haha i’ve spent ~six hours transferring site content over to a new system that we don’t need and now i’m probably going to get into some degree of trouble because the web dev has made a list that propagates every single article written under a certain subdomain and all the pages i’ve transferred have been filed under that subdomain and the goofy CMS we’re using doesn’t allow them to change subdomains without remaking an entirely new post.
tldr: i might get fussed at for people not being able to communicate what needs to be done and because this is the first time i’ve ever used this CMS ever
Or there would have been, had anyone but a portion of its inhabitants given any thought to the giant rock pirouetting through space.
Some might have contended it was “Whoops,” an admission of a grave mistake by the scientists intended to keep a vigilant eye on such things. Others would perhaps have held a different view, slurring something scandalous over white Russians at a cocktail party where no one could remember what the drink’s name meant, Russia having been melted instantaneously when the climactic event occurred. Perhaps the belief would be popular among a third group that the planet swore concurrently, the sound rising, mingling, and somehow ringing out across the universe in a perfect chord, a harmonic hello from the ephemerally existent Earth.
But you mustn’t forget: all those people are dead. Their histories are gone. Their personalities don’t matter, if they ever did. Beliefs burned up with the rest of the planet.
It wouldn’t be fair to say there was ample warning, because Earth’s sun had exploded millennia ahead of schedule. Somewhere the entity that had written the laws of physics shrugged and laughed. It happens, thought the unknowable being existing beyond time and space. Sometimes you fuck up. It laughed again. That shit was cool.
Earth wouldn’t have agreed, but, conveniently, it was out of the picture.
Far, far away, miles and miles from the empty space where the planet to whose orbit it had been leashed had been, the International Space Station drifted endlessly in the blackness. Within its depths, an American astronaut laughed and laughed.
His companion turned to him, swore in her native Japanese.
“What the fuck could you possibly be laughing at?” she shouted, panic swelling beneath her words and pushing them up an octave. “There goes everything and everyone you ever knew!”
He sobered for a moment.
“I’m sorry… I was just thinking…’I love my dead gay Sun’.”
my mind just went supernova*, like our sun, when the earth ends, except it was me brains
*actually that is probably not the astronomical term for what occurs when a sun dies
I view all women who don’t identify themselves as feminists as unintelligent.
Intelligent people understand when they’re rights have been violated. Intelligent people fight for themselves.
Isn’t that a bit harsh? What about alternative movements like egalitarianism or equalism?
isn’t it a little patronising to assume that every woman should dedicate themselves to feminism in particular above all else or they’re ‘unintelligent’? there are women of different types who are affected by different things, and also women who identify as feminists in different forms. if a woman is disabled, for instance, is her status as a disabled person or a woman going to be more important to her day to day reality? if she is black, what about black issues? if she’s a transwoman what about transgendered rights? and so on.
hahaha because every woman should have ubiquitous access to havens of free speech and the benefit of historical, literary and cultural studies necessary to learn about the injustices of the past and the slow but steady progression of women’s rights internationally
and any women too busy raising multiple children or preoccupied with being oppressed by totalitarian patriarchal social hierarchies or *gasp* women that “just want to be taken care of” and sacrifice complete freedom for a steady income that involves them doing nothing because it makes them happy, yeah, all those women are fucking idiots.
yeah, you tell’em OP!! fuck them!! Fuck Those Other Women That Might Be Like Me for not knowing anything but what they’ve been surrounded by all their lives, fuck them for not knowing better and educating themselves with resources they may or may not ever have the possibility of obtaining, let’s free all women from oppression and injustice by cloistering the “smart ones” in our own beatnik internet hovels and ostracizing the “unintelligent” ones because they don’t fit in to our ideological slumber party.
“Mr. Breivik managed to commit two terrorist attacks in a single afternoon. But the hatred and contempt from which he drew his deranged determination were shared with many others throughout the international right-wing blogosphere.”—Joshua Gaarder, author of “Sophie’s World,” and Thomas Hyland Erickson, professor of social anthropology at the University of Oslo • In a New York Times opinion piece emphasizing the right-wing blogosphere’s influential nature — especially in terms of the Norway terror attacks, perpetrated by a man with ties to the right-wing in Norway. Plenty of people on the Internet are bigots in an extreme sense, extreme enough to encourage behavior like Breivik’s. It’s a sad and scary truth, but it’s one that needs to be taken seriously — no man works alone. He may have been a lone wolf in his actions, but he certainly wasn’t alone in his thinking. source (via • follow)
One of the cool things about the internet, and about tumblr especially, is the way that it allows for the quick propagation of all sorts of antiracist, antisexist, antihomophobic, etc., ideas. The appearance of sites like Color Lines, Jezebel, Racialicious, Feministe (sites which vary greatly in quality and ideological orientation), among others, have all been really important in popularizing antioppression ideas in general, and in producing a class of people able to problematize and critique oppressive discourses, especially those that can be found in popular culture.
One of the not so cool things about the internet is that it has helped to produce a class of people who are, relatively speaking, quite comfortable in their general anti-oppression stance. Anti-oppression discourse, nowadays, isn’t even about a politics (i.e. working collectively to change the world you inhabit) as much as it is about style—about speaking the right language, using the right terms, expressing outrage at the right moment, etc. Unlike previous generations of people discussing anti-oppression ideas, we who are members of this class don’t need to go to long, drawn-out meetings or to join activist groups in order to satisfy our desire to be against oppression. The discussion, in many ways, comes to us—just follow the right people, read the right blogs, etc. Anti-oppression, that is, arrives to us with the slick, polished ease of a commodity.
Without even talking about the billions of people who cannot access this kind of discourse precisely because the very late capitalism that provides us with cheap-ish computers and internet access needs to keep their wages incredibly low in order to do so, I’ll end by saying this: I believe that there’s a difference between producing evidence of oppression, explaining oppression, and fighting oppression. One can produce evidence of oppression without being able to explain why oppression happens. My problem with the Jezebels and Racialiciouses of the world, as well as with a lot of stuff I see around here, is that they glorify their own capacity to produce evidence about oppression without explaining it. Or if they do explain it, the explanation tells us very little: it relies on the fact that we know oppression is bad and the fact that it feels good to know that. This, I think, is why sarcasm works so well on Jezebel and various other liberal feminist blogs—it allows its reader to ignore the lack of analytical depth by allowing her to substitute the feeling of Knowing Better Than Someone Else Does.
You might think that people who analyze oppression professionally would at least think about the question of who benefits from oppression, a question that necessitates at least a critical view onto capitalism. The problem is, of course, that those who produce evidence of oppression professionally have a class interest in not explaining or learning to explain who benefits from oppression. Folks like (Racialicious founder) Carmen Van Kerckhove have found creative ways to make a living off of talking about race (and talking about talking about race) without explaining much at all save the fact that racism exists, a fact that we seem not to be able to be reminded of enough.
But the fact that an entire industry has emerged to produce evidence about oppression without doing much at all to fight it should tell us something about where we’re at in terms of capitalism. Anti-oppression has become a commodity, too, and “we” are part of the machine by and through which that commodity is made and consumed. I’m not trying to trivialize or downplay the existence of oppression—oppression exists, and exists on a scale any in ways I am not even in a position to know or speak about. But I am trying to begin to understand how capitalism has enabled people—especially upwardly mobile, college educated people like me—to generate an anti-oppression discourse that allows many of us to feel as if we are doing much more to fight it than we actually are.
…’cause a camp, where young people learn about democracy and becomes a part of the democracy is apparently the same as Hitlerjugend, yeah, totally -_-
Norwegian link, this is what he said:
“There was a shooting at a political camp, which sounds a little like, you know, the Hitler youth. I mean, who does a camp for kids that’s all about politics? Disturbing.”
To be honest, you know what I find disturbing? If the US, the most powerful country at the moment, don’t have camps for young people interested in politics, where they can discuss and debate different political issues (in a safe enviroment, which these camps normally are).
We actually do, but most of these are fundamental Christian camps or gems like the Tea Party Summer Camp. To be honest, having had the displeasure of attending one of the former, they can’t be too far apart in terms of the sheer creepy ”Hitler Youth” indoctrination factor.
Pretty sure you've always wanted to see me naked.. Well.. I'm feeling pretty adventurous today so go to datelink6[dot]com (switch [dot] with .) then sign up and find my profile under the username 'lolsummer69'. I hid my face in the pictures. but I want you to guess who I am and then hit me up on Facebook lol. Good luck.
it’s cool how people can learn to hate things without ever interacting with them
like me and ray william johnson
my old coworker used to watch it on the daily during work and it is literally Entertainment Tonight America’s Funniest Home Videos but for internet nerds and facebook moms. it’s really bad and he has created a small empire out of saying grossly obvious things about youtube videos and shilling grossly sexist/racist/offensive songs like “Stalking Your Mom,” “Doin’ Your Mom,” “The Stereotypes Song” and other chart-toppers to 11 year olds with mom’s credit card on itunes.
there is your education for the day and yeah i dont like the guy either but there’s not really a good way to dislike him without sounding like a buttfrustrated angry internet jerk jealous of his relative success
Something bothered me about Simon Dumenco’s piece about Huffington Post yesterday. Not the substance of his column, which was valid and well-argued, nor the favorable comparison to Techmeme, which was, well, favorable to Techmeme.
What irked me was the reminder that “aggregator” is a rather broad-brush term that paints systematic news-rewriters like the Huffington Post (who bury links) as cousins to snippet-quoting sites like Techmeme and Mediagazer (which link prominently). Dumenco’s piece, whose subtitle begins with “The Blog Queen Defends Her Aggregation Practices” also cites Bill Keller’s famous column from earlier this year, entitled “All the Aggregation That’s Fit to Aggregate”, which goes as far as coyly utilizing the term “aggregate” repeatedly as a euphemism for “steal”.
Since all “aggregators” are now tainted by association, I’m wondering if we should start using a different term to describe what we do at Techmeme. Something more specific, like “headline aggregator”? Or “link curator”? Meanwhile, can we all just call the rewriters “rewriters”? Aggregation is not the essence of what they do.
On a different note, allow me to stress that Dumenco’s crediting Techmeme as fair and generous with referrals is seen as a very welcome gesture from this corner, as it echoes what Frédéric Filloux wrote last September. In fact, it presents me a good opportunity to promote and expand on this idea, framing Techmeme as the antithesis to all that is sketchy and sucky about news on the internet. The following table summarizes my thoughts succinctly:
In closing, if you find yourself writing about Techmeme, it would be best if you could link prominently to this post. Or just paraphrase, or copy and paste at will. With or without attribution. It’s all fine with me.
Techmeme is a little hard on the eyes, but I’m giving it a second try thanks to this.
“Spend less money, create more jobs” is the kind of world one normally finds only in Woody Allen movies, and it’s a profoundly unserious stance for any politician to take. Spending cuts, whether they’re implemented by the public sector or the private sector, are never going to create jobs. And there’s simply no magical ju-jitsu whereby government spending cuts get reversed and amplified, becoming larger private-sector spending increases.
Boehner’s rhetoric, here, is a cynical play on our nation’s economic illiteracy. But the jobs crisis is far too big and too important to become a tactical political football. Now more than ever, it’s the job of government to come together and to do something constructive to create high-quality, long-term employment. Fast. Instead, the House majority is giving us aggressively harmful stupidity. Today’s a bad day in the annals of job statistics. But it’s equally bad in the annals of public service.
This is an apology reblog for the previous Republican-themed news reblog I posted about what “real Republicans would do” after being aptly informed that “real Republicans” would actually let the nation default so we can actually focus on the very real and very serious debt problem instead of arduously writhing and worming around it in order to keep it stirring in the news media cauldron.
If you put the entirety of DC to you ear, you can faintly make out the echoed whispers of countless interns and advisers nodding their heads and saying “daaah gee Boss, dats a great idea Boss, good thinkin’ Boss,” just like all the lampooned 40’s mafia cronies in Looney Toons.
If the Republican Party were a normal party, it would take advantage of this amazing moment. It is being offered the deal of the century: trillions of dollars in spending cuts in exchange for a few hundred billion dollars of revenue increases.
A normal Republican Party would seize the opportunity to put a long-term limit on the growth of government. It would seize the opportunity to put the country on a sound fiscal footing. It would seize the opportunity to do these things without putting any real crimp in economic growth.