Enduring Beta

[staff]

A better, more positive Tumblr

Since its founding in 2007, Tumblr has always been a place for wide open, creative self-expression at the heart of community and culture. To borrow from our founder David Karp, we’re proud to have inspired a generation of artists, writers, creators, curators, and crusaders to redefine our culture and to help empower individuality.

Over the past several months, and inspired by our storied past, we’ve given serious thought to who we want to be to our community moving forward and have been hard at work laying the foundation for a better Tumblr. We’ve realized that in order to continue to fulfill our promise and place in culture, especially as it evolves, we must change. Some of that change began with fostering more constructive dialogue among our community members. Today, we’re taking another step by no longer allowing adult content, including explicit sexual content and nudity (with some exceptions).  

Let’s first be unequivocal about something that should not be confused with today’s policy change: posting anything that is harmful to minors, including child pornography, is abhorrent and has no place in our community. We’ve always had and always will have a zero tolerance policy for this type of content. To this end, we continuously invest in the enforcement of this policy, including industry-standard machine monitoring, a growing team of human moderators, and user tools that make it easy to report abuse. We also closely partner with the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children and the Internet Watch Foundation, two invaluable organizations at the forefront of protecting our children from abuse, and through these partnerships we report violations of this policy to law enforcement authorities. We can never prevent all bad actors from attempting to abuse our platform, but we make it our highest priority to keep the community as safe as possible.

So what is changing?

Posts that contain adult content will no longer be allowed on Tumblr, and we’ve updated our Community Guidelines to reflect this policy change. We recognize Tumblr is also a place to speak freely about topics like art, sex positivity, your relationships, your sexuality, and your personal journey. We want to make sure that we continue to foster this type of diversity of expression in the community, so our new policy strives to strike a balance.

Why are we doing this?

It is our continued, humble aspiration that Tumblr be a safe place for creative expression, self-discovery, and a deep sense of community. As Tumblr continues to grow and evolve, and our understanding of our impact on our world becomes clearer, we have a responsibility to consider that impact across different age groups, demographics, cultures, and mindsets. We spent considerable time weighing the pros and cons of expression in the community that includes adult content. In doing so, it became clear that without this content we have the opportunity to create a place where more people feel comfortable expressing themselves.

Bottom line: There are no shortage of sites on the internet that feature adult content. We will leave it to them and focus our efforts on creating the most welcoming environment possible for our community.

So what’s next?

Starting December 17, 2018, we will begin enforcing this new policy. Community members with content that is no longer permitted on Tumblr will get a heads up from us in advance and steps they can take to appeal or preserve their content outside the community if they so choose. All changes won’t happen overnight as something of this complexity takes time.

Another thing, filtering this type of content versus say, a political protest with nudity or the statue of David, is not simple at scale. We’re relying on automated tools to identify adult content and humans to help train and keep our systems in check. We know there will be mistakes, but we’ve done our best to create and enforce a policy that acknowledges the breadth of expression we see in the community.

Most importantly, we’re going to be as transparent as possible with you about the decisions we’re making and resources available to you, including more detailed information, product enhancements, and more content moderators to interface directly with the community and content.

Like you, we love Tumblr and what it’s come to mean for millions of people around the world. Our actions are out of love and hope for our community. We won’t always get this right, especially in the beginning, but we are determined to make your experience a positive one.

Jeff D’Onofrio CEO

[enduringbeta]

This sucks.

[suppermariobroth]

Top: In his video “Walls, Floors, & Ceilings Part 3“, youtube.com user “UncommentatedPannen“ presents the discovery of a small invisible wall in a tunnel in the Tall, Tall Mountain slide in Super Mario 64. He then posits that this wall could have been a sign with a left-pointing arrow during the game’s development.

Bottom: After extensive research, I have found video evidence that confirms this theory. A video recorded of a beta version of Super Mario 64 shows this exact tunnel, and it has a left arrow sign in the precise spot where the invisible wall is in the finished game. (Source)

[enduringbeta]

#ManhoodNow

https://www.wnycstudios.org/story/manhood-now

FiveThirtyEight and Death, Sex & Money (a show I’m newly familiar with!) partnered together to do a show about men. In the wake of #MeToo, in quiet, genuine moments, how are men feeling about their manhood?

The episode captures a wide variety of men’s experiences, which was great to hear. This subject isn’t talked about much in general, and it’s unfortunately a raucous and disjointed reactionary mess when manhood is discussed after yet another predatory man is revealed.

But I have a take that wasn’t explicitly highlighted in the episode. It was hinted at in a rapid-fire series of clips from men interviewed “on the street” about some basic questions, like, “What’s confusing about being a man?” Many men didn’t feel it was confusing at all.

This is perhaps a rough draft of my feelings, but for me, manhood is primarily two things: absent and externally-defined.

On the former: for the most part, I just don’t think of things in terms of my gender or its role. I want to learn, but not because I’m a man. I want to have a stable existence, but not because I’m a man. I want to provide community and support others, but not because I’m a man. When I think of the things that drive me, that I want to accomplish, that I deeply value: barely anything brings in my gender as an essential element.

Every time there’s a conversation about What It Means to be a wo/man, I check out from a large part of it. For everything someone purports to be an essential quality of a gender I simply ask why it couldn’t equally apply to the other (generalizing, erasing the spectrum right now, I know). Women can be strong, men can be nurturing. What are we even doing digging these stereotypical holes deeper with the emphasis on these things?

I won’t deny disparities in gendered priorities and proclivities. I’m going to do more heavy lifting in my life than my woman friends, sure, and that’s a product of my male body (which is highly correlated with manhood). But I don’t find that particularly important or deeply meaningful as a guiding influence in my life.

At the end of the day, humanism is a much less fraught framework in which to ascribe these ideals onto (surprise) people. Who cares what gender is in their brain?

On the latter: when I think about being a man, the most prominent way that manifests is in how other people perceive my manhood. I don’t give a shit about being a man personally, but I know that my manhood matters to others.

I’m aware that when I say I’m a feminist as a man that this breaks norms, stereotypes, and barriers. It opens doors of possibility.

I’m mindful of how I was raised and socialized as a boy and then man such that I need to watch how often I interrupt in conversations or how long I speak compared to not-men.

I cry at “Cat’s In The Cradle” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jmhoOp2fUzg) not because of particularly necessary qualities of manhood. I cry at it because of our social structures that have cropped up around gender that create overworked and distant fathers.

These things have everything to do with being a man, but for everything but myself and my own satisfaction.

This is just a quick dump of some thoughts after hearing this interesting show. Not every example for the latter personal aspect of manhood has to be so explicitly feminist or progressive, but it’s what came to mind at the moment.

[enduringbeta]

Inside Whose Atheist Mind?

The following is a quick response I wrote to the author of a book who was excerpted on Fox News today: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2018/03/20/todays-atheists-are-bullies-and-are-doing-their-best-to-intimidate-rest-us-into-silence.html

---

Hello Anthony! My name is Ross Llewallyn. I'm the president of Sunday Assembly Atlanta, a secular community that takes the good stuff that churches do just without the God part. We have members from all over the spectrum of religiosity.

I read the excerpt from your book on Fox News and was pretty confused. There are absolutely those who follow the firebrand style of atheism, being loud and proud about their nonbelief and what it represents to them. But while calling nonbelievers like myself ignorant, you're revealing a significant amount of ignorance about the scope of the secular community.

I'm curious which atheists or members of the secular community you talked to, if you spoke to any at all, while writing a book on us. In the except on Fox News, you made a number of claims about facts that my community ignores or doesn't acknowledge. Did you search for discussions about "atheist dictators" or scientific achievements by the religious throughout history? Who specifically in the atheist community discredits scientific advancement on the basis of the religiosity of the discoverer?

Frankly, nothing in that excerpt is new to the nonreligious, and I think you may know that.

I'm a fan of reason and nuance. The excerpt did not project those values. But I approach you with an open palm to learn more about the process that went into your work describing atheism and to provide another perspective if you are so interested.

Last Sunday I gathered with about 50 other people to sing songs together, share the ups and downs in life, provide support to one another, learn, and have fun. It was our monthly Sunday Assembly. Over and over I hear from folks who find so much meaning in what we're doing; they find immense positivity and newfound community where there wasn't one before. People cry and hug and clap and laugh and ponder and help one another.

My atheism is not a hindrance to creating good in the world. I'd love to talk with you about that.

[enduringbeta]

#PauseAndThink

On Twitter and Facebook this year I’ve been asking questions in a series I call #PauseAndThink or #PaT. I’ve enjoyed finding new purpose for my social media through something that is consistent and repeated. I probably modeled this after friends of mine who have other patterns.

The first time I used the hashtag was on 20 January 2017. I wanted to find a way to help people, in my way, get through what I feared and has turned out to be a tumultuous year. The questions I ask are big and small, topical and not. I ask them because I either think they’re important or interesting. Frequently they are questions pursuing unturned stones in the landscape of current conversation or just thoughts I come across that challenge assumptions I make. Sometimes they encourage mindful observation.

I’ve gotten questions about... these questions. And objections. In this post I’ll cover what I’ve seen.

I don’t like the name, either.

When I came up with this hashtag, I honestly couldn’t think of something better that captured what I was trying to do. #PauseAndThink, in some lights, sounds arrogant: implying that those reading it don’t think, even for a moment. That is not the intention. My approach is more like, “Here’s a suggested thought for your consideration.”

I do think the questions have value. I don’t think I am the sole arbiter of intellectualism. I’m a fan of nuance, after all.

One of the reasons I use #PaT most of the time is because I dislike the original label I gave this project. I haven’t found another so sufficiently better to warrant transitioning.

If no one answers my questions, that’s fine.

I find having a collection of interesting questions, easily searchable by a hashtag, to be useful and valuable. If I am ever bored or lacking a conversation topic, I can go to #PaT. I’ve passed along a link to my questions for someone constructing an event around having a bunch to ask people. It’s a resource.

Furthermore, even when I ask a question and get no response, some people almost assuredly saw it, read it, and maybe gave it a quick ponder. I never expect people to answer in replies or comments. I love it when they do, but it’s not a prerequisite for “success”.

My questions aren’t objective.

My questions reflect what I’m thinking about and what I find important. I try to make them broadly applicable, but even that doesn’t change the fact that they’re coming from my perspective.

The hashtag name and the simplicity of the project (no explanation, preamble, context) may imply an attempt at comprehensiveness or objectivity that isn’t there. I hope this post sets a slightly different tone for the whole thing.

Questions get in the queue when I think of them seemingly randomly. (I use Buffer, which shares posts I write later on both Facebook and Twitter.) I may have observed bursts of them when I’m less stressed, often after some big task is completed. This can happen at work, at a meal, when I’m with friends, just about any time. I formulate the question in a way that I think will most strongly evoke response or get to the heart of what I’m curious about.

#PaT is a product of randomness, craft, biases, and intentions. I want that to be clear.

Questions have different purposes.

Sometimes I ask questions because I’m genuinely curious for the distribution of answers among my circles. Sometimes the questions are pointing at a subject I don’t think is being considered enough. Sometimes a question is bridging a divide between groups that I feel are talking past one another.

Sometimes the questions have quick, simple answers. Sometimes the answers are long. Sometimes they’re stories, sometimes opinions. Sometimes they shouldn’t be answered publicly at all.

Character limits restrict clarity and contextualization.

This may sound pat, but it’s genuinely one cause of some of the objections I receive to this project. Twitter’s 140 characters encourages conciseness but harms the ability to appropriately frame and guide a conversation. Since I like to share the questions on both Facebook and Twitter, the most convenient way to do this is to fit all questions in the smaller space.

Sometimes, this has been a mistake, and I completely own that. I have caused harm and hurt feelings with questions that revealed unchecked privilege, assumed poorly, or fostered careless and hurtful answers. But only some of that is a product of character limits.

Still, my convenience is less important than creating inclusive and positive spaces.

My priorities need adjustment.

This post is inspired by a frustrated response to a question I asked about punching Nazis. This is a subject I have mixed feelings about, and I decided to propose the staple, “What would change your mind?” query for whatever stance readers had on the issue.

I did not do my due diligence to establish boundaries on the conversation, especially knowing the subject matter, current climate, and the challenging nature of the question.

A friend of mine answered with a phrase I found innocuous but that another friend (who is subject to the threat of Nazis) found alarming. It was a very casual phrase for such serious subject matter. A brief exchange with Another Friend about their frustrations revealed the need for this post explaining the project more thoroughly as well as my requirement to adjust.

When engaging in subjects that deeply and acutely affect people, I must prioritize respect and careful consideration of those effected. Questions have weight, and deeming to ask them is not a neutral act. There’s a broader context of responsibility that it is dishonest to retreat away from.

These questions matter because they affect people. One person’s thought exercise is another’s reality. To ignore the valid reactions and feelings of people is to undermine a primary tenet of the project (and of any good morality).

So, going forward, when asking questions about or adjacent to acutely harmful or troubling subjects, I will contextualize, remind readers of the real people effected by the subject, and judiciously moderate.

I’m sorry, Another Friend, for making these mistakes, but thank you for encouraging me to be better.

I hope this post serves well to explain a project that to date I haven’t put many words to. Here’s the list of questions on Twitter, if you’re interested: https://twitter.com/search?src=typd&q=%23PaT%20EnduringBeta

[enduringbeta]

Shawn

I originally wrote and shared everything below the break on March 16, 2016, in a secular support group on Facebook. Shawn died today. For two weeks he was out of work/in the hospital, and many people in our branch signed a card for him. I recently moved buildings but made special effort to get over there to write a note recounting the impact this conversation below had on me.

If he read it, if it gave him a sliver of peace or calm in his last moments of existence, I... would be glad for the rest of my life.

===

This is about death.

There's a guy who works on the same floor as me who's been here for what seems like forever. He has an office away from everyone else that's packed to gills with resistors and soldering equipment and such. He doesn't talk much, and I have no idea what he does all day.

Lately he's been sending regular emails (like people do all the time) alerting our branch that he'll be off work visiting the doctor. Sometimes he mentions the hospital.

I decided to send him a message expressing my hope that things are okay, even though we don't talk much and don't work together.

He came to my office a bit later and told me about his liver failure, about how the transplant system works, and how he may only have a year or so to live.

He told me about how he's happy with the life he's led, how he lived for years in Scotland and Japan, and how much he enjoyed a cruise that went around the world, through the two canals. He told me he designed some of the cards used on the radar system I worked on for a year when I got this job during his 28-year time with the system.

He told me so frankly that he's okay with his life ending.

I told him that he reminds me of my dad who has a similar frankness about this subject that I just can't grasp.

There wasn't any crying, like I'm nearly doing now. He talked as if it were about the traffic on I-85 on this boring Tuesday afternoon, even though the subject was one of the most important in all of human experience. And I listened. He just thought I might want to know what's going on with him, since I sent that email. I told him I was really glad we talked.

Then he left because someone else was waiting to talk to me about whether this little drop-down box on this website page was sending the right value to the backend.

---

I am overwhelmed right now with the number of things I have to do, but I don't think I can get anything more done until I finish sharing this. I don't know what I'm doing, really.

I feel I need to share his story, because I don't know if anyone else would. But if he doesn't care, should I?

I just casually stumbled into the deepest well possible, because I can't even process death, and yet this man is telling me his prognosis like it's the forecast of a rainy weekend.

I just don't know. My empathy engine is both on overdrive and conflicted.

Mostly I'm sad. No, mostly I'm happy. We never had to have that conversation, but I chose to. Shawn is a person I know now. I didn't have to, but now I do.

Just... I needed to share this. I needed to write it down. I need people to know about Shawn, just for a second.

[pearlybae]

I was told by several friends and tumblr users that my Fisher the Voidfish cosplay from The Adventure Zone was being shared uncredited via pintrest and tumblr, so I hurried to put out my big compilation post faster than I usually do. I would very much appreciate it if everyone could reblog this version of the post, instead of any other post floating around that doesn’t correctly credit the costume back to me!! As an artist and a fan, it was incredibly hurtful that this happened. Although the original reposter has apologized profusely for this and properly credited me afterwards, it’s incredibly difficult to undo the damage that results from the reposting of any uncredited image in a large fandom. 

All photos in this post are taken by either myself, scribblesafterdark, or by cowbuttcrunchies!! My darling Magnus is the other half of cowbuttcrunchies. I would also like to take this time to shoutout to my friend automb, who provided endless support with this costume and helped me with cutting and trimming all the tentacles on Fisher’s dress, They also made Junior for me under my guidance, while I was going nutso over the rest of the costume. 

 Thank you again to everyone who commented and tagged me on the other post, and I hope that everyone reblogs this version instead!!! As usual, more information about my work process will be under the cut, so if you’re interested in that kind of thing, read on! 💙 

Keep reading

[enduringbeta]

Open Letter to /r/PCMasterRace

Hello. I'm a PC gamer who appreciates the flexibility, knowledge, and efficiency that comes from building your own box. I'm really grateful to the kinds of folks who frequent these spaces and help one another diagnose problems or pick out parts.

But I'm also someone who cares a lot about people who are subject to bigotry and hate.

In the wake of Charlottesville this weekend, there's been a renewed sense of awareness around the US about what problematic imagery or language we continue to display.

I looked on the sidebar for your rules. Of course I saw this:

[L]inking the PC Master Race with racial supremacy or any kind of fascist ideologies, or making distasteful analogies in this regard, is not acceptable in the slightest.

Which I expected to. But is that enough? Does rule #7, which I had to hunt for to find reassurance, displace the tone, language, and decade-old Yahtzee Croshaw ubermensch imagery used throughout this space? A space with one million people?

I also saw this post from 2 years ago that purports to justify the subreddit's namesake and tone. It has significant flaws, in my opinion, that deserve investigation by your team.

Honestly, if Nazism comes to your mind when you think about our community, and you are not a grossly uninformed person, you have some deep issues.

This is... wrong. Obviously? "Master race" rhetoric is inexorably tied to Nazism and will not be free of that context for hundreds years, if ever. I don't have "deep issues", thank you very much, for considering history and the meaning and implications of language.

Let me be clear: I get jokes. I get satire. But surely we can all agree that "It's satire!" has limits, I hope. Especially when the rhetoric or ideas being satirized are so harmful and hateful that they are connected with the deaths of millions of people. Especially when these ideas are seeing a resurgence, right now.

And I wouldn't call this a "reclaiming" of the term, as the post implies. A reclaiming would center the people subjected to the harm of the language and turn it positive. The usage here still involves "peasantry" and other neutered forms of hate, mirroring the Nazi usage.

Your "Yankee" example in the old post falls flat because Americans were the ones subjected to the term (and colonization, oppression by the British) and chose to own it.

In contrast, and I can't believe I feel the need to say this, PC gamers were never displaced, tortured, and gassed en masse by a fascist regime.

What portion of /r/pcmasterrace are Jewish, people of color, or LGBTQ? You may say that doesn't matter (and by that I mean you literally say these factors are irrelevant in another part of rule #7). But these are the communities, among others, who were actually subjected to the horrors of Nazi idealogy. These are the people who would best be able to say whether usage of "master race" is appropriate satire or deeply harmful.

And when I listen to those groups, they are not supportive of the term at all. Very much the opposite.

I guess what I'm asking is if y'all, the moderators of this space, are comfortable with normalizing Nazi ideas. I wonder how many Jews, people of color, or LGBTQ people feel comfortable in one of the most prominent forums for learning how to build computers, making jokes, and sharing your accomplishments.

Finally, to address the beginning of that old post, this is not "concern trolling". I am genuinely asking for consideration and response to what I've asked. I am not uninformed, I don't have "deep issues", I am not being disingenuous. I am being real.

I'd really appreciate a response to this explaining the rationale behind maintaining the space as it is. I would love to have a larger conversation on this subject, so I'll be sharing this message publicly, as well. Thanks.

- Ross Llewallyn (/u/boss1000, @EnduringBeta)

[enduringbeta]

No Longer Buffering?

A lot of what happened is still unknown, but recently a podcast I liked featuring a trio of sisters, including one host who is 16, was complained to/accused about not considering race (they are a white family) on the show. Apparently the volume and vitriol of these complaints was so bad that today they may have decided to cancel the podcast. The show, generally speaking, was a casual chat about the family life of the sisters, not an exploratory deep dive with research or frequent guests. It was in part a learning experience for the youngest sister in podcast production. I recognized the perspective they were coming from and accepted its limitations (like all shows have). This is a complicated issue in which sweeping generalizations are not useful. But it definitely makes me sit back and question my stalwart defense of people harshly criticizing work they love because the criticism falls along progressive lines. The result of this situation is a failure. A show people enjoyed might be stopped because the demands people put on it outstripped the hosts' ability and tolerance to face them. It's easy to point to all this and say Poor Little White Feelings. But... Should it be that easy? This doesn't have to be a "let people live in their privilege" thing; it feels more like a "not everything is designed to be diverse" or "sometimes things have white audiences and that isn't bad" thing. Or at the very least: whatever harm this white space was causing, the good it did for being a podcast about women's experiences and cross-generational conversation far outstrips that. But now it might be gone.

[theadventurezone]

On The Adventure Zone Graphic Novel, Blue Taako, and Representation

 Yesterday, we revealed some pages for our graphic novel adaptation of the first Adventure Zone arc, and received some criticism of the direction we went with for Taako’s coloring. This artwork reveal came some months after the first reveal of some of our characters, for which we also received criticism of our three leads, all of whom were white in these initial designs. Us and the graphic novel team realized that, yes, that is extremely bad, went back to the drawing board, and had several long discussions about how to best rectify this situation, resulting in the artwork revealed yesterday.

More or less all of the criticism we’ve received centers on Taako, whose skin is a pale blue color in these designs. What we’ve heard most is disappointment that Taako is not realized in these pages as a person of color — or, to be more specific, a Latinx or explicitly Mexican character. There was concern we had failed to follow through on an opportunity to get better representation for Latinx listeners, instead opting to take a safe route, and make Taako a fantasy color without any kind of real-world connection. Much of the criticism also focuses on how that color (or, to be more specific, green skin) has anti-semitic connotations.

This conversation was happening in certain corners of our fandom long before the graphic novel art reveal took place yesterday. We’ve heard criticism from some folks over our policy of not having canonical visual representations of any of our characters — a policy that has resulted in a genuinely humbling ocean of fan art, but also some instances of in-fighting between members of the community who take umbrage with one another’s disparate interpretations of these characters. Another criticism of that policy is that it inherently does not foster good representation, and in fact represents a noncommittal way of handling racial representation on this show.

Here’s the truth of the matter: I think all of this comes from this underlying friction between where The Adventure Zone and us, its creators, were when we started doing the podcast, and where we, the show, and you, the community, are at now. 

Keep reading

[enduringbeta]

This is the most complicated issue about race and representation I have ever considered. Honestly, just from this conversation, I feel a lot of people are becoming more educated and aware. Silver lining.

Here’s a comment I left on Reddit:

I have an overwhelmingly strong feeling about this whole situation. It's the need to be empathetic to every perspective on this issue. Because everyone has something valid to say.

I really don't want to hear from people who think the fans wanting representation are annoying. The stance of THB and Griffin has been one of never pinning down the representation, which worked in very interesting and positive ways up until this moment where a color had to be chosen for this book.

No matter how many times the book is characterized as Not Canon and that Your Interpretation Is Valid, this still matters a lot. The quantum superpositioned states of black, white, brown, blue and whatever else had to collapse into one thing, and that's a rough transition to make if the look of a particular character was important to you.

I would like to ask if any heritage/color combinations are without problems, though. This really does seem like a search without a perfect answer, and I'd hope everyone has patience and consideration for THB/G and the artist's position on this, as well. I consider myself pretty aware of problematic representation (white, but progressive), and some roadblocks listed in this piece surprised me. I don't believe there is a way to avoid all bad undertones, and their solution is admirable.

Since these characters were played without regard for representation on race, I feel like their complex personalities have shades of stereotypes for all sorts of groups in them, which can approach the point of absurdity to try to avoid (and, if I may, unreasonableness to nitpick).

All in all, I hope people who dive into this issue don't feel like they can walk away with an easy answer. I'll bet you no matter what it is, it's probably not ideal. Marginalized folks who have little to know people like them in the media they consume deserve it. THB/G who started this show on a lark and had to navigate the haphazard maze they laid for themselves when it evolved deserve our sympathy.

The way they are talking about this issue I also believe deserves our respect, even if it is alongside justified disappointment. But it seems like that disappointment should be laid at the situation, rather than individuals (with exceptions for mistakes made along the way here, like the all-white original).

[enduringbeta]

#FC2k17: Pocketing

All this year I’ve been getting emails each week from a list I joined called Feminist Challenge 2017: http://feministchallenge.wixsite.com/fc2k17/about

I haven’t done every week, even though I intended to at the start. At this point, I’m comfortable with the balance I’m taking of adopting the weeks’ challenges that I feel I’ll get something significant out of but that also won’t disrupt my everyday life (including, for example, making me stressed that week until I accomplish something difficult).

Challenges I completed from previous weeks include:

- Shaving my legs (this first challenge was surprisingly hard to do because I’m self-conscious about changing my appearance)

- Taking a pregnancy test (which specifically involved going to the store and asking for where they were)

- Waiting to speak in conversations (this was painfully hard in work meetings where I definitely could have answered questions quicker or resolved misunderstandings)

Obviously though, every bit of discomfort and annoyance was purposeful. All of these exercises are to increase awareness in ally feminists who are not subject to the experiences of people we wish to elevate. The first challenge forced me to introspect on why it was so uncomfortable for me to do this thing I do on my face multiple times a week. The second was a more direct experience of knowing the basic steps of this crucially important moment surrounding pregnancy that men don’t usually see. The third gave me a glimpse into the perspective of not feeling able to speak when you have the answer (for me because of an artificial challenge, for others because of social norms) as well as reminding me of all the important things I could hear if I didn’t interrupt.

---

This week’s challenge was to not use your pockets. Tons and tons of women’s clothing either has no pockets or have ones so small they hardly count.

This is extremely disruptive to me and exactly the kind of challenge I wanted to take.

I like being prepared, being able to complete transactions quickly, getting information from my phone immediately, and in general having an elegance and economy of motion and effort to get through my day-to-day.

- Front left: Tic Tacs (sometimes headphones)

- Front right: Keys

- Back left: Phone

- Back right: Wallet

This dedicated system had to be abandoned for either (i) taking my messenger bag with me to unusual places; (ii) carrying things around in my hands; or (iii) going without things.

Tuesday was my sister’s graduation, where I had to have someone examine my bag to get in. After the ceremony, it started raining heavily, and in a bright moment of positivity, I had an umbrella with me that I wouldn’t have had otherwise, so my sister was less drenched.

Friday I went to a park to see a quad-copter fly around and record it. Over and over I had to set my phone on a table out of reach rather than my pocket and chance missing an interesting moment.

Saturday I biked downtown with a friend, which required me to bring my messenger bag again (and actually tear it up a little on my tire) to carry those 5 items I listed above.

All between those two larger moments were major interruptions to my routine. I usually listen to podcasts constantly through my phone in my back pocket: not so this week. Buying food at Jimmy John’s while meeting a friend was a hassle. Using the self-checkout at Target yesterday was super clumsy. I like my things being clean, so having to place them all over the place or handle them way more often when I hadn’t washed my hands was frustrating. Walking to get my mail was that little bit extra annoying because I had to hold on to my phone and keys. Remembering where I put my phone and worrying about it being stolen was an extra mental burden.

I dropped my phone I believe twice this week, which I absolutely hate doing and cringe on the rare occasions it happens. This may be a third of all phone drops I do in the average year.

But every bit of frustration, every bit of change from my normal life and routine is precisely the point. The relief I felt today when I could just put my phone in my pocket while walking around my own home is also the point. It’s building an appreciation, an understanding of someone else’s life, and that’s exactly what I want to spend mine doing.

---

As an addendum, I want to get a little more concrete. I feel like a lot of times, these efforts fall on deaf ears because it seems pointless or performative or just needless pain or annoyance. I have specific concepts in my head of how I’ve changed based on this.

- When someone complains about lack or pockets, or asks me to hold something for them in part because of that, I will better understand and sympathize with why. I will be able to point to specific experiences.

- When the subject of pockets or women’s clothing is brought up in any context, I will be more vocal about this issue, because it sucks.

- I believe things are more easily stolen, lost, or broken when pockets are less of an option. I will have more patience and consider this factor more when I hear of these things happen to people who have fewer pockets in their life.

- I will view purses in a new context of necessity.

- I will notice whether articles of clothing have pockets.

Experiencing something firsthand is way more impactful and immersive than just reading about it or being told it. If we remove ourselves from any political topics and just think back to elementary school days, working on an art project to illustrate a story or designing steps to run an experiment certainly engages children more with the subject. It’s easy to make the case that the same applies here.

[enduringbeta]

Chris Cornell, Gregg Allman

Gregg Allman, founding titular member of the blues/Southern rock Allman Brothers Band, died today. Less than two weeks ago, another singer I really appreciate, Chris Cornell of alt rock/grunge Soundgarden and Audioslave, died, as well. It hasn’t been a good stretch for musicians I really like.

Here are a few songs I encourage giving a listen to, perhaps to satisfy your curiosity, but perhaps also to know something that’s meaningful to me, if that’s of interest. First Gregg Allman, then Chris Cornell.

---

A classic tune he rerecorded solo after his brother died that I hadn’t heard before tonight.

Midnight Rider - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yojZ-Ksr8AE

This song is much more of a solo instrumental feature, but the lyrics hit an important tone.

“'Cause I'm hung up on dreams I'll never see, yeah Baby Ahh help me baby, or this will surely be the end of me, yeah“

Dreams - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rK_5cJpM06k

This one is honestly just too much in this context. Listening to it echoes of its namesake. You can feel the strain in his voice when he sings the evocative line, “Sometimes I feel like I’ve been tied, to the whipping post”.

Whipping Post - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wqg4taiLRRE

---

A song with an extremely irregular time signature that I learned to appreciate through Rock Band 2 drums about a man who performs music with spoons:

Spoonman - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0_zzCLLRvE

A heavy song where Cornell requests “you gave me life, now show me how to live”. A powerful message for my burgeoning atheism.

Show Me How To Live - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVXIK1xCRpY

One of the heaviest, most impactful riffs I’ve personally experienced, no doubt influenced by the build-up and Cornell’s caustic lyrics and style.

Cochise - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDMvN45sjo4

---

I’m really going to miss them. As I continue to exist, more and more people who have been influential to me will fall. I’m still getting used to it.

[enduringbeta]

The Conceptual Penis as a Social Construct: A Double-Hoax

Skeptic Magazine just published an article in which Peter Boghossian and James Lindsay submitted a hoax paper (”The Conceptual Penis as a Social Construct“) to an open-access gender studies journal and got it published.

Ketan Joshi wrote a response to this article that mirrors a lot of what I want to say. Thanks to Melanie Brewster for bringing this to my attention. I have a few more things I’d like to expand upon.

And real quick: I could endlessly caveat this post about trends and biases by explaining (as best I can) my own or pointing out that no institution is completely perfect or evil. Suffice it to say that when I argue, I’m doing so within relatively tight bounds that any extreme extrapolation is probably misconstruing somewhere.

1. Trends

One of the strongest points made by the Skeptic article is that gender studies uniquely represents a scientific community compromised by trends, in this case anti-maleness:

"[C]ertain kinds of ideas can become so fashionable that the critical faculties required for the peer-review process are compromised"

Before even examining the legitimacy of the claim about gender studies, I find it essential to confront the presumably-obvious-but-evidently-not-apparent fact that the skeptic community also has trends.

Unsurprisingly, those trends line up perfectly with the motivations and conclusions of the article.

While no community is truly One Thing, this pocket of the skeptic community is notoriously hostile to feminism, social justice, progressive ideas, and the “soft sciences” (sometimes a pejorative label) that comprise the subject of their complaints.

This stance is perhaps no more epitomized than by Michael Shermer, head of Skeptic Magazine, against whose actions numerous claims of sexual harassment and worse have been levied and under whose banner this double-hoax was perpetrated. This figurehead has inserted himself into community discussions of inclusiveness, safety, and identification of problem members all to resist the evolution of policies and attitudes necessary to survive and grow in the modern day.

The conclusions reached by this group of skeptics nestles perfectly within their pre-existing beliefs. Nothing challenging their existing norms is addressed. While not evidence itself that the results are wrong, this scenario is perfectly compatible with that case. The lack of due diligence and extraordinary claims (what do those require, again?) to be discussed in the next section are more damning evidence.

By attempting to "test the hypothesis that flattery of the academic Left’s moral architecture" would succeed, the authors were also stroking the popular disregard for these fields of research, for feminism, and for the people who stand up for its validity and value in and out of the community.

2. Rigor and Scope

There are important and valid points made in some parts of this article. It's a shame it has to be sandwiched between unjustified claims or filtered through denialism of sociological research. I agree that problems exist when an absurd paper penetrates appropriate gatekeeping and is presented to the world as Science. Unfortunately, this article does not seem to want to have just that conversation: the piece takes targeted and specific aim at gender studies.

"As we see it, gender studies in its current form needs to do some serious housecleaning."

How could one sham paper submitted to two publications, one of which rejected it, possibly justify this conclusion? If the authors were true science fans or skeptics, they would readily acknowledge the limitations of their work. This article starts to rival its own paper in terrible scientific methodology and reasoning.

Incredibly, they do not discuss how this experiment was not conducted among other fields of study. Based on this one effort, we do not know whether the publishing infrastructure of gender studies is uniquely bad or among a large fraction of fields that would succumb to this hoax. (Joshi’s post, linked above, gathers more data on this idea.)

This leaves the majority of criticism levied against "moral and political biases masquerading as rigorous academic theory" in gender studies moot until comparative, parallel analysis is conducted.

3. Diminishing Returns

The article tackles two subjects that need blame apportioned to them for this failure: uncritical open-access journals and gender studies confirmatory gullibility. Two examples illuminate their misallocated ire.

First, much emphasis is placed on the rejecting institution recommending another publisher. No time is spent examining whether this was a genuine suggestion or dismissive politeness. It is not explained whether this was a personal recommendation or an automated one. It is not clear whether the quality of any submission is considered before those messages from the rejecting institution are sent (see rigor).

Some blame belongs to the rejecting institution, but what degree is directly affected by these factors, which are not explored.

Second, much of the article is devoted to exploring the absurdity, creativity, and humor poured into the hoax paper. This is certainly for equal parts evidence for the hollow nature of the paper and simple amusement.

Consider, however, the fact that one reviewer of the paper graded it with straight "outstandings", which significantly increases the likelihood that it was simply not read by that reviewer. Does this not undermine every excruciating step taken to revel in the absurdity of the language of the paper?

It's clear the review process was not thorough, which on the surface may appear to prove the authors' point. But on another level, if the paper was not examined at all, which may have been the case here, its subject matter, thesis, title, and all the clever jokes within mean less and less. Being duped by trendy confirmation bias is not the same thing as being lazy: the problem increasingly becomes that of lax open access journal gatekeeping, not on gender studies specifically.

---

The claims of this article far outreach its grasp, to the degree that I agree with Angus Johnston that those who do not review their supportive clucks for the piece deserve to have their status as “skeptics” or “critical thinkers” shrink.

Nuance, humility, thoroughness, and care cannot be secondary to ideology. This applies to the skeptic community, the science publishing community, everyone.

[epsee]

my brother my brother my father and me

[mostlysignssomeportents]

Boston school district switches to a more accurate world map, blows kids' minds

The Mercator projection maps we’re all familiar with dates to a 16th-centry Flemish cartographer who wanted to emphasize colonial trade routes; as a result, it vastly distorts the relative sizes and positions of the world’s continents, swelling Europe and North America to absurd proportions and shrinking South America and Africa.

Boston schools are phasing in the 1974 Peters projection maps in place of the Mercators, which more accurately represent the landmasses’ scales (at the cost of some accuracy in the shapes of those masses – everything is a trade-off). This gives teachers the chance to present side-by-side comparisons to their students, blowing their minds.

https://boingboing.net/2017/03/21/no-maps-for-these-territories.html

[enduringbeta]

I suggested Sunday Assembly Atlanta show this West Wing clip about this very subject for some theme months ago. We didn’t end up using it, but it always comes to mind for absolutely nailing this subject.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVX-PrBRtTY

[enduringbeta]

My Review of Seeso’s My Brother, My Brother and Me: Season 1

My Brother, My Brother and Me is a comedy podcast that’s been going strong for many years now. The three siblings got a chance to create a show for Seeso, and it finally released this week. I watched all six episodes today.

I feel very passionately about these people and what they put out into the world. I think what they do is immensely good. They make me laugh every week without fail, but they represent a form of comedy and, frankly, humanism that inspires me.

I contribute by saying nice things when they do something amazing, like writing a review and giving five stars. Give it a read.

---

Humor with so much heart

There's so much heart in the McElroys. The goofs, the silliness, the larks are a part of a lifetime of making their siblings smile and, increasingly, the rest of the world with them. It's a choice to celebrate their hometown, a choice to be positive. The show varies between fourth-wall-breaking and fourth-wall-destroying. Elaborate scenarios and settings give structure to the episodes, but frequently the bits and jokes exist on a thin, almost transparent layer above the genuine. You see these brothers, and their family, as they are: not as caricature, not as archetypes, but as people with nuance, limits, and desires. It's tempting to make observations about the current political climate as this show arrives. It takes place in a space at the center of a tidal shift in our society, a part of America that isn't often highlighted. At the very least, this show reveals and revels in the very human and good nature of the people of Huntington, West Virginia. And perhaps everywhere. The show's lightness and positivity is a breath of fresh air and a renewal. These brothers have mastered audio, and this is their entrance into visual. Their wonderful crew surely helped them find their legs in this new medium. I am confident, if they're willing to embark on this adventure again, that they'll reach even greater heights. If you are familiar with the McElroy brothers or any of their familial shows, this is required viewing. It is a natural progression and extension of the podcast. If you're new to their style of comedy, please give it a try. It is good people taking a chance at making the world a little lighter. And succeeding. Also? It's really, really funny.

---

https://www.amazon.com/My-Brother-Me-Season/dp/B06X6LQ9VB

[wateryday-moved]

i had to make a quick comic about the end of that adventure zone episode