PSYCHOphancy Avatar

224 Notes

Satanists Demand Religious Exemption From Abortion Restrictions, Cite Hobby Lobby Ruling

punchbuggydragon:

scorpysue:

spiritualbrainstorms:

This. This is why I like Satanists. This right here.

THIS IS WHAT I WAS HOPING WOULD HAPPEN

THANK YOU SATANISTS

Once again proving Satanists sometimes got their shit together more so than the rest of the world.

7 Notes

We Experiment On Human Beings!

I’m the first to admit it: we might be popular, we might create a lot of great relationships, we might blah blah blah. But OkCupid doesn’t really know what it’s doing. Neither does any other website. It’s not like people have been building these things for very long, or you can go look up a blueprint or something. Most ideas are bad. Even good ideas could be better. Experiments are how you sort all this out. Like this young buck, trying to get a potato to cry.

Christian Rudder has finally posted his first OkTrends post in three years. Being a numbers geek, I always find his analyses to be insightful and fun.

33 Notes

http://psychophancy.tumblr.com/post/93092722921/polyturtles-ok-i-get-it-and-its-important-but

okpoly2:

polyturtles:

Ok I get it and it’s important but can we please stop only caring about polyamory when it’s a plot device to take away love triangles and forge ot3s?? And stop throwing it under the bus by equating faithfulness to having only one partner. And recognize that it’s an orientation,…

For what it’s worth, I don’t think polyamory is always an orientation. I see mine more as a lifestyle, a choice. It can be cool, but I could go back to being mono sometime down the road. *shrug*

To clarify my own perspective, I tend to look at a person’s “orientation” toward something more loosely as comprising a person’s present set of interests and preferences, rather than as a fixed, immutable trait. I think it’s worth noting that sexual orientation is far from fixed in many people as well; it can often vary depending on time, circumstance, and of course shifts in gender identity; and sexual orientation can also be a deliberate lifestyle decision—as, for example, in political lesbianism. As I see it, one’s romantic and sexual preferences/orientations also occur on a spectrum of flexibility vs. immutability, and the ability to happily engage in a range of different relationship arrangements is an “orientation” in that sense as well.

33 Notes

polyturtles:

Ok I get it and it’s important but can we please stop only caring about polyamory when it’s a plot device to take away love triangles and forge ot3s?? And stop throwing it under the bus by equating faithfulness to having only one partner. And recognize that it’s an orientation, not just a type of relationship? Like a bi person doesn’t become straight when dating someone of the opposite sex, nobody becomes ace when they’re single, and a polyamorous person doesn’t become monoamorous just because they’re in that type of relationship. Please and thanks.

15 Notes

lookinforsugardaddies:

is polyamorous, or polyamory people that are in open relationships, is that a sexuality because in the (a)sexual documentary this polyamory claim it’s the opposite of asexuality, which I whole-heartedly believe and support but I honestly don’t know if polyamory is a sexuality. I just don’t know enough about it if you know just message me please ☺️

Polyamory as I see it is on more of a “relationship orientation” spectrum than a “sexual orientation” spectrum. Loving, romantic relationships needn’t involve sex, and being asexual doesn’t exclude you from being able to engage in multiple loving relationships simultaneously.

I don’t happen to know all that many in person, but there are definitely quite a few people on Tumblr who identify both as ace and poly. Which is no less logically valid than someone who identifies as straight and poly, or as pansexual and monogamous, etc.

6 Notes

Dates & other miscellany

Plans with the cute 20-year-old for Tuesday fell through, but on the plus side, it prompted us to get together for a late lunch/early dinner today. Sushi in Torrance followed by a post-thunderstorm stroll along the Hermosa Beach boardwalk.

Fortunately, I felt less lecherous because she didn’t look way underage (unlike Fox, who easily could’ve passed for 15 despite being 21 when we met). The conversation flowed naturally and we seemed to hit it off quite well despite our age differences. So it seems there may be more adventures in store for us, although I won’t give her a nickname just yet.

Tomorrow is my date with the Derby Doll. She’s much closer to my age so we can actually, y’know, meet at a bar. :P

This is going to be a rough week at work for Blondie, so it’s a bit convenient that I’m able to get all this week’s dates out of the way early in the week so I can be there as her big accreditation visit progresses.

Less appealing news: This is my last week before the new job starts. Eek! D:

196 Notes

DAMN RIGHT!!!!

DAMN RIGHT!!!!

27 Notes

Multiple Lovers, Without Jealousy

vaguelyraji:

I’m sick to death of the main argument against polyamorous relationships being that they would “get complicated.” You know what else is complicated? Lawsuits. And yet I don’t see anyone discouraging people from getting involved in those. If your only response to reading about polyamory is thinking that it is “complicated” and “unstable,” then you have demonstrated a failure to understand the concept in its entirety and an unwillingness to consider its possible positive attributes.

Polyamorous relationships may be complicated but it is foolish to imply that monogamous relationships are not also complicated in their own right. I don’t appreciate people who are not polyamorous, have never been polyamorous, and don’t know anyone who is polyamorous passing invalid and empty criticism on polyamory. Monogamy is for some people and not for others, and I would like it if people would get off their high horses about which is the superior, less-complicated relationship structure.

And can we please stop saying that those in polyamorous / open relationships are giving their partners “permission to cheat?” Cheating implies breaking a rule, and if the rules of the relationship allow the people in it to get involved with others, then it is not “cheating.”

Everyone just needs to stop.

Reblogging for the commentary.

29 Notes

quietobservation:

My opinion:

A virtue is a positive moral characteristic that is good for everyone.

My view on monogamy and polyamory is that it is a part of a sexuality spectrum, that there is no black and white definitives- that neither is right or wrong. For thousands+ years we have had cultures and societies of people and animals that have been on various ranges of this spectrum. But I believe that many of today’s 1st world countries do not culturally accept this practice, despite it’s history. I think that unfortunately individuals who do not naturally fall on the monogamous end of the spectrum are taught by society that they must hide and cover up their natural inclinations, resulting in dishonesty, lack of faithfulness and commitment, mistrust, and high guardedness. Those are characteristics that are about integrity, not sexuality. Some of the greatest individuals of integrity and communication and love that I’ve met are poly.

So no, I believe sexuality has nothing to do with virtues. How one represents themself within the relationships is what shows their character.

^ ^ ^ THIS ^ ^ ^

23 Notes

How Polyamory is Turning Patriarchy on Its Head -

Some interesting food for thought. Sandy is a friend of mine and she has one of the broadest understandings of poly-related issues of anyone I know.

19 Notes

Poly update

  • Blondie and I are doing an ice cream tour in the morning. I hope they let me slather it on her. :D
  • We had a lovely evening that involved alcohol and Cards Against Humanity. I can think of no better way to spend a night than with booze, cards, and Blondie.
  • I wound up texting Canvas and Raven briefly tonight. It’s good to chat with them, even though I won’t be seeing either of them in the immediate future.
  • A quick internet search tells me that my date Monday is an L.A. Derby Doll. And she looks damn good in fishnets. Nice!
  • A super cute 20-year-old wants to meet up with me. Also nice, albeit perhaps a little lecherous. I feel like I should care, but I have no sense of social decorum anyway, so whatever.
  • Life is good. :)

78300 Notes

itsjustalittlerain:

carpeumbra:

kittengrin:

kittengrin:

carpeumbra:

kittengrin:

carpeumbra:

Fifty Shades of Domestic Abuse

50 Shades of Damaging Stereotypes 

Fifty Shades of Wanna Guess How Many People Will Be Hospitalized Due To Flesh Wounds From Improper Knots After The Movie?

50 Shades of Glorified Abuse

50 Shades of Kidney Damage from Incompetent Crop Use

Fifty Shades of Pathological Violence Due To Past Trauma Isn’t Kink

50 Shades of completely ignoring the BDSM ethic..

50 Shades of E.L. James deserving the shit she inflicted on her characters.

12089 Notes

tastefullyoffensive:

What Your Graphic Tee Says About You (more) [collegehumor]

Previously: 'Fun vs. Effort' Graph for Pets

119404 Notes

tastefullyoffensive:

Creations from French Girls, an iPhone app where people draw portraits based on selfies of others. [via]

Related: Subway Snapchat Art

7831 Notes

In Light Of The New 50 Shades of Grey Trailer

fuckyeahsexpositivity:

E.L. James knows as much about BDSM as she would have found in a five minute Google search, which is to say that she knows precisely jack shit.

50 Shades of Grey does not depict a realistic kinky relationship, nor does it depict a healthy relationship of either the kinky or vanilla variety.

It is a Twilight fanfic, and has all the elements of Edward and Bella’s abusive relationship with kink added for extra flavor. Just as Edward and Bella are not a healthy or realistic couple, neither are Christian Grey and Anastasia Steele.

Christian Grey is an abuser who manipulates a young woman with zero knowledge of BDSM into a relationship with him. He knows she is ignorant of what a healthy BDSM relationship looks like, and uses this to:

  • ignore and override her attempts at negotiation,
  • play without a safeword (since she doesn’t know that they exist),
  • create a false dichotomy of “either we’re kinky my way or we just don’t have sex at all,”
  • threaten and stalk her,
  • rape her,
  • prevent her from discussing her relationship with anyone other than him,
  • and control aspects of her personal life, including what car she drives, what medications she takes, and how she spends her free time.

This is not BDSM. This is not sexy. This is abuse.

Using 50 Shades as your basis for how a kinky relationship works (for critical or practical purposes) is like treating Titanic: The Legend Goes On as a historical documentary. Don’t do it.

—BB

I couldn’t possibly disagree more.

Five minutes on Google would have revealed to E.L. James the importance of negotiation, safewords, enthusiastic consent, etc., in BDSM.

She knows less about BDSM than someone who did nothing more than skim the Wikipedia entry on the topic would know.