do action movies know they can have more than one female character
if they did they would have to uncast some explosions.
a woman speaking is always “whining” unless it’s what a man wants to hear.
if you are a guy and you call me any of these I will unhinge my jaw and swallow you whole
I’ll probably just kill you. But not after I tear your fragile ego to shreds and shit inside of your heart.
this is such a ironic post
escapedosmil asked: You can either unfollow me or i will block you but i will not have an ignorant selfrighteous bigot among my followers.
& are extremely shocked that they end up pregnant infuriate me, because what we’re you expecting? A washing machine out of unprotected sex? Maybe a car..hmm. BUT PREGNANCY? noo HOW DID THAT HAPPEN? Not me, I’m too young, I have a future ahead of me blah blah so my only choice is abortion (most times). Noo YOU thought it was okay to have sex knowing the consequences, you weren’t thinking about any of that before having sex, while, or after. I applaud those young moms who own up the responsibilities to their actions. Seriously good JOB! Doesn’t matter if you’re a teen mom that doesn’t make you a bad mom automatically, if you own up I respect you. I’m talking about ppl in general.
More than half of people obtaining abortions were using contraception when they got pregnant. [x]
Abortion is one of the many ways to take responsibility when an accidental pregnancy occurs.
over half of American soldiers that get shot wear body armor. Doesn’t invalidate that they consented to go into a situation where they could get shot. Just like using birth control doesn’t invalidate your consent to sex.
Abortion is like buying a car then realizing you can’t afford it so you blow up the car. It is not responsible. It erases the responsibility, so you can make the same irresponsible choice again.
Soldiers who are shot in combat aren’t told, “sorry, you made this choice and you have to live with it, sucks to be you!” and refused any and all medical attention.
Consenting to sex is not the same thing as consenting to pregnancy, but I’ve had this discussion with you quite a few times, so if you’d like to hear my point of view, please go back and read the numerous posts where I have stated it.
That analogy does not work at all. Someone who knows they don’t want a child is not going out and purposely trying to get pregnant, like the person buying the car in your situation. You can’t really accidentally buy a car - so this doesn’t make sense.
Either way, assuming someone did buy a car and found out they couldn’t afford it, the obvious course of action for them would be to sell the car. Blowing up a car doesn’t take away their car payments.
The issue with pregnancy being unaffordable is taken away with abortion, because you are no longer paying for a pregnancy. Deciding not to have a child when you know you can not raise one, much like deciding not to buy a car when you know you can not afford one, is a very responsible choice.
Soldier getting medical attention has nothing to do with that analogy. It is about how lessing odds of a result doesn’t invalidate consent. Even if one of those soldiers get shot , body armor or not they agreed to go into that situation. Them getting medical attention is a whole different situation. Want =/= consent.
You only gave a statement that sex is not consent to pregnancy , but you never gave a argument of why. pregnancy is the primary objective of sex , pleasure is secondary. Do you really think that your body has to follow what you want?
A person that is having sex is purposely trying to get pregnant because the primary objective of sex is pregnancy. There for having sex= equal trying to procreated. Just because those may not be your intentions doesn’t mean your not doing it.
If you blow up your car and get away with it the insurance will pay for the rest of the car and give you money to get a new one. That is if they want to. Yes, most people would sell the car. But just like the car why not give the child to someone that can’t afford it. Or not participate in activity of sex making the child rather then completely destroying it ?
Why do you claim it is responsible to end the pregnancy already in progress, but not getting pregnant in the first place by not having sex is a bad? But despite you claim if you are concered about the cost of pregnancy why are you fighting to give women the choice to kill their babies, and not the choice to have fully paid births, new child starter kits , or health care for all children , better adoption situations , ect.?
When researchers at the University of Toronto and the University of Washington observed young people’s behavior in bars, they found that the man’s aggressiveness didn’t match his level of intoxication. There was no relationship.
Instead, men targeted women who were intoxicated."
Ever notice these studies are one sided? Always?
You can tell it’s Feminist backed research when it’s a study of woman as victim, man as predator and they always come to a Feminist conclusion.
Male Sexuality Is Rape.
For example, this entire “study” is destroyed with a single question:
“Were the intoxicated women the most sexually aggressive?”
Any human being who has ever imbibed alcohol knows that it lowers your inhibitions and though it’s anecdotal, alcohol has ALWAYS made the women around me SIGNIFICANTLY more sexually aggressive.
Yet not a single “researcher” ever fucking thought for a single second to ask this question? And more importantly, neither did anyone REVIEWING this shit?
This is a Propaganda Piece for the Tumblr Crowd and they’ll eat it up accordingly and won’t question it at all.