Oh hey, didn't see you there.

Following

Oh hey, didn't see you there.

Lives in Chula Vista Born on December 18, 1992

the3rdcoolkid:

lovelyandbrown:

blackgeologist:

royalblackpirate:

fuck-what-haters-got-to-say:

telvi1:

crissle:

pattilahell:

thiagoarrio:

rejeanexxx:

aleezilla:

thatwellspokentoken:

suburbanwhitedaughter:

bestfromyoutube:

Girl rapping makes boy choke: Rap battle 

SLAYYYYYYYYED

YOOOOOOOOOO

DAM

Oh shit 😂

Good Lord

his face 

all of em lying “WE JUST CHILLIN. WE AINT DOIN NOTHIN.”

I couldn’t watch it all. Smh that shit hurt me

lmaooooooooooooooooooooooooo

YOOOOOOOOOOOOOO I RAN AROUND MY HOUSE SCREAMING!! I’m here for black women with talent. She went IN! She slayed him and then sipped her drink. Carefree black girl.

Besides the homophobia she went in

so…this is actually my old high school. Sycamore High, Cincinnati, OH. LMAOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. RANDOM.

i see some savages took up residence after i left. get em, girl.

she almost 8 mile’d him!

(via jessayexd)

(via jessayexd)

teaseon:

ultrafacts:

 For more posts like this, follow Ultrafacts

OH MU GOD THE LAST INE I AM FREAKJN T OUT

(via explosivelycrunchy)

jkhaskell:

fuckyeah1990s:

My review of the boy meets world episode where Shawn joins a cult

For some reason I just could not stop laughing

(via sviado)

explosivelycrunchy:

teaseon:

ultrafacts:

Want more facts? Visit the Ultrafacts blog!

The national geographic one gets me all the time.

I wonder who those 250 dead people are.

medical-mechanicas:

kawaiisquad:

u dun fucked up

u know he dead

(via americancelery)

diarrheaworldstarhiphop:

chakrabot:

durkin62:

chakrabot:

durkin62:

chakrabot:

slaaneshi-party-bus:

marialuisa-pr:

gynocraticgrrl:

Jessica Rey presents the history of the evolution of the swimsuit including the origins of its design, how it has changed overtime and the post-feminist association of the bikini symbolizing female empowerment. She refers to neuro-scientific studies revealing how male brains react to images of scantily clad women versus images of women deemed modest and what the implications of the results are for women in society.

(Note: As the OP, I disagree with Rey’s approach to putting the onus on women to alter ourselves rather than to alter the male perception of women – brain wiring has plenty to do with socialization and if we worked against the culture that fuels men’s objectification of women, women’s clothing choices would matter far less in terms of how men perceive us and determine how to interact with us).

Jessica Rey - The Evolution of the Swim Suit

bolding mine

Wow this is some shit science. So yes when humans - not just men as the op implies - are shown videos that would involve the use of tools, then this specific area of the brain called left anterior supra marginal gyrus shows activity. So that’s really cool right? Know what else this area of the brain is involved in? Reading facial expressions.

just the way her work is worded sounds unscientifically fluffed up. The sad thing is that there IS truth to what she’s saying… sort of… bbut she didn’t hit that nail on the head, so to speak.

If she had cited the fact that men can readily identify parts of a woman’s body even when clipped or viewed upside down or at an angle far faster than they can identify the same images of other men, and faster than women can identify men in the same tests, therefore indicating that men categorize the female body as an object, not a person (something derived from the fact that their instant recognition regardless of placement is only really seen when a person recognizes an object), then she’d have something. But as someone who makes a living off of arousing men to make them dumb and compliant, and who likes to wear skimpy bikinis because *I* feel hot in them, I’m not really here for OP content.

She intentionally left bit and pieces out to make this sound more plausible and severe. Here’s the whole study. http://www.kipnews.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Sexist-Attitudes-and-Neural1.pdf

And it basically comes down to men are more likely to be aroused when looking at women scantly clad than fully clothed, Go fucking figure. Tax dollars well spent right there. Do the same study for women and compare the two, then there might be something worth discussing. 

Bolding mine. Surprise fucking surprise. Extremism and lying by omission.

Like… the need for feminism (*cough*egalitarianismalsorules*cough*) being what it is, it’s really fucking annoying that by and large, whenever someone wants to gain their space on the soap box, they shoot themselves in the foot and damage the movement by being manipulative, biased, and untruthful.

If the whole argument wasn’t compelling enough for your point then you don’t have one. Things are often more middle-of-the-road than all this; life isn’t black and white. There’s plenty of other shit she could have said about men as a social entity.

So I’ve been reading through the actual study trying to make more sense of it, originally trying to find which parts of the brain she is referencing here.( Pretty key thing to leave out.) Found some interesting bits.

"Although men and women were, in general, slightly faster to pair images of sexualized female targets with first-person action verbs (e.g., push) and clothed female targets with third-person action verbs (e.g., pushes) than the inverse"

Big fucking difference there between the studies findings, and what was said.

"The whole-brain deviant-cell contrast demonstrated that passively viewing images of sexualized female targets activated the bilateral fusiform gyrus as well as bilateral inferior frontal regions."

Which are responsible for, processing of color information, face and body recognition, word recognition, within-category identification. Pretty big stretch to claim it’s just for screwdrivers and shit.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inferior_frontal_gyrus

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusiform_gyrus

I’d call her a liar but I’ve seen too many of these types to be that naive. They’re so deep into their own victim complexes they literally see things differently from the rest of the world. 

You did the thing. Yes, good. For science.

I would like to see a similar study of 22 female participants viewing those same four sample groups (sexualized and modest females and males) because i would wager you would get similar results. I’m pretty certain women don’t look at a fireman calender and immediately consider the agency and personality of the greased up fellow bulging out of his uniform. When women get off, I’m certain they aren’t fingering themselves to the rational thoughts, motivations and agency of the man they are thinking of and how they would like to connect and understand them better. Oh fuck, what an amazing orgasm one would have to that.

Until then, this study means nothing to me other than MEN REACT TO THE PHYSICAL ATTRIBUTES OF ATTRACTIVE FEMALES, NO SHIT SHERLOCK! HUMAN INSTINCT MUsT BE STAMPED OUT.

Why don’t we get to the bottom of it and just lobotomize men and be done with it. That’s more or less the intention here.

(via psychoprism)

Send Message

About

So my name is Manuel and this is stuff I like or I think is cool.

Likes

View more likes
online.