"We’re learning a lot about this thing called Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. This war time disease. This combat fatigue diagnosis. And we read something worth sharing. Fact, urban youth are twice as likely to get Post Traumatic Stress Disorder than soldiers who are coming home from war. So tell me, what’s the difference between homicide in the streets and bloodshed on the battlefields of Iraq. […] The only difference there is between a soldier with PTSD and one of my students with it is that a soldier gets to leave the battlefield, while my kids go home to it."
This is the kind of world we live in today
If your suggestion as an administrator is to tell a teenage girl to go under the knife instead of telling a teenage boy to respect women, you are in the wrong damn line of work.
this is some fucking bullshit
this is the world we live in
and it’s horrible
reblogging for a nice discussion on what type of aggression is considered “acceptable”
this is hilarious
and dudes wanna call women weak, hahaha
On topic about the representation of women in media. Read the link because the graphics are supposed to go with the context and commentary in the article.
fucking rich white people laughing at how poverty is some diet they should try.
Social experiments where wealthy people say they’re going to live on a budget below the poverty line for a month don’t accomplish much more than partonize people actually living in low income situations with no end in sight. It was the exact problem I had with Morgan Spurlock’s “30 Days” thing where he and his wife lived on minimum wage for a month, they didn’t behave like people living with the reality of poverty, they lived like two useless rich people who had their credit cards taken away for a couple weeks. It’s super easy to run up a lot of debt and make dumb decisions in money management if you know you’re going to be rich again in a couple weeks just like it’s super easy to stick to an extreme diet for a month. When people watch someone live on foodstamps for a month to prove a point and say “ha ha you’re gonna lose ten pounds and look great!” they’re showing a complete inability to extrapolate that situation to a long-term scenario. “Oh wow, you’re gonna lose weight because you’ll be undernourished!” And that’s good? They’re supposed to just enjoy being malnourished and losing weight until when? They get sick and die?
And I mean, sure, it’s totally doable to live on $133 a month for food, but wow does a super restrictive food budget ever suck when there’s no end in sight. The world is just a grey and shitty place when you’re malnourished and eating the same meal of watered down soup and rice every day for the indefinite future. When I was at my worst my hair was falling out, I was dizzy and passing out all the time. Like in public, standing at the mall, suddenly on the ground. Talking to a kid on the lawn, on the ground. I cracked my head open on a tile floor and knew a trip to the hospital wasn’t in the budget so I ended up just hoping for the best that I didn’t have a brain hemorrhage. There’s a dull ache in that part of my skull to this day. That’s not the kind of life experience you get from one month of living on rice and beans when you know there’s a sweet steak dinner with your name on it in four weeks.
I had the same problem with “Nickled and Dimed.” That bitch could have chosen to opt out of her little stint anytime. Impoverished people don’t have an out.
These experiments only occur because the experiences of marginalized people are doubted and minimized. These experiments imply that poor people just don’t know how to budget properly, or worse, that they don’t work hard enough, and let’s see if it’s *really true* that they can’t make ends meet. I don’t care how well you budget; minimum wage is not enough, particularly if you have a family to support, no matter how you slice it. In summary, the whole *rich white people experimenting with being poor* thing is classist, condescending, and proves exactly nothing.
“The bottom line is that saying there are differences in male and female brains is just not true. There is pretty compelling evidence that any differences are tiny and are the result of environment not biology,” said Prof Rippon.
“You can’t pick up a brain and say ‘that’s a girls brain, or that’s a boys brain’ in the same way you can with the skeleton. They look the same.”
Prof Rippon points to earlier studies that showed the brains of London black cab drivers physically changed after they had acquired The Knowledge – an encyclopaedic recall of the capital’s streets.
She believes differences in male and female brains are due to similar cultural stimuli. A women’s brain may therefore become ‘wired’ for multi-tasking simply because society expects that of her and so she uses that part of her brain more often. The brain adapts in the same way as a muscle gets larger with extra use.
“What often isn’t picked up on is how plastic and permeable the brain is. It is changing throughout out lifetime
“The world is full of stereotypical attitudes and unconscious bias. It is full of the drip, drip, drip of the gendered environment.”
Prof Rippon believes that gender differences appear early in western societies and are based on traditional stereotypes of how boys and girls should behave and which toys they should play with.
Okay, okay, I’m going to tell you what Hermione sees in Ron.
A trio is a balancing act, right? They’re equalizers of each other. Harry’s like the action, Hermione’s the brains, Ron’s the heart. Hermione has been assassinated in these movies, and I mean that genuinely—by giving her every single positive character trait that Ron has, they have assassinated her character in the movies. She’s been harmed by being made to be less human, because everything good Ron has, she’s been given.
So, for instance: “If you want to kill Harry, you’re going to have to kill me too”—RON, leg is broken, he’s in pain, gets up and stands in front of Harry and says this. Who gets that line in the movie? Hermione.
“Fear of a name increases the fear of the thing itself.” Hermione doesn’t say Voldemort’s name until well into the books—that’s Dumbledore’s line. When does Hermione say it in the movies? Beginning of Movie 2.
When the Devil’s Snare is curling itself around everybody, Hermione panics, and Ron is the one who keeps his head and says “Are you a witch or not?” In the movie, everybody else panics and Hermione keeps her head and does the biggest, brightest flare of sunlight spell there ever was.
So, Hermione—all her flaws were shaved away in the films. And that sounds like you’re making a kick-ass, amazing character, and what you’re doing is dehumanizing her. And it pisses me off. It really does.
In the books, they balance each other out, because where Hermione gets frazzled and maybe her rationality overtakes some of her instinct, Ron has that to back it up; Ron has a kind of emotional grounding that can keep Hermione’s hyper-rationalness in check. Sometimes Hermione’s super-logical nature grates Harry and bothers him, and isn’t the thing he needs even if it’s the right thing, like when she says “You have a saving people thing.” That is the thing that Harry needed to hear, she’s a hundred percent right, but the way she does it is wrong. That’s the classic “she’s super logical, she’s super brilliant, but she doesn’t know how to handle people emotionally,” at least Harry.
So in the books they are this balanced group, and in the movies, in the movies—hell, not even Harry is good enough for Hermione in the movies. No one’s good enough for Hermione in the movies—God isn’t good enough for Hermione in the movies! Hermione is everybody’s everything in the movies.
Harry’s idea to jump on the dragon in the books, who gets it in the movies? Hermione, who hates to fly. Hermione, who overcomes her withering fear of flying to take over Harry’s big idea to get out of the—like, why does Hermione get all these moments?
[John: Because we need to market the movie to girls.]
I think girls like the books, period. And like the Hermione in the books, and like the Hermione in the books just fine before Hollywood made her idealized and perfect. And if they would have trusted that, they would have been just fine.
Would the movies have been bad if she was as awesome as she was in the books, and as human as she was in the books? Would the movies get worse?
She IS a strong girl character. This is the thing that pisses me off. They are equating “strong” with superhuman. To me, the Hermione in the book is twelve times stronger than the completely unreachable ideal of Hermione in the movies. Give me the Hermione in the book who’s human and has flaws any single day of the week.
Here’s a classic example: When Snape in the first book yells at Hermione for being an insufferable know-it-all, do you want to know what Ron says in the book? “Well, you’re asking the questions, and she has to answer. Why ask if you don’t want to be told?” What does he say in the movie? “He’s got a point, you know.” Ron? Would never do that. Would NEVER do that, even before he liked Hermione. Ron would never do that.
|—||Melissa Anelli THROWS IT DOWN about the way Ron and Hermione have been adapted in the movies on the latest episode of PotterCast. Listen here. This glorious rant starts at about 49:00. (via karakamos)|
Hi guys, it’s A-KA here
thanks for ya follow! X
"it’s a competition none of us agreed to" I want to give the author of this quote the hardest dap ever.
I know we’ve reblogged this before, but we’ve been seeing a lot of “no but doctors are SUPPOSED to shame fatties/everybody SHOULD be mean to fatties, how else are fatties going to get thin” bullshit lately, so I thought I’d bring it back.
The article ignores the well-established fact that repeated efforts to lose weight lead to yo-yoing and long-term weight gain, but it does document that fat people who experience fat discrimination tend to stay fat or get fatter over time, not to lose weight.
Really beautiful art of Beyoncé at the 2014 Grammy Awards. I tried to find the source artist and it looks like this illustration is a composite of two illustrations by Adrian Valencia.
Chris Traeger arrives at an important part in the development of a male feminist