assuming being gay is inherently about sexual deviance or hypersexuality is homophobic. what is wrong with this fucking website passing the idea that anyone discussing being gay must clarify whether or not sex is involved is progressive. weve really looped right back around to baseline homophobia
mark saltzman said he wrote these two childrens character as in love and gay. everyone (including sesame street) wants to focus on that relationship as being overtly sexual and inappropriate for children, because that is classic homophobia. how is the response “this is dismissive of people who dont have sex” instead of “this is a homophobic line weve been fed for ages because homophobes dont believe we can really feel love for one another, just lust”
the older i get the more i can understand why people back in the old fairytale days would just fuck off and be a hermit in the woods. just chilling out in the middle of nowhere and occasionally telling random heroes cryptic shit. living the fucking dream.
If you have billions of dollars it shouldn’t be a crime to steal from you. You’ve got enough money that your security should be your own responsibility and anyone who manages to swipe from your hoard deserves applause for besting a supervillain
Over a billion and you reach the social connotations that dragons have, as in stealing from you is considered a Challenge rather than a Crime
it builds itself up like OKAY WE FOUND THESE DEVASTATING RESULTS
and then you go in to look and you find it had a sample size of 40
and then you’re like okay, what was the fantastic difference between these 40 people when sleeping with and without a dog
and the article is like
…so you get through it and you’re like you’re trying to tell me you think this is substantial in any capacity, this 40 sample size 3% difference ass bullshit??????????? you fucking shitforbrick bad at math fake ass science losers?
My blog except its not tumblr 