorderlyfashion:

    blackqueerbravado:

    mewtwoofficial:

    yappanese:

    I love this

    lil fairy queen’s wings got tired so she took the subway

    hope this child knew yall took they pic tho

    hope they parents let it be posted tho

    Fear not blackqueerbravado. The child in this picture is my niece. She knew I was taking her picture and her mother, my sister, let me post it. The person you reblogged it from or the person they reblogged it from removed the caption I originally put on it, which was:

    The Queen as a Fairy Princess, Halloween NYC 2013

    photographed by ©Channon Simmons

    Reblogged from: living-for-fiction
  7. Feel inspired by your own existence.
    Dae Lee (via raysofthesun)
    Reblogged from: chubby-bunnies
  8. so-personal:

everything personal♡

    so-personal:

    everything personal♡

    Reblogged from: these-dandelion-wishes
  9. marxvx:

    if i as a retail worker have to work with a dozen cameras pointed at me to deter me from stealing $10, cops should have to work with a camera pointed at them to deter them from arbitrarily maiming and killing people

    Reblogged from: plague-nurse
  10. kingsleyyy:

    this hedgehog is cheering for u bc u can do anything image

    Reblogged from: skelekliiin
Next

The Third Decade

Paper theme built by Thomas