hevenmoonbunny:

✿ ✿ “Melty moon” earrings ╰(◡‿◡✿╰)

Facebook

(via mypasteluniverse)


jameshollingshead:

Oh, right. The marathon. The marathon for Disneyland, the marathon chosen especially to run around Disneyland, Disneyland’s marathon. That marathon? - Imgur

(via theatrhythm)


damegreywulf:

trust:

i want a relationship but i want them to be like a friend to me, i dont want the relationship to be all about kissing, making out and sex i just wanna hang out with them, and go places, and just have fun wherever we go

This post is surreal because that is exactly how a healthy relationship should be yet we’re convinced this is a weird and unusual thing to ask of our partners.

(Source: trust, via pinkpetti)

♡ 234381 ♡

"My response to the “I am not a feminist” internet phenomenon….

First of all, it’s clear you don’t know what feminism is. But I’m not going to explain it to you. You can google it. To quote an old friend, “I’m not the feminist babysitter.”

But here is what I think you should know.

You’re insulting every woman who was forcibly restrained in a jail cell with a feeding tube down her throat for your right to vote, less than 100 years ago.

You’re degrading every woman who has accessed a rape crisis center, which wouldn’t exist without the feminist movement.

You’re undermining every woman who fought to make marital rape a crime (it was legal until 1993).

You’re spitting on the legacy of every woman who fought for women to be allowed to own property (1848). For the abolition of slavery and the rise of the labor union. For the right to divorce. For women to be allowed to have access to birth control (Comstock laws). For middle and upper class women to be allowed to work outside the home (poor women have always worked outside the home). To make domestic violence a crime in the US (It is very much legal in many parts of the world). To make workplace sexual harassment a crime.

In short, you know not what you speak of. You reap the rewards of these women’s sacrifices every day of your life. When you grin with your cutsey sign about how you’re not a feminist, you ignorantly spit on the sacred struggle of the past 200 years. You bite the hand that has fed you freedom, safety, and a voice.

In short, kiss my ass, you ignorant little jerks.”


- Libby Anne (via jessiccachastain)

(Source: dumbledoresarmy-againstbigotry, via 2kawaiitofunction)

♡ 119533 ♡


Gonna play some league and then I have things to do. Sending out stuff, getting quotes for t-shirts.

I also just realised that I can now afford to get contact lenses without dipping into my bank account. Thank you based dress buyer. 

♡ 1 ♡


mewmewcrossing:

Bob you can’t eat Merengue she’s our friend.

(via itsdeepforhappypeople)


(Source: lovelylor, via madi-kuma)


schwirl said: Lolita is sexual. Literally. The definition of lolita is a sexually attractive adolescent girl. It's not just a cute 'kawaii' fashion statement. You can't sexualise something that is already sexual by default.

lapinhearted:

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.

This is important.

♡ 5672 ♡


tianyi:

halloween should be 1 week long

(via littlepancake)

♡ 5459 ♡


ubiquitousdreams:

can-u-not-my-wayward-son:

recklesscreature:

robochai:

This was a running gag with my sister during our Disney World trip.

its pretty true 

not to mention drinking hot drinks. steamy glasses will be the death of me

this is so accurate i want to cry

Opening ovens/dishwashers. 

(via feminismandtea)