1.5M ratings
277k ratings

See, that’s what the app is perfect for.

Sounds perfect Wahhhh, I don’t wanna
ginormouspotato
6teeth

Why do sorority girl pics always look like lesbian wedding announcements ????

6teeth

I have not stopped thinking abt this

athousanderrors

okay I am in the UK and my only knowledge of sororities comes from like, US teen movies and Buffy. So. I realise my perception is warped but. 

…are these NOT lesbian wedding announcements? I mean, c’mon guys. Lookit these adorable li’l lipstick lesbians. 

ginormouspotato

this is so incredibly gay how is this not lesbian content?????

mitigatedchaos

Because, according to field reports, men won’t refuse to date a heterosexual woman just because she has done things that look gay sometimes, but straight women don’t want to date men who have done gay things.

Men aren’t allowed to touch almost anyone, but with gender constructed as a binary, that means women get to touch people more without suspicion on them.

(That’s only part of it, though.)

Source: 6teeth

More you might like

ranma-official

Anonymous asked:

No one advocates corrective rape for asexual people. Corrective rape is used against gay men and lesbian women.

ranma-official answered:

No one except for the people who advocate it!

mitigatedchaos

Considering that refusing sex is still considered “abusive” in some institutional texts on relationships, it’s about as believable that the same sort of people who advocated “corrective” rape for gays and lesbians would advocate it for asexuals.  If they don’t it’s probably because they’re unaware of asexuals, not that they actually respect them or their wishes.

gender politics rape cw
mutant-aesthetic
yayfeminism

Originally posted by gif-007

redcharlie

This just in: Women who wear tank tops and have short hair are all lesbians.

deliriumbubbles

Wearing clothes is gay.

trilllizard420

isn’t this the same website that keeps insisting that that Cora woman from Mass Effect: Andromeda is “lesbian coded”?

you people keep insisting women with short hair are lesbians but get pissed off when idiot men say the same thing?

a little bit of consistency would be nice!

mutant-aesthetic

how much of a fucking killjoy do you have to be to think the one on the right is better than the one on the left

mitigatedchaos

The amount of clothing and its coverage isn’t the issue with the image on the right - the clothing isn’t interesting (even though a tank top is practical, so it depends on the context the character appears in), but what I’m really seeing here is a failure to make the most of that prosthetic arm. It looks like it’s trying to be elegant… but it isn’t. Maybe work in some sort of gold lace and drop the color to reflective black, *or* make it look a bit more industrial and reconfigure those glow lines - because glow lines are not necessary, meaning they’re aesthetic, so they should be arranged more aesthetically than this. There’s a lot of potential for a prosthetic arm, actualize it.

Source: twitter.com video games art
slartibartfastibast
the-grey-tribe

If there is a gay gene, gay marriage and adoption will pull it out of circulation soon.

mailadreapta

This is the usual and obvious response to people who say that gayitude can’t be genetic because otherwise it would have been selected out already. Bruh, before we had gay liberation being gay was not a major knock on fertility since you would probably be having kids anyway. Fortunately, now we do have gay liberation so we can weed the queers out of the gene pool as Darwin intended.

mailadreapta

Cochran goes off against the “gay uncle” theory and other cockamamie schemes which claim that gayness is not selected out of the population because of some offsetting benefit, by making the entirely true point that the benefits to your family have to huge in order to compensate for taking you out of the gene pool entirely. However, this objection loses a lot of its force if the fertility loss from homosexuality is small. If homosexuals reproduce at rates similar to heterosexuals, then having the gay gene becomes all-upside from a Darwinian perspective.

Seen in this light, homophobia is a eugenic cultural institution which keeps gay genes in the gene pool by forcing even obligate homosexuals to marry and have children.

slartibartfastibast

Personal anecdote indicates that Cochran is probably on so something:

http://slartibartfastibast.com/post/159672281259/i-imagine-one-of-those-big-complex-things-being

It’s semi-heritable but non-genetic:

http://slartibartfastibast.com/post/114665865499/being-suspicious-of-gmos-is-only-irrational-if-you

I think it’s an alternative developmental trajectory that can reduce intermale competition for mates or something. Seems like it could be more influenced by early environmental triggers than anybody wants to admit. In-utero tuning to the parental environment is probably part of it. Cochran goes so far as to say that it has to be partly communicable, which would upset a lot of people.

I mean, Alzheimer’s is apparently bacterial/microbiomic in origin, but nobody treats it like it’s communicable because it really doesn’t look like it is. The vector would have to be extremely convoluted and indirect.

Also, humans are probs eusocial:

http://slartibartfastibast.com/post/160728219904/contra-scott-alexander-on-prestige
mitigatedchaos

I don’t think we’ll lose the gays for another reason - by the end of the century, we will have figured out how to make new people gay or bisexual on purpose. That has to be factored in to the calculations.

Source: the-grey-tribe gender politics
argumate
argumate

Younger brothers more likely to be gay right?

Birthrates have dropped; in the past it was not unusual to have 8+ kids.

Exactly how many people were gay in the past? Most of them?

the-selfie-ofdoriangray

I was given to understand that higher population density is correlated with a higher proportion of gay individuals, so presumably these two factors cancel out somewhat

argumate

we’ll figure this out one day.

mitigatedchaos

No one expected the arrival of what 4chan dubbed the “Fag Maximizer” AI.

(Or, as the beleagured sociology students that accidentally unleashed it onto the world called it, Kinsey Indexer.)

shtpost this is a joke do not actually maximize or minimize the number of gays augmented reality break
argumate
argumate

I see posts like if you are a WOMAN attracted RUBY ROSE then you are not a LESBIAN because she is GENDERFLUID and I’m like hmm, that creates a weird quantum dependency between attraction and gender identity.

See you in the club and think damn, that person is hot. But wait, I don’t know their gender identity, which means my own sexuality is now a mystery to me!

Awkwardly, you are also attracted to me, and feel your gender identity shifting to take into account this new and unforeseen attraction! Except you don’t know my gender identity, leaving you stranded in ambiguity.

Tragically we lose sight of each other in the crowd, and never see each other again, leaving our sexualities indeterminate for all time.

wearejustdoingthisfortheticket

legitimately could not tell if “ruby rose” was referring to a real person or a gem fusion

argumate

this is Tumblr, it could go either way.

gender politics
flakmaniak
flakmaniak

@mitigatedchaos how about this sci-fi take on gendpol:

“Men are indeed worse than women in various ways, more antisocial, violent etc…

And we have egg-combining technology so we can make a Lesbian Utopia…

HOWEVER, we should still keep the population at approximately 50:50… For the long-term psychological benefits of romantic interaction, given most women are straight.”

mitigatedchaos

You say this, but I already once did a fake nation writeup where they created a single-sex and it turned out terrible - not because they weren’t gay enough, but rather, because they embraced the worst aspects of both masculinity and femininity simultaneously.  (And also, they would have been less bad off if they had just a few teaspoons of Feminism, but that wasn’t going to happen, for Reasons.)

gendpol
the-grey-tribe
the-grey-tribe

I have seen exclamations like “I bet he does not even have one gay/black/jewish“ friend, used as some kind of bait, to make the target say the unfortunate words.

mitigatedchaos

That’s when to either go meta, attack along another vector of the same topic (“oh, so the only real gay people are the ones that already agree with you?”) or flip the switch and start shitposting about how you are friends with literally every Jew on Earth, including the questioner.

the-grey-tribe
the-grey-tribe

I have seen exclamations like “I bet he does not even have one gay/black/jewish“ friend, used as some kind of bait, to make the target say the unfortunate words.

mitigatedchaos

That’s when to either go meta, attack along another vector of the same topic (“oh, so the only real gay people are the ones that already agree with you?”) or flip the switch and start shitposting about how you are friends with literally every Jew on Earth, including the questioner.

the-grey-tribe

“I can’t be racist, I have Jewish enemies!”

“Some of my best friends are homophobic!”

“I asked a racist and he hates it, so it must be woke.”

mitigatedchaos

“Oh, so you’re saying that minorities only count if they agree with you, otherwise they’re not people?  You know who else thought that?  HITLER.  Get the fuck out of this fucking building, you racist piece of sht!”

I guarantee they will not see that coming.  Once you’ve stunlocked them, start using other Discourse moves…

shtpost
ranma-official
theonion: “SAN FRANCISCO—In an effort to reduce the number of unprovoked hostile communications on the social media platform, Twitter announced Monday that it had added a red X-mark feature verifying users who are in fact perfectly okay to harass....
theonion

SAN FRANCISCO—In an effort to reduce the number of unprovoked hostile communications on the social media platform, Twitter announced Monday that it had added a red X-mark feature verifying users who are in fact perfectly okay to harass. “This new verification system offers users a simple, efficient way to determine which accounts belong to total pieces of shit whom you should have no qualms about tormenting to your heart’s desire,” said spokesperson Elizabeth James, adding that the small red symbol signifies that Twitter has officially confirmed the identity of a loathsome person who deserves the worst abuse imaginable and who will deliberately have their Mute, Block, and Report options disabled. “When a user sees this symbol, they know they’re dealing with a real asshole who has richly earned whatever mistreatment they receive, including profanity, body-shaming, leaking of personal information, and relentless goading to commit suicide. It’s really just a helpful way of saying to our users, ‘This fuck has it coming, so do your worst with a clear conscience and without fear of having your account suspended.’” At press time, Twitter reassuredly clarified that the red X was just a suggestion and that all users could still be bullied with as little recourse as they are now.

Source: theonion queue
See this in the app Show more
Top Photos