Photo Set
Photo

eatsleepdraw:

"Sometimes we stay quiet for a reason."  - Trae Perez Tattoos

Source: eatsleepdraw
Photo

weirdvintage:

Dr. Rose’s Arsenic Complexion Wafers, from the Sears and Roebuck 1902 catalog (via)

(via weirdvintage)

Source: mentalfloss.com
Photo Set
Photo Set

indestructibleannajay:

bad—cop:

wrote-miss-ibis:

cellarspider:

lyricalred:

whiskyrunner:

Just a reminder:the natural diet of these birds is BONES. Not just bone marrow; actual bone shards. They pick up huge freaking bones from carcasses and drop them onto rocks until they get spiky pieces and then they swallow them. Their stomach acid dissolves bone.

look me in the eye and tell me that’s not a fucking dragon

And they aren’t naturally red like that. That’s self-applied makeup. They find the reddest earth they can to work into their feathers as a status symbol.

And they don’t scavenge other parts of carcases, just the bones. 85-90% of their diet is exclusively bone. Hence why it’s only a myth that these birds would just pick up whole lambs and carry them off. It’s not true, but in German they’re still called Lämmergeier as a result.

So metal

The guy and the vulture both look like they’ve witnessed a serious fashion tragedy walk by

(via lankawitch)

Source: jenkristofu
Audio
Photo Set

chrisbrinleejr:

Took Finch on her first camping trip for my birthday this weekend.

(via untalentedandhorny)

Source: chrisbrinleejr
Text

dxglitter:

theresabonita:

You know what’s really sad? In middle school we learn about STD’s and sexual infections and how to have sex safely but we never  learned about women’s personal health. How to take care of our vagina’s because that’s a thing. I knew what a wet dream was before I knew what a yeast infection was and by then it was too late.

This thing. This thing is so fucked up.

We also learn that STDs are the end of the world.  We don’t learn how to take care of them.

Source: theresabonita
Text

So, I’m applying for this job as a museum registrar.  Can I tell you how much I want this job?  With every inch of my mind and body, I want it.  No, it isn’t a dream job…It isn’t glorious work.  I’d be cataloging, accessioning, and all around preserving historical artifacts. It is the first position that I saw that rekindled my passion for public history.  Okay, so that fire was reduced to  smoldering bed of coals for the past few years with small flames popping up here and there. While thinking about this, I remembered that a few years ago I was prepping for my comprehensive exams and I wrote a post that I didn’t publish. I still get excited when I think about history or knowledge in these terms.  Overall, the idea of dissolving ignorance is pretty important to me.  Both, within my own mind and that of others.  I’ve grown to accept the idea that maybe my “dream” job is public history…but on the more public education side of history.  

Read past the cut if you want…it’s mostly my thoughts on the word “history” and how it’s misuse.

Read More

Photo

just-art:

Colored Skull by Katherine Dawson

Artist: TumblrFacebook

Source: just-art
Text

holisticsexualhealth:

Male Birth Control, Without Condoms, Will Be Here by 2017

Remember Risug? HSH Posted it awhile back as the one if the best birth controls for folks with prostates. A lot of folks wondered the same thing I did, When would we have it?? Well never fear folks! Follow available below. GET EXCITED. Non invasive cheap birth control for non ovary bearing folks is here (soon)! (Disclaimer: Uses cis language)

Male Birth Control, Without Condoms, Will Be Here by 2017

Vasalgel, a reversible, non-hormonal polymer that blocks the vas deferens, is about to enter human trials. How will rhetoric change when male bodies become responsible for birth control?

Vasalgel, a reversible form of male birth control, just took one step closer to your vas deferens.

According to a press release from the Parsemus Foundation, a not-for profit organization focused on developing low-cost medical approaches, Vasalgel is proving effective in a baboon study. Three lucky male baboons were injected with Vasalgel and given unrestricted sexual access to 10 to 15 female baboons each. Despite the fact that they have been monkeying around for six months now, no female baboons have been impregnated. With the success of this animal study and new funding from the David and Lucile Packard Foundation, the Parsemus Foundation is planning to start human trials for Vasalgel next year. According to their FAQ page, they hope to see it on the market by 2017 for, in their words, less than the cost of a flat-screen television.

So how does Vasalgel work? It is essentially a reimagining of a medical technology called RISUG (reversible inhibition of sperm under guidance) that was developed by a doctor named Sujoy Guha over 15 years ago in India, where it has been in clinical trials ever since. Unlike most forms of female birth control, Vasalgel is non-hormonal and only requires a single treatment in order to be effective for an extended period of time. Rather than cutting the vas deferens—as would be done in a vasectomy—a Vasalgel procedure involves the injection of a polymer contraceptive directly into the vas deferens. This polymer will then block any sperm that attempt to pass through the tube. At any point, however, the polymer can be flushed out with a second injection if a man wishes to bring his sperm back up to speed.

"Unlike most forms of female birth control, Vasalgel is non-hormonal and only requires a single treatment in order to be effective for an extended period of time."

The Parsemus Foundation’s messaging on Vasalgel has focused on making the technology appealing to men. In a New York Times op-ed published this year, Elaine Lissner of the Parsemus Foundation pitches the product to “a 20-something or 30-something man, out on the dating market” who is worried about the effectiveness of the pill, given how many women forget to take pills during any given cycle. This pitch, too, is a plea for help. The Parsemus Foundation has to rely on donations and crowdfunding in order to bring male birth control to the market. Long-term treatments like Vasalgel are much less appealing to potential funders in the pharmaceutical industry who, as they observe, would much rather “sell pills to men’s partners every month.” Why sell a flat-screen television to a man, after all, when you can rent one to a woman for a decade?

In other words, the medical industry’s investment in the multibillion-dollar female birth control industry might block men’s access to male birth control just as effectively as Vasalgel would block their sperm. But a contraceptive polymer like Vasalgel would be a major medical innovation for more than just the man about town looking to copulate without consequence. In fact, male birth control could be the next major medical advance in women’s health, as strange as that idea seems.

If the use of polymer contraceptives were to become widespread, male birth control would completely transform the ways in which we understand sexual and reproductive health. Ever since men started wrapping animal intestines around their penises hundreds of years ago, we have been approaching birth control as a way of temporarily preventing fertilization inside a woman’s body. But what if we haven’t been able to see the forest through the ovaries? What if we could use polymer contraceptives like Vasalgel to block sperm at the source, rather than implementing expensive, convoluted, and potentially harmful contraceptive countermeasures inside women’s bodies?

If Vasalgel were to become as widespread and inexpensive as the Parsemus Foundation expects, unintended pregnancies could be substantially reduced. According to the Center for Disease Control, nearly half of pregnancies in the United States are unintended. That figure rises to 80 percent of all pregnancies among women age 19 and younger, and to 90 percent below age 15. The physical, financial, and emotional toll of an unintended pregnancy can be immense. As a report from the Guttmacher Institute notes, the average cost of an abortion is $485, which “pose[s] a major financial burden for women seeking these services,” who are often lower income. Not all unintended pregnancies are unwanted, however, and given the fact that modern birth control has deep roots in Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger’s belief in eugenics, the benefits of male birth control for lower-income families in particular should not be overemphasized.

Even if we set the prevention of unintended pregnancies aside, however, the potentially deleterious side effects of female birth control are enough to justify the implementation of Vasalgel on their own. As WomensHealth.Gov notes, side effects of the birth control pill include an increased risk of heart disease, high blood pressure, blood clots, nausea, irregular bleeding, and depression. Less common methods of contraception like diaphragms and sponges can cause the rare and life-threatening toxic shock syndrome (TSS). Injections like Depo-Provera can cause bone loss and the use of intrauterine devices (IUDs) can potentially cause rips or tears in the uterus itself. It would take a commercial announcer a full minute of speed-reading to list off all the risks of every form of female birth control. Interrupting ovulation and fertilization is a complex process that requires a degree of hormonal regulation, often impacting other areas of a woman’s health.

What if we could use polymer contraceptives like Vasalgel to block sperm at the source, rather than implementing expensive and potentially harmful contraception inside women’s bodies?”

But as luck would have it, you don’t have to tamper with testosterone in order to block sperm. It might seem as if men are unstoppable sperm machines, especially given the fact they produce 1,500 of them per second. But because sperm are as fickle as they are plentiful, technologies like Vasalgel and RISUG need not interfere with the production of sperm itself in the same way that female birth control often interferes with ovulation. Like the Little Dutch Boy walking by a dike on the brink of bursting, Vasalgel can simply plug up the vas deferens and stop an entire sea of sperm from crashing through. It promises to be a parsimonious solution to the age-old problem of preventing unwanted pregnancies. This is nothing short of Occam’s razor for your testicles.

While the way Vasalgel works inside a man’s body might be simple, its cultural impact would be complex. The Religious Right, in particular, has grown accustomed to a world in which regulating access to birth control means regulating women’s bodies, rather than men’s bodies. Although the Affordable Care Act began offering women no-to-low-cost contraceptive coverage in 2010, the Supreme Court’s now-infamous Hobby Lobby ruling this summer allowed “closely-held corporations” to offer health insurance plans without contraceptive coverage. The Hobby Lobby ruling is already being used to try to undermine Obamacare’s contraceptive requirement altogether. This week, Missouri state Representative Paul Wieland’s lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services went to the Eighth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The court will consider whether or not it is constitutional for “closely-held corporations” to be able to opt out of contraceptive coverage while states like Missouri cannot.

Lost in all of this legal conflict, however, is the fact that Hobby Lobby, of course, still covers vasectomies. But what if vasectomies were cheap, non-invasive, fully reversible, and as widespread as the female birth control pill? Would businesses like Hobby Lobby begin to object to them? If Vasalgel became popular and affordable enough to surpass female birth control, it would put the Religious Right’s opposition to contraception to the test. As The New York Times reported in 2012, many on the Religious Right justify their opposition to some forms of birth control by equating them with abortion because they “prevent the implantation of a fertilized egg in the uterus.” But if men’s bodies became the primary site for birth control, would religious leaders shift their rhetoric and take issue with a technology like Vasalgel on the grounds that it prevents life on a massive scale? Or do debates about life only have meaning when they take place over women’s bodies?

"If Vasalgel became popular and affordable enough to surpass female birth control, it would put the Religious Right’s opposition to contraception to the test."

If the Parsemus Foundation’s optimistic timeline for the release of Vasalgel holds true, we may be forced to confront these questions sooner than expected. In the meantime, men, prepare for the possibility that you may soon take over primary responsibility for contraception from your wife or girlfriend. The future of birth control is coming and soon it might be inside of you.

I really hope so.

Source: holisticsexualhealth
Quote

"I barely find anybody attractive. I barely feel an affection for anybody.. But when I do.. I fall in so deep, so hard it’s ridiculous."

- Bayron Ortiz (via sluttybastard)

(via ourloveissemperfii)

Source: sluttybastard
Photo

utcjonesobservatory:

Congressional Hearing Slams Feasibility Of Asteroid Mining:

Two congressmen recently introduced the ASTEROIDS Act, which would grant property rights to companies seeking to mine the asteroid belt. Yesterday, the House Space Subcommittee held a hearing on the bill, where expert testimony bluntly told Congress the private sector is not up to the task of mining in space.

The American Space Technology for Exploring Resource Opportunities in Deep Space (ASTEROIDS) Act — also known as H.R. 5063 — was introduced this past July by Rep. Bill Posey (R-FL) and Rep. Derek Kilmer (D-WA). The two congressmen, both members of the House Science, Space and Technology Committee, declared in a joint statement that the bill would not only create more jobs but also safeguard America’s economic security:

"We may be many years away from successfully mining an asteroid, but the research to turn this from science fiction into reality is being done today," said Rep. Derek Kilmer.

"Businesses in Washington state and elsewhere are investing in this opportunity, but in order to grow and create more jobs they need greater certainty. That’s why I’m excited to introduce this bill with Representative Posey so we can help the United States access new supplies of critical rare metals while serving as a launch pad for a growing industry."

Currently, rare minerals used to manufacture a wide range of products are found in a small number of countries. This has left the United States dependent on foreign nations for these resources. The limited supply and high demand for these materials, alongside major advances in space technology and a deeper understanding of asteroids, has led a number of private sector investors to begin developing plans to identify and secure high-value minerals found on asteroids and transport them for use here on Earth.

The legislation has the support of several organizations and companies that comprise the “NewSpace community,” which is dedicated to promoting innovative commercial ventures as the primary means to expand our presence beyond the Earth. That includes two U.S. companies that are actively developing plans for asteroid mining: Deep Space Industries (DSI) and Planetary Resources.

The initiative has also been tentatively endorsed by the Planetary Society as a way to build an off-world infrastructure for space exploration, by making use of resources extracted and manufactured in space — what is known as “in situ resource utilization” (ISRU). At yesterday’s hearing, James F. Bell, the president of The Planetary Society and a professor in the School of Earth and Space Exploration at Arizona State University, testified that:

The issue of resources on asteroids is particularly compelling, not only from the scientific perspective noted above, but also as we begin to imagine a future where humanity is moving outward beyond our home world, exploring and settling new frontiers in our solar system. Just like many of the settlers who moved to the American West in the 19th century, settlers moving outward from Earth in the 21st century and beyond will want to try to figure out how to “live off the land” as much as possible. Based on what we know now, there’s good reason to believe that asteroids could provide many of the raw natural resources that humans will need to live and work beyond Earth. Some are water-bearing (and thus, oxygen-bearing), others have significant concentrations of metals and silicates useful as building materials. Based on meteorite studies, some are even likely to contain significant amounts of precious metals. All of these attributes make asteroids potentially economically attractive targets for future resource extraction.

While the extraction of space-based resources from asteroids is certainly still many years away, The Planetary Society believes that it would be wise to start making the required investments in technology, infrastructure, and transportation systems required to study asteroids in the level of detail needed to make truly informed future decisions about their individual resource potential. As such, we support investments, through both commercial and governmental programs, in the kinds of technologies needed for the exploration and utilization of asteroids as contemplated in H.R. 5063.

The Long Road Ahead

The most detailed testimony at the hearing was also the most skeptical. Mark Sykes, the Director of the Planetary Science Institute and a co-investigator on the NASA Dawn mission to Vesta and Ceres, bluntly stated that, “The development of an NEO ISRU infrastructure is beyond the scope of private enterprise.”

Congressional Hearing Slams Feasibility Of Commercial Asteroid Mining

Sykes believes that such an endeavor might one day be feasible, but not without first overcoming several hurdles that will likely require funding on a scale that could only be provided by the government. In fact, he reminds us, we’re not even sure about the precise composition of asteroids, which is crucial to planning mining operations:

We have some idea of their composition from remote spectroscopic observations and by picking up meteorites on the surface of the Earth and analyzing them. However, while spectra provide important clues to composition, they do not necessarily provide detailed information on bulk minerals comprising an asteroid. ….Likewise, meteorites represent only a small fraction of the mass of the asteroid entering the Earth’s atmosphere and do not necessarily present a complete picture of its composition.

Commercial asteroid resource extraction requires an understanding of the composition and mechanical properties of the material to be processed, and an understanding of how to do this under low-gravity conditions….In fact, it is unknown the extent to which any asteroid is compositionally homogeneous ….Extraction processes will have to be developed that accommodate a range of compositions …. At some point there would have to be the demonstration of an autonomous resource recovery facility on a near-Earth asteroid. There is then the need to assess the resource that has been extracted, determine the need for subsequent processing into usable material (e.g., water may need to be purified and then converted to hydrogen and oxygen, liquefied, and stored).

All this basic science and engineering is something beyond the scope of reasonable investment by a commercial entity, because there would be no expectation of return in investment on a reasonable timescales. I expect it would take a couple of decades to get to the point when one could answer the question of whether, with some level infrastructure in place, the marginal cost of processing and returning water from an asteroid would be cheaper than bringing it up from the surface of the Earth. Given the potential long-term benefit of a positive outcome in opening up the solar system to expanded human activity, this is a logical area of governmental investment. Once the basic science is known and basic technologies supporting this effort are developed, this would be the logical time for the private sector to come in and see if it could do things more cost-effectively.

Ad Astra, Contra Legem?

Congressional Hearing Slams Feasibility Of Commercial Asteroid Mining

And then there’s the tiny detail about whether granting asteroid mining rights to U.S. companies is legal under international law.

Joanne Irene Gabrynowicz, a prominent legal expert who was formerly the editor-in-chief of the Journal of Space Law, testified that current treaties do appear to allow for the appropriation of natural resources from other planets and asteroids. However, what remains unclear is the ownership status of the resources when they are collected.

Michael Listner, an attorney who counsels governmental and private organizations on matters relating to space law and policy, raised similar concerns when I interviewed him for a previous article. Those in the commercial sector, who believe private ownership of resources extracted from space is legal, point to a British legal decision, which permitted the private sale of lunar soil that had been obtained by the Soviet Union. Listner, however, said:

My opinion is that the effect of the Soviet lunar sample precedent will be negligible when it is compared to the potentially trillions of dollars in mineral resources that could be extracted. The sale of the Soviet lunar sample was so minuscule that the international community hardly batted an eyelash….

The ASTEROID Act does score points for being crafted with international law in mind. It calls upon the U.S. government to:

Promote the right of United States commercial entities to explore and utilize resources from asteroids in outer space, in accordance with the existing international obligations of the United States, free from harmful interference, and to transfer or sell such resources; and develop the frameworks necessary to meet the international obligations of the United States.

But the “free from harmful interference” statement is problematic. The legislation further defines it as:

As between any entities over which the United States can exercise jurisdiction, any assertion of superior right to execute specific commercial asteroid resource utilization activities in outer space shall prevail if it is found to be first in time, derived upon a reasonable basis, and in accordance with all existing international obligations of the United States.

Sykes points out why this could quickly turn ugly:

Under the current language, I could today take published observations of near-Earth objects by the NASA Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer telescope, identify those with low albedo (enhancing their probability of being water sources), and lay claim to the 100 objects having the most favorable orbits for low-energy missions with good dynamical opportunities for returns of material to Earth orbit. Resource recovery may be decades in the future, but under the terms of this bill I can make an “assertion of superior right” by being “first in time, derived upon a reasonable basis” to have made that assertion and assuming it is “in accordance with all existing international obligations of the United States.” I can effectively increase the future costs of those who might be compelled to pay me for access to “my” asteroids or go to a less dynamically favorable resource target.

And the Wild West’s gold rush begins anew.

Source: io9.com
Link

Second Amendment Hero Stands Her Ground against 11-year-old practicing clarinet

quickhits:

Police were strangely able to arrest her without gunning her down in the street. Weird.

Weird…

Source: quickhits
Quote

"

Here’s a sure-fire way to know that you hate women: when an incident of intimate partner violence in which a man knocks a woman unconscious gains national attention and every question or comment you think to make has to do with her behavior, you really hate women. Like, despise.

There is no other explanation. There is no “I need all the facts.” There is no excuse. You hate women. Own it.

Now, you probably don’t believe you hate women. You probably honestly think you’re being an objective observer whose only interest is the truth. You are delusional.

We have this problem in our discourse around the most important challenges we face where we feel we have to be “fair to both sides.” But sometimes, one of those sides is subjugation and oppression. If you’re OK with legitimizing that side in the interest of “fairness,” you’re essentially saying you’re OK with oppression as a part of the human condition. That’s some hateful shit.

"

Source: thepeoplesrecord