If I flail enough, then maybe...

Truth! Justice! Freedom! Reasonably Priced Love! And a Hard Boiled Egg!

Moss Graffiti

Reblog if you feel like it.

We let Willow cut her hair. When you have a little girl, it’s like how can you teach her that you’re in control of her body? If I teach her that I’m in charge of whether or not she can touch her hair, she’s going to replace me with some other man when she goes out in the world. She can’t cut my hair but that’s her hair. She has got to have command of her body. So when she goes out into the world, she’s going out with a command that it is hers. She is used to making those decisions herself. We try to keep giving them those decisions until they can hold the full weight of their lives.

“

—

(On why he let Willow cut all of her hair off)

- He raises a really great point. What would it mean to believe very early that my body was mine. That it’s not for anyone or for any particular purpose other than to be mine until I decide otherwise.

(via larepublicadedet)

I was damned near 30 before I could believe my body belonged to me & me alone. Dear people who take an issue with this,

Let the Smiths do right by their babies & shut the fuck up about how you think they should parent.

(via karnythia)

Lot of love for Will Smith right now.

(via inflateablefilth)

A++ fathering right there. <333 If only more fathers of daughters were this thoughtful about the shit their daughters have to face in the world and giving them support & respect enough to handle that with a sense of dignity.

(via mswyrr)

weaponizedwit:

I am burdened with glorious purpose.

To say thank you to my followers and to celebrate The Avengers’ success, I have decided to do a giveaway.

This is my bargain.

ONE medium sized box (approx 11” x 8.5” x 5.5”) full of Avengers/Marvel toys and merchandise.

How desperate are you?

You can reblog this post a MAXIMUM of THREE times. Likes also count.

Following me does not increase your chances of winning, so please don’t feel compelled to do so unless you just really enjoy an insane amount of Tom Hiddleston all over your dash.

Yes, I will ship anywhere in the world.

Please make sure your ask box is open so I can contact you if you win. I would hate to have to choose someone else.

Stalling won’t change anything.

You have ONE WEEK from today. The giveaway ends Saturday, 26 May.

In the end, it will be every man for himself…good luck.

So I’m basically hiatusing.

Too stressed, multiple reasons. Shall continue checking my messages and so on. Contributing to qpadvice, etc. Just. Can’t do this right now. So I’m not gonna try.

Seeya.

The FBI is asking Internet companies not to oppose a controversial proposal that would require firms, including Microsoft, Facebook, Yahoo, and Google, to build in backdoors for government surveillance. . . . The FBI general counsel’s office has drafted a proposed law that the bureau claims is the best solution: requiring that social-networking Web sites and providers of VoIP, instant messaging, and Web e-mail alter their code to ensure their products are wiretap-friendly.“If you create a service, product, or app that allows a user to communicate, you get the privilege of adding that extra coding,” an industry representative who has reviewed the FBI’s draft legislation told CNET. »

choochoobear:

wilwheaton:

Moreover, for anyone who defends the Obama administration here and insists that the U.S. Government simply must have access to all forms of human communication: does that also apply to in-person communication? Should home and apartment builders be required to install monitors in every room they build to ensure that the Government can surveil all human communications in order to prevent threats to national security and public safety? I believe someone once wrote a book about where this mindset inevitably leads. The very idea that no human communication should ever be allowed to take place beyond the reach of the Government is definitive authoritarianism, which is why Saudi Arabia and the UAE — and their American patron-ally — have so vigorously embraced it.

Greenwald points out that the FBI does not need this, because they can go to a judge, get a warrant, and use traditional surveillance when it’s necessary. “But what about encryption?!” Well:

the problem cited by the FBI to justify this new power is a total pretext: “investigators encountered encrypted communications only one time during 2009′s wiretaps” and, even then, “the state investigators told the court that the encryption did not prevent them from getting the plain text of the messages.” As usual, fear-mongering over national security and other threats is the instrument to justify massive new surveillance powers that will extend far beyond their claimed function.

I’m profoundly disappointed in the Obama administration’s record on civil rights and privacy. I expected better from a president who is a Constitutional law scholar.

tl;dr: The very idea that no human communication should ever be allowed to take place beyond the reach of the Government is definitive authoritarianism

The only thing missing is the whole, “If you’ve done nothing wrong you have nothing to be worried about” bullshit argument we were force-fed for almost a decade.