My name is Heather, and I live in Austin, TX.
E-mail is dorkyturtle (a) gmail.

Jul 21

“If Obama is indeed elected—the first truly Internet-enabled candidate—we should take him at his word. He does not offer himself as the agent of change, but as an advocate of the change that could be enacted by people. It is not for government to create solar power, for example, but to get out of the way of all those people who are ready to implement solar power, themselves. Responding to the willingness of people to act, he can remove regulations developed on behalf of the oil industry to restrict its proliferation. In an era when people have the ability to reprogram their reality, the job of leaders is to help facilitate this activity by tweaking legislation, or by supporting their efforts through better incentives or access to the necessary tools and capital. Change does not come from the top—but from the periphery. Not from a leader or a myth inspiring individuals to consent to it, but from people working to manifest it together. Open Source Democracy—which I wrote about a decade ago—is not simply a way to get candidates elected to office. It is a collective reprogramming of the social software, a disengagement from the myths through which we abdicate responsibility, and a reclamation of our role as citizens who participate in the creation of the society in which we want to live. This is not personal democracy at all, but a collective and participatory democracy where we finally accept our roles as the fully literate and engaged adults who can make this happen.”

Douglas Rushkoff (somethingchanged)

Exactly!

(via asprettyasasong)

(via bellavita)

(via soupsoup)


Jul 20
“The hammer is my penis.” He can give me his hammer anytime.

“It’ll take about twenty minutes to cook. We could have sex, but what are you going to do for the other nineteen minutes?”

“Men don’t realize that if we’re sleeping with them on the first date, we’re probably not interested in seeing them again either.”

Chelsea Handler (via whateverlolawants)

I’m guessing (hoping?) this was a comment said in jest, because seriously, who follows The Rules anymore? Do people actually still wait three dates for sex or two days to call back? If I fuck you, it usually means I like you, not the reverse.

Also, the last time I slept with someone on a first date, the sex was amazing. Then we fucked again on the second date. And the third. And then we stopped going on dates since I basically never left his apartment anyway (being quite busy with getting fucked and all). See how much wonderful sex people are missing out on by postponing what they want? STOP ABIDING BY THE RULES. THEY DON’T WORK.

(via lenachen)

Amen, Lena. I wrote a post about this earlier and deleted it, but after Lena spoke of this, I’m going to say it again:

I’ve slept with guys on the first date who turn out to be wonderful, loving boyfriends. I’ve given men chaste kisses on the cheek after dinner with no intention of ever calling them again. And every little thing in between.

Can we not make up “rules” about who sleeps with who / when / why? If you want to know if someone likes you… why not ask them, instead of assuming based off of some archaic sexual courtship dance?

Maybe I’m naive, but I don’t think sex should be a bargaining chip.

(via jgh)

Verra nice.


Jul 18
&lt;3 <3

I wanted to type “immature,” but instead I typed “internet.”  Hmmmm.


Jul 17

My computers at home have died.

I has no iphone.

And I have a big project to work on today for the parliamentarian.

So I’m going into Tumblr radio silence for awhile.  Email me if I’m missing anything epic.

Have a good Thursday, my lovelies!


As Long as there's Women...

peterwknox:

There’s this joke/quote I read a few years ago that stuck with me:

Women are the number one reason I’m not gay.

First off, thank you (women) for that. We men can be disgusting and I’m so very glad there’s another option here. But what an option it can be!

I realized this morning, hardly for the first time (today, even), just how much I LOVE women. I love the way they look, the way they sound, the way they talk, the way they feel, the way they act, they way they think, the way they move, the way they taste, the way they smell, and most importantly, the way they make ME feel.

Yes, I’m that selfish, self-serving, and self-centered (if you’ve seen my site before, this is no surprise) that my favorite thing about women is the effect they have on me. Women are the strongest drug available, anywhere, and I live in a city with four million of them - some of the most beautiful, most intelligent, most ambitious, and incredible ones alive in the world.

I have never had a higher high or a lower low at the expense of anything else. With a single glance, a simple touch, or a spoken word my world changes, taking flight or crash landing (maybe I am a little sensitive). And it’s always been that way for me.

Women steal and own my attention in ways video games never could. I love looking at them, reading about them, hearing about them, talking about them, and desperately trying to understand them. Much of the vast amount of content I’ve processed has had the underlying motivation of deciphering their behavior and thought processes in the hopes of being able to co-exist peacefully with them like I have always been able to do with my guy friends.

I think the biggest breakthrough in my development with girls came with the advent of AIM. In person, or on the phone, I speak fast and excitedly in hopes of saying everything I want to say before the person listening loses interest (some confidence I have), which doesn’t always go over well, especially when I chose the inappropriate awkward joke over the casual calm comment. But I’ve always been a man of letters, writing notes and mail to my female friends in lieu of a four hour phone call about nothing to speak of.

Finally I was able to interpret their instant message and labor over my response, thus developing a “conversation” I could control and enjoy without the in person awkwardness. It worked. I improved.

And when it finally happens you can breathe a sigh of relief knowing your gravestone won’t read “virgin” (every pimpled boy’s deepest fear) and you relax even a little bit more. But the beauty is that just like talking with girls or having sex with them, the more you can do both, the better each gets. And every girl is different and wonderful - a short story and a poem at the same time. Plus, just like the libraries I’ll never get to read, there are infinite variations of women, making you appreciate the ones that can appreciate you.

Aside from the combination of Dead Poets Society and a bottle of red wine, I can think of nothing else on this planet capable of making me feel so emotionally and physically high as a women I’ve been able to connect with, if for months or minutes.

And therefore I think it’s a good thing that I am so sensitive and vulnerable around women. (To borrow a phrase from this book) I’m the guy at the swanky rooftop pool party where girls are taking their tops off, thinking “HOLY SHIT, BOOBS”, and trying desperately to look cool about it. I’m never thinking about how badly burned I’m getting on a nude beach. And I prefer that to being indifferent to women. I like that I’m still thinking like an over eager adolescent in the bedroom. The second I stop feeling fascinated that “this is really happening right now” is the second I’d need rehab, and I never want to have to quit women.

Now there might not be a big possibility that that woman will sleep with you, but there’s no chance she will if you’re dead. That’s your reason to get up in the morning - possibility.

Fantastic post.


brianvan:

These people are unfairly smeared (by, um, BLOGGERS, hello!) as being vacuous because they want to be famous. Non-fucking-sense. Julia just crawled into a hole for the past three or however many months and didn’t come out. Julia used to appear on talk shows that aired at 2 A.M. as part of her hustle and bustle. Do you really think she wants to be famous? No. She just wants to be a successful writer and media commentator.

Sorry Brian, I just cannot believe that.  Not for one minute.


soupsoup:

jeralyndwile:handa:marjoree:via ricchan:



Sea steps (via Jon Read)
Where I would like to be right now.

soupsoup:

jeralyndwile:handa:marjoree:via ricchan:

Sea steps (via Jon Read)

Where I would like to be right now.


shiningstar:

mufti:

jeralyndwile:

Do you think that if more people lived together before they got married there would be less divorces? My sister and I were talking about that. Put in your vote.

I personally think that in theory it might sound good but I think that ultimately it is better to wait for two reasons. Firstly, I think that living together simply enables the non-commital types. Those type of people get to have their cake and eat it too; its like you live with the person but you’re not sure enough about them to make a life-long commitment. I know of a lot of women who after investing years in a relationship like this are left with nothing - no money, no place to live, etc. Secondly, I believe that there is something sacred about marriage. When two people start living together after they are married there should always be this idea in their minds that what they have created is of extreme importance. In a way its to hold you accountable and let me explain that statement. A lot of people are tempted to say “well if all thats holding you together is a piece of paper…” But this is what I mean, we are all flawed individuals with hundreds of issues, personal problems, and other things clouding our judgment at all times. And sometimes I would like to think that if we are personally in a moment of weakness that maybe remembering why we made those vows in the first place and the weight that they hold could mean the difference between a divorce or not. If its not a marriage its much easier to leave; no mess, no paperwork, just take your stuff and go.

P.S. There was an article I read one or two years ago in Psychology Today that talked about the research done on divorce rates for couples that live together and the evidence proved that they got divorced slightly more that couples that did not.

UPDATE: The article is on their website The Perils of Playing House.

I’m going to have to agree with mufti on this one. Living together hasn’t been proven to reduce the probability of divorce at all. I think that living together before you’re married is definitely a personal choice, but marriage definitely raises the stakes. Both parties know that they can’t very easily just walk away from the situation over a minor (or even major) issue or hiccup. Marriage is a serious thing. Real estate and money are also very serious things. I’m always hesitant to combine these sorts of serious things with things that aren’t very serious (committed relationships without any sort of back-up). The reason why a lot of marriages work out is because they are just that, marriages.

Some people think they need to test the goods before they buy, but honestly, if there’s any doubt in your mind to begin with, the relationship probably isn’t going in the right direction. Maybe my (semi) conservative upbringing is showing, but I don’t believe in giving the milk for free… If you know what I’m saying.

That said, ‘living together’ in New York and other comparable cities is much different. That becomes more of an economic/money saving issue than one of the status of the realtionship.

All things considered though, I can’t see enough plusses of living together to sway me in that direction.

Totally agree.  This is why I don’t plan on living with a man I’m dating until we’re married.  I mean, I’ve already given up the V-card, might as well have something to look forward to. ;)  And I love the idea of building a life and a home together after taking those vows.  To me, there’s something sacred about it.

I don’t fault others for living together without being married, it’s just not for me.


Jul 16

re: tumblr etiquette

nudawn:

mascarah:

If you write anything (be it nice or nasty) and you blog it, it is out there. Deleting something that has been reblogged doesn’t really make sense and is highly annoying (I’ve been guilty of this myself, shame on me!). Once reblogged the post lives on via  someone else’s blog and if they have good tumblr reblogging etiquette, it has your name attached to it.

I think the best policy is: if you say it, leave it be. Write an apology if you need to or edit it with the infamous “UPDATE” clarification. But removing it is just not kosher.

i completely agree.  i think people who delete their posts are pussys or narcissists.  i’ve seen a few people do it.

I do this all the time.  Mostly because I reblog a lot of stuff that I don’t want to clutter dashboards with, so I make those private sometimes at the end of the day.  Or I dislike the fact that I was mean and want to take back what I said.

Call me a pussy.  That sounds kind of hawt. :winky:


peterwknox:

emmas:

I recently picked a new primary care doctor. After two visits and exhaustive lab tests, he said I was doing ‘fairly well’ for my age. A little concerned about that comment, I couldn’t resist asking him, ‘Do you think I’ll live to be 85?’ He asked, ‘Do you smoke tobacco, or drink beer or wine?’ ‘Oh no,’ I replied. ‘I’m not doing drugs, either!’ Then he asked, ‘Do you eat rib-eye steaks, barbecued ribs or Sausage?’ I said, ‘No, my former doctor said that all red meat is very unhealthy!’  ‘Do you spend a lot of time in the sun, like playing golf, boating, hiking, or bicycling?’ ‘No, I don’t,’ I said. He asked, ‘Do you gamble, drive fast cars, ride a Harley or have a lot of sex?’  ‘No,’ I said. He looked at me and said,

‘Then, why do you even give a shit?’