A Collection Of My Favorite Tweets Regarding The Ever Given In The Suez Canal

I don’t know if I should feel bad for laughing at this or...

Who made this

This bitch’s true love gave him 78 gifts.

reblog to pet the sad cat 　　　　　　 ＿＿ 　　　　　／＞　　フ 　　　　　|  　_　 _ l 　 　　　／` ミ＿xノ 　　 　 /　　　 　 | 　　　 /　 ヽ　　 ﾉ 　 　 │　　|　|　| 　／￣|　　 |　|　| 　| (￣ヽ＿_ヽ_)__) 　＼二つ

Me: Dad, can I get some gum?

Dad: Do you have money?

Me: You don’t give me an allowance.

Dad: Get a job.

Me: Dad, I’m nine.

So I went to pride on Saturday. (I’m pansexual btw in case you didn’t know.)

I wanna address something I’ve seen a lot of. Bear in mind that this post is not addressing or defending anything J.K. Rowling has said about the trans community. To be clear, trans rights are human rights. But this post is not about that. This is strictly about some of the racism accusations I’ve seen. I just wanted to clarify some things so that people don’t feel guilty for enjoying books that many are claiming to themselves be racist. The first thing I wanted to clarify is about house elves. House elves are not based on slavery, as many people have claimed. House elves are actually taken directly from English folklore. Almost every detail is pulled directly from there, so this is an extremely easy claim to debunk. I also wanted to address the discussion about goblins. First, I will say that goblins have always been portrayed as greedy with large hooked noses, though that could definitely be related to antisemitism. However, the fact of the matter is that Rowling never described the goblins as having hooked noses in the books. The only goblin described as having a hooked nose was Griphook. It was just one of his facial features. All of the goblins having hooked noses was a decision made by the film team, not Rowling. The final things I wanted to discuss are the names. Two in particular. Cho Chang and Kingsley Shacklebolt. The argument about Kingsley in particular is just ridiculous. The last name Shacklebolt has nothing to do with slavery any more than Flitwick does with candle wicks or Lockhart does with Locks or Hufflepuff does with smoking or Bagshot does with shooting bags or Fudge does with chocolate- you see my point. The books contain a myriad of ridiculous names that are not innuendos, so why should we assume this one is? As for the Cho Chang matter, yes, they are both last names. However, there was clearly no racist intent in this. She saw the names. She thought they sounded good together. It’s alliterative, like so many other names in her books. That’s it. So are the books a little insensitive by today’s standards? Yes. But so are a lot of things. Hindsight is 20/20 people. Are they racist though? No, they’re not. So think whatever you want about the books’ author, but the books themselves are not racist, so please feel free to read them without any guilt. They are wonderful books that have managed to make hundreds of millions of people happy, and it’d be a shame to stop people from reading them because of false information being spread on the internet.