Love Thyself First
18. Feb 8th. A contradiction that's waiting to travel the world.
854 notes / reblog
marfmellow whitegirlsaintshit
kmtcxt-culture:

bitteroreo:

duggygene:

Never really noticed till now.

Lupe made this I’m sure.

Exactly
duggygene dapenguinninja
zebracaaaakes beyoncevevo
dontactlikewewerenothing:

THEYRE STILL FRIENDS
g-iggle tina-rose
The Black Muslims learned much from Marcus Garvey and Noble Drew Ali. Like those earlier prophets of black nationalism, they capitalize on the lower-class Black Man’s despair and reservations about the white man, and they have developed black consciousness into a confession of faith. The Black Man, they teach, has a manifest destiny, and the white man is the personification of the evil that separates the Black Man from his freedom, his moral development, and his God… .For the black nationalist, the Black Man’s Zion is where the white man is not (via collctr)
22242 notes / reblog
vinebox stone--cold--bush
Like this post
preludetoreality:

"A rooster crows only when it sees the light. 
Put him in the dark and he'll never crow. 
I have seen the light and I'm crowing." 

Muhammad Ali
preludetoreality oldspirit-newmind
174011 notes / reblog
hoppusfarm flying-mermaids420

sniffing:

if we’re in a mutual you should give me your:

skypes

snapchats

kiks

iMessages

money

drugs

social security #’s

go!!!!!!

Florida City About To Make It Illegal For Homeless People To Have Possessions In Public

nakedbutt:

losenanitosverdes:

locsgirl:

think-progress:

The criminalization of the homeless.

A backpack. Spare clothes. A notebook. Some keepsake photos. Crackers.

Though they may not have a home in which to secure their stuff, homeless people still have possessions like everyone else.

Yet the city of Ft. Lauderdale, Florida is on the cusp of passing a new regulation that would make it illegal for anyone to store their personal things on public property. Specifically, it would empower police to confiscate any personal possessions stored on public property, provided they have given the homeless person 24-hours notice. If the homeless people wish to retrieve their items, they must pay the city “reasonable charges for storage and removal of the items,” though that fee is waived if the person is able to demonstrate he or she cannot afford to pay. The city may dispose of any possessions not retrieved within 30 days. One of the driving factors behind the measure, according to the legislation, is the city’s “interest in aesthetics.”

Last week, the City Commission gave unanimous preliminary approval to the measure, despite overwhelming opposition from local residents who testified.

One woman, Gazol Tajalli, told Commissioners that is “insanity that we are even here discussing whether an individual can put on the ground the few objects that they own.” Another citizen, Rev. Gail Tapscott of the Unitarian Universalist Church of Ft. Lauderdale, criticized some of the Commissioners for “demoniz[ing]” the homeless.

Maria Foscarinis, Executive Director of the National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty, chastised Ft. Lauderdale’s approach. “Maintaining city streets is a legitimate concern, but simply punishing homeless people for leaving their possessions in public places is not an effective or humane way to address it,” she told ThinkProgress. “Instead, city and business leaders should work with advocates and homeless people to develop alternative short and long term solutions, such as public storage options for homeless people and affordable housing.”

According to the Sun Sentinel, “The commission’s actions were backed by business leaders who said they were looking for some controls on a situation that scares away customers and makes visitors uncomfortable.” The commission is also considering other initiatives targeting the homeless, including stiffer penalties for urinating or defecating in public, prohibitions on panhandling at intersections or sleeping in public, and restrictions on charity groups that hand out food to the homeless.

Ft. Lauderdale is not the only city to embrace new ordinances that criminalize people for being homeless. Scores of cities, including ColumbiaPalo AltoMiamiRaleighTampa, Harrisburg, and others have enacted measures that render homeless people simply trying to survive as criminals. Other cities, like Davis, California, are taking a different approach: constructing public lockers where homeless people can safely store their possessions.

This is my hometown I’m gonna throw up

outstanding performance!!!!!!!!!!! by humans yet again!!!! crowd goes wild

think-progress fckrudeboyjongup
73755 notes / reblog
ruinedchildhood fromzimbabwee
Obama Just Took One Big Step Towards Ending the War on Drugs

U.S. President Barack Obama is expected to pardon “hundreds, perhaps thousands” of federal drug inmates before leaving office. That number might not seem so big. But it’s historic in executive terms. In fact, reports indicate that the potential number will be well above the norm for an outgoing president and may even approach levels not seen since President Gerald Ford gave mass clemency to draft dodgers after the Vietnam War.

policymic oldspirit-newmind
raikis 3modagawd
tarassein:

stunningpicture:

Lions pretend to be hurt by the bites of their young to encourage them.

this put the biggest smile on my face
stunningpicture fromzimbabwee

A black male could not offer his hand (to shake hands) with a white male because it implied being socially equal. Obviously, a black male could not offer his hand or any other part of his body to a white woman, because he risked being accused of rape.

Blacks and whites were not supposed to eat together. If they did eat together, whites were to be served first, and some sort of partition was to be placed between them.

Under no circumstance was a black male to offer to light the cigarette of a white female — that gesture implied intimacy.

Blacks were not allowed to show public affection toward one another in public, especially kissing, because it offended whites.

Jim Crow etiquette prescribed that blacks were introduced to whites, never whites to blacks. For example: “Mr. Peters (the white person), this is Charlie (the black person), that I spoke to you about.”

Whites did not use courtesy titles of respect when referring to blacks, for example, Mr., Mrs., Miss., Sir, or Ma’am. Instead, blacks were called by their first names. Blacks had to use courtesy titles when referring to whites, and were not allowed to call them by their first names.

If a black person rode in a car driven by a white person, the black person sat in the back seat, or the back of a truck.

White motorists had the right-of-way at all intersections.

Jim Crow Etiquette Just a little more history for the folks who think slavery was the end of racism in America. (via karnythia)

My suburban white friends were so confused that my parents introduced themselves as Mr. and Mrs. and that I always addressed adults that way. They just don’t know.  And I don’t know how popular of a trend this was, but some Black folks gave their children honorifics as first names so white people would have no choice but to call them ‘Mister’ or ‘Sir’.  Like, I know tangentially of a woman who’s first name is Doctor.

(via blackraincloud)

Blacks were not allowed to show public affection toward one another in public, especially kissing, because it offended whites.”

Can we look at this one right here real close?

POC in intimate relationships showing each other affection *was considered offensive*. I am kinda wondering, given the absence of intra poc relationships in mass media, if it still is considered as such.

(via deluxvivens)

PRECISELY WHAT CAUGHT MY EYE. DA FUCK?????????????????

(via searchingforknowledge)

Well looking at this post, yes

http://ai-yo.tumblr.com/post/25570734067/deluxvivens-karnythia-deluxvivens-snip

(via ai-yo)

karnythia 3modagawd