Partners in the Morning by Matt Stemerman
Via Flickr:
Thanks for looking! Instagram - Twitter -


“Remember … Dreams Come True” Fireworks Spectacular at Disneyland 

Photographer: George Landis

Pluto Through the Houses of Astrology

Pluto is a generational planet, it takes a long time for it to transition into a different sign, it takes somewhere from 14-30 years, so it doesn’t take part in our daily life. Although, where it’s placed in the houses is far more important than the sign, because that changes by the hour. I will start off by explaining what exactly is Pluto? Well, Pluto is the co-ruler of the sign Scorpio. Now, we all know something about Scorpio ;) (hehehe) There are 5 main themes of Pluto. One is transformation, two is destruction, three is intensity, four is rebirth, and five is obsession. Pluto is also known to be the ruler of the underworld which can be very intimidating and powerful. He’s mentioned in many books, and my favorite mention of Pluto is Inferno by Dante Alighieri, where Plutus is the lord of the 4th Circle for those who are the Miserly or Prodigal, which means people who sinned by trying to control money and fortune were to be in the 4th Circle. As many of you may know, the 8th house rules other people’s money, due to Pluto being the ruler of that house along with Mars. Now that we’ve learned a few things about Pluto, I will explain what it means when it goes through each house!

Pluto in the 1st house: The 1st house is the house of your identity, public persona, first impression, personality, and physical appearance. So when Pluto is placed here, you can be a bit of an intense person because you come off as different from society, you don’t mind hanging in the shadows. Being in the public eye and having everyone know about you can annoy you a little. You change a lot, whether it’s weight, height, style, personality, so on. Each person thinks of you differently because of that. You can have a bit of a dark atmosphere hanging around you, and your eyes are hypnotic, demanding, and very powerful. You can seem a bit power hungry yourself, always trying to be in control. 1st house also represents the story of your birth, and early childhood. Your birth could’ve been painful, intense, and transformative for your mother. In your early childhood, there could’ve been a war in your birthplace, or some sort of deep conflict that later brought enlightenment.

Keep reading


Golden Afternoon by Jackie Nell


“Remember, we must always believe in our wishes, for they are the magic in the world!” by Andrew Carter
Having unprotected sex without telling partner about HIV-positive status no longer would be a felony under new bill
In a test of shifting attitudes about HIV, state lawmakers have proposed to no longer make it a felony to intentionally expose others to the disease without their knowledge
By Patrick McGreevy

No, no, no. You shouldn’t be allowed to have sex when carrying a potentially lethal disease without telling your partner & get away with it. 

How can one state be so ‘progressive’ as to think poisoning someone is fine, so long as its with your cock?


Partners and the Matterhorn 3_7_2017

Photographer:  Dominick Tabon


Partner’s Statue before Sunset Hour by Dominick Tabon


See Ya 2016! by Cam

anonymous asked:

(rape tw) Can you explain why you don't think HIV+ people have a moral responsibility to tell potential partners their status, if that is indeed your position? I understand that if they have an undetectable viral load and they practice safer sex, the risk of transmission is very low, but it still exists, no? I'm just trying to understand. I have HPV and I feel guilty for not telling the man who raped me beforehand, and that's not even a potentially fatal illness, just an inconvenience. (1/2)

(2/2) I want to support HIV+ people and not make their lives harder, but I’m having a really hard time with this perspective from an ethical standpoint.

(anon sorry, i answered this but forgot it in my drafts)

anon, i’m not really sure where this is coming from since i haven’t posted about this in a while [since this came in before my other post got resurrected] but i’ll try to explain (and forgive me, this got so damn long but i’m quite swamped lately and have no time to edit)

i don’t think i’ve said that there’s no responsibility to disclose, and i wonder what made you think i did, but the main point i want to get across is that it doesn’t really matter what i think about the morality of nondisclosure in any given situation — what matters is whether i think it should be a serious crime. this is a separate question because the law isn’t about morality, in this case it should be about public health.

and these laws are a resounding failure from a public health perspective, especially since as written they penalize testing and usually completely fail to take into account the risk level of the activity (including condom use) or even whether transmission actually occurred (even when the charge is “criminal transmission”!). these laws were born out of stigma, not science or real ethics. but you don’t have to take my word for it; this is the accepted position among HIV/AIDS and sexual health advocacy organizations, and even the CDC is recommending that they be reviewed. i really recommend reading what these organizations have to say about it. from a quick search UNAIDS’s policy brief (pdf) seems pretty good and clear but there is much more out there.

i’m so sorry about what happened to you and i want to know that you’re not at fault at all. no rape survivor is at fault for their rape or for the consequences of the rape for the rapist. he chose to do that to you, and he accepted the risks that came with that. that is entirely on him!

i think a major problem with the debate about disclosure is that, as the UNAIDS brief says, it “places […] responsibility for HIV prevention exclusively on those already living with HIV and dilutes the public health message of shared responsibility for sexual health between sexual partners.” this applies to other STIs as well. we all have to take responsibility for our own sexual health, at least when it comes to acts we consented to.

even if it may seem to make sense on a moral level, placing the entire responsibility on people who know they’re positive for HIV or any other infection just doesn’t work. there will always be people who don’t know their status or can’t know their status for sure because they were exposed too recently. these people can’t disclose, yet if they are HIV+ they pose a much greater transmission risk than people who know they’re positive because they can’t possibly be accessing treatment, because transmission risk is highest in the acute infection stage when they’ve first contracted HIV, and because they’re less likely to be taking the additional safer sex precautions that they’d take if they knew.

there is still a profound stigma against people living with HIV and other STIs. when we’re influenced by this stigma, we’re likely to focus on finding someone to blame for transmission (or even the possibility of transmission). when we reject the stigma, we can focus on effective methods of prevention which involve helping everyone accurately judge their risk level and make informed choices to protect themselves.

you mention that safer sex with someone with an undetectable viral load is very low-risk (so low-risk, in fact, that i don’t think there’s ever been a documented case of transmission under these circumstances) but that any risk is too much. it’s fine if you feel that way; you set your own boundaries. but sex with someone who doesn’t know their status is much riskier. so is it morally permissible not to disclose to your partners that you don’t know your status? and should not disclosing that be a crime?

i don’t think most people think so, or they haven’t thought about it. to a lot of people, not knowing their status is normal, because their sexual choices are governed by assumptions: they assume that they are negative, for HIV, HSV, etc., and they assume that everyone they have sex with is negative, unless they say otherwise. they assume this partly because of lack of education, and partly because of stigma. we think of people with STIs as dirty, reckless, less than virtuous. we don’t want to think of ourselves or the people we’re intimate with that way. but of course, people with STIs are not those things — having an STI is an entirely morally neutral characteristic of a person. and these assumptions about ourselves and others aren’t sound. they are actually an obstacle to STI prevention.

so these debates trouble me because they obscure the fact that the best practice for everyone is to get tested regularly, disclose what you know about your status (including whether you know it!), and ask about your partner’s status, making it clear that it’s safe for them to be honest. and when we place all responsibility on people who know they’re positive, we validate our assumptions that everyone is negative, but we have to challenge those assumptions if we want to protect ourselves and each other. we have to acknowledge that when we decide to have sex based on the assumption that our partner must be negative, we are taking a risk. even in a world where everyone who knows they’re positive disclosed — and i believe most do — this would be a risk.

the sooner we can accept this and reject stigma, the sooner we can take steps toward more honest and open communication in our sexual lives and make healthy, fully informed choices, the sooner we can stop the spread of HIV.

Healthy vs Unhealthy INTJ

I’ll probably do these upon request, since I’d like to do one huge master post but it’d be SOOO LONG so individually it is…

and since so many of my followers are INTJs I figured I’d start here.

So this is largely based off of the 6 total INTJs I know in person, of which some are “unhealthy,” and others are “healthy.”
For those of you who are unfamiliar with this term, it just means, in essence, an individual’s overall rate of character development (or lack thereof). 

Unhealthy INTJs…

  • Will be extremely rude and arrogant and boastful, believing themselves to be the smartest, single most capable person in a room
  • Express insecurity through bragging/fits of anger
  • When in the wrong they will argue that they are right until the original argument is forgotten or the other person yields
  • Sees relationships and religion and sometimes life entirely as dumb and unimportant
  • May perceive school and work as stupid and may give up on such pursuits
  • Sees life as fleeting and insignificant 
  • Wants a lot of things they cannot have 
    • Desirable but unattainable wealth, partner, status, etc.
  • Terrible at friendships and relationships
    • Push too fast for things or far too slowly
    • Miss emotional cues and make partner feel alienated
    • Cannot express emotion 

Healthy INTJs…

  • Are proud of themselves, more so based on their accomplishments rather than their pure sense of self-importance
  • Highly motivated and driven to succeed
  • Desire healthy relationships with others, good at maintaining and building relationships
    • But only with very, very few people
    • Most people are still only considered acquaintances
  • Less inclined to brag about themselves rather than just list achievements over time 
  • See life as important and something based upon bettering oneself and (eventually) helping others
  • Good listeners of people’s problems and can talk about their own problems decently well, though probably will not be seeking advice
    • Still prefer dealing with their own problems 
  • Set tangible life goals and strive to reach them by realistic means
  • Relationships with partners will be steady, long-lasting (as far as it can be helped), and built on trust 
    • Able to grant appropriate attention to partners as to not make them feel alienated
    • For most, treating a partner particularly specially still must be planned beforehand, but they are capable of dealing with spontaneous showers of affection as well
  • Aren’t total assholes

Lol and there we have it! It’s pretty broad, but it’s still focused on INTJs. Remember that most people fall in between these two at “average health,” so don’t panic if “healthy INTJ” doesn’t fit you entirely. 


A Brief Intro to Imagineer Blaine Gibson

Blaine Gibson joined the Disney Studio in 1939 as an animator. Over the next fifteen years, he worked as an animator on most of the studio’s most famous projects, including FantasiaBambiSong of the SouthAlice in WonderlandPeter PanSleeping Beauty, and 101 Dalmatians.

In 1954, Walt Disney was putting together a team of artists that would help him create the Disneyland park. Walt remembered a small art exhibit he’d attended that featured some animal sculptures Gibson had created during his off hours, and immediately asked Gibson to join his team of ‘Imagineers.’

In 1961, Gibson became the head of the Imagineering sculpture department. Gibson’s sculpture work in Imagineering is the stuff of legend. He sculpted the head of the original Abe Lincoln animatronic (and most of the presidents since), the pirates in Pirates of the Caribbean, many of the spooks in The Haunted Mansion and the original Partners statue that stands in the hub of Disneyland.

Blaine Gibson died in July of 2015. A great artist, he will be missed. Thankfully, much of his work still stands at the various Disney parks throughout the world. A lasting tribute to a remarkable man.