🔥 | Latest

Birthday, Comfortable, and Confidence: reddit-tales What has been your worst "nice guy" experience? So, possibly one of the coolest things I've ever seen. I mean you know how you hear the "women want him, men want to *be* him" stuff in old movies? Well I'm a man and by *god* I wanted to be this guy. Anyway! I'm having dinner with my girlfriend at the time, and behind us are a couple on a not going well. Guy was being I rather inappropriate comments, the girl doesn't look at all comfortable. The girl finishes her appetiser really quickly my guess is she wanted to get it over with. Guy proceeds to comment on it and says "well, least I know you can swallow right?" Loudly Girl goes red and tells him that isn't appropriate, he literally waves his hand in a "shoo" type motion and says "oh calm down I was going to find out in a few hours anyway" I missed her exact re as she moved to a hushed tone, but it was fairly obvious what was being said-fuck no, fuck off, fuck this. He responded with "sweetheart I picked lost the colour in her face and said nothing. No. No. Fuck no. I'm one of those "get involved" type of people and there is no way I'm sitting here watching this go down. I get up. I don't know what I'm going to do, but I'm 23, fighting fit and happy to put that motherfucker through a wall. I may have had a slight temper in my youth. But anyway. I was halfway out of my chair when a hand came down on my shoulder and I look up to this mid-50s but super fit guy who says "Easy. I've got this one son". Absolute, total confidence in his voice.. so seeing as my current plan amounted to "stab him in the neck" and I'm already thinking maybe that's not the best idea, I sit down. He walks over, grabs a nearby chair, flips it around and sits down with the couple. Then.. he pulls out his police ID and puts it on the table. Now the guy doesn't have any colour in his face Cop: "So, I'm quietly celebrating my daughters birthday with my family when I distinctly hear you threaten this young lady, would you care to explain yourself?" Guy: "I, ah, well, um, you see. Cop: "That's what I thought. Now see, we take a *very* dim view of that kind of thing, so right now I'm deciding if I want to have some of my buddies come pick you up" Guy: "oh no well that..." Cop: "But that would disrupt everyone's dinner, so how about you hand me your ID, me, the dn't want yhe staff here and settle your bill., the full bill now, this young lady shouldn't go hungry on account of your poor behaviour. Or we can go with the first option, I'll leave it up to you. Guy: "No no! That's perfectly fine!" 1*hands over ID, gets up and walks very quickly in the direction of the counter Cop: while writing down the guys details 1* "Sorry about that miss, I hope I'm not intruding it just seemed like you could use some help. Oh and don't worry, if you want to pursue this further I'll have some of the boys pick him up on his way home, we can definitely take this further. Girl: "No, thank you so much, I wanted to run out 30 minutes ago but he drove me here". Cop: *shifts from hardarse cop to comforting father figure in about half a second* "Well I'm here with my daughter, she's about your age, perhaps you'd like to finish your meal with us? We can run you home afterwards if you'd like, unless you'd prefer to call someone else?" Girl: "Oh.. that would be really nice.. thankyou so much! *guy returns, so does the hardarse cop* Guy: "Uh so, I've paid the bill, if I could have back.". my Cop: "There you go. now I have your details right here so I *highly* recommend you don't go near or contact this young lady ever again. Guy: "Yes yes of course, I'm so sorry!" The quy pretty much fled the restaurant, the qirl went and sat with the cop and his family and by the time we left they were still sitting around talking and laughing about random crap. It was hands down the best way I have ever seen anybody handle any situation, ever. That cop is my hero. malicemanaged Dude. I hope that man has a great rest of his life. Wholesome cop via /r/wholesomememes https://ift.tt/2SkCLRT
Birthday, Comfortable, and Confidence: reddit-tales
 What has been your worst
 "nice guy" experience?
 So, possibly one of the coolest things I've
 ever seen. I mean you know how you hear the
 "women want him, men want to *be* him"
 stuff in old movies? Well I'm a man and by
 *god* I wanted to be this guy. Anyway!
 I'm having dinner with my girlfriend at
 the time, and behind us are a couple on a
 not going well. Guy was being
 I
 rather
 inappropriate comments, the girl doesn't
 look at all comfortable.
 The girl finishes her appetiser really quickly
 my guess is she wanted to get it over with.
 Guy proceeds to comment on it and says
 "well, least I know you can swallow right?"
 Loudly
 Girl goes red and tells him that isn't
 appropriate, he literally waves his hand in
 a "shoo" type motion and says "oh calm
 down I was going to find out in a few hours
 anyway"
 I missed her exact re
 as she moved to a
 hushed tone, but it was fairly obvious what
 was being said-fuck no, fuck off, fuck this.
 He responded with "sweetheart I picked
 lost the
 colour in her face and said nothing.
 No. No. Fuck no. I'm one of those "get
 involved" type of people and there is no way
 I'm sitting here watching this go down. I get
 up. I don't know what I'm going to do, but
 I'm 23, fighting fit and happy to put that
 motherfucker through a wall. I may have had
 a slight temper in my youth. But anyway.
 I was halfway out of my chair when a hand
 came down on my shoulder and I look up
 to this mid-50s but super fit guy who says
 "Easy. I've got this one son". Absolute, total
 confidence in his voice.. so seeing as my
 current plan amounted to "stab him in the
 neck" and I'm already thinking maybe that's
 not the best idea, I sit down.
 He walks over, grabs a nearby chair, flips it
 around and sits down with the couple. Then..
 he pulls out his police ID and puts it on the
 table. Now the guy doesn't have any colour in
 his face
 Cop: "So, I'm quietly celebrating my
 daughters birthday with my family when I
 distinctly hear you threaten this young lady,
 would you care to explain yourself?"
 Guy: "I, ah, well, um, you see.
 Cop: "That's what I thought. Now see, we
 take a *very* dim view of that kind of thing,
 so right now I'm deciding if I want to have
 some of my buddies come pick you up"
 Guy: "oh no well that..."
 Cop: "But that would disrupt everyone's
 dinner, so how about you hand me your ID,
 me, the dn't want yhe staff here and
 settle your bill., the full bill now, this young
 lady shouldn't go hungry on account of your
 poor behaviour. Or we can go with the first
 option, I'll leave it up to you.
 Guy: "No no! That's perfectly fine!" 1*hands
 over ID, gets up and walks very quickly in the
 direction of the counter
 Cop: while writing down the guys details
 1* "Sorry about that miss, I hope I'm not
 intruding it just seemed like you could use
 some help. Oh and don't worry, if you want
 to pursue this further I'll have some of the
 boys pick him up on his way home, we can
 definitely take this further.
 Girl: "No, thank you so much, I wanted to run
 out 30 minutes ago but he drove me here".
 Cop: *shifts from hardarse cop to
 comforting father figure in about half a
 second* "Well I'm here with my daughter,
 she's about your age, perhaps you'd like to
 finish your meal with us? We can run you
 home afterwards if you'd like, unless you'd
 prefer to call someone else?"
 Girl: "Oh.. that would be really nice.. thankyou
 so much!
 *guy returns, so does the hardarse cop*
 Guy: "Uh so, I've paid the bill, if I could have
 back.".
 my
 Cop: "There you go. now I have your details
 right here so I *highly* recommend you
 don't go near or contact this young lady ever
 again.
 Guy: "Yes yes of course, I'm so sorry!"
 The quy pretty much fled the restaurant, the
 qirl went and sat with the cop and his family
 and by the time we left they were still sitting
 around talking and laughing about random
 crap.
 It was hands down the best way I have ever
 seen anybody handle any situation, ever. That
 cop is my hero.
 malicemanaged
 Dude. I hope that man has a great rest of his
 life.
Wholesome cop via /r/wholesomememes https://ift.tt/2SkCLRT

Wholesome cop via /r/wholesomememes https://ift.tt/2SkCLRT

Tumblr, Twitter, and Control: 回。 。4G42 11:15 PM Enjoy Free Twitter with MTN! Learn more @_clvrarose if a penis is being forced into a woman's vagina, it will hurt therefore the body will try to self lubricate because that's what it does 5:53 PM 29 Mar 17 6,728 RETWEETS 7,003 LIKES @_clvrarose 29 Mar Replying to @_clvrarose it is not a conscious thing, it's literally the body's reaction: it doesn't mean the woman is enjoying it Tweet your reply 4G 11:15 PM Enjoy Free Twitter with MTN! Learn more Tweet 1,643 2,505 @_clvrarose 29 Mar even if it physically "feels good", even if she has an orgasm, it doesn't mean she wanted it or enjoyed it 1,309 2,174 @_clvrarose 29 Mar the body reacts, like that's what it does... it's not hard to understand 1,083 1,949 a_clvrarose 29 Mar same way that those who are ticklish may not like being tickled or the sensation but they still laugh when tickled 1,938 3,185 Tweet your reply 4G 11:15 PM Enjoy Free Twitter with MTN! Learn more Tweet @_clvrarose 29 Mar just because they are laughing doesn't mean they find it enjoyable, it's just their body's reaction... they have no real control 1,370 2,300 @_clvrarose 29 Mar some of vou really need to understand the effects and implications of what you say, it truly doesn't make sense R1,020 1,887 @_clvrarose 29 Mar do you know how many men ang women who have been raped HATE themselves because they had an orgasm during the attack? 1,557 2,495 Tweet your reply 牁 4G42 11:16 PM Enjoy Free Twitter with MTN! Learn more @_clvrarose 29 Mar they didn't enjoy the attack, but they feel conflicted because their body responded in a way as if they did, their body turned against them 1,168 1,937 @clvrarose 29 Mar if a man gets hard or ejaculates during a sexual attack, it doesn't mean he enjoyed it either-they are involuntary responses 998 1,576 @_clvrarose 29 Mar if you are reading this and cannot fathom the fact that rape victims can orgasm during their attack... and it was still RAPE. Block me. Now. Tweet your reply chocolatehighhh: Please reblog this every time you see it
Tumblr, Twitter, and Control: 回。
 。4G42 11:15 PM
 Enjoy Free Twitter with MTN! Learn more
 @_clvrarose
 if a penis is being forced into a
 woman's vagina, it will hurt therefore
 the body will try to self lubricate
 because that's what it does
 5:53 PM 29 Mar 17
 6,728 RETWEETS 7,003 LIKES
 @_clvrarose 29 Mar
 Replying to @_clvrarose
 it is not a conscious thing, it's literally
 the body's reaction: it doesn't mean
 the woman is enjoying it
 Tweet your reply

 4G 11:15 PM
 Enjoy Free Twitter with MTN! Learn more
 Tweet
 1,643 2,505
 @_clvrarose 29 Mar
 even if it physically "feels good", even if
 she has an orgasm, it doesn't mean
 she wanted it or enjoyed it
 1,309 2,174
 @_clvrarose 29 Mar
 the body reacts, like that's what it
 does... it's not hard to understand
 1,083 1,949
 a_clvrarose 29 Mar
 same way that those who are ticklish
 may not like being tickled or the
 sensation but they still laugh when
 tickled
 1,938 3,185
 Tweet your reply

 4G 11:15 PM
 Enjoy Free Twitter with MTN! Learn more
 Tweet
 @_clvrarose 29 Mar
 just because they are laughing doesn't
 mean they find it enjoyable, it's just
 their body's reaction... they have no
 real control
 1,370 2,300
 @_clvrarose 29 Mar
 some of vou really need to understand
 the effects and implications of what
 you say, it truly doesn't make sense
 R1,020 1,887
 @_clvrarose 29 Mar
 do you know how many men ang
 women who have been raped HATE
 themselves because they had an
 orgasm during the attack?
 1,557 2,495
 Tweet your reply

 牁 4G42 11:16 PM
 Enjoy Free Twitter with MTN! Learn more
 @_clvrarose 29 Mar
 they didn't enjoy the attack, but they
 feel conflicted because their body
 responded in a way as if they did, their
 body turned against them
 1,168 1,937
 @clvrarose 29 Mar
 if a man gets hard or ejaculates during
 a sexual attack, it doesn't mean he
 enjoyed it either-they are involuntary
 responses
 998
 1,576
 @_clvrarose 29 Mar
 if you are reading this and cannot
 fathom the fact that rape victims can
 orgasm during their attack... and it
 was still RAPE. Block me. Now.
 Tweet your reply
chocolatehighhh:
Please reblog this every time you see it

chocolatehighhh: Please reblog this every time you see it

Bad, Girls, and Internet: Hot Take: Kim Kardashian Is Being Offensive On Purpose MOST READ Pervert Tries to Sexualize Billie Eilish, Twitter Takes Him Down 5 Women on What It's Like to Be Raped by a Boyfriend Anders Holm and Emma Nesper Are Perhaps The Cutest Couple Ever 'Good Girls': Loving Beth and Rio's Relationship Makes Me Feel Like a Bad Feminist J.K. Rowling Has Been Following Anti-Trans Activists And We Need an Explanation femestella: Kim Kardashian recently filed a trademark for the name of her new shapewear line and — shocker — it’s incredibly offensive. The line is going to be called Kimono, you know, as in the traditional Japanese garment.  Kim responded to the backlash but didn’t actually apologize. This is pretty much the Kardashian-Jenner M.O.: do something offensive, respond without an actual apology, and then go about their merry way. We’ve seen it time and time again with Kendall Jenner’s Pepsi ad (she still hasn’t technically apologized), Kim’s blackface, and Kylie’s *numerous* instances of cultural appropriation. And that doesn’t even begin to cover it all. The strange thing is that each time a KarJenner pulls a stunt like this, the internet reacts with shock and awe all over again as if they’re surprised by the behavior. It seems pretty obvious though: the KarJenners are doing it on purpose. Continue reading here.
Bad, Girls, and Internet: Hot Take: Kim Kardashian Is Being
 Offensive On Purpose
 MOST READ
 Pervert Tries to Sexualize Billie Eilish, Twitter
 Takes Him Down
 5 Women on What It's Like to Be Raped by a
 Boyfriend
 Anders Holm and Emma Nesper Are Perhaps The
 Cutest Couple Ever
 'Good Girls': Loving Beth and Rio's Relationship
 Makes Me Feel Like a Bad Feminist
 J.K. Rowling Has Been Following Anti-Trans
 Activists And We Need an Explanation
femestella:
Kim Kardashian recently filed a trademark for the name of her new shapewear line and — shocker — it’s incredibly offensive.
The line is going to be called Kimono, you know, as in the traditional Japanese garment. 
Kim responded to the backlash but didn’t actually apologize.
This is pretty much the Kardashian-Jenner M.O.: do something offensive, respond without an actual apology, and then go about their merry way.
We’ve seen it time and time again with Kendall Jenner’s Pepsi ad (she still hasn’t technically apologized), Kim’s blackface, and Kylie’s *numerous* instances of cultural appropriation. And that doesn’t even begin to cover it all.
The strange thing is that each time a KarJenner pulls a stunt like this, the internet reacts with shock and awe all over again as if they’re surprised by the behavior.
It seems pretty obvious though: the KarJenners are doing it on purpose.
Continue reading here.

femestella: Kim Kardashian recently filed a trademark for the name of her new shapewear line and — shocker — it’s incredibly offensive. The ...

Bad, Girls, and Internet: Hot Take: Kim Kardashian Is Being Offensive On Purpose MOST READ Pervert Tries to Sexualize Billie Eilish, Twitter Takes Him Down 5 Women on What It's Like to Be Raped by a Boyfriend Anders Holm and Emma Nesper Are Perhaps The Cutest Couple Ever 'Good Girls': Loving Beth and Rio's Relationship Makes Me Feel Like a Bad Feminist J.K. Rowling Has Been Following Anti-Trans Activists And We Need an Explanation Kim Kardashian recently filed a trademark for the name of her new shapewear line and — shocker — it’s incredibly offensive.The line is going to be called Kimono, you know, as in the traditional Japanese garment. Kim responded to the backlash but didn’t actually apologize.This is pretty much the Kardashian-Jenner M.O.: do something offensive, respond without an actual apology, and then go about their merry way.We’ve seen it time and time again with Kendall Jenner’s Pepsi ad (she still hasn’t technically apologized), Kim’s blackface, and Kylie’s *numerous* instances of cultural appropriation. And that doesn’t even begin to cover it all.The strange thing is that each time a KarJenner pulls a stunt like this, the internet reacts with shock and awe all over again as if they’re surprised by the behavior.It seems pretty obvious though: the KarJenners are doing it on purpose.Continue reading here.
Bad, Girls, and Internet: Hot Take: Kim Kardashian Is Being
 Offensive On Purpose
 MOST READ
 Pervert Tries to Sexualize Billie Eilish, Twitter
 Takes Him Down
 5 Women on What It's Like to Be Raped by a
 Boyfriend
 Anders Holm and Emma Nesper Are Perhaps The
 Cutest Couple Ever
 'Good Girls': Loving Beth and Rio's Relationship
 Makes Me Feel Like a Bad Feminist
 J.K. Rowling Has Been Following Anti-Trans
 Activists And We Need an Explanation
Kim Kardashian recently filed a trademark for the name of her new shapewear line and — shocker — it’s incredibly offensive.The line is going to be called Kimono, you know, as in the traditional Japanese garment. Kim responded to the backlash but didn’t actually apologize.This is pretty much the Kardashian-Jenner M.O.: do something offensive, respond without an actual apology, and then go about their merry way.We’ve seen it time and time again with Kendall Jenner’s Pepsi ad (she still hasn’t technically apologized), Kim’s blackface, and Kylie’s *numerous* instances of cultural appropriation. And that doesn’t even begin to cover it all.The strange thing is that each time a KarJenner pulls a stunt like this, the internet reacts with shock and awe all over again as if they’re surprised by the behavior.It seems pretty obvious though: the KarJenners are doing it on purpose.Continue reading here.

Kim Kardashian recently filed a trademark for the name of her new shapewear line and — shocker — it’s incredibly offensive.The line is going...

Dogs, Drugs, and Facts: DAPASTOR YOO uncleromeo: feet-man-ahhh-sucker-of-the-toes: emotionsclashagainstemotions: thatpettyblackgirl: Because we know they value the lives of dogs over blac… nevermind 😒 the ironic part is, racism is probably why the cop was so convinced the drugs were there. the dog was doing its job, which is not reacting to drugs that don’t exist. the cop, on other hand, saw a black man, and was sure he had drugs. Drug dogs have also been found to be ineffective in many cases, basing their reactions on the cop’s body language. “For the purpose of this post, though, I want to focus on what’s missing from Colb’s analysis and, should the Supreme Court decide to hear the case, will almost certainly also be missing from oral arguments, the court’s ruling and most discussion of the case: that narcotics-detecting dogs and their handlers aren’t very good at discerning the presence of illegal drugs. Multiple analyses of drug-dog alerts have consistently shown alarmingly high error rates — with some close to and exceeding 50 percent. In effect, some of these K-9 units are worse than a coin flip. For some units, the reason may be sinister — the police handler may have trained the dog to alert on command. I’ve asked dog trainers to look at videos of roadside searches in the past, and, on more than one occasion, they said they saw clear indications that a dog was being cued to alert. But it needn’t be so malicious. While dogs are indeed capable of sniffing out illicit drugs, we’ve bred into them another overriding trait: the desire to please. Even drug dogs with conscientious handlers will read their handlers’ unintentional body language and alert accordingly. A 2010 study found that packages designed to trick handlers into thinking there were drugs inside them were much more likely to trigger false alerts than packages designed to trick the dogs. (Police-dog handlers and trainers responded to that study by refusing to cooperate with further research.) Many drug dogs, then, are not alerting to the presence of drugs, but to their handlers’ suspicions about the presence of drugs. And searches based on little more than law enforcement’s suspicions are exactly what the Fourth Amendment is supposed to prevent. (Tracking dogs that pick suspects out of “scent lineups” have had similar problems, and have led to numerous wrongful convictions.)” ^^^!!!
Dogs, Drugs, and Facts: DAPASTOR YOO
uncleromeo:

feet-man-ahhh-sucker-of-the-toes:


emotionsclashagainstemotions:


thatpettyblackgirl:

Because we know they value the lives of dogs over blac… nevermind 😒

the ironic part is, racism is probably why the cop was so convinced the drugs were there. the dog was doing its job, which is not reacting to drugs that don’t exist. the cop, on other hand, saw a black man, and was sure he had drugs.


Drug dogs have also been found to be ineffective in many cases, basing their reactions on the cop’s body language.
“For the purpose of this post, though, I want to focus on what’s missing from Colb’s analysis and, should the Supreme Court decide to hear the case, will almost certainly also be missing from oral arguments, the court’s ruling and most discussion of the case: that narcotics-detecting dogs and their handlers aren’t very good at discerning the presence of illegal drugs. Multiple analyses of drug-dog alerts have consistently shown alarmingly high error rates — with some close to and exceeding 50 percent. In effect, some of these K-9 units are worse than a coin flip.
For some units, the reason may be sinister — the police handler may have trained the dog to alert on command. I’ve asked dog trainers to look at videos of roadside searches in the past, and, on more than one occasion, they said they saw clear indications that a dog was being cued to alert.
But it needn’t be so malicious. While dogs are indeed capable of sniffing out illicit drugs, we’ve bred into them another overriding trait: the desire to please. Even drug dogs with conscientious handlers will read their handlers’ unintentional body language and alert accordingly. A 2010 study found that packages designed to trick handlers into thinking there were drugs inside them were much more likely to trigger false alerts than packages designed to trick the dogs. (Police-dog handlers and trainers responded to that study by refusing to cooperate with further research.) Many drug dogs, then, are not alerting to the presence of drugs, but to their handlers’ suspicions about the presence of drugs. And searches based on little more than law enforcement’s suspicions are exactly what the Fourth Amendment is supposed to prevent. (Tracking dogs that pick suspects out of “scent lineups” have had similar problems, and have led to numerous wrongful convictions.)”


^^^!!!

uncleromeo: feet-man-ahhh-sucker-of-the-toes: emotionsclashagainstemotions: thatpettyblackgirl: Because we know they value the lives o...

Being Alone, Booty, and Cats: RT This baby boy wasfoun food and diapers onacoldwinter night in Obninsk, Russia d with a bag containing baby Masha,the Cat, Saved the babyis life by curling around him and shielding!himtromlbelowitreezingtemperatures By the time paramedics responded totake thechild'toa hospital, Mashalhad grown protective of him, running after the baby and trvingttoljumplintothe ambulance afterhim baenemy: neurodivergent-crow: jenniferrpovey: goaliesarethebest: pon-raul: wewill-tryagain: dendritic-trees: booty-uprooter: asryakino: srsfunny: Masha The Hero They forgot the part where the ambulance actually stopped to let the cat in oh good I was worried What a good cat. What a kind cat. How can anyone not love cats they are so good and loving. they also forgot the part where they only found the baby because masha was screaming her head off bc she knew this baby was in danger. she went around outside the alley the next morning and yelled at passerby until she got one to follow her to the baby. she kept him warm all night and then made sure someone found him. she was adopted after this bc she was a stray and is in a loving home and is a hero Hero cat Thank you, Masha, you’re such a good girl. See. Kittens can’t regulate their own body temperature. That’s why they pile up. Cats see us as colony members. Masha saw a kitten that was on its own, no mommy, no other kittens to cuddle with. She instinctively knew that was a cold kitten. She knew that a kitten alone on a cold night was very likely to die. Because a kitten would have died too. So, all she was doing was what any good colony member does - protecting the abandoned kitten. Then when the abandoned kitten’s mommy didn’t come back, she called the rest of the colony for help. People have this bizarre idea that housecats don’t have a social sense. They do, and it saved this kid’s life. And possibly Masha’s too, as life on the streets is dangerous for a kitty. We say “good dog” all the time, but Masha was being a very, very good cat…not just by human moral standards but by feline ones. Jackson Galaxy needs to do a My Cat From Heaven segment on her anyone who says cats are ‘evil’ can go choke honestly
Being Alone, Booty, and Cats: RT
 This baby boy wasfoun
 food and diapers onacoldwinter night in Obninsk, Russia
 d with a bag containing baby
 Masha,the Cat, Saved the babyis life by curling
 around him
 and shielding!himtromlbelowitreezingtemperatures
 By the time paramedics responded totake thechild'toa
 hospital, Mashalhad grown protective of him, running after the
 baby and trvingttoljumplintothe ambulance afterhim
baenemy:
neurodivergent-crow:

jenniferrpovey:

goaliesarethebest:

pon-raul:

wewill-tryagain:

dendritic-trees:

booty-uprooter:

asryakino:

srsfunny:

Masha The Hero

They forgot the part where the ambulance actually stopped to let the cat in


oh good I was worried

What a good cat. What a kind cat. How can anyone not love cats they are so good and loving.

they also forgot the part where they only found the baby because masha was screaming her head off bc she knew this baby was in danger. she went around outside the alley the next morning and yelled at passerby until she got one to follow her to the baby. she kept him warm all night and then made sure someone found him. she was adopted after this bc she was a stray and is in a loving home and is a hero


Hero cat

Thank you, Masha, you’re such a good girl.

See.
Kittens can’t regulate their own body temperature. That’s why they pile up.
Cats see us as colony members.
Masha saw a kitten that was on its own, no mommy, no other kittens to cuddle with. She instinctively knew that was a cold kitten. She knew that a kitten alone on a cold night was very likely to die. Because a kitten would have died too.
So, all she was doing was what any good colony member does - protecting the abandoned kitten. Then when the abandoned kitten’s mommy didn’t come back, she called the rest of the colony for help.
People have this bizarre idea that housecats don’t have a social sense. They do, and it saved this kid’s life. And possibly Masha’s too, as life on the streets is dangerous for a kitty.
We say “good dog” all the time, but Masha was being a very, very good cat…not just by human moral standards but by feline ones.


Jackson Galaxy needs to do a My Cat From Heaven segment on her


anyone who says cats are ‘evil’ can go choke honestly

baenemy: neurodivergent-crow: jenniferrpovey: goaliesarethebest: pon-raul: wewill-tryagain: dendritic-trees: booty-uprooter: asryakin...

Being Alone, America, and Click: Jason Fuller, Contributor Working to bring about the best in America, both on-line and off. Impeachment Is No Longer Enough; Donald Trump Must Face Justice Impeachment and removal from office are only the first steps; for treason and-if convicted in a court of law-executed. 06/11/2017 10:39 pm ET for America to be redeemed, Donald Trump must be prosecuted Donald Trump has been President of the United States for just shy of six months now. I think that most of us among the electorate knew that his presidency would be a relative disaster, but I am not sure how many among us expected the catastrophe our nation now faces. friendly-neighborhood-patriarch: hominishostilis: abstractandedgyname: siryouarebeingmocked: mississpithy: bogleech: notyourmoderate: angrybell: thinksquad: http://archive.is/5VvI5 Huffpo, everybody. Can someone tell me what high crime or misdemeanor Trump has committed that merits this? Or is the HuffPo just publishing outright fantasies? God dammit, I’m now in the position of defending Huffington. I didn’t want to be here. Okay, @angrybell … actually, @ literally everyone who reblogged this uncritically as a tacit endorsement and agreement. Such as @the-critical-feminist that I reblog this from.My first question has to be: are you serious? Don’t read that with a tone, don’t read that as an attack. That’s my first question: Are you asking a serious question about what high crimes or misdemeanors Trump has perpetrated? Are you asking a sincere question or is this the sort of rhetoric that doesn’t translate well into text? And, if you are actually asking this question, are ou going to hear the answer or are you going to immediately start concocting your counter-argument because you just know in your heart that anyone who disagrees with you must be wrong, so you start formulating a plan to prove them wrong before you actually hear what they have to say?Next: did you read the article that was posted in the link you responded to? Because the author of that article does a reasonable job of explaining their thought process behind the headline. Or did you lash out before you read the article? Okay, presuming that you did read the article in good faith, evaluate its points, perform the follow-up research to understand context, and still disagree with the central tenets and simply believe that the author’s reasoning does not hold up for whatever reasons you have chosen not to state, and you believe their source information is falsified for whatever reason you have chosen not to state, I will move on. After I have given you and yours every conceivable benefit of the doubt and every charitable assumption. Because if the article itself doesn’t convince you, there’s the fact that Donald Trump has broken literally every federal law against corruption and conflict of interest. Not one or two, not most, not all but a few. Literally every single law we have against corruption, from the Constitution to the informal guidelines circulated as a memo from the White House ethics scholars. He’s broken literally every one of those rules. He’s openly traded favors for money and favors for months now. Hell, that Chinese influence-peddler that paid him off for sixteen million dollars should have been enough to get him convicted of treason. Sharing code-word level classified information with a government on the opposite side of an ongoing military conflict isn’t *necessarily* treason, unless the information was part of a share program with an allied nation and wasn’t his to distribute. That’s aiding a foreign aggressor at the expense of a military ally, and that’s treason. Giving aid and comfort to enemies of the nation. Obstruction of justice is pretty clear-cut, that’s an impeachment, except that the justice in question is also a matter of national security, so that’s treason. Again. Defaming the former president? Misdemeanor, impeachable. The way he drags his heels nominating posts in Justice and State could be prosecuted as dereliction of duty. If he has tapes of Comey, he’s on the hook for contempt, if he doesn’t then he’s on the hook for witness tampering. Hell, deleting the covfefe tweet is destroying federal records, which is a misdemeanor, and impeachable. The man doesn’t go a week without bringing on an impeachable offense. Strictly speaking, every time he goes to Mar-A-Lago he’s committing grand larceny by fraud, because he’s taking millions of dollars of American funds for his own benefit, after promising not to do that. There are dozens, hundreds maybe, of impeachable offenses already in this 140 days, “high crimes and misdemeanors”. Actual counts of treason, punishable by death by hanging, is probably only five or six counts. Only five or six counts of high treason by our sitting president. His job does not put him above reproach. His job is to *be* above reproach. And he’s failing that job. Trump’s supporters probably believe he’s done nothing impeachable or treasonous because they spent eight years claiming on no grounds whatsoever that Obama was impeachable and treasonous, just because they didn’t like him. They now probably convince themselves that these facts about Trump are as fake as their Obama theories and they’ve ruined the gravity of these terms for themselves. “ His job does not put him above reproach. His job is to *be* above reproach. And he’s failing that job. “ I like how Bogleech doesn’t know many Trump supporters are former Obama supporters. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/04/us/obama-trump-swing-voters.html https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/10/16/17980820/trump-obama-2016-race-racism-class-economy-2018-midterm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obama-Trump_voters It’s not even a secret. But why am I not surprised bogleech - that intellectual titan - failed to do basic research? And last time I checked, no nation required their politicans to be perfect. Which is what NYM is asking for with that quote; perfection. That’s what ‘above reproach’ means. An impossible standard, considering people “reproach” Trump for feeding fish wrong, for his skin color, for any and every little thing, even if they have to twist reality into a pretzel to do it. In fact, I’ve seen people take pictures of kids in cages from 2014, and blame Trump for it. So this: Are you asking a serious question about what high crimes or misdemeanors Trump has perpetrated? Is a question of this: Can someone tell me what high crime or misdemeanor Trump has committed that merits this? Seems you missed the part that says “merits this”. Next: did you read the article that was posted in the link you responded to? Because the author of that article does a reasonable job of explaining their thought process behind the headline. Or did you lash out before you read the article? (The underlined is in the subtitle, not the headline.) Okay, presuming that you did read the article in good faith, evaluate its points, perform the follow-up research to understand context, and still disagree with the central tenets… Context? Central tenets? Do you not know how highlighting works? You don’t need to know the context, or any other point, when you’re indicating a specific, explicit, and isolated quality. The subtitle called for Trump’s execution, we’re 5 paragraphs in and you haven’t even acknowledged that part yet. Or at all, I’m guessing, because I’m not reading further. You keep talking around it. You accuse others, preemptively, of not hearing the answer and pre-”concocting” a response, and yet you’re waffling on about shit around the one, sole, isolated thing that was indicated in the first place. This isn’t about ignoring context, this is about criticising one thing. Which is a thing people are allowed to do, by the way, just because people criticise one thing, doesn’t mean they’re criticising everything about the everyone involved, and everything said before, adjacent to, and after that one thing, and therefore are required to include all of those things in their consideration and assessment of this one thing. The specific criticism of the indicated quality is the advocation of Trump’s execution. That’s it. No context is needed to understand that this is what was said, especially since that which was said, which is being criticised, is explicit. No amount of, “So, click-bait subtitle that you don’t see until you’ve already clicked on the article link out of the way, here’s what I actually meant when I said I wanted this person tried and executed,” could excuse the use of that language, let alone actually believing in it. It’s like… it’s like if someone makes a typo, someone else is like, “Oh, seems you made a typo,” you’d jump in like, “But what about they’re perfectly reasonable spelling everywhere else? Hm? Forced to ignore contextual perfect spelling I see. They’re lack of typos everywhere else explains this typo, and vindicates it”. You and what’s his face, James, fuckin ReasonAndEmpathy or whatever now, y’all keep saying “but what of the context?” when the criterion of criticism is isolated, atomic, specific, and/or explicit. No amount of context invalidates the very specific, singular words explicitly spoken. “Sure he called for Trump to be executed, but he explains himself.” Fucking and? When did the death sentence become ok? When did that happen? Moderates are ok with the death sentence now? Aight, weird. Man this fucking post aged like fine wine, take a SIP Delicious This was quite a ride
Being Alone, America, and Click: Jason Fuller, Contributor
 Working to bring about the best in America, both on-line and off.
 Impeachment Is No Longer Enough;
 Donald Trump Must Face Justice
 Impeachment and removal from office are only the first steps;
 for treason and-if convicted in a court of law-executed.
 06/11/2017 10:39 pm ET
 for America to be redeemed, Donald Trump must be prosecuted
 Donald Trump has been President of the United States for just shy of six months now. I
 think that most of us among the electorate knew that his presidency would be a relative
 disaster, but I am not sure how many among us expected the catastrophe our nation now
 faces.
friendly-neighborhood-patriarch:

hominishostilis:

abstractandedgyname:
siryouarebeingmocked:

mississpithy:

bogleech:

notyourmoderate:

angrybell:

thinksquad:


http://archive.is/5VvI5


Huffpo, everybody. 




Can someone tell me what high crime or misdemeanor Trump has committed that merits this? Or is the HuffPo just publishing outright fantasies?

God dammit, I’m now in the position of defending Huffington. I didn’t want to be here. Okay, @angrybell … actually, @ literally everyone who reblogged this uncritically as a tacit endorsement and agreement. Such as @the-critical-feminist that I reblog this from.My first question has to be: are you serious? Don’t read that with a tone, don’t read that as an attack. That’s my first question: Are you asking a serious question about what high crimes or misdemeanors Trump has perpetrated? Are you asking a sincere question or is this the sort of rhetoric that doesn’t translate well into text? And, if you are actually asking this question, are ou going to hear the answer or are you going to immediately start concocting your counter-argument because you just know in your heart that anyone who disagrees with you must be wrong, so you start formulating a plan to prove them wrong before you actually hear what they have to say?Next: did you read the article that was posted in the link you responded to? Because the author of that article does a reasonable job of explaining their thought process behind the headline. Or did you lash out before you read the article? Okay, presuming that you did read the article in good faith, evaluate its points, perform the follow-up research to understand context, and still disagree with the central tenets and simply believe that the author’s reasoning does not hold up for whatever reasons you have chosen not to state, and you believe their source information is falsified for whatever reason you have chosen not to state, I will move on. After I have given you and yours every conceivable benefit of the doubt and every charitable assumption. Because if the article itself doesn’t convince you, there’s the fact that Donald Trump has broken literally every federal law against corruption and conflict of interest. Not one or two, not most, not all but a few. Literally every single law we have against corruption, from the Constitution to the informal guidelines circulated as a memo from the White House ethics scholars. He’s broken literally every one of those rules. He’s openly traded favors for money and favors for months now. Hell, that Chinese influence-peddler that paid him off for sixteen million dollars should have been enough to get him convicted of treason. Sharing code-word level classified information with a government on the opposite side of an ongoing military conflict isn’t *necessarily* treason, unless the information was part of a share program with an allied nation and wasn’t his to distribute. That’s aiding a foreign aggressor at the expense of a military ally, and that’s treason. Giving aid and comfort to enemies of the nation. Obstruction of justice is pretty clear-cut, that’s an impeachment, except that the justice in question is also a matter of national security, so that’s treason. Again. Defaming the former president? Misdemeanor, impeachable. The way he drags his heels nominating posts in Justice and State could be prosecuted as dereliction of duty. If he has tapes of Comey, he’s on the hook for contempt, if he doesn’t then he’s on the hook for witness tampering. Hell, deleting the covfefe tweet is destroying federal records, which is a misdemeanor, and impeachable. The man doesn’t go a week without bringing on an impeachable offense. Strictly speaking, every time he goes to Mar-A-Lago he’s committing grand larceny by fraud, because he’s taking millions of dollars of American funds for his own benefit, after promising not to do that. There are dozens, hundreds maybe, of impeachable offenses already in this 140 days, “high crimes and misdemeanors”. Actual counts of treason, punishable by death by hanging, is probably only five or six counts. Only five or six counts of high treason by our sitting president. His job does not put him above reproach. His job is to *be* above reproach. And he’s failing that job. 

Trump’s supporters probably believe he’s done nothing impeachable or treasonous because they spent eight years claiming on no grounds whatsoever that Obama was impeachable and treasonous, just because they didn’t like him. They now probably convince themselves that these facts about Trump are as fake as their Obama theories and they’ve ruined the gravity of these terms for themselves.





“

His job does not put him above reproach. His job is to *be* above reproach. And he’s failing that job.


“






I like how Bogleech doesn’t know many Trump supporters are former Obama supporters.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/04/us/obama-trump-swing-voters.html
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/10/16/17980820/trump-obama-2016-race-racism-class-economy-2018-midterm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obama-Trump_voters
It’s not even a secret. But why am I not surprised bogleech - that intellectual titan - failed to do basic research?
And last time I checked, no nation required their politicans to be perfect. Which is what NYM is asking for with that quote; perfection. That’s what ‘above reproach’ means. An impossible standard, considering people “reproach” Trump for feeding fish wrong, for his skin color, for any and every little thing, even if they have to twist reality into a pretzel to do it. In fact, I’ve seen people take pictures of kids in cages from 2014, and blame Trump for it.

So this:


Are you asking a serious question about what high crimes or misdemeanors Trump has perpetrated?


Is a question of this:


Can someone tell me what high crime or misdemeanor Trump has committed that merits this?


Seems you missed the part that says “merits this”.


Next: did you read the article that was posted in the link you responded to? Because the author of that article does a reasonable job of explaining their thought process behind the headline. Or did you lash out before you read the article? 


(The underlined is in the subtitle, not the headline.)


Okay, presuming that you did read the article in good faith, evaluate its points, perform the follow-up research to understand context, and still disagree with the central tenets…
Context? Central tenets? Do you not know how highlighting works? You don’t need to know the context, or any other point, when you’re indicating a specific, explicit, and isolated quality.
The subtitle called for Trump’s execution, we’re 5 paragraphs in and you haven’t even acknowledged that part yet. Or at all, I’m guessing, because I’m not reading further. You keep talking around it. You accuse others, preemptively, of not hearing the answer and pre-”concocting” a response, and yet you’re waffling on about shit around the one, sole, isolated thing that was indicated in the first place.
This isn’t about ignoring context, this is about criticising one thing. Which is a thing people are allowed to do, by the way, just because people criticise one thing, doesn’t mean they’re criticising everything about the everyone involved, and everything said before, adjacent to, and after that one thing, and therefore are required to include all of those things in their consideration and assessment of this one thing.
The specific criticism of the indicated quality is the advocation of Trump’s execution. That’s it. No context is needed to understand that this is what was said, especially since that which was said, which is being criticised, is explicit. No amount of, “So, click-bait subtitle that you don’t see until you’ve already clicked on the article link out of the way, here’s what I actually meant when I said I wanted this person tried and executed,” could excuse the use of that language, let alone actually believing in it.
It’s like… it’s like if someone makes a typo, someone else is like, “Oh, seems you made a typo,” you’d jump in like, “But what about they’re perfectly reasonable spelling everywhere else? Hm? Forced to ignore contextual perfect spelling I see. They’re lack of typos everywhere else explains this typo, and vindicates it”.
You and what’s his face, James, fuckin ReasonAndEmpathy or whatever now, y’all keep saying “but what of the context?” when the criterion of criticism is isolated, atomic, specific, and/or explicit. No amount of context invalidates the very specific, singular words explicitly spoken. “Sure he called for Trump to be executed, but he explains himself.” Fucking and? When did the death sentence become ok? When did that happen? Moderates are ok with the death sentence now? Aight, weird.


Man this fucking post aged like fine wine, take a SIP 

Delicious

This was quite a ride

friendly-neighborhood-patriarch: hominishostilis: abstractandedgyname: siryouarebeingmocked: mississpithy: bogleech: notyourmoderate: ...