19 7 / 2014



Weird Al Yankovic—“Word Crimes” (“Blurred Lines” parody)

Disclaimer: Use prescriptivism responsibly; don’t be a jerk to others.

all the catchiness of blurred lines without the misogyny

and it’s an ode to proper grammar

love u weird al

(via diniknits)

19 7 / 2014

19 7 / 2014

James McAvoy playing Double Dutch (9/05/14 @ Jimmy Fallon) [x]

More evidence this man is goddamn adorable.

(Source: jjamesmcgoaway, via fallontonight)

18 7 / 2014



daddy makes the perfect bun

omg this is the cutest thing

(via knitmecrazy)

18 7 / 2014

(Source: jedilady2, via diniknits)

18 7 / 2014


Learn to Crochet!
Crochet Gif Tutorials: Crocheting into the Chain

If the first row of stitches after the chain are going to be single crochet stitches (sc’s), you’ll need to crochet one extra chain. If they are going to be double crochet stitches (dc’s), you’ll need two extra, because dc’s are taller and you’ll need more space. Treble crochet stitches (trc’s) require three, etc. A pattern will always tell you what to do!

For a more detailed explanation of the single crochet (sc) stitch used in this example, please see the tutorial here

I NEEDED THIS SO MUCH as I’m a brand new crocheter (I’ve been a knitter most of my life). I started because I needed to make flowers for a baby blanket, and I’m now starting to branch out into more complex things—I recently started making hexagons with the leftover yarn from other projects so I can use all that extra yarn in a nifty way. I never could figure out how to crochet into other stitches (since the flower and hexagon patterns don’t really require it). Now I know!! 

(via we-love-crocheting)

18 7 / 2014


“you don’t look depressed though”

oh yeah sorry i forgot to bring my literal dark cloud with me today

(via diniknits)

18 7 / 2014



Kacy Catanzaro: the first woman in history to qualify for Mt. Midoriyama.

I just need everyone to watch this video [x]. She’s a 5 foot, 100 lb gymnast and she beasts through this insanely difficult, heavily upper body focused course like it was her morning jog. The camera keeps cutting to these massive, musclebound men in the audience with their mouths hanging open. 

this is the most amazing thing ive ever seen

(Source: felicityperhaps, via cleolinda)

16 7 / 2014

This was my grandmother’s mantra. I try to live by it, but it’s definitely hard sometimes. 

This was my grandmother’s mantra. I try to live by it, but it’s definitely hard sometimes. 

(Source: mariannapaige, via diniknits)

02 7 / 2014


I have very tenuously tied my discussion of the Hobby Lobby decision to the theme of this blog through the clever use of Doctor Who gifs, so thank you to all of my followers for putting up with me for the past few days. This will (probably) be my last post about the case, but I just had to respond to two arguments that I’ve seen cropping up again and again in response to my posts. 

Myth #1: Employers were being forced to pay for contraception, and people should pay for it themselves.

Let me show you how health insurance benefits work. 

Let’s say a company has $100 dollars which they will use to compensate their employee in various ways. They’ll give $50 directly to the employee in cold, hard cash, $10 will go into a retirement or savings account, and $40 will go towards health insurance benefits (These numbers are made up to illustrate a point, so just work with me for a minute). It’s all part of an employee’s compensation. Employer provided healthcare is very common in the United States because consumers can usually get cheaper healthcare when they go into together in large groups, and so employers often group all of their employees together in a group, purchase a healthcare plan, and use the size of their group to negotiate better rates.

People use their health insurance benefits in many different ways. Some people need allergy medication, some people need hip-replacement surgery, and some people need insulin. The health insurance plans handle all of those individual transactions. But now, thanks to Hobby Lobby, closely held corporations can say, “Actually, we don’t want the insurer to provide these forms of birth control. So don’t pay for them.”

Sure, the employee has $50 in cold hard cash, but that cash is already being used to pay for rent, food, clothes, and health care (because you still have to pay a co-pay out of pocket for a lot of care). Many people simply can’t afford to buy that birth control out-of-pocket (that stuff is EXPENSIVE).

They were promised a health plan worth about 40% of their total compensation that would provide for their medical needs, including birth control. But those companies aren’t providing their employees with birth control or an extra bonus in cash now that they won’t provide those methods of birth control. Therefore, their employees are being unfairly denied their compensation.

This is not a person of faith being forced to pay for birth control. This is a company providing compensation to an employee, and the employee choosing to spend that compensation on their medical needs. If a company isn’t allowed to determine how I spend my paycheck, it shouldn’t be allowed to determine how I use my health insurance.

Myth #2: This decision only impacted a few forms of birth control. It’s not a big deal.

Nope, nope, nope. The Supreme Court didn’t just say that excluding those forms of birth control was okay. They established a legal precedent which could have devastating long term consequences.

First of all, this won’t just affect Hobby Lobby. 90% of all corporations in the U.S. are “closely held,” and they employ about 52% of the American workforce. Millions of Americans could be denied the birth control they need.

And we’re not just talking about a few forms of birth control. The Supreme Court has ordered several appeals courts to review cases in which employers object to all forms of birth control using the Hobby Lobby decision. Their legal precedent may allow some companies to refuse to provide all forms of birth control to their employees. 

Furthermore, this decision could affect a myriad of things beyond birth control. The decision specifically says that their reasoning wouldn’t apply to things like blood transfusions and vaccinations, which some religious individuals oppose, but gave no particular reason why not. A future court could decide this distinction is arbitrary and allow employers to refuse to provide these services too.

The court also said this decision wouldn’t necessarily allow employers to discriminate against employees based on race, but what about sexual orientation or gender identity? The Hobby Lobby decision could provide the legal justification for 90% of corporations employing 52% of the workforce to request an exemption from non-discrimination protections by claiming those protections are against their religious beliefs. 

I agree with Justice Ginsburg, the majority decision stepped into a legal minefield.