you 🫵 can kiss 👩‍❤️‍💋‍👨💋 a hundred 💯 boys 👨⛹️♂️ in bars 🍸🍹✨ shoot 🔫🌠 another shot 💥🎉 try to stop 🚫✋the feeling 🤭 you 🫵 can say it's just ✨the way you are✨🤥 make a new excuse 🗣️🤕 another stupid 🤡 reason 🙄 good luck babe 😘👄 WELL GOOD LUCK BABE 💥✨🌠🏳️‍🌈

I've been thinking about the fact that some readers of Sense and Sensibility don't believe Willoughby truly loved Marianne, even though everyone in the book believes it and the narrator makes it clear how much he cared for her, at the end. And I think this reading of him takes away from one of the messages of the book, which is that love is not enough.

Willoughby loves Marianne, but that's not enough to stop him from hurting her, it's not enough to make him give up his cushy lifestyle and marry her, and it wouldn't have been enough to keep him happy with her long-term. Marianne loves Willoughby, but it wouldn't have been enough for her to be happy with him long-term either.

Edward loves Elinor, but that's not a good enough reason to break his promise to Lucy, because integrity and honor and responsibility are just as important to him. Brandon loves Marianne, but that's not reason enough to court her, because he knows her feelings lie elsewhere and she doesn't respect and esteem him yet.

Love is important to all these characters, and is a vital part in making the marriages that they ultimately end up in strong and happy, but it's not the only thing that makes them work.

Of course, Sense and Sensibility is hardly the only Austen novel to make the point that you need more than love or romance or passion to make a relationship work. But I think it's interesting how we get to see this play out in the villain of the novel. Willoughby does some truly horrific things, but his character shows that even really bad guys are capable of feeling love and guilt and remorse. But none of these feelings are ultimately strong enough to change him. Because love is not enough.

working hard at the sunk cost factory

bunny i saw on a hike ⛰️⛅

the idea that restrooms, locker rooms, etc need to be single-sex spaces in order for women to be safe is patriarchy's way of signalling to men & boys that society doesn't expect them to behave themselves around women. it is directly antifeminist. it would be antifeminist even if trans people did not exist. a feminist society would demand that women should be safe in all spaces even when there are men there.

Camille Pissarro (1830-1903) - Rue Saint-Honoré, dans l'après-midi. Effet de pluie, 1897. - source Saša Svoiski.

passages that make you whisper "oh my god"

Some Gamechanger shows are like “we have brought together some of the absolute most talented people you have ever seen in your life in order to allow them to showcase their amazing skills in the guise of a friendly competition” and other Gamechanger shows are like “we are going to psychologically torment these people to see which one breaks first” and there’s no telling which is which until it’s too late

Dean Devlin: Could not be more proud of my new Librarians! The universe of the Librarians is expanding in a spectacular way! #TheLibrarians #TheLibrariansTNC The CW

hormonal birth control is honestly the best thing to ever happen to me idc i ❤️ not being in touch with my natural cycle 🥰