I'm experimenting

@everyone looking at Jake rn and saying “this is not what aromanticism looks like”

What the hell do you think aromanticism does look like? What do you think it entails? Do you really think that it’s all queerplatonic partners and green and grayscale flags and jokes about how silly romance is?

Sometimes, aromanticism is depression. Sometimes it’s hating yourself for not being able to make your romantic life work the way it’s supposed to. Sometimes it’s thinking you’re a shitty, uncaring person because you don’t feel something you think you should. Sometiems it’s being afraid you’ll die alone. Sometimes it’s isolation after romantic relationships fall apart.

Sometimes it’s a sort of lightness in knowing that’s you’re who you are and that’s okay. Sometimes it’s laughing at the idea of being so wrapped up in a relationship and feeling grateful that you don’t have to care about that. Sometimes it’s the joy of finding other aromantic people. But aromanticism is not always easy for everyone, especially people without a community. Often times, it can go hand in hand with exactly what Jake is expressing!

When people act like we shouldn’t claim Jake as aromantic because he’s sad, what the fuck are they saying? Why are they so uncomfortable seeing an aromantic who actually struggles with the difficult parts of being aromantic? And most worryingly, when their standards are so ridiculously high, who do they accept as being a “real” aromantic?

Anxiety is the most silently painful experience. It makes no sense and you sit there alone and suffer for a unknown reason. You can’t explain it. You can’t stop it. It is horrible.
—  A silent storm

Hi everyone !

So here is my second follow forever. The first one is from last year and I felt like doing a 2015 edition (plus someone asked me on anon about my fave blogs). I’ve met so many wonderful people on here with who I can share my passions and I’d like to give them some appreciation. So here are the people who enlighten my dash with their blog, posts, reblogs. Big hugs to all of you !

altatensione ❄️ athletageek ❄️ bellezzamortale ❄️ blenamiboa ❄️ brosnia ❄️ buffysummerr ❄️ dancinginmyswimsuit ❄️ e-durm ❄ edge-triggered ❄️ everyonelovesiniesta ❄️ finnhaagenkrogh ❄️ firkloever ❄️ iamlestat ❄️ iheartskijumpers ❄️ in-love-with-arsenal ❄️ insteadofsound ❄️ jetaimeskiliashkeane ❄️ lowe-magdii ❄️ maeaettae ❄️ magioghvitetekopper ❄️ martumes ❄️ mesutsergio ❄️ miss-wimbledon ❄️ myfourcade ❄️ nordiccombined ❄️ ohlalaskijumping ❄️ oliviajonasson ❄️ petternorthugjr ❄️ podolzki ❄️ preciousidiots ❄️ queens-of-football ❄️ secondhand-sunlight ❄️ scarlet-wltch ❄️ swawrinka ❄️ theroseathiagoseelva ❄️ treasuredthings ❄️ wintersportsmadness ❄️ whereisyourpippinnow ❄️ wolvesofdead

Also a big thank you to all my followers who handle my sport obsession ♡

anonymous asked:

what would you recommend as the best literature about the real Mobs of New York and about those five families? I'm really interested in it all but I have no idea where to start!

YES GOOD!! There is so much out there and it’s definitely a huuuugely daunting process to start. I’m going to recommend littlelansky‘s Book Rec List first, because she’s read more than I have

Are you looking for books about the mob and the families in general, or are you looking for biographies about specific people? Most of what I’ve read have been biographies specifically about Charlie, so I can’t really speak to many books about the New York mob in general. But I really recommend Tough Jews as an excellent read. It gives a good look at Murder Inc. and the Jewish gangsters, whose contributions are often downplayed in a lot of Italian-centric books. It also has a lot of literary value as a well-written and emotive book. At times it can be a little more literary than historical, but that’s something that appeals to me personally, because I like the combination of Rich Cohen’s excellent prose and perspective and how he uses that to reconstruct Murder Inc. and its members and their experiences.

The more general books are first on the book rec list, and while I haven’t read them myself and can’t really speak to what they’re like, littlelansky majored in history and has a really good sense for what’s historically useful and what isn’t, so I trust her judgment