Wow, it's been awhile.

No title available
almost home
Sade Olutola

⁂
KIROKAZE

Andulka
we're not kids anymore.
trying on a metaphor
occasionally subtle
sheepfilms

shark vs the universe
taylor price
Cosmic Funnies
art blog(derogatory)
PUT YOUR BEARD IN MY MOUTH
official daine visual archive

tannertan36
Not today Justin

No title available

PR's Tumblrdome
seen from Türkiye
seen from Pakistan

seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United Kingdom
seen from United States

seen from Malaysia

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from Türkiye
seen from Mexico
seen from Netherlands

seen from Peru
@orryia
Wow, it's been awhile.
There's that common saying: "Having a mental illness is not an excuse to act like a jerk." Now I completely agree with this. We have responsibility for our actions, and having a mental illness does not give anyone license to hurt people. You still have to apologize when you make mistakes and learn to do better. HOWEVER, I still think it's important that other people understand why people with mental illnesses act like jerks sometimes, and that it's usually not rooted in malicious intent at all. Like, take me for example, as a socially anxious person. Conversation with people outside of my immediate family used to be incredibly difficult. It was about as easy to talk to people as having a conversation with blaring music in the background while standing at the edge of cliff. I had to consciously concentrate on the words and try to come up with responses while dealing with overwhelming fear. And once I finally managed to come up with something to say and gathered my courage, the rest had long ago moved to a different topic. So while undergoing therapy, I tried changing this and forcing myself to be more spontaneous, and you know what happened? I started blurting out any thought that was in my head, including some rude, hurtful and insensitive remarks. But not because I wanted to hurt anyone. I was mortified every time I realized what I'd said. It was just that my absolute inexperience in conversation, together with extreme anxiety and my desperate attempts to overcome it, made me sometimes completely forget about tact. If you ever call out a mentally ill person for being a jerk, please do it first in a private setting, and as gently as possible. This is true in particular with socially anxious people, since very often our worst nightmare is hurting and offending other people. Don't put that person on trial and demand an explanation in front of a dozen people. I can tell you from personal experience, that's awful and unnecessary.
I think I'll give up on reblogging stuff. From now on this is a liking blog only.
Can I just point out how interesting it is that in Jewish mysticism (Kabbala and other) it's masculinity that symbolizes kindness and mercy, and femininity that symbolizes judgement and strength? It's just so counter to how we intuitively view gender in our culture.
The four initial facts you absolutely need to know about For Such a Time by Kate Breslin are as follows: 1) It is an inspirational romance. God, faith, and the Bible (actually, a ‘magic’ Bible** that seems to show up whenever the main character needs to see it most) make regular appearances. 2) It is set almost entirely in the Theresienstadt concentration camp during World War II, and deals extensively with the horrors of the … Continue reading For Such a Time by Kate Breslin →
So yes, this is a romance novel published by a Christian press, retelling the story of Esther, and featuring a love story between a Jewish woman in Terezin, (passing as a Gentile and doing paperwork in the camp office) and a high-ranking SS officer. Let me repeat that, this is not a dramatic novel that includes survival sex, this is a romance novel. Oh, and apparently ‘Hadassah’ and ‘Aric’ become Christians at the end.
It was nominated for a RITA award. I’m planning to write to the publisher if I can only stop swearing so often.
so many gifs of ostriches doing their mating dance for humans but did u know
they actually did a study on this
and ostriches repeatedly found humans more attractive than other ostriches
yes
ostrich farmers have trouble setting up their ostriches with each other because they’re just not interested, they want their farmers instead
it’s incredible
also, ostriches show notable sexual preference
some male ostriches will only display for male humans, some will display for anybody, some will display for female humans only
I can’t believe ostriches are reverse furries
It's just ostriches that were raised by humans, though. They probably think they're human themselves.
Wild ostriches are just aggressive if humans interrupt their mating.
10 Photos Of Norway’s Fairy Tale Architecture
Norway started out as a kingdom in 872 and has existed ever since. It has also saved quite a bit of its traditional architecture. Traditional Norwegian architecture makes it look like a land out of a fairytale. Stave churches – so named because of the Norse words for their load-bearing poles – were extremely popular back in the 12th century, and their unique shape matched with all-wooden construction make is simply spectacular.
Norvegian vernacular (as in, built to local requirements and using local materials) architecture is wonderful. Moss and even trees grow on the roofs of wooden or stone buildings, making Norway a sort of Norse Shire. Have a look, and plan your next holiday accordingly!
via: boredpanda
Aren’t these habits inspiring?
actual Tumblr Social Justice problems:
- antisemitism is often veiled as “combating white supremacy” - lack of focus on mental illnesses besides depression - honest mistakes tend to be poorly dealt with - “callout culture” (people looking for others to mess up, solely in order to defame them) - in-depth education on terms tends to be scarce, leading to people having only a vague understanding of terms, and using them - bigots are able to redefine these (poorly-defined) terms in ways that hurt the oppressed - emotional manipulation / guilt-tripping (“i see my followers ignoring this”; “why is nobody talking about this?”)
re-reblogging cause i thought of things
Excessive and abusive punishment of young teenagers over mistakes made in discourse they don’t completely understand by bloggers much older than they are
US-centrism
Reliance on fear of retribution for spread of information (contributes to rapid spread of misinformation)
Moral absolutism - the line between “perfect innocent angel” and “disgusting shit trash” can be as thin as one mistake
Reliance on followed blogs for education about social issues
In other news, I'm already hungry. Ugh.
Hearing Eicha today at the synagogue really made me think that the Jews who lived after the exile had really survived something like the Holocaust. I mean, their whole world was completely shattered, many of their people were dead, and a lot of them probably lost their faith. Also the descriptions you have there- of people starving to death, and mothers cooking their children, also bring up familiar images. It's amazing how we survived, as a people, not only one major catastrophe, but several. And we rebuild every time.
I feel like I should be warning every new person that follows my blog. "No! This blog is purely for my own amusement! You're not going to get much out of it!"
TAYLOR SWIFT IS SELLING MERCH IN CHINA
SELLING TANK TOPS WITH “1989” EMBLAZONED ON THEM
IN
CHINA
OH MY GOD?!?!?!?!?!? I WANT TO SMACK HER IN THE FACE WITH MY SANDAL?!
if anyone isn’t aware, 1989 was the year of the Tiananmen Square Protests & Massacre.
Also her initials, TS She’s selling shirts that say TS 1989 on them in a country where anything related to that massacre is completely censored https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2015/07/22/taylor-swifts-next-feud-might-be-with-the-chinese-government/?wprss=rss_world
A mess! taylorswift
history1970s:
how do u fuck up that bad (its a rhetorical question we all know why)
ok woah there!
i think that people’s problems with her merchandise here might be problematic itself and comes from a western pov on the what happened at Tienanmen Square–and also probably bc people love to be out for her blood bc she’s a symbol of white feminism. i get it. i agree she’s very problematic. but i don’t think the spread of misinformation is helping any cause, and i think this particular piece of misinformation contributes to a very problematic eurocentric worldview.
first of all the issue with the TS part of it: afaik from the pov of a diasporic 2nd generation chinese person (so correct me if i am wrong and i apologise if i am because i haven’t lived in china myself) aside from its use as a language for business… english language and the english alphabet are not widely used in china aside from use as loanwords or for western names, or in business. people learn it in school because it’s necessary if you want to be a part of the westernised international conversation, but aside from that it’s not really used widely like it is in the western world.
what i’m getting at is that people in china wouldn’t immediately recognise TS in any association with Tienanmen Square because english is not the primary mode of communication there, especially not in the context of things pertaining to China it self–it’s mostly used in the context of thing pertaining to the western world. on its own, TS means nothing to most chinese citizens on its own because they have many different languages but english that they prefer to speak in, and use written chinese, not english to communicate when writing.
next: from what i can tell from doing some quick googling, her album cover for 1989 had “t.s. 1989″ on it… and no one had a problem with it at all. even in china, and the chinese gov’t didn’t censor it. nor did people use her album as a symbol of Tienanmen Square because 1989 itself has nothing to do with Tienanmen Square.
why is this? because 1989 itself has no meaning in china on its own and is just another year–the specific date june 4, 1989 is heavily censored because that is the date Tienanmen Square happened. taylor swift it born december 13 which is nowhere near the time of the massacre… and she was born in america and is white and has nothing to do with china anyway, so she has nothing to do with chinese politics and isn’t a symbol for government rebellion in china (or at least didn’t, until people started making a storm about this).
if she was born chinese in 1989 and made a hugely successful album named 1989 that criticised the chinese government, then the gov’t would raise some eyebrows. but that’s not the case (and honestly that would be a just cause, but again is not what is happening here).
the other issue i’m having here is that you all are treating china like an oppressive regime like that of north korea where people are brainwashed, and by disrupting the brainwashing with your dangerous western provocations you’re going to get a lot of people killed.. when it’s not. it’s a large country full of a diverse range of people in all sorts of living conditions, including lots of young people who simply enjoy pop music like taylor swift and are also unfortunately but blissfully unaware of political issues. the government heavily censors things and denies things and does a lot of awful shit behind people’s backs but that’s an issue that a lot of countries in the western world face too, and you know that.
what i’m getting at is: the outrage over this is very americentric/eurocentric and orientalist because 1) china’s none of china’s primary languages or modes of communication are english and taylor swift to china has nothing to do with June 4, 1989 and 2) none of you are seeing china as a developed country full of actual people and instead view it through the lens of some sort of oppressive regime that is overseas somewhere with people you need to protect with your power as a westerner.
Chinese students have to learn English in schools and nowadays imo there’s an increase in casual English usage due to US popular culture (i.e so not really just confined to business). But on the whole, yes- most people would still communicate in written Chinese, Mandarin or another Chinese dialect. And the whole thing about the massacre being heavily censored and scrubbed from public consciousness is correct (there won’t be a whisper of it in textbooks). In that context, unlike say, when there were ongoing riots in Tibet that led to even just ‘Tibet’ being censored, the govt doesn’t view everything referencing ‘TS 1989′ as subversive, much less coming from an album by a white american woman referencing her own birthday.
Those previous posts before the last poster are so Western-centric indeed. There’s an entire internet culture in China where people get around government censorship using puns because of the inherent nature of Mandarin meaning that words with similar sounds can have drastically different meaning. ‘River crabs’ (he xie) is an euphemism for censorship because it sounds similar to ‘harmony’ (also he xie). And the government often cites protecting ‘national harmony’ as a justification for censorship. So the point is, how political subversion takes place and what the government clamps down on is very different due to language differences itself. Like, ‘TS for Tiananmen Square’ is an English transliteration. As far as I know, the incident isn’t widely referred to as ‘TS 1989′ in China. The shit that usually gets censored is the full date or the date plus the name of the square in Chinese characters.
Like I’m very critical of the CCP and I think people who idolise China’s economic growth are really glossing over the serious shit the govt does to people. But all the same I DO also feel similar to the last poster- the OP and the others later are projecting a Western-centric lens over modern China. That just discomfits me because it’s an analysis completely missing the complexity and subtly strips agency from people.
Like fuck, there are ALREADY Chinese activists who are in jail for actually trying to raise awareness about the Tiananmen Square incident. But these posters just focus their attention on Taylor Swift’s album! When there’ve been no reprisals involving her Chinese fans re this allegedly controversial merchandise line. ‘Activism’? The original posts are really just continuing to centre Western countries and whiteness and do nothing for the people actually already being hurt.
A satirical website has accidentally broken a real news story – by revealing that America offered Israel “a nice, big shipment” of weapons to try and salve its anger of the Iran nuclear deal.
A spoof news story on The Onion, headlined “US Soothes Upset Netanyahu With Shipment Of Ballistic Missiles”, appeared 24 hours before reports emerged that this had actually happened in real life.
Israeli newspaper Haaretz noted the similarity to its own story, published the following day, which carried the headline, “After Iran deal, Obama offers military upgrade to help Israel swallow bitter Iranian deal”.
“Where do you get your news, POL?”
The Onion, of course.
OH MY FUCKING GOD.
This:
The only difference between spoof and reality was that Mr Netanyahu (in reality) initially didn’t respond to the offer and later rejected it. – the second time he had turned down such a proposal – “believing that any kind of reciprocal deal would be construed as Israel having come to terms with the Iran nuclear deal”.
“We are such spoiled bigots that we are literally turning down new “toys” lest anyone get the impression that we don’t hate brown people so much anymore.”
Not that they need more weapons from the U.S. They have plenty, and they already get most of the U.S. foreign aid budget.
OK, let’s put this in perspective, using some facts.
What did the US supposedly offer? F-35 planes, troop carriers and a couple other similar things: not exactly ballistic missiles.
Why did the US offer this? Because the coming treaty with Iran may not lead to a *nuclear* state that has wiping out Israel on its agenda(the jury is still out on this, and will be for the next several years), but it will give that same state a very large amount of money to empower its cats’-paws(Hamas and Hizbullah, among others) to fight against Israel. Conventional missiles and rockets can do a whole lot of damage, thanks - people who don’t believe me are welcome to looks at pictures of Faluja after the US Air Force was done.
Netanyahu is rejecting this because, essentially, he believes this will makes him indebted to Obama and be a tool used against him when he tries to object to the treaty to Congresspeople. He is doing this over the strenuous objections of the professional people at both the Israel Foreign Office and Security Office(what you would call Defense Office in the US)
Israel gets ~5% of US foreign aid as of 2015, this is directly as a result of the Camp-David treaties(it was what assured the treaties would be signed), and the fact Israel has been an ally of the US in a hostile environment for the last 40 years, not some candy given to a brat.
Moreover, that foreign aid?Can be only used to buy things made in the US.This is not money that goes out of the US economy in any way, shape or form.
knowing stuff about history is hard….
I am sorry for the non-book related post but its been 10 minutes and I am still laughing.
This is what Bella’s reaction should have been.
“When I was 26, I went to Indonesia and the Philippines to do research for my first book, No Logo. I had a simple goal: to meet the workers making the clothes and electronics that my friends and I purchased. And I did. I spent evenings on concrete floors in squalid dorm rooms where teenage girls—sweet and giggly—spent their scarce nonworking hours. Eight or even 10 to a room. They told me stories about not being able to leave their machines to pee. About bosses who hit. About not having enough money to buy dried fish to go with their rice.
They knew they were being badly exploited—that the garments they were making were being sold for more than they would make in a month. One 17-year-old said to me: “We make computers, but we don’t know how to use them.”
So one thing I found slightly jarring was that some of these same workers wore clothing festooned with knockoff trademarks of the very multinationals that were responsible for these conditions: Disney characters or Nike check marks. At one point, I asked a local labor organizer about this. Wasn’t it strange—a contradiction?
It took a very long time for him to understand the question. When he finally did, he looked at me like I was nuts. You see, for him and his colleagues, individual consumption wasn’t considered to be in the realm of politics at all. Power rested not in what you did as one person, but what you did as many people, as one part of a large, organized, and focused movement. For him, this meant organizing workers to go on strike for better conditions, and eventually it meant winning the right to unionize. What you ate for lunch or happened to be wearing was of absolutely no concern whatsoever.
This was striking to me, because it was the mirror opposite of my culture back home in Canada. Where I came from, you expressed your political beliefs—firstly and very often lastly—through personal lifestyle choices. By loudly proclaiming your vegetarianism. By shopping fair trade and local and boycotting big, evil brands.
These very different understandings of social change came up again and again a couple of years later, once my book came out. I would give talks about the need for international protections for the right to unionize. About the need to change our global trading system so it didn’t encourage a race to the bottom. And yet at the end of those talks, the first question from the audience was: “What kind of sneakers are OK to buy?” “What brands are ethical?” “Where do you buy your clothes?” “What can I do, as an individual, to change the world?”
Fifteen years after I published No Logo, I still find myself facing very similar questions. These days, I give talks about how the same economic model that superpowered multinationals to seek out cheap labor in Indonesia and China also supercharged global greenhouse-gas emissions. And, invariably, the hand goes up: “Tell me what I can do as an individual.” Or maybe “as a business owner.”
The hard truth is that the answer to the question “What can I, as an individual, do to stop climate change?” is: nothing. You can’t do anything. In fact, the very idea that we—as atomized individuals, even lots of atomized individuals—could play a significant part in stabilizing the planet’s climate system, or changing the global economy, is objectively nuts. We can only meet this tremendous challenge together. As part of a massive and organized global movement.
The irony is that people with relatively little power tend to understand this far better than those with a great deal more power. The workers I met in Indonesia and the Philippines knew all too well that governments and corporations did not value their voice or even their lives as individuals. And because of this, they were driven to act not only together, but to act on a rather large political canvas. To try to change the policies in factories that employ thousands of workers, or in export zones that employ tens of thousands. Or the labor laws in an entire country of millions. Their sense of individual powerlessness pushed them to be politically ambitious, to demand structural changes.
In contrast, here in wealthy countries, we are told how powerful we are as individuals all the time. As consumers. Even individual activists. And the result is that, despite our power and privilege, we often end up acting on canvases that are unnecessarily small—the canvas of our own lifestyle, or maybe our neighborhood or town. Meanwhile, we abandon the structural changes—the policy and legal work— to others.”
- Naomi Klein
honestly tumblr ideological discourse is such a mess, like, a huge section of tumblr is young people being inundated with radical ideas that they’ve never been exposed to before with absolutely no context, and then they’re expected to immediately start pushing these ideas (even though they’re incapable of understanding them because they haven’t been given the framework with which to do so) and it just ends up in a mess of guilt-tripping and increasingly confused ideology