shonens:

reblog if you would die for jotaknuckles

orcfvcker:

orcfvcker:

i like how out of all the possible scenes they could have chosen for the thumbnail of spy kids netflix decided THIS was the one.

OH

swagmage420:

warlocksmith:

powerarmor:

arr-jim-lad:

Barbie in the newest movie looks like if Elsa from Frozen was in Mass Effect

Don’t ask me why I know this.

i thought this was a constable frozen edit

Apparently the plot for this movie is that all the stars are dying and barbie needs to find a way to stop the universe succumbing to a cold dark end which is honestly more terrifying than a lot of actual scifi

Barbie and the heat death of the universe

Elsa Shepard vs Entropy

pembrokewkorgi:

verdantrange:

That’s nothing. In Canada, we used to have this chain of stores.

It’s my way or the bi-way, baby!

priorwaltering:

benafflecksgf:

benafflecksgf:

you: I want a sugar daddy
me, an intellectual: i have a need for a glucose father

everyone reblogging this and saying its “sucrose.” listen you clowns. listen. i don’t give a mcfuckadoodle doo about your correct terminology you science SJW freaks. it’s glucose or fucking die

the people reblogging and saying “sucrose” are actually working with a shallow understanding of the concept of sugar. sucrose is, specifically, table sugar. but “sugar” is a term for a family of molecules, including glucose. just because it’s a simple sugar that one is unlikely to find in a kitchen doesn’t make it less applicable for use in this post. sucrose isn’t “sugar”, it’s a sugar, as are glucose, fructose, galactose, maltose, and lactose. you could use any of these and the post’s internal logic would hold up. nowhere in the phrase “sugar daddy” does it indicate that we’re referring to a table sugar daddy. the original post is scientifically sound

I am here for intellectual sugar daddy discourse

tastefullyoffensive:

by It’s the Tie

reignfall:

When you and your friends all hate the same things