Alexander McQueen menswear s/s 2007
Where to begin. I promised myself that I’d stay away from it the very first time I stepped into that mess of a tag. However, the part of me that really enjoys a good hot mess was tempted to go in, so I did. And boy, do I have a lot to say. Prepare yourselves for a rant of mass proportions (and by rant I mean a list and lots of text).
1) There seems to be a lot of fetishization in this tag. Why? Asians really aren’t superior to anyone in terms of looks. We have our good looking people (a beautiful case in point being the Asian Adonis Godfrey Gao) and our not so good looking people. Just like everyone else. Asians are not monolithic beings that you can and should fetishize. We don’t ALL look good in those super skinny jeans that those k-pop stars tend to wear. People tend to come in different body shapes and you know, so do we. So what looks good on one person may not look good on another. Hey, if you’re confident and happy go for it but to say that you want to be Asian because we’re “pretty” and look good in everything is a big fallacy. You obviously need to stop looking at Asian celebrities as the ideal for Asian beauty. Celebrities are supposed to look good, THAT’S THEIR JOB. It’s also, in a sense, a manufactured sort of beauty because they are meant to appeal to the general public.
2) The exaltation of a certain kind of Asian. The East Asians, basically. Because ya’ll know that when you’re talking about wanting to be Asian you’re thinking of a certain kind, don’t lie. The term ‘Asian’ encompasses a wide variety of diversity yet no one seems to really notice. You know. Because we all look alike.
3) The model minority myth. I actually didn’t expect to find this here because the last time I went into this tag, most of the people just focused on the superficial aspects of being Asian. This time I see people linking good grades to being Asian and obviously, I’m going to say something. One, just because we’re Asian doesn’t mean we’re all good at math. If this was true, I was unjustly left out of this so called ‘math gene.’ Two, we work JUST ADS HARD as everyone else does for their grades. Three, by placing all Asians under one identity, it erases those communities that do not tend to have enough resources and cannot match up to other Asians who may have more of an advantage. You can see this with many Southeast Asian communities in America. There’s a lot more I could say about the model minority myth but I feel like this is fine for now.
That’s pretty much all I have to say. Now, every serious person in the ‘I wish I was Asian’ tag, it’s okay to admire different cultures but remember: fetishization is bad, wanting to not be who you were born as is actually really sad, and all of us Asians were not meant for the no-sleep-engineering-lyfe *~*~*
How to break out of a zip-tie- potentially life-saving information
You guys, please share it. You never know when someone is going to need this information.
PLEASE reblog this— zipties are one of the most common ways of binding a person upon kidnapping because they are cheap and hard to break.
Knowing things like this puts you one step closer to freedom if, heaven forbid, you fall into a situation where you need to use this information.
Watch the full video: Blossoming into Science with actress Mayim Bialik
things they should have taught us in high school number fucking one
my life might be very different if i wasn’t told - repeatedly and endlessly - that science and math “wasn’t for creative people”
Mayim Bialik is pretty damn awesome. I think she’s one of the most fascinating people in media. I love that her life blends art and science and religion and she has no concerns about there being contradictions or whatever. Also that video is totally worth watching, if you’ve got five minutes to spare.
- don’t trust men who have to insult other women in order to compliment you
- a subset of this rule is don’t trust men who say ‘you’re pretty/smart/[adjective] for an indian/asian/[identity group]’
- or ‘you’re not like other [identity group optional] girls’
Effects Of Thinking White People Are “All Like That”:
- Literally nothing other than white people having their feelings hurt on the internet
- I’m not joking there is no real world consequence of this
Effects Of Thinking People of Color Are “All Like That”:
- Saudi student is literally surrounded by FBI for cooking rice under terrorist suspicions
- White people literally can not associate positive words with Black faces because of racism
- More white people use drugs but Black people are sent to jail for drugs at 10 times the rate that white people are
- Black people who “sound Black” earn less money than those who don’t because of associations with stereotypes. Black people who “sound Black” are less likely to get called back for jobs
- Black children grow up literally associating being Black with being bad and ugly
- White people when tested shot more unarmed Black subjects than armed and unarmed white subjects
- Hate crimes increase after Boston tragedy
- Moroccan High School Student is linked to Boston tragedy for being Brown
- Bangladeshi man is beaten by people out of racism
- NYPD Commissioner wants Black and Latino men to fear him after the police targeted literally 90 percent Black and Latino men in New York and humiliating them by frisking them in public under the assumption that they had weapons. Studies found that white men were the ones who overwhelmingly had weapons while Black and Latino men didn’t
- White people blaming and convicting Black men for crimes they never committed and everyone believing them because of racism
- Stop and Frisk, ruled unconstitutional was practiced by New York police disproportionately and unfairly affecting 90% Black and Latino men because of racism
- Universities throwing racist ‘Fiesta Party’ homogenizing culture with extreme racism
- Here are some of the numbers on hate crimes against People of Color and btw, Neo Naziism is increasing!
- Every 28 Hours an African American is Extrajudicially Murdered in the U.S.
- Black people 3 times more likely to be arrested for Marijuana
- Black people receive much harsher sentencing than white people for the same crimes do I need to go on?
But yeah, white people’s feelings :*(
thank you for this fucking post
Of geometry, glitter, and greyness…
One of my favourite manis of recent times :)
i want to do this so bad.
cultural appropriate 101
omfg guys i have perfect color vision??
feel free to do it yourself and let me know what you get. c; a lower score is better.
I got a score of 39. Hmm…
i got 15, not too bad
Zero. Perfect color vision aw yeah.
12, I’m pretty happy with that score
115…Okay, I suck
I got a zero, which is weird because I wasn’t trying very hard, it just bugged me when things weren’t right.
I got a 12. My eyes started to get kinda wonky towards the end, though. Maybe I’ll try again tomorrow, after I’ve had some sleep.
8, lucky number. I’mma laugh if I get a different score using a Mac.
You’ll probably find this useful at some point.
Man, where was this chart when I was in library school?
Reblogging because EVERYONE (ESPECIALLY COLLEGE STUDENTS) needs this in their life. -H
Silvia Federici, at the 2013 Historical Materialism Plenary, “The Politics of Feminism” (via mansplainedmarxist)
okay i find federici’s work very interesting (especially caliban) but she’s seriously wrong here. while gender roles vary across time and culture and are not “set in stone”, they have always been, and still are, used to demarcate masculinity and femininity and have always been boxes to determine “proper behavior” for males and females (ie their sex determines which gender they’re supposed to fulfill).
by abolishing these expectations and changing/expanding the definition of what is proper behavior for a woman you are abolishing gender. if you want to have it your way you can say “anything a woman does is feminine behavior,” but that is ultimately rendering gender meaningless because its purpose in a patriarchal society has been to restrict the behavior and actions of people (mainly women).
i also personally don’t think gender expectations have changed all that much for women. yes we can (in theory) be astronauts and CEOs, but we’re also still expected to look good doing it, as well as be willing to have dinner on the table and raise a family when we get home.
I can see the argument for the comments made by sendforbromina but I think what Federici is getting at here is something slightly different, and to be fair, not especially clear in the way she phrased the statement. It seems to me that what she’s saying is that gender abolitionists are functionally gener essentialists insofar as they tend to ascribe to the discursive category of gender a certain kind of power or agency that operates independent of its articulation in and through the discourse of gender itself. I read the statement “they assume what it means to be a woman is set in stone” as “they make the category ‘woman’ fully identical with and exhaustive of the various social forms that woman-ness might take.” Federici seems to be claiming that the position is essentialist because it locates within the term ‘woman’ a kind of final authority on what that term can mean.
Certainly, the term—as it’s articulated within a patriacho-capitalist political formation—does do things, and often those things are violent, restrictive, and oppressive. But to advocate for the abolition of the category that “woman” defines on the grounds that it can only ever and will only ever operate in the service of those violences is to grant it a measure of autonomy that elides the way that “women” is, as you point out, underwritten and overdetermined by other forces (particularly capital). I think it also does a disservice to feminist agency: the ability of women to dis- and re-articulate the terms on/through which their gendered category is constructed.
I think if there’s a mistake here—and I think there is—it’s with the way that Federici seems to rhetorically collapse “woman” as a signifier of gender as a system into that very system. Or, at least in this phrasing, she seems to conflate the literal word “woman” with the construction it points to. Because obviously abolishing the word “woman” wouldn’t abolish “woman” as a constructed system, and I think her feminism is (by a significant distance) nuanced enough to apprehend that. I just think her phrasing here doesn’t quite do that nuance justice. But then it was probably a spoken remark during a panel or whatever, and it can be hard to capture those little details when speaking off the cuff.
So yeah. I think there’s a mistake somewhere in here. But generally I kind of dig the claim that gender abolition subscribes, in effect, to a kind of gender essentialism.
The first immigrants to Europe arrived thousands of years ago from central Asia. Most pre-contact Europeans lived together in small villages. Because the continent was very crowded, their lives were ruled by strict hierarchies within the family and outside it to control resources. Europe was highly multi-ethnic, and most tribes were ruled by hereditary leaders who commanded the majority “commoners.” These groups were engaged in near constant warfare.
Pre-contact Europeans wore clothing made of natural materials such as animal skin and plant and animal-based textiles. Women wore long dresses and covered their hair, and men wore tunics and leggings. Both men and women liked to wear jewelry made from precious stones and metals as a sign of status. Before contact, Europeans had very poor diets. Most people were farmers and grew wheat and vegetables and raised cows and sheep to eat. They rarely washed themselves, and had many diseases because they often let their animals live with them.
Religion infused every part of Europeans’ lives. Europeans believed in one supreme deity, a father figure, who they believed was made of three parts, and they particularly worshiped the deity’s son. They claimed that their god had given humans domination over the earth. They built elaborate temples to him and performed ceremonies in which they ate crackers and drank wine and believed it was the body and blood of their god, who would provide them with entrance into a wondrous afterlife called heaven when they died. Many wars were fought over disagreements about the details of this religion, each group believing their interpretation was the right one that should be spread across the land.
|—||Indigenous History: “What if people told European history like they told Native American history?” (via stfuconservatives)|
- you don’t need to learn to enjoy a sexual act to be a better person or really for any reason.
- “not wanting to” is enough of a reason to not.
- anyone who frames a sexual act as inherently radical is lying, there is nothing inherently radical about: squirting, anal sex, penetrative sex, threesomes, or pegging
- the idea that you can only get true pleasure through doing things you’re deeply uncomfortable with and don’t want to do is Not Okay