a lesbian woman Daniel worked with at his old job found out I had slept with a woman and then harassed him on the job for six months by insinuating that I was ~really a lesbian~ around him constantly. This woman was a manager with seniority over him, and the restaurant has a history of being very reluctant to fire or confront awful people - there was a dude who made rape jokes there that got to stay (and keep making rape jokes!) until he quit - so he tried to ride it out cause he didn’t feel like he could go to the owners and get any results. It got to the point where he had to find another job cause he couldn’t take the nasty comments about us any more (I mean, it was at that point months ago, but he just switched jobs this month), and, haha, her harassment probably was a not-so-insubstantial contributor to Daniel’s fear that I’m going to leave him for a woman someday, which continues to affect our attempt to build up our relationship now, sooo.
there’s one for the “lesbians being biphobic in ways that have concrete financial and emotional consequences for the ppl involved” files.
we’re giving it another shot. we’re going to try staying together while dating other people, check in at the end of our lease and see if we want to keep living together. Not trying to put a name on it right now. Things like “I can’t make a forever commitment to you without dating women” became easier to say when the forever commitment was discarded. Things like “I was unhappy too” “this is a weight off my shoulders” “I still love you”. All the ways we were contorting ourselves to (we thought) please the other ended up crushing us, but maybe we can unkink our selves and find we [still] love each other [better] when we give each other room to stand upright. Maybe we don’t have to defer pursuing our dream lives in order to make it together; maybe building the future we wanted instead of setting it aside while we “worked on” ourselves is precisely what we should have been doing all along.
Bloomberg News: The U.S. National Security Agency knew for at least two years about a flaw in the way that many websites send sensitive information and regularly used it to gather critical intelligence, two people familiar with the matter said.
Is anyone surprised about this?
The most obvious follow-up ever.
This is what happens when you come for Rihanna
DRAG HA!I just don’t understand why people are so worried about who Rihanna is fucking
Lmfaoooo lolo is a hating ass geek every time someone else has success she has to shit on them for literally no reason
Lolo Jones is the poor man’s stacey dash like rly
Lolo need to worry about her mediocrity and not about the dick Rihanna is gettin’ tbh.
i’m going to screenshot this and show it to the person who holds the rights to the movie and make them do something about it
A look at which companies have issued a security patch to fix the Heartbleed bug.
Hey friends, I know this might seem like a huge pain in the ass, but you gotta change your passwords. This is one of the biggest internet security flaws in history and your personal data including your credit card info could be compromised. I had to change my Tumblr password TWICE today because of suspicious activity. This isn’t a joke. Before changing your passwords makes sure to check the above linked list on Mashable and make sure that the flaw has been patched on that specific sites AND THEN change your password. Also, if you have Gmail or are using Gmail for business, it’s a good idea to set up 2-step verification just to be extra safe.
Heartbleed looks like it’s serious business. Time to update your passwords, everyone, moving to 2-step verification wherever you can, and definitely consider picking up a complex password generator like KeePass. Keep your information safe!
i actually think the whole model of a petition that has to reach a certain number of signatures and then ~something vague will happen!~ is really harmful
i’m not against petitions in general, honest to god i’m not. but in my understanding, apart from this model, there are basically two types of petition:
- petitions that are judged to be successful once the thing they’re petitioning for has actually happened. example: residents petition their regional manager of post office operations not to close their tiny local post office. the petition is successful when it’s announced that the post office will not be closed, regardless of the number of signatures collected.
- petitions that are judged to be successful once they’ve reached a certain number of signatures, but only because that will trigger something to actually happen, usually by law. example: someone wants their proposed state law or constitutional amendment (such as prop 8) to be put on the ballot for a statewide vote in california, so (after formally drafting their law and requesting a title and summary of it from the attorney general) they circulate a petition proposing it. once that petition reaches 504,760 signatures (for a normal law) or 807,615 signatures (for a constitutional amendment) it will be verified and the proposed law will appear on the ballot in the next election and have the chance to actually become law.
both of these models keep the organizers’ eyes on the prize. they know what they’re doing and why they’re doing it. they know what constitutes success and what does not.
whitehouse.gov-style petitions complicate this. they allow organizers to avoid thinking about what their actual goal is, who they should be petitioning and why. and they provide a false goal, encouraging people to focus not on their actual end goal, but on an arbitrary number of signatures that has no guarantee of achieving anything of real value. and since that arbitrary number is high, they encourage people to put a lot of work into this false goal, to the exclusion of other efforts, without even acquiring supporters’ contact information which would be invaluable for future campaigns. then, if the signature threshold is reached, they allow people to have a false sense of accomplishment—they’ll get the feeling of success without having actually changed anything, meaning that many of them will no longer feel motivated to act on this issue.
this seems to me like one of the worst organizing endeavors one could undertake. it almost feels as though this process was specifically calculated with the aim of undermining causes by distracting organizers and supporters with a carrot on a stick. and considering that this is a service voluntarily offered by the white house—a seat of power which, whether held by democrats or republicans, is invested in protecting the status quo—that may just be the case.
G.U.Y. isn’t even charting in the top 200 on itunes and 3 year old S&M.mp3 by Rihanna is #83 | @ladygaga didn’t get thrown up on for this