A Dark Corner

Jul 23

synadikt:

drassbebigger:

#Truth

Preach!!!

Memories of one who visits here

synadikt:

drassbebigger:

#Truth

Preach!!!

Memories of one who visits here

(via badsinner100)

Sep 08

Time for another digital detox

Might be back, might not be.

It’s been fun kids but I need a break. Ill be back in from time to time so message me if you wish to keep in touch.

Sep 07

[video]

Sep 05

If you have to write it on a tee shirt, I doubt very much that you are.
In fact, it’s very likely you’re worth fucking, but not worth knowing. I’ll leave you to sit a while and work out how that’s different.
Via: chattelprod:

If you have to write it on a tee shirt, I doubt very much that you are.

In fact, it’s very likely you’re worth fucking, but not worth knowing. I’ll leave you to sit a while and work out how that’s different.

Via: chattelprod:

(Source: tush)

Sep 04

[video]

Professor Longhair, Big Chief

[video]

[video]

[video]

List of Harry Potter Spells

Sep 03

reblog if you dont have a bra on

Never do!!

(via halfnakedgeek)

Can we stop and think for a moment?

Syria and chemical weapons.

The UN sends a “fact finding team”. They are half way through their work and are currently analysing the results. The UN says it might be another 7 to 10 days before their findings can be published.

Meantime, ahead of any findings from the UN team the USA, France and a couple of other countries are publishing their “conclusions” that there’s no doubt the Govt used chemicals and France today says they have even uncovered “intelligence”, satellite pictures etc that “proves” the Army was responsible and even where the shelling came from.

Australia lines up behind the US and says that “if they go, we have to go to”. After all, the USA are our allies, right?

And so the warpigs crank up their propaganda machines.

Excuse me but haven’t we heard this song before? Didn’t we learn anything about the consequences of rushing into Iraq? Are we really going to be that stupid again? Barge in with some kind of “necessary military response” (whatever the fuck that means) before there is ANY conclusive evidence in the public domain?

The only saving grace this time is that Britain’s Lower House has said NO to any British support, not even “at this time” but straight up No, meaning if they want to change their mind, there needs to be a whole new debate in the House to overturn this decision, presumably if/when there is new evidence.

Please God, let this stupidity end. And yeah, Im fucking angry and I approve this message!

Aug 31

The Cartographer's Paper: French lesson for the day -

thecartographerspaper:

alexander51:

domwithpen:

thecartographerspaper:

I’m a linguistic morphologist at heart. I love the way language shapes and forms meanings by the structure of a word or the order of a sentence. In that way, English is so very bland.

So in the theme of D/s, here is a beautiful breakdown of the most common of phrases:

"Please, Sir."

In…

This. Is. Fucking. Great.

If I may make one small correction since this is a most informative piece about the derivation of “Please, Sir”. The correct grammar in French when addressing a superior (or someone of equal rank with whom you are not acquainted) is “vous”, not “te”. So the correct address in the example referred to by the writer would be “s’il vous plait”, not “s’il te plait”. Both are correct grammatically but to address a Master or Sir as “te” would be very bad form and looked down upon as simply not polite. The only possible exemption would be if permission had been given by the superior due to a familiarity have arisen between the two. This could possibly be the case where a long standing relationship exists and particularly if the pair are currently intimate and most likely would still only be permissible in private. Publicly “vous” would always be used.

In French, it is known as “la politesse”.

Thank you for this, however I took exception to that grammatical nuance in French on the basis of religious reference, where “tu” is used in place of “vous,” so as to convey a monotheism, not a polytheism, and that if using “tu” in reference to a deity is acceptable, even if for the sake of clarification, it may also be appropriate in a D/s context. Ultimately, this difference would come down to a preference between two partners.

Agreed…if both partners had agreed. You and I are in heated agreement! I was simply wishing to heed the need for such agreement rather than taking a liberty and suffering some kind of consequence. 

The Cartographer's Paper: French lesson for the day -

domwithpen:

thecartographerspaper:

I’m a linguistic morphologist at heart. I love the way language shapes and forms meanings by the structure of a word or the order of a sentence. In that way, English is so very bland.

So in the theme of D/s, here is a beautiful breakdown of the most common of phrases:

"Please, Sir."

In…

This. Is. Fucking. Great.

If I may make one small correction since this is a most informative piece about the derivation of “Please, Sir”. The correct grammar in French when addressing a superior (or someone of equal rank with whom you are not acquainted) is “vous”, not “te”. So the correct address in the example referred to by the writer would be “s’il vous plait”, not “s’il te plait”. Both are correct grammatically but to address a Master or Sir as “te” would be very bad form and looked down upon as simply not polite. The only possible exemption would be if permission had been given by the superior due to a familiarity have arisen between the two. This could possibly be the case where a long standing relationship exists and particularly if the pair are currently intimate and most likely would still only be permissible in private. Publicly “vous” would always be used.

In French, it is known as “la politesse”.

(via domwithpen-deactivated20140601)