🔥 Popular | Latest

toxic-spill: socialistexan: whyyoustabbedme: https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/pharma-giant-profits-from-hiv-treatment-funded-by-taxpayers-and-patented-by-the-government 1. Taxpayer-funded research discovers new use for HIV drug; 2. Company w/ monopoly on drug says gov cant patent it; 3. Company makes $3B on drug/year; 4. Taxpayers get no return on investment, ~80% who need treatment dont get it Our capitalist aristocratic elites commit mass murder and treason against the people, and make billions, some black guy gets caught with a joint and goes to jail for years… “American justice” sure is a joke This is incredibly common with pharmaceuticals in the US. Drugs are researched with public funds, patented by the government, but then they are given directly to a private corporation for billions (if not trillions) in profit for that corporation. 210 drugs from 2010 to 2016 benefited from this process. Kill capitalism before it kills humanity. : Business An HIV treatment cost taxpavers millions. The government patented it But a pharma giant is making billions Antiretroviral pills Truvada sit on a tray at Jack's Drug Store on Nov. 23, 2010, in San Anselmo, Calif. (Justin Sullivan/Getty Images) By Christopher Rowland March 26 at 7:26 PM Thomas Folks spent vears in his U.S Centers for Disease Control and Prevention lab developing a treatment to block deadly HI co AIDS V in monkeys. Then San Francis researcher Robert Grant, using $50 million in federal grants, proved the treatment worked in people who engaged in risky sex Their work-almost fully funded by U.S toxic-spill: socialistexan: whyyoustabbedme: https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/pharma-giant-profits-from-hiv-treatment-funded-by-taxpayers-and-patented-by-the-government 1. Taxpayer-funded research discovers new use for HIV drug; 2. Company w/ monopoly on drug says gov cant patent it; 3. Company makes $3B on drug/year; 4. Taxpayers get no return on investment, ~80% who need treatment dont get it Our capitalist aristocratic elites commit mass murder and treason against the people, and make billions, some black guy gets caught with a joint and goes to jail for years… “American justice” sure is a joke This is incredibly common with pharmaceuticals in the US. Drugs are researched with public funds, patented by the government, but then they are given directly to a private corporation for billions (if not trillions) in profit for that corporation. 210 drugs from 2010 to 2016 benefited from this process. Kill capitalism before it kills humanity.

toxic-spill: socialistexan: whyyoustabbedme: https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/pharma-giant-profits-from-hiv-treatment-fu...

Save
whyyoustabbedme: https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/pharma-giant-profits-from-hiv-treatment-funded-by-taxpayers-and-patented-by-the-government 1. Taxpayer-funded research discovers new use for HIV drug; 2. Company w/ monopoly on drug says gov cant patent it; 3. Company makes $3B on drug/year; 4. Taxpayers get no return on investment, ~80% who need treatment dont get it Our capitalist aristocratic elites commit mass murder and treason against the people, and make billions, some black guy gets caught with a joint and goes to jail for years… “American justice” sure is a joke : Business An HIV treatment cost taxpavers millions. The government patented it But a pharma giant is making billions Antiretroviral pills Truvada sit on a tray at Jack's Drug Store on Nov. 23, 2010, in San Anselmo, Calif. (Justin Sullivan/Getty Images) By Christopher Rowland March 26 at 7:26 PM Thomas Folks spent vears in his U.S Centers for Disease Control and Prevention lab developing a treatment to block deadly HI co AIDS V in monkeys. Then San Francis researcher Robert Grant, using $50 million in federal grants, proved the treatment worked in people who engaged in risky sex Their work-almost fully funded by U.S whyyoustabbedme: https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/pharma-giant-profits-from-hiv-treatment-funded-by-taxpayers-and-patented-by-the-government 1. Taxpayer-funded research discovers new use for HIV drug; 2. Company w/ monopoly on drug says gov cant patent it; 3. Company makes $3B on drug/year; 4. Taxpayers get no return on investment, ~80% who need treatment dont get it Our capitalist aristocratic elites commit mass murder and treason against the people, and make billions, some black guy gets caught with a joint and goes to jail for years… “American justice” sure is a joke

whyyoustabbedme: https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/pharma-giant-profits-from-hiv-treatment-funded-by-taxpayers-and-patente...

Save
dagwolf: therogueprofessor: dagwolf: therogueprofessor: bizarrodf: isn’t that really good then if you could donate 16$ to improve 1000 people’s lives, wouldn’t you? Also, no one is forcing them to donate a thing to anyone. Would this person rather them just keep their money to themselves? what does the bottom of a boot taste like? ????? Never mind that this amount is laughably small, they donated it to an organization that only provides financial aid to DACA students with the highest GPA. In other words, they’re donating in a way that will see the money returned to them in the form of a tax break of some kind and in a way that reaffirms the cruel aristocratic social order where rich nobles handpick a few poor youth to patronize in hopes that they will become future managers or researchers for their businesses. In no way imaginable for you, me, and them is this gift a means to equality and fairness. In fact, it’s a form of racist nationalism that demands assimilation without even being willing to award citizenship in return. : Zeru @DoubleStraps 6m To put it in perspective of percentage, this is the equivalent of a person making $50k donating $16. CNN @CNN Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos and his wife, MacKenzie, are donating $33 million to send 1,000 Dreamers to college cnn.it/2Ezh3So 01 17 Show this thread dagwolf: therogueprofessor: dagwolf: therogueprofessor: bizarrodf: isn’t that really good then if you could donate 16$ to improve 1000 people’s lives, wouldn’t you? Also, no one is forcing them to donate a thing to anyone. Would this person rather them just keep their money to themselves? what does the bottom of a boot taste like? ????? Never mind that this amount is laughably small, they donated it to an organization that only provides financial aid to DACA students with the highest GPA. In other words, they’re donating in a way that will see the money returned to them in the form of a tax break of some kind and in a way that reaffirms the cruel aristocratic social order where rich nobles handpick a few poor youth to patronize in hopes that they will become future managers or researchers for their businesses. In no way imaginable for you, me, and them is this gift a means to equality and fairness. In fact, it’s a form of racist nationalism that demands assimilation without even being willing to award citizenship in return.

dagwolf: therogueprofessor: dagwolf: therogueprofessor: bizarrodf: isn’t that really good then if you could donate 16$ to improve 1...

Save
hetascanlations:Hetalia World ☆ Stars - Chapter 304OriginalTranslation: y4nderenka // spaghettifelice Scanlation: jammerleaPlease link back to our Tumblr when using translated imageson other sites.: Wo r dt a rs HIMARUYA HIDEKAZ The world-famous JC4 now on sale!! SooTOTHNK THAT THE FASHION GANG LEADER OF EUROPE WOULD LOSE TO A CHIVALRIC ORDER FROM THE STICKS... 31 AMI OONE FOR..? WHAT'S THIS/P SHOULON'T YOU BE WEARING / EXPENSIVE COOL REY CLOTHES? HETASCANLATIONS HETASCANLATIONS.TUMBLR.COM NICE CLOTHES ARE NICE NO MATTER WHAT ANYONE SAYS! в вит ARISTOCRATIC TASTES COULD GET ME le HASSLED Tremo Tremble REMEMBER HOW UPLIFTING IT FELT AS SOON AS YOu PUT THEM ON! IF YOu DON'T WEAR THEM NOW, WHEN WILL YOu EVER WEAR THEM AGAIN? I LIKE COUNTRIES WHO SPENO MONEY ON CLOTHES! cO.. COMMANDER NAPOLEONN トマ HETASCANLATIONS .。HETASCAALATIONS.TUMBLR.COM HAVEN'T I BEEN SAYING THAT CLOTHES HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH STRENGTH? WHAT KIND OF CLOTHES oO YOu THINK WOULD BE GOOD FOR INCREASING SOLIDARITY? っ NOr YOU'RE WRONe ABOUT THAT, AUSTRIA/ GOOL GLOTHES DO ENHANGE A MAN'S 1 STRENGTH WHAT THE HELLP FRANCE HAS BEEN COMPLETELY RESURRECTED! HIS LEVEL OF STYLE IS CLEARLY GOING UP, THE BASTARo!! NAPOLEON HAD EXTREMELY FLASHY TASTES, SO IN THE END, THEIR CLOTHING ALSO REGAINED ITS FLASHY FEEL HETASCANLATIONS HETASCANLATIONS.TUMBLR.COm NEXTCHAPIERTOBE RELEASEDONSEPTEMBERTTH MONDAY! hetascanlations:Hetalia World ☆ Stars - Chapter 304OriginalTranslation: y4nderenka // spaghettifelice Scanlation: jammerleaPlease link back to our Tumblr when using translated imageson other sites.
Save
generalmajorlieutenant: gallifrey-feels: alliartist: rifa: prokopetz: nebcondist1: prokopetz: I’ve seen this image going around, and I feel compelled to point out that it’s only half-right. It’s true that high heels were originally a masculine fashion, but they weren’t originally worn by butchers - nor for any other utilitarian purpose, for that matter. High heels were worn by men for exactly the same reason they’re worn by women today: to display one’s legs to best effect. Until quite recently, shapely, well-toned calves and thighs were regarded as an absolute prerequisite for male attractiveness. That’s why you see so many paintings of famous men framed to show off their legs - like this one of George Washington displaying his fantastic calves: … or this one of Louis XIV of France rocking a fabulous pair of red platform heels (check out those thighs!): … or even this one of Charles I of England showing off his high-heeled riding boots - note, again, the visual emphasis on his well-formed calves: In summary: were high heels originally worn by men? Yes. Were they worn to keep blood off their feet? No at all - they were worn for the same reason they’re worn today: to look fabulous. so then how did they become a solo feminine item of attire? A variety of reasons. In France, for example, high heels fell out out of favour in the court of Napoleon due to their association with aristocratic decadence, while in England, the more conservative fashions of the Victorian era regarded it as indecent for a man to openly display his calves. But then, fashions come and go. The real question is why heels never came back into fashion for men - and that can be laid squarely at the feet of institutionalised homophobia. Essentially, heels for men were never revived because, by the early 20th Century, sexually provocative attire for men had come to be associated with homosexuality; the resulting moral panic ushered in an era of drab, blocky, fully concealing menswear in which a well-turned calf simply had no place - a setback from which men’s fashion has yet to fully recover. FASHION HISTORY IS HUMAN HISTORY OK Thank you, history side of tumblr. That “stay out of blood” thing has been driving me mad. Wait. So, you’re telling me that the reason straight boys dress horribly is because they’re not over a 100 year old gay panic? You’re telling me that the gross, baggy, shapeless menswear that has been almost singlehandedly ruining my life is the result of a bunch of dudes in the 1900’s collectively going ‘AAAAH WHAT IF THEY THINK WE’RE GAY’ Fuck that shit. BRING BACK MENS HEELS BRING BACK MENS TIGHTS MAKE MEN SEXY AGAIN i for one like the idea of a man’s legs being an absolute prerequisite for male attractiveness and second bringing back mens heels and tights : High heels were originally created for men. Butchers used them to avoid stepping in blood. generalmajorlieutenant: gallifrey-feels: alliartist: rifa: prokopetz: nebcondist1: prokopetz: I’ve seen this image going around, and I feel compelled to point out that it’s only half-right. It’s true that high heels were originally a masculine fashion, but they weren’t originally worn by butchers - nor for any other utilitarian purpose, for that matter. High heels were worn by men for exactly the same reason they’re worn by women today: to display one’s legs to best effect. Until quite recently, shapely, well-toned calves and thighs were regarded as an absolute prerequisite for male attractiveness. That’s why you see so many paintings of famous men framed to show off their legs - like this one of George Washington displaying his fantastic calves: … or this one of Louis XIV of France rocking a fabulous pair of red platform heels (check out those thighs!): … or even this one of Charles I of England showing off his high-heeled riding boots - note, again, the visual emphasis on his well-formed calves: In summary: were high heels originally worn by men? Yes. Were they worn to keep blood off their feet? No at all - they were worn for the same reason they’re worn today: to look fabulous. so then how did they become a solo feminine item of attire? A variety of reasons. In France, for example, high heels fell out out of favour in the court of Napoleon due to their association with aristocratic decadence, while in England, the more conservative fashions of the Victorian era regarded it as indecent for a man to openly display his calves. But then, fashions come and go. The real question is why heels never came back into fashion for men - and that can be laid squarely at the feet of institutionalised homophobia. Essentially, heels for men were never revived because, by the early 20th Century, sexually provocative attire for men had come to be associated with homosexuality; the resulting moral panic ushered in an era of drab, blocky, fully concealing menswear in which a well-turned calf simply had no place - a setback from which men’s fashion has yet to fully recover. FASHION HISTORY IS HUMAN HISTORY OK Thank you, history side of tumblr. That “stay out of blood” thing has been driving me mad. Wait. So, you’re telling me that the reason straight boys dress horribly is because they’re not over a 100 year old gay panic? You’re telling me that the gross, baggy, shapeless menswear that has been almost singlehandedly ruining my life is the result of a bunch of dudes in the 1900’s collectively going ‘AAAAH WHAT IF THEY THINK WE’RE GAY’ Fuck that shit. BRING BACK MENS HEELS BRING BACK MENS TIGHTS MAKE MEN SEXY AGAIN i for one like the idea of a man’s legs being an absolute prerequisite for male attractiveness and second bringing back mens heels and tights
Save
gallifrey-feels: alliartist: rifa: prokopetz: nebcondist1: prokopetz: I’ve seen this image going around, and I feel compelled to point out that it’s only half-right. It’s true that high heels were originally a masculine fashion, but they weren’t originally worn by butchers - nor for any other utilitarian purpose, for that matter. High heels were worn by men for exactly the same reason they’re worn by women today: to display one’s legs to best effect. Until quite recently, shapely, well-toned calves and thighs were regarded as an absolute prerequisite for male attractiveness. That’s why you see so many paintings of famous men framed to show off their legs - like this one of George Washington displaying his fantastic calves: … or this one of Louis XIV of France rocking a fabulous pair of red platform heels (check out those thighs!): … or even this one of Charles I of England showing off his high-heeled riding boots - note, again, the visual emphasis on his well-formed calves: In summary: were high heels originally worn by men? Yes. Were they worn to keep blood off their feet? No at all - they were worn for the same reason they’re worn today: to look fabulous. so then how did they become a solo feminine item of attire? A variety of reasons. In France, for example, high heels fell out out of favour in the court of Napoleon due to their association with aristocratic decadence, while in England, the more conservative fashions of the Victorian era regarded it as indecent for a man to openly display his calves. But then, fashions come and go. The real question is why heels never came back into fashion for men - and that can be laid squarely at the feet of institutionalised homophobia. Essentially, heels for men were never revived because, by the early 20th Century, sexually provocative attire for men had come to be associated with homosexuality; the resulting moral panic ushered in an era of drab, blocky, fully concealing menswear in which a well-turned calf simply had no place - a setback from which men’s fashion has yet to fully recover. FASHION HISTORY IS HUMAN HISTORY OK Thank you, history side of tumblr. That “stay out of blood” thing has been driving me mad. Wait. So, you’re telling me that the reason straight boys dress horribly is because they’re not over a 100 year old gay panic? You’re telling me that the gross, baggy, shapeless menswear that has been almost singlehandedly ruining my life is the result of a bunch of dudes in the 1900’s collectively going ‘AAAAH WHAT IF THEY THINK WE’RE GAY’ Fuck that shit. BRING BACK MENS HEELS BRING BACK MENS TIGHTS MAKE MEN SEXY AGAIN : High heels were originally created for men. Butchers used them to avoid stepping in blood. gallifrey-feels: alliartist: rifa: prokopetz: nebcondist1: prokopetz: I’ve seen this image going around, and I feel compelled to point out that it’s only half-right. It’s true that high heels were originally a masculine fashion, but they weren’t originally worn by butchers - nor for any other utilitarian purpose, for that matter. High heels were worn by men for exactly the same reason they’re worn by women today: to display one’s legs to best effect. Until quite recently, shapely, well-toned calves and thighs were regarded as an absolute prerequisite for male attractiveness. That’s why you see so many paintings of famous men framed to show off their legs - like this one of George Washington displaying his fantastic calves: … or this one of Louis XIV of France rocking a fabulous pair of red platform heels (check out those thighs!): … or even this one of Charles I of England showing off his high-heeled riding boots - note, again, the visual emphasis on his well-formed calves: In summary: were high heels originally worn by men? Yes. Were they worn to keep blood off their feet? No at all - they were worn for the same reason they’re worn today: to look fabulous. so then how did they become a solo feminine item of attire? A variety of reasons. In France, for example, high heels fell out out of favour in the court of Napoleon due to their association with aristocratic decadence, while in England, the more conservative fashions of the Victorian era regarded it as indecent for a man to openly display his calves. But then, fashions come and go. The real question is why heels never came back into fashion for men - and that can be laid squarely at the feet of institutionalised homophobia. Essentially, heels for men were never revived because, by the early 20th Century, sexually provocative attire for men had come to be associated with homosexuality; the resulting moral panic ushered in an era of drab, blocky, fully concealing menswear in which a well-turned calf simply had no place - a setback from which men’s fashion has yet to fully recover. FASHION HISTORY IS HUMAN HISTORY OK Thank you, history side of tumblr. That “stay out of blood” thing has been driving me mad. Wait. So, you’re telling me that the reason straight boys dress horribly is because they’re not over a 100 year old gay panic? You’re telling me that the gross, baggy, shapeless menswear that has been almost singlehandedly ruining my life is the result of a bunch of dudes in the 1900’s collectively going ‘AAAAH WHAT IF THEY THINK WE’RE GAY’ Fuck that shit. BRING BACK MENS HEELS BRING BACK MENS TIGHTS MAKE MEN SEXY AGAIN
Save
sandookchi: Zohra Sehgal, a South Asian actress par excellence, actually spoke multiple languages including Urdu, Hindi, English and German. She is one of the earliest international actresses who came from an aristocratic Muslim family in India. When her father insisted that she get married, she outright said, ‘I don’t want to get married,’  and announced that she might become a pilot. In 1917 she went to a boarding school in Lahore, after which, in 1930, she donned a burqa and set off for Europe by road — crossing Iran, Syria, Palestine and Egypt. She trained as a ballet dancer in Germany. Zohra was quite blunt when it came to expressing her opinions. She was an agnostic and defied all the stereotypes about a “Muslim girl from a traditional family”. She was unbelievably bold and confident and was known for her mischievous humor. She earned immense respect in British TV at a time when people were not accepting of ‘diversity’ and even the Asian roles were played by white people. When she had first arrived in Britain, “it was such that if we were sitting in the bus, the British did not sit next to us. Unconsciously in the minds of white people, there was a hesitation”. She defied cultural norms once more when she married her Hindu student eight years younger than her. She never felt welcomed in Lahore, so she left half her family in Pakistan after 1947 Partition and settled in Delhi where she taught a theater group. She raised her children on her own when her husband committed suicide at a young age. She was literally unstoppable and appeared consistently in British TV series like The Jewel in Crown, Mind Your Language and Doctor Who. She has acted in myriad Bollywood films and performed across Japan, Egypt, Europe and the US. She was a classical dancer, choreographer, cinema, theater and television actress whose career spanned over 8 decades. She was awarded Padma Shri and Padma Vibhushan, some of the highest civilian honors in India. She was a fighter all her life, she even defeated cancer. On her 100th birthday she said, “I want an electric cremation. I don’t want any poems and fuss after that. And for heaven’s sake don’t bring back the ashes. Flush them down the toilet if the crematorium refuses to keep them. If they tell you that I am dead, I want you to give a big laugh". Zohra aapa lived the life of a grand diva and passed away in 2014 at the age of 102. “Oh, my burqa was of lovely silk and I was so glad I made petticoats out of it!” Zohra with her husband Kameshwar Sehgal in 1945. “What actually makes brings out your beauty is the radiance of being content and you can only be content when you are employed in something you love.” “You see me now when I am old and ugly, in fact you should have seen me earlier — when I was young and ugly!” Zohra at her 100th birthday was quietly humming “Abhi To Main Jawan Hoon” (I am still young) by poet Hafeez Jullundhri, as she attacked the huge cake. “Life’s been tough but I’ve been tougher. I beat life at its own game” : Tell the silly bitch I'm not deaf, will you? Tell her I speak four languages fluently. sandookchi: Zohra Sehgal, a South Asian actress par excellence, actually spoke multiple languages including Urdu, Hindi, English and German. She is one of the earliest international actresses who came from an aristocratic Muslim family in India. When her father insisted that she get married, she outright said, ‘I don’t want to get married,’  and announced that she might become a pilot. In 1917 she went to a boarding school in Lahore, after which, in 1930, she donned a burqa and set off for Europe by road — crossing Iran, Syria, Palestine and Egypt. She trained as a ballet dancer in Germany. Zohra was quite blunt when it came to expressing her opinions. She was an agnostic and defied all the stereotypes about a “Muslim girl from a traditional family”. She was unbelievably bold and confident and was known for her mischievous humor. She earned immense respect in British TV at a time when people were not accepting of ‘diversity’ and even the Asian roles were played by white people. When she had first arrived in Britain, “it was such that if we were sitting in the bus, the British did not sit next to us. Unconsciously in the minds of white people, there was a hesitation”. She defied cultural norms once more when she married her Hindu student eight years younger than her. She never felt welcomed in Lahore, so she left half her family in Pakistan after 1947 Partition and settled in Delhi where she taught a theater group. She raised her children on her own when her husband committed suicide at a young age. She was literally unstoppable and appeared consistently in British TV series like The Jewel in Crown, Mind Your Language and Doctor Who. She has acted in myriad Bollywood films and performed across Japan, Egypt, Europe and the US. She was a classical dancer, choreographer, cinema, theater and television actress whose career spanned over 8 decades. She was awarded Padma Shri and Padma Vibhushan, some of the highest civilian honors in India. She was a fighter all her life, she even defeated cancer. On her 100th birthday she said, “I want an electric cremation. I don’t want any poems and fuss after that. And for heaven’s sake don’t bring back the ashes. Flush them down the toilet if the crematorium refuses to keep them. If they tell you that I am dead, I want you to give a big laugh". Zohra aapa lived the life of a grand diva and passed away in 2014 at the age of 102. “Oh, my burqa was of lovely silk and I was so glad I made petticoats out of it!” Zohra with her husband Kameshwar Sehgal in 1945. “What actually makes brings out your beauty is the radiance of being content and you can only be content when you are employed in something you love.” “You see me now when I am old and ugly, in fact you should have seen me earlier — when I was young and ugly!” Zohra at her 100th birthday was quietly humming “Abhi To Main Jawan Hoon” (I am still young) by poet Hafeez Jullundhri, as she attacked the huge cake. “Life’s been tough but I’ve been tougher. I beat life at its own game”
Save