Did everyone just…. forget how to create, all of a sudden? Disney pumping out the fourth remake in a row? Movies are like 70% sequels? Stories in games being just bad if they exist at all? Haven’t had a book get hyped in like half a decade? Are we okay? What’s going on?
“They’re afraid of losing friends, being ridiculed in class, getting worse grades and are even afraid of being assaulted and physically hurt.”
good
no, not good. because if we hate them as much as Trump and his supporters hate certain groups, we are no better than they are.
yeah I am
“if you hate these bigots you’re just as bigoted as they are”
This “we’re no better than them” mentality makes the critical mistake that hate itself is the problem.
Hate is not the problem. At all. Hate can be constructive. Hate can be defensive and come from righteous outrage.
The problem is irrational hate towards innocent people.
Hating a racist is COMPLETELY fucking different from hating a race. A whole race didn’t do anything wrong. A racist did. Hating the racist is 100% proportionate, justifiable retaliation.
Fucking. Mic. Drop.
The reason that hate groups like the Klan have been driven so near to extinction is because of this exact thing. It became unfashionable to be publicly racist, and the backlash against those kinds of groups became unbearable for them. It drove them out of the limelight and into the very fringes of society.
This postmodern “hating the hate makes you just as bad” bullshit is what’s allowing them to re-prosper.
Fuck that.
Expose them. Make them lose their friends. Ridicule them in classes. If you can get away with it, beat their asses. Show them what it means that we will not go back to that way of life again. It’s time for the racists to be the ones who live in fear.
Hating bigotry does not a bigot make.
Imma just leave this here
The paradox of tolerance is that you cannot ever tolerate intolerance of any name or nature or tolerance itself will be snuffed out.
Punch your local Nazi. Make them bleed.
People of color, Jewish people, queer and trans people, immigrants, and a whole bunch of people can never truly exercise the full extent of their freedom of speech so long as Nazis are exercising their freedom of speech. You literally cannot let everyone have unlimited freedom when a big group of people wants to use their freedom to, at best, keep other groups of people from being free, and at worst wants to keep other groups of people from being alive. It is 100% impossible to accommodate the viewpoints of every single person at the same time.
So you actually have to choose whose rights you want to preserve. There is nothing to be gained by defending facists’ right to free speech, as doing that inherently attacks the free speech of a bunch of other people. You have to choose, you can’t be wishy washy about this. Not making a choice just means choosing the status quo, and the status quo sucks. Actively fight facists.
The paradox of tolerance described by Karl Popper in 1945
The passenger steamer SS Warrimoo was quietly knifing its way through
the waters of the mid-Pacific on its way from Vancouver to Australia.
The navigator had just finished working out a star fix and brought
Captain John DS. Phillips, the result. The Warrimoo’s position was LAT
0º 31’ N and LONG 179 30’ W. The date was 31 December 1899.
“Know what this means?” First Mate Payton broke in, “We’re only a few
miles from the intersection of the Equator and the International Date
Line”. Captain Phillips was prankish enough to take full advantage of
the opportunity for achieving the navigational freak of a lifetime.
He called his navigators to the bridge to check & double check the
ship’s position. He changed course slightly so as to bear directly on
his mark. Then he adjusted the engine speed.
The calm weather & clear night worked in his favor. At mid-night the
SS Warrimoo lay on the Equator at exactly the point where it crossed
the International Date Line! The consequences of this bizarre position
were many:
The forward part (bow) of the ship was in the Southern Hemisphere &
in the middle of summer.
The rear (stern) was in the Northern Hemisphere & in the middle of
winter.
The date in the aft part of the ship was 31 December 1899.
In the bow (forward) part it was 1 January 1900.
—
This ship was therefore not only in:
Two different days,
Two different months,
Two different years,
Two different seasons
But in two different centuries - all at the same time!
Am I the only one that’s a just a tiny bit pissed off that this is still an issue?
The Original Series wasn’t even in the general VICINITY of fucking around yo
How many shows these days would do this, and do it this way? These days, it would be all, “Ohh, we have to be sensitive and show the nuances of each side” and try not to make either side seem wrong. It wouldn’t be clearly spelled out, “pro-choice is right, if you’re against it you’re the bad guys.”
Jim Kirk is not here for your anti-birth-control, anti-choice, pro-death-penalty BS
James Tiberius Kirk was written and portrayed as a feminist and I will fight anyone who says otherwise.
Yep. That episode is exactly what you think it is: pro-birth control, pro-population control, pro-choice, and pro-women’s right to choose. And yes, Kirk, the supposed playboy of the spaceways, is in favor of all of the above.
It was written and aired in 1969.
It probably couldn’t air today.
THINK ABOUT THAT.
Also LMAO at all the sad whiny geek boys who are like “I miss the GOOD OLD DAYS of SCI-FI when it wasn’t all about SOCIAL ISSUES and instead it was just about MEN HAVING FUN IN SPACE. Like Star Trek! Star Trek wouldn’t put up with all this SOCIAL JUSTICE FEMINISM IN SCI FI bullshit!” And meanwhile I’m just over here like “…did you actually watch the show?”
It’s also important to bear in mind that the Original Series had a predominantly female fanbase, and during its initial run, was widely mocked and dismissed by mainstream (i.e., male) science fiction fans as being fake sci-fi for girls. It’s difficult to overstate the influence women had on the franchise in its early days; most of the early Star Trek conventions were organised by and for women, and indeed, those same organisers were primarily responsible for the massive letter-writing campaign that prevented the show from being cancelled after the 1968 season. Without that campaign, the episode pictured in this post would never have been made.
The popular image of James Kirk as a sleazy womaniser is part of a conscious effort to erase that history and render the franchise’s roots palatable to the misogynistic geekboys of the modern SF/F fandom.
And a gentle reminder that TOS was a Desilu production, which its board of directors voted to cancel after the second pilot due to cost concerns, a vote that Chairman Lucille Ball overruled. There is no Star Trek without Lucille Ball.
Basically you have women to thank for Star Trek. Go suck on that, JJ Abrams.
Bringing this back because I recently saw a post from a dudebro complaining about how Star Trek has become all “PC and has an agenda” unlike in the “good old days”
so here is a clip from the “good old days” of Star Trek not having an agenda.
so i just sent this to my brother who thinks he’s ‘all that’ about star trek and i’m just grinning at how annoyed he’s gonna be with it bc i keep sending him snippets of the reblogs ahahaha
I will always support girls who figure out that they’re lesbians after thinking they were bisexual and girls who figure out that they’re bisexual after thinking they were lesbians. It can be really hard to determine whether what you are feeling is compulsory heterosexuality or genuine attraction, and we should always show a girl love and support when she tries to figure that out and when she does figure it out.
A New Hampshire Republican State Representative anonymously created the “Red Pill” subreddit.
Wow.
these aren’t just bullshitter dweebs in their mom’s basements trolling the internet, these are men who formulate the way we implement laws and who govern the way we live our lives.
^^^ Hello, yes, everyone needs to see this. It’s not always a bunch of nobodies trolling around on 4chan. It’s, doctors, lawyers, judges, businessmen, bankers, law enforcement, etc. People who have pulls on society. They literally don’t see other groups besides themselves as human or equal
Female figurine from the Hohle Fels cave near Stuttgart, about 35,000 years old. Interpreted as a pornographic pin-up.
“The Earliest Pornography” says Science Now, describing the 35,000 year old ivory figurine that’s been dug up in a cave near Stuttgart. The tiny statuette is of a female with exaggerated breasts and vulva. According to Paul Mellars, one of the archaeologist twits who commented on the find for Nature, this makes the figurine “pornographic.” Nature is even titling its article, “Prehistoric Pin Up.” It’s the Venus of Willendorf double standard all over again. Ancient figures of naked pregnant women are interpreted by smirking male archaeologists as pornography, while equally sexualized images of men are assumed to depict gods or shamans. Or even hunters or warriors. Funny, huh?
Consider: phallic images from the Paleolithic are at least 28,000 years old. Neolithic cultures all over the world seemed to have a thing for sculptures with enormous erect phalluses. Ancient civilizations were awash in images of male genitalia, from the Indian lingam to the Egyptian benben to the Greek herm. The Romans even painted phalluses on their doors and wore phallic charms around their necks.
Ithyphallic figure from Lascaux, about 17,000 years old. Interpreted as a shaman.
But nobody ever interprets this ancient phallic imagery as pornography. Instead, it’s understood to indicate reverence for male sexual potency. No one, for example, has ever suggested that the Lascaux cave dude was a pin-up; he’s assumed to be a shaman. The ithyphallic figurines from the Neolithic — and there are many — are interpreted as gods. And everyone knows that the phalluses of ancient India and Egypt and Greece and Rome represented awesome divine powers of fertility and protection. Yet an ancient figurine of a nude woman — a life-giving woman, with her vulva ready to bring forth a new human being, and her milk-filled breasts ready to nourish that being — is interpreted as pornography. Just something for a man to whack off to. It’s not as if there’s no other context in which to interpret the figure. After all, the European Paleolithic is chock full of pregnant-looking female statuettes that are quite similar to this one. By the time we get to the Neolithic, the naked pregnant female is enthroned with lions at her feet, and it’s clear that people are worshipping some kind of female god.
Yet in the Science Now article, the archaeologist who found the figurine is talking about pornographic pin-ups: “I showed it to a male colleague, and his response was, ‘Nothing’s changed in 40,000 years.’” That sentence needs to be bronzed and hung up on a plaque somewhere, because you couldn’t ask for a better demonstration of the classic fallacy of reading the present into the past. The archaeologist assumes the artist who created the figurine was male; why? He assumes the motive was lust; why? Because that’s all he knows. To his mind, the image of a naked woman with big breasts and exposed vulva can only mean one thing: porn! Porn made by men, for men! And so he assumes, without questioning his assumptions, that the image must have meant the same thing 35,000 years ago. No other mental categories for “naked woman” are available to him. His mind is a closed box. This has been the central flaw of anthropology for as long there’s been anthropology. And even before: the English invaders of North America thought the Iroquois chiefs had concubines who accompanied them everywhere, because they had no other mental categories to account for well-dressed, important-looking women sitting in a council house. It’s the same fallacy that bedevils archaeologists who dig up male skeletons with fancy beads and conclude that the society was male dominant (because powerful people wear jewelry!), and at another site dig up female skeletons with fancy beads and conclude that this society, too, was male dominant (because women have to dress up as sex objects and trophy wives!). Male dominance is all they can imagine. And so no matter what they dig up, they interpret it to fit their mental model. It’s the fallacy that also drives evolutionary psychology, the central premise of which is that human beings in the African Pleistocene had exactly the same values, beliefs, prejudices, power struggles, goals, and needs as the middle-class white professors and students in a graduate psychology lab in modern-day Santa Barbara, California. And that these same factors are universal and unchanged and true for all time.
Hohle Fels phallus, about 28,000 years old. Interpreted as a symbolic object and …flint knapper. Yes.
That’s not science; it’s circular, self-serving propaganda. This little figurine from Hohle Fels, for example, is going to be used as “proof” that pornography is ancient and natural. I guarantee it. Having been interpreted by pornsick male archaeologists as pornography because that’s all they know, the statuette will now be trotted out by every every psycho and male supremacist on the planet as “proof” that pornography is eternal, that male dominance is how it’s supposed to be, and that feminists are crazy so shut the fuck up. Look for it in Steven Pinker’s next book. ***
P.S. My own completely speculative guess on the figurine is that it might be connected to childbirth rituals. Notice the engraved marks and slashes; that’s a motif that continues for thousands of years on these little female figurines. No one knows what they mean, but they meant something. They’re not just random cut marks. Someone put a great deal of work into this sculpture. Given that childbirth was incredibly risky for Paleolithic women, they must have prayed their hearts out for help and protection in that time. I can imagine an elder female shaman or artist carving this potent little figure, and propping it up somewhere as a focus for those prayers.
On the other hand, it is possible that it has nothing to do with childbearing or sexual behavior at all. The breasts and vulva may simply indicate who the figure is: the female god. Think of how Christ is always depicted with a beard, which is a male sexual characteristic, even though Christ isn’t about male sexuality. The beard is just a marker. Or, given the figurine’s exaggerated breasts, it may have something to do with sustenance: milk, food, nourishment.
The notion that some dude carved this thing to whack off to — when he was surrounded by women who probably weren’t wearing much in the way of clothes anyway — is laughable.
#reclusiveleftist #women’s history #porn #white men are stupid
There was a post doing the rounds on tumblr a while back that I wish I could find, but most of it seemed to be taken from this study by LeRoy McDermott, Comparing Modern Bodies with Prehistoric Artifacts.
When looked at from above, as a woman observes herself, the breasts of PKG-style figurines assume the natural proportions of the average modern woman of childbearing age. For example, the dimensions of the breasts of the off-illustrated Venus of Willendorf are comparable to those of a 26-year-old mother-to-be with a 34C bust (see fig. 5). When foreshortened from above, even the apparent hypertrophic dimensions of the Venus of Lespugue and the best-preserved figurine from Dolní Vestonice enter into a reasonably normal, albeit buxom, range.
McDermott goes on to theorise that the reason most of these hyper-female statues are missing a head and hands is that the head, obviously, can’t be viewed by the sculptor without access to a reflection of some kind. As the hands are in a constant state of motion making the figurine, it would also be difficult to have a fixed reference to work from.
The whole thing reminds me of that oft-quoted Sandi Toksvig article:
When I was a student at Cambridge I remember an anthropology professor holding up a picture of a bone with 28 incisions carved in it. “This is often considered to be man’s first attempt at a calendar” she explained. She paused as we dutifully wrote this down. “My question to you is this – what man needs to mark 28 days? I would suggest to you that this is woman’s first attempt at a calendar.”
It was a moment that changed my life. In that second I stopped to question almost everything I had been taught about the past. How often had I overlooked women’s contributions? How often had I sped past them as I learned of male achievement and men’s place in the history books?
Working (loosely) in an archeological field for this past year has made me realise how much is taken for granted about ancient culture and to what degree we patch up the remnants of the past with modern values and notions of gender and sexuality. On a daily basis I’m asked - when in character - who my husband is, whether I’m a cook, why I’m holding a spear and carry a dagger and slingshot as part of my kit. These notions of a woman’s place are so ingrained that the children on school trips to the hill fort frequently can’t believe it when I tell them our Chieftain is a woman. Even if the only Iron Age Briton they can name is Boudica, they have a hard time getting their head around it.
I know I’ve reblogged this before, but I just can’t help myself. It’s way too cool.
I read Naomi Alderman’s novel The Power a while ago (the premise of the story is basically: “How would the world change if women suddenly developed superpowers?”) and there is one thing that really stuck with me: At one point in the book, there are pictures of two statues, one called “The Priestess Queen” and one called“The Serving Boy”. At that point in the book, I didn’t think too much of it and thought they were just inventions for the sake of the story.
But in the afterword, the author revealed that these statues exist in real life, only that they are called “The Priest King” and “The Dancing Girl”. (Links to photos here and here). They were found in the Indus Valley and are between 4000 and 4500 years old. And yet it was immediately assumed that the male statue must be an important person but that the female one was just “a girl”.
This really made me realize how deeply the patriarchy is rooted in our society.
