Reblogged from heichousam  185,037 notes
avengersonna:

smaug-official:

wicked-mint-leaves:

naoren:

filmeditor16:

official-sokka:

thats-not-a-toilet:

korrastyle:

OH SHIT

is this why the show was taken off nick?

So this is what air benders can do. Sucking the air out of people’s lungs. Just as cool as lightening bending if you ask me

No I don’t think you guys understand this is frightening

Airbenders are pretty much the most powerful benders. A firebender has to create fire. A waterbender is most powerful on the open seas as much as an earthbender is on land. But air is literally everywhere.
The Air Nomads weren’t dangerous because they chose not to be.

you’vE GONE TOO DEEP

Hey, HOLD UP.
While I agree that Airbenders do have a lot of power at their exposure, they aren’t the only ones.
Waterbenders can bend any type of fluid containing water, even blood inside the human body! That’s pretty fucking metal.

They can also take the water vapor out of the air, use their own sweat or even drain the water out of every living thing nearby. 

Imagine that ^^ happening to a person..
Next we have fire, the element of destruction. Like Airbenders, they can use the air around them, and transfer it into energy. Firebenders can bend or generate anything fire/ heat related.  That means lightning, flames, or extreme heat that has the potential to shape its environment (such as melt molten rock and metal.) Even fire breath!



Next we have Earth. Earthbenders can bend anything related or comprised of Earth, such as metal, rock, dirt, sand, etc. EVEN LAVA. Anything mineral related? You got it. Admittedly, minerals- although extremely easy to come by, are not as present as water or air. But there sure is enough to make use of, and we can’t say Earthbenders aren’t powerful!

This guy just stopped a volcano. 

Not only are they powerful, but they are also graceful. 

And I mean look at this! Avatar Kyoshi Earthbends a freaking continent in HALF!

In conclusion, fear all benders. 


This show cray

avengersonna:

smaug-official:

wicked-mint-leaves:

naoren:

filmeditor16:

official-sokka:

thats-not-a-toilet:

korrastyle:

OH SHIT

is this why the show was taken off nick?

So this is what air benders can do. Sucking the air out of people’s lungs. Just as cool as lightening bending if you ask me

No I don’t think you guys understand this is frightening

Airbenders are pretty much the most powerful benders. A firebender has to create fire. A waterbender is most powerful on the open seas as much as an earthbender is on land. But air is literally everywhere.

The Air Nomads weren’t dangerous because they chose not to be.

you’vE GONE TOO DEEP

Hey, HOLD UP.

While I agree that Airbenders do have a lot of power at their exposure, they aren’t the only ones.

Waterbenders can bend any type of fluid containing water, even blood inside the human body! That’s pretty fucking metal.

image

They can also take the water vapor out of the air, use their own sweat or even drain the water out of every living thing nearby. 

image

Imagine that ^^ happening to a person..

Next we have fire, the element of destruction. Like Airbenders, they can use the air around them, and transfer it into energy. Firebenders can bend or generate anything fire/ heat related.  That means lightning, flames, or extreme heat that has the potential to shape its environment (such as melt molten rock and metal.) Even fire breath!

image

image

image

Next we have Earth. Earthbenders can bend anything related or comprised of Earth, such as metal, rock, dirt, sand, etc. EVEN LAVA. Anything mineral related? You got it. Admittedly, minerals- although extremely easy to come by, are not as present as water or air. But there sure is enough to make use of, and we can’t say Earthbenders aren’t powerful!

image

This guy just stopped a volcano. 

image

Not only are they powerful, but they are also graceful. 

image

And I mean look at this! Avatar Kyoshi Earthbends a freaking continent in HALF!

image

In conclusion, fear all benders. 

This show cray

Reblogged from lokistribble  9,823 notes
thetomlinsonnetwork:

cloudcuckoolander527:

yayfeminism:

One would assume that scientists, who are trained to think objectively, are completely immune to gender discrimination. However, a recent Yale study by Corinne Moss-Racusin and colleagues suggests otherwise.
The researchers created a fictional student and sent out the student’s application to science professors at top, research-intensive universities in the United States. The professors were asked to evaluate how competent this student was, how likely they would be to hire the student, how much they would pay this student, and how willing they would be to mentor the student. All of the applications sent out were identical, except for the fact that half were for a male applicant, John, and half were for a female applicant, Jennifer. Results showed that, with statistical significance, both male and female faculty at these institutions were biased towards male students over female students.
Data from the study shows that on average, science faculty was willing to pay the male applicant about $4,000 more per year. source

"The gender gap doesn’t exist" 
"We don’t need feminism" 
"Maybe he just worked harder"
"*any MRA bullshit*"

not only are salaries affected, but female grad students/professors in the sciences are less likely to be given lecture teaching assignments and more likely to be given lab teaching assignments. regardless of their own gender, those doing the hiring regarded male applicants/students as more able to command respect from their audience.
the lab assignments are less prestigious, but they also take up 3-4x the amount of time to run - leaving the female academics much less time to focus on their own research and getting published, which will lead to slower advancement through the ranks to full professorship.

thetomlinsonnetwork:

cloudcuckoolander527:

yayfeminism:

One would assume that scientists, who are trained to think objectively, are completely immune to gender discrimination. However, a recent Yale study by Corinne Moss-Racusin and colleagues suggests otherwise.

The researchers created a fictional student and sent out the student’s application to science professors at top, research-intensive universities in the United States. The professors were asked to evaluate how competent this student was, how likely they would be to hire the student, how much they would pay this student, and how willing they would be to mentor the student. All of the applications sent out were identical, except for the fact that half were for a male applicant, John, and half were for a female applicant, Jennifer. Results showed that, with statistical significance, both male and female faculty at these institutions were biased towards male students over female students.

Data from the study shows that on average, science faculty was willing to pay the male applicant about $4,000 more per year. 
source

"The gender gap doesn’t exist" 

"We don’t need feminism" 

"Maybe he just worked harder"

"*any MRA bullshit*"

not only are salaries affected, but female grad students/professors in the sciences are less likely to be given lecture teaching assignments and more likely to be given lab teaching assignments. regardless of their own gender, those doing the hiring regarded male applicants/students as more able to command respect from their audience.

the lab assignments are less prestigious, but they also take up 3-4x the amount of time to run - leaving the female academics much less time to focus on their own research and getting published, which will lead to slower advancement through the ranks to full professorship.