This makes everything all better.

Hahahahaha, nope. Time for some police harassment, faggot yelled from passing cars, and family tragedies.

Wee.

bigclitslittletits:

Reposting this again, just thought I should post for people who don’t know/would like to know more

dcartfag:

meinaglasshouse:

Let’s get through this together, you and I.

I don’t know how I could have possibly missed this. I am totally blindsided by losing you, Alex. You were one of my best friends in high school, and were always the first to come drive at some odd hour to rescue me from whatever…

I hope, deeply, that he now has found the peace he never had in life. The world is a lesser place without him.

sexreeducated:

Triangular Theory of Love

• Nonlove “refers simply to the absence of all three components of love. Nonlove characterizes the large majority of our personal relationships, which are simply casual interactions.”

• Liking/friendship is “used here in a nontrivial sense. Rather, it refers to the set of feelings one experiences in relationships that can truly be characterized as friendship. One feels closeness, bondedness, and warmth toward the other, without feelings of intense passion or long-term commitment.”

• Infatuated love: “infatuation results from the experiencing of passionate arousal in the absence of intimacy and decision/commitment…like Tennov’s limerance.”^[5] Romantic relationships often start out as infatuated love and become romantic love as intimacy develops over time. Without developing intimacy or commitment, infatuated love may disappear suddenly.

• Empty love is characterized by commitment without intimacy or passion. A stronger love may deteriorate into empty love. In an arranged marriage, the spouses’ relationship may begin as empty love and develop into another form, indicating “how empty love need not be the terminal state of a long-term relationship…[but] the beginning rather than the end.”

• Romantic love “derives from a combination of the intimate and passionate components of love…romantic lovers are not only drawn physically to each other but are also bonded emotionally” - bonded both intimately and passionately, but without sustaining commitment.

• Companionate love is an intimate, non-passionate type of love that is stronger than friendship because of the element of long-term commitment. “This type of love is observed in long-term marriages where passion is no longer present” but where a deep affection and commitment remain. The love ideally shared between family members is a form of companionate love, as is the love between close friends who have a platonic but strong friendship.

• Fatuous love can be exemplified by a whirlwind courtship and marriage - “fatuous in the sense that a commitment is made on the basis of passion without the stabilizing influence of intimate involvement.”

• Consummate love is the complete form of love, representing an ideal relationship toward which people strive. Of the seven varieties of love, consummate love is theorized to be that love associated with the “perfect couple.” According to Sternberg, these couples will continue to have great sex fifteen years or more into the relationship, they cannot imagine themselves happier over the long-term with anyone else, they overcome their few difficulties gracefully, and each delight in the relationship with one other. However, Sternberg cautions that maintaining a consummate love may be even harder than achieving it. He stresses the importance of translating the components of love into action. “Without expression,” he warns, “even the greatest of loves can die.” Thus, consummate love may not be permanent. If passion is lost over time, it may change into companionate love.

By far one of my favorite love theories in Psychology. I don’t know why they didn’t teach this when I was much much younger. Knowing the proper terms for how one feels about another is the first step towards emotional maturity. Nobody wants to call their feelings “Puppy Love” when “Fatuous Love” sounds so much more appropriate.

I learned to understand my poly life through this triangle.

faggyposts:

safeword:

bigjaysfavs:

I always get mixed feelings from shots like these. On the one hand, it’s horny. On the other hand, what does she get out of blowing a dildo?

headwithwings:

anotherheadwithwings:

You know I love you, slave.

(via anotherheadwithwings-deactivate)

thank you so much for saying this! i, like many other female tops, get frustrated when i see women who are supposed to be tops doing things that are obviously for the male viewer’s pleasure and not at all for hers. it’s just a different kind of submission, but the aim is still pleasing men and not herself, and then subs go out into the world excepting this kind of thing from me. no thank you! i have no interest in blowing your dildo. that is there so you can fuck me without even getting to taste. now head downstairs like a good girl and stop choking me with that thing.

anyway, thank you, bigjay, for bringing this up! usually i only see it on feminist kink blogs, but obviously you think critically about the intricacies of domination. i, along with many other female tops who are sick of subs (male and female) thinking that domination is all about the sub’s pleasure. they get to earn that. i appreciate it.

(via safeword)

I only agree somewhat with this commentary. On the one hand, true, this photo looks very much shot for MAAB and/or male-identified people. On the other hand, some people (myself included!) really, really love sucking cock. This could also easily be some sort of punishment, chastity play, pre-face-fucking teasing, or post-face-fucking clean-up.

We are also assuming that the bottom is FAAB. Maybe they also have a dick, which would make chastity play via dildos even more personal for them.

Not everything in sex is about the Top. This dildo-sucking could be as much about the Top enjoying a cock in their mouth as it could be about their knowing it does something to their bottom’s mind.

(via faggyposts)

Uh, in fact, most of it isn’t. Hey followers, let me let you into a little secret - the Top has absolutely no power. Everything we do, we do with explicit consent and, truthfully, with the intention of pleasing (sometimes in a round-a-bout-way) our bottoms. So really, the bottom has all the power, and everything a top does is done for or at least with permission from the bottom.

So yeah. 

dance-thrusting:

Here we go Muscles Monday/semi-topless Tuesday? I do what I want dammit.

I have so many feels and I don’t know what to do with any of them.

DR. L’HEUREUX LEWIS (via msandrogynous)

Feminists say this all the time but let Michael Kimmel say it and IT ALL MAKES SENSE NOW.

I guess. Doesn’t make it less true but…

I’m also not the *biggest* Michael Kimmel fan.

(via newwavefeminism)

It’s an unfortunate reality, but part of the definition of privilege is having the privilege of being heard. One of the most important things we, as men, can do is educate other men - specifically because we have the privilege to be heard by those men.

Yeah, that fucking blows and is ridiculous - I certainly didn’t have any trouble learning from women. But it’s the reality of the situation. In what other ways should we (being men) spend our privilege?

The hitachi, good lord it makes this.

(Source: shygirl364)

boyprincessdiaries:

Trans* rights? Racial issue. Education? Racial issue. Job market? Racial issue. Police brutality? Racial issue. Economic disparity? Racial issue. Where they’re putting that new shopping center? Racial issue. Your favorite video game? Racial issue. Who makes it big on that American Whatever reality show? Racial issue. What new book becomes a top seller this year? Racial issue.

Stop whining that you have to think about someone other than yourself for a change and just get that fact through your head.

Thissssssssssssssssss