Heroic Cops Now Protect us From the Dangerous People Who’d Dare to Sit on a Sidewalk | Free Thought Project 

A ridiculous “WTF” Cop moment was caught on camera during the filming of a documentary.

According to their website, Scrapped is a film that takes a journey into the world of the homeless and dehumanized, and the search for a way out.

The filmmakers were rolling a production camera when cops decided to approach and harass a homeless man for the dangerous crime of “sitting.” They cared not about being on film enforcing such a ludicrous piece of legislation.

The heroic cop informs the dangerous “sitter” that he cannot site in the alleys, nor in the streets, nor in the sidewalks in Denver.

When the cop is asked why people can’t sit, he replies, “Because everybody would be sitting around homeless.” “How about you let all the homeless sit in front of your house and see how you like it!”

Dear cop, at what level of stupidity, brutality, or dehumanization, would you refuse to enforce a law? Is there a cutoff? If tomorrow a law is passed that states anyone with brown hair is now illegal, would you be able to sleep at night, enforcing such an immoral decree handed to you from upon high?

Here is a tip cops, legality does not dictate morality. You’d do best to remember this truism in order to be on the right side of history.

Every day. Fuck the Police. Fuck those that grind the faces of the poor.



I still want this book.

Smiling so hard right now.


  • I am nonbinary and 23 years old, dfab, pansexual, and I am in a committed long-distance relationship and I am not polyamorous
  • I have a 413 square foot studio apartment (that means the entire apartment is one room so any privacy will be in the bathroom or walk-in closet) on the second floor (no…

Free House! Remember when you were a kid and you built that tree house? What did it cost? Tree houses can be built for pennies out of scraps with almost no tools (rock=hammer), they can be made dry and warm, and nobody will bother you in it if you place it strategically (ie, not in a city park or in someones yard) in a location nobody cares about…like next to a creek that regularly floods or in a densely wooded (yet unimproved) lot. if it gets seen, people will assume it was built by children. Almost nobody will climb up your rickety ladder nailed to the tree except maybe kids…and then only during the day. At night you are golden.

sexualized-desexualization of south asian women


(just listing my favorite quotes from this discussion for future reference because they successfully communicated what I have always felt but was never able to describe.  all bolding is mine)

Harry sees Cho as this unattainable delicate flower, while completely undervaluing Parvati. Ron loves Hermione and doesn’t even see Padma. Both Parvati and Padma express that this makes them upset, but Harry and Ron are completely dismissive… They are made to be entitled to using two darker-skinned girls as pawns in their pursuit of lighter-skinned girls.”

And don’t even get me started on that scene in the movie where Hermione enters the room, all dressed up, and Parvati exclaims, “She’s beautiful!” Fuck that!”


"…we are exotified in this bizarre hyper desexualized context, the kind of bodies you wouldn’t mind looking at but generally don’t want to touch.” (YES YES YES YES THANKYOUTHANKYOUTHANKYOU)

On the other hand, because of the appropriation of yoga, the kama sutra, even the exposed midriff when wearing a sari, South Asian women deal with an interesting, contradicting sexual stereotypes: always a virgin but expected to be kinky, hyper flexible.”


 Submissive but not delicate, less human than woman but not woman enough. Filthy therefore a virgin and untouched yet exotic and thus desired.”



Steve Sack: Tortured Artist


Photo, Check my blog for more ;)

Now THAT’S a cat tree. Literally. :P



Photo, Check my blog for more ;)

Now THAT’S a cat tree. Literally. :P







Students Fed Up With Michelle Obama’s School Lunch Overhaul — Menu-Item Snapshots Spell Out Why

Wow that is depressing. 

okay but is that michelle’s fault for pushing for healtheir lunches or is it school districts’ faults for cutting corner by cutting calories but not making lunch any healthier?

let’s look into it.

Yes, thank you. Because yes she is pushing for a healthier lunch, but the schools still value football over feeding their students, which means that instead of providing enough healthy food to keep their students from starving, they are cutting down the amount of food available to fit within the caloric requirements … while then taking the money they saved to re-sod the football field for the third year in a row. Maybe new uniforms.

….Because apparently Michelle Obama has the executive power to order all schools to do certain things?


…and I doubt any one would consider any of this shit “healthy.”

also, I’m going to point out that the reason why this looks like so little food is because these schools don’t actually know how to comply, or aren’t willing to give the lunch programs the time, effort, funding, and training, to comply with these standards.

Also, look: that link was filled with misinformation. Check the actual USDA factsheet.