lost-but-saved:

kwamejaw:

subbieblackgrl:

melodic-ivy-lady:

citizenblue:

sizvideos:

Watch the video of this 3D rendering young girl

australia, 46
canada, 54.
india, 103.

what the fuck dude.

SIGNAL BOOST! This is too awesome not to reblog!

GOOD!

This is like to catch a predator, but like gone super saiyan

MY GOD!!!! SVU….

(via legendof-super-emewyn-who-stuck)

elysedc:

The ultimate dad joke compilation

(via allonsyforever)

fappuclno:

when you and ya bestfriend say something at the exact same time
image

(via taverenpotter)

phoenixfire-thewizardgoddess:

the-internet-addict:

pottern:

don’t date someone you wouldn’t have a harry potter movie marathon with

That’s nearly 24 hours. I wouldn’t do that with anyone

…the weak are already weeding themselves out…

(via taverenpotter)

7 Things I Wish Parents Would Stop Teaching Their Children:

goddess-river:

  1. That nudity is inherently sexual
  2. That people should be judged for their personal decisions
  3. That yelling solves problems
  4. That they are too young to be talking about the things they’re already starting to ask questions about
  5. That age correlates to importance
  6. That interacting with someone of the opposite sex is inherently romantic
  7. That the default for someone is straight and cisgender

(Source: moon-sylph, via taverenpotter)

"

… “You must have shown me real loyalty down in the Chamber. Nothing but that could’ve called Fawkes to you.” That’s the very first thing Dumbledore thanks and praises Harry for. Not for rescuing Ginny, or saving the school from the basilisk, or for keeping Voldemort from coming back, but for loyalty.

Dumbledore judges the people he works with based first and foremost on how loyal they are to him. Not because he thinks he’s all that, but because, as I said, he views people as game pieces, and you can’t have your game pieces acting up, can you? He values his pieces. He wants to advance and protect them. But he doesn’t want them running off beyond his sphere of influence and doing their own thing. I think there’s something very ambiguous about Dumbledore’s habit of seeking out desperate, socially outcast people and doing them one or two huge favors that leave them bound to him for life. Remus, Hagrid and Snape all fit that pattern, and Trelawney and Firenze appear to join the ranks in OOP. It kind of makes me wonder what Dumbledore has done for Fletcher, Moody and Shacklebolt.

…The problem with Sirius is, he’s not loyal to Dumbledore at all; he’s loyal to Harry. From Dumbledore’s point of view, it’s as if he’s playing wizard chess, and one of the knights suddenly decides that he doesn’t care what happens to the king, he’s just going to take care of that little pawn on the left. So Dumbledore does the only thing he thinks he can do — he sticks his recalcitrant knight into a safe, isolated corner of the board and keeps him from making any moves. Perfectly sensible and strategically sound, as long as you don’t expect your game pieces to have any pesky emotions or psychological issue that need to be taken into account.

…Dumbledore’s actions at Hogwarts are another symptom of his general approach. He doesn’t treat it just as a school, but also as an instrument in his strategy. People like Snape, Hagrid and Trelawny — all lousy teachers, in very different ways — are given their jobs as perks, because of their past of future usefulness to the Order, and because it strengthens their bonds of loyalty to Dumbledore.

OTOH, look at Lupin, who is a talented teacher. Why wasn’t he hired before Harry’s third year, especially given the difficulty of finding qualified DADA professors? My theory is that Dumbledore didn’t consider it necessary. As far as he knew, Lupin was already totally loyal simply because Dumbledore had allowed him to attend Hogwarts. There was no need to bribe him with a job. He was hired only when his familiarity with Sirius became an important factor. Once Sirius proved not to be a threat, Lupin was allowed to resign…

"

Thoughts on Dumbledore by marinarusalka, from hp-essays (via pottersir)

THIS IS SO GREAT AND SO INTERESTING AND EVEN MORE SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT SNAPE’S STORYLINE AND HERE’S WHY

Just look at Dumbledore’s behavior in The Prince’s Tale - especially at the contrast between before and after Snape agreed to help him defeat Voldemort. There’s so much emotional manipulation, so much that Dumbledore is doing to keep Snape on his side.

“That is why – it is for that reason – he thinks it means Lily Evans!”

“The prophecy did not refer to a woman,” said Dumbledore. “It spoke of a boy born at the end of July – ”

“You know what I mean! He thinks it means her son, he is going to hunt her down – kill them all – ”

If she means so much to you,” said Dumbledore, “surely Lord Voldemort will spare her? Could you not ask for mercy for the mother, in exchange for the son?”

“I have – I have asked him – ”

You disgust me,” said Dumbledore, and Harry had never heard so much contempt in his voice. Snape seemed to shrink a little, “You do not care, then, about the deaths of her husband and child? They can die, as long as you have what you want?”

That line, the “you disgust me” line is SO IMPORTANT. Contrary to popular belief, Dumbledore doesn’t find Snape’s obsession love for Lily beautiful; he finds it disgusting - and understandably so. Because she “means so much” to Snape that he’s willing to sacrifice her family, and therefore happiness, in order to keep her alive. And, frankly, that’s gross. Dumbledore agrees.

“Hide them all, then,” he croaked. “Keep her – them – safe. Please.”

And what will you give me in return, Severus?

“In – in return?” Snape gaped at Dumbledore, and Harry expected him to protest, but after a long moment he said, “Anything.”

Aaaaaand Dumbledore gets himself the perfect soldier - someone who is willing to do anything.

“I thought…you were going…to keep her…safe…”

“She and James put their faith in the wrong person,” said Dumbledore. “Rather like you, Severus. Weren’t you hoping that Lord Voldemort would spare her?”

Also really important. Dumbledore was supposed to protect her, keep her alive, and it didn’t work out and that greatly puts Snape’s loyalty at risk. So what does Dumbledore do? Deflect. He places the blame on Snape and Voldemort here - which, I’m pretty much with him here because Snape did tell Voldemort the prophecy and Voldemort did personally kill the Potters. But this isn’t about that. This is strategy. Keep Snape guilty and keep the blame off Dumbledore by having this whole “well there was nothing I could do” stance and thereby keep Snape both vulnerable and loyal. Make Voldemort the real enemy, someone that Snape would be willing to do anything to fight against at all cost.

“Her boy survives,” said Dumbledore.

With a tiny jerk of the head, Snape seemed to flick off an irksome fly.

“Her son lives. He has her eyes, precisely her eyes. You remember the shape and color of Lily Evans’s eyes, I am sure?

“DON’T!” bellowed Snape. “Gone…dead…”

“Is this remorse, Severus?”

“I wish…I wish I were dead…”

“And what use would that be to anyone?” said Dumbledore coldly. “If you loved Lily Evans, if you truly loved her, then your way forward is clear.

Okay so Dumbledore is definitely using Snape’s love for Lily against him - I think we can all agree with that. I mean look at how he’s referring to her as “Lily Evans” rather than as her married name, “Lily Potter.” Dumbledore has a very tough sell here; he wants Snape to help him protect the child of someone Snape loves and someone he hates. So he takes James out of the equation and it’s all about Harry’s eyes and how much they look like Lily’s and Evans. And then he takes Snape’s love and gives it a purpose.

“You know how and why she died. Make sure it was not in vain. Help me protect Lily’s son.”

“He does not need protection. The Dark Lord has gone – ”

“The Dark Lord will return, and Harry Potter will be in terrible danger when he does.”

There was a long pause, and slowly Snape regained control of himself, mastered his own breathing. At last he said, “Very well. Very well. But never – never tell, Dumbledore! This must be between us! Swear it! I cannot bear…especially Potter’s son…I want your word!”

My word, Severus, that I shall never reveal the best of you?” Dumbledore sighed, looking down into Snape’s ferocious, anguished face.

Before it was disgusting, but now that Snape’s agreed to help him, has pledged his loyalty, Snape’s love is now ~the best part of him~

“ – mediocre, arrogant as his father, a determined rule-breaker, delighted to find himself famous, attention-seeking and impertinent – ”

“You see what you expect to see, Severus,” said Dumbledore, without raising his eyes from a copy of Transfiguration Today . “Other teachers report that the boy is modest, likable, and reasonably talented. Personally, I find him an engaging child.”

Dumbledore turned a page, and said, without looking up, “Keep an eye on Quirrell, won’t you?”

Snape is only seeing James’ worst qualities in Harry (which tbh first year Harry definitely did not have) so Dumbledore brings up qualities that were, actually, found in and associated with Lily to placate him. Because Dumbledore’s biggest challenge is to make Snape forget that James is Harry’s father. He then follows this up with a request.

“Karkaroff’s Mark is becoming darker too. He is panicking, he fears retribution; you know how much help he gave the Ministry after the Dark Lord fell.” Snape looked sideways at Dumbledore’s crooked-nosed profile. “Karkaroff intends to flee if the Mark burns.”

“Does he?” said Dumbledore softly, as Fleur Delacour and Roger Davies came giggling in from the grounds. “And are you tempted to join him?”

“No,” said Snape, his black eyes on Fleur’s and Roger’s retreating figures. “I am not such a coward.”

“No,” agreed Dumbledore. “You are a braver man by far than Igor Karkaroff. You know, I sometimes think we Sort too soon…

He walked away, leaving Snape looking stricken…

Whether you believe it or not, both Sirius and Remus have said that Snape was jealous of James - of his popularity, his talents, all the glory he received, etc. And a lot of those things are perks from being a brave Gryffindor rather than an “evil” Slytherin. Dumbledore is capitalizing on that, on Snape’s secret desires. He’s manipulating Snape because wow he thinks he’s brave, he thinks he’s brave enough to even be a mighty Gryffindor - something I’m sure no one has even told him before. Something he’d never admit to secretly reveling in because he grew up unloved and unwanted. But it keeps him loyal, keeps him close to Dumbledore.

“I am fortunate, extremely fortunate, that I have you, Severus.”

The power of being complimentary, my friends, is not focused on enough. (And I’m not trying to take away from the fact that Snape is a talented wizard, because I do think that, but Dumbledore is so totally manipulating him come on. What makes me say that? Because not long afterwards does he segue into asking Snape to kill him)

“In short, the boy has had a death sentence pronounced upon him as surely as I have,” said Dumbledore. “Now, I should have thought the natural successor to the job, once Draco fails, is yourself?

There was a short pause.

“That, I think, is the Dark Lord’s plan.”

Lord Voldemort foresees a moment in the near future when he will not need a spy at Hogwarts?

“He believes the school will soon be in his grasp, yes.”

“And if it does fall into his grasp,” said Dumbledore, almost, it seemed, as an aside, “I have your word that you will do all in your power to protect the students at Hogwarts?

Snape gave a stiff nod.

Great, Dumbledore has not only a spy, but an heir.

“He is his father over again – ”

In looks, perhaps, but his deepest nature is much more like his mother’s. I spend time with Harry because I have things to discuss with him, information I must give him before it is too late.”

Harry actually shares plenty of traits with James - and based on how he’s spoken of James in the past, Dumbledore liked him. (And why wouldn’t he? Not only is James amazing jkalsdsalkdjasldaskdh but he was very loyal to Dumbledore) So this is for Snape’s benefit. Again, he’s keeping him under control by bringing Lily into the equation and make Harry worthy enough, in Snape’s eyes, to protect.

“Information,” repeated Snape. “You trust him…you do not trust me.

“It is not a question of trust. I have, as we both know, limited time. It is essential that I give the boy enough information for him to do what he needs to do.”

“And why may I not have the same information?”

I prefer not to put all of my secrets in one basket, particularly not a basket that spends so much time dangling on the arm of Lord Voldemort.”

“Which I do on your orders!”

“And you do it extremely well. Do not think that I underestimate the constant danger in which you place yourself, Severus. To give Voldemort what appears to be valuable information while withholding the essentials is a job I would entrust to nobody but you.

“Yet you confide much more in a boy who is incapable of Occlumency, whose magic is mediocre, and who has a direct connection into the Dark Lord’s mind!”

Dumbledore is clearly making Snape angry and I don’t think it’s necessarily intentional. But I do think he’s trying to make sure that Snape desires and values his trust over Voldemort’s. I mean, I’m sure he’s double checked that he has Snape’s loyalty before, but it’s safe to keep checking every now and then. But then this happens:

Snape looked angry, mutinous. Dumbledore sighed.

“Come to my office tonight, Severus, at eleven, and you shall not complain that I have no confidence in you…”

MUTINOUS IS SUCH AN IMPORTANT WORD. DUMBLEDORE IS AT RISK OF LOSING THE BEST AND MOST ESSENTIAL PIECE TO HIS GAME, HIS MVP, SO HE HAS TO REEL HIM BACK IN.

“So the boy…the boy must die?” asked Snape quite calmly.

“And Voldemort himself must do it, Severus. That is essential.”

Another long silence. Then Snape said, “I thought…all those years…that we were protecting him for her. For Lily.

Snape is currently reevaluating his life and all of his choices. Because he thinks, if not for Lily, then what is the point of protecting Harry Potter? Why is he fighting this war? Why is he on Dumbledore’s side?

“We have protected him because it has been essential to teach him, to raise him, to let him try his strength,” said Dumbledore, his eyes still tight shut. “Meanwhile, the connection between them grows ever stronger, a parasitic growth. Sometimes I have thought he suspects it himself. If I know him, he will have arranged matters so that when he does set out to meet his death, it will truly mean the end of Voldemort.”

Dumbledore opened his eyes. Snape looked horrified.

“You have kept him alive so that he can die at the right moment?”

“Don’t be shocked, Severus. How many men and women have you watched die?”

“Lately, only those whom I could not save,” said Snape. He stood up. “You have used me.

Indeed he has! And after all this time, you’ve finally caught on!

“I have spied for you and lied for you, put myself in mortal danger for you. Everything was supposed to be to keep Lily Potter’s son safe. Now you tell me you have been raising him like a pig for slaughter – ”

Uh-oh no longer Lily Evans - now she is Potter, now she and everything that’s a part of her (i.e. her son) is tainted by James. Still worth protecting? Still worth sacrificing and risking so much for? Apparently yes because this happens:

“But this is touching, Severus,” said Dumbledore seriously. “Have you grown to care for the boy, after all?”

For him?” shouted Snape. “ Expecto Patronum!”

From the tip of his wand burst the silver doe. She landed on the office floor, bounded once across the office, and soared out of the window. Dumbledore watched her fly away, and as her silvery glow faded he turned back to Snape, and his eyes were full of tears.

“After all this time?”

“Always,” said Snape.

Okay so obviously, if you hadn’t already caught on, Snape isn’t doing all of this for the cause or because he’s repenting for being a Death Eater. It’s all for Lily. The woman he helped kill. I beg you to not find that romantic. Remember Dumbledore’s "you disgust me"? That’s pretty much how I feel about Snape, and I suspect that Dumbledore still feels that way. Because, as valuable as he is, Snape has not changed. And I guess it doesn’t bother him at all if he’s risked and sacrificed so much for a child who will die anyway if it was all for her.

After all this time, you still do not see the value of protecting an innocent child? Always. After all this time you still cannot let go of a woman who never loved you romantically? Always. After all this time, you’re still fighting against Voldemort because he killed Lily and not because you believe in muggle-born rights? Always. Dumbledore had to have known this - I mean he’d been using Snape’s love for Lily against him for how long? But I’m sure it still saddened him.

Anyway, “The Prince’s Tale” is a brilliant example of Dumbledore’s manipulation and how he used it to win a war. This is where we see him really in action - and it’s fascinating. Because this is the power of loyalty - how Dumbledore could get a Death Eater so firmly on his side that he continues to do Dumbledore’s work for him after his own death. That’s powerful.

And that’s why Voldemort’s fucking scared of him. I’m kind of scared of him.

(via comealongraggedypond)

(Source: pottersir, via matrim-notabloodylord-cauthon)

Tags: HP Real Talk

doloresjaneumbridge:

Some snaps from my Harry Potter Reread - Part 1 [Part 2]

(via taverenpotter)

arctowardsthesun:

jessicalprice:

thebaconsandwichofregret:

bronzebasilisk:

blu-thoth:

meta-bubbles:

DO NOT GIVE OR GET ANY VACCINATIONS FOR YOURSELF OR  YOUR KIDS………..

Ok, lets break this down nice and simple.
Formaldehyde is from the purification of the vaccine. 99.9% of which is removed. The reason it doesn’t give a dosage is so minuscule that it can’t be measured without going into picograms. That’s one trillionth of a gram. You breathe in more formaldehyde by driving down a busy road than in a vaccine.
Thimerosal is NOT elemental mercury, It is a molecular compound made up of carbon, hydrogen, mercury, sodium, oxygen, and surfer. This is used as a preservative for the vaccine. Thimerosal is used in a variety of other things, like tattoo ink, facial creams, nasal sprays. It’s toxic to humans only in fairly large quantities but highly toxic to aquatic born organisms like infectious bacteria. In short, it makes sure you don’t get salmonella from a stray bacteria from the chicken embryos.As for the dosage of the Thimerosal. That is the most laughable point in this post. It says 25 mcg, that’s micrograms, or one millionth of a gram. To put this in perspective, a dollar bill weighs roughly 1 gram, the average human eyelash is around 80-90 micrograms. The box also says that it contains a 5ml (milliliter/cc) vial which leads me to my next point.
A little simple math and we find out that 25 mcg = 0.00003 ml and a little more math we find that 0.00003 ml is 0.00006% of 5 ml. Let me put this another way. By the age of 5, an American child weighs about 50-55lbs and their body contains 55 mcg of Uranium. I don’t see any kids running around with radiation sickness, so I think they’re safe with a preservative in them.TL;DR: This is like saying you don’t want your child eating their baked birthday cake because raw eggs were used to make it and you don’t want your child getting salmonella from it.

THANK YOU

not vaccinating your children is child abuse and it should be illegal.

^This.

I have something that approximates the flu right now and it sucks balls and it’s just the fever/muscle aches/things that go along with fever. GET YOUR DAMN VACCINES.
/someone who’s had pertussis. TWICE.
PS Steve Rogers approves of vaccines.

arctowardsthesun:

jessicalprice:

thebaconsandwichofregret:

bronzebasilisk:

blu-thoth:

meta-bubbles:

DO NOT GIVE OR GET ANY VACCINATIONS FOR YOURSELF OR  YOUR KIDS………..

Ok, lets break this down nice and simple.

Formaldehyde is from the purification of the vaccine. 99.9% of which is removed. The reason it doesn’t give a dosage is so minuscule that it can’t be measured without going into picograms. That’s one trillionth of a gram. You breathe in more formaldehyde by driving down a busy road than in a vaccine.

Thimerosal is NOT elemental mercury, It is a molecular compound made up of carbon, hydrogen, mercury, sodium, oxygen, and surfer. This is used as a preservative for the vaccine. Thimerosal is used in a variety of other things, like tattoo ink, facial creams, nasal sprays. It’s toxic to humans only in fairly large quantities but highly toxic to aquatic born organisms like infectious bacteria. In short, it makes sure you don’t get salmonella from a stray bacteria from the chicken embryos.

As for the dosage of the Thimerosal. That is the most laughable point in this post. It says 25 mcg, that’s micrograms, or one millionth of a gram. To put this in perspective, a dollar bill weighs roughly 1 gram, the average human eyelash is around 80-90 micrograms. The box also says that it contains a 5ml (milliliter/cc) vial which leads me to my next point.

A little simple math and we find out that 25 mcg = 0.00003 ml and a little more math we find that 0.00003 ml is 0.00006% of 5 ml. Let me put this another way. By the age of 5, an American child weighs about 50-55lbs and their body contains 55 mcg of Uranium. I don’t see any kids running around with radiation sickness, so I think they’re safe with a preservative in them.

TL;DR: This is like saying you don’t want your child eating their baked birthday cake because raw eggs were used to make it and you don’t want your child getting salmonella from it.

THANK YOU

not vaccinating your children is child abuse and it should be illegal.

^This.

I have something that approximates the flu right now and it sucks balls and it’s just the fever/muscle aches/things that go along with fever. GET YOUR DAMN VACCINES.

/someone who’s had pertussis. TWICE.

PS Steve Rogers approves of vaccines.

(via taverenpotter)

Tags: yaaass

strangelybeautifulworld:

nympherret:

like how much more obvious does this need to be made for people to get it?

this isnt even an exaggeration 
like at all

strangelybeautifulworld:

nympherret:

like how much more obvious does this need to be made for people to get it?

this isnt even an exaggeration 

like at all

(Source: america-wakiewakie, via matrim-notabloodylord-cauthon)

morivan:

My dream for the 2016 presidential election is not having to choose which human rights I’m feeling like compromising on.

(Source: griffmorivan, via kellyclowers)

treebourbon:

quiyst:

mrzstargazzer:

jepaithe:

transposedsouls:

boo-author:

bitterseafigtree:

thinksquad:

An eighth grade student from Weaverville Elementary School got a detention slip for sharing his school prepared lunch Tuesday.
Kyle Bradford, 13, shared his chicken burrito with a friend who didn’t like the cheese sandwich he was given by the cafeteria.
Bradford didn’t see any problem with sharing his food.
"It seemed like he couldn’t get a normal lunch so I just wanted to give mine to him because I wasn’t really that hungry and it was just going to go in the garbage if I didn’t eat it," said Bradford.
But the Trinity Alps Unified School District has regulations that prohibit students from sharing their meals.
The policies set by the district say that students can have allergies that another student may not be aware of.
Tom Barnett, the Superintendent of the Trinity Alps Unified School District says that hygiene issues also come into play when banning students from sharing meals.
"We have a policy that prohibits students from exchanging meals. Of course if students are concerned about other students not having enough to eat we would definitely want to consider that, but because of safety and liability we cannot allow students to actually exchange meals," said Barnett.
Bradford’s mother Sandy Bradford thinks that her son did the right thing by sharing his lunch. She also believes that it isn’t up to the school to discipline her son for good manners.
“By all means the school can teach them math and the arithmetic and physical education, but when it comes to morals and manners and compassion, I believe it needs to start at home with the parent,” Sandy said.
Bradford says that he would definitely share his lunch again if a friend wanted a portion of his meal.
http://www.krcrtv.com/news/local/student-put-in-detention-for-sharing-school-lunch/28115110

Kids can’t share now? Or trade lunches? What the actual fuck is happening?

I think this article is talking around what the actual issue is.The student who was “given a cheese sandwich” and “couldn’t get a normal lunch?”That’s how schools handle students whose families can’t pay their lunch bills. They’re required to give the kid something, so they get a slice of processed cheese between two pieces of white bread. Cheese sandwich.All those stories about the kids who went through the lines and then had their trays taken away and dumped in the trash in front of them because their account was $5 in the red when they got to the end of the line?Those kids were given cheese sandwiches.This isn’t about allergies. I guarantee you that kids at those tables are swapping food all the time. It’s part of the school cafeteria experience.If the second kid was allergic to the burrito, we’d be reading a different story.It’s because this kid undermined the system that is supposed to punish students for their parents’ “negligence” (poverty).

^ this

Taken from this article:

These aren’t isolated cases, either. Here’s a recap of the most recent honor roll of American public school cafeteria douchebaggery:
An elementary school in Salt Lake City, Utah reportedly seized between 40 and 50 students’ lunches on pizza day and threw them all in the garbage when the kids got up to the register and couldn’t pay because their account balances were either low or empty. Students all over the cafeteria were broken down in tears. I’m sure that made for a great learning environment.
Remember the most important meal of the day? A 12-year-old Dickinson, Texas boy’s breakfast was thrown in the trash right in front of him at his middle school because his account was short a whopping .30 cents. The breakfast itself cost $1.25.
Around 25 students at a Massachusetts middle school were forced to throw out their lunches or refused lunch entirely because their accounts were empty or they could not afford to pay. An employee from the school’s on-site lunch provider reportedly gave an order not to provide lunch to students with overextended credit or empty accounts. At least that employee was later put on leave. “I’m pissed that when there are people in prison who are getting meals, my daughter, an honor student, is going hungry,” one father remarked.
A New Jersey elementary school threw a 10-year-old autistic boy’s lunch in the trash because of an unpaid account…despite having already done so before. “It’s between the parents and the cafeteria. It’s not between the child and the lunch lady. Let the kids eat their lunch,” the boy’s mother told a local news station.
The middle and high schools in Old Town, Maine have a “no pay, no food policy” that Superintendent David Walker says students, like the 11-year-old denied food because his mom hadn’t paid his account, should be able to understand. “Students are old enough to take responsibility for their lunches” by middle school age, said Walker. You know, because apparently 11-year-olds can suddenly get jobs in this country to afford their lunch at school.
Over 40 elementary school students in Kentucky were denied a full lunch during state testing week. One student’s account was short $1.15, which the mother told a news station she paid online as many schools require the night before, but the funds hadn’t been processed by lunch time the next day, so her fourth grader spent all day upset and left school crying at the end of the day. Luckily a good samaritan showed up to that school and donated $56 to pay up all student lunch accounts so no more kids would have to go without a full lunch (which isn’t even that large to begin with in this country) during state tests.
Worse, apparently students at some schools across the state of Minnesota are actually branded with “Money” or “Lunch” stamps across their hands when they are late on accounts as a message to parents to pay up. Yep, they are actually branding children with the scarlet letter of poverty if they cannot afford their lunch, so the child will have to walk around school for the whole entire rest of their day branded and a walking target for ridicule by other children because they are poor or the parents forgot to put money in their children’s accounts.

I’ve personally had the same type of situation happened to me before in which lunch has been thrown right in the trash in front of me when I didn’t have enough money for lunch, and was given an alternate meal of lesser quality. I hadn’t even realized how disgustingly perverse that was at the time because of how it was normalized. Shaming the poor, and even depriving children of food has become normalized. This is especially a problem in conservative states where funding for education is low and funding for things like football stadiums and other less important things is high. Public schools need to be providing students with free meals, which can’t be done without the proper funding as well as the proper allocation of funds on the part of schools and school districts. 

This is exactly why I stopped volunteering to help with lunch at my son’s school (a”catholic”school). They are ruthless. They literally snatch trays out of the kids hands. There were kindergarteners who would be moved to the “no lunch table” if the parents hadn’t paid for their lunches, but yet, they’d offer me, a volunteer, food for free.
One day I took a tray hoping I could divide the food among 3 kids who were denied food. You should’ve seen the uproar when I tried to offer the little ones at the no-lunch table the double helping of nuggets and tatortots given to me. I mean, I thought they were going to call the cops on me. I had to stop going because it was incredibly heartbreaking and rage-inducing to see kids go hungry while they handout extra lunches to the staff and throw the rest out.
I received no response from the archdiocese of NY when I wrote to them regarding this behavior. I mean, I could’ve sworn that all those “corporal works of mercy” they shove down your fucking throat (two of which happen to be feed the hungry, give drink to the thirsty), actually meant that catholic schools should do just that with the children that attend their insanely expensive schools. But you know what the bible says- “it’s all about the bottom line kids”.

Our previous elementary school principal had worked out a deal with the PTO (PTA) wherein they had a fund that would cover the cost of the full lunch for kids who had depleted their accounts so that no kid had to get the cheese sandwich in the paper bag. The school board eventually chased this guy out because he exceeded state standards for student achievements and care.
When the new principal came in, he unilaterally scratched the program because “that’s just not how it should be done,” even though the PTO was more than happy to continue covering those kids’ meals. I fucking hated that guy.

Read this.

treebourbon:

quiyst:

mrzstargazzer:

jepaithe:

transposedsouls:

boo-author:

bitterseafigtree:

thinksquad:

An eighth grade student from Weaverville Elementary School got a detention slip for sharing his school prepared lunch Tuesday.

Kyle Bradford, 13, shared his chicken burrito with a friend who didn’t like the cheese sandwich he was given by the cafeteria.

Bradford didn’t see any problem with sharing his food.

"It seemed like he couldn’t get a normal lunch so I just wanted to give mine to him because I wasn’t really that hungry and it was just going to go in the garbage if I didn’t eat it," said Bradford.

But the Trinity Alps Unified School District has regulations that prohibit students from sharing their meals.

The policies set by the district say that students can have allergies that another student may not be aware of.

Tom Barnett, the Superintendent of the Trinity Alps Unified School District says that hygiene issues also come into play when banning students from sharing meals.

"We have a policy that prohibits students from exchanging meals. Of course if students are concerned about other students not having enough to eat we would definitely want to consider that, but because of safety and liability we cannot allow students to actually exchange meals," said Barnett.

Bradford’s mother Sandy Bradford thinks that her son did the right thing by sharing his lunch. She also believes that it isn’t up to the school to discipline her son for good manners.

“By all means the school can teach them math and the arithmetic and physical education, but when it comes to morals and manners and compassion, I believe it needs to start at home with the parent,” Sandy said.

Bradford says that he would definitely share his lunch again if a friend wanted a portion of his meal.

http://www.krcrtv.com/news/local/student-put-in-detention-for-sharing-school-lunch/28115110

Kids can’t share now? Or trade lunches? What the actual fuck is happening?

I think this article is talking around what the actual issue is.

The student who was “given a cheese sandwich” and “couldn’t get a normal lunch?”

That’s how schools handle students whose families can’t pay their lunch bills. They’re required to give the kid something, so they get a slice of processed cheese between two pieces of white bread. Cheese sandwich.

All those stories about the kids who went through the lines and then had their trays taken away and dumped in the trash in front of them because their account was $5 in the red when they got to the end of the line?

Those kids were given cheese sandwiches.

This isn’t about allergies. I guarantee you that kids at those tables are swapping food all the time. It’s part of the school cafeteria experience.

If the second kid was allergic to the burrito, we’d be reading a different story.

It’s because this kid undermined the system that is supposed to punish students for their parents’ “negligence” (poverty).

^ this

Taken from this article:

These aren’t isolated cases, either. Here’s a recap of the most recent honor roll of American public school cafeteria douchebaggery:

  • An elementary school in Salt Lake City, Utah reportedly seized between 40 and 50 students’ lunches on pizza day and threw them all in the garbage when the kids got up to the register and couldn’t pay because their account balances were either low or empty. Students all over the cafeteria were broken down in tears. I’m sure that made for a great learning environment.
  • Remember the most important meal of the day? A 12-year-old Dickinson, Texas boy’s breakfast was thrown in the trash right in front of him at his middle school because his account was short a whopping .30 cents. The breakfast itself cost $1.25.
  • Around 25 students at a Massachusetts middle school were forced to throw out their lunches or refused lunch entirely because their accounts were empty or they could not afford to pay. An employee from the school’s on-site lunch provider reportedly gave an order not to provide lunch to students with overextended credit or empty accounts. At least that employee was later put on leave. “I’m pissed that when there are people in prison who are getting meals, my daughter, an honor student, is going hungry,” one father remarked.
  • A New Jersey elementary school threw a 10-year-old autistic boy’s lunch in the trash because of an unpaid account…despite having already done so before. “It’s between the parents and the cafeteria. It’s not between the child and the lunch lady. Let the kids eat their lunch,” the boy’s mother told a local news station.
  • The middle and high schools in Old Town, Maine have a “no pay, no food policy” that Superintendent David Walker says students, like the 11-year-old denied food because his mom hadn’t paid his account, should be able to understand. “Students are old enough to take responsibility for their lunches” by middle school age, said Walker. You know, because apparently 11-year-olds can suddenly get jobs in this country to afford their lunch at school.
  • Over 40 elementary school students in Kentucky were denied a full lunch during state testing week. One student’s account was short $1.15, which the mother told a news station she paid online as many schools require the night before, but the funds hadn’t been processed by lunch time the next day, so her fourth grader spent all day upset and left school crying at the end of the day. Luckily a good samaritan showed up to that school and donated $56 to pay up all student lunch accounts so no more kids would have to go without a full lunch (which isn’t even that large to begin with in this country) during state tests.
  • Worse, apparently students at some schools across the state of Minnesota are actually branded with “Money” or “Lunch” stamps across their hands when they are late on accounts as a message to parents to pay up. Yep, they are actually branding children with the scarlet letter of poverty if they cannot afford their lunch, so the child will have to walk around school for the whole entire rest of their day branded and a walking target for ridicule by other children because they are poor or the parents forgot to put money in their children’s accounts.

I’ve personally had the same type of situation happened to me before in which lunch has been thrown right in the trash in front of me when I didn’t have enough money for lunch, and was given an alternate meal of lesser quality. I hadn’t even realized how disgustingly perverse that was at the time because of how it was normalized. Shaming the poor, and even depriving children of food has become normalized. This is especially a problem in conservative states where funding for education is low and funding for things like football stadiums and other less important things is high. Public schools need to be providing students with free meals, which can’t be done without the proper funding as well as the proper allocation of funds on the part of schools and school districts. 

This is exactly why I stopped volunteering to help with lunch at my son’s school (a”catholic”school).
They are ruthless. They literally snatch trays out of the kids hands. There were kindergarteners who would be moved to the “no lunch table” if the parents hadn’t paid for their lunches, but yet, they’d offer me, a volunteer, food for free.

One day I took a tray hoping I could divide the food among 3 kids who were denied food. You should’ve seen the uproar when I tried to offer the little ones at the no-lunch table the double helping of nuggets and tatortots given to me. I mean, I thought they were going to call the cops on me. I had to stop going because it was incredibly heartbreaking and rage-inducing to see kids go hungry while they handout extra lunches to the staff and throw the rest out.

I received no response from the archdiocese of NY when I wrote to them regarding this behavior. I mean, I could’ve sworn that all those “corporal works of mercy” they shove down your fucking throat (two of which happen to be feed the hungry, give drink to the thirsty), actually meant that catholic schools should do just that with the children that attend their insanely expensive schools. But you know what the bible says- “it’s all about the bottom line kids”.

Our previous elementary school principal had worked out a deal with the PTO (PTA) wherein they had a fund that would cover the cost of the full lunch for kids who had depleted their accounts so that no kid had to get the cheese sandwich in the paper bag. The school board eventually chased this guy out because he exceeded state standards for student achievements and care.

When the new principal came in, he unilaterally scratched the program because “that’s just not how it should be done,” even though the PTO was more than happy to continue covering those kids’ meals. I fucking hated that guy.

Read this.

(Source: thinksquad, via elvenmuggle)

thebacksideofthewall:

I swear the fuckin producers of the simpsons knew shit was an issue before anyone opened their eyes.

(Source: monodoh, via taverenpotter)

YAAAAAAAAAAAAAS

(Source: fyeahtaylor, via allonsyforever)

notcisjustwoman:

brutereason:

telltale-goddess:

zennistrad:

Several minutes ago, Anita Sarkeesian posted this to her Twitter.
First response, a guy calling her a “cunt”, and the third is a guy linking to this image (VERY NSFW.)
Yeah, good job proving that you’re not sexist, guys.

Once again I do not support anita’s message in any way and agree with her on very few things but she in no way ever deserved death threats and harassment and a bunch of uneducated fucks harassing her every time she tries to say something.
Good job guys, you all proved how progressive you are.

Why do people do this? Always add the disclaimer that you absolutely totally do not agree with her at all BUT. Why does it matter in this context?
I mean, sure, I’m glad that you, unlike many people who disagree with her, don’t think she deserves harassment. That’s good. 
But what would it take for there to be a strong show of support for her that isn’t full of caveats about how you disagree?

And furthermore, what in the FUCK is there to disagree with her on? I mean, if she likes potatoes and you like carrots, then what the fuck ever. But how can you disagree with her analysis of misogyny in video games when literally every time she breathes, dudes show up to threaten to rape her and blow her up? Practically her entire life has become one long series of bullshit that proves her right at every turn. Fuck you if you don’t believe her. Fuck you if you don’t agree with her.

That last comment though.

notcisjustwoman:

brutereason:

telltale-goddess:

zennistrad:

Several minutes ago, Anita Sarkeesian posted this to her Twitter.

First response, a guy calling her a “cunt”, and the third is a guy linking to this image (VERY NSFW.)

Yeah, good job proving that you’re not sexist, guys.

Once again I do not support anita’s message in any way and agree with her on very few things but she in no way ever deserved death threats and harassment and a bunch of uneducated fucks harassing her every time she tries to say something.

Good job guys, you all proved how progressive you are.

Why do people do this? Always add the disclaimer that you absolutely totally do not agree with her at all BUT. Why does it matter in this context?

I mean, sure, I’m glad that you, unlike many people who disagree with her, don’t think she deserves harassment. That’s good. 

But what would it take for there to be a strong show of support for her that isn’t full of caveats about how you disagree?

And furthermore, what in the FUCK is there to disagree with her on? I mean, if she likes potatoes and you like carrots, then what the fuck ever. But how can you disagree with her analysis of misogyny in video games when literally every time she breathes, dudes show up to threaten to rape her and blow her up? Practically her entire life has become one long series of bullshit that proves her right at every turn. Fuck you if you don’t believe her. Fuck you if you don’t agree with her.

That last comment though.

(via radicalfeministuprising)