(via selfappointedblackdeity)
Sleep Habits of the Zodiac
- ♈ Aries: Aries are a hyperactive sign and tend to have sleeping troubles. Their dreams are often intense and vivid, They find it very hard to wind down at night and ignore the health benefits of good sleep. Slide sleeping is known to improve sleep quality
- ♉ Taurus: Sleep can be very fitful for Taurus if they are not comfortable. They are especially sensitive to their environment. They tend to sleep long and appreciate bed time. Meaningful dreams. Sleep best in company.
- ♊ Gemini: Gemini can survive off a fairly minimal amount of sleep - but it eventually catches up with them. Their minds are always racing in overdrive so sleep never comes easily. Many see sleep as an inconvenience and insomnia as productive 'extra' time
- ♋ Cancer: Cancer can have restless sleep patterns because they are likely to suffer nightmares a lot. Bedtime is especially volatile for Cancer because they dwell in all their troubles before sleep. They usually never feel completely 'awake'
- ♌ Leo: Most Leo are back sleepers and tend to drift off quite easily; unless they are stressed. They appreciate bed time and like to sleep amongst the most luxurious and sensuous of sheets and linen. Meaningful and precognitive dreams
- ♍ Virgo: Virgo cannot sleep if they are stressed or in an environment of disorder. Their chronic habit of overthinking makes it difficult for them to wind down before bed. They function most well when they have obtained a 'sleep schedule'
- ♎ Libra: Libra swing between sleeping too much and not enough. They can survive on minimal sleep for a short period then literally spend days in bed. A balanced sleep pattern is a good sign of inner equilibrium for Libra
- ♏ Scorpio: Scorpio's sleep is directed by their state of moods. A 'lifted' Scorpio will survive off minimal sleep - pushing bed time back as late as possible as they fall into their concentrated obsessions. An unhappy Scorpio will become very hypersomniac and need a lot of sleep
- ♐ Sagittarius: Sagittarius can survive off a minimal sleep arrangement but tend to naturally exhaust themselves through the day. They can put off bed time by becoming too excited or hyper about things at night. Occasionally restless, meaningful dreams
- ♑ Capricorn: Capricorn appreciate their sleep and try to get as much as possible - knowing it is within their best interests. A stressed Capricorn will have pronounced sleep troubles - insomnia is a sign of great inner distress for this sign
- ♒ Aquarius: have pronounced sleep troubles and tend to be restless and uncomfortable in sleep. Their racing thoughts make it hard for them to wind down at night and their use of technology and reading before bed compounds their minimal sleep
- ♓ Pisces: Sleep is opium for Pisceans; and out of all the zodiac, they need the most hours. Their receptive nature means they are drained by others and sleep restores their energy reserves. Many never feel truly 'awake'; they tend to have vivid and meaningful dreams
(Source: alyssalou, via thefoxxypoet)
Tweet from Judith Browne Dianis with a good idea about Angela Bassett on Scandal
Judith Browne Dianis (@jbrownedianis)
5/17/13, 12:03 AM
@ImAngelaBassett would be the best at being the OG “Original” gladiator as Liv’s mama on @ScandalABC
If there’s one thing that most fans of Star Trek will agree on, it’s the fact that Gene Roddenberry’s vision for the show — and, more optimistically, for human society — was predicated on the idea that all life is valuable, and that the worth of a person should not be judged by their appearance. Much of this was done through the old sci-fi trope of using aliens to stand in for oppressed groups, but Star Trek didn’t rely on the metaphor; it had characters who were part of the ensemble, important and beloved members of the Enterprise crew, who were people of colour. It had background characters who were people of colour. And, here and there, it had anti-heroes and villains who were people of colour … one of whom, Khan Noonian Singh, became well-nigh iconic.
Image 1: “Who is your favorite villain?” ; Actor John Cho (Lt Sulu) answers.
Image 2: TOS Khan looking at a watercolor of himself. Yes, he’s wearing a dastar (Sikh turban)
Image 3: Cumberbatch and Montalbán (as Khan)
And who is now being played by white actor Benedict Cumberbatch in the new JJ Abrams reboot movie, Star Trek: Into Darkness.
We’re all cynical and jaded enough to know the standard dismissal when it comes to matters of media representation: Paramount Pictures and most film studios are not interested in diversity or visibility, they only care about the bottom dollar. Star Trek as a franchise is too much of a juggernaut to affect with boycotts. There are too many people who love it, who love those characters and that world, and will go to see the movie. And for some of these people, this devotion to the idea of a future where even South and East Asian men get to pilot a starship and love swashbuckling, where Black women make Lieutenant on the Enterprise and actually get the boy, will be trivialized and eroded and whitewashed when the most formidable and complex Star Trek baddie becomes a white man named Khan.
It wasn’t perfect in the 60s when Ricardo Montalbán was cast to play Khan (a character explicitly described in the episode script of Space Seed as being Sikh, from the Northern regions of India). But considering all of the barriers to representation that Roddenberry faced from the television networks, having a brown-skinned man play a brown character was a hard-won victory. It’s disappointing and demoralizing that with the commercial power of Star Trek in his hands, JJ Abrams chose not to honour the original spirit of the show, or the symbolic heft of the Khan character, but to wield the whitewash brush for … what? The hopes that casting Benedict Cumberbatch would draw in a few more box office returns? It’s doubly disappointing when you consider that Abrams was a creator of the television show Lost, which had so many well-rounded and beloved characters of colour in it.
Add to this the secrecy prior to release around Cumberbatch’s role in the film, and what seems like a casting move that would typically be defended by cries of “best actor for the job, not racism” becomes something more cunning, more malicious. Yes, the obfuscation creates intrigue around and interest in the role, but it also prevents advocacy groups like Racebending.com from building campaigns to protest the whitewashing. This happened with the character of the Mandarin in Iron Man 3, as well as ‘Miranda Tate’ in The Dark Knight Rises, who ended up being Talia al Ghul but played by French actress Marion Cotillard. This practice is well in effect in Hollywood; and after the negative press that was generated by angry anti-oppression activists and fans when Paramount had The Last Airbender in the works, studios are wising up. They don’t want their racist practices to be called out, pointed at, and exposed before their movies are released — Airbender proved that these protests create enough bad feeling to affect their bottom line.
So the studio has now found a way to keep it secret and underhanded. Racebending.com was there for most of the production of The Last Airbender, and were even able to correspond with Paramount Pictures about it. This time, for Star Trek: Into Darkness, their hiding and opaque practices has managed to silence media watchdogs until the movie’s premiere.
As I said, this racist whitewashing of the character of Khan won’t affect how much money this Trek movie makes. And I’m happy that the franchise is popular, still popular enough to warrant not only a big-budget reboot with fantastic actors but also a sequel with that cast. I’m happy that actors I enjoy like Zoë Saldaña and John Cho are playing characters who mean so much to me, and that they, in respect for the groundbreaking contributions by Nichelle Nichols and George Takei in these roles, have paid homage to that past.
But all of that will be marred by having my own skin edited out, rendered worthless and silent and invisible when a South Asian man is portrayed by Benedict Cumberbatch up on that screen. In the original Trek, Khan, with his brown skin, was an Übermensch, intellectually and physically perfect, possessed of such charisma and drive that despite his efforts to gain control of the Enterprise, Captain Kirk (and many of the other officers) felt admiration for him.
And that’s why the role has been taken away from actors of colour and given to a white man. Racebending.com has always pointed out that villains are generally played by people with darker skin, and that’s true … unless the villain is one with intelligence, depth, complexity. One who garners sympathy from the audience, or if not sympathy, then — as from Kirk — grudging admiration. What this new Trek movie tells us, what JJ Abrams is telling us, is that no brown-skinned man can accomplish all that. That only by having Khan played by a white actor can the audience engage with and feel for him, believe that he’s smart and capable and a match for our Enterprise crew.
What an enormous and horribly ironic step backwards. For Star Trek, for media representation, and for the vision of a future where we have transcended systemic, racist erasure.
(via RaceBending)
THIS IS PISSING ME OFF
(via rutella)
(Source: meangameofpoliticalchess, via drkerrywashington)
If Carrie from “Homeland” can fall in love with a married terrorist while she is an agent for the CIA, why can’t Olivia be with Fitz? Homeland is a way better show than Scandal and they are not afraid to take those kinds if risks. That is why they have won so many awards. Shonda is scared. She…
↑↑↑↑ All of the above.
About that tepid, lame azz season finale….
Well the dust has settled. My mind is at rest and I can now see clearly that the road ahead for Fitz and Olivia is always gonna be drama. I don’t mind the drama but I will say that the long drawn out dismantling of their passionate, potent love will not leave them looking their best as characters. I am sad to see Olivia once again choose to walk away from Fitz. This is disheartening. I did not buy the ‘I’m returning to my gladiators’ line it felt hollow and silly. It was like seeing someone being offered steak and lobster but choosing a Rally’s under $5 combo because it’s what they’re familiar with. She is not obligated to return his love but if she ain’t truly feeling it then by all means cut him loose. The 2nd season finale of Scandal made Olivia Pope look mean-spirited and condescending in regards to the love that Fitz offers her openly and without limits.
That’s an odd place to be…the social/political meme has always been ‘White men will fuck Black women but they will never have you in public on their arm’. Here’s Fitz ditching his wife and willing to flee away from it all for Olivia…with Olivia…and she chooses her co-workers/employees/friends over him!?!?!! Yeah this is not a good look for Olivia Pope…with or without the white hat or long gloves she appears to be temperamental in the face of steadfast love. Who does that? What type of woman takes the love offered to her…pets it with feint acknowledgement and then turns away sheepishly to go do something else!?!? On the other hand…life is full of choices. You choose the life you live or accept.
Fitzgerald Grant’s love for Olivia Pope is the stuff of songs and folklore. It’s epic in that not often if ever do you see anyone so besotted by a Black woman. Many are sexually turned on by Black women but that does not denote passion or passionate love. Many have pointed out how silly and ineffective Fitz seems in regards to Olivia and dealing with his love for a woman who is not his wife. After last night’s episode…as we watch him go to Mellie and lay his head in her lap as some sort of mea culpa I too have begun to wonder what’s the point to all this love if it’s going to continue to be shunted and stymied by half hearted attempts at ensuring the greater good of the republic aka the voters of the United States of America.
Again I am not saying I will no longer watch Scandal or cheer on the relationship of Olivia and Fitz however, the scene between Olivia and Fitz in the Oval Office lacked something. Watching her place her job/her business above and beyond the love she has for Fitz seemed to be half ass obstruction based storytelling. They, Shonda Rhimes’ scribbling minions, can’t write ‘And they lived happily ever after’ ….. so they come up with something totally the opposite. I believe if Olivia had said ‘At this time I believe we should part. For now. I still love you. And I hope we can be together but for now with all that has happened I need for us to step back and look closer at what it is we are fighting so hard for’ that would have been a much better and more sane road to go. Instead we got another moment of Olivia being self-serving and high handed with the need to fall on the sword once again to avoid seeming greedy or amoral. As I watched Olivia push Fitz away one more time, I thought of the phrase ‘Mary get off the Cross we need the wood’.
I have ranted/rattled/pontificated enough . :sigh: I shall spend the summer not thinking about Fitz & Olivia…I shall of course occasionally think about Fitz and his superpower but that’s about all. This season has worn me out. I’m taking a hiatus. No joke.
Folklore time; Dullahan are Irish spirits who ride black horses and carry their own severed heads along with whips made of human spines.
… I wanted to draw a female one :P
(via selkie-heart)
The Patented Presidential Pelvis Press: The Complete Set
Every time his face is like “you feel that”. Lol, I see ‘ya Tony. *Boing
Superpower
(Source: worldwithoutanend)
That shit is just coming back to me now
Like honestly if a nigga said his superpower is eating pussy… and was damn good at it….. I would be more inclined to stay with his ass.
Because how many motherfuckers gon’ say their superpower is eating pussy and back that shit up…… You gon’ leave… girl
…
For the bolded…pure truth
(Source: galileogst, via mushroomvision)
