vegasthecorgi:

halp the bed is eating me alive SAVE ME 
vegasthecorgi:

halp the bed is eating me alive SAVE ME 
vegasthecorgi:

halp the bed is eating me alive SAVE ME 
vegasthecorgi:

halp the bed is eating me alive SAVE ME 
vegasthecorgi:

halp the bed is eating me alive SAVE ME 

vegasthecorgi:

halp the bed is eating me alive SAVE ME 

(via corgiaddict)

nucleir:

i think we all know who the real supreme isimage

(via juwlie)

Contrary to popular belief…

obenibo:

tsunime:

intersectionalfeminism:

This is not equal representation:

image

This is equal representation:

image

SAY IT AGAIN ONE MOE TIME

Thank youuuuuuuuuuu

(via juwlie)

Sia | Chandelier [Piano Version]

(via lostwithme)

fuckitandflee:

The real problem with books-turned-movies isn’t “omg they didn’t include every single word in the book” it’s “omg they completely overlooked the main theme, threw out any significant allegories, took away all the emotional pull, an turned it into a boring action movie with a love triangle in it”

(via ericaolivero)

queerhawkeye:

there is no one expecting dick to taste good though. i’ve never ever once met a cis dude paranoid about his genitals tasting weird or salty or sweaty or whatever. but of course pussy has to taste like fruit and whatever. OF COURSE. 

(via juwlie)

jazzforyourcow:

turbomun:

Gender dimorphism in animation at its finest.
In Frozen, we see three of the main human characters as children, then later as adults. This showcases a trend that isn’t new to animation but has been getting more and more obvious in recent years — namely, that female characters are given infantile faces on top of idealized adult bodies.
Look at Kristoff (sorry I couldn’t find a better picture of him, btw). There are numerous changes in his face between his child and adult designs, and yet enough similarities that you can tell it’s the same character at two different ages. The main difference is that his younger form is given more infantile features, such as larger eyes, a smaller nose, and a rounder face shape.
Then move down to Anna and Elsa. There’s no mistaking them for different characters at their different ages…but that’s because their child and adult designs are incredibly similar. Both ages show them with the same infantile features: large eyes, small nose, round face shape. It’s my understanding that these three people are only a few years apart in age; so why do Anna and Elsa look so much younger?
And if you’re about to say “NO, Anna and Elsa don’t have the same faces at both ages! There are slight differences in — ” then you’re missing the point. I didn’t say that Anna and Elsa’s faces don’t change, but the changes are very slight…especially compared to the major alterations that Kristoff’s design went through for his age progression.
Some might insist that it’s so Anna and Elsa are still recognizable. But again, how do you account for Kristoff being recognizable in both forms? Why do the female characters need to be treated differently than him?
Remember: Anna and Elsa are not real people, who through some random coincidence of biology happened to retain the same face as they got older. A large team of people had to design, revise, and approve them at both ages, and literally every facet of what these characters looked like was controllable.

[whispers] it’s because we infantalize women to give them less agency, but retain adult body shapes so they can be sexualized jazzforyourcow:

turbomun:

Gender dimorphism in animation at its finest.
In Frozen, we see three of the main human characters as children, then later as adults. This showcases a trend that isn’t new to animation but has been getting more and more obvious in recent years — namely, that female characters are given infantile faces on top of idealized adult bodies.
Look at Kristoff (sorry I couldn’t find a better picture of him, btw). There are numerous changes in his face between his child and adult designs, and yet enough similarities that you can tell it’s the same character at two different ages. The main difference is that his younger form is given more infantile features, such as larger eyes, a smaller nose, and a rounder face shape.
Then move down to Anna and Elsa. There’s no mistaking them for different characters at their different ages…but that’s because their child and adult designs are incredibly similar. Both ages show them with the same infantile features: large eyes, small nose, round face shape. It’s my understanding that these three people are only a few years apart in age; so why do Anna and Elsa look so much younger?
And if you’re about to say “NO, Anna and Elsa don’t have the same faces at both ages! There are slight differences in — ” then you’re missing the point. I didn’t say that Anna and Elsa’s faces don’t change, but the changes are very slight…especially compared to the major alterations that Kristoff’s design went through for his age progression.
Some might insist that it’s so Anna and Elsa are still recognizable. But again, how do you account for Kristoff being recognizable in both forms? Why do the female characters need to be treated differently than him?
Remember: Anna and Elsa are not real people, who through some random coincidence of biology happened to retain the same face as they got older. A large team of people had to design, revise, and approve them at both ages, and literally every facet of what these characters looked like was controllable.

[whispers] it’s because we infantalize women to give them less agency, but retain adult body shapes so they can be sexualized jazzforyourcow:

turbomun:

Gender dimorphism in animation at its finest.
In Frozen, we see three of the main human characters as children, then later as adults. This showcases a trend that isn’t new to animation but has been getting more and more obvious in recent years — namely, that female characters are given infantile faces on top of idealized adult bodies.
Look at Kristoff (sorry I couldn’t find a better picture of him, btw). There are numerous changes in his face between his child and adult designs, and yet enough similarities that you can tell it’s the same character at two different ages. The main difference is that his younger form is given more infantile features, such as larger eyes, a smaller nose, and a rounder face shape.
Then move down to Anna and Elsa. There’s no mistaking them for different characters at their different ages…but that’s because their child and adult designs are incredibly similar. Both ages show them with the same infantile features: large eyes, small nose, round face shape. It’s my understanding that these three people are only a few years apart in age; so why do Anna and Elsa look so much younger?
And if you’re about to say “NO, Anna and Elsa don’t have the same faces at both ages! There are slight differences in — ” then you’re missing the point. I didn’t say that Anna and Elsa’s faces don’t change, but the changes are very slight…especially compared to the major alterations that Kristoff’s design went through for his age progression.
Some might insist that it’s so Anna and Elsa are still recognizable. But again, how do you account for Kristoff being recognizable in both forms? Why do the female characters need to be treated differently than him?
Remember: Anna and Elsa are not real people, who through some random coincidence of biology happened to retain the same face as they got older. A large team of people had to design, revise, and approve them at both ages, and literally every facet of what these characters looked like was controllable.

[whispers] it’s because we infantalize women to give them less agency, but retain adult body shapes so they can be sexualized jazzforyourcow:

turbomun:

Gender dimorphism in animation at its finest.
In Frozen, we see three of the main human characters as children, then later as adults. This showcases a trend that isn’t new to animation but has been getting more and more obvious in recent years — namely, that female characters are given infantile faces on top of idealized adult bodies.
Look at Kristoff (sorry I couldn’t find a better picture of him, btw). There are numerous changes in his face between his child and adult designs, and yet enough similarities that you can tell it’s the same character at two different ages. The main difference is that his younger form is given more infantile features, such as larger eyes, a smaller nose, and a rounder face shape.
Then move down to Anna and Elsa. There’s no mistaking them for different characters at their different ages…but that’s because their child and adult designs are incredibly similar. Both ages show them with the same infantile features: large eyes, small nose, round face shape. It’s my understanding that these three people are only a few years apart in age; so why do Anna and Elsa look so much younger?
And if you’re about to say “NO, Anna and Elsa don’t have the same faces at both ages! There are slight differences in — ” then you’re missing the point. I didn’t say that Anna and Elsa’s faces don’t change, but the changes are very slight…especially compared to the major alterations that Kristoff’s design went through for his age progression.
Some might insist that it’s so Anna and Elsa are still recognizable. But again, how do you account for Kristoff being recognizable in both forms? Why do the female characters need to be treated differently than him?
Remember: Anna and Elsa are not real people, who through some random coincidence of biology happened to retain the same face as they got older. A large team of people had to design, revise, and approve them at both ages, and literally every facet of what these characters looked like was controllable.

[whispers] it’s because we infantalize women to give them less agency, but retain adult body shapes so they can be sexualized jazzforyourcow:

turbomun:

Gender dimorphism in animation at its finest.
In Frozen, we see three of the main human characters as children, then later as adults. This showcases a trend that isn’t new to animation but has been getting more and more obvious in recent years — namely, that female characters are given infantile faces on top of idealized adult bodies.
Look at Kristoff (sorry I couldn’t find a better picture of him, btw). There are numerous changes in his face between his child and adult designs, and yet enough similarities that you can tell it’s the same character at two different ages. The main difference is that his younger form is given more infantile features, such as larger eyes, a smaller nose, and a rounder face shape.
Then move down to Anna and Elsa. There’s no mistaking them for different characters at their different ages…but that’s because their child and adult designs are incredibly similar. Both ages show them with the same infantile features: large eyes, small nose, round face shape. It’s my understanding that these three people are only a few years apart in age; so why do Anna and Elsa look so much younger?
And if you’re about to say “NO, Anna and Elsa don’t have the same faces at both ages! There are slight differences in — ” then you’re missing the point. I didn’t say that Anna and Elsa’s faces don’t change, but the changes are very slight…especially compared to the major alterations that Kristoff’s design went through for his age progression.
Some might insist that it’s so Anna and Elsa are still recognizable. But again, how do you account for Kristoff being recognizable in both forms? Why do the female characters need to be treated differently than him?
Remember: Anna and Elsa are not real people, who through some random coincidence of biology happened to retain the same face as they got older. A large team of people had to design, revise, and approve them at both ages, and literally every facet of what these characters looked like was controllable.

[whispers] it’s because we infantalize women to give them less agency, but retain adult body shapes so they can be sexualized jazzforyourcow:

turbomun:

Gender dimorphism in animation at its finest.
In Frozen, we see three of the main human characters as children, then later as adults. This showcases a trend that isn’t new to animation but has been getting more and more obvious in recent years — namely, that female characters are given infantile faces on top of idealized adult bodies.
Look at Kristoff (sorry I couldn’t find a better picture of him, btw). There are numerous changes in his face between his child and adult designs, and yet enough similarities that you can tell it’s the same character at two different ages. The main difference is that his younger form is given more infantile features, such as larger eyes, a smaller nose, and a rounder face shape.
Then move down to Anna and Elsa. There’s no mistaking them for different characters at their different ages…but that’s because their child and adult designs are incredibly similar. Both ages show them with the same infantile features: large eyes, small nose, round face shape. It’s my understanding that these three people are only a few years apart in age; so why do Anna and Elsa look so much younger?
And if you’re about to say “NO, Anna and Elsa don’t have the same faces at both ages! There are slight differences in — ” then you’re missing the point. I didn’t say that Anna and Elsa’s faces don’t change, but the changes are very slight…especially compared to the major alterations that Kristoff’s design went through for his age progression.
Some might insist that it’s so Anna and Elsa are still recognizable. But again, how do you account for Kristoff being recognizable in both forms? Why do the female characters need to be treated differently than him?
Remember: Anna and Elsa are not real people, who through some random coincidence of biology happened to retain the same face as they got older. A large team of people had to design, revise, and approve them at both ages, and literally every facet of what these characters looked like was controllable.

[whispers] it’s because we infantalize women to give them less agency, but retain adult body shapes so they can be sexualized

jazzforyourcow:

turbomun:

Gender dimorphism in animation at its finest.

In Frozen, we see three of the main human characters as children, then later as adults. This showcases a trend that isn’t new to animation but has been getting more and more obvious in recent years — namely, that female characters are given infantile faces on top of idealized adult bodies.

Look at Kristoff (sorry I couldn’t find a better picture of him, btw). There are numerous changes in his face between his child and adult designs, and yet enough similarities that you can tell it’s the same character at two different ages. The main difference is that his younger form is given more infantile features, such as larger eyes, a smaller nose, and a rounder face shape.

Then move down to Anna and Elsa. There’s no mistaking them for different characters at their different ages…but that’s because their child and adult designs are incredibly similar. Both ages show them with the same infantile features: large eyes, small nose, round face shape. It’s my understanding that these three people are only a few years apart in age; so why do Anna and Elsa look so much younger?

And if you’re about to say “NO, Anna and Elsa don’t have the same faces at both ages! There are slight differences in — ” then you’re missing the point. I didn’t say that Anna and Elsa’s faces don’t change, but the changes are very slight…especially compared to the major alterations that Kristoff’s design went through for his age progression.

Some might insist that it’s so Anna and Elsa are still recognizable. But again, how do you account for Kristoff being recognizable in both forms? Why do the female characters need to be treated differently than him?

Remember: Anna and Elsa are not real people, who through some random coincidence of biology happened to retain the same face as they got older. A large team of people had to design, revise, and approve them at both ages, and literally every facet of what these characters looked like was controllable.

[whispers] it’s because we infantalize women to give them less agency, but retain adult body shapes so they can be sexualized

(via ericaolivero)