m7angela:


Another art trade but this time with chewytriforce !! It’s really quick and how to draw bbies CAUSE I DON’T KNOW UGH?? but I hope you’ll like it, Chewy!! 
god, ed i just can’t with your nerdy ass, i’m sure winry is so fed up with you sometimes
Also Ed’s hoodie was inspired by one of johannathemad's newest work, which i saw today and HAD to draw something similar to this jacket she drew for him, it was a reaaaally strong need ok ;;

m7angela:

Another art trade but this time with chewytriforce !! It’s really quick and how to draw bbies CAUSE I DON’T KNOW UGH?? but I hope you’ll like it, Chewy!! 

god, ed i just can’t with your nerdy ass, i’m sure winry is so fed up with you sometimes

Also Ed’s hoodie was inspired by one of johannathemad's newest work, which i saw today and HAD to draw something similar to this jacket she drew for him, it was a reaaaally strong need ok ;;


nose-nippin-fun:

chrissymodi-frost:

I have to reboot this today!

((I HAVE BEEN WAITING ALL YEAR!))

nose-nippin-fun:

chrissymodi-frost:

I have to reboot this today!

((I HAVE BEEN WAITING ALL YEAR!))


the-unpopular-opinions:

Popular opinion:
Homosexuals shouldn’t be bullied.
Unpopular opinion:
However, homosexuality isn’t natural, and society shouldn’t accept it or make it a cultural norm any more than they should attraction to a table lamp.
The reason that sexual relationships in the animal world generally consist of male and female contact is because sex in and of itself is meant to be used for reproduction. Of course it’s also used for recreation nowadays as well, but I always have to question someone who would say something like “it’s natural for two people of the same sex to sleep together”, because no, it’s honestly not.
I view it as a less extreme version of something like bestiality. It’s a sexual attraction for something that we’re not meant to be sexually attracted to, but we are anyway, through some error in mentality.
This isn’t to say it’s as wrong as bestiality. It’s consensual, for one. Even if I view it as a mental illness or perversion, I will acknowledge that as long as two parties are consenting the act itself is entirely up to the individuals.
At this point people generally bring up the topic of men and women who are unable to have children, but I think it’s important to realize that if someone cannot have children that generally means that there’s something wrong with the individual. In no case will a woman be able to have a child with another woman, or vice versa with men, unless we’re counting the people who prefer to be called female or male. I’m talking about sex rather than gender.
Additionally, marriage has never been a ‘right’. No one is stopping anyone from sleeping with another man, another woman, or five men and five women and a car. The reason that homosexual relationships have never been considered for marriage is because marriage has always been used as a safety net for possible future children. Not only is homosexuality unnatural, there is no chance of the couple ever being able to conceive and therefore the state has never felt a need to interfere.
So, regardless, why am I against changing the definition of marriage?
According to studies by K. Freund and R.I. Watson, homosexuals- while accounting for 2% of the population- commit 33% of child molestation cases in the United States.
Homosexual relationships are by their very nature unnatural, and should not be encouraged or normalized.
And, finally, it’s pointless. Civil Unions would do, and adding more benefits wouldn’t do much besides make it more culturally acceptable. It doesn’t make sense.
Tldr;; I’ve always viewed homosexuality as something akin to a mental abnormality based on the biological purpose of sex and reproduction and I think that while obviously no one should be harassed for it, it shouldn’t be culturally acceptable.

“The reason that sexual relationships in the animal world generally consist of male and female contact is because sex in and of itself is meant to be used for reproduction.” Yes, reproduction is a possible byproduct of most heterosexual sex. That does not mean that sex is exclusively for reproductive purposes. Sex is present in several species as a means of pleasure, stress relief, and group bonding. It is mainly present in this context in social animals, as it strengthens group bonds. Homosexual sex is not present in humans alone, in fact there are more than 450 animal species that have been documented as exhibiting homosexual behaviors (x)
Furthermore your statistic on child molestation are very distorted. Psychologists have argued against this distortion in claiming that “pedophilia is a separate orientation from homosexuality and that the vast majority of molesters who target boys have either no interest in mature males or are heterosexual men who are attracted to the feminine characteristics of young boys.” (x)
Your arguments against homosexual marriage cite the inability to have children as your main proponent. If you’re going by that argument then only people proven to be capable of having children should be licensed to marry. Furthermore you’re eliminating the possibilities of adoption, and surrogacy. Marriage as “a safety net for children” is an antiquated view of a legal bond between two people. 
You’re claiming that you’re against homosexuals being harassed, while at the same time saying that their acceptance into social norms should be refuted. These two arguments are contradictory because removing someone’s actions from social norms will subject them to harassment. 

the-unpopular-opinions:

Popular opinion:

Homosexuals shouldn’t be bullied.

Unpopular opinion:

However, homosexuality isn’t natural, and society shouldn’t accept it or make it a cultural norm any more than they should attraction to a table lamp.

The reason that sexual relationships in the animal world generally consist of male and female contact is because sex in and of itself is meant to be used for reproduction. Of course it’s also used for recreation nowadays as well, but I always have to question someone who would say something like “it’s natural for two people of the same sex to sleep together”, because no, it’s honestly not.

I view it as a less extreme version of something like bestiality. It’s a sexual attraction for something that we’re not meant to be sexually attracted to, but we are anyway, through some error in mentality.

This isn’t to say it’s as wrong as bestiality. It’s consensual, for one. Even if I view it as a mental illness or perversion, I will acknowledge that as long as two parties are consenting the act itself is entirely up to the individuals.

At this point people generally bring up the topic of men and women who are unable to have children, but I think it’s important to realize that if someone cannot have children that generally means that there’s something wrong with the individual. In no case will a woman be able to have a child with another woman, or vice versa with men, unless we’re counting the people who prefer to be called female or male. I’m talking about sex rather than gender.

Additionally, marriage has never been a ‘right’. No one is stopping anyone from sleeping with another man, another woman, or five men and five women and a car. The reason that homosexual relationships have never been considered for marriage is because marriage has always been used as a safety net for possible future children. Not only is homosexuality unnatural, there is no chance of the couple ever being able to conceive and therefore the state has never felt a need to interfere.

So, regardless, why am I against changing the definition of marriage?

According to studies by K. Freund and R.I. Watson, homosexuals- while accounting for 2% of the population- commit 33% of child molestation cases in the United States.

Homosexual relationships are by their very nature unnatural, and should not be encouraged or normalized.

And, finally, it’s pointless. Civil Unions would do, and adding more benefits wouldn’t do much besides make it more culturally acceptable. It doesn’t make sense.

Tldr;; I’ve always viewed homosexuality as something akin to a mental abnormality based on the biological purpose of sex and reproduction and I think that while obviously no one should be harassed for it, it shouldn’t be culturally acceptable.

The reason that sexual relationships in the animal world generally consist of male and female contact is because sex in and of itself is meant to be used for reproduction.” Yes, reproduction is a possible byproduct of most heterosexual sex. That does not mean that sex is exclusively for reproductive purposes. Sex is present in several species as a means of pleasure, stress relief, and group bonding. It is mainly present in this context in social animals, as it strengthens group bonds. Homosexual sex is not present in humans alone, in fact there are more than 450 animal species that have been documented as exhibiting homosexual behaviors (x)

Furthermore your statistic on child molestation are very distorted. Psychologists have argued against this distortion in claiming that “pedophilia is a separate orientation from homosexuality and that the vast majority of molesters who target boys have either no interest in mature males or are heterosexual men who are attracted to the feminine characteristics of young boys.” (x)

Your arguments against homosexual marriage cite the inability to have children as your main proponent. If you’re going by that argument then only people proven to be capable of having children should be licensed to marry. Furthermore you’re eliminating the possibilities of adoption, and surrogacy. Marriage as “a safety net for children” is an antiquated view of a legal bond between two people. 

You’re claiming that you’re against homosexuals being harassed, while at the same time saying that their acceptance into social norms should be refuted. These two arguments are contradictory because removing someone’s actions from social norms will subject them to harassment. 



fuckyesdeadpool:

Deadpool V4 #27 - The Wedding of Deadpool

fuckyesdeadpool:

Deadpool V4 #27 - The Wedding of Deadpool


ilikestrangersalot:

So jason did this to theirself this morning. Jason calls it a “breakfast burrito.” Pepperjack cheese, sausage, scrambled eggs with bacon and broccoli, drenched in tobasco sauce.

ilikestrangersalot:

So jason did this to theirself this morning. Jason calls it a “breakfast burrito.” Pepperjack cheese, sausage, scrambled eggs with bacon and broccoli, drenched in tobasco sauce.


fjordism:

AARON PAUL JUST POSTED THIS ON TWITTER AND I’M SHITTING


my RA basically just told me that he has heard me having sex before


strawberrypatty:

detectivesangelstardisandwands:

sheep-boy:

a ravenclaw inventing a spell like “ive enchanted this quill so that one dip in an inkwell and it will be able to draw from that inkwell until its out! no redipping!” and their muggle born friend just

"a…pen.you literally just used magic to make a pen" 

And then the muggleborn gives them a normal pen and they’re just like “how does it workOH MY MERLIN IT CLICKS” and they just spend the whole class clicking their pen

OMG, I want to imagine purebloods clicking all through class.