of me

everybodyilovedies:

(ノ◕ヮ◕)ノ*:・゚✧ covert ops:・゚✧
aka a hat and some glasses and suddenly no one recognizes you

tony’s more famous than Steve and Natasha combined that’s why he had the hat sunglasses AND hoodie.

(Source: thezhenger)

justplainsomething:

batgirlrising:

moriarty:

saunterdown:

baruchsbalthamos:

littleblueartist:

never not reblog Scarlett calling idiots out on their bullshit

image

and the shitty part is that once scarlett called them out on their fucking bullshit, she automatically became coined a bitch. a bitch. for being brave enough to publicly tell them what was so annoying about a still continuing problem for women in media

"You work hard making independent films for fourteen years and you get voted best breasts.” - scarlett johansson

god i feel horrible for her. i feel horrible for every single woman in this world. and it was to the point where she decided to get breast reduction surgery for her to be taken more seriously as an actress. what the hell is wrong with everybody

and i never, ever understood the hate towards anne hathaway. new york times magazine stated “Anne Hathaway practically demands that we love her.” fucking wrong. anne never gave a shit about looking stuck up when she was out there on stage, preaching for gay rights and how wrong it is for men to constantly sexualize and put down women in the media in every single interview where a man asked the bullshit question “what diet plan did you use for your role in les mis, i bet every single girl wants to know”. she knew a backlash would come from for being so strong and forceful with her retortive statements, but they saved the people that mattered.

and another point. kristen stewart. why in the hell do people hate kristen stewart as a person. women today are expected to act pretty. nice. be respectful 24/7, never argue back, smile pretty, be a lady. don’t make rash, argumentative statements, because if you do, you are not a lady. this is a message our society tries to suffocate women with. kristen stewart will not smile for you, or act like a fuckin lady for you, because that is not her character

yet people hate her because she decides to be herself. “god kristen, you gotta smile some more, talk more ladylike”

what in the fuck for? absolutely nobody knows kristen stewart’s personality. she’s a private person. but just because she refuses to lie through her teeth to seem like a respectable, golden lady of hollywood, she’s considered a bitch. “do this or that because if you don’t you aint a lady” god fuckin damn all of you

its really early in the morning and i cant think straight so if my rant seems messy im sorry 

PS… douche in the first gif is the same interviewer who pulled the same stunt on Anne Hathaway during her TDKR press tour.

None for you, Jerry Penacoli, none for you.

The best thing about both of these moments is that in both cases (even though it’s hard to tell with how this particular gifset is cropped), Renner and Downey are both obviously reacting negatively to the comment but just sit back and let Scarlett rip into the douchebags. Cause they know she’s got the situation fucking covered.

(Source: alianovnataliasoldblog)

scripturespice:

martinfreeman:

"why would you make it gay for no reason?"

why am i gay for no reason? what reason do i need to be gay

justnevilledup:

Going to Hell in a hand Easter basket
My mom’s driving the bus to Hell and I’m riding shotgun

justnevilledup:

Going to Hell in a hand Easter basket

My mom’s driving the bus to Hell and I’m riding shotgun

thatwasnotmydesign:

eyebrowsandbadpuns:

I’m in love

HE STARTS SINGING AT 2:19 AND NOTHING COULD POSSIBLY PREPARE ANYONE FOR THIS MAN’S VOICE

meghanconrad:

If you don’t want to listen to Janelle Monae covering David Bowie, you need to reconsider your listening choices.

babybutta:

dmolech:

I did a thing for a contest and I think it turned out pretty durn cute

Well I hope you fucking win because this is a win!

babybutta:

dmolech:

I did a thing for a contest and I think it turned out pretty durn cute

Well I hope you fucking win because this is a win!

socimages:

How to lie with statistics: The relationship between Florida’s Stand Your Ground law and gun deaths.
At Junk Charts, Kaiser Fung drew my attention to a graph released by Reuters.  It is so deeply misleading that I loathe to expose your eyeballs to it.  So, I offer you the mishmash above.
The original figure is on the left.  It counts the number of gun deaths in Florida.  A line rises, bounces a little, reaches a 2nd highest peak labeled “2005, Florida enacted its ‘Stand Your Ground’ law,” and falls precipitously.
What do you see?
Most people see a huge fall-off in the number of gun deaths after Stand Your Ground was passed.  But that’s not what the graph shows.  A quick look at the vertical axis reveals that the gun deaths are counted from top (0) to bottom (800).  The highest peaks are the fewest gun deaths and the lowest ones are the most.  A rise in the line, in other words, reveals a reduction in gun deaths.  The graph on the right — flipped both horizontally and vertically — is more intuitive to most: a rising line reflects a rise in the number of gun deaths and a dropping a drop.
The proper conclusion, then, is that gun deaths skyrocketed after Stand Your Ground was enacted.
This example is a great reminder that we bring our own assumptions to our reading of any illustration of data.  The original graph may have broken convention, making the intuitive read of the image incorrect, but the data is, presumably, sound.  It’s our responsibility, then, to always do our due diligence in absorbing information.  The alternative is to be duped.
Lisa Wade is a professor of sociology at Occidental College and the author of Gender: Ideas, Interactions, Institutions, with Myra Marx Ferree. You can follow her on Twitter and Facebook.

socimages:

How to lie with statistics: The relationship between Florida’s Stand Your Ground law and gun deaths.

At Junk Charts, Kaiser Fung drew my attention to a graph released by Reuters.  It is so deeply misleading that I loathe to expose your eyeballs to it.  So, I offer you the mishmash above.

The original figure is on the left.  It counts the number of gun deaths in Florida.  A line rises, bounces a little, reaches a 2nd highest peak labeled “2005, Florida enacted its ‘Stand Your Ground’ law,” and falls precipitously.

What do you see?

Most people see a huge fall-off in the number of gun deaths after Stand Your Ground was passed.  But that’s not what the graph shows.  A quick look at the vertical axis reveals that the gun deaths are counted from top (0) to bottom (800).  The highest peaks are the fewest gun deaths and the lowest ones are the most.  A rise in the line, in other words, reveals a reduction in gun deaths.  The graph on the right — flipped both horizontally and vertically — is more intuitive to most: a rising line reflects a rise in the number of gun deaths and a dropping a drop.

The proper conclusion, then, is that gun deaths skyrocketed after Stand Your Ground was enacted.

This example is a great reminder that we bring our own assumptions to our reading of any illustration of data.  The original graph may have broken convention, making the intuitive read of the image incorrect, but the data is, presumably, sound.  It’s our responsibility, then, to always do our due diligence in absorbing information.  The alternative is to be duped.

Lisa Wade is a professor of sociology at Occidental College and the author of Gender: Ideas, Interactions, Institutions, with Myra Marx Ferree. You can follow her on Twitter and Facebook.

tornadoallie:

WHAT IS THIS COMPANY

Hi we’re Bic, we make plastic shit with bits of metal on

thebiblemachine:

braiker:

Are you fucking kidding me? Did we all just wake up in 1938?

wtat

thebiblemachine:

braiker:

Are you fucking kidding me? Did we all just wake up in 1938?

wtat