Text25 Jun101,979 notes

hopelesslyscattered:

spookylilmoonpie:

numinous-queer:

Japanese tea bag maker Ocean-Teabag has been making waves by creating little parcels of aroma in the shape of marine animals. Luckily for us, their wide range of tea bags are available at online Japanese novelty retailer Village Vanguard, maker of such fine products as Space Tea and cat-shaped kitchen utensils.

image
image
image

Ocean-Teabag’s earliest designs included beautiful dolphin tea bags filled with blue mallow tea leaves. Steeping them turns your otherwise normal pot of water into a tranquil ocean. Proving to be a hit among tea lovers, Ocean-Teabag expanded their repertoire to many other sea creatures including the sea turtle (butterfly pea jasmine tea)…

image

the distinctive ocean sunfish (Japanese hojicha — roasted green tea)…

image

the graceful manta ray (tropical mango tea)…

image

and even a blood-thirsty shark (blended herb tea).

image

The newest addition to their robust series of marine creatures is a tea bag shaped like an innocuous sea cucumber. This little parcel is filled with jasmine tea, as well as a smidgen of sea cucumber powder to lend some authenticity. Ocean-Teabag warns that some people who have a sensitive tongue may find it tasting a little fishy.

image

The company also crafted a deep sea series that will satisfy even the most adventurous of tea drinkers out there. A few such examples are the anglerfish (earl grey tea)…

image

the creepy giant isopod (Eastern Beauty oolong tea)…

image

the horseshoe crab (white apricot tea)…

image

…and lastly the king of them all, the enormous giant oarfish. ( Delicious Assam tea of epic proportions! ) Just like its namesake, it measures a whopping 19 centimeters (7.5 inches). Drinking tea becomes an art when half of your tea bag hangs out of your cup.

image

 While the notion of turning your cup of tea into fish-inhabiting waters is not new, these tea bags will hopefully conjure up images of gentle ocean waves in your mind. 

image

WHERE TO FIND THE TEA

@multi-fandomxmess

@adarose

Text21 May920 notesI loved Jon Snow.

carbonitekisses:

I loved the man who fought for the living. I loved the man who loved his family, the Starks. I admired his moral strength. There was a lot I liked about his character. 

This is not the Jon Snow I came to favor above other characters.

The Jon Snow I love would have seen Daenerys for what she was. He would not become a blind follower, parroting “My queen” to the queen of the ashes. He would not have to be convinced by fucking Tyrion Lannister that Daenerys is not the just ruler she proclaims herself to be—especially after witnessing the horror and devastation she rained down upon a city of innocents. 

The Jon I know would not have easily brushed aside his best friend’s grief when he learned his family died by the hand of Jon’s lover. Jon would have sought, at the very least, an explanation from the woman who burnt his friend’s family alive, men who were prisoners of war. The Jon I know would not have continued to blindly follow a woman that burnt a man alive in front of him. Not when we have canonical evidence of him despising that method of execution when he shot an arrow through Mance’s heart to spare him a gruesome death by fire. Even though it was treason against Stannis and could have meant Jon’s own death.

The Jon I know would not have ignored his family’s distrust and advice. 

Jon had already seen how volatile she was. He had seen how often she had to be talked out of burning Kings Landing to rubble. He had heard her more or less threaten Sansa time and time again. He was victim to her emotional manipulation when she told him to keep his parentage a secret—never mind that the Starks had a right to know that their lord father never betrayed their mother’s honor or love. 

On and on and on.

Keep reading

via .
Text12 May425 notes

aryastarkanotherday:

Sandor Clegane when dealing with anyone: fuck these fucking people

Sandor Clegane with the Stark sisters:

image
Text13 Dec96 notes

maroucia:

doublehex:

nobodysuspectsthebutterfly:

maroucia:

Currently rereading AGOT and now I’m so pissed at Mormont, the old bear, for giving his valyrian steel sword to Jon when he could’ve given it to the women at Bear’s island. He’s like: ‘this sword has been in my family for 500 years, take it, son. My real son has dishonored our name so you better have it,’ like the Mormonts have stopped existing now that he and Jorah are gone! I’m fuming! 😠

No, but the thing is, the women of Bear Island sent Longclaw to Jeor. Jorah left the sword with them when he left to go into exile, and Maege chose to send it to her brother instead of keeping it for herself or her daughters, or even for her daughters’ future children. It’s possible she didn’t want Longclaw for herself or her daughters as a bastard sword is a bit large for most women to handle, or perhaps she had another reason, I don’t know. But I have a post on the matter here, discussing what her reasoning probably was.

I mean I do hope Jon gives Longclaw back to the Mormonts eventually – even if Alysane isn’t tall enough to wield it herself, she does have a son who might be able to one day. And if he gets Blackfyre (as he might), then he’d surely have an excellent reason to pass the sword back to where it came from.

I would define this as a clear example of “Early Series Weirdness”, where the author did not come up with the finer intricacies of his setting, and later installments contradict earlier parts in the name of better storytelling.

In this case, it makes little sense for Jeor to give away Longclaw like that. Or even for Longclaw to be given to Jeor in the first place. In a world where Tywin Lannister could not buy a Valyrian steel sword with all the gold of Casterly Rock, this is just a strange and unusual plot development.

@nobodysuspectsthebutterfly, I did read that part about Maege sending the sword back, but my interpretation was that she just wanted it to be useful. I didn’t think it meant she didn’t want it for the family anymore. It’s like when you lend something long-term to someone; it doesn’t mean they can give it away to whoever they choose. It needs to be returned eventually. And he never tells Jon it’s a loan so… 

@doublehex, Exactly! Like it’s a priceless sword, one who’s been in his family for generations! It just doesn’t make sense! I don’t think one man’s misconduct makes it suddenly unusable when many good men used it as well before. The sword is not tainted with Jorah’s misdeeds imo.

In my head-canon, the Sword was Jon’s to begin with:

Longclaw is Blackfyre, the sword of Aegon the Conqueror.

I imagine Mormont to merly have acted as a keeper, knowing a long time that Jon would join the Night’s Watch. Ned Stark couldn’t give his “bastard son” a Valyrian steel sword without rasing too much eyebrows (and disappointing Catelyn Stark), so he went through one of his most trusted allies.

With that background, the whole heirloom story becomes a necessary lie, as Mormont cannot tell Jon the truth (maybe he didn’t even knew the entire story) while returning to him what was rightfully his.

That theory has been blown to bits by the TV show already with the whole conversation between Jon on Jorah, yet I still have book-canon to hope for.

(Speaking of the TV show, it also annoyed me greatly that Jon would made the offer to Jorah to return Longclaw. He could have asked Lyanna Mormont first, esp. after she bascially made him KitN.)

Video2 Dec186,233 notes

stachionalgeographic:

queerandbrown:

canisgryphus:

flacomexicano:

shiiiiiiiiiiit

POLYAMORY POST. YASSSSS

precisely the twist i was hoping for

HERE FOR THIS

Video24 Nov75,780 notes

eatloveprayandpray:

housewifeswag:

architectureland:

Where Children Sleep photographed by James Mollison around the world.

“When photographer James Mollison was asked to do a project on children’s rights, he found himself thinking back to his childhood bedroom and the deep importance it played in his upbringing. Taking that idea with him around the world, he photographed a diverse cross section of children and the bedrooms they call home. His moving images remove the children from their home environment, showing them before a neutral background that mostly hides their economic status as if to say “kids are just kids.” Only when their bedroom is observed, however, does the full scope of their living situation become poiniently clear.”

wow.

This. Life, wow.

via like it is.
Video22 Nov100 notes

humanipathic:

feathernotdot:

46 and 2 by Tool / Presented by Aaron O’Keefe (by Aaron Okeefe)

Why am I just now seeing this?

THIS IS MESMERIZING.

Whole ensemble but I just love this young girl’s voice and vocal style/melodies

Text22 Nov2 notesIs there anyway I can look up trigger warnings for Dexter episodes?

illaskforthesea:

Specifically rape or any non consent triggers. I really wanna watch the show but I can’t if I keep being startled

I do not know of any such source existing.

This is a show about a serial killer. Almost all his kills are without the consent of those being killed. And those he kills are portrayed over the top evil and also kill without asking for consent.

In terms of rape, Dexter girlfriend is a former victim of abuse and that gets mentioned. Dexter’s sister will get abducted. There will be torture, especially in season 3 and 5, drastic violence, and Dexter himself will rape a woman in season 7 (your mileage may vary, some actually think of it being true love, but I strongly disagree). Especially, the whole big bads of season 5 are rapists, so skip the whole season 5. But throughout the show there are other instances that could be considered rapey.

I would say: This show will startle you. There is no way around that.

Photo22 Oct8 notesmargretarson:
“In case there was any doubt.
”

margretarson:

In case there was any doubt.

Video17 Oct323,799 notes
Photo29 Sep115 notesboysdeservebetter:
“ Wow, even more reason to respect the first woman to earn a medical degree in the United States. (1849)
Unfortunately, these excuses which she believed “our honourable profession” would NOT support are EXACTLY the things which the...

boysdeservebetter:

Wow, even more reason to respect the first woman to earn a medical degree in the United States. (1849)

Unfortunately, these excuses which she believed “our honourable profession” would NOT support are EXACTLY the things which the American Academy of Pediatrics used as justifications in its 2012 Circumcision Policy Statement.

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/changingthefaceofmedicine/physicians/biography_35.html

“A pioneering woman doctor, 1890s
A serious warning against the unnatural practice of circumcision must here be given. A book of “Advice to mothers” by a Philadelphia doctor was lately sent to me. This treatise began by informing the mother that her first duty to her infant boy was to cause it to be circumcised! Her fears were worked upon by an elaborate statement but false statement of the evils which would result to the child were this mutilation not performed. I should have considered this mischievous instruction unworthy of serious consideration, did I not observe that it has lately become common among certain short-sighted but reputable physicians to laud this unnatural practice, and endeavour to introduce it into a Christian nation.

Circumcision is based upon the erroneous principle that boys, i.e. one half of the human race, are so badly fashioned by Creative Power that they must be reformed by the surgeon; consequently that every male child must be mutilated by removing the natural covering with which nature has protected one of the most sensitive portions of the human body. The erroneous nature of such a practice is shown by the fact that although this custom (which originated amongst licentious nations in hot climates) has been carried out for many hundreds of generations (by Moslems and Jews), yet nature continues to protect her children by reproducing the valuable protection in man and all the higher animals, regardless of impotent surgical interference.

Appeals to the fears of uninstructed parents on the grounds of cleanliness or of hardening the part are entirely fallacious and unsupported by evidence. It is a physiological fact that the natural lubricating secretion of every healthy part is beneficial, not injurious to the part thus protected, and that no attempt to render a sensitive part insensitive is either practicable or justifiable. The protection which nature affords to these parts is an aid to physical purity by affording necessary protection against constant external contact of a part which necessarily remains keenly sensitive; and bad habits in boys and girls cannot by prevented by surgical operations. Where no malformation exists, bad habits can only be forestalled by healthy moral and physical education.

The plea that this unnatural practice will lessen the risk of infection to the sensualist in promiscuous intercourse is not one that our honourable profession will support. Parents, therefore, should be warned that this ugly mutilation of their children involves serious danger, both to their physical and moral health.”

Elizabeth Blackwell, The human element in sex: Being a medical enquiry into the relation of sexual physiology to Christian morality (1884; 2nd edition, London, 1894), pp. 35-6

http://www.historyofcircumcision.net/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=32

via Uncutting.
Video12 Sep925,310 notes

potatosmack:

tedywestside:

me tryin’ to get my life together

Nothing as ever been more accurate

Video26 Aug142,369 notes
Photo26 Aug249,785 notesboozebluntsandblink182:
“ bitch-jerk-assbutt-teamfreewill:
“ yourladyfriend:
“ “dirty bikers” are my favorite people
”
JK Rowling got the idea for Hagrid after talking to a “dirty biker” in a pub, where he spent the better part of an hour talking...

boozebluntsandblink182:

bitch-jerk-assbutt-teamfreewill:

yourladyfriend:

“dirty bikers” are my favorite people

JK Rowling got the idea for Hagrid after talking to a “dirty biker” in a pub, where he spent the better part of an hour talking enthusiastically about how well his garden was blooming.

I posted this on my Dad’s Facebook the other night after seeing it on Tumblr, and he replied saying “sh, I have a reputation to uphold you know!”

Video20 Aug402,168 notes

always-coffee-and-cherries:

thecopperscales:

sophspiration:

yerawizardmary:

onthepursuitforhappiness:

why would they edit so much?

They physically moved her bones. They moved her collar bone lower. I hope stuff like this makes girls realize how ridiculous the media is.

Even the ‘before’ picture is unattainable by most women. To begin with, she’s had her makeup and hair styled by professionals with expensive products. She’s also been given a flattering designer outfit, which is most likely altered to perfectly fit her shape. She has also been photographed in a fancy studio with perfect lighting and camera equipment, by an industry professional.

The fact that they would then go on to photoshop her beyond recognition (they even changed the appearance of her fingers, for crying out loud) just further emphasizes the unattainability of the media’s idea of ‘beauty’.

I am thoroughly disgusted by all this.

this pisses me off


Designcrafted by Prashanth Kamalakanthan. Powered by Tumblr.
Modified by me :)