This week on "Tumblr: Why the Website You Know and Love Is A Fucking Joke"
What the shit
"Do you have to be so vulgar about men, like they’re pieces of meat?"
I HAVE WAITED SO LONG FOR THIS GIF SET
"I now have…" You have always had the "right" to look at whatever the fuck you want to, they’re your goddamn eyes
"after centuries…" really? centuries? you’re speaking in first person here so either you’re a fucking vampire or you’re just fucking wrong. Plus it isn’t even your whole life, as a child you aren’t sexualized and by the looks of this gifset she’s in her thrities, maybe? So maybe two full decades of having to "deal with" men being attracted to her not only equates to centuries of being ogled and disrespected, but also means that she now has some sort of "divine right" to retaliate in kind.
Nobody fucking cares what you look at, you do not have any “divine right” because you don’t fucking need it. You’re are always and forever allowed to do what you want to do, everyone is.
Do what you want, stop trying to fucking justify it with bullshit arguments and exaggerations, you don’t fucking need to explain yourself to me or anyone else, because nobody gives a shit.
Hate to break it to ya, bud. But yes, young girls are in fact sexualized. And arguing about someone’s syntax doesn’t exactly help your argument
In general children are not sexualized, yes the are by some people but by that argument everything is sexualized at some point by some people. Granted, i would agree that children, girls in particular, are sexualized at much younger ages than they should be, if you can even say that anyone “should be” sexualized and it is much more common than most other strange or “wrong” sexualizations.
As far as her syntax goes, it doesn’t really matter whether it’s centuries or not, my original point that she doesn’t need to justify herself still stands, adding imaginary years to her “sexualization” is useless.