Doing The Pledge of Allegiance every school day for 4 or 5 years is one of those things that don’t seem strange when you’re young
But then you get older and you realized “yeah, swearing your allegiance to a flag for about 200+ days out of 365 day year in unity with other small children is without a doubt a creepy as fuck activity”
wait is that actually a thing american schoolchildren do what the fuck
This is how I feel about the existence of Mount Rushmore
ignore anyone who tells you otherwise.
No white girls?
Why? You do t think white girls should be told they’re beautiful?
The amount of white whine in the notes…it’s ridiculous.
Every time we ask for the inclusion of young girls and women of color in pieces similar to this, where everyone is white, we’re told
"If you want representation then make it yourself and shut up about this!"“Let the artist make whatever they want and include whoever they want! Freedom of expression!”
"If you need to see someone who looks like you in order to feel included then you are the real racist."
Yet all I see in the notes are:
"If you want equality you have to include EVERYONE including white girls and guys!"
“it’s pathetic that the only way you can feel good about yourself is by excluding others.”
No doubt they feel some type of way with their own bodies but what is dedicating a piece such as this to women who fall no where near the Eurocentric standards of beauty taking away from white women when they have so much representations and campaigns centered around them.~Eon
Surreal furniture by Lila Jang
The strange and surreal furniture designer and Korean artist Lila Jang, who in his last series likes to twist and distort the classic French furniture of the 18th century. Lila Jang studied design and Fine Arts in Paris in Seoul, and has already participated in numerous exhibitions worldwide.
I want my house to be filled with just this furniture and for everyone to attempt to sit down.
A poster on Reddit asks: What are two events that took place in the same time in history but don’t seem like they would have?
Spain was still a fascist dictatorship when Microsoft was founded.
There were no classes in calculus in Harvard’s curriculum for the first few years because calculus hadn’t been discovered yet.
Two empires [Roman & Ottoman] spanned the entire gap from Jesus to Babe Ruth.
When the pyramids were being built, there were still woolly mammoths.
The last use of the guillotine was in France the same year Star Wars came out.
Oxford University was over 300 years old when the Aztec Empire was founded.
When pilgrims were landing on Plymouth Rock, you could already visit what is now Santa Fe, New Mexico to stay at a hotel, eat at a restaurant and buy Native American silver.
The first wagon train of the Oregon Trail heads out the same year the fax machine is invented.
Nintendo was formed the same year Van Gogh painted Starry Night.
Cleopatra (the last Pharaoh of Egypt) lived closer to the moon landings than she did to the building of the Pyramids of Giza.
When Kublai Khan became the Mongol Emperor, the first humans were setting foot on New Zealand.
Portuguese designer Susana Soares has developed a device for detecting cancer and other serious diseases using trained bees. The bees are placed in a glass chamber into which the patient exhales; the bees fly into a smaller secondary chamber if they detect cancer.
Scientists have found that honey bees - Apis mellifera - have an extraordinary sense of smell that is more acute than that of a sniffer dog and can detect airborne molecules in the parts-per-trillion range.
Bees can be trained to detect specific chemical odours, including the biomarkers associated with diseases such as tuberculosis, lung, skin and pancreatic cancer.
Is this for real?
(it’s pretty neat either way)
Met this Birb at Camp for the Nature, wanted to share Birb with Important Birb such as your self
HEY it is ME the BILL GUY A SCIENCE BILL today the ready CREAT A SICEN? today we discovers… how happen a pets the head. Every a tern! Try a head pats! GRAMD EXPERIME
BILL GUY A SCIENCE BILL
okay so imagine an au where the potters live. harry dates oliver wood briefly. james hears of this and pulls harry aside. stares him in the eye with a deadly serious face
“he’s a Keeper”
You made an entire AU that would alter almost every facet of that series
For a pun
You’re a beautiful person.
"Are you serious right now, Dad?"
"No, I’m not serious. I’m Dad. He’s Sirius."
magical dad jokes
In response to your article about the working mother who was arrested for allowing her child to play at the park while she was at work: Overreach by child welfare officials is an unfortunate and troubling phenomenon. I was widowed at 35 with four children. Following my husband’s death from lung cancer, I decided to go back to college and finally finish my degree, with the hopes of improving my ability to provide for my kids, who at that time were between the ages of 10 and 5. I swiftly enrolled at a local community college to take summer classes. Everything was set, except for one emergent problem–I had no access to daycare.
I went through babysitters who didn’t show up, babysitters who absconded with my money, babysitters who took my kids to play cards with their friends without telling me. Formal daycare was exorbitantly cost-prohibitive. A friend suggested that my kids, all school-aged, might be safer staying in their own home for a few hours while I attended classes than in the care of adult strangers. At the time, I agreed.
I believed I had no alternative options.
My decision to allow my kids to stay home for a few hours while I went to school for several hours, a mile away, turned out to be the most catastrophically life-altering decision I’ve ever made. A neighbor noticed me walking to school without the kids and called the police. When I arrived home several hours later, I found a note on the door, but no kids inside. Despite having been told my whereabouts, neither the police nor the CPS workers who removed my kids from our home made any effort to find me, instead regarding the situation as an emergency, procedurally.
As of this writing, John Green’s The Fault in Our Stars has sold over one million copies, and holds a place on several bestseller lists. The film adaptation of the book has made over two hundred million dollars in the domestic and foreign market. The book and the movie tell the story of two terminally ill American teenagers, and both contain a scene where the protagonists, Hazel and Augustus, share a kiss in the Anne Frank House. John Green made the following statement regarding the scene:
“Anne Frank was a pretty good example of a young person who ended up having the kind of heroic arc that Augustus wants—she was remembered and she left this mark that he thinks is valuable—but when he has to confront her death, he has to confront the reality that really she was robbed of the opportunity to live or die for something. She just died of illness like most people. And so I wanted him to go with a sort of expectation of her heroism and be sort of dashed.”
Here, Green makes it clear that he reads Anne Frank’s death as being from an illness like “most people,” like his protagonist. In doing so, he erases the circumstances under which she contracted typhus. “Most people” are not Ashkenazic Jewish teenage girls who contracted typhus in a concentration camp during the Holocaust. This fundamental erasure of the context of her death allowed him, those involved in the cinematic adaptation, and yes, a large portion of his readership, to accept the use of Anne Frank and her death as a prop in this American YA love story. Indeed, when further called on the issue, Green stated:
“I’ve been getting this question a lot. I can’t speak for the movie, obviously, as I didn’t make it, but as for the book: The Fault in Our Stars was the first non-documentary feature film to be granted access to the Anne Frank House precisely because the House’s board of directors and curators liked that scene in the novel a great deal. (A spokesperson recently said, ‘In the book it is a moving and sensitively handled scene.’) Abraham H. Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League and a Holocaust survivor, had this to say: ‘The kissing scene in ‘The Fault in Our Stars’ in the annex of the Anne Frank House is not offensive or against who Anne Frank was. What Anne communicated in her diary was hope. She celebrated life and she celebrated hope.’ Obviously, the Anne Frank House and the ADL do not have a monopoly on Anne’s life or her legacy, but their opinions are important to me.”
I take issue with this response. Here, Green is divesting himself of responsibility for the scene, and communicating to his critics that he is not to blame, because the Anne Frank House board of directors, curators, and a Holocaust survivor approved of it. In other words, he is drawing these peoples’ assumed authority to silence criticism, and to avoid taking responsibility for the filmed version of a scene he created.
The Anne Frank House, for all the wonderful work it does, is a museum. Like all museums, it must work to attract and reach out to potential patrons. In other words, museums have to advertise because they require patrons and revenues to exist. Therefore, I read the official approval of the Anne Frank House simply as a targeted attempt to reach out to and attract a pool of untapped, younger patrons. They chose to support the filming of a sympathetic romantic scene about terminally ill teenagers in their institution to reach out to young people. While that is a sound business decision, I would argue that it’s hardly an ethical one for the Anne Frank House, an institution devoted, as per their website, to:
“the preservation of the place where Anne Frank went into hiding during the Second World War, and to bringing the life story of Anne Frank to the attention of as many people as possible worldwide with the aim of raising awareness of the dangers of anti-Semitism, racism and discrimination and the importance of freedom, equal rights and democracy,”
to support the filming of this scene. For, in Green’s own words, that scene had nothing to do with the context of Anne Frank’s death, and therefore, it did nothing to bring Anne Frank’s story to life. And it hardly raises awareness of contemporary European anti-Semitism.
As for the ADL, I very much agree with Mr. Foxman’s assessment of Anne Frank. However, what she celebrated in her life and her writings have little to do with what she has come to mean in within public memory of the Holocaust of European Jewry. Her narrative has been used by nations and educational systems to the extent that for many, she is the Holocaust; she is the face of the Holocaust. But what we inherit from her isn’t the experience of the Holocaust. That experience, and her death at Bergen Belsen take place outside the pages of her diary. Readers are never forced to experience the Holocaust through her eyes; they are able to embrace the tragedy of the Holocaust through her story while remaining removed from its experiential realities. Thus, Anne Frank becomes the Holocaust without forcing anyone to experience it. Her name can be invoked to summon tragedy, without forcing anyone to feel it.
While Anne Frank may be the face of the Holocaust of European Jewry, the memory of the experiential reality of the Holocaust is male. The way we conceptualize and remember the concentration camp experience is constructed by male narratives. More Jewish men survived the Holocaust than Jewish women. Due to attitudes towards education in the interwar period, more male Jewish survivors had the education and literary capital needed to craft enduring narratives of their experiences than did female Jewish survivors. There are three foundational male Holocaust survival narratives: Night by Elie Wiesel, Survival in Auschwitz by Primo Levi, and Maus by Art Spiegelman about his father’s Holocaust experience. Never have I seen those three men and their narratives used as a joke, or a meme, or a cheap narrative device, or as self-promotion by an American pop star.
These men are revered, and their narratives taken extremely seriously. And none of them, none of them have been used in a prop in a story about terminally ill gentile American teenagers. They survived, in perhaps the type of heroic arc a John Green protagonist would yearn for. Yet Augustus doesn’t look to them. He doesn’t share a kiss with his girlfriend at Auschwitz. He shared a kiss with her in the Anne Frank House.
Anne Frank is not a prop. She is not a symbol, she is not a teenager who happened to die of an illness, and she is not one of the canonical Jewish male survivors. She is one of many millions of Jewish women and girls who were industrially murdered like livestock, incinerated, and left in an unmarked grave. That is the story of the Holocaust of European Jewry, and that is the story of the persecution and murder of all Europeans (the disabled, Romani, Irish Travelers, homosexuals, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Communists) who failed to fit into Nazi racial and ideological constructs.
And we would all do well to remember that.
If you choose to reblog, please reblog as text (link leads to visual guide of how to do so). Thank you!
This is a blog post that’s incredibly confusing and painful for me to write.
Yesterday morning, Josh forwarded me a tweet that said:
TIL: Max Temkin, co-creator of Cards Against Humanity, raped a friend of my friend while attending Goucher College. I don’t support CAH.
Having gone to college with both of these people I cannot understand why he thinks this is something she would make up. All she’s asked for is people to know that this happened.
I’m standing with my friend against her rapist.
Please, please, before you reblog this, read Max Temkin’s response. Read it again, and keep reading it until you see all the things he’s saying. Read it until you see all the things he’s not saying.
Notice how he never apologizes. The word “if” has to be inserted into every sentence. “IF she felt I did something wrong,” “IF any part of that was traumatic for her.” Notice how he bandies about words like “feminism” and “rape culture”, and how he uses them to divert blame from himself.
“Part of rape culture that hurts everyone is that it makes it difficult to talk about what is and is not consent, and makes it incredibly scary for people to speak up when their boundaries are crossed. It is entirely possible she read something completely different than I did into an awkward college hookup.”
It’s not his fault. It’s rape culture’s fault. Rape culture muddles boundaries. How was he supposed to know that he crossed one? Don’t forget, a huge part of rape culture is the presumption of consent.
I will continue to be a feminist and an advocate for women’s rights to the best of my capacity. Cards Against Humanity will continue to hire amazing, talented women.
We removed all of the “rape” jokes from Cards Against Humanity years ago. We’ll continue to use the game as best we can to “punch up” and not “punch down.”
In what way is Max Temkin an advocate for women’s rights? Because he removed the date rape card from CaH? Because he hires women? That’s a pretty low bar for advocacy. Google “Max Temkin women’s rights” and the very first hit is this post. There are no records that I found of any activism on his part.
Even if he were, how does A equal B? What does his hiring practices or the cards in CaH have to do with an accusation of assault? Max Temkin can’t have hurt a woman, because he’s a feminist? Hey, I heard that person isn’t racist because he has a black friend.
Notice how bad we’re supposed to feel for him.
I have made a career on the incredible power of social media, and the radical new ability that we all have to say whatever we want to a mass audience. Today I can’t help but feel hurt by those same tools that I love.
He feels hurt! He needs a hug! Never mind that he states outright he’s harassed his victim, sending her at least two messages (one via email, one via FB message) that he’ll admit to. No where in the text does he acknowledge the harm done to his victim, and while he tells his fans not to harass her further, he doesn’t acknowledge that this harassment is taking place, nor apologize for it. Because, remember, this isn’t a post about her assault. It’s a post about how “This is just baseless gossip that will now haunt me for the rest of my life.” Like those poor Steubenville kids with their bright futures.
But the point where this gets truly disgusting is here:
I spoke with my lawyer, and she thinks I have a clear case to sue this woman for libel and get a restraining order, but I have no desire to bully or harm her. Additionally, I’m not wild about the precedent that sets for other women to come forward in cases of actual sexual assault.
Part of this paragraph, like the rest of the post, is crafted to earn our sympathy. He could seek legal action, but he won’t, because he’s such a good guy. Look at him taking the high ground (and flaunting it.) Look at him protecting “other women.”
The truth is, he almost certainly could win a libel suit against his victim. The crime wasn’t reported at the time, and there’s no physical evidence. We all know our courts will go to any lengths to avoid prosecuting and convicting rapists, even in recent cases with clear and unambiguous evidence. What chance does a victim shamed into silence for ten years have?
But the second, more sinister part of this is the way he throws shade on his victim. Don’t miss the implicit threat. He never says he won’t sue, he says “he has no desire to bully or harm her”. (More than he already has, presumably.) He doesn’t want to hurt her, but again, she’s forcing his hand. If he sues, it will be because she made him. And there’s that subtle dig at the end, too. “Cases of actual sexual assault”. He’s minimizing her experiences to make himself look better.
All in all this is an epic piece of mansplaining. It’s also super gross.