trust-me-imma-doctor:

realslimcaity:

THIS SCENE RUINED MY LIFE

I dont even watch this show and this is literally the cutest thing I have ever seen

The danger of humanization.

(Source: supagirl, via mrswhichandmeg)

202,489 notes

Comments

permguerrero:

memes are people too 

And thankfully, most appear amused by the trip.

(Source: deezyville, via mrswhichandmeg)

345,739 notes

Comments

kirkwa:

Awesome Halloween Ideas For Handicapped Children

How cool is this!

I have a friend who has a little brother that is challenged and when I saw these pictures I was inspired. I showed my friend and we’ve now got plans to do something like this for his brother.

This is going to be a Great Halloween!

That’s really imaginative! We are all potential canvases for creativity and ingenuity.

(via eclecticdreamweaver)

843 notes

Comments
In Ferguson and Beyond, Punishing Humanity

The humanist line on Ferguson is unduly optimistic, and rests on a psychologically dubious assumption. Namely, that when people who have historically enjoyed a dominant position in society (in this case white men) come to recognize historically subordinated people (racial minorities, women) as their moral and social equals, they will welcome the newcomers.  But seeing others as similar to ourselves can lead to hostility and resentment under certain conditions. It’s true that Orwell’s vision of a person running across the battlefield holding up his trousers during the Spanish civil war transformed an enemy combatant into a vulnerable human being in his eyes — someone who must have been undressed or indisposed moments before the gunfire started. But this humanizing vision involved no loss of status for Orwell. He felt sorry for the man. He saw him as ridiculous.

The situation is different when it comes to white men’s perception of non-whites and women. Over time, as the fight for equality has allowed some advancement and social mobility for racial minorities, as well as for women, toward what we might call the inner circle of humanity, white men have experienced a relative loss of status. And they now have more rivals for desirable positions. Add to that the fact that they may find themselves surpassed by those they tacitly expected to be in social positions beneath them, and we have a recipe for resentment and the desire to regain dominance.

I’d go further and say that it becomes harder to justify the exploitation of fellow members of equal-status humans. Thus there are perceived costs not just of privilege in the abstract, but of lifestyle and even identity and history, to admitting others. It means accepting a collective retroactive guilt. Therefore, the closer a group comes to social equality, the harder some members, namely the more economically vulnerable, will resist. And police, who identify as working class and have the power to impose their authority and will on potential competition, will as a group resist the hardest.

I kept reading, expecting this piece to jump the tracks; but it never did. It stayed true, disciplined, and focused, making elegant points and resisting the temptation to exceed its logical underpinnings.

It’s all theoretical of course, and therein lies the weakness of psychology: postulation unbound, drawing untestable connections between outcomes, too often with only anecdotal evidence as a guide. Empirics can answer the what, sometimes the how, never the why. Neurology can give us much of the how, with increasing effectiveness. Psychology without neurology has thus been relegated to the why alone, its hypotheses more closely akin to philosophy and literature than any other realm of science or medicine. It is poetry. But even poetry can contain great and important truths.

Oh, this just in: I misread Ms. Manne’s discipline. I thought it was psychology and philosophy, but no, she’s all philosophy. My feelings on psychology still stand, though, as does my admiration for her analysis

0 notes

Comments

feelsspiral:

everybodyilovedies:

<3 <3 <3 <3 <3

x100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

(Source: iwatchforsasha, via optimistsareunprepared)

219,856 notes

Comments
georgetakei:

We often speak of natural beauty. But are our eyes being fooled? These photos show how far some go to attain “beauty.” Does it push too far, or should we admire these results?

I&#8217;d say the problem is that we&#8217;re so surrounded by the artifice of &#8220;beauty&#8221; that we no longer recognize it as artifice, and thus demand it of ourselves and others in real life. And if our expectations are not met, it is both a physical and moral failing to fall short of the conditioned fantasy.
There was a time when stars were glamorous, and ruled over the mere mortals; now the mortals are required to appear as glamorous as the stars on screen, in makeup and costume, and prepped with scripts, direction, and flattering camera angles. I&#8217;m not sure which is more oppressive.

georgetakei:

We often speak of natural beauty. But are our eyes being fooled? These photos show how far some go to attain “beauty.” Does it push too far, or should we admire these results?

I’d say the problem is that we’re so surrounded by the artifice of “beauty” that we no longer recognize it as artifice, and thus demand it of ourselves and others in real life. And if our expectations are not met, it is both a physical and moral failing to fall short of the conditioned fantasy.

There was a time when stars were glamorous, and ruled over the mere mortals; now the mortals are required to appear as glamorous as the stars on screen, in makeup and costume, and prepped with scripts, direction, and flattering camera angles. I’m not sure which is more oppressive.

654 notes

Comments

- La Diva de l’Empire by Erik Satie -

A somewhat more operatic voice than Satie, Bonnaud, and Blès likely intended, or Darty possessed. But the voice one has is the voice one has, and Ms. O’Neill uses it rather effectively here. I only wish Ms. Ritter had been more cakewalk and less mélodie in her accompaniment. As for the furtive skirt lift, it’s been a long time since opera and art song were closely associated with burlesque, The Enchanted Organ notwithstanding. Besides, contemporary formal attire is more revealing than the naughtiest 1904 could come up with.

Where I’m torn is the presentationalism. O’Neill plays the coquette perfectly, in both body and face. It’s entirely synched up with the vocal mannerisms, and all decisions are clear, most smooth and natural, without much sense of a choreography followed by rote. There is meaning to it. But does a song need shtick? Does it need to stand as an appeal to past conventions, or some mix of past and present, for the sake of intelligibility of signifiers? Does one need to “act the part” or even “act a part?”

In this song, with this performer, it certainly seems to add a great deal. Another performer might have a different range of references, preferences, and strengths, and might prefer a more sedentary or subtle approach. I think I’m more scarred by directors and coaches demanding a cookie-cutter approach to interpretation (the cutter after their own design), which need not be customized to suit the performers’ individual identities and reactions to their repertoire. They want a static, definitive interpretation, and if that does not fit the singer, it is the singer’s fault for lacking flexibility, not the singer’s prerogative, and indeed imperative, to find their own truth and truthful direction for the interpretation. Ms. O’Neill has both truth and fun. So did I, watching. That should be more than enough.

0 notes

Comments

Anonymous said: Is it weird that I feel safer around pro-Israel Jews than pro-Palestine Gentiles, despite being a pro-Palestine Jew?

returnofthejudai:

No. Pro-Israel Jews aren’t silent about anti-semitism, don’t uncritically pass around anti-semitic propaganda, don’t deny the history of Jewish persecution, don’t compare you to a Nazi, have clear motives however much you might disagree with them, actually visibly care about the survival of the Jewish people, even if you disagree about how best to go about it, and don’t tokenize you. 

Honestly, the apathy towards, tacit approval of and occasional perpetuation of anti-semitism shown by so many anti-zionist gentiles does more to justify Zionism to me than anything Netanyahu could ever do or say. 

When 300,000 Jews fleeing German occupied Europe from 1933-1942 rant to Palestine, it wasn’t because of anti-Arab racism or Settler-Colonialism. It’s because they were fleeing persecution. The sheer APATHY towards those circumstances exhibited by so many anti-zionist gentiles makes me angry.

I mean, I can understand believing Israel is illegitimate. But to treat refugees like they were no different than the Boers? They didn’t run away to profit, they ran away to live. The US was barred. Much of Europe was barred. Where were they supposed to go? And if anyone says they should’ve stayed in Germany and Austria I have 6 million reasons why they can go fuck themselves.

You can be against Israel’s actions without dismissing anti-semitism, without denigrating Jewish history, without spreading Khazar conspiracy bullshit. But they do it or they allow it to be done. They deny the causal link between anti-semitism and Zionism, even though it’s obvious, and, in doing so, make their spaces feel unsafe for Jews. They excuse anti-semitism in their midst as “just a small fringe” rather than calling it out and pushing it aside forcefully. They don’t understand that Jews have more power to affect change in Israel than gentiles do, but they are empowering the most conservative voices with every anti-semitic micro-aggression and actual aggression they allow to happen. 

The lesson I learned running this blog last summer is that gentile anti-zionists care more about being called anti-semitic than about whether or not they actually are anti-semitic. 

At the end of the day lies the unfortunate question: if some modern version of the Amalekites comes for us again, will the anti-zionist gentiles have our backs if there is no longer a Jewish State? There’s no question other Jews will. 

54 notes

Comments

- Geto Boys - Damn It Feels Good To Be A Gangsta [Explicit] -

What I love about this song, and what so many miss, is the message that the biggest gangstas, the ones with the most power to help and harm who they choose, though always themselves first, are the ones who appear the most legit.

The worst criminals are the ones who can get by without breaking a single law, successfully skirting all accountability for the injury caused by their actions.

1 note

Comments

- Buffalo Springfield-For what it’s worth -

What’s easy to forget is that, sympathetic as the song is for youthful demonstrators, it also expresses a skepticism for the rigid absolutism exhibited by so many protests. “For What it’s Worth” is not an optimistic song.

1 note

Comments

- Skee-Lo - I Wish (Official Video) -

Ah, the last gasp of commercially viable geekboy hip-hop for about a decade and a half, as the labels, DJs and VJs all pursued gangsta exclusively.

What I love about so many old school geeks is that they defined aspirational according to everyday, human needs, not ostentatious bling, and were candid about their embarrassments, their deficits, their failures, not rigidly restricted to braggadocio in service to some absurd masculine code.

They were the kids I went to school with, keeping “real” real.

0 notes

Comments
Careful, floor&#8217;s hot.

Careful, floor’s hot.

(Source: thejogging, via juliasegal)

572,006 notes

Comments

- Malcolm McLaren - Buffalo gals -

That’s a pretty nonsensical juxtaposition, unless one wants to compare DJ Kool Herc’s rapping above the break with the instructions of a square dance caller.

OK, maybe not so nonsensical, after all.

Just the confusion I’d expect to be sowed by the Scotsman who assembled the Sex Pistols.

1 note

Comments
http://shiman6.tumblr.com/post/100598549079/derselala-thosegreenapples-lyrangalia

cthulhulovesewe:

derselala:

thosegreenapples:

lyrangalia:

carry-on-my-wayward-butt:

voltisubito:

Who the fuck named the Sahara Desert anyway

Sahara is just the Arabic word for “deserts”

You fucking named it the Desert Desert

way to fucking go

chai tea

I’ll take “European…

The La Brea tar pits = The The Tar tar pits.

I’d give whoever started this post a $20 bill, but first I’d have to go to an ATM machine.

438,829 notes

Comments

"…it is NOT offensive that Red-GOP states ask for gradual ramp-ups in ID, which theoretically could be neutral and proper. What exposes these laws as utter-hypocrisy and dastardly cheating is the complete lack of any allocation of resources to help citizens to COMPLY with such new, onerous regulations. Compliance assistance is standard and routinely given to major corporations. Were it given to the poor/minorities/women etc, the IDs would be helpful toward their NOT being poor anymore. It would have been simple to do this, if ANY of the red state republicans had been sincere and decent people, with citizenship in their hearts and outcomes in their minds and honesty in their souls. But they did not allocate one.. red… cent… to help poor neighbors, the elderly, divorced women etc to exercise their right as citizens… …revealing these red state officials and legislators ABSOLUTELY to be damned liars, unambiguously rotten-souled cheaters and utter, utter traitors. There are no words for such horrible beings."

David Brin (via azspot)

Of course, not to mention, compliance assistance would also prove the IDs to be more easily faked than the safeguards already in place for in-person voting, thus nullifying the entire case for the more stringent requirements. However they try to frame it, they only expose their real motives more clearly - to suppress voting by Democratic-leaning demographics.

(via cthulhulovesewe)

15 notes

Comments