Yet do any of you know the anniversary of George Harrison’s passing was…yesterday? The 29th?
Rest in Peace, Georgie.
Here’s some advice:
pay attention to traffic signals,
watch signs, lights,
drive defensively if you can,
but if somebody hits you,
hurts you, breaks something,
I don’t care what
the insurance agent says,
it was not your fault.
— a poem by Jhon Merz, 2011
all the notes. holy crap.
at first the reblog button didn’t work for me, i was like FUCK FUCK FUCK but then it worked.lol.
It worked immediately. I’M HARRY FREAKIN POTTER!
…looks like i got the magic in me. >:)
HA! FINALLY! after the 73902356504600th try! ;)
look @ me now.
fuck yeaahhhhh first time
VIVA LA MAGICAL REVOLUTION!!!
I’m the boss.
1st time baby :)
Because the reasons for why we’re all “pretentious” and “special snowflakes” and “fakes” are always the same damn thing.
You’re really just bisexual! But I’m not! And you know why I’m not? Because I don’t feel as though that word fits the definition that I have for my sexuality and because of that I don’t feel comfortable using that term.
You just hate all bisexuals, then! You think you’re better than them! Again, no. I think that people should be able to identify as whatever the fuck they feel the most comfortable with and if someone IDs as bisexual, then more power to them. It just so happens that the term that they feels fits them is not the same term that I feel most fits me.
You just want attention! Because I’m totally screaming from the rooftops about my sexual orientation and of course, every single thing that I’ve ever posted on tumblr is in relation to my pansexuality and because anything more than locking myself in a closet is obviously me being totes obnoxious about myself, right?
Pansexual is a new word and therefore, it must be fake! There’s this whole thing about how language evolves and grows and how every word was a new word at some point, but I am not an etymologist and I really don’t think I could go into more detail about why this point is bullshit even if I wanted to.
Pan means all, so you must want to fuck ALL THE THINGS! Pan meaning all. Sexuality meaning human sexuality. Pansexuality meaning the capability of being attracted to people of all sexes and gender identities. I assure you, I will not be showing up at your door any time soon to ask your kitchen-wear if it wants to take a trip up to Motel 6.
Identifying as pansexual is cissexist because it denies that trans* people are real men and real women! An example of this point being made is this: someone defines pansexuality as being defined as “being attracted to men, women, and everyone else” and the person who is making the point takes the “everyone else” and assumes that by “men and women”, they meant cis men and women and that “everyone else” meant trans men and women. The thing that this point completely fails to see, almost all of the time that I’ve seen it made, is the fact that there are people who do not identify as either a man or a woman.
Pansexuality is a political statement! I…don’t even think that I understand this point? I can say that, yes, the fact that my gender identity is inclusive in the definition and the fact that pansexuality rejects the gender binary do make me more comfortable with the term, but are those the sole reasons that I identify as pansexual? No, they’re not. It makes me like the term more, yes, but it doesn’t change the fact that the term fits what I define my sexuality as to begin with. Other than that, if I’m way off-base and am missing the idea behind what political statement ID’ing as pansexual gives…then I have no clue what it could be referring to. 0_o
And…that’s really it, for now at least. I’m sure there’s more, but anyway.
TL;DR - I identify as pansexual, because I feel that it is the word that most fits my sexuality. I don’t identify as that because I think I’m better than anyone else or because I want to be a “special snowflake”. I identify as it because it is what I am and that identity is just as valid and just as real as anyone else’s.
The Fed didn’t tell anyone which banks were in trouble so deep they required a combined $1.2 trillion on Dec. 5, 2008, their single neediest day. Bankers didn’t mention that they took tens of billions of dollars in emergency loans at the same time they were assuring investors their firms were healthy. And no one calculated until now that banks reaped an estimated $13 billion of income by taking advantage of the Fed’s below-market rates, Bloomberg Markets magazine reports in its January issue.
Saved by the bailout, bankers lobbied against government regulations, a job made easier by the Fed, which never disclosed the details of the rescue to lawmakers even as Congress doled out more money and debated new rules aimed at preventing the next collapse.
But, you know, we have to close schools and limit unemployment benefits and destroy the social safety net because something something I can’t even stomach this bullshit any more.