|Courtney shared this story from Super Opinionated.|
Inspired of course by by Joanna Russ. And not set off by anything in particular, just an aggregate of comments and a good friend being treated terribly for posting some of her fiction for free online.She tweets and tumblrs so she must not be working.She never tweets and tumblrs so she must she think she is too good for her fans.Her books don’t sell so she must be a failure.Her books do sell so she must write for the money.She writes too much of one series. A good writer would write books set in lots of different universes.She should write more of the same series because that is what I like. Hope she doesn’t think I will buy her new stuff.She talks about and answers questions about her books, why won’t she leave her fandom alone? Why is she trying to impose her views on them?She doesn’t answer questions from her fans or listen to what they say. She must not care about them.She sells her work for money so she must just want money.She posted her work for free so it doesn’t really belong to her.I like her main female character so she must be a Mary Sue that the author based on herself.I hate her main female character so she needs to learn how to write women.I wrote her a nasty message and she didn’t answer so she is a coward.I wrote her a nasty message and she did answer so she is a bully.She contradicted me when I accused her of something so I know she did it, otherwise she wouldn’t be so defensive.She didn’t contradict me when I accused her of something so I know she did it, otherwise she would have defended herself.She wrote it but she tried too hard to be literary so I couldn’t get into it.She wrote it and I really enjoyed it but because of the subject matter I know it’s trash, really.
This is so, so, so true. Unconscious bias bubbles up over and over, poisoning discourse. It’s enraging and it’s also really boring after a while.
AAAAEEEEEEE!!!!!! UHUUUU!!! \o/
Charlie Brooker’s Emmy-winning drama Black Mirror is returning with a feature-length Christmas special called Yuletide.
Three interwoven stories will come together in the new film which Channel 4 says is “the most mind-bending Black Mirror yet”. The drama has not yet been cast.
Brooker said: "I always enjoy a good ghost story at Christmas, and I'm a sucker for the Amicus’ compendium horror movies of the 70s. Our aim is to create the Black Mirror equivalent of that."
Phil Clarke, Channel 4’s head of comedy, added: “I’m delighted that we have a Black Mirror Special this Christmas. Charlie Brooker has penned a dystopian future festive tale, that intertwines three stories to deliver a dramatic and thrilling twist. It’s satirical, comic, disturbing, and thought provoking. Not to be missed.”
The anthology show, which is ironically made by the channel's comedy department, began life in 2011 and has already aired two series of three episodes each.
Brooker has written most of them, including all of series two, but the episode The Entire History of You from series one was written by Peep Show writer Jesse Armstrong.
Black Mirror explores the sinister and troubling side of technology in self-contained stories with different cast members.
In series one, t The National Anthem concerned a fictional Prime Minister played by Rory Kinnear who was forced to have sex with a pig in order to save the life of an (also fictional) member of the royal family.
In series two, the episode Be Right Back saw Hayley Attwell play a grieving girlfriend who buys a robot to take the place of her dead boyfriend.
In February, RadioTimes.com broke the news that a single episode of Black Mirror was planned for this year – and with the festive timing it appears C4 has got it in under the wire just in time.
Give it Up is a new track released yesterday by Israeli musician and composer Kutiman. The song was created entirely using vocal and instrument tracks lifted from 23 different YouTube videos of mostly amateur musicians, credited here. If you liked this, you’ll be happy to learn this is just the first track off his upcoming album Thru You Too which the artist says will be comprised entirely of unrelated YouTube videos.
In other composing-music-with-videos news, Andrew Huang created a version of the 80s hit 99 Red Balloons… using only red balloons. Included here for your listening pleasure.
(via Adam Savage)
On Thursday, Judge Thokozile Matilda Masipa found Oscar Pistorius, 27, guilty of culpable homicide, “a vindication for the athlete who vehemently protested his innocence during a trial in South Africa that gripped millions around the world,” reports The Guardian.
Last year, on Valentines Day, Pistorius fired four shots through the bathroom door, killing his girlfriend, Reeva Steenkamp, 29, who was on the other side of the door, locked in the bathroom. “Culpable homicide” is equivalent to a manslaughter charge, meaning that Pistorius will get 15 years max. Max. There is no minimum sentence. It is unlikely Pistorius will serve 15 years. He could be punished with community service and fines. Pistorius got away with murder.
He was not charged with murder because Masipa felt “It cannot be said that he foresaw that the deceased or anyone else would be killed when he fired shots at the toilet door.” Had he been convicted of murder, Pistorius would have faced a minimum of 25 years in jail.
His lawyer, Barry Roux, asked that Pistorius remain free on bail: “I think it is premature to think of a likely sentence in this case,” Mr. Roux said. “There is no reason not to allow him out on bail.”
Culpable homicide means Pistorius was found guilty of negligence rather than intent. Which means that we are to believe Steenkamp’s death was an accident.
Steenkamp’s death was not an accident.
Pistorius claims he fired at the bathroom door, thinking “an intruder” was on the other side, and only realized it was his girlfriend after breaking the door down with a cricket bat.
Pistorius knew she was in there. She was, after all, trying to escape from him. How many women have locked themselves in the bathroom, hiding from their partner? We know what she was doing in there. We know how she got there. We know Pistorius probably chased her in there, that he clearly heard her screaming and crying. That he probably threatened her. Neighbours testified that they heard a woman screaming. She had her cell phone with her. She must have been terrified.
“I’m scared of you sometimes and how you snap at me,” Steenkamp had written in a text message to Pistorius, weeks before her death. He was extremely jealous, from the sounds of it.
“Every 5 seconds I hear how you dated another chick, you really have dated a lot of people, yet you get upset if I mention ONE funny story with a long term boyfriend,” she’d complained. “You… throw tantrums in front of people.”
Pistorius has a history of violence. His ex-girlfriend, Samantha Taylor, said he was “angry and possessive” and that she was afraid he would kill her.
“His jealousy was very tough. He’d phone my mum and dad 10 times a day to find out where I was. In one month I received around 700 calls… It was excessive. If I hadn’t replied to messages within 30 seconds I was doing something wrong.”
“I had to show him photos ‘look at me in my pyjamas – I’m not out! Look I’m watching TV, sitting with my brother.’”
“He didn’t like me dressing up and other men looking at me.”
“It could have been me,” Taylor had said about Reenkamp.
Taylor says Pistorius would bite, pinch, and spit on her. He was mentally, verbally and emotionally abusive, locking her in the house and leaving her all day and night, alone, without food. He had a volatile temper and extreme mood swings. He would drive up to 200 mph with her in the passenger seat in order to instill fear — to “punish” her. At one point Taylor was so scared of him she hid his gun.
I point to all this because any woman who has been with an abusive man will recognize this behaviour instantly. Certainly I do.
Pistorius has taught abusers everywhere that they can come up with the flimsiest of lies and will be believed. Women everywhere have learned that their partners can terrorize and abuse and and even murder them and get away with it.
She must have been terrified.
Have you ever wondered what you life would be like if you ended up with one of your exes? Or just a random person on the street, somebody whose trajectory in life would have changed your own drastically?
Czech photographer Dita Pepe has, but she took it an step further than most of us when she turned these spousal what-ifs into a series of portraits that take an interesting look at “what might have been” had her family life taken a different direction.
Pepe started the series by posing with friends and acquaintances, men and their children that she actually knew. As the series progressed, however, she eventually started reaching out to strangers, questioning in thought, execution and photographs what her life would be like had they been her partner.
As a whole, the series depicts a number of archetypes present across the globe; but individually, Pepe blends in with each of the families, completely immersing herself into the question at hand.
Whether the resulting images are taken at face-value or explored more thoroughly, the series will probably have you asking similar questions of your own life. What if you had ended up with this or that person? What would your family look like? Pepe knows, and in Self-Portraits with Men, she’d like to introduce you to her ‘families’:
To see more of Pepe’s work, head over to hear website by clicking here.
(via Feature Shoot)
Image credits: Photographs by Dita Pepe and used with permission
We got nothing but time.
C R Y I N G OMG
I DONT THINK YOU GUYS UNDERSTAND
HOW MUCH I LOVE THESE SPIDERMAN PICS
OH OH OHHH! I have some!!
oh shit not this fucking bullshit again oh my god jfklsdjflkj
THERE’S MORE WHERE THAT CAME FROM!
HOLY FUCK HE’S BACK OMG
I’M ACUTALLY CRYING HERE OH GOD
can’t forget these
THESE ARE GOLDEN
Spiderman memes were one of my earliest experiences with the internet and with Tumblr and they will always be the greatest
I’ve seen these countless times and they still crack me up so much. I just hate when they appear on my dash at work. So hard not to laugh maniacally
Goddamn I love me some Spider-Man memes.
It's always fun to watch a craftsman at work.
I don't want a job as a Russell's viper milker.
Lots of explodey GIFs so explodey they could be directed by Michael Bay. Read the rest
But Wells Fargo, Bank of America, Chase Manhattan Bank, an JPMorgan Chase are not powerful because they worked hard. The best illustration of this point comes through a historical analysis. How did the banking system in this country get started? How did the richest people in the richest country in the world get their money?
Banking got started in this country by investing in the Triangular Slave Trade. The reason historians call it Triangular Slave Trade is that Europeans went to Africa, enslaved the people, brought them to this part of the world, and sold the people for products like hemp, sugarcane, cotton, and then those products were sent to Europe. That is why there were three angles: Africa, the United States, and Europe. The banking system—Lloyd’s of London, Barclays Bank, Bank of America, Wells Fargo-invested in that process and that is how their hegemony was established. In the last five years, almost all the banks I just mentioned have reluctantly acknowledged that they became established through the institution of slavery and the slave trade. So we see many people today questioning the system considering this simple fact: ‘Because the banks got rich by exploiting my ancestors I don’t see why I should have to pay them anything. They owe me if anything. I don’t want their money, because there is no price tag that can be placed on the suffering.’”
Ahjamu Umi, from a guest lecture on March 21, 2013 at Concordia University
For more reading on the origins of the present American banking system and its foundations in the Euro-American slave trade, check out Slavery and American Economic Development (2006) by Gavin Wright and Debt, investment, slaves: credit relations in East Feliciana Parish, Louisiana, 1825-1885 (1995) by Richard Kilbourne.
Breaking news: The D.C. Appeals Court just killed Net Neutrality.
This could be the end of the Internet as we know it. But it doesn’t have to be.
Tell the FCC to restore Net Neutrality: http://bit.ly/1iOOjoe
they want to make the internet like tv. with channels and paying to get to specific websites and things. net neutrality = not doing that
This impacts every internet user. Please signal boost the hell out of this and sign the petition if you are American
I do not reblog things like this very often, but this affects me both personally and my business as a freelance artist.
In the economy here; cash is already strapped as it is. You bet your ass companies would suck the ever living life out of misc. art sites.
I don’t want it to ever come down to me choosing between groceries or purchasing a new tier package via comcast to be able to access tumblr or DeviantArt (let alone not guaranteeing I’ll even be seen by my customer base since they may not want to pay out their asses either). It doesn’t seem important to most, but I do 90% of my business online entirely.
Please sign up, fight for this and share it with your followers/friends/family and urge them to give them hell as well.
Not writing related, but this is incredibly important. While we pay for service via ISPs, the internet has been a relatively free space where everyone, no matter their income level, is able to connect, access a wealth of information, and express themselves. The Internet has become a major part of our culture as human beings and the notion that ISPs might be able to limit what sites I can access unless I pay them more is utterly sickening. A lot of us are cash strapped as is, and I’d rather not be limited even more by someone else’s greed. Net Neutrality is essential and I hope you guys will understand why it needs to remain.
P.S. Signal boost this if you’re able.
“ limit what sites I can access unless I pay them more”
limit what sites I can access unless I pay them more
limit what sites I can access unless I pay them more
limit what sites I can access unless I pay them more
limit what sites I can access unless I pay them more
DO YOU WANT THIS? NO?? CLICK THE LINK. REBLOG.
Okay, maybe not #4.
Nossa, coisas no pulso durante o calor é o PEOR.
he needs his morning coffee
Comic URL: http://www.lefthandedtoons.com/1719/
Joan Jett on Santa Monica Pier, 1977
Na última semana, surgiu aí pelas redes sociais o “Desafio sem make” acompanhado da hashtag #stopthebeautymadness (pare a loucura por beleza). O desafio parece ter alguns objetivos, por exemplo, criticar a indústria da beleza e naturalizar a beleza real das mulheres. Eu não duvido das boas intenções por trás do desafio. Por isso, quero deixar claro que não condeno ninguém que tenha participado do desafio e inclusive acho que ele é importante e empoderador para algumas mulheres. Vi várias postagens muito bonitas, de pessoas que realmente não tiravam fotos sem maquiagem pelos mais diversos motivos e que, com o desafio, conseguiram tomar coragem para fazê-lo. Então sim, o desafio valeu. Ele tem seus pontos positivos que devem ser destacados.
A crítica que quero fazer com este texto é a respeito da homogeneidade do discurso, da falha em atingir plenamente os objetivos e da falta de interseccionalidade da maior parte das campanhas pela auto aceitação. Usarei apenas como exemplo o desafio sem make.
Eu, que sou uma mulher gorda, reconheci neste desafio um discurso muito similar a outro que ouço com muita frequência: É muito comum que se exija da mulher gorda que ela “ame suas curvas”. Amar suas curvas e parar a loucura pela beleza são duas coisas importantíssimas, urgentes. Porém é necessário que possamos direcionar melhor os nossos discursos, do contrário estaremos sutilmente culpando as vítimas. Quando impomos o discurso da aceitação para a mulher (tanto na questão da maquiagem quanto do emagrecimento), estamos apontando o dedo para quem?
No caso do desafio da (falta de) maquiagem, pediram para as mulheres postarem suas fotos ao natural no intuito de “parar a loucura pela beleza”. Será que a loucura por beleza é algo que está apenas dentro da mulher e, portanto, é dela a prerrogativa de parar de usar a maquiagem? Eu não acredito nisto. Eu creio que se existe a imposição por uma beleza artificial, é fruto de uma sociedade hostil. E, acima de tudo, é esta sociedade que deveria ser cobrada.
Várias campanhas de empoderamento feminino cobram um posicionamento da mulher para que ela seja “a mudança que gostaria de ver no mundo”. Existe gordofobia? Ame suas curvas. Há imposição por maquiagem? Não use. Há imposição para se depilar? Não se depile. É válido, mas não pode ser a única forma de reagir. Eu gostaria de ver campanhas mais frontalmente combativas, que cobrem posturas de empresas, da mídia e da sociedade de forma mais ampla, não apenas da mulher. Ainda mais essa cobrança em forma de “desafio”, quando cada mulher tem o seu próprio tempo para encontrar o caminho para se aceitar e conseguir postar fotos suas com tranquilidade.
Outro questionamento que tenho é sobre os objetivos desta campanha. Vi algumas amigas feministas postarem suas fotos sem maquiagem tecendo críticas certeiras a essa indústria da beleza que promove e lucra com a insegurança da mulher. Entretanto, outras mulheres não feministas não tiveram a mesma abordagem. Em geral, o que vi foram muitas mulheres dizerem que “mulher bonita é bonita até sem maquiagem” e muitos homens comentando que “homem gosta de mulher sem maquiagem”. O desafio pode até gerar empoderamento, porém não questiona as bases do problema: O machismo. Inclusive até o promove em alguns momentos. Há pessoas usando o desafio para definir quem é “realmente bonita” ou até condenando o comportamento da mulher que usa a maquiagem, por considerá-la fútil.
Sobre a interseccionalidade, preciso fazer uma pequena digressão: no tumblr é possível encontrar muitas imagens de nus femininos empoderados, de fotos sensuais e até mesmo tiradas durante ou após o sexo. Fotos que exaltam a liberdade sexual feminina. Porém, em sua maioria, estas fotos são de pessoas jovens, brancas e magras. Comparativamente, há muito menos imagens deste tipo de pessoas gordas ou negras. Não é diferente no desafio sem maquiagem. A maior parte das imagens que vi é de pessoas jovens, brancas e magras. Entendo que é importante para essas mulheres este tipo de campanha, mas é evidente que o empoderamento proposto é restrito.
Há pessoas que tem um rosto considerado mais aceitável. O rosto de “traços delicados” (eufemismo para rosto de gente branca) e magro tem uma aparência mais tolerada. Já reparou que se faz maquiagem para simular estes traços, buscando efeitos de cor e sombra afinar o nariz e afundar as bochechas? Pois é. Dentro de certos grupos, algumas mulheres podem até ser elogiadas e bem vistas por não usar maquiagem, por serem “bonitas de verdade” e “não serem fúteis”, mas a mulher gorda, que simplesmente por existir já é chamada de “relaxada”, passa por uma cobrança maior para se enquadrar. Para outras mulheres, ficar sem maquiagem não é desafio, é a única opção. As mulheres negras, por exemplo, tem uma dificuldade enorme de encontrar produtos para a pele negra, como base e corretivos. Então, enquanto algumas de nós resistem a usar maquiagem, outras querem ter o poder de decidir se usarão ou não, pois neste momento nem se trata de uma escolha. A libertação atingida pela campanha é desigual.
Todas estas contradições nos mostram que a loucura pela beleza tem muitas faces e, por isso deve haver muitas formas de serem combatidas. Talvez nenhuma delas seja 100% eficaz. Então, estou sugerindo que se deixe de apoiar campanhas desse tipo? Não. É importante falar em aceitação do corpo, estimular a autoestima das mulheres e parar a loucura pela beleza, mas é preciso tomar cuidado para não acabar isentando a sociedade de culpa. Estou sugerindo que promover a aceitação pessoal é parte de uma luta, mas não constitui o todo.
Devemos tentar iniciar mais campanhas que sejam diretamente apontadas para quem oprime a mulher. Para recordar um exemplo: Você se lembra quando a Loja Marisa fez aquela propaganda estimulando que as mulheres parassem de comer para ter um corpo de verão? Foi duramente criticada. E se houvesse uma campanha por menos photoshop nas revistas? Se cobrássemos mais proteção para as mulheres que perdem vagas de emprego em nome da discriminação por aparência física? Acho possível voltarmos os olhos para o que acontece à nossa volta e não observar apenas o que se passa dentro de nós.