Floral Tumblr Themes
Viva La Revolución.

19. Feminist. Activist. Aspiring hero.
Rhythm And Poetry
"She loves Hip Hop and Rap more than her own reflection"

1/199 Next





Why feeding water birds bread is harmful:

  • Duckling Malnutrition: In an area where ducks are regularly fed bread, ducklings will not receive adequate nutrition for proper growth and development. Furthermore, because ducks will naturally seek out an easy food source such as human handouts, ducklings will not learn to forage for natural foods as easily.
  • Overcrowding: Where an easy food source is abundant, ducks and other waterfowl will lay more eggs and the pond or lake will become overcrowded. This makes it more difficult for the birds to seek out healthier food sources and increases the likelihood of territorial aggression.
  • Pollution: When too much bread is offered to ducks, not all of it will be eaten. The soggy, uneaten bread is unsightly and rotting bread can create noxious odors as well as lead to greater algae growth that can clog natural waterways. This concentrates the pollution and can eventually eradicate fish and other life in the vicinity.
  • Diseases: Feeding ducks bread can increase the spread of diseases in two ways. First, a carbohydrate-rich diet leads to greater defecation, and bird feces easily harbor bacteria responsible for numerous diseases, including avian botulism. Second, moldy bread can cause aspergillosis, a fatal lung infection that can decimate entire duck and waterfowl flocks.
  • Pest Attraction: Rotting supplies of food leftover from sated ducks will attract other unwelcome pests such as rats, mice and insects. These pests can also harbor additional diseases that can be dangerous to humans.
  • Loss of Natural Behaviour: When birds become accustomed to handouts, they lose their natural fear of humans and may become aggressive in order to get more food. Their loss of fear can also cause other dangers, such as a willingness to cross busy roads in order to reach picnickers and other likely sources of food.

Good Foods to Feed Ducks:

The best foods for ducks are those that provide the nutrients, minerals and vitamins the birds need for healthy growth and development. Many of these foods are similar to the natural seeds, grains and plants the birds will forage on their own. As omnivorous birds, ducks will eat a great deal of different foods, and the best foods to offer ducks include:

  • Cracked corn
  • Wheat, barley or similar grains
  • Oats (uncooked; rolled or quick)
  • Rice (cooked or uncooked)
  • Birdseed (any type or mix)
  • Grapes (cut in half)
  • Frozen peas or corn (defrosted, no need to cook)
  • Earthworms
  • Mealworms (fresh or dried)
  • Chopped lettuce or other greens or salad mixes
  • Vegetable trimmings or peels (chopped)
  • Duck feed pellets or poultry starter pellets (x)

Every year I will reblog some kind of reminder of this! Please don’t feed waterfowl bread.

I used to volunteer at a country park and we would literally ban people if they fed the ducks and swans bread. People said it was because we wanted to make money via the seeds we sold in the gift shop (which were a special blend especially for waterfowl) but in reality it is because disposing of ducks that had died from being fed too much bread was starting to have a mental impact on the volunteers.

Oh wow I didn’t know this! Everyone should know this!




Playboy’s catcall flowchart.  

I’m reblogging Playboy. Somebody stop me. 

Even Playboy wants men to stop screaming at women on the street. When the pinnacle of female objectification is telling you you’re being a sexist pig, maybe for real you’re being a sexist pig. (I mean, women have been telling you you’re a sexist pig for catcalling for a long time, but then again, they’re *women* so their opinions don’t count. Now a magazine for men has acknowledged it so LISTEN UP.)

Love em for this




Yea it’s clearly our “generation that’s making homosexuality a trend.” Seriously, pisses me off when people say that. look at this! It’s always been around, it’s not a trend, it’s real. It’s beautiful.

These are really beautiful images.

History Lesson: In America from about 1700-1920 there was a social rule that said that women did not have a sex drive. According to men, all women ever were asexual and only ever had sex because their husbands wanted it and as a good doting wife they would open up for him. That said, lesbians flourished in this time! Because it was believed that women did not have sex, when two women would share a house and finances together (called a Boston Marriage, look it up!) nobody thought anything of it. Because clearly they werent homosexuals since clearly women were incapable of being independently sexual. The more you know!


Daily Show correspondent Michael Che tries to find a safe place to report from.

people’s reaction when i’m talking


people’s reaction when you’re talking…






Stop over jealous and insecure boys 2014 

what the hell is hw even code for 

hand wjobs 

Anonymous Asked:
About the Ferguson thing: The cop was severely beaten and even suffered a major eye injury, which many people think caused him to miss Mike Brown so many times. And there are also many witnesses who claim to have seen Mike Brown rush back at the cop after assaulting him in the car (and I know this is pretty much irrelevant, but just to let you know, some of those witnesses were black). So can't you at least give this guy the presumption of innocence please?

My answer:



On the right is the image right-wing pundit Jim Hoft used to prove that Darren Wilson had an orbital blowout fracture. On the left is a CT scan of a blowout fracture, taken at the University of Iowa in 2008 and used on a website explaining what orbital blowout fractures are. If you look carefully or casually or at all in any way using eyeballs of any kind, you’ll notice that they’re the same image, except that the one on the right has been edited so that it no longer includes the date or location. That’s because the story was made up.

In video taken after the shooting, you can see Wilson walking around uninjured. His eye socket is not busted, nor is his jaw (an addition to the story I’ve seen since it’s been on its telephone game journey across the internet). In addition, Michael Brown’s autopsy showed no sign of struggle. And the claim that over a dozen witnesses agreed with the cop’s story were fabricated, made up by either police or a local journalist who has been on leave since March and is not reporting officially or unofficially on the situation in Ferguson. None of the actual witnesses (the ones who exist and are not made up) agree with the cop’s story.

Given that everything so far in defense of Wilson has been made up, police have been intentionally spreading lies to make Wilson look better and Brown look worse, and they deleted Wilson’s social media presence and helped him flee town before revealing his identity (making it impossible to know what he may have said about the case or comments he may have made about other subjects that could paint a picture of who he is as a person), it’s pretty hard to presume they’re not hiding something.

Please forgive me, but I need to interject:

"The cop was severely beaten and suffered a major eye injury… Witnesses claim to have seen Mike Brown rush the cop…"

Let’s say, for the sake of argument, that everything here is true.  Mike Brown rushed the officer and attacked him, causing him severe eye injury.


I’m the daughter of a Right-Wing, NRA loving, Republican voting police officer (may he rest in peace), and *I* know that this was murder, because it WAS murder, and even a criminal has the right not to be murdered!

(And I’m REALLY not convinced that Michael Brown had done anything illegal, but we’re pretending for argument’s sake.)

Brown was unarmed.  He used physical violence that could have been handled in a non-lethal manner.

Lethal force is ONLY justifiable in matters of Last Resort.  Last Resort means that if you don’t act right now, you or someone else will die.

You don’t shoot an unarmed man unless he’s right there going to kill someone.  Yes, you have a right to defend yourself.  Yes, you have a right to kill someone who is trying to murder you.

NO, you do NOT have the right to kill someone who is not going to, or not able to, kill you or someone else.

There are non-lethal methods of defense that this officer should have been trained in, not the least of which is the Taser and pepper spray.  Both of which the officer should have had on his person.


If Mike Brown had a gun on him, yes, I’d wait and hear the officer out because there is a chance he could have brandished the weapon.

Hell, if Brown had a knife on him, I’d at least listen to the officer, though I’d want him suspended from the force for the duration of the investigation.

But Brown was UNARMED.

jean-luc-gohard, I love you for your thorough debunking of the Wilson eye-injury thing, and thank you.  

But we shouldn’t have to sit here and debunk it, because it doesn’t matter!  No lethal force was used against the officer, so none should have been used against Brown.  It’s as simple as that!

It shouldn’t matter that Brown was black, it shouldn’t matter if he’d actually committed a crime or not, it shouldn’t matter if he punched the officer - a police officer has the responsibility to protect and serve, and that includes using the least amount of force necessary to stop a criminal.

If a white guy had thrown a punch at the officer, do you think the officer would have shot him, or do you think he’d have used non-lethal methods first?