🔥 Popular | Latest

feministscoundrel: This photo means a lot to me. And I’ll tell you why.  Natalie Portman, as we know, was shut out of Marvel. She chose not to sign any new contract not just because of the way her character was treated (though there is that) but because Thor: The Dark World was slated to be the first Marvel movie directed by a woman, her friend (and eventual Wonder Woman director) Patty Jenkins. Portman hadn’t planned on being in The Dark World, but lept at the chance to be a part of feminist history and to be directed in what would have beenJenkin’s first film since her 2003 Oscar-winning Monster. Portman signed a new contract with Marvel. They fired Jenkins soon after. Portman was crushed because she essentially had been duped into a contract for a film that would keep her away from her young son and force her back into a one-dimensional role under yet another male director. And we all remember how awful that movie was.  When it came time for the third Thor movie, they tried to get Portman under contract again. And she said no. Marvel decided to spin the story to make it seem like it was all their idea. At first, they went for the lame and nonsensical:  When Marvel Studios President Kevin Feige was asked about why she wouldn’t be in the third film, and said there were “many reasons, many of which are in the film, so you will see that” continuing with “There are only a couple of scenes on Earth in this movie. The majority, 95 percent of the movie, takes place in the cosmos.” (x) Seeing as The Dark World also took place in space, this answer didn’t have a lot of credibility. When Portman said she was “done” with the Marvel Universe, Feige got vicious in interviews, telling reporters that Valkyrie was in Ragnorak to be better than Jane Foster and a better match for Thor.  “We wanted Thor to encounter somebody that was near his equal and that his relationship with Jane may have evolved in unexpected ways in between The Dark World and Ragnarok, and we wanted to pit him against a character who was much more his equal and in many ways his superior.” (x) Feige implies that A) Valkyrie was in Ragnorak just to be a romantic interest for Thor, B) Valkyrie is better and more powerful than Jane Foster, and C) Jane Foster was always Thor’s inferior.  What’s ridiculous is that Ragnorak had a “sorry Jane dumped you” throwaway line to explain Portman’s absence. And instead of saying that Jane and Thor broke up in interviews, a line that does not spoil literally anything about the film, Feige chose to attack Jane’s strength and capability, which would have been a very special dig at Portman.  Do you want to know what none of this sounds like? Taika Waititi’s opinion. Waititi is a master storyteller who does not sacrifice his feminist views for laughs. You can bet that Feige’s ridiculous slams on Portman and her character Jane– disguised as “promotion” for WAITITI’S FILM– would have troubled him immensely. This is a man with a Māori father, who had to use his mother’s maiden name– Cohen– for earlier work because an indigenous last name kept him away from opportunity. This man does NOT fuck around with entertainment that gets its power off of sexism and inequality. He knows from experience just how infuriating it is when it comes to directors missing out on opportunities because they aren’t a white man.  So how does he fix this? How does he fix the idea that Jane Foster can’t go to space, or that she’s not powerful enough for Thor, the god of thunder?  He makes her Thor.  Waititi saw Portman / Jane Foster’s name dragged through the mud by Kevin Feige in order to promote his movie, and when he got hired to direct again, he decided to right those wrongs. This picture means everything. He is on his knee, handing her Thor’s hammer, essentially saying, you will never have to go through that shit with me. With me, you’re a god. And the expression on her face, after Marvel attempted to break her, doesn’t need words.  What a photo. What a film. What a man.  : INTERNATIONAL INTERNATIONAL SAN DIEGO AN DIE ECON CONCON CON INTERNA INTER INTERNATIONAL 1N DIEG0 OIEGO SAN DIEGO CON OUG NO CON DIEGO CON INTERNATIONAL ONAL INTERNATIONAL IN E WATIONAL TERNATIONA SAN DIEGO CON SAN OIEG0 0 93 eONCON CO SAN OIEG N OIEG CO INTERNATIO COMICE CO OM feministscoundrel: This photo means a lot to me. And I’ll tell you why.  Natalie Portman, as we know, was shut out of Marvel. She chose not to sign any new contract not just because of the way her character was treated (though there is that) but because Thor: The Dark World was slated to be the first Marvel movie directed by a woman, her friend (and eventual Wonder Woman director) Patty Jenkins. Portman hadn’t planned on being in The Dark World, but lept at the chance to be a part of feminist history and to be directed in what would have beenJenkin’s first film since her 2003 Oscar-winning Monster. Portman signed a new contract with Marvel. They fired Jenkins soon after. Portman was crushed because she essentially had been duped into a contract for a film that would keep her away from her young son and force her back into a one-dimensional role under yet another male director. And we all remember how awful that movie was.  When it came time for the third Thor movie, they tried to get Portman under contract again. And she said no. Marvel decided to spin the story to make it seem like it was all their idea. At first, they went for the lame and nonsensical:  When Marvel Studios President Kevin Feige was asked about why she wouldn’t be in the third film, and said there were “many reasons, many of which are in the film, so you will see that” continuing with “There are only a couple of scenes on Earth in this movie. The majority, 95 percent of the movie, takes place in the cosmos.” (x) Seeing as The Dark World also took place in space, this answer didn’t have a lot of credibility. When Portman said she was “done” with the Marvel Universe, Feige got vicious in interviews, telling reporters that Valkyrie was in Ragnorak to be better than Jane Foster and a better match for Thor.  “We wanted Thor to encounter somebody that was near his equal and that his relationship with Jane may have evolved in unexpected ways in between The Dark World and Ragnarok, and we wanted to pit him against a character who was much more his equal and in many ways his superior.” (x) Feige implies that A) Valkyrie was in Ragnorak just to be a romantic interest for Thor, B) Valkyrie is better and more powerful than Jane Foster, and C) Jane Foster was always Thor’s inferior.  What’s ridiculous is that Ragnorak had a “sorry Jane dumped you” throwaway line to explain Portman’s absence. And instead of saying that Jane and Thor broke up in interviews, a line that does not spoil literally anything about the film, Feige chose to attack Jane’s strength and capability, which would have been a very special dig at Portman.  Do you want to know what none of this sounds like? Taika Waititi’s opinion. Waititi is a master storyteller who does not sacrifice his feminist views for laughs. You can bet that Feige’s ridiculous slams on Portman and her character Jane– disguised as “promotion” for WAITITI’S FILM– would have troubled him immensely. This is a man with a Māori father, who had to use his mother’s maiden name– Cohen– for earlier work because an indigenous last name kept him away from opportunity. This man does NOT fuck around with entertainment that gets its power off of sexism and inequality. He knows from experience just how infuriating it is when it comes to directors missing out on opportunities because they aren’t a white man.  So how does he fix this? How does he fix the idea that Jane Foster can’t go to space, or that she’s not powerful enough for Thor, the god of thunder?  He makes her Thor.  Waititi saw Portman / Jane Foster’s name dragged through the mud by Kevin Feige in order to promote his movie, and when he got hired to direct again, he decided to right those wrongs. This picture means everything. He is on his knee, handing her Thor’s hammer, essentially saying, you will never have to go through that shit with me. With me, you’re a god. And the expression on her face, after Marvel attempted to break her, doesn’t need words.  What a photo. What a film. What a man. 
Save
ebonyheartnet: jewishdragon: feministscoundrel: This photo means a lot to me. And I’ll tell you why.  Natalie Portman, as we know, was shut out of Marvel. She chose not to sign any new contract not just because of the way her character was treated (though there is that) but because Thor: The Dark World was slated to be the first Marvel movie directed by a woman, her friend (and eventual Wonder Woman director) Patty Jenkins. Portman hadn’t planned on being in The Dark World, but lept at the chance to be a part of feminist history and to be directed in what would have beenJenkin’s first film since her 2003 Oscar-winning Monster. Portman signed a new contract with Marvel. They fired Jenkins soon after. Portman was crushed because she essentially had been duped into a contract for a film that would keep her away from her young son and force her back into a one-dimensional role under yet another male director. And we all remember how awful that movie was.  When it came time for the third Thor movie, they tried to get Portman under contract again. And she said no. Marvel decided to spin the story to make it seem like it was all their idea. At first, they went for the lame and nonsensical:  When Marvel Studios President Kevin Feige was asked about why she wouldn’t be in the third film, and said there were “many reasons, many of which are in the film, so you will see that” continuing with “There are only a couple of scenes on Earth in this movie. The majority, 95 percent of the movie, takes place in the cosmos.” (x) Seeing as The Dark World also took place in space, this answer didn’t have a lot of credibility. When Portman said she was “done” with the Marvel Universe, Feige got vicious in interviews, telling reporters that Valkyrie was in Ragnorak to be better than Jane Foster and a better match for Thor.  “We wanted Thor to encounter somebody that was near his equal and that his relationship with Jane may have evolved in unexpected ways in between The Dark World and Ragnarok, and we wanted to pit him against a character who was much more his equal and in many ways his superior.” (x) Feige implies that A) Valkyrie was in Ragnorak to be a romantic interest for Thor, B) Valkyrie is better and more powerful than Jane Foster, and C) Jane Foster was always Thor’s inferior.  What’s ridiculous is that Ragnorak had a “sorry Jane dumped you” throwaway line to explain Portman’s absence. And instead of saying that Jane and Thor broke up in interviews, a line that does not spoil literally anything about the film, Feige chose to attack Jane’s strength and capability, which would have been a very special dig at Portman.  Do you want to know what none of this sounds like? Taika Waititi’s opinion. Waititi is a master storyteller who does not sacrifice his feminist views for laughs. You can bet that Feige’s ridiculous slams on Portman and her character Jane– disguised as “promotion” for WAITITI’S FILM– would have troubled him immensely. This is a man with a Māori father, who had to use his mother’s maiden name– Cohen– for earlier work because an indigenous last name kept him away from opportunity. This man does NOT fuck around with entertainment that gets its power off of sexism and inequality. He knows from experience just how infuriating it is when it comes to directors missing out on opportunities because they aren’t a white man.  So how does he fix this? How does he fix the idea that Jane Foster can’t go to space, or that she’s not powerful enough for Thor, the god of thunder?  He makes her Thor.  Waititi saw Portman / Jane Foster’s name dragged through the mud by Kevin Feige in order to promote his movie, and when he got hired to direct again, he decided to right those wrongs. This picture means everything. He is on his knee, handing her Thor’s hammer, essentially saying, you will never have to go through that shit with me. With me, you’re a god. And the expression on her face, after Marvel attempted to break her, doesn’t need words.  What a photo. What a film. What a man.  Wiatiti And Portman are also BOTH jewish! Jews lifting up Jews! : INTERNATIONAL INTERNATIONAL SAN DIEGO AN DIE ECON CONCON CON INTERNA INTER INTERNATIONAL 1N DIEG0 OIEGO SAN DIEGO CON OUG NO CON DIEGO CON INTERNATIONAL ONAL INTERNATIONAL IN E WATIONAL TERNATIONA SAN DIEGO CON SAN OIEG0 0 93 eONCON CO SAN OIEG N OIEG CO INTERNATIO COMICE CO OM ebonyheartnet: jewishdragon: feministscoundrel: This photo means a lot to me. And I’ll tell you why.  Natalie Portman, as we know, was shut out of Marvel. She chose not to sign any new contract not just because of the way her character was treated (though there is that) but because Thor: The Dark World was slated to be the first Marvel movie directed by a woman, her friend (and eventual Wonder Woman director) Patty Jenkins. Portman hadn’t planned on being in The Dark World, but lept at the chance to be a part of feminist history and to be directed in what would have beenJenkin’s first film since her 2003 Oscar-winning Monster. Portman signed a new contract with Marvel. They fired Jenkins soon after. Portman was crushed because she essentially had been duped into a contract for a film that would keep her away from her young son and force her back into a one-dimensional role under yet another male director. And we all remember how awful that movie was.  When it came time for the third Thor movie, they tried to get Portman under contract again. And she said no. Marvel decided to spin the story to make it seem like it was all their idea. At first, they went for the lame and nonsensical:  When Marvel Studios President Kevin Feige was asked about why she wouldn’t be in the third film, and said there were “many reasons, many of which are in the film, so you will see that” continuing with “There are only a couple of scenes on Earth in this movie. The majority, 95 percent of the movie, takes place in the cosmos.” (x) Seeing as The Dark World also took place in space, this answer didn’t have a lot of credibility. When Portman said she was “done” with the Marvel Universe, Feige got vicious in interviews, telling reporters that Valkyrie was in Ragnorak to be better than Jane Foster and a better match for Thor.  “We wanted Thor to encounter somebody that was near his equal and that his relationship with Jane may have evolved in unexpected ways in between The Dark World and Ragnarok, and we wanted to pit him against a character who was much more his equal and in many ways his superior.” (x) Feige implies that A) Valkyrie was in Ragnorak to be a romantic interest for Thor, B) Valkyrie is better and more powerful than Jane Foster, and C) Jane Foster was always Thor’s inferior.  What’s ridiculous is that Ragnorak had a “sorry Jane dumped you” throwaway line to explain Portman’s absence. And instead of saying that Jane and Thor broke up in interviews, a line that does not spoil literally anything about the film, Feige chose to attack Jane’s strength and capability, which would have been a very special dig at Portman.  Do you want to know what none of this sounds like? Taika Waititi’s opinion. Waititi is a master storyteller who does not sacrifice his feminist views for laughs. You can bet that Feige’s ridiculous slams on Portman and her character Jane– disguised as “promotion” for WAITITI’S FILM– would have troubled him immensely. This is a man with a Māori father, who had to use his mother’s maiden name– Cohen– for earlier work because an indigenous last name kept him away from opportunity. This man does NOT fuck around with entertainment that gets its power off of sexism and inequality. He knows from experience just how infuriating it is when it comes to directors missing out on opportunities because they aren’t a white man.  So how does he fix this? How does he fix the idea that Jane Foster can’t go to space, or that she’s not powerful enough for Thor, the god of thunder?  He makes her Thor.  Waititi saw Portman / Jane Foster’s name dragged through the mud by Kevin Feige in order to promote his movie, and when he got hired to direct again, he decided to right those wrongs. This picture means everything. He is on his knee, handing her Thor’s hammer, essentially saying, you will never have to go through that shit with me. With me, you’re a god. And the expression on her face, after Marvel attempted to break her, doesn’t need words.  What a photo. What a film. What a man.  Wiatiti And Portman are also BOTH jewish! Jews lifting up Jews!
Save
feministscoundrel: This photo means a lot to me. And I’ll tell you why.  Natalie Portman, as we know, was shut out of Marvel. She chose not to sign any new contract not just because of the way her character was treated (though there is that) but because Thor: The Dark World was slated to be the first Marvel movie directed by a woman, her friend (and eventual Wonder Woman director) Patty Jenkins. Portman hadn’t planned on being in The Dark World, but lept at the chance to be a part of feminist history and to be directed in what would have beenJenkin’s first film since her 2003 Oscar-winning Monster. Portman signed a new contract with Marvel. They fired Jenkins soon after. Portman was crushed because she essentially had been duped into a contract for a film that would keep her away from her young son and force her back into a one-dimensional role under yet another male director. And we all remember how awful that movie was.  When it came time for the third Thor movie, they tried to get Portman under contract again. And she said no. Marvel decided to spin the story to make it seem like it was all their idea. At first, they went for the lame and nonsensical:  When Marvel Studios President Kevin Feige was asked about why she wouldn’t be in the third film, and said there were “many reasons, many of which are in the film, so you will see that” continuing with “There are only a couple of scenes on Earth in this movie. The majority, 95 percent of the movie, takes place in the cosmos.” (x) Seeing as The Dark World also took place in space, this answer didn’t have a lot of credibility. When Portman said she was “done” with the Marvel Universe, Feige got vicious in interviews, telling reporters that Valkyrie was in Ragnorak to be better than Jane Foster and a better match for Thor.  “We wanted Thor to encounter somebody that was near his equal and that his relationship with Jane may have evolved in unexpected ways in between The Dark World and Ragnarok, and we wanted to pit him against a character who was much more his equal and in many ways his superior.” (x) Feige implies that A) Valkyrie was in Ragnorak to be a romantic interest for Thor, B) Valkyrie is better and more powerful than Jane Foster, and C) Jane Foster was always Thor’s inferior.  What’s ridiculous is that Ragnorak had a “sorry Jane dumped you” throwaway line to explain Portman’s absence. And instead of saying that Jane and Thor broke up in interviews, a line that does not spoil literally anything about the film, Feige chose to attack Jane’s strength and capability, which would have been a very special dig at Portman.  Do you want to know what none of this sounds like? Taika Waititi’s opinion. Waititi is a master storyteller who does not sacrifice his feminist views for laughs. You can bet that Feige’s ridiculous slams on Portman and her character Jane– disguised as “promotion” for WAITITI’S FILM– would have troubled him immensely. This is a man with a Māori father, who had to use his mother’s maiden name– Cohen– for earlier work because an indigenous last name kept him away from opportunity. This man does NOT fuck around with entertainment that gets its power off of sexism and inequality. He knows from experience just how infuriating it is when it comes to directors missing out on opportunities because they aren’t a white man.  So how does he fix this? How does he fix the idea that Jane Foster can’t go to space, or that she’s not powerful enough for Thor, the god of thunder?  He makes her Thor.  Waititi saw Portman / Jane Foster’s name dragged through the mud by Kevin Feige in order to promote his movie, and when he got hired to direct again, he decided to right those wrongs. This picture means everything. He is on his knee, handing her Thor’s hammer, essentially saying, you will never have to go through that shit with me. With me, you’re a god. And the expression on her face, after Marvel attempted to break her, doesn’t need words.  What a photo. What a film. What a man.  : INTERNATIONAL INTERNATIONAL SAN DIEGO AN DIE ECON CONCON CON INTERNA INTER INTERNATIONAL 1N DIEG0 OIEGO SAN DIEGO CON OUG NO CON DIEGO CON INTERNATIONAL ONAL INTERNATIONAL IN E WATIONAL TERNATIONA SAN DIEGO CON SAN OIEG0 0 93 eONCON CO SAN OIEG N OIEG CO INTERNATIO COMICE CO OM feministscoundrel: This photo means a lot to me. And I’ll tell you why.  Natalie Portman, as we know, was shut out of Marvel. She chose not to sign any new contract not just because of the way her character was treated (though there is that) but because Thor: The Dark World was slated to be the first Marvel movie directed by a woman, her friend (and eventual Wonder Woman director) Patty Jenkins. Portman hadn’t planned on being in The Dark World, but lept at the chance to be a part of feminist history and to be directed in what would have beenJenkin’s first film since her 2003 Oscar-winning Monster. Portman signed a new contract with Marvel. They fired Jenkins soon after. Portman was crushed because she essentially had been duped into a contract for a film that would keep her away from her young son and force her back into a one-dimensional role under yet another male director. And we all remember how awful that movie was.  When it came time for the third Thor movie, they tried to get Portman under contract again. And she said no. Marvel decided to spin the story to make it seem like it was all their idea. At first, they went for the lame and nonsensical:  When Marvel Studios President Kevin Feige was asked about why she wouldn’t be in the third film, and said there were “many reasons, many of which are in the film, so you will see that” continuing with “There are only a couple of scenes on Earth in this movie. The majority, 95 percent of the movie, takes place in the cosmos.” (x) Seeing as The Dark World also took place in space, this answer didn’t have a lot of credibility. When Portman said she was “done” with the Marvel Universe, Feige got vicious in interviews, telling reporters that Valkyrie was in Ragnorak to be better than Jane Foster and a better match for Thor.  “We wanted Thor to encounter somebody that was near his equal and that his relationship with Jane may have evolved in unexpected ways in between The Dark World and Ragnarok, and we wanted to pit him against a character who was much more his equal and in many ways his superior.” (x) Feige implies that A) Valkyrie was in Ragnorak to be a romantic interest for Thor, B) Valkyrie is better and more powerful than Jane Foster, and C) Jane Foster was always Thor’s inferior.  What’s ridiculous is that Ragnorak had a “sorry Jane dumped you” throwaway line to explain Portman’s absence. And instead of saying that Jane and Thor broke up in interviews, a line that does not spoil literally anything about the film, Feige chose to attack Jane’s strength and capability, which would have been a very special dig at Portman.  Do you want to know what none of this sounds like? Taika Waititi’s opinion. Waititi is a master storyteller who does not sacrifice his feminist views for laughs. You can bet that Feige’s ridiculous slams on Portman and her character Jane– disguised as “promotion” for WAITITI’S FILM– would have troubled him immensely. This is a man with a Māori father, who had to use his mother’s maiden name– Cohen– for earlier work because an indigenous last name kept him away from opportunity. This man does NOT fuck around with entertainment that gets its power off of sexism and inequality. He knows from experience just how infuriating it is when it comes to directors missing out on opportunities because they aren’t a white man.  So how does he fix this? How does he fix the idea that Jane Foster can’t go to space, or that she’s not powerful enough for Thor, the god of thunder?  He makes her Thor.  Waititi saw Portman / Jane Foster’s name dragged through the mud by Kevin Feige in order to promote his movie, and when he got hired to direct again, he decided to right those wrongs. This picture means everything. He is on his knee, handing her Thor’s hammer, essentially saying, you will never have to go through that shit with me. With me, you’re a god. And the expression on her face, after Marvel attempted to break her, doesn’t need words.  What a photo. What a film. What a man. 
Save
joshualunacreations: So many creators of color feel pressured into depicting white characters in order to make a living, denying an important part of our identities and experiences in the process. But we deserve better.(Please don’t repost or edit my work. Reblogs are always appreciated) : WRITING WRONGS I WANT TO CREATE THE MARKET STORIES WITH FILIPINO-AMERICAN AND OTHER AS-AM PROTAGONISTS SORRY, BRO, WHITE W DON'T SELL IN THE MARKET. IF YO WANT HAVE A CAREER, YO NEED TO DEPICT WHITE PROTAGONISTS CENTRAL ASIAN LATINX PACIFIC SOUTHEASTISLANDER MARKET IS MUCH BIGGER THAN THAT. YOU'VE JUST BEEN HIDING IT ASIAN BLACK INDIGENOUS SO THAT YOU DON'T HAVE TO SHARE RESO RCES WITH PEOPLE OF COLOR EAST ASIAN SOUTH ASIAN MIDDLE EASTERN IT'S OBVIOUS LU A THREAT B T PEOPLE OF COLOR ARE TIRED OF THE LIE THAT R STORIES AREN'T WANTED, WHEN WE KNOW THEY ARE. ONS SO I'M GOING TO WRITE MINE. DRAET LOOK, WHAT IF WE GIVE YO ANOTHER ASIAN SIDEKICK... OF ONE OF OUR ESTABLISED) WHITE CHARACTERS? WHITE OR YOu CAN JUST LET us WRITE YOUR STORY BECAUSE WE'VE WRITTEN EVERYONE'S STORY FOR A LONG TIME... CRAP DIT JUST PROVEHIS POINT? joshualunacreations: So many creators of color feel pressured into depicting white characters in order to make a living, denying an important part of our identities and experiences in the process. But we deserve better.(Please don’t repost or edit my work. Reblogs are always appreciated)

joshualunacreations: So many creators of color feel pressured into depicting white characters in order to make a livin...

Save
alicepolitical: libertarirynn: Distracted cop slams into cyclist because he was looking at his phone. But this is actually a god cop. He admits he was wrong, called the right authorities, and apologized. Yes, he did something wrong, but he went about to fix it the right way. Humans make mistakes and cops are human. The ones we should be calling out are the ones who use force to hide their wrong-doings and ones who intentionally harm other people. This cop is a good cop. “Humans make mistakes“ He could’ve fucking killed that guy all because of a completely preventable “mistake“. He made the choice to look at his damn phone while driving, something he wouldn’t hesitate to write a ticket to somebody else for. Of course he admitted his wrongs (with significant downplaying of his actions and the victims injuries I might add) he was literally on camera and there was no denying it. Without the camera evidence I wouldn’t be surprised if he somehow made it the cyclist’s fault. Would you be making the same excuses for a civilian? What if he had hit a child on a bike? Some “mistakes“ absolutely deserve to be heavily criticized. Color me not at all impressed.: alicepolitical: libertarirynn: Distracted cop slams into cyclist because he was looking at his phone. But this is actually a god cop. He admits he was wrong, called the right authorities, and apologized. Yes, he did something wrong, but he went about to fix it the right way. Humans make mistakes and cops are human. The ones we should be calling out are the ones who use force to hide their wrong-doings and ones who intentionally harm other people. This cop is a good cop. “Humans make mistakes“ He could’ve fucking killed that guy all because of a completely preventable “mistake“. He made the choice to look at his damn phone while driving, something he wouldn’t hesitate to write a ticket to somebody else for. Of course he admitted his wrongs (with significant downplaying of his actions and the victims injuries I might add) he was literally on camera and there was no denying it. Without the camera evidence I wouldn’t be surprised if he somehow made it the cyclist’s fault. Would you be making the same excuses for a civilian? What if he had hit a child on a bike? Some “mistakes“ absolutely deserve to be heavily criticized. Color me not at all impressed.
Save
Did you know its completely OK to make mistakes? Read on… ✔️We learn from mistakes! The best way to learn is to experience life for ourselves and learn the natural consequences of our actions. This does not mean that we have to try everything to know better. After we develop critical-thinking skills, we can also observe the mistakes of others and see where their choices lead or anticipate possible outcomes. This can help us avoid major mistakes that can change the course of our life. ✔️When we know better, we do better. Making a mistake is not the end of the world. It just means that we can correct ourselves and start again. If you've hurt someone, apologize. If you've done something wrong, make it right. ✔️Your best is good enough. Forget trying to be perfect, and just do your best. Mistakes will still happen, but that is normal. Stop comparing yourself to the people at the gym, neighbors, friends, family members or co-workers. You may think they are perfect, but everyone has their flaws, regardless of how good they are at hiding them. ✔️Don't be hard on yourself for making mistakes. Focus on what you have learned and pat yourself on the back for correcting the wrong. Leave the past in the past and look toward to making better choices in the future. - Mistakes are essential for our growth and understanding of ourselves and the world. Whether it's our mistake or an error of a family member or friend, we need to realize that it does not make us, or them, bad people. We can learn, grow, change and start making better choices. Wrongs can be made right, and we can become our best self as we learn to be patient with ourselves. Remember, everyone makes mistakes, and it's normal. We can change. We can learn and make better choices! - What do you guys think? Leave a comment below! - mistakes success millionairementor: MILLIOHATRE MENTOR MAKEF CKING MISTAKES. Did you know its completely OK to make mistakes? Read on… ✔️We learn from mistakes! The best way to learn is to experience life for ourselves and learn the natural consequences of our actions. This does not mean that we have to try everything to know better. After we develop critical-thinking skills, we can also observe the mistakes of others and see where their choices lead or anticipate possible outcomes. This can help us avoid major mistakes that can change the course of our life. ✔️When we know better, we do better. Making a mistake is not the end of the world. It just means that we can correct ourselves and start again. If you've hurt someone, apologize. If you've done something wrong, make it right. ✔️Your best is good enough. Forget trying to be perfect, and just do your best. Mistakes will still happen, but that is normal. Stop comparing yourself to the people at the gym, neighbors, friends, family members or co-workers. You may think they are perfect, but everyone has their flaws, regardless of how good they are at hiding them. ✔️Don't be hard on yourself for making mistakes. Focus on what you have learned and pat yourself on the back for correcting the wrong. Leave the past in the past and look toward to making better choices in the future. - Mistakes are essential for our growth and understanding of ourselves and the world. Whether it's our mistake or an error of a family member or friend, we need to realize that it does not make us, or them, bad people. We can learn, grow, change and start making better choices. Wrongs can be made right, and we can become our best self as we learn to be patient with ourselves. Remember, everyone makes mistakes, and it's normal. We can change. We can learn and make better choices! - What do you guys think? Leave a comment below! - mistakes success millionairementor

Did you know its completely OK to make mistakes? Read on… ✔️We learn from mistakes! The best way to learn is to experience life for ourse...

Save
Did you know its completely OK to make mistakes? Read on… ✔️We learn from mistakes! The best way to learn is to experience life for ourselves and learn the natural consequences of our actions. This does not mean that we have to try everything to know better. After we develop critical-thinking skills, we can also observe the mistakes of others and see where their choices lead or anticipate possible outcomes. This can help us avoid major mistakes that can change the course of our life. ✔️When we know better, we do better. Making a mistake is not the end of the world. It just means that we can correct ourselves and start again. If you've hurt someone, apologize. If you've done something wrong, make it right. ✔️Your best is good enough. Forget trying to be perfect, and just do your best. Mistakes will still happen, but that is normal. Stop comparing yourself to the people at the gym, neighbors, friends, family members or co-workers. You may think they are perfect, but everyone has their flaws, regardless of how good they are at hiding them. ✔️Don't be hard on yourself for making mistakes. Focus on what you have learned and pat yourself on the back for correcting the wrong. Leave the past in the past and look toward to making better choices in the future. - Mistakes are essential for our growth and understanding of ourselves and the world. Whether it's our mistake or an error of a family member or friend, we need to realize that it does not make us, or them, bad people. We can learn, grow, change and start making better choices. Wrongs can be made right, and we can become our best self as we learn to be patient with ourselves. Remember, everyone makes mistakes, and it's normal. We can change. We can learn and make better choices! - What do you guys think? Leave a comment below! - mistakes success millionairementor: FUCKIT WE ALL MAKE MISTAKES, BUT LIFE GOES ON. Did you know its completely OK to make mistakes? Read on… ✔️We learn from mistakes! The best way to learn is to experience life for ourselves and learn the natural consequences of our actions. This does not mean that we have to try everything to know better. After we develop critical-thinking skills, we can also observe the mistakes of others and see where their choices lead or anticipate possible outcomes. This can help us avoid major mistakes that can change the course of our life. ✔️When we know better, we do better. Making a mistake is not the end of the world. It just means that we can correct ourselves and start again. If you've hurt someone, apologize. If you've done something wrong, make it right. ✔️Your best is good enough. Forget trying to be perfect, and just do your best. Mistakes will still happen, but that is normal. Stop comparing yourself to the people at the gym, neighbors, friends, family members or co-workers. You may think they are perfect, but everyone has their flaws, regardless of how good they are at hiding them. ✔️Don't be hard on yourself for making mistakes. Focus on what you have learned and pat yourself on the back for correcting the wrong. Leave the past in the past and look toward to making better choices in the future. - Mistakes are essential for our growth and understanding of ourselves and the world. Whether it's our mistake or an error of a family member or friend, we need to realize that it does not make us, or them, bad people. We can learn, grow, change and start making better choices. Wrongs can be made right, and we can become our best self as we learn to be patient with ourselves. Remember, everyone makes mistakes, and it's normal. We can change. We can learn and make better choices! - What do you guys think? Leave a comment below! - mistakes success millionairementor
Save