Hi there!

Justine. 19. Christchurch, New Zealand. University of Canterbury 2nd, Double Majoring in Anthropology and History.

Fandoms: Supernatural, Hannibal, Game of Thrones, Teen Wolf, Sherlock, Doctor Who, Glee, Marvel, Tolkien, American Horror Story and a hell of a lot more.

Music: Twenty One Pilots, My Chemical Romance, 30 Seconds to Mars, Linkin Park, Evanescence, Panic! At The Disco, Paramore, Fall Out Boy, The Pretty Reckless, Get Scared, Between The Trees.

IT'S OKAY TO NOT BE OKAY. If you ever need someone to talk to, or someone to just listen, please message me.I'm always willing to help,

taiey:

"Some women like pretty girls" said the prettiest girl in Westeros to the other prettiest girl in Westeros.

cattailsandcattales:

urbies:

Great moments in tv history

The best part is how the hand giving the cigarette doesn’t belong to anyone in the room—no one is wearing that shirt.

p1ants:

still kinda mad that clouds aren’t solid

meajoraswrath:

xdominoe:

queenofthesouthernisles:

I just LOVE the animation here. The part with just their hands looks real. And I love the way Gothel’s fingers go from motherly gentle touch to creepy and evil. Beautiful

#I really apprecciate this gif#because when you’re in an abusive relationship often nothing seems wrong until you try to stand up for yourself#that loving pat tranforms into a claw when she defends herself#but really it was a claw all along(via)

Tangled actually did a better job capturing an emotionally abusive relationship than most other things I’ve seen. And I don’t just mean when Gothel kidnapped her and lied to her about who she was. It was everything. She kept Rapunzel with her by cutting people out of her life and destroying her self-esteem. She puts her down and doesn’t allow her to feel confident at all. Recall when Rapunzel states she thinks Flynn likes her, Gothel blows her off with, “But just look at you. You think he’s impressed?” She also constantly makes Rapunzel feel responsible for everything that goes wrong. When they get in the argument in the beginning, Gothel victimizes herself and does her best to make Rapunzel feel guilty for asking her for a simple favor. It’s so textbook. And immediately after anything, she treats Rapunzel by promising her favourite soup and reminding her, “I love you most” to reel her back into that false sense of security.
And back to the animation of how she didn’t notice the maternal and loving hand was actually a malicious claw until she realised she was in an abusive relationship. Basically, Tangled is a really important movie, and the fact Gothel is so familiar to those of us who have experienced abuse is good because children are going to watch this and look for Gothels in their own lives.

meajoraswrath:

xdominoe:

queenofthesouthernisles:

I just LOVE the animation here. The part with just their hands looks real. And I love the way Gothel’s fingers go from motherly gentle touch to creepy and evil. Beautiful

(via)

Tangled actually did a better job capturing an emotionally abusive relationship than most other things I’ve seen. And I don’t just mean when Gothel kidnapped her and lied to her about who she was. It was everything. She kept Rapunzel with her by cutting people out of her life and destroying her self-esteem. She puts her down and doesn’t allow her to feel confident at all. Recall when Rapunzel states she thinks Flynn likes her, Gothel blows her off with, “But just look at you. You think he’s impressed?” She also constantly makes Rapunzel feel responsible for everything that goes wrong. When they get in the argument in the beginning, Gothel victimizes herself and does her best to make Rapunzel feel guilty for asking her for a simple favor. It’s so textbook. And immediately after anything, she treats Rapunzel by promising her favourite soup and reminding her, “I love you most” to reel her back into that false sense of security.

And back to the animation of how she didn’t notice the maternal and loving hand was actually a malicious claw until she realised she was in an abusive relationship. Basically, Tangled is a really important movie, and the fact Gothel is so familiar to those of us who have experienced abuse is good because children are going to watch this and look for Gothels in their own lives.

quietandsarcastic:

Read it again:  EVERY.  SINGLE.  REPUBLICAN.  Yes, that includes women. 

quietandsarcastic:

Read it again:  EVERY.  SINGLE.  REPUBLICAN.  Yes, that includes women. 

problackgirl:

we’ve taught girls to romanticise nearly everything a boy does. when i was younger i thought it was cute that boys chased the girl even after she said no. i loved it when after a girl moved away from a kiss, the guy would pull her back and force it on. i thought a guy saying ‘i won’t take a no for an answer’ was passionate and romantic. we’re literally always teaching girls to romanticise abusive traits.

weedjoke420:

what am i gonna be for halloween???? an emotional wreck probably

When you make an adult decision without calling your mother first.

king-of-aces:

ofgeography:

perfectxmystery:

image

when you realize your adult decision has unforeseen consequences:

image

Too real

theweedteacher:

sammymanny15:

Hangin’ out  Down the street

They’re so fucking baked

theweedteacher:

sammymanny15:

Hangin’ out
Down the street

They’re so fucking baked

e-bae:

Told this girl to text me when she got home… I think she homeless

rowling:

dakotaaaa:

My 9 year old brother started reading Harry Potter, and he asked me, so earnestly, “Were the Dursley’s mean to Harry when he was little?” I hadn’t thought much about it before, and he seemed so upset that I totally lied to that little kid. “NO! Of course they weren’t.” 
But then I couldn’t get young Harry out of my head. There must have been a time before he was resigned to their neglect that he wanted their affection.

There will never be a time when I am not absolutely broken up over this.

rowling:

dakotaaaa:

My 9 year old brother started reading Harry Potter, and he asked me, so earnestly, “Were the Dursley’s mean to Harry when he was little?” I hadn’t thought much about it before, and he seemed so upset that I totally lied to that little kid. “NO! Of course they weren’t.” 

But then I couldn’t get young Harry out of my head. There must have been a time before he was resigned to their neglect that he wanted their affection.

There will never be a time when I am not absolutely broken up over this.

x

sexadvicegoddess:

sarcasticlittlefuckk:

standard

I am crying I love this too much

youngbloodcaster:

onesilentcall:

sammybitchfacewinchester:

reading-rainbow:

THIS AIN’T A SCENE, IT’S A

GAH

DEH

ARH

REH

WE’RE GOING DOWN DOWN INANULLIARAN

AND SUGAR WE’RE GOING DOWN SWINGIN’

I’LL BE YANUMBAWAH WITHABULLIN

ALLUDIGA CORNFLAKES COCKITENBOOLIT

DANCE DANCE, WEFALLEENAPAH DOO HURRDAH

DANCE DANCE, ANEEZADA LIES YOU LUVDALEEB

This has made me realize 90% of old Fall Ouut Boy songs wouldn’t need to be changed into Simlish for a Sims game.

alliartist:

rifa:

prokopetz:

nebcondist1:

prokopetz:

I’ve seen this image going around, and I feel compelled to point out that it’s only half-right. It’s true that high heels were originally a masculine fashion, but they weren’t originally worn by butchers - nor for any other utilitarian purpose, for that matter.
High heels were worn by men for exactly the same reason they’re worn by women today: to display one’s legs to best effect. Until quite recently, shapely, well-toned calves and thighs were regarded as an absolute prerequisite for male attractiveness. That’s why you see so many paintings of famous men framed to show off their legs - like this one of George Washington displaying his fantastic calves:

… or this one of Louis XIV of France rocking a fabulous pair of red platform heels (check out those thighs!):

… or even this one of Charles I of England showing off his high-heeled riding boots - note, again, the visual emphasis on his well-formed calves:

In summary: were high heels originally worn by men? Yes. Were they worn to keep blood off their feet? No at all - they were worn for the same reason they’re worn today: to look fabulous.

so then how did they become a solo feminine item of attire?

A variety of reasons. In France, for example, high heels fell out out of favour in the court of Napoleon due to their association with aristocratic decadence, while in England, the more conservative fashions of the Victorian era regarded it as indecent for a man to openly display his calves.
But then, fashions come and go. The real question is why heels never came back into fashion for men - and that can be laid squarely at the feet of institutionalised homophobia. Essentially, heels for men were never revived because, by the early 20th Century, sexually provocative attire for men had come to be associated with homosexuality; the resulting moral panic ushered in an era of drab, blocky, fully concealing menswear in which a well-turned calf simply had no place - a setback from which men’s fashion has yet to fully recover.

FASHION HISTORY IS HUMAN HISTORY OK

Thank you, history side of tumblr. That “stay out of blood” thing has been driving me mad.

alliartist:

rifa:

prokopetz:

nebcondist1:

prokopetz:

I’ve seen this image going around, and I feel compelled to point out that it’s only half-right. It’s true that high heels were originally a masculine fashion, but they weren’t originally worn by butchers - nor for any other utilitarian purpose, for that matter.

High heels were worn by men for exactly the same reason they’re worn by women today: to display one’s legs to best effect. Until quite recently, shapely, well-toned calves and thighs were regarded as an absolute prerequisite for male attractiveness. That’s why you see so many paintings of famous men framed to show off their legs - like this one of George Washington displaying his fantastic calves:

… or this one of Louis XIV of France rocking a fabulous pair of red platform heels (check out those thighs!):

… or even this one of Charles I of England showing off his high-heeled riding boots - note, again, the visual emphasis on his well-formed calves:

In summary: were high heels originally worn by men? Yes. Were they worn to keep blood off their feet? No at all - they were worn for the same reason they’re worn today: to look fabulous.

so then how did they become a solo feminine item of attire?

A variety of reasons. In France, for example, high heels fell out out of favour in the court of Napoleon due to their association with aristocratic decadence, while in England, the more conservative fashions of the Victorian era regarded it as indecent for a man to openly display his calves.

But then, fashions come and go. The real question is why heels never came back into fashion for men - and that can be laid squarely at the feet of institutionalised homophobia. Essentially, heels for men were never revived because, by the early 20th Century, sexually provocative attire for men had come to be associated with homosexuality; the resulting moral panic ushered in an era of drab, blocky, fully concealing menswear in which a well-turned calf simply had no place - a setback from which men’s fashion has yet to fully recover.

FASHION HISTORY IS HUMAN HISTORY OK

Thank you, history side of tumblr. That “stay out of blood” thing has been driving me mad.

WLT