tockthewatchdog:
“i can’t even think about the electoral college right now i will spit venom
”

tockthewatchdog:

i can’t even think about the electoral college right now i will spit venom

(via pumpkin-spice-milk-slug)

poetic-ness:
“mtv:
“when someone asks how i feel about a potential bae
”
God her smile! And the way her mouth moves when she speaks got me weak
”

poetic-ness:

mtv:

when someone asks how i feel about a potential bae 

God her smile! And the way her mouth moves when she speaks got me weak

(via beyonceprivilege-deactivated201)

invisiblelad:
“ sonofbaldwin:
“ Even though John Crawford III was only holding a BB gun he picked up—IN A STORE THAT SELLS BB GUNS.
Even though it was an open carry state.
Even though he was on the phone when police officers opened fire on him.
Even...

invisiblelad:

sonofbaldwin:

Even though John Crawford III was only holding a BB gun he picked up—IN A STORE THAT SELLS BB GUNS.

Even though it was an open carry state.

Even though he was on the phone when police officers opened fire on him.

Even though he was shot in the back.

Even though the cops lied and were caught in a lie because of the subsequent video.

A grand jury who, when added together, obviously didn’t have half a gnat’s brain, declined to indict the officers.

The message here?

It has been, is, and always will be open season on black people for as long as white supremacy is the philosophie du jour.

(H/T Chad Goller-Sojourner)

Even though they interrogated the girlfriend of Mr. Crawford as though she was a co-conspirator of some invented crime by proxy for hours…and then cruelly informed her that he’d died. 

This is the stuff of “heroism”? 

Can we really, honestly say that our system of rules and governance is allocated fairly when every single case of negligence, or at minimum squandered life is met with the gross indifference of grand juries? It’s more than obvious at this point that the system upholds and supports policemen in a way that actively damages its own credibility.

If we cannot trust the simple concept of justice as lawful citizens, if we cannot trust the social contract and simply what keeps any of us investing in it and society at large outside of general purpose fear and a decided lack of other options? 

(via kroove)

When asked why they hassled women, most of the men responded that harassment alleviated boredom, was โ€˜โ€œfun,โ€ and gave them a feeling of camaraderie with other men; many added, defensively, that it didnโ€™t hurt anybody. Some said it was intended as a compliment. Twenty percent said they would not engage in the behavior alone but only did so when they were in groups of men - a finding that supports a โ€œmale-bondingโ€ explanation of harassment of demonstrating solidarity and mutual power. A minority, approximately fifteen percent, who were also the group that employed the most graphic commentary and threats, said explicitly that they intended to anger or humiliate their victims.
Street Harassment and the Informal Ghettoization of Women by Cynthia Grant Bowman in Harvard Law Review, January 1993

(via moniquill)

(via hrairroo-deactivated20140712)