Kate

There was a period in law school when I frequently posed in pictures as Mary Kate Olsen hiding her face from the camera. This was around the time of Amanda Bynes’ mental breakdown. In retrospect, my morbid obsession with women crumbling under the public gaze was likely related to being in law school, where I was told on the daily that my natural way of being was insufficient—that I should speak with more authority, professionalize my demeanor, tame my hair. When Mandy threw that bong out the window, claiming to the probing NYPD officers that it was “just a vase,” I felt strangely liberated.

Years later, when I came across Laura Collins’s 2015 series of paintings, Olsen Twins Hiding From Paparazzi, I freaked the fuck out. I devoured her acrylics of Mary Kate covering her face with gargantuan luxury bags, unkempt blonde tresses, and packs of Marlboro Reds. Collins had also recreated Amanda’s iconic post-bong toss courtroom look on acrylic, askew platinum wig captured flawlessly. The Chicago-based artist was painting my most cherished pop culture moments, elevating them to the realm of high art, where I always thought they belonged.

“For centuries, women have been portrayed through paint as reclined nudes and doting mothers,” Collins told me. “We idolize the Mona Lisa and praise her gentle smile, but all it does is reinforce in our society that women should be objectified and keep their mouths shut.” With paintings ranging in subject from Celebrities Crying to Lady Gaga’s Hats, Laura Collins is challenging the status quo.

As someone who has been called “Bravosexual” on more than one occassion, I was thrilled when I got wind of Collins’ most recent series of paintings, Real Housewives Pointing Fingers (currently on display at Brooklyn’s THNK1994 Museum). To counter historical depictions of women as exclusively caregivers or sex objects, Collins’ paintings portray the women of Bravo “aggressively pointing” at one another, in turn embodying “rankism and dominance.” With titles like “Sheree Pointing at Her Party Planner” and “Lisa Rinna Pointing at Her Eyebrow,” the humorous works simultaneously convey an empathy with their subjects, who grapple with the probing public gaze. Collins draws a connection between the Housewives’ pointing outwards and the Olsens hiding their faces from paparazzi. “Both are physical responses to feeling attacked, scrutinized, and being placed in a defensive mode,” she told me.

Collins told me about “a saying that when you point your finger, three more point back at you.” She believes than in addition to seeing the finger points as an act of aggression, “there is a vulnerability and defensiveness at the heart of these gestures”; this dichotomy is what interests her most. This notion conjures many images from my Bravo memory bank: Sheree yanking Kim’s wig on the streets of Atlanta, later claiming she was only trying to “shift it”; Teresa flipping a table due to a book entitled “Cop Without a Badge”; Dorinda inadvertently stabbing herself with a knife while arguing with Bethenny in Mexico. And of course, my personal favorite, an extremely hungover Lu Ann charging Heather in Turks and Caicos, demanding that she “be cool” rather than slut shame her for bringing home a married man the previous night. (The moment inspired Lu Ann’s next single, “Girl Code (Don’t Be So Uncool).”

“Female celebrities,” Collins lamented, “particularly those from reality television, are dismissed as idiotic.” She complained that “investing any interest in their activities is a mark on your own intelligence.” I am likewise irritated that many immediately dismiss reality TV as mindless trash, or worse, a “guilty pleasure.” (i-D opened its review of Collins’ exhibit: “‘Real Housewives’ is the ultimate guilty pleasure. What reality TV show is […] more trashy than one on which you can watch rich American women with melting facelifts pull each other’s hair while binge drinking rosé?”) “Like so many other gendered media texts,” wrote Anne Helen Petersen in Bitch Magazine, celebrity gossip, (an umbrella under which today’s reality stars fall) “causes anxiety […] because it has been labeled, mostly by men, as feminine and frivolous.”

Admittedly, “The Real Housewives” doesn’t have the intellectual heft of, say, a documentary feature on particle science or the ills of the criminal justice system, but it’s no less intelligently crafted than shows viewers readily admit to loving, sans guilt, such as “Westworld” or “Master of None.” In The New Yorker, Emily Nussbaum wrote that while reality TV is an “easily mocked mass artistic medium,” it also provides a “magnetizing mirror for culture.” The mirror shows women who, according to author Sady Doyle, “have succeeded all too well at becoming visible” being “penalized vigilantly and forcefully, and turned into spectacles.” Collins’ paintings depict women coping with this punishment, either by crying, hiding their faces, or deflecting the gaze outwards through aggressive gesture.

Mindfulness expert Melanie Greenberg, Ph.D. hailed the “The Real Housewives” in Psychology Today for its strong emotional appeal and ability to bond its viewers. Academic provacatrice and “Housewives” superfan Camille Paglia wrote that she adores the franchise for its “frank display of emotion” and the “intricate interrelationships.” (Is there a television relationship more honest and intricate than NeNe and Kims’? Sonja and Ramonas’? Kyle and Kim Richards’?) Collins echoed that the “Housewives” provide “one of the rare cases where you can see women of a certain age forming bonds, going through a plethora of life events, owning their sexuality, dealing with tough relationships, experiencing loss and still forming friendships and enjoying each other.” Her recent series distills these intense emotional exchanges by removing them from their context in order to highlight their nuance and relatability.

Feminist theorist Robyn R. Warhol wrote that books, movies and TV shows that encourage emotions like excitement, desire, or crying have been “systematically devalued by critics.” On the flipside, it can be said that shows like “Real Housewives” are revolutionary in that they present a aspirational version of the world in which women and our stories reign supreme. The Kardashians likewise comprise very public matriarchy, with Kris Jenner and her five daughters at the center, while boyfriends and husbands come and go. The most potent example: Bruce Jenner was not taken seriously by the family until she transitioned to Caitlyn. While Bruce (a world-renowned Olympian) was mostly ignored, or mocked for his “silly,” stereotypically male interests (toy helicopters and golf), Caitlyn was at the forefront of the storylines, gracing magazine covers and participating in public feuds; her transition highlights how the Kardashians prioritize femininity. In spotlighting female stories while ignoring male characters and their interests, reality TV presents an alluring counter-narrative to mainstream society’s tendency to dismiss female concerns. As Collins put it, “Just having that representation is important.”

I asked Collins how she responds when people tell her that her obsession with pop culture is frivolous. “It is not my place to impose my views on how people should spend their money or wear their clothes,” she said. “If you want to wear an entire palette of eyeshadow, get it girl. You probably look great.” When I posited that the appearance-obsessed Housewives and Kardashians may contribute to the objectification of the female figure, Collins immediately provided an alternative: “Valuing one’s own physical appearance is too often viewed as egotistical, and should instead be praised as a worthwhile form of self-care.” Likewise, Paglia praised OC Housewife Tamra Judge’s fanatic dedication to her abs: “[Tamra] is a whirling dervish of physical activity [who] represents the gung-ho athleticism of a new generation of American women.”

Subashini Navartnam wrote in her review of Jennifer Egan’s 2001 novel Look at Me, which eerily foreshadowed the the imminent popularity of reality television in that the protagonist agrees to film herself 24/7 for a website called “Ordinary People”:

Indeed, the gaze that is filtered through celebrity culture and spectacle, it turns out, implicates both you and me—the same gaze that people use to worship and judge celebrities in what they wear is the one that people learn to train onto ourselves and their best friends.

It is therefore of crucial importance to interrogate this gaze, and to think critically about how and why the public reacts to famous women. Collins’ recent paintings encourage us to think twice before dismissing the reality TV genre and the alpha women who grace its screens. At the show’s opening, for example, viewers took turns sitting in the “Tamra Judgment Zone, described as “a place to reflect while [OC housewife] Tamra’s most famous quotes ‘You will never see my face again,’ ‘that’s my opinion,’ and ‘here’s your f*cking letter bitch,’ hover above your head.” Collins hopes the show “makes my viewers reconsider their role as spectators both inside and outside of the gallery.”

 

“Real Housewives Pointing Fingers” is on view at THNK1994 Museum from October 7th–November 12th.

malachi-is-shiny:

actualmenacebuckybarnes:

edcynic:

spookyphernelia:

if you are ASEXUAL, you do not experience SEXUAL ATTRACTION.

if you are AROMANTIC, you do not experience ROMANTIC ATTRACTION.

if you are AROMATIC, you have a PLEASANT AND DISTINCTIVE SMELL.

And if you are AUTOMATIC, SYSTEMATIC, and HYDROMATIC, why then you’re GREASED LIGHTENINGGGGG

I was not prepared

A reader writes:

Recently my seven-year-old son’s pediatrician has recommended that he be evaluated by a psychologist for ADHD and giftedness. He has had some behavior challenges at home and at school. We live in a small town an hour’s drive away from any larger town or city, and the options for psychological care nearby are limited. My son has seen a local psychologist for an unrelated issue in the past, and I was less than impressed. I made an appointment with a specialist in the nearby city and informed my boss that I would need to take a half-day off and why. She expressed surprise and questioned me about finding local care, but granted the request.

The next day, she came to my office and said that she had discussed the matter with her husband and that he said that I was overreacting — that excessive energy was normal and to be expected for a boy. He went on to say that he had been energetic as a boy himself, received many spankings, and look at him now — university professor. My response in the moment was “Respectfully, your husband has never met my son. I have spent seven years with him and I believe I know best.”

At no point did she insist that I cancel the appointment or alter my plans. The tone was more advice-giving than managerial time-management. However, I don’t want to seem like an employee who requests time off for frivolous things as this is not the impression I want to leave. I also remain bothered by the fact that she discussed this matter with her husband at all. I’m not sure if I am overreacting about that. My son will likely require several follow-up appointments in the city to establish his diagnosis and treatment plan. Do you have any advice for me if this (vocal skepticism regarding my son’s care) comes up again?

Possibly relevant details: I am salaried (exempt) and do not have to take sick time for less than a full day’s absence.

I think this is a case of how people who are overbearing in life don’t stop being overbearing once they become managers.

In other words, I think this is less about her acting as your manager, and more about her just saying something obnoxious that she would have said even if she weren’t your manager and knew you socially. It sounds like she’s offering you what she thinks is helpful advice, not signaling that you shouldn’t be taking the time off.

Of course, that’s not okay. Managers need to be aware that their words will always carry more weight and be seen through a different lens. The fact that she’s your manager means that you have to worry about different things than if a social acquaintance (or even just a peer-level coworker) said this to you — whether she intended that or not.

In the future, I’d recommend not sharing details with her at all. If you need time off to take your son to an appointment, be as vague as possible — “I’ll be out a half day on Tuesday for a medical appointment.” That’s it.

If she asks how your son is doing, stay vague — “he’s hanging in there,” “he’s good,” or so forth. If she pushes for details beyond that, say something like, “Oh, I’m enjoying not having to think about it while I’m at work!” or “Nothing anyone but his mom would find interesting” or “Oh, nothing worth getting into.”

If she tries to offer her own opinions again (or her husband’s — ?@!?), say this: “Oh, I’d rather not discuss it. These things can be so complicated, as I’m sure you know. I appreciate your thinking of us though!” That last part might be insincere — because you probably do not appreciate her thinking about this — but it’s there just for relationship-preservation reasons. This is your boss, and it’s helpful to soften a “mind your own business” when you can do that without compromising the outcome you’re going for.

my boss is questioning the need for my child’s medical care was originally published by Alison Green on Ask a Manager.

A post shared by Квартирник с енотами в Питере (@raccoon_house) on May 24, 2016 at 3:49am PDT

tastefullyoffensive:

Doing some serious math.

mother!, mother! mother! mother!.

 

 

mother! mother! mother! mother! mother!, mother! mother!.

Kitty accidentally pressed the turbo button pic.twitter.com/zJ9BtMgGUr

— Nature is Amazing (@AMAZlNGNATURE) October 6, 2017

(via Nature is Amazing)

When a friend says something shocking or even surprising, I respond with a long, drawn out “oh….my god.” I pause for exactly three seconds between the “oh” and “my god,” and this has the effect of making the friend feel as though what he or she just said was absolutely shocking. Little do they know—I’m not doing it for dramatic effect. I’m doing it because the only peaceful moments I get all day are those few blissful seconds between saying “oh” and “my god.”

We live in a world riddled with technology and instant accessibility. I never get a break from responding to emails and liking posts on Facebook. I even check my Instagram in the middle of the night, just to make sure no one has twisted their ankles sliding into my DMs or gotten stuck for too long in my thirst traps. I crave alone time and solitude, but I worry that our modern society has made it impossible to come across. The only time I can ever catch a break is in between saying “oh” and “my god.” It’s like my own personal meditation, and it’s one that I can work into any conversation.

I’m not a religious woman. I want to be clear that I don’t say “oh my god” to refer to my actual God, because I don’t have one. I say “oh my god” because I’ve gotten used to using the expression and now, if I don’t ever say “oh my god,” I don’t get those three seconds of calm that I’ve come to depend on. In many ways, even though I don’t actually believe in God, you can say that the expression “oh my god” has saved me. It allows me time to look inward, center myself, and plan exactly what I’m going to eat for lunch. Without the phrase “oh my god,” I might be stuck eating a turkey sandwich every day. My god does that sound dull.

I’d highly recommend you yourself try to find peace in between the words “oh” and “my god.” I can assure you, it will be relaxing, and you can take as much time as you need. No one dares interrupt a person in the middle of saying “oh my god.”  If someone were to interrupt such a spiritual act, the whole conversation would turn on them. There’s nothing anyone wants more than to hear someone finish their “oh my god.” It’s really the only thing that men are guaranteed to listen to, so I highly recommend you take advantage of it and pause long and hard before you embark on your “my god.”

I’d like to add that “OMG” (phonetically ‘oh em gee’) can’t be generalized in the same way. If you pause for too long between the “OH” and the “EM GEE,” people may wonder why you needed to save yourself time by using an acronym in the first place.

You can now cover your luggage with a giant photo of yourself. Because nothing says “hands off my stuff” like an oversized portrait of yourself soaring down the conveyor belt. This nearly made me snort my coffee out my nose, laughing.

Neil Gaiman adaptations are all over TV and streaming platforms now—on the heels of the first season of American Gods, the author wrote the short anthology series Likely Stories, which is based on some of his lesser known stories, for Shutter. Amazon also seized on the horror-fantasy momentum, ordering an adaptation…

Read more...

After watching this short experimental video I have decided I want to live in Lucas Zanotto‘s brain for a little bit. (My kids LOVE his apps.)

ashtoniousrex:

backstories to random gifs are my favorite thing and they need to continue

jasper-rolls:

kushblazer666:

rasec-wizzlbang:

can we bring back captcha comics

Never seen an Owl sneeze before 🦉 pic.twitter.com/7c2WfaqdFS

— Nature is Amazing (@AMAZlNGNATURE) September 22, 2017

(via)

tastefullyoffensive:

thenatsdorf:

Hero cat saves his friend from the vet. [full video]

“Come with me if you want to live!”

[ By SA Rogers in Technology & Vehicles & Mods. ]

A Ford van zooming around the Washington D.C. area last month, seemingly without a human in the driver’s seat, wasn’t self-driving after all: it was a man in a ‘seat suit.’ A fake driverless car might seem like a weird experiment, especially considering the fact that there’s an entire fake town for testing self-driving vehicles at Ford’s disposal. But as it turns out, they have their reasons: observing how people react to seeing it. While Virginia Tech has already been testing autonomous vehicles in the area, they’re still using human overseers to take over the wheel in case something goes wrong.

In the video above, a few people muse aloud, “Is that a self-driving car?” Slow-motion shots show the vehicle passing by with a seemingly empty driver’s seat. But the fact that there’s a man camouflaged as a car seat is almost more interesting, anyway. After learning of the stunt, Adam Tuss of NBC Washington followed the car around until he could pull up next to it at a red light and get a shot of the interior, revealing the driver’s hands and legs. “Brother, who are you?” he asks in the video. “What are you doing? I’m with the news, dude.”

This is one of the strangest things I've ever seen @nbcwashington @ARLnowDOTcom pic.twitter.com/8ipKEnkeiq

— Adam Tuss (@AdamTuss) August 7, 2017

John Shutko, a Ford self-driving researcher, divulges some answers in a piece on Medium.

“We’re teamed up with [Virginia Tech] to test our communications method and to explore how pedestrians and bicyclists react to self-driving vehicles with no human in the driver’s seat. Of course, we do need someone in the seat right now, so we dressed a human up in a seat suit to make it appear as though there was nobody inside our simulated self-driving Ford Transit Connect. This seat suit allowed us to collect real-world reactions to an autonomous vehicle driving on miles of public roads in northern Virginia, without actually using an autonomous vehicle.”

Six different drivers wore the suit throughout August, reporting that they started out on a test track before moving onto the streets, and that the suit was definitely uncomfortable. Ford hasn’t released detailed results as yet — there is a lot of data yet to be gathered. Eventually, though, they aim to share their findings with standards-making organizations and collaborate on future industry-wide safety measures.

---

---

[ By SA Rogers in Technology & Vehicles & Mods. ]

[ WebUrbanist | Archives | Galleries | Privacy | TOS ]

catsbeaversandducks:

Super-realistic!

By poorly drawn cats

delthefunkyhomosexual:

markv5:

“У меня просто кость пушистая. Дай колечки”…

noun: In cricket, a ball bowled with a deceptive action so that it bounces in a direction different from what the batsman was expecting. adjective: (eyes) Staring, bulging, or wide open, in amazement or admiration.

You do not need The A.V. Club to tell you that there is a lot to be afraid of in the world, a near-unceasing stream of bad news, dire prognostications, unforeseen catastrophes, and Jake Paulers. Step outside your so-called filter bubble and you will only see your own fears inverted and used to frighten other people.…

Read more...

bext-k:

nudityandnerdery:

jaxblade:

harcules:

mma-gifs:

mma-gifs:

Sean O'Connell still has the best weigh-in stare downs

You guys, he’s back!

I didn’t know that I needed to see this until I saw it.

To put it simple. You DONT have to act tuff. To be a tough guy.  haha

So I looked this guy up. First, not shown in the first gif is the fact that he’s just wearing regular pants:

Also, he’s written a sci-fi novel and has spent time in Africa building a school and orphanage for abused teenage girls. So, good for that guy.

I love him

It’s a fashion-light episode but it DOES involve Spot, so. 

We start with Riker in sickbay getting some sort of spiny plant removed from his back after things “started getting romantic” with him and another crew member in the arboretum. 

Fuck so hard I roll over dangerous plants and don’t give two shits

Nurse Ogawa is here, which is always a pleasure, and she’s rocking a seriously voluminous updo, sort of a 1940s meets 1990s sensible French twist. I’m sure she loves having to remove Riker’s sexytime plant spines. That’s definitely what she went to Starfleet Nursing Academy for. 

Barclay is also in sickbay, because: Barclay.

He literally claimed he had something called “Terellian Death Syndrome” which is honestly a terrible name for a syndrome

Beverly has asked him repeatedly not to search the medical database before coming to her (AKA Never Search WebMD), but of course Broccoli does. She’s got her gorgeous strawberry shortcake season 7 hair happening:

MFW Barclay shows up in sickbay for the third time this week

The other patient being tended to is also a beautiful redhead:

The laying on of hands

Spot is pregnant and at first I was like “HOW THE FUCK DID SPOT GET PREGNANT” but apparently a) there are 12 male cats on board and b) Spot has a tendency to sneak out of Data’s quarters.

Okay, listen.

1. If there are AT LEAST 13 cats on board, WHERE ARE THEY? I want a Bridge Cat.

Bridge Cat: artist’s rendering

2. HOW IS SPOT GETTING OUT? This is a fucking SPACESHIP. Shit should be LOCKED DOWN. It’s literally AIRTIGHT. I GUESS she could sneak through, like, a vent or something but if you’re going to have cats on board, you need to PLAN for their fuckery.

This could be really bad

3. If the cats are WANDERING THE SHIP, aren’t you worried they’re going to end up in the warp core? Or that even just their fur is? WHO IS VACUUMING UP ALL THE FUR.

Anyway, Crusher is apparently also a veterinarian (which I guess makes sense since she treats all sorts of species) and says that Spot should deliver her babies soon. Nurse Ogawa then says that she’s also pregnant! THIS WILL BE IMPORTANT LATER, which is the only reason she says it.

Also important for later:

Oh yeah gimme that t-cell injection

I’ll just tell you now that all the weird stuff that occurs in this episode is a result of Broccoli’s mutated t-cells after he gets this shot (or something). It’s (enjoyable) nonsense so don’t worry about it. I just wanted you to see how much he loved getting this hypospray.

Picard and Data have to drive through an asteroid field to get a stray torpedo (bad). Data asks Barclay to keep an eye on Spot, since she’s about to give birth, and she likes Barclay best of all the people on board. You can tell by the way she looks at him:

This IS my “I love you” face

Broccoli is pleased, because no one likes him.

WE’RE BEST FRIENDS NOW

It’s actually very sweet; Barclay even seems to know something about cats and asks Data where she’s planning to have her kittens.

With Barclay’s luck, she will have them inside his pants while he’s wearing them, somehow

I just really enjoy Data’s display case here, with his violin case juuuuust open enough to let all the dust in, but not quite enough to actually see the instrument.

Spot’s in good hands:

Yarn, Spot? You cliche

Elsewhere on the ship, Worf is having a fucking feast:

No I asked for a SIDE of tentacles

This looks delicious, actually. Giant turkey leg? Some kind of weird dried fish? Potato salad on a bed of green beans? I’m in. 

Troi shows up, a little upset that Worf didn’t wait for her, since they planned to have lunch together. He’s mean and it’s weird. You can already tell something STRANGE is happening on the ship, mostly because Troi is NOT wearing a jewel tone:

Eileen Fisher for Spacefleet

Drink this look in, kids, because it’s one of the two non-uniform looks in this episode. We can see here that I THINK Troi is wearing some Danskin shimmer tights with her beige on beige minidress and matching waterfall cardigan. The color is not what we usually see on her, but it’s not terrible (except for my pre-existing anti-beige bias). It’s certainly along the lines of what I wear when I’m lounging around.

Secret pajamas except it’s not a secret. It’s just pajamas I wear in public

Ed. note: I copied that picture of my cat Violet to my clipboard earlier when I was making the images above and I accidentally pasted it here and I can’t bring myself to delete it.

Troi’s hair has reached its astonishing season 7 pouf levels and I just love everything about it. Anyway, Worf is acting like a real dick, but we do get another good look at those Ten-Forward outfits.

IS THAT HOUNDSTOOTH

If I ever attend another con, that’s going to be my look because houndstooth is everything to me.

Later, Worf’s dickishness turns into something MORE:

I’M A DICK ON A RAMPAGE

This scene is super dark and it’s not totally clear what’s happening, but Worf basically just destroys his own quarters, including his pillows, then cuddles up with them on the floor. We do get a decent look at Worf’s jammies, which are brown and might be made of varying colors of burlap.

If anyone was gonna wear burlap pajamas, it would be the Klingons

I’m not sure what’s going on with that shoulder detail, but it can’t be that comfortable to sleep in? But again - Klingons aren’t exactly a culture that considers “comfort” to be something to aim for. If you showed a Klingon an Aerosole, he would 100% cut it in half and throw the halves in your face.

These PJs might also be linen, which would be WAY nicer to sleep in, but a little off-brand. I mean, a Klingon in linen? Can you imagine? Hold on, you don’t have to:

Pure white to better show off the blood of my slain enemies

So everyone is acting weird. Troi is like “I’m cold. I need a bath,” and walks off the bridge. The next time we see her, this is happening:

Deanna, sweetie? It’s more relaxing if you take your uniform off

As she’s taking her fully-clothed bath, Worf busts in and:

CHOMP

It’s actually very upsetting, and at first neither of them even really know how to react either:

Oh god did I just bite you

Did you just fucking BITE me??????

Troi goes to sickbay, where she gets my favorite disco blanket:

Disco Blanket: Because why shouldn’t a blanket be iridescent

To be fair, emergency blankets ARE shiny, so.

You better believe that’s an affiliate link, friend

Okay so THEN Crusher is examining Worf and she asks him to open his mouth and HOO BOY was that a mistake.

Does the replicator not have the recipe for Listerine, or

He SPRAYS her like a fucking dilophosaurus!! 

NOT IN THE FAAAAAAAAAACE

Later someone says her injuries were so bad that SHE WILL NEED RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY. That means in every episode after this (not many, but still), we are seeing a RECONSTRUCTED BEV. 

So everyone is losing it, basically, which doesn’t explain why Broccoli thinks this is a normal way to stand:

Is this how a human? Does a stand? How is stand

Finally, Picard and Data come back, and when they arrive, the Enterprise is just adrift. They board and find this:

Sir, if the t-shirt does not spark joy when you touch it, the book counsels you to throw it away. I was unable to apply this method as I do not feel joy, nor any other emotion

It’s the shed skin of a reptile, which: whaaaaaat? Ain’t no reptiles on this ship!

Narrator: actually, there were reptiles on this ship

Troi is still in the bathtub when Picard and Data find her, and she is like, half lizard because the t-cells released when Barclay got that hypospray are making everyone de-evolve. Sure. She looks terrible, which is a real feat since Marina Sirtis is such a Betty:

Honestly she’s still p hot

I think my favorite part of this makeup is the gecko-like fingertips. Excellent detail. Love the scales, love the contacts, love the unripe banana shade of green they used. All great. 

Data and Picard go check out what else is happening, and they find a caveman at one of the control panels:

Not a Starfleet regulation haircut

But what’s this? It’s not a caveman at all! It’s…

I heard dramatic eyebrows were back in

…Riker! I guess! The makeup on Frakes here is SO heavy that it’s not immediately apparent that it’s Riker, except that he’s wearing command red and has a beard. Plus, Picard says “Will?” upon this reveal. 

FUCK YOU GUYS

I’m saving this as my “flipping the bird” image to use forever.

Data and Picard manage to subdue Riker and get him to sickbay, after which they go to Data’s quarters to use his computer. But guess what happened?

KITTENS

Spot had her babies! They’re legit VERY small kittens and very cute. Data says they’re hungry, and wonders why Spot isn’t taking care of them. And then comes one of the best shots since chicken in the hallway:

Sup

IT’S AN IGUANA WEARING SPOT’S COLLAR. SPOT DEVOLVED INTO LITERALLY JUST AN IGUANA. I laughed so hard at this shot and I REALLY wanted the kittens to interact with the iguana, but they didn’t. I don’t know if that iguana was even on set.

LOL

Data notes that the kittens didn’t turn into baby iguanas, so he thinks maybe there’s some kind of cure for the devolution from pregnancy? Or something? This is where Nurse Ogawa’s recently-announced pregnancy comes into play. So he goes to sickbay, and Picard goes to see what’s going on in Engineering, and finds:

Help meeee

Barclay devolved into, like, a spider? I guess? Because this gene mutating thing is just nuts and does whatever the effects people think will look cool. (And they all do look pretty cool.)

Nurse Ogawa has devolved into Standard Neanderthal #4:

On loan from the American Museum of National History

And finally, the big boss: Worf. Worf turned into something with an exoskeleton that was able to make this dent in the sickbay door:

Rude

Picard and Data speculate that Worf thinks Troi is his mate (sure) and he’s trying to get through the door to her, so they synthesize her pheromones to draw Worf away from sickbay so that Data can focus on making a cure with Nurse Ogawa’s pregnancy hormones. Obviously. But first Picard has to get out of sickbay.

PEEK

Picard manages to lure away the Worf-monster, which looks like this:

Part beetle, part conch shell, all covered in chocolate

It’s hard to see what’s happening but what you can see is just really gnarly:

Are there horny toads on Klingon?

Ultimately, Data is successful in making a cure and sends it through the air ducts so everyone on board is fine. And when Barclay finds out that it was his treatment that started it all, and that he might have a disease named after him:

A hypochondriac’s dream

And don’t forget: THERE ARE AT LEAST 13 CATS ON THE ENTERPRISE

(via)

A reader writes:

I was hoping you would be able to help me with a conundrum I got myself into.

I have been an expat since graduating and have been moving a lot. More than a decade ago, when I was still young, I was in a relationship with a woman, Sylvia, in a country where we both lived. Sylvia wanted to settle down but I was not ready to commit so young. We clearly had different expectations from the relationship. I did not know what to do and, well, I ghosted her. Over the Christmas break, while she was visiting her family, I simply moved out and left the country. I took advantage of the fact that I accepted a job in other country and did not tell her about it. I simply wanted to avoid being untangled in a break-up drama. Sylvia was rather emotional and became obsessed with the relationship, tracking me down, even causing various scenes with my parents and friends.

Anyhow, fast forward to now. I now work as a math teacher in an international school. I have been in other relationships since, so Sylvia is a sort of forgotten history. Sadly, till now. This week, I learnt that our fantastic school director suddenly resigned due to a serious family situation and had to move back to her home country over the summer. The school had to replace her. We are getting a new director. I read the bio of the new boss and googled her and was shocked to discover it is Sylvia. We have not been in touch and do not have any mutual friends anymore. I am not a big fan of social media and had no idea what she had been up to since the unpleasant situation a long time ago.

I have no idea what to do and how to deal with this mess. It is clear this will be not only embarassing but I will also be reporting to my ex. I am not in a position to find another job at present. There are no other international schools so finding another job in this country is not an option. Even finding a job elsewhere is not possible on such a short notice. These jobs usually open for school terms so I have to stay put for few months. But more importantly, I am happy and settled here so do not want to move. To make the situation worse, the expat community here is very small and tightly knit so teachers also socialize a lot.

Do you have any suggestions for me how to handle it and what should I do? I understand that this would not have happened if I did not ghost her back then, but I cannot do anything about it now. I gathered from the comments that readers usually have a go on people like me for “bad behavior” but I am really looking for constructive comments how to deal with the situation.

Ooof. I wrote back and asked, “How long were you in the relationship with her?”

We were together for three years and lived together for two of those years. I know that ghosting is not a way to end the relationship but I cannot do much about it now. I appreciate the trouble you are taking with getting back to me.

Double oof.

If you had ghosted her after a month of dating, it would have been rude but potentially salvageable. A month of dating more than a decade ago isn’t likely to loom very large for most people, emotionally. And ghosting after a short amount of time dating shouldn’t generally be devastating. Rude and frustrating, but not devastating.

But you were together for three years, and you lived together! And then you disappeared with no word? That’s some serious emotional destruction that you inflicted there. I’m not surprised that she contacted your family and friends; she was probably worried about whether you were alive or not! (Really, think about it. If you came home one day and your long-time partner was gone and had left no note, would you just shrug and go on with your life, or would you try to figure out if she were okay or not? Obviously I don’t know the details and maybe it moved into boundary-crossing inappropriateness, but you can’t expect to disappear on a long-term partner with no note or anything and not have them try to find out if you’re okay. Exceptions made for abuse, of course, but that doesn’t sound like the case here.)

I say all that to make the point that this is a pretty big deal. Normally I’m a fan of people putting aside personal emotions in order to conduct themselves professionally, but I don’t even know what that would look like for Sylvia in this situation. She’s most likely going to be shocked and horrified when she finds out that you work at her school, and that she’s supposed to manage you.

I don’t know that you can salvage this! It’s not reasonable to ask Sylvia to manage someone who she has this history with. You can try and see what her take on it is, but I’d be prepared to have to move on, whatever that might look like for you. I get that it’s going to be inconvenient — maybe even quite hard — but there may not be an alternative here.

Your best chances of an okay outcome are probably to contact Sylvia ahead of time to let her know you work there so that she’s not blindsided by it on her first day. Acknowledge that you made a terrible mistake when you disappeared, say that you’re very sorry for the hurt and alarm you must have caused her, and say that you realize that neither of you are in a great position to work together now. Ask her if she’d like to talk about what to do. (Beyond that, I’d avoid sounding like you’re presuming anything about how she’ll feel now, since who knows — best case scenario, if she actually can work with you now, she might be offended that you’d think she couldn’t.)

Be aware that apologies are going to sound pretty hollow and self-interested now, since you had 10 years to apologize and are only doing it now that she’s in a position of power over you. But acknowledging your behavior is better than not acknowledging it at all. (This is a theme with letters this year!)

I don’t know what will come of doing it. But you’re going to have to have the conversation with her eventually, so you might as well get it started and begin moving toward whatever the consequences here are going to be.

I ghosted my ex, and she’s about to be my new boss was originally published by Alison Green on Ask a Manager.

It's hard to stay positive sometimes, so here's a bird realizing a love of drumming pic.twitter.com/DplQ4uZAPf

— Kyle Hill (@Sci_Phile) August 15, 2017

(via)

I’m throwing this one out to readers to weigh in on. Here’s the letter:

My wife and I are both very ambitious in our careers. She works in higher-ed and I work in the nonprofit sector. While her job allows for a more flexible schedule, it requires her to bring a lot of her work home with her. My job is the traditional 9-5 but there is an expectation that I will be a part of the community that I serve by attending events and running programs in the evenings.

We have a two-year-old son and one on the way. I drop the kid off at daycare every morning, but because my wife’s schedule is more flexible she picks him up early and spends a couple of hours alone with him before I get home (I commute 45 minutes each way). By the time I get home, she can’t wait to hand him off so she can cook dinner or have some peace and quiet.

The expectations of my job are that I will be available to work some evenings. It has been expressed to me by my boss. My wife thinks that I can just tell him that I am unavailable due to child care issues. She thinks I am asking too much of her when I work an evening and leave her to care for our child. Currently I am trying to keep evening commitments to about two a month, but there are times where there will be more requirements. We don’t have family near by and we really don’t have anyone who can help with our son.

I am having a difficult time fulfilling the expectations of the job because of all this and it is creating an incredible amount of stress in our lives. Any time I mention that I need to work an upcoming evening, it becomes a big fight. I am afraid that I may lose my job if I remain elusive to evening work, I am a senior-level member of the organization. I try to be understanding of my wife but can’t bring myself to tell my boss “I can’t work tonight because my wife wont take care of my child alone.” It seems unreasonable and I don’t know what to do. Especially because other people in the office with small children work some evenings.

I am not asking you to diagnose my marriage, rather I am seeking advice on how to fulfill the requirements of the job and my family. Since my wife only knows the demands of academia, I feel that she doesn’t understand the requirements of my job, and I can’t convince her that it is normal for people to work outside of scheduled hours. I also wonder, what boundaries are normal for a parent of a young child to set with their workplace? Is it okay for me to say that I can’t work evenings and that weekends are out of the question? How many hours beyond the dedicated 40 hours a week is appropriate?

I am losing sleep and I am having a hard time being productive because I am afraid that this is all about to come to a head. I could really use some advice.

Readers, what advice do you have?

ask the readers: how can I balance kids, marriage, and a job, when I sometimes have to work in the evening? was originally published by Alison Green on Ask a Manager.

Denouncing Nazis and the KKK and violent white supremacists by those names should not be a difficult thing for a president to do, particularly when those groups are the instigators and proximate cause of violence in an American city, and one of their number has rammed his car through a group of counter-protestors, killing one and injuring dozens more. This is a moral gimme — something so obvious and clear and easy that a president should almost not get credit for it, any more than he should get credit for putting on pants before he goes to have a press conference.

And yet this president — our president, the current President of the United States — couldn’t manage it. The best he could manage was to fumble through a condemnation of “many sides,” as if those protesting the Nazis and the KKK and the violent white supremacists had equal culpability for the events of the day. He couldn’t manage this moral gimme, and when his apparatchiks were given an opportunity to take a mulligan on it, they doubled down instead.

This was a spectacular failure of leadership, the moral equivalent not only of missing a putt with the ball on the lip of the cup, but of taking out your favorite driver and whacking that ball far into the woods. Our president literally could not bring himself to say that Nazis and the KKK and violent white supremacists are bad. He sorely wants you to believe he implied it. But he couldn’t say it.

To be clear, when it was announced the president would address the press about Charlottesville, I wasn’t expecting much from him. He’s not a man to expect much from, in terms of presidential gravitas. But the moral bar here was so low it was on the ground, and he tripped over it anyway.

And because he did, no one — and certainly not the Nazis and the KKK and the violent white supremacists, who were hoping for the wink and nod that they got here — believes the president actually thinks there’s a problem with the Nazis and the KKK and the violent white supremacists. If he finally does get around to admitting that they are bad, he’ll do it in the same truculent, forced way that he used when he was forced to admit that yeah, sure, maybe Obama was born in the United States after all. An admission that makes it clear it’s being compelled rather than volunteered. The Nazis and the KKK and the violent white supremacists will understand what that means, too.

Our president, simply put, is a profound moral shambles. He’s a racist and sexist himself, he’s populated his administration with Nazi sympathizers and white supremacists, and is pursuing policies, from immigration to voting rights, that make white nationalists really very happy. We shouldn’t be surprised someone like him can’t pass from his lips the names of the hate groups that visited Charlottesville, but we can still be disappointed, and very very angry about it. I hate that my baseline expectation for the moral behavior of the President of the United States is “failure,” but here we are, and yesterday, as with previous 200-some days of this administration, gives no indication that this baseline expectation is unfounded.

And more than that. White supremacy is evil. Nazism is evil. The racism and hate we saw in Charlottesville yesterday is evil. The domestic terrorism that happened there yesterday — a man, motivated by racial hate, mowing down innocents — is evil. And none of what happened yesterday just happened. It happened because the Nazis and the KKK and the violent white supremacists felt emboldened. They felt emboldened because they believe that one of their own is in the White House, or at least, feel like he’s surrounded himself with enough of their own (or enough fellow travelers) that it’s all the same from a practical point of view. They believe their time has come round at last, and they believe no one is going to stop them, because one of their own has his hand on the levers of power.

When evil believes you are one of their own, and you have the opportunity to denounce it, and call it out by name, what should you do? And what should we believe of you, if you do not? What should we believe of you, if you do not, and you are President of the United States?

My president won’t call out evil by its given name. He can. But he won’t. I know what I think that means for him. I also know what I think it means for the United States. And I know what it means for me. My president won’t call out evil for what it is, but I can do better. And so can you. And so can everybody else. Our country can be better than it is now, and better than the president it has.