If you go to see ‘Catching Fire’ this weekend, don’t miss the opportunity to remind everyone that the Capitol cut food stamps for the hungry while giving corporate welfare to the rich, that the police ruthlessly suppress all dissent against the Capitol, and that the ‘Hunger Games’ is actually based on our current situation.
Do also remind them that in the books, Katniss was described with olive skin and long black hair, and the Seam descriptor was consistently used as an indicator of an oppressed ethnic group, making Katniss a woman of color despite the movie casting her as Jennifer Lawrence, and in fact flat-out refusing to allow any actresses of color to audition despite requests from organizations such as Racebending, and that the books in general had a racial dynamic that the movies just plain didn’t have.
And that, you know, all that about District 11/District 12 solidarity was also about poor brown and Black people joining forces, and that, while “Catching Fire” was I thought really well done, we got like three articles about how Collins insisted they recast the CAT because the CAT was the wrong color, but it is okay for Katniss to stay white.
do you ever wish you could just stop time for like a couple weeks so you could just sleep and do whatever you want and just get your shit together and then after that time would just start back up again and you wouldn’t have missed anything because you would just pick up where you left off
This is when you know your life has gone in a particular direction: when the answer to “What would you do with a time machine?” is an immediate, no-hesitation, “Naps. And sorting things out after naps. And then coming right back here.”
i thought i would share this
While I sympathize with the purpose of this exercise—yay for dispelling gross Islamophobia!—it’s a little misleading, because the scriptures in question aren’t the same length. The Bible is a compendium of numerous documents, translated from various languages over the course of centuries, and is many times longer than the Qur’an, which is a single document, with one author, in one language. It would be a more telling exercise to compare the Qur’an to just one book of what we call the Bible—Genesis, maybe, or Psalms.
Yes, but both the Bible and Qu’ran are the defining holy books for their respective religions. It makes sense to look at both of them in their entirety.
Sure, but number-of-instances-of-words comparisons are pretty meaningless when one document is many times the length of the other. You could do percentages—that might make some actual meaningful data—or maybe do the Qur’an and the Hadith, to bulk up the wordcount? But otherwise you might as well be counting up instances of “and” and “the” and noting there are WAY MORE of each in the Bible, because there are just way more of all the words, in the Bible, because there’s just way more Bible. It doesn’t let us know anything about how many instances of these words there are as a proportion of the books in question. This is why the only interesting piece of information in that table, for me, is the one where there’s more of something in the Qur’an than in the Bible—because that means it’s a much higher percentage of a much shorter book.
People who don’t mind if you get hurt, but get really upset if you defend yourself in a way that they have to notice. (via madeofpatterns)
i thought i would share this
While I sympathize with the purpose of this exercise—yay for dispelling gross Islamophobia!—it’s a little misleading, because the scriptures in question aren’t the same length. The Bible is a compendium of numerous documents, translated from various languages over the course of centuries, and is many times longer than the Qur’an, which is a single document, with one author, in one language. It would be a more telling exercise to compare the Qur’an to just one book of what we call the Bible—Genesis, maybe, or Psalms. The Bible as a whole just has more words in it in general—more conjunctions, more verbs, more versions of “he said,” whatever.
That said, it makes the comparison of hopeful words at the end very interesting.
What happens when men enter women’s feminist spaces? Dale Spender did an experiment to find out, and published the results in Man Made Language:
Present at the discussion, which was a workshop on sexism and education in London, were thirty-two women and five men. Apart from the fact that the tape revealed that the men talked for over 50 per cent of the time, it also revealed that what the men wanted to talk about – and the way in which they wanted to talk – was given precedence.
definitely one reason a man-in-feminist space doesn’t necessarily have to be excluded, but HAS to be willing to take a back seat and listen rather than full-on participate.
feminist men lmao
I really want to like this, and also, the blog linked here has a blogroll endorsing almost exclusively anti-trans-woman hate sites. Likely, the linked post is made by a person who includes trans women in that category “men” who ruin women’s spaces.
After consulting for a client for over 30 hours (a fact that was laid out in the contract), I submitted my invoice. A day later I got an email about how they weren’t “liable for the invoice I have sent,” because they were working with someone else that had a better price. They also insulted my hourly rate and told me about how I was really pricing myself out of the market (I have been doing this for 20 years).
I wrote back, explaining that if he planned on working with someone else he should not have signed a contact with me, and that he was still liable for the invoice I had submitted.
Three days later, I got an email for the client’s wife, which explained:
"We feel strongly that having the desire, willingness, and ability to resolve misunderstandings and conflicts in a way that demonstrates the love of Christ and the spirit of reconciliation through an attitude of forgiveness, compassion, and humility is of the utmost importance.”
Maybe he’ll tell that to the collection agent.
illegal immigrants? you mean white people
except that white people didn’t immigrate into the united states… they funded the united states. you can’t illegally immigrate into a society you created.
did you actually just say white people created society in america
Let’s not forget that those funds consisted of treasure stolen from brown people, crops stolen from brown people and grown on stolen land, and the fruit of the unpaid labor of a stolen and brutalized workforce, shall we?
…or did they mean “founded” and just stumble into a really interesting typo?
I played a very bad hand very well. There is a distinction.
So much of that show was worth it just for Adele DeWitt being…present, in any given scene.
I have plenty of crankiness at Joss Whedon but Dollhouse was full of ridiculous amazing performance-craft from the actors. Well, most of the actors.
The same Hebrew word that is used in Genesis 2:24 to describe how Adam felt about Eve (and how spouses are supposed to feel toward each other) is used in Ruth 1:14 to describe how Ruth felt about Naomi. Her feelings are celebrated, not condemned.
And throughout Christian history, Ruth’s vow to Naomi has been used to illustrate the nature of the marriage covenant. These words are often read at Christian wedding ceremonies and used in sermons to illustrate the ideal love that spouses should have for one another. The fact that these words were originally spoken by one woman to another tells us a lot about how God feels about same-gender relationships.
And (sorry to butt in) but not only does the language in the text reflect that used for heterosexual relationships, but the relationship between Ruth and Naomi is recognized and celebrated by the community they belong to in the story as well. Boaz respects Ruth so much because of how much Ruth loves Naomi and because of the lengths Ruth will go to provide for her. When Ruth and Boaz have a child, “the women living there [in their community] said, ‘Naomi has a son.’” Naomi, not Boaz, is recognized by them as the parent of the child.
But there isn’t just this —- Ruth is also honored for her love and commitment to Naomi and to God by her place in the lineage of David. Her son, Obed, is the father of Jesse, who is the father of David.
In the Christian tradition, this puts Ruth as a direct ancestor of Jesus Christ too. In the Genealogy of Jesus in Matthew 1, there are five women mentioned, one of whom is Ruth.
So the instance of a romance between two women that we have in the Bible isn’t just acknowledged as romantic by the text, and isn’t just recognized and celebrated by the people around Ruth and Naomi, but is also a part of the family history of Jesus. These queer women are an irrevocable link in the chain that connects Abraham to David to Christ.
#sorry i get really Real about Ruth #because i love Ruth #shes a character who is praised and loved because of her capacity to love and her willingness to sacrifice for those who she loves #for the daring nature of her actions and even the impropriety of some #shes a widow and a foreigner and a woman who loves another woman more than anyone but its not in spite of this #but because of it #that she becomes a part of the line of david
Oh hey, here’s some where you go I will go and your people shall be my people feelings.