(this post was reblogged from jamesbriandwyer)
I GOT GIFD

I GOT GIFD

(Source: riffinbutts)

(this post was reblogged from thechrisgethardshow)

AlunaGeorge - You Know You Like It (DJ Snake Remix)

cinephilearchive:


“I went to film school. I did screenwriting school. The best thing for me was reading scripts.” —Stuart Beattie


THE SCREENWRITING GUIDE TO FINDING PDF SCRIPTS ONLINE
Websites
WSF Screenplay database
screenplayexplorer
Cinephilia and Beyond
casaizzo
lexwilliford
Read. Watch. Write.
mypdfscripts
Awesomefilm
SimplyScripts
Movie Page
Horror Lair
Science Fiction and Fantasy Scripts
Movie Scripts and Screenplays
Daily Actor
Script-o-Rama
Daily Script
Movie Scripts and Screenplays
JoBlo’s Movie Scripts
Scriptologist
The Script Source
Downloadable Oscar Screenplays 2012
Jim Uhls is not your average screenwriter. For one thing, his nickname is “Professor Peculiar.” For another, as this exclusive off-kilter discussion of his craft demonstrates, Uhls is eager to break the first rule of Fight Club: He talks about Fight Club. A lot. That seminal film, directed by David Fincher (Se7en, Panic Room), pushed every boundary possible for a studio movie, and Uhls’ darkly funny script, adapted from the Chuck Palahniuk novel, is a wickedly subversive example of how to successfully adapt an “unadaptable” book. Step inside the mind of the man who figured out how to do it, as Professor Peculiar explains how to use a newspaper story approach to build a brilliant pitch, why you should interview your characters, how to know when to “stick a fork” in your screenplay, and the macabre particulars of how and why he had to murder his brother’s cat.

Forums
The idea here is that you simply make a request in the comments with your email or PM and someone will send it to you anonymously. Typically this works quite well.
reddit/screenwriting
Done Deal Pro
Scriptshadow
Screenwriting Gold Mine
TV Writing
This site will be of plenty of interest to TV fans, but fundamentally it’s for people who want to take their love of TV and transform it into something more practical: actually creating telly that people want to see. These scripts are here because the only way to learn how to write a TV script is to read A LOT of other TV scripts, and there aren’t many places you can do that. So here you can study scripts for existing shows, some of your old favourites, and many that never even made it to air. Figure out what makes an episode work, how to format that spec, why a pilot failed and how to write in four, five or six acts.
US Drama‎ > ‎Pilot Scripts 












The first episode of a TV show is called the pilot episode. Writing a pilot is one of the toughest things a TV scribe can do. In it, you have to introduce your central character and core cast, build enough of your show’s world without overwhelming the audience with backstory, create an episode “template,” and communicate the show’s tone. Oh, and you have to tell a really good story as well, or no-one will come back for episode two!












US Drama‎ > Show Collections
UK Drama
UK Drama‎ > ‎Pilot Scripts
Bibles

Rod Serling’s final interview. March 4, 1975: Not knowing that he has less than four months to live, Rod weighs in eerily on awards, prejudice, censorship, compulsion, immortality, final unproduced screenplay The Stops Along the Way (which J.J. Abrams bought), (not) planning ahead… and crying.

Patterns by Rod Serling, 1957

The Twilight Zone 1x01 - Where is Everybody?
The Twilight Zone 1x02 - One for the Angels
The Twilight Zone 1x05 - Walking Distance
The Twilight Zone 1x07 - The Lonely
The Twilight Zone 1x08 - Time Enough at Last
The Twilight Zone 1x30 - A Stop at Willoughby
The Twilight Zone 1x34 - The After Hours
The Twilight Zone 2x05 - The Howling Man 
The Twilight Zone 2x06 - The Eye of the Beholder 
The Twilight Zone 2x07 - Nick of Time
The Twilight Zone 2x28 - Will the Real Martian Please Stand Up
The Twilight Zone 3x08 - It’s a Good Life
The Twilight Zone 3x16 - Nothing in the Dark
The Twilight Zone 3x24 - To Serve Man
The Twilight Zone 5x03 - Nightmare At 20000 Feet

Writer/Producer Vince Gilligan was interviewed for nearly four hours in Burbank, CA. He talked about knowing that he wanted to be involved with storytelling, in film or television, from a very early age. He discussed his education at NYU Film school and winning a screenwriting award which lead to his first jobs in television writing. He discussed becoming a staff writer on The X-Files after a chance meeting with series’ creator Chris Carter. He spoke in great detail about his seven years as a writer, and later producer, on X-Files and described several specific episodes including the Emmy-winning “Memento Mori”. He spoke about the short-lived spinoff, The Lone Gunmen, and how both series were affected by the events of 9/11. He spoke at length about his current project (then concluding season 4), the AMC drama Breaking Bad, which he created and produced. The interview was conducted by Jenni Matz on August 9, 2011.

Read, learn, absorb:
Breaking Bad 1x01
Breaking Bad 3x01 — No Mas
Breaking Bad 3x03 — IFT
Breaking Bad 3x08 — I See You


This is quite a treat. Someone got ahold of some scripts from The Wire and posted them online.
Season 1, episode 1, “The Target”Season 1, episode 9, “Game Day”Season 5, episode 10, "-30-"
But the real gem is a document dated September 6, 2000 that appears to be David Simon’s pitch to HBO for the show. The document starts with a description of the show. 

Simon had the show nailed from the beginning. Near the end of the overview, he says:

But more than an exercise is realism for its own sake, the verisimilitude of The Wire exists to serve something larger. In the first story-arc, the episodes begin what would seem to be the straight-forward, albeit protracted, pursuit of a violent drug crew that controls a high-rise housing project. But within a brief span of time, the officers who undertake the pursuit are forced to acknowledge truths about their department, their role, the drug war and the city as a whole. In the end, the cost to all sides begins to suggest not so much the dogged police pursuit of the bad guys, but rather a Greek tragedy. At the end of thirteen episodes, the reward for the viewer -— who has been lured all this way by a well-constructed police show — is not the simple gratification of hearing handcuffs click. Instead, the conclusion is something that Euripides or O’Neill might recognize: an America, at every level at war with itself.

The final section is entitled “BIBLE” and contains draft outlines of a nine-episode season. —
kottke.org

Tweet

// 
// ]]>
Follow @LaFamiliaFilm

// 
// ]]>

cinephilearchive:

“I went to film school. I did screenwriting school. The best thing for me was reading scripts.” —Stuart Beattie

THE SCREENWRITING GUIDE TO FINDING PDF SCRIPTS ONLINE

Websites

Jim Uhls is not your average screenwriter. For one thing, his nickname is “Professor Peculiar.” For another, as this exclusive off-kilter discussion of his craft demonstrates, Uhls is eager to break the first rule of Fight Club: He talks about Fight Club. A lot. That seminal film, directed by David Fincher (Se7en, Panic Room), pushed every boundary possible for a studio movie, and Uhls’ darkly funny script, adapted from the Chuck Palahniuk novel, is a wickedly subversive example of how to successfully adapt an “unadaptable” book. Step inside the mind of the man who figured out how to do it, as Professor Peculiar explains how to use a newspaper story approach to build a brilliant pitch, why you should interview your characters, how to know when to “stick a fork” in your screenplay, and the macabre particulars of how and why he had to murder his brother’s cat.

Forums

The idea here is that you simply make a request in the comments with your email or PM and someone will send it to you anonymously. Typically this works quite well.

TV Writing

This site will be of plenty of interest to TV fans, but fundamentally it’s for people who want to take their love of TV and transform it into something more practical: actually creating telly that people want to see. These scripts are here because the only way to learn how to write a TV script is to read A LOT of other TV scripts, and there aren’t many places you can do that. So here you can study scripts for existing shows, some of your old favourites, and many that never even made it to air. Figure out what makes an episode work, how to format that spec, why a pilot failed and how to write in four, five or six acts.

The first episode of a TV show is called the pilot episode. Writing a pilot is one of the toughest things a TV scribe can do. In it, you have to introduce your central character and core cast, build enough of your show’s world without overwhelming the audience with backstory, create an episode “template,” and communicate the show’s tone. Oh, and you have to tell a really good story as well, or no-one will come back for episode two!

Rod Serling’s final interview. March 4, 1975: Not knowing that he has less than four months to live, Rod weighs in eerily on awards, prejudice, censorship, compulsion, immortality, final unproduced screenplay The Stops Along the Way (which J.J. Abrams bought), (not) planning ahead… and crying.

Patterns
by Rod Serling, 1957

  • The Twilight Zone 1x01 - Where is Everybody?
  • The Twilight Zone 1x02 - One for the Angels
  • The Twilight Zone 1x05 - Walking Distance
  • The Twilight Zone 1x07 - The Lonely
  • The Twilight Zone 1x08 - Time Enough at Last
  • The Twilight Zone 1x30 - A Stop at Willoughby
  • The Twilight Zone 1x34 - The After Hours
  • The Twilight Zone 2x05 - The Howling Man 
  • The Twilight Zone 2x06 - The Eye of the Beholder 
  • The Twilight Zone 2x07 - Nick of Time
  • The Twilight Zone 2x28 - Will the Real Martian Please Stand Up
  • The Twilight Zone 3x08 - It’s a Good Life
  • The Twilight Zone 3x16 - Nothing in the Dark
  • The Twilight Zone 3x24 - To Serve Man
  • The Twilight Zone 5x03 - Nightmare At 20000 Feet

Writer/Producer Vince Gilligan was interviewed for nearly four hours in Burbank, CA. He talked about knowing that he wanted to be involved with storytelling, in film or television, from a very early age. He discussed his education at NYU Film school and winning a screenwriting award which lead to his first jobs in television writing. He discussed becoming a staff writer on The X-Files after a chance meeting with series’ creator Chris Carter. He spoke in great detail about his seven years as a writer, and later producer, on X-Files and described several specific episodes including the Emmy-winning “Memento Mori”. He spoke about the short-lived spinoff, The Lone Gunmen, and how both series were affected by the events of 9/11. He spoke at length about his current project (then concluding season 4), the AMC drama Breaking Bad, which he created and produced. The interview was conducted by Jenni Matz on August 9, 2011.

Read, learn, absorb:

This is quite a treat. Someone got ahold of some scripts from The Wire and posted them online.

Season 1, episode 1, “The Target”
Season 1, episode 9, “Game Day”
Season 5, episode 10, "-30-"

But the real gem is a document dated September 6, 2000 that appears to be David Simon’s pitch to HBO for the show. The document starts with a description of the show. 

image

Simon had the show nailed from the beginning. Near the end of the overview, he says:

But more than an exercise is realism for its own sake, the verisimilitude of The Wire exists to serve something larger. In the first story-arc, the episodes begin what would seem to be the straight-forward, albeit protracted, pursuit of a violent drug crew that controls a high-rise housing project. But within a brief span of time, the officers who undertake the pursuit are forced to acknowledge truths about their department, their role, the drug war and the city as a whole. In the end, the cost to all sides begins to suggest not so much the dogged police pursuit of the bad guys, but rather a Greek tragedy. At the end of thirteen episodes, the reward for the viewer -— who has been lured all this way by a well-constructed police show — is not the simple gratification of hearing handcuffs click. Instead, the conclusion is something that Euripides or O’Neill might recognize: an America, at every level at war with itself.

The final section is entitled “BIBLE” and contains draft outlines of a nine-episode season. —

(Source: cinephilearchive)

(this post was reblogged from ellena)

You want to say Hi to the cute girl on the subway. How will she react? Fortunately, I can tell you with some certainty, because she’s already sending messages to you. Looking out the window, reading a book, working on a computer, arms folded across chest, body away from you = do not disturb. So, y’know, don’t disturb her. Really. Even to say that you like her hair, shoes, or book. A compliment is not always a reason for women to smile and say thank you. You are a threat, remember? You are Schrödinger’s Rapist. Don’t assume that whatever you have to say will win her over with charm or flattery. Believe what she’s signaling, and back off.

If you speak, and she responds in a monosyllabic way without looking at you, she’s saying, “I don’t want to be rude, but please leave me alone.” You don’t know why. It could be “Please leave me alone because I am trying to memorize Beowulf.” It could be “Please leave me alone because you are a scary, scary man with breath like a water buffalo.” It could be “Please leave me alone because I am planning my assassination of a major geopolitical figure and I will have to kill you if you are able to recognize me and blow my cover.”

On the other hand, if she is turned towards you, making eye contact, and she responds in a friendly and talkative manner when you speak to her, you are getting a green light. You can continue the conversation until you start getting signals to back off.

The fourth point: If you fail to respect what women say, you label yourself a problem.

There’s a man with whom I went out on a single date—afternoon coffee, for one hour by the clock—on July 25th. In the two days after the date, he sent me about fifteen e-mails, scolding me for non-responsiveness. I e-mailed him back, saying, “Look, this is a disproportionate response to a single date. You are making me uncomfortable. Do not contact me again.” It is now October 7th. Does he still e-mail?

Yeah. He does. About every two weeks.

This man scores higher on the threat level scale than Man with the Cockroach Tattoos. (Who, after all, is guilty of nothing more than terrifying bad taste.) You see, Mr. E-mail has made it clear that he ignores what I say when he wants something from me. Now, I don’t know if he is an actual rapist, and I sincerely hope he’s not. But he is certainly Schrödinger’s Rapist, and this particular Schrödinger’s Rapist has a probability ratio greater than one in sixty. Because a man who ignores a woman’s NO in a non-sexual setting is more likely to ignore NO in a sexual setting, as well.

So if you speak to a woman who is otherwise occupied, you’re sending a subtle message. It is that your desire to interact trumps her right to be left alone. If you pursue a conversation when she’s tried to cut it off, you send a message. It is that your desire to speak trumps her right to be left alone. And each of those messages indicates that you believe your desires are a legitimate reason to override her rights.

For women, who are watching you very closely to determine how much of a threat you are, this is an important piece of data.

an excerpt from Phaedra Starling’s “Schrödinger’s Rapist: or a guy’s guide to approaching strange women without being maced” (via lostgrrrls)

HOLY FUCK THE TRUTH.

Can every one of my male followers read this? And please, before you get defensive (“I would never rape anyone!”) keep in mind, women being afraid of Shrodinger’s Rapists (oh my god i still can’t get over the encompassing brilliance of this phrase) is a conditioned, learned response from being immersed in rape culture and the evolution of sexism and sexual violence in our society from the day we’re born. And unfortunately, it’s very difficult to unlearn without the efforts of all genders to dismantle it. Which is where you come in.

(via lil-ith)

Mind blown. WOW. This is put so perfectly.

(via miss-love)

A lot of this article, which I’ve read several times over the last few years, makes sense.  Obviously, everyone should do his/her best not to threaten anyone else, wittingly or unwittingly.  We should all try to be sensitive to one another.

I can’t pretend to understand what it is to be a woman, or to understand the ways in which women absorb the threat of gendered violence through every pore at all times, but the logic of this article doesn’t totally make sense to me.  I know that this is a topic fraught with tension, so I hope I’m not offending anyone with the following thought:

This general line of reasoning (group X commits most crimes of type Y, therefore it is legitimate to believe that all members of group X are prone to committing crime Y until evidence leads us to believe otherwise) is exactly what I watched Bernie Goldberg use last night on Bill O’Reilly’s show when he said that it was was reasonable for white people to fear black people.  Obviously, there are hundreds of social constructs that underlie the statistics of crime, but the reasoning, to me, seems parallel.   I don’t think it’s the best case to assume that all members of a group are likely to act in a particular way.  People belong to groups, but in the end we are individuals, not bound by the actions of those who, by sheer coincidence, share our gender or race.

If you’re inherently suspicious of men, women, athletes, rabbis, blacks, whites, or whatever group, I don’t begrudge you your suspicion.  But to attempt to spread your suspicion by making it a universal maxim seems off base to me.  Worse, that same logic can/will be used to justify generalizations whose heinousness will be patently obvious.

Of course, I could be wrong.  I welcome your disagreement. 

(via dontcomplain)

I interpreted her argument to mean that forcing nonconsensual interaction is the same type of disregard for a woman’s consent involved in sexual assault. I’m not sure she’s necessarily arguing that women should be fearful of men in general, but rather those who either can’t recognize when a woman says no, or don’t care that she does. I think that’s very far from making a generalization about an entire group of people, as Bernie Goldberg sounds like he was doing.

(via toastface)

The quoted portion of the article doesn’t make me as uncomfortable as the full article, which says if a man approaches a woman in public, he is Schrödinger’s Rapist, he is a threat.  I may be misinterpreting the article (seems very likely given how many people whom I know and respect love it), but that sounds like profiling to me.  I don’t even really have a problem with profiling men, except that I worry that it’s the first step in a “profiling is ok” mentality.  To be clear, under no circumstance do I think anyone who isn’t committing a crime should be forced into a nonconsensual interaction.  I’m not arguing for a man’s right to catcall women.  I am anti-that.

EDITED TO ADD: Never mind, she does say that stuff in the quote.

(via dontcomplain)

I see your point. However, I’d say there is a difference between racial profiling and the concept of Schrödinger’s Rapist that Starling describes. Bernie Goldberg fear is a different kind. He isn’t afraid of black people because people like him are at a great risk of being victim to any number of crimes perpetrated by black people. He’s just ignorant. However, women are at risk of being raped simply because they are women. Maybe the term “Schrödinger’s Rapist” is the point of contention here, because maybe what Starling is getting at is the idea that every encounter with a strange man is potentially the incident where one in six women becomes a victim of sexual violence, and that is a fear that she wants men to at least acknowledge and respect.

(this post was reblogged from dontcomplain)

You want to say Hi to the cute girl on the subway. How will she react? Fortunately, I can tell you with some certainty, because she’s already sending messages to you. Looking out the window, reading a book, working on a computer, arms folded across chest, body away from you = do not disturb. So, y’know, don’t disturb her. Really. Even to say that you like her hair, shoes, or book. A compliment is not always a reason for women to smile and say thank you. You are a threat, remember? You are Schrödinger’s Rapist. Don’t assume that whatever you have to say will win her over with charm or flattery. Believe what she’s signaling, and back off.

If you speak, and she responds in a monosyllabic way without looking at you, she’s saying, “I don’t want to be rude, but please leave me alone.” You don’t know why. It could be “Please leave me alone because I am trying to memorize Beowulf.” It could be “Please leave me alone because you are a scary, scary man with breath like a water buffalo.” It could be “Please leave me alone because I am planning my assassination of a major geopolitical figure and I will have to kill you if you are able to recognize me and blow my cover.”

On the other hand, if she is turned towards you, making eye contact, and she responds in a friendly and talkative manner when you speak to her, you are getting a green light. You can continue the conversation until you start getting signals to back off.

The fourth point: If you fail to respect what women say, you label yourself a problem.

There’s a man with whom I went out on a single date—afternoon coffee, for one hour by the clock—on July 25th. In the two days after the date, he sent me about fifteen e-mails, scolding me for non-responsiveness. I e-mailed him back, saying, “Look, this is a disproportionate response to a single date. You are making me uncomfortable. Do not contact me again.” It is now October 7th. Does he still e-mail?

Yeah. He does. About every two weeks.

This man scores higher on the threat level scale than Man with the Cockroach Tattoos. (Who, after all, is guilty of nothing more than terrifying bad taste.) You see, Mr. E-mail has made it clear that he ignores what I say when he wants something from me. Now, I don’t know if he is an actual rapist, and I sincerely hope he’s not. But he is certainly Schrödinger’s Rapist, and this particular Schrödinger’s Rapist has a probability ratio greater than one in sixty. Because a man who ignores a woman’s NO in a non-sexual setting is more likely to ignore NO in a sexual setting, as well.

So if you speak to a woman who is otherwise occupied, you’re sending a subtle message. It is that your desire to interact trumps her right to be left alone. If you pursue a conversation when she’s tried to cut it off, you send a message. It is that your desire to speak trumps her right to be left alone. And each of those messages indicates that you believe your desires are a legitimate reason to override her rights.

For women, who are watching you very closely to determine how much of a threat you are, this is an important piece of data.

an excerpt from Phaedra Starling’s “Schrödinger’s Rapist: or a guy’s guide to approaching strange women without being maced” (via lostgrrrls)

HOLY FUCK THE TRUTH.

Can every one of my male followers read this? And please, before you get defensive (“I would never rape anyone!”) keep in mind, women being afraid of Shrodinger’s Rapists (oh my god i still can’t get over the encompassing brilliance of this phrase) is a conditioned, learned response from being immersed in rape culture and the evolution of sexism and sexual violence in our society from the day we’re born. And unfortunately, it’s very difficult to unlearn without the efforts of all genders to dismantle it. Which is where you come in.

(via lil-ith)

Mind blown. WOW. This is put so perfectly.

(via miss-love)

A lot of this article, which I’ve read several times over the last few years, makes sense.  Obviously, everyone should do his/her best not to threaten anyone else, wittingly or unwittingly.  We should all try to be sensitive to one another.

I can’t pretend to understand what it is to be a woman, or to understand the ways in which women absorb the threat of gendered violence through every pore at all times, but the logic of this article doesn’t totally make sense to me.  I know that this is a topic fraught with tension, so I hope I’m not offending anyone with the following thought:

This general line of reasoning (group X commits most crimes of type Y, therefore it is legitimate to believe that all members of group X are prone to committing crime Y until evidence leads us to believe otherwise) is exactly what I watched Bernie Goldberg use last night on Bill O’Reilly’s show when he said that it was was reasonable for white people to fear black people.  Obviously, there are hundreds of social constructs that underlie the statistics of crime, but the reasoning, to me, seems parallel.   I don’t think it’s the best case to assume that all members of a group are likely to act in a particular way.  People belong to groups, but in the end we are individuals, not bound by the actions of those who, by sheer coincidence, share our gender or race.

If you’re inherently suspicious of men, women, athletes, rabbis, blacks, whites, or whatever group, I don’t begrudge you your suspicion.  But to attempt to spread your suspicion by making it a universal maxim seems off base to me.  Worse, that same logic can/will be used to justify generalizations whose heinousness will be patently obvious.

Of course, I could be wrong.  I welcome your disagreement. 

(via dontcomplain)

I interpreted her argument to mean that forcing nonconsensual interaction is the same type of disregard for a woman’s consent involved in sexual assault. I’m not sure she’s necessarily arguing that women should be fearful of men in general, but rather those who either can’t recognize when a woman says no, or don’t care that she does. I think that’s very far from making a generalization about an entire group of people, as Bernie Goldberg sounds like he was doing.

(this post was reblogged from dontcomplain)

You want to say Hi to the cute girl on the subway. How will she react? Fortunately, I can tell you with some certainty, because she’s already sending messages to you. Looking out the window, reading a book, working on a computer, arms folded across chest, body away from you = do not disturb. So, y’know, don’t disturb her. Really. Even to say that you like her hair, shoes, or book. A compliment is not always a reason for women to smile and say thank you. You are a threat, remember? You are Schrödinger’s Rapist. Don’t assume that whatever you have to say will win her over with charm or flattery. Believe what she’s signaling, and back off.

If you speak, and she responds in a monosyllabic way without looking at you, she’s saying, “I don’t want to be rude, but please leave me alone.” You don’t know why. It could be “Please leave me alone because I am trying to memorize Beowulf.” It could be “Please leave me alone because you are a scary, scary man with breath like a water buffalo.” It could be “Please leave me alone because I am planning my assassination of a major geopolitical figure and I will have to kill you if you are able to recognize me and blow my cover.”

On the other hand, if she is turned towards you, making eye contact, and she responds in a friendly and talkative manner when you speak to her, you are getting a green light. You can continue the conversation until you start getting signals to back off.

The fourth point: If you fail to respect what women say, you label yourself a problem.

There’s a man with whom I went out on a single date—afternoon coffee, for one hour by the clock—on July 25th. In the two days after the date, he sent me about fifteen e-mails, scolding me for non-responsiveness. I e-mailed him back, saying, “Look, this is a disproportionate response to a single date. You are making me uncomfortable. Do not contact me again.” It is now October 7th. Does he still e-mail?

Yeah. He does. About every two weeks.

This man scores higher on the threat level scale than Man with the Cockroach Tattoos. (Who, after all, is guilty of nothing more than terrifying bad taste.) You see, Mr. E-mail has made it clear that he ignores what I say when he wants something from me. Now, I don’t know if he is an actual rapist, and I sincerely hope he’s not. But he is certainly Schrödinger’s Rapist, and this particular Schrödinger’s Rapist has a probability ratio greater than one in sixty. Because a man who ignores a woman’s NO in a non-sexual setting is more likely to ignore NO in a sexual setting, as well.

So if you speak to a woman who is otherwise occupied, you’re sending a subtle message. It is that your desire to interact trumps her right to be left alone. If you pursue a conversation when she’s tried to cut it off, you send a message. It is that your desire to speak trumps her right to be left alone. And each of those messages indicates that you believe your desires are a legitimate reason to override her rights.

For women, who are watching you very closely to determine how much of a threat you are, this is an important piece of data.

an excerpt from Phaedra Starling’s “Schrödinger’s Rapist: or a guy’s guide to approaching strange women without being maced” (via lostgrrrls)

HOLY FUCK THE TRUTH.

Can every one of my male followers read this? And please, before you get defensive (“I would never rape anyone!”) keep in mind, women being afraid of Shrodinger’s Rapists (oh my god i still can’t get over the encompassing brilliance of this phrase) is a conditioned, learned response from being immersed in rape culture and the evolution of sexism and sexual violence in our society from the day we’re born. And unfortunately, it’s very difficult to unlearn without the efforts of all genders to dismantle it. Which is where you come in.

(via lil-ith)

Mind blown. WOW. This is put so perfectly.

(via miss-love)

(this post was reblogged from leilacohanmiccio)

I’m late to this apparently but it’s fantastic

Laura Mvula - Green Garden