This is a body positive blog!

All the things I like or find interesting. I believe that every person deserves to be treated with respect regardless or their size, sex, gender, race or ability.

I also enjoy novels, graphic novels/comics, movies, throwbacks from the 80's and (1980 and 1880) fabulousness and many things nerdy.


Link

Apr 17, 2014
@ 2:24 pm
Permalink
1,274 notes

http://kat-rampant.tumblr.com/post/83017602777/blue-author-projectivepenteract »

blue-author:

projectivepenteract:

theuppitynegras:

projectivepenteract:

theuppitynegras:

I’m about 90% sure the economy is never gonna “improve”

this is capitalism in it’s final form

this is it honey

except, you know, those companies that do a charitable thing…


Photo

Apr 17, 2014
@ 1:40 pm
Permalink
6,704 notes

(Source: cammadanar, via kangaya)


Photoset

Apr 17, 2014
@ 12:56 pm
Permalink
39,013 notes

gracekraft:

Believe in Steven

(via fyeahstevenuniverse)


Photoset

Apr 17, 2014
@ 12:12 pm
Permalink
18,321 notes

doidles:

doidles:

"tiger millionaire" gave me trans headcanons out the wingwang

why is this still getting notes. i’m dead

(via fyeahstevenuniverse)


Text

Apr 17, 2014
@ 11:28 am
Permalink
3,819 notes

pun-demon:

*whispers from your closet* we

*busts out of closet* ARE THE CRYS-TAL

*punches giant hole in your wall* GEMS

(via fyeahstevenuniverse)


Photo

Apr 17, 2014
@ 10:44 am
Permalink
4,044 notes

w7he:


A Giant Woman.

Drama queen Opal, because i love her. 

w7he:

A Giant Woman.

Drama queen Opal, because i love her. 

(via fyeahstevenuniverse)


Photo

Apr 16, 2014
@ 1:40 pm
Permalink
13,506 notes

curvily:

How often have you been shopping and you come across something that is just PERFECT, but does not go up to your size? Over 60% of American women wear a size 14 or above, but only 17% of clothing sold is 14 & up. That is a ridiculous disparity.
Moreover, when some brands move into plus (ahem H&M), they throw their signature trendy looks by the wayside in favor of flowy dark fabrics that they think “work” for plus sizes. That is crap. Plus size women want color, print, and structure. Moreover, we want variety. A group this numerous cannot be a monolith, and since style is such a personal thing, we all have different tastes. I want #plussizeplease to be a way to showcase the demand for styles we’d buy and rock, and all the money brands are forfeiting by refusing to expand their sizes.
So here’s how to use it:
1) Snap a picture of a garment you love but does not come in your size. Include the brand and price, tagging the company if possible. For example, I am in love with this Zara marble print dress. I would have purchased it yesterday if it went above a size L. My tweet would be:
“.@Zara marble print sheath, $59. I’d buy it right now if it came in my size. #plussizeplease”
2) Use it on any social media – Twitter, Instagram, Tumblr, Pinterest… even Facebook supports hashtags now.
3) Tag anything you’d purchase, whether in store or online.
4) Feel free to include the size range it comes in and/or the size you think you’d need. Sizing can be tricky, so this is definitely not required.
5) Tell your friends! I don’t just want this to be a blogger thing – I want all women who wear size 14 and up to show their purchasing power and share styles they love. Let’s be unignorable!

curvily:

How often have you been shopping and you come across something that is just PERFECT, but does not go up to your size? Over 60% of American women wear a size 14 or above, but only 17% of clothing sold is 14 & up. That is a ridiculous disparity.

Moreover, when some brands move into plus (ahem H&M), they throw their signature trendy looks by the wayside in favor of flowy dark fabrics that they think “work” for plus sizes. That is crap. Plus size women want color, print, and structure. Moreover, we want variety. A group this numerous cannot be a monolith, and since style is such a personal thing, we all have different tastes. I want #plussizeplease to be a way to showcase the demand for styles we’d buy and rock, and all the money brands are forfeiting by refusing to expand their sizes.

So here’s how to use it:

1) Snap a picture of a garment you love but does not come in your size. Include the brand and price, tagging the company if possible. For example, I am in love with this Zara marble print dress. I would have purchased it yesterday if it went above a size L. My tweet would be:

“.@Zara marble print sheath, $59. I’d buy it right now if it came in my size. #plussizeplease”

2) Use it on any social media – Twitter, Instagram, Tumblr, Pinterest… even Facebook supports hashtags now.

3) Tag anything you’d purchase, whether in store or online.

4) Feel free to include the size range it comes in and/or the size you think you’d need. Sizing can be tricky, so this is definitely not required.

5) Tell your friends! I don’t just want this to be a blogger thing – I want all women who wear size 14 and up to show their purchasing power and share styles they love. Let’s be unignorable!

(via alibuttons)


Photo

Apr 16, 2014
@ 12:56 pm
Permalink
4,628 notes

(Source: keefvanhorn, via fuckyeah1990s)


Quote

Apr 15, 2014
@ 11:28 am
Permalink
224 notes

A lot of characters are called strong female protagonists when it’s kind of a cipher, and it doesn’t mean what it should mean. Like, a female character will be called a strong female protagonist for crying only a handful of times as opposed to the entire story, when Indiana Jones is not called a strong male protagonist for bullwhipping Nazis and shooting guns at ghosts and stuff. So [our webcomic Strong Female Protagonist] started as an exercise in making a character strong in every sense of the word that we could find, where she’s strong in a literary sense — or so we hope — strong in the sense of conviction and heroism and morality, and then physically, superhumanly strong.

The Mary Sue interviews the creators of webcomic Strong Female Protagonist (via themarysue)

(via themarysue)


Photo

Apr 15, 2014
@ 10:44 am
Permalink
741 notes

abaldwin360:

neurosciencestuff:

Brain scans link concern for justice with reason, not emotion
People who care about justice are swayed more by reason than emotion, according to new brain scan research from the Department of Psychology and Center for Cognitive and Social Neuroscience.
Psychologists have found that some individuals react more strongly than others to situations that invoke a sense of justice—for example, seeing a person being treated unfairly or mercifully. The new study used brain scans to analyze the thought processes of people with high “justice sensitivity.”
“We were interested to examine how individual differences about justice and fairness are represented in the brain to better understand the contribution of emotion and cognition in moral judgment,” explained lead author Jean Decety, the Irving B. Harris Professor of Psychology and Psychiatry.    
Using a functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) brain-scanning device, the team studied what happened in the participants’ brains as they judged videos depicting behavior that was morally good or bad. For example, they saw a person put money in a beggar’s cup or kick the beggar’s cup away. The participants were asked to rate on a scale how much they would blame or praise the actor seen in the video. People in the study also completed questionnaires that assessed cognitive and emotional empathy, as well as their justice sensitivity.
As expected, study participants who scored high on the justice sensitivity questionnaire assigned significantly more blame when they were evaluating scenes of harm, Decety said. They also registered more praise for scenes showing a person helping another individual.
But the brain imaging also yielded surprises. During the behavior-evaluation exercise, people with high justice sensitivity showed more activity than average participants in parts of the brain associated with higher-order cognition. Brain areas commonly linked with emotional processing were not affected.
The conclusion was clear, Decety said: “Individuals who are sensitive to justice and fairness do not seem to be emotionally driven. Rather, they are cognitively driven.” 
According to Decety, one implication is that the search for justice and the moral missions of human rights organizations and others do not come primarily from sentimental motivations, as they are often portrayed. Instead, that drive may have more to do with sophisticated analysis and mental calculation.
Decety adds that evaluating good actions elicited relatively high activity in the region of the brain involved in decision-making, motivation and rewards. This finding suggests that perhaps individuals make judgments about behavior based on how they process the reward value of good actions as compared to bad actions.
“Our results provide some of the first evidence for the role of justice sensitivity in enhancing neural processing of moral information in specific components of the brain network involved in moral judgment,” Decety said.

So, can the folks who always equate those of use who talk about these things to “being emotional” or “appealing to emotion” shut the fuck up now?

abaldwin360:

neurosciencestuff:

Brain scans link concern for justice with reason, not emotion

People who care about justice are swayed more by reason than emotion, according to new brain scan research from the Department of Psychology and Center for Cognitive and Social Neuroscience.

Psychologists have found that some individuals react more strongly than others to situations that invoke a sense of justice—for example, seeing a person being treated unfairly or mercifully. The new study used brain scans to analyze the thought processes of people with high “justice sensitivity.”

“We were interested to examine how individual differences about justice and fairness are represented in the brain to better understand the contribution of emotion and cognition in moral judgment,” explained lead author Jean Decety, the Irving B. Harris Professor of Psychology and Psychiatry.    

Using a functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) brain-scanning device, the team studied what happened in the participants’ brains as they judged videos depicting behavior that was morally good or bad. For example, they saw a person put money in a beggar’s cup or kick the beggar’s cup away. The participants were asked to rate on a scale how much they would blame or praise the actor seen in the video. People in the study also completed questionnaires that assessed cognitive and emotional empathy, as well as their justice sensitivity.

As expected, study participants who scored high on the justice sensitivity questionnaire assigned significantly more blame when they were evaluating scenes of harm, Decety said. They also registered more praise for scenes showing a person helping another individual.

But the brain imaging also yielded surprises. During the behavior-evaluation exercise, people with high justice sensitivity showed more activity than average participants in parts of the brain associated with higher-order cognition. Brain areas commonly linked with emotional processing were not affected.

The conclusion was clear, Decety said: “Individuals who are sensitive to justice and fairness do not seem to be emotionally driven. Rather, they are cognitively driven.” 

According to Decety, one implication is that the search for justice and the moral missions of human rights organizations and others do not come primarily from sentimental motivations, as they are often portrayed. Instead, that drive may have more to do with sophisticated analysis and mental calculation.

Decety adds that evaluating good actions elicited relatively high activity in the region of the brain involved in decision-making, motivation and rewards. This finding suggests that perhaps individuals make judgments about behavior based on how they process the reward value of good actions as compared to bad actions.

“Our results provide some of the first evidence for the role of justice sensitivity in enhancing neural processing of moral information in specific components of the brain network involved in moral judgment,” Decety said.

So, can the folks who always equate those of use who talk about these things to “being emotional” or “appealing to emotion” shut the fuck up now?

(via sleepydumpling)