jphani:

do u ever miss a friend but u don’t want to tell them bc they’re probably doing perfectly fine without u and to them it probably doesn’t even matter and so u don’t want them to think ur annoying or needy

(via jonasbrothers)

Sam Pepper handcuffs himself to women on the street, refusing to release one woman until she kisses him

everythingsbetterwithbisexuals:

pfdiva:

aka14kgold:

jean-luc-gohard:

celebreceipts:

In January, Sam Pepper uploaded a video called “How To Get A Girlfriend Easy” in which he sneaks up behind or beside unsuspecting women on the street and handcuffs them to himself. He then tells them they’re “his girlfriend now.”

When one victim reacts furiously, saying “No! I don’t know you! Take it off!” and demands that he remove the handcuffs, he refuses and replies with “We’re dating now.” She tries again, “Look, I don’t know where you’re from, but we don’t do this in America. Take this off,” while fighting with the cuffs. He refuses again, insisting they’re “going on a date.” She then tells him that she’s married, to which he says “No, you’re married to me now,” and refuses yet again to remove the handcuffs.

At the end of the video, another woman is pleading with him to undo the handcuffs, and he refuses to until she kisses him on the lips. Pepper appears to think the entire scenario is hilarious at best and endearingly misguided at worst, while the women being “pranked” are visibly livid, terrified, and profoundly uncomfortable.

NONE OF THESE THINGS ARE PRANKS.

We need to stop calling assault by white men on men of color and women of all races “pranks,” because it makes them seem lighthearted and fun, not like the violent criminal acts they are.

NONE OF THESE THINGS ARE PRANKS.

NONE OF THESE THINGS ARE PRANKS.

NONE OF THESE THINGS ARE PRANKS.

NONE OF THESE THINGS ARE PRANKS.

NONE OF THESE THINGS ARE PRANKS.

NONE OF THESE THINGS ARE PRANKS.

I would stab that man’s eyes out with my thumbs.

I’d call 911 and enjoy watching him attempt to unlock the handcuffs before the cops arrived.

(via dreamingofdoctorwho)

Anonymous asked:

How does wand switch loyalties? I first thought it 's because of the expelliarmus because that's how Harry won Draco's but that would make the dueling club ridiculous with wands changing loyalties left and right. Bella's snatched wand didn't work for Hermione nor Charlie's old one for Ron. The wand has to be forcibly taken to switch loyalties? But then Death Eaters would have too many wands because they've certainly used force. I am confusing myself , the answer's probably in front of me ...

AllAboutNothin Answer:

simplypotterheads:

Mr Ollivander states that a wand chooses a wizard. It is not clear why, but certain wands seem to have a natural affinity for certain wizards or witches; this is the most fundamental law. The second states the connections made between both wizard and wand are complex, and will grow with experience, the wand learning from the wizard, the wizard from the wand. Thirdly, a wizard may channel his energy with any wand, whether his or not. However, the best results come where there is a great likeness between a wizard and a wand.

Lastly, a wand may be won from its master, and only then will its allegiance bend towards the new master. This does not apply in situations such as practice duels, in which being disarmed or defeated will not affect a wand’s loyalty. Wands develop an affinity to their owners that they will not give up easily; even when won, they will often retain some loyalty to the original owner. The only exception to this is the Elder Wand, which is “completely unsentimental” and will only be loyal to strength. In other words, when won, it switches its allegiance entirely. When a wand has not been won, it will not work as well for its new owner, as when Harry Potter was forced to use a blackthorn wandand whenHermione Granger used Bellatrix Lestrange’s wand, neither of which they had won

[x]

-Marissol