Adam Victor Brandizzi

Amazing photography – Fox in the Snow by Roeselien Raimond, a photographer from Netherlands. She is passionate in love with animals & nature, from tiny waterdrops, fascinating insects, hidden treasures, beautiful scenery to exotic animals…

More photos

Advertise on DYT! - Join us on Facebook - Twitter - Pinterest - Tumblr

fromoceantoocean:

countrycapitolquidditchgirl:

icannotevenwilliamshatner:

A corgi leading a conga line of pugs on an adventure.

He’s taking the corgis to Isengard.

"The juvenile sea squirt wanders through the sea searching for a suitable rock or hunk of coral to cling to and make its home for life. For this task, it has a rudimentary nervous system. When it finds its spot and takes root, it doesn't need its brain anymore, so it eats it. It's rather like getting tenure." -- Daniel Dennett

Home Alone is basically “Saw” for kids. Kevin McAllister clearly grows up to become Jigsaw.                   

Some of you may dispute an item here or there, but otherwise I’m pretty sure this is accurate. -Ray

Tweet

For her project Sworn Virgins of Albania, photographer Jill Peters visited to the mountain villages of northern Albania to capture portraits of “burneshas,” or females who have lived their lives as men for reasons related to their culture and society.

Many of the women assumed their male identities from an early age as a way to avoid the old codes that governed the tribal clans, which stated that women were the property of their husbands. Peters explains,

The freedom to vote, drive, conduct business, earn money, drink, smoke, swear, own a gun or wear pants was traditionally the exclusive province of men. Young girls were commonly forced into arranged marriages, often with much older men in distant villages. As an alternative, becoming a Sworn Virgin, or ‘burnesha” elevated a woman to the status of a man and granted her all the rights and privileges of the male population. In order to manifest the transition such a woman cut her hair, donned male clothing and sometimes even changed her name. Male gestures and swaggers were practiced until they became second nature. Most importantly of all, she took a vow of celibacy to remain chaste for life. She became a “he”. This practice continues today but as modernization inches toward the small villages nestled in the Alps, this archaic tradition is increasingly seen as obsolete. Only a few aging Sworn Virgins remain.

Thus, Peters wanted to capture this fading tradition before it disappeared forever. She also writes that she learned a great deal from her interactions with her subjects and their communities:

I learned that the Burrnesha are well respected within their communities. They possess an indescribable amount of strength and pride, and value their family honor above all else. Their absolute transition is wholly accepted, posited and taken without question by the people among whom they live. But most surprising, is they have very few regrets for the great deal they have sacrificed.

Wikipedia has an entire article regarding Albanian sworn virgins, in case you’d like to learn more about this practice.

Sworn Virgins of Albania by Jill Peters (via Feature Shoot)

Image credits: Photographs by Jill Peters and used with permission

I know a pilgrim from a distant land
Who said: Two vast and sawn-off limbs of quartz
Stand on an arid plain. Not far, in sand
Half sunk, I found a facial stump, drawn warts
And all; its curling lips of cold command
Show that its sculptor passions could portray
Which still outlast, stamp'd on unliving things,
A mocking hand that no constraint would sway:
And on its plinth this lordly boast is shown:
"Lo, I am Ozymandias, king of kings:
Look on my works, O Mighty, and bow down!"
'Tis all that is intact. Around that crust
Of a colossal ruin, now windblown,
A sandstorm swirls and grinds it into dust.

(By Georges Perec, translated from the French by Gilbert Adair.)

Muslims of Syrian town of Saraqeb put up Christmas tree for local Christians.

The young man who is being interviewed stresses the unity of all Syrians, whether Muslim, Christian, Druze, etc.

The Syrian revolutionaries took it at the beginning of November. It was subsequently the site of the execution of captured Syrian army troops. Last spring, the Syrian military was also accused of war crimes in Saraqeb.

honkshu:

Le génie du mal [The genius of evil, aka Lucifer]; Guillaume Geefs 

“The statue was originally a commission for Geefs’ younger brother Joseph, who completed it in 1842 and installed it the following year. It generated controversy at once and was criticized for not representing a Christian ideal. The cathedral administration declared that “this devil is too sublime.” The local press intimated that the work was distracting the “pretty penitent girls” who should have been listening to the sermons.” [wikipedia]

[The original ‘sublime’ version shown below, and the ‘revised’ one in the photoset above]

 

“People are fed up!” I’m told. “People don’t feel safe!” Uh oh, I’ve heard that before, are we going to vote to invade all the states that start with Co? Everyone hates living in a police state until the moment they suddenly want a police state, and then they wonder why they live in a police state. Understandably, in such existential moments, people want someone to protect them, to take over; but if that’s impossible they will settle for the appearance of a larger power differential– they will willingly weaken themselves to create the illusion– in their own head– that their protector is that much more powerful. Yes, just like the gimmick in BDSM.

“I’m outraged!” someone will have written on Facebook. “This can’t go on!”

The louder people yell for change, the more things will stay the same. You’ve all argued vociferously for or against gun control, I’m sure, but how many of you did something about it– called your Congressman, which is your only (albeit miniscule) avenue of power? Or do you think they read your twitter?

But anyone can say that yelling won’t help, things won’t change, but my point is very different: you are yelling so that things don’t change.

Frantic hyperactivity to mask impotence, frantic hyperactivity to signal to some omnipotent entity that you are trying to make things right– it’s the description for what’s happening now and the definition of obsessional neurosis. That could be coincidence, I guess.

II.

Well here’s what both sides of the debate can agree on: “The media should stop publicizing the killer’s name! It makes killers think they can be famous, getting their fifteen minutes of fame.” Tip: If you find yourself in total agreement with people you wanted to murder in the last election, you’re wrong.

It’s interesting that we think spree killers are motivated by fame, an idea so entrenched it is immune to critical examination, we assume that that must be what drives people, crazy people doubly so. That would be an example of projection. Or perception. Whatever. This guy left no manifesto and obliterated his computer on his way out. Fame? Sounds like his problem was he felt overscrutinized, but I’m no shrink. Unless he thought he was playing Candyland he did it out of rage. You know what’s even more interesting? That you don’t think “rage” is a satisfying explanation, but “fame” is.

“But constant exposure on CNN does spur copycats!” Oh, yeah, because what every twenty-something homicidal maniac uses as an identity touchstone is the news programs targeted to a demo twice his age and three times his estrogen level. You think they are motivated by what they see on CNN? What year do you think this is? You think they want to get on the local news? They don’t even watch TV! I know your heart is in the right place, but are you seriously arguing for a world where someone decides what information is suitable for you to know? And even if some killers motivated by fame, for this to work, you can’t cause a media blackout of a killer’s name on the TV news only, you’d have to black it out on the entire internet. Does anyone have a killswitch for the internet? Keep yelling like that, someone will.

III.

“But now’s the time for action!” Note the date, February 13, 2013, it is the day you will stop talking about this tragedy, it is the day you will simply say, “that’s the system, I guess, we yelled for two straight months, but nothing ever changes.”

I arrived at that date in a semi-scientific way: that’s how long it took Occupy Wall Street to die of ennui, and it’s worth pointing out that those people had youthful energy and infinite free time. You know who they put in charge of changing gun policy? Joe Biden.

Google Trends supports me:

 

N is Virginia Tech, H is Giffords, B is Aurora, and etc, note they all run about a month, and the dotted lines in the graph is Google’s guess– they give it a month. This is just a horrific massacre, so you’ll be in for two. Then it’s Superbowl, Oscars and Season 16 of Dancing With The Stars.

 

IV.

 

“Will nothing ever change?” Oh, one thing will, can’t stop the steady march of authoritarianism.

Since you don’t have the courage to look to the inevitable conclusion of your opinions, I’ll do it for you: there’s absolutely no chance that guns will be illegal, so “gun control” means tighter control of who gets guns.

In America, if the word “control” is anywhere near a social policy issue, then to your left will be its unwitting executor: psychiatry. “They already decide financial benefits, criminal responsibility and who gets more time on tests, so why not mandate a psychiatric clearance for gun owners!” Because it’s madness. Of course I’m not opposed to this in theory, because in theory is the only place where it would be conceivably valid or reliable. In practice you will have a guy judge you based on his own prejudices, or his fear of lawsuits, or on the negotiated fee. Why not have a gypsy run some tarot cards? At least when it all goes bad you can blame the cards.
 

 

Which is the whole point: the system is designed to fail in specific and predictable ways, because a tragedy that is the result of a failure of the system is much easier to live with than a tragedy that happens for no reason, even though they are equally common and equally dead. Which is the whole point of the frantic hyperactivity. It’s not to prevent it, but to feel like it is going to be prevented. I realize this doesn’t sound very satisfying, but on February 13, you will realize it was.

 

 

No related posts.

Seria a vaca da Galinha Pintadinha atacando novamente?

ESA’s Proba-1 satellite imaged the French-Italian Concordia base on November 21, 2012 (ESA)

Located in one of the loneliest locations on Earth, the French-Italian Concordia station was captured on high-resolution camera by ESA’s Proba-1 microsatellite last month, showing the snow-covered base and 25 square kilometers of the virtually featureless expanse of Antarctic ice surrounding it.

A cluster of scientific research buildings situated 3233 meters above sea level in the Antarctic interior, Concordia is one of the only permanently-crewed stations on the southern continent. Around 12–15 researchers and engineers spend months — sometimes over a year —  in isolation at Concordia, where during the winter months there are no deliveries, no chance of evacuation, temperatures below -80 ºC (-112 ºF) and the next closest station is 600 km (370 miles) away. It’s like working on another planet.

And that’s precisely why they’re there.

(...)
Read the rest of The Most Remote Workplace on Earth (424 words)

© Jason Major for Universe Today, 2012. | Permalink | 6 comments |
Post tags: antarctica, Concordia, esa, Proba, research, satellite

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh

Letter to the Times, Jan. 15, 1915:

Sir,

May I add another illustration to those which have already appeared in your columns, showing how near two lives can bring together events which seem so far apart? I remember my father telling me how, when he was attending a country grammar school in 1805, one day the master came in, full of a strange excitement, and exclaimed, 'Boys, we've won a great victory!' Then he stopped, burst into tears, and added, 'But Nelson -- Nelson is killed!' When I was myself a boy Waterloo was a recent event, and even 'the '45' was remembered and talked about.

In a few weeks I shall be 85, but I can still ride my bicycle.

William Wood, DD

SO RARELY has political corruption led to punishment in Brazil that there is an expression for the way scandals peter out. They “end in pizza”, with roughly the same convivial implication as settling differences over a drink. But a particularly brazen scandal has just drawn to a surprisingly disagreeable close for some prominent wrongdoers. The supreme-court trial of the mensalão (big monthly stipend), a scheme for buying votes in Brazil’s Congress that came to light in 2005, ended on December 17th. Of the 38 defendants, 25 were found guilty of charges including corruption, money-laundering and misuse of public funds. Many received stiff sentences and large fines.The supreme court must still write its report on the trial, and hear appeals—though it is unlikely to change its mind. So in 2013 Brazilians should be treated to an unprecedented sight: well-connected politicos behind bars. José Dirceu, who served as chief of staff to the former president, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, was sentenced to almost 11 years; Delúbio Soares, former treasurer of the ruling Workers’ Party (PT), got almost nine. Under the penal code, at least part of such...

Nossa investigação revela: brutalidade inaugurada no Carandiru alastra-se há vinte anos pela PM. Para ter paz, Estado terá de enfrentá-la

Por Vinicius Souza e Maria Eugênia Sá, editores do MediaQuatro

Outubro de 2012 registrou o recorde de homicídios e latrocínios na Grande São Paulo no ano: 345. Na capital, o aumento foi de quase 110% em relação ao ano anterior. O número só pode ser comparado aos 493 mortos entre os dias 12 e 20 de maio de 2006, cuja macabra contagem diária (média de 55 por dia) somente tem paralelo nos 111 detentos executados pela PM no Massacre do Carandiru, em 2 de outubro de 1992. Mesmo assim, a atual crise na segurança teve destaque nos jornais e TVs apenas após as eleições. Até então, as quase cem vítimas entre policiais, principalmente PMs de baixa patente e fora do horário de serviço, e as centenas de casos de pessoas baleadas nas proximidades desses assassinatos nas horas seguintes, estavam sendo tratadas, todas, como “casos isolados”. Sem o fator eleitoral, a culpa pela violência recai agora sobre o suspeito usual: o Primeiro Comando da Capital ou, como é chamado nos telejornais, “a facção criminosa que age dentro e fora dos presídios”. Mas será assim tão simples?

Várias linhas ligam os sangrentos eventos de 1992, 2006 e 2012. No primeiro, não há dúvidas sobre quem atirou. Ainda assim, o único condenado pela chacina de presos desarmados foi o Coronel Ubiratan Guimarães, que comandou a invasão do presídio. Sua pena de 632 anos de reclusão, porém, foi derrubada pelo Órgão Especial do Tribunal de Justiça de São Paulo, em fevereiro de 2006, quando ele já tinha sido eleito deputado estadual com o sugestivo número 14.111. Em setembro do mesmo ano, o político/coronel foi morto com um tiro no peito em seu apartamento. A única indiciada foi sua então namorada, Carla Cepollina, julgada e absolvida na primeira semana de novembro desse ano. Foi na esteira do Massacre do Carandiru que nasceu o PCC, inicialmente para impedir futuras mortandades em massa dentro das cadeias. Com o crescimento do “partido”, realmente despencaram os índices de assassinatos e estupros nas penitenciárias, além de praticamente não haver uso de crack.

O caso de 2006 é bem mais emblemático. Logo depois de o governo estadual transferir cerca de 700 prisioneiros tidos como líderes do PCC para os presídios de Presidente Bernardes e de Presidente Prudente, considerados de maior segurança, policiais civis e militares passaram a ser mortos nas ruas das principais cidades do estado. Ao todo, 59 foram assassinados, incluídos guardas civis e bombeiros, principalmente entre os dias 12 e 13 de maio. Ato contínuo, a “tropa de elite” da PM paulista, a Rota, saiu às ruas “trocando tiros” com “criminosos” e elevando como nunca as “resistências seguidas de morte”. Ao mesmo tempo, assassinos mascarados passaram a atirar em pessoas nas periferias.

Crimes de maio

O saldo de mortos oficialmente registrados entre maio e junho de 2006 passa de 600, fora os desaparecidos. Dos “confrontos” entre polícia e “bandidos”, 60% a 70% tinham claros indícios de execução (tiros à queima roupa, de cima para baixo, na região do tórax e/ou da cabeça como confirmou o perito Ricardo Molina a respeito de 124 mortos), segundo uma comissão formada pelo Conselho Estadual de Defesa dos Direitos da Pessoa Humana, Defensoria Pública, Ouvidoria da Polícia, Ministério Público (Estadual e Federal), Ordem dos Advogados do Brasil, Conselho Regional de Medicina e Núcleo de Estudos da Violência da Universidade de São Paulo, entre outras entidades. As mortes jamais foram investigadas e até hoje ninguém está preso pelos assassinatos de civis durante esse período. A “I Guerra do PCC” teria acabado devido a um acordo, nunca admitido, firmado entre o grupo e o governo. É inegável, no entanto, o fortalecimento da facção criminosa, que extrapolou os muros das cadeias. Sem a concorrência de outro grande grupo, diminuíram também os confrontos entre traficantes rivais e as mortes por dívida de drogas, ajudando a derrubar significativamente as taxas de homicídios nas ruas (72% entre 1999 e 2011)*.

A nova onda

A trégua, contudo, parece ter chegado ao fim em 29 de maio de 2012, quando policiais da Rota cercaram supostos integrantes do PCC em um lava-rápido na Zona Leste matando seis pessoas e prendendo outras três. Ao menos um dos mortos teria sido levado vivo para a beira da rodovia Ayrton Senna e torturado antes de ser executado, conforme relatou uma testemunha. Três oficiais chegaram a ser presos mas foram absolvidos em novembro, porque a testemunha teria “entrado em contradição”. Nos dias seguintes ao confronto, PMs começaram a ser assassinados em dezenas de emboscadas. A cada morte de policial, em média mais dez pessoas são mortas, a maior parte na mesma região do assassinato, poucas horas depois do evento e por meio de homens encapuzados, em motos sem placas ou carros de vidros escuros, que atiram aleatoriamente em grupos de pessoas nas periferias (93% das mortes são registradas fora do centro expandido da capital).

Apesar do padrão óbvio, somente com a queda do secretário de Segurança Pública de São Paulo, Antonio Ferreira Pinto, em 21 de novembro, a imprensa realizou um levantamento apontando que pelo menos 16 chacinas (com 28 mortes) entre junho e novembro ocorreram a menos de cinco quilômetros de onde foram executados sete policiais. E mais, o ex-chefe da Polícia Civil Paulista, Marcos Carneiro de Lima, admitiu publicamente que várias das vítimas civis fora das chacinas tiveram suas fichas criminais levantadas em delegacias distantes de suas regiões antes de serem mortas, o que leva a suspeitas de execuções premeditadas. A apuração rigorosa desses crimes, no entanto, não deve ser motivo de grandes esperanças.

Policiais bandidos

De fato, a maior probabilidade é que aconteça exatamente o contrário. Um exemplo é o aumento de 100% sobre a indenização a familiares de policiais mortos e sua extensão para oficiais vitimados fora do horário de serviço, anunciada recentemente pelo governador Geraldo Alckmin. Com isso é bem possível que as famílias dos dois policiais executados em 1º de novembro em Heliópolis recebam R$ 200 mil cada. A polícia não parece muito interessada em averiguar a fundo o que os dois, considerados “linha dura” pelos colegas, faziam juntos numa moto, à meia noite no meio da favela. Uma boa resposta pode estar na excelente matéria da repórter Tatiana Merlino, “Em cada batalhão da PM tem um grupo de extermínio”, publicada em setembro, em Caros Amigos.

Pior, para alguns analistas, muitos policiais estão sendo executados por colegas de farda, aproveitando a onda de violência como cortina de fumaça. É o que pode ter acontecido com o sargento da PM Marcelo Fukuhara, assassinado na Baixada Santista no início de outubro. Conhecido como “ninja” ou “japonês”, ele seria o chefe de um dos mais temidos grupos de extermínio da região. Logo após sua morte, um outro oficial não identificado pelo comando da PM foi preso suspeito de ser o executor, o que não impediu que oito pessoas fossem mortas em duas chacinas na mesma área, nas duas horas seguintes à morte do sargento. Segundo testemunhas, os executores foram homens encapuzados saídos de um carro preto. Fontes de dentro da polícia também afirmam que a única oficial mulher assassinada esse ano, a soldado Marta Umbelina da Silva, teria sido vítima de seu ex-marido, um ex-policial. A informação, contudo, não pode ser confirmada, já que todas as investigações seguem sob sigilo.

BOX

Palavra de mãe

Débora Maria da Silva, coordenadora e fundadora o Mães de Maio, grupo de parentes e amigos de civis mortos em 2006 conta sua versão sobre os fatos

“O que mais nos revolta é a impunidade dos policiais matadores. A explosão das mortes na periferia de São Paulo está ocorrendo há pelo menos três anos na Baixada Santista. E quem mais mata são os policiais e ex-policiais. Pra mim, essa coisa de PCC é balela pra justificar a morte de civis. Eles entram em favela, mostram listas de policiais marcados pra morrer, mas não mostram as listas de civis. O próprio antigo secretário tinha falado que todos os que morreram tinham ficha suja, mas como é que ele sabe? A verdade é que desde 2006 tem uma máfia de extermínio, com os policiais ganhando mais com bicos do que registrado na carteira. Com isso, ficam disputando os bicos e estão totalmente fora do controle do comando. Diferente do que disse o governador, quem não reage é que tá morto! Por isso a gente cobra investigação, intervenção federal e federalização dos Crimes de Maio. Porque esse estado não tem mais remendo. Tem que trocar tudo, não só a cúpula da segurança!”

Com a nova onda de violência, as Mães de Maio estão se organizando com dezenas de outros movimentos e grupos para reagir, formando o Comitê Ampliado Contra o Genocídio (veja a carta-manifesto exigindo, entre outras coisas, o fim dos “autos de resistência” em http://bit.ly/SkE9QZ). Já solicitaram uma audiência pública com o governador e com o Ministro da Justiça. Também estão promovendo atividades de divulgação de suas lutas, como marchas periódicas pela paz. A repercussão midiática, contudo, ainda é frágil. “A primeira vez que nosso nome saiu na TV esse ano foi no programa da Sonia Abraão, com o Coronel Telhada, o Comandante Camilo e o Capitão Conte Lopes nos chamando de ‘amigas de bandidos’, como fizeram com o jornalista André Caramante, que teve de sair do Brasil com medo”, diz.

* Para uma visão mais profunda e séria sobre o “crime organizado” em SP, vale a pena ler o documento 16 Perguntas sobre o PCC, em http://bit.ly/SnVgzQ

Last year, University of Queensland psychology undergraduate Sean Murphy was collecting images of faces while preparing an experiment. As he skimmed through them, he noticed that they began to appear grotesque and deformed, though when viewed individually they appeared normal and even attractive. (The demonstration above uses photographs of celebrities.)

"The effect seems to depend on processing each face in light of the others," writes grad student Matthew Thompson, who published the result last year with Murphy and Jason Tangen. "By aligning the faces at the eyes and presenting them quickly, it becomes much easier to compare them, so the differences between the faces are more extreme. If someone has a large jaw, it looks almost ogre-like. If they have an especially large forehead, then it looks particularly bulbous. We're conducting several experiments right now to figure out exactly what's causing this effect."

(Tangen, J. M., Murphy, S. C., & Thompson, M. B. (2011). Flashed face distortion effect: Grotesque faces from relative spaces. Perception, 40, 628-630.)

Claudette is born in 1950 and dies in an accident in 2000. If the accident had not occurred she would lived until 2035. We think of this as a misfortune because her life has been cut short -- she has lost 35 years.

But it's equally true that Claudette might have been born in 1915 and enjoyed another 35 years of life in that way. Why don't we regard this as equally tragic? "We feel uncomfortable with the idea that her late birth is as great a misfortune for Claudette as her premature death," writes philosopher Fred Feldman. "Why is this?"

Lucretius wrote, "Think too how the bygone antiquity of everlasting time before our birth was nothing to us. Nature therefore holds this up to us as a mirror of the time yet to come after our death. Is there aught in this that looks appalling, aught that wears an aspect of gloom? Is it not more untroubled than any sleep?" Why are we more troubled at a lost future than a lost past?

renancu:

its back

YouTube Description:

In today's crazy world, productivity is on the minds of many. So what can science tell us about the human brain and productive work? How do we become more efficient at working, and spend less time working overall?

 Part 2 here

Three questions, open book:

1.  Did Hipster Gerry get his money's worth from the University of Chicago, either $100k in future income or knowledge?  No.

2. Did society get their money's worth in sending him, i.e. by permitting/facilitating the diversion of his intellect into whatever it was he majored in?  No.

Neither of those questions have the force to change reality.  This one does:

3. Did the University of Chicago get their money's worth out of him, was $100k worth the dilution to their brand?   No.

Universities are going to need to differentiate themselves as something more than a processing plant for future consumers of Chinese textiles, local produce, and California  pornography.  But that time is a long, long way off.  What can universities do in the meantime, to keep up their brand in the face of thousands of product recalls every year?
 
Time for the go team: The New York Times.


II.

The NYT has an article criticizing hipsters.  How much would you pay for such an article?  (NB: you paid zero for mine.)  That's a legit question, not "you get what you pay for."  Ten cents?  A dollar?  Remember that figure, we'll come back to it.

This is how the article begins:

If irony is the ethos of our age -- and it is -- then the hipster is our archetype of ironic living.

If your reservoir for archetypes goes back only one generation, you need your eyeball scanned, you're probably a replicant.  Keep that in mind, we'll come back to it, too.

The ironic frame functions as a shield against criticism. The same goes for ironic living. Irony is the most self-defensive mode, as it allows a person to dodge responsibility for his or her choices, aesthetic and otherwise.

So this is true, but that's the secondary purpose of irony, not the primary purpose:  in exchange for this self-defense, it puts all of the ironist's energy in the service of the thing it is defending against; that while he affects a distance from "all this", he participates 100% in it. However much the "not corporate" hip coffeehouse needs the barista's extensive roasting knowledge or values the ambiance he creates with his MFA and thoughts about 2666, it is way more than the $7/hr no benefits it is paying him, but they got him, making skinny lattes for an organ donor in a light blue North Face coat while he and his Julliard buddy Garf roll their eyes disdainfully when she asks for two Splendas.  "You're saying he's underpaid?"  Yeah, but not the point, the point is why does he accept it?  It's only because he can roll his eyes about how mainstream she is that he stays, it offers him a perch from which he is better than her, while simultaneously and no less ironically, this woman thinks she is better than him because she's on the correct side of the counter and her husband works on Wall Street.  In math terms, the difference between what he is actually worth and the amount he is paid is how much he values feeling superior to MILFs.

Or, if I can be permitted a judicious use of psychoanalytic jargon: it's the rationalization that allows you to blow a guy you can't stand, "I hate him but I'm going to make him cum so hard he'll just want more of me, which will be his punishment."  Let that analogy sink in for a moment.  From his perspective, not only did he still get blown, he liked it even more.  NB: in this analogy, the guy is capitalism and you're not.

III.

Christy Wampole is an assistant professor of French at Princeton University, so right away you should be suspicious of  her allegiances, so I figured this was just another NYT hit piece for its overeducated and overpaid demo.  But then this happened:

[The hipster] is merely a symptom and the most extreme manifestation of ironic living.

Hold on, something is amiss.  There's a gigantic difference between an "archetype" and "merely a symptom", e.g. one is cause and the other is effect, and for a Professor of Confusing Words it's a big mistake to make-- especially when it's been reviewed by the editor at the NYT.  It's about as big as missing the primary purpose of irony.  Cause, or effect?  They are almost opposites, which means she's wants them to be the same, which makes this evidence of a defense.  So this article isn't simply "kids today are lazy."  There's something else happening:

For many Americans born in the 1980s and 1990s -- members of Generation Y, or Millennials -- particularly middle-class Caucasians, irony is the primary mode with which daily life is dealt.  One need only dwell in public space, virtual or concrete, to see how pervasive this phenomenon has become. Advertising, politics, fashion, television: almost every category of contemporary reality exhibits this will to irony.

"Will to irony" may mean she's an idiot, and if this were true I could happily close my computer and buckle down to another night of alcoholic hallucinosis, but she's not an idiot, she's probably smarter than me, which means something far more sinister is going on: conflating the irony of the kids with the irony of the "public space."  Who does she think made the public space?  20 somethings?  Who is running the advertising agencies?  Who is running for politics?  How old is every legit fashion designer?  Who is responsible for the human rights violations of the ABC Network?  She's not decrying the hipster generation, she's describing hers.


IV.

Here is a paragraph so preposterous I was sure this was a McSweeny's gag.  But she didn't mean this to be ironic, which is itself ironic, good luck not laughing:

Born in 1977, at the tail end of Generation X, I came of age in the 1990s, a decade that, bracketed neatly by two architectural crumblings -- of the Berlin Wall in 1989 and the Twin Towers in 2001 -- now seems relatively irony-free. The grunge movement was serious in its aesthetics and its attitude, with a combative stance against authority, which the punk movement had also embraced. In my perhaps over-nostalgic memory, feminism reached an unprecedented peak, environmentalist concerns gained widespread attention, questions of race were more openly addressed......

"Relatively irony-free!  Architectural crumblings! Socially conscious!  Bosnia Herzigova or whatever!"  I realize Aspirational 14% wants their beloved 90s to be about something more than just bicuriosity and JDSU, but I was there, it wasn't.  Anyone who thinks the grunge movement was "serious" and "combative" and who thinks feminism "reached a peak" also thinks The Hunger Games was a step forward for women and 50 Shades is poorly written "but still hot."  Just because you call yourself a progressive or a feminist, doesn't make it true, your progressive passions may end up setting women back five hundred years-- that's right, 500 years.  Even 200 years ago Catherine took power away from her husband and became something great, Walpole's is the generation that admires Hillary Clinton as a female role model, not because she became Secretary of State, but because she stayed with her husband so that she could become Secretary of State.  Read it again if you didn't get it the first time, it's important.  I forbid you from having daughters.  Or oxygen.  I know, I know, I don't have any real power, but maybe someday a man will give me some.



V.


When someone hates something that to outside observers looks exactly like themselves in every way, you should quickly consult a French book to see if they don't have a word for that phenomenon, and they do, it's called projection.

Before you nod and use it to hate on her, you should understand what projection is.  It sounds like you project unwanted feelings onto another person, which is both wrong and impossible.  It's not an action, it's a problem of perception.  The unwanted feelings don't make sense coming from someone like you, so you conclude they must be coming from the other person.

To use the frequent example of "homophobia": a guy feels gay impulses and can't "handle it" but he doesn't get rid of them by putting them onto someone else, he confuses them as coming from someone else.  He smells gayness, "Where is it coming from?  Me?  Impossible! Jesus washed my feet.  Must be that guy."   Sorry, wildman, whoever smelt it dealt it.  Projection is the most primitive of defenses, circa age 2, and the description should make it clear it is a narcissistic defense: one's perception of the world is inextricably, concretely the result of one's inner states.  There is no "objectivity" possible. 

The purpose of projection is not to get rid of the feelings, but to explain their presence, to defend the self against a label: "I'm not gay..... even if I have gay sex once in a while."  The point isn't to avoid gay sex, the gayness isn't intolerable to them-- e.g. observe the high hat Christians caught in various rest stops across our land-- but even thought they've committed the act, it doesn't affect their identity.

My use of gay as an example is unfortunate because half of you will see "gay" as "bad," but the projected impulse doesn't have to be "bad", merely incongruous to the desired identity that you are trying to solidify.   If you doubt this, consider the sullen engineering student at a party, "I'm not like these superficial sorority girls with perfect smiles and condomless sex" who then perceives great happiness in these people.


 
You could be happy, too, dude, if you weren't so invested in not being happy.  If you want a partial understanding of why 19-21 Saudi/Egyptian terrorists could live in America and enjoy our strip clubs but still want to crumble our architecture, there you go. 

The article continues with a "nuanced" criticism of irony and the hipster mindset, and then towards the end she tries a reversal, but it's a trick, not because it's not genuine, it is, but precisely because it is genuine:

Obviously, hipsters (male or female) produce a distinct irritation in me, one that until recently I could not explain. They provoke me, I realized, because they are, despite the distance from which I observe them, an amplified version of me.

So true; totally wrong.  When people "figure themselves out" and then applaud themselves for their "brutal self-honesty", you can be sure it is further defense.  The easiest way for a self-aware person to protect himself is to "figure out" something that is actually correct so that he stops there and doesn't go any further, which is also the problem with most therapies.  "I'm learning a lot about myself and my motivations."  No you're not.  "Figuring yourself out" not only fails, but is the defense itself.  Stop doing it.

She thinks she "realizes" hipsters are an amplified version of her, i.e. that she is projecting-- which is in fact/duh correct, but never asks the question, "Why am I projecting?  What do I benefit from this madness?  How does the system benefit?"

There are so many ways, let's just take one.   Is the result of her work product ironic?  Yes.  Then it's in the service of the system, while she is able to affect a distance from "all this" she participates 100% in it.

However much the NYT values her PhD, however much they value her intellect and opinions, it's way more than what they paid her, which is nothing.  The question is, why didn't she demand to be paid?  I'm not saying you have to do everything for money, god knows I write a lot of blog and drink very long rums and neither one have delivered profits commensurate with the labor.  If she was promoting something of course I'd understand writing for free, but what can she do after writing for the Times except write for the Times again?  See also Princeton, where you will pay them more to get the degree that they will then pay you less to use for them, in no other profession is learning how to do something more valuable than actually doing it. Is that ironic?  Then she is able to affect a distance from "all this" while she participates 100% in it.  Undoubtedly she's thinking, "well, hell, I got an article in the Times!" as if that has some incalculable value, but that's the trick.  It doesn't.  It's a scam.

"I'm not a vicious capitalist, I don't always have to get paid for what I do. I like to participate in the public debate."  I. I. I.  Stop it, look around!   This isn't charity, the Times is a billion dollar corporation and Princeton is in actuality a gigantic hedge fund-- why are you giving them your work for free?    "That's the system, I can't change it."  Exactly.

No different than the person who doesn't ask for a raise because they're nervous, "should I ask for 5% more?" and they agonize about it for a month, ten months.  The point isn't whether you deserve the extra money, the point is whether you deserve it more than the company, because if you don't take the extra money home to your kids, the company takes it to theirs.  Note that no one ever frames it this way, it is always about "making a case" or "explaining how you can both benefit."   Note also that in most cases the person you'd ask for a raise is a manager, one who has no investment in that money, it doesn't come out of his pocket.  Yet he is the biggest obstacle, he will put sugar in your gas tank to stop you from getting that raise.  Is that ironic?  Or totally the point? 

Glengarry Glen Ross is on Netflix, you should watch it a lot.  The easy "critique of capitalism" is that "second prize is a set of steak knives" because that's how little it costs to motivate you to work harder for them, and if that doesn't work there's always "third prize is you're fired."  But the real wisdom which is not about capitalism but which is about narcissism comes from understanding that first prize isn't a Cadillac Eldorado, you think Alec Baldwin needs a car?   There is no first prize.  Real closers don't want the prize, they want to be the best, that's why they will practice practice practice and don't play the lottery.  The car is a temptation only for people who do not know their own value, the value of their own work, who won't lift a finger to advance themselves, who are motivated only by threats or by rewards, who would rather have the appearance of success than actual success. "I got an article in the Times!"  celebrates the person whose brain is broken.  "Alec Baldwin's character is a raging narcissist!" Jesus are you stupid, Alec's name is MacGuffin, that's why he's in Act I and never again yet propels the story forward.  It is irrelevant whether Alec Baldwin has metal testicles or pathological grandiosity, what matters is that after years of C minus work, what finally gets those dummies fired up is First Prize or Third Prize, left to themselves they meander in mediocrity while deluding themselves that they are more than what they do. "I was number one in '87!"  So was Alf.   And the system knows this, which is why it lets Wampole call herself a professor but pays her like a TA-----  and she's upset at hipsters.  Is that ironic?  

She's criticizing-- sorry, critiquing-- hipsters for their defensive posture against society, and for not working, but, look, at least they are not working for free, like a Matrix battery propping up the very system that sucks the life out of them.  "Well, it's cool that I got an article in the Times, maybe I'll get to write another one."  I know, I know, the temptation of a moment of celebrity was too great to resist, only a fool would pass it up.   Meanwhile Princeton is happy to use her to market their anti-hipster brand to the demo that has the money to send their batteries to Princeton one day.   However much Princeton values her article to the NYT, it is way more than they... never mind.

The thing is, if I tie her to a chair and shine the heat lamp on her and ask her whose fault "all this" is, she'll answer the Republicans.  Since she's a nuanced thinker she'll probably say George Bush.  And when she has to get a job at Rutgers because Princeton won't give her tenure, she'll blame the tax cuts or "an undercurrent of sexism in academia."  But she will save and save and save to send her own daughters to college one day, hey, if you send them to Rutgers they'll generously give a 10% employee discount.  Sweet!

You gave the system you don't like a spectacular blowjob, and then try to punish it by making it want you more.  From the system's perspective, not only did it still get blown, it liked it even more.  In this analogy, the system is the system and you're not.



http://twitter.com/thelastpsych

In the 1650s an intriguing handbill appeared in London:

A merchant named Dan Edwards had brought the first coffee to England in 1652, and his Greek servant, Pasqua Rosee, opened the first coffee-house there. Evidently he saw some potential.

Muito lindo esse catálogo de brinquedos, ainda mais porque, ao contrário do que disse uma das fontes, ele não “troca” gêneros, mas mostra meninos e meninas brincando juntos. Ademais, não é um panfleto nem nada, como podem ver no catálogo em si.

The last greak auk in the British Isles was killed because its keepers feared it might be a witch. In 1840 five men discovered it asleep on the Scottish island of Stac an Armin. From John Alexander Harvie-Brown's Vertebrate Fauna of the Outer Hebrides (1888):

It was Malcolm M'Donald who actually laid hold of the bird, and held it by the neck with his two hands, till others came up and tied its legs. It used to make a great noise, like that made by a gannet, but much louder, when shutting its mouth. It opened its mouth when any one came near it. It nearly cut the rope with its bill. A storm arose, and that, together with the size of the bird and the noise it made, caused them to think it was a witch. It was killed on the third day after it was caught, and M'Kinnon declares they were beating it for an hour with two large stones before it was dead: he was the most frightened of all the men, and advised the killing of it.

They threw the body behind the hut and left it there.

When the last heath hen, "Booming Ben," died in 1932 on Martha's Vineyard, local newspaper editor Henry Beetle Hough wrote an obituary for the species: "There is a void in the April dawn, there is an expectancy unanswered ... We are looking upon the utmost finality which can be written, glimpsing the darkness which will not know another ray of light. We are in touch with the reality of extinction."

See I Think That I Shall Never See ...

brandizzi: RT @Beschizza: The Church of England defending the sanctity of marriage is the punchline to a joke 500 years in the making

O manifesto do fixador: utópico, contraditório, totalmente correto. Assino embaixo.

nevver:

Fixer’s Manifesto