JLPT N1 study, the amount of red on this page makes me sad(;_;)
IF YOU HIT “X+C” IT SHUTS OFF EVERY GIF ON YOUR DASH
EVERY SINGLE ONE TURNS TO A LITTLE GREY BOX WITH A LOCK
TUMBLR HAS MADE ITSELF SAFE FOR EPILEPTICS
PASS IT ON
(Source: moosekleenex, via themidorineko)
I don’t think a white person has had so much sass in all the history of sassyness as in this moment. 11 probably invented sass.
“11 probably invented sass”
11 invented sass my ass.
My ass invented sass
Nine. God, I love his sassy ass so. He’s so fucking fantastic.
I thought to myself when I saw this, “no. This has to be some one being silly. This has to be something some one fabricated to make microsoft look worse and people just aren’t checking the source.”
NOPE. IT’S REAL.
AND IT GOT WORSE:
I want everyone to think long and hard on this information.
This means that you are not buying your games. You are paying 60+ dollars to rent the games from Microsoft, and they can take their game back whenever they feel like it.
You will not own your game. You will not own your console. Essentially, Microsoft is saying “We can disable your games and cut you off from accessing your console whenever we choose to.” Because a ban that locks your XBox Live account means that you will be locked out from all non-game functionality of the system, and by revoking your ‘licenses’ on all your games associated with your account, they can then disable each and every game you own for the system. Leaving you with a five hundred dollar cable receiver. Or, in the case of most users of the console, a five hundred dollar paperweight.
All because you accidentally walked into some online glitch and the rest of the players rage-report you for cheating.
This is unacceptable. Buy any console but an XBox One. Do not support Microsoft’s sudden belief that they own everything despite our purchase of it, and we have to prove we’re worthy of being shared with by paying exorbitant fees and jumping through constant hoops and hoping someone doesn’t report us for cheating because we made them mad in an online game.
Tell Microsoft ‘No,’ and do not give them your hard-earned money for what amounts to a video game subscription service with a $500 starting fee and $60+ dollar purchases.
It’s like they love shooting themselves in the dick.
This only solidifies my theory on Nintendo and PlayStation hypnotizing them
(Source: voldey, via terresdebrume)
Go to Starbucks. Order coffee for “Prisoner 24601”
When they call out your order, jump up and yell “My name is Jean Valjean!”
And if the barista replies with “AND I’M JAVERT,” you tip that motherfucker so hard
you tip them right over the edge of a bridge
you fucking didn’t
oh my god.
(Source: villainyandgoodcheekbones, via tonystarksnipples)
Okay look here’s the thing.
Derek is an asshole. Bless his heart, he’s really awful in a lot of ways; that’s part of why I love him as much as I do. He’s not perfect, he has some really serious issues, and he tends to lash out at people like a big uncaring jerkface. That being said:
1) Derek is an asshole in very specific ways. His jerkish behavior is informed (though not excused) by his background. 90% of the time he lashes out it’s him projecting his belief of his own failures onto other people. (See: “no one cares that you’re captain of the lacrosse team” to Jackson; “you’re not in love, you’re sixteen, you’re a child” to Scott; “if you start running you’ll never be able to stop” to Erica and Boyd, etc.) Which could’ve meant an excellent opportunity in addressing Lydia’s involvement in raising Peter from the dead, because … well, Kate, anyone? Causing damage to others (and knowing Peter, potentially fatal damage) because of an older, manipulative outside influence? This is right in Derek’s Actual Living Projector wheelhouse. There’s a lot that he could’ve said to Lydia that would’ve made it clear he was talking at least partially to himself, and we all would’ve cried, and he’d still have been an asshole but he’d have been in character for it.
Instead, if he knows what had happened to her and spoke to her the way he did regardless, that’s showing no indication that he believes it’s even relevant. It’s holding her accountable for her actions while she was being psychically violated and manipulated/controlled, which is especially gross since he seems perfectly willing to work with Peter even though he doesn’t trust him. The man who engineered the whole thing, who physically and psychically violated two teenagers, is a-ok, but one of his victims isn’t?
2) The way that Jeff responded to the question has made many people extremely uncomfortable. There’s a good reason for that. Having the dismissal of Lydia’s trauma treated in such a cavalier way is playing into the idea that it isn’t really a big deal. It is a big deal. It’s victim-blaming, it plays into a larger, overarching problem of a culture that holds women accountable for their own assaults, and it is a perfectly valid thing to be upset about.
All of this are good points, but I maintain that this, “It’s holding her accountable for her actions while she was being psychically violated and manipulated/controlled”, is pretty much Derek’s view of himself.
But thank you for that verbalization of why I was side-eyeing Jeff’s response.
(Source: wolfgenes, via scottsredhoodie)
Ugh, I hate it when you’re trying to write a chapter but the only thing you have inspiration for is a scene that won’t happen until about 4 chapters later.