polandgallery:

Warsaw then & now. 1944-2014

polandgallery:

Warsaw then & now. 1944-2014

(via so-much-mint)

inbox:

there is no reason for “sean” to be pronounced “shawn”

(via geekygayy)

darklittlefaun:

methbusters:

moresongsaboutbuildings:

theneolistickid:

Bats illuminated by lightning

THIS IS WHAT LOVE LOOKS LIKE.

Goth

This is actually really cool

darklittlefaun:

methbusters:

moresongsaboutbuildings:

theneolistickid:

Bats illuminated by lightning

THIS IS WHAT LOVE LOOKS LIKE.

Goth

This is actually really cool

(via acolderindigo)

iwriteaboutfeminism:

Police brutality in Ferguson costs taxpayers millions.

(via swolizard)

vireonovae-archive:

"anxIETy??" mOM saYS, "n OO jUSTT dON””TtTTT lET thINGS boTHEr yOU”

thAT

sIMpLE????? jUST dONT “leT" IT bOTHER ME??? anxIetY„„, gonEE THEN!!!???

scIeNTIFIC brEAKthROUGH???!!! thAT………

eASSYYY??!!!!????

(via dweebscar)

nubbify:

haremlead​

#❤❤❤ ~~~ like if you want a relationship like this~~~ ❤❤❤

nubbify:

haremlead​

#❤❤❤ ~~~ like if you want a relationship like this~~~ ❤❤❤

(via adasellers)

riseoftheguardian:

i honestly can’t even hear the words “tri-state area” without thinking of phineas & ferb

(via peter-pans-booty-shorts)

acceber74:

bitterseafigtree:

audio-sexual:

epherites:

afroboheme:

skinnyniggaballin:

flawlessxqueen:

designbydiaspora:

lovelylavenderchild:

darvinasafo:

Y’all believe it now?

You’re fucking kidding me right?

People are suffering to Ebola and America had a way to potentially cure it

AND THEY REFUSE A FUCKING REQUEST?

Does saving lives not mean anything to anyone anymore?

I fucking cant

Who’s really surprised? AMERICA isn’t shit & never will be.

They said it costing too much was part of the issue but I haven’t seen the government have any issue with the billions of dollars they constantly give Israel to do any mother fucking thing they please.

Seriously?! the US ain’t shit

Didn’t they give it to a Spanish patient today

Wtf America

http://www.usnews.com/news/business/articles/2014/08/11/spanish-ebola-patient-gets-experimental-drug

It’s fucking true. They said no to Nigeria. But then ship it right the fuck out to Spain for one patient.

It is so hard to love a country that does not value you/people who look like you.

Welp/

Told y’all this was going to happen. Just like what they did with the HIV/AIDS drug treatments. 

(via childrenmilk)

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.

(via its-a-corpse-party)

NO PLEASE WHAT THE HELL KIND OF EPISODE

WHAT THE HELL KATE

I LOOKED AWAY FOR TWO SECONDS BUT PARRISH’S EYES

THEME BY CYBERSITY