Sometimes I wonder if I’m not also a magnet for crazy people. It’s like trying to go about life, and have conversations with so many amazing and interesting people that you meet, but you’re also trying to contend with angry pomeranians that keep repeatedly running into the back of your ankle.
White privilege is your history being taught as a core class and mine being taught as an elective.
Actually, this kind of depends on what nation we’re talking about here. At least when I went to school, we were taught about black history as it happened in America, because I went to a school in the American educational system. Slavery, the civil rights movement: Everything that went into making this particular nation what it is today is part of “our” history, but that isn’t just a “white” history. It’s a Native American history, an Italian history, a Jewish history—it’s the history of everyone who came to this country to seek a better future. That history is still rife with tragedy and civil unrest, but frankly, I defy you to find a single country in this world that wasn’t plagued with conflict and sorrow from its very inception. The ancient civilization of Egypt came under fire from various other powers, including the Romans, the Nubians, the Libyans, the Babylonians, and others. The Mongol empire incorporated Turkic confederations in their conquest of Asia and Eastern Europe. I doubt I even need to go into the political, theocratic, and social unrest surrounding the area known as the Holy Land.
If we’re talking about any other culture in terms of their history beginning within their own nation, then it isn’t really part of the history of how a different nation was founded. It becomes a part of that history when we bring up the matter of civil rights for people that come to this country from other nations, and become part of what this nation is today. Like, you wouldn’t buy a biography about the Beatles if you wanted to learn the history of the Rolling Stones. BUT, if the Rolling Stones were integral in the history of the Beatles, then they’d be mentioned in books about either band.
Think of it this way:
If a relative of yours married a relative of mine, they would become part of both of our family’s history. However, if they had never met, we’d likely never learn a thing about them.
I’m going to assume you mean Muffin, because I don’t consider Gizmo to be “my” dog (also she is an irritating little assclown with the most annoying-sounding bark in the universe).
Muffin and Stinky would probably get along swimmingly, though Stinky might get bored after a while, seeing as Muffin doesn’t share the same level of intelligence as another GravityKitten would (i.e., can’t play video games, etc.). I could definitely see them chasing each other around in the backyard for a few hours, though.
Why is bisexuality such a difficult concept for people to grasp? It doesn't involve sorcery or mathematics. It's literally just liking two completely different things. If you listen to and enjoy death metal there is no rule anywhere that says you can't also listen to and enjoy classical music. You're allowed to like steak and ice cream. Why do most people have to create a massive halt in conversation to question and doubt the legitimacy of the exact same concept when it comes to sexuality?
I didn’t know there was that much of an issue about it. Are people really arguing over this?
As someone who took well over a decade to finally admit just to myself that I also like women, it is an actual thing. A person can be attracted to both men and women at the same time. I can look at a picture of an attractive man, and think, “DAYUM, I’d like to hit that!”, but I can also look at a picture of a woman, and think the same thing.
I do think some people may be confused about the definition of bisexuality, as I’ve seen it be described as “being able to put your hand down someone’s pants, and like whatever you find”. But, that would actually be closer to pansexuality, because it disregards all other aspects of gender (secondary sexual characteristics, androgyny, and just overall gender identity of that person). Though I may be mistaken, I believe bisexuality refers to the attraction to cisgendered males or females (hence the “bi”, meaning “two”). Pansexuality, meanwhile, encompasses all gender identities, whether they fall into the gender binary or not: Ergo, if they find a penis on a person that also has breasts, it’s not necessarily an issue, because they aren’t as limited in their attraction.
I think of it like appreciating classic cars with their original frames, or being able to appreciate them when they’ve been customized with body kits, or other features. Some folks like lowriders, or custom rims, because the car is still beautiful in any form, while some have a preference for the original model, because that’s just what they find the most visually pleasing.
Of course, it becomes a delicate line of sexual politics here, because there may be an assumption that a bisexual person somehow has anything against trans or non-binary people, or believes such individuals can’t be sexually attractive, which simply isn’t true. After all, there’s a difference between embracing all people as who they feel they are as human beings, and what psychologically arouses a person’s sexual desire.
I may not personally care for the taste of chocolate when I want something sweet, but that doesn’t make it any less delicious for anyone else. :3
Who is George A. Romero? Well, let me tell you children. Let me describe the glory in which is George A. Romero.
If you are a huge horror film fan, you will know this name. You will especially know if you are into the zombie fan culture. George A. Romero is the sole creator of the original “zombie”. According to Merriam Webster.com, a zombie is considered ”a dead person who is able to move because of magic according to some religions and in stories, movies, etc.” This is where George Romero obtained his inspiration.
(Dawn of the Dead 1978)
George A. Romero is in fact a college dropout. He enjoyed a plethora of horror movies and decided that was where he would focus his filmmaking. His original inspiration for the undead came from the early film White Zombie (1932) (Birth of the Living Dead 2013). This film focused on the voodoo aspect of zombies. In case some of you are not familiar, some African Americans (especially in Louisiana) practice Voodoo, which involves activities pertaining to the occult (including raising the dead back to life).
After being inspired by this early film, he decided to write a daring script. He gathered his crew including members he still uses for some of his later films: Michael Gornick, John Russo and Tom Savini (however, Tom Savini was not able to do the makeup for Night of the Living Dead because he was a combat photographer in Vietnam at the time; he later did makeup for Romero’s films such as Creepshow and Day of the Dead).
(Night of the Living Dead 1968)
His low budget film soared in headlines of various Pittsburgh newspapers. Evidently, his movie was so frightening to vast majorities of audiences that it was banned in certain theaters. Also as time progressed, the film became known as a “Grindhouse Film”. Grindhouse is a term coined in the early 1960’s for dirty, violent and pornographic films that were being produced like an assembly line and introduced in dangerous districts of certain towns (American Grindhouse 2010). There were no restrictions implemented by the MPAA at the time, so filmmakers went absolutely wild…including George Romero, in a sense.
(George a. Romero)
He was not afraid to take chances. Over the past few years, my personality has turned a bit meek. I’ve been feeling useless and not in control of my life or decisions. Then I remember that I know George Romero must have had his doubts; he may even believed that his groundbreaking first film was going to be a complete failure. However, he created a piece of art that caused a heck of a lot of cultural change. I hope to match that one day.
be an atheist, be a christian, be buddhist, be straight, be gay, be cisgender, be transgender, be non-binary, be carnivore, be vegan, be whatever the hell you want to be but don’t be an asshole is this so hard to understand
Pacifica’s parents used to make her compete in beauty pageants and that’s why her hair’s so big. Mabel finds out and she asks a million questions about it “like with the sparkly dresses and everything?” And she begs Pacifica to teach her everything. Pacifica used to hate pageants but with Mabel it’s fun. Mabel bedazzels her dress.
What an excellent message that we would like to preserve for the consideration of your future employers.
What feels like almost an eternity ago, an article was written in a rag called City Paper. Found within it, are a collection of words that disgrace journalistic ethics so terribly, that it makes Horse News seem like we should be eligible for a Pulitzer (for City Paper employees: That’s like a Shorty Award for grown ups). It was written in the lead-up to BronyCon by a Baltimore Journalism student named Gianna DeCarlo.
When she was called-out for her laundry-list of well-documented biases and inaccuracies and overall shittiness, she did what every responsible future-journalist does, and locked her twitter, and hoped it would all just go away.
An anon on Tumblr informed us of the fact that she unlocked her twitter once more, so that we are now able to see, just what exactly she was saying about us “shitty and gross" fans, behind the twitter wall.
Remember everyone, this person is writing for a “legitimate” news outlet.
So, first we have her bragging about how she wrote this article, essentially as clickbait with no regard for balance or accuracy, and is treating bronies as a mealticket.
If this is “the big time” then you have a very sad career ahead of you.
We aren’t sure if she is saying that she loves brony penises, or likes calling bronies “dicks” as an insult. Either way.
Everything about this.
All of these taunts and comments would seem to only be good for one purpose; getting those who are upset, more upset, an act that is commonly referred to as “trolling”. According to this writer “trolls feed off attention and the controversy their comments cause”.
Wait, who wrote that?
Oh shit, Gianna Herself wrote that. Read the whole thing when you get a chance, but let’s read an excerpt.
"Rational discussion and open conversation about the topics presented is encouraged and one of the goals of well-done journalism. But when this gets twisted into some sort of witchhunt, then it can overshadow the message your writing is trying to send.
So on the internet, you have to be careful, but be brave. Don’t censor yourself. Criticism is avoidable and some of it will help you grow and improve.
And don’t feed the trolls. They’re not worth your time. Flip your hair and walk away, you fabulous person.”
Recently, she seems to have been on a self-depreciation streak, commenting on her low self esteem, her shitty newspaper, and her reliance on prescription medications.
That may have something to do with the fact she realized nearly a month later, that at least some of the many criticisms of her piece were in-fact justified. Like her usage of the word “queer”.
So at the end of the day, what did she learn? Clearly nothing about ethics, or dealing with criticism, and most certainly nothing about hypocrisy. Naturally all of this will just be referred to as “harrassment” and “personal attacks” (see: hypocrisy), but that’s okay. We have it on good authority that she is a part of the community, and that it’s okay to be critical of a community you’re a part of.
Wait who said that?
Sorry, but this was too priceless to not reblog. What a pathetic individual. I’m not the least bit surprised that her self-esteem is low, because she’s clearly a person whose only self-confidence comes from trying to tear others down. Also, she acts like a bitter, 14-year-old white girl trying way too hard to be “ghetto”, because she thinks it makes her “cool”.
This is a person that shouldn’t be writing for any paper. Here’s hoping her superiors catch wind of her actions, and drop her from their employ.