🔥 Popular | Latest

Baby, It's Cold Outside, Christmas, and Definitely: Andrew Rannells @AndrewRannells I don't think any more people need to record Baby It's Cold Outside. I think we're good there teachingwithcoffee It's time to bring an end to the Rape Anthem Masquerading As Christmas Carol bigbutterandeggman Hi there! Former English nerd/teacher here Also a big fan of jazz of the 30s and 40s So. Here's the thing. Given a cursory glance and applying today's worldview to the song, yes, you're right, it absolutely *sounds* like a rape anthem. BUT! Let's look closer! "Hey what's in this drink" was a stock joke at the time, and the punchline was invariably that there's actually pretty much nothing in the drink, not even a significant amount of alcohol See, this woman is staying late, unchaperoned, at a dudes house. In the 1940's, that's the kind of thing Good Girls aren't supposed to do-and she wants people to think she's a good girl. The woman in the song says outright, multiple times, that what other people will think of her staying is what shes really concerned about "the neighbors might think" "my maiden aunt's mind is vicious," "there's bound to be talk tomorrow." But she's having a really good time, and she wants to stay, and so she is excusing her uncharacteristically bold behavior (either to the guy or to herself) by blaming it on the drink -unaware that the drink is actually really weak, maybe not even alcoholic at all. That's the joke That is the standard joke that's going on when a woman in media from the early-to-mid 20th century says "hey, what's in this drink?" It is not a joke about how she's drunk and about to be raped. It's a joke about how she's perfectly sober and about to have awesome consensual sex and use the drink for plausible deniability because she's living in a society where women aren't supposed to have sexual agency Basically, the song only makes sense in the context of a society in which women are expected to reject mens advances whether they actually want to or not, and therefore it's normal and expected for a lady's gentleman companion to pressure her despite her protests, because he knows she would have to say that whether or not she meant it, and if she really wants to stay she won't be able to justify doing so unless he offers her an excuse other than "I'm staying because I want to." (That's the main theme of the man's lines in the song, suggesting excuses she can use when people ask later why she spent the night at his house: it was so cold out, there were no cabs available, he simply insisted because he was concerned about my safety in such awful weather, it was perfectly innocent and definitely not about sex at all!) In this particular case, he's pretty clearly right, because the woman has a voice, and she's using it to give all the culturally-understood signals that she actually does want to stay but can't say so She states explicitly that she's resisting because shes supposed to, not because she wants to: "I ought to say no no no..." She states explicitly that she's just putting up a token resistance so she'll be able to claim later that she did whats expected of a decent woman in this situation: "at least I'm gonna say that I tried." And at the end of the song they're singing together, in harmony, because they're both on the same page and they have been all along So it's not actually a song about rape in fact it's a song about a woman finding a way to exercise sexual agency in a patriarchal society designed to stop her from doing so. But it's also, at the same time, one of the best illustrations of rape culture that pop culture has ever produced. It's a song about a society where women aren't allowed to say yes..which happens to mean it's also a society where women don't have a clear and unambiguous way to say no Source: matchingvnecks #baby it's cold outside #not about rape #so tired of having to explain this on 238,267 notes Dec 3rd, 2016 Its that time of year again
Save
Baby, It's Cold Outside, Christmas, and Definitely: I don't think any more people need to record Baby It's Cold Outside. I think we're good there teachingwithcoffee It's time to bring an end to the Rape Anthem Masquerading As Christmas Caral bigbutterandeggman Hi there! Former English nerd/teacher here. Also a big fan of jazz of the 30s and 40s So. Here's the thing. Given a cursory glance and applying today's worldview to the song. yes, you're right, it absolutely 'sounds' like a rape anthem. BUTI Let's look closerl "Hey what's in this drink" was a stock joke at the time, and the punchline was invariably that there's actually pretty much nothing in the drink, not even a significant amount of alcohol. See, this woman is staying late, unchaperoned at a dude's house. In the 1940's, that's the kind of thing Good Girls aren't supposed to do - and she wants people to think she's a good girl. The woman in the song says outright, multiple times, that what other people will think of her staying is what she's really concerned about: the neighbors might think," "my maiden aunt's mind is vicious," "there's bound to be talk tomorrow." But she's having a really good time and she wants to stay, and so she is excusing her uncharacteristically bold behavior (either to the guy or to herself) by blaming it on the drink - unaware that the drink is actually really weak maybe not even alcoholic at all. That's the joke. That is the standard joke that's going on when a woman in media from the early-to-mid 20th century says "hey, what's in this drink?" It is not a joke about how she's drunk and about to be raped. It's a joke about how she's perfectly sober and about to have awesome consensual sex and use the drink for plausible deniability because she's living in a society where women aren't supposed to have sexual agency Basically, the song only makes sense in the ext of a society in which women are expected to reject men's advances whether they actually want to or not, and therefore it's normal and expected for a lady's gentleman companion to pressure her despite her protests because he knows she would have to say that whether or not she meant it, and if she really wants to stay she won't be able to justify doing so unless he offers her an excuse other than "I'm staying because I want to." (That's the main theme of the man's lines in the song suggesting excuses she can use when people ask later why she spent the night at his house: it was so cold out, there were no cabs available, he simply insisted because he was concerned about my safety in such awful weather, it was perfectly innocent and definitely not about sex at all!) In this particular case, he's pretty clearly right, because the woman has a voice, and she's using it to give all the culturally- understood signals that she actually does want to stay but can't say so. She states explicitly that she's resisting because she's supposed to, not because she wants to: "l ought to say no no no..." She states explicitly that she's just putting up a token resistance so she'll be able to claim later that she did what's expected of a decent woman in this situation: "at least I'm oonna sav that I tried. And at the end of the that she's resisting because she's supposed to not because she wants to: "l ought to say no no no..." She states explicitly that she's just putting up a token resistance so she' ll be able to claim later that she did what's expected of a decent woman in this situation: "at least I'm gonna say thatI tried." And at the end of the song they're singing together, in harmony because they're both on the same page and they have been all along. So it's not actually a song about rape in fact it's a song about a woman finding a way to exercise sexual agency in a patriarchal society designed to stop her from doing so. But it's also, at the same time, one of the best llustrations of rape culture that pop culture has ever produced. It's a song about a society where women aren't allowed to say yes...which happens to mean it's also a society where women don't have a clear and unambiguous way to say no. Source:matchinovnecks #baby it's cold outside #not about rape #30 tired of having to explain this one 196,155 notes "C But Baby It’s Cold
Save
Apparently, Baked, and Beautiful: wine-loving-vagabond A loaf of bread made in the first century AD, which was discovered at Pompeil, preserved for centuries in the volcanic ashes of Mount Vesuvius. The markings visible on the top are made from a Roman bread stamp, which bakeries were required to use in order to mark the source of the loaves, and to prevent fraud (via Ridiculously Interesting) dduane (sigh) I've seen these before, but this one's particularly beautiful. hungrylikethewolfie I feel like I'm supposed to be marveling over the fact that this is a loaf of bread that's been preserved for thousands of years, and don't get me wrong, that's hella cool. But honestly, I'm mostly struck by the unexpected news that "bread fraud" was apparently once a serious concem. ironychan Bread Fraud was a huge thing, Bread was provided to the Roman people by the govermment bakers were given grain to make the free bread, but some of them stole the government grain to use in other baked goods and wouid add various substitutes, like sawdust or even worse things, to the bread instead So if people complained that their free bread was not proper bread, the stamp told them exactly whose bakery they ought to burn down. dancingspirals Bread stamps continued to be used at least until the Medieval period in Europe. Any commercially sold bread had to be stamped with an official seal to dentify the baker to show that it complied with all rules and regulations about size, price, and quality. This way, rotten or undersized loaves could be traced back to the baker. Bakers could be pilloried, sent down the streets in a hurdle cart with the offending loaf tied around their neck, fined, or forbidden to engage in baking commercially ever again in that city. There are records of a baker in London being sent on a hurdie cart because he used an iron rod to increase the weight of his loaves, and another who wrapped rotten dough with fresh who was pilloried. Any baker hurdled three times had to move to a new city if they wanted to continue baking If you have made bread, you are probably familiar with a molding board. it's a flat board used to shape the bread. Clever traudsters came up with a molding board that had a little hole drilled into it that wasn't easily noticed. A customer would buy his dough by weight, and then the baker would force some of that dough through the hoie, so they could sell and underweight loaf and use the stoien dough to bake new loafs to sell. Molding boards ended up being banned in London after nine different bakers were caught doing this. There were also instances of grain sellers withholding grain to create an artificial scarcity drive up the price of that, and things like bread Bread, being one of the main things that literally everyone ate in many parts of the world, ended up with a plethora of rules and regulations. Bakers were probably no more likely to commit fraud than anyone else, but there were so many of them, that we ended up with lots and lots of ruies and records of people being shifty Check out Fabulous Feasts. Medieval Cookery and Ceremony by Madeleine Peiner Cosman for a whole chapter on food laws as they existed in about 1400 Plus the color plates are fantastic hjuliana ALL OF THIS IS SO COOL thisandthathistoryblog l found som ething too awesome not share with you! I'm completely fascinated by the history of food, could I choose a similar topic for my Third Year Dissertation? Who knows, but it is very interesting all the same! youmightbeamisogynist fraud us actually where the concept of a bakers dozen came from Undersized rolis/loaves/whatever were added to the dozen purchased to ensure that the total weight evened out so the baker couldn't be punished for shorting someone. donesparce wants to talk about bread fraud laws and punishments holds it inj bread police Bread Police! Open up!

Bread Police! Open up!

Save
Apparently, Baked, and Beautiful: haiku-robot: areyoutryingtodeduceme: diglettdevious: soylent-queen: gallifrey-feels: drtanner: dancingspirals: ironychan: hungrylikethewolfie: dduane: wine-loving-vagabond: A loaf of bread made in the first century AD, which was discovered at Pompeii, preserved for centuries in the volcanic ashes of Mount Vesuvius. The markings visible on the top are made from a Roman bread stamp, which bakeries were required to use in order to mark the source of the loaves, and to prevent fraud. (via Ridiculously Interesting) (sigh) I’ve seen these before, but this one’s particularly beautiful. I feel like I’m supposed to be marveling over the fact that this is a loaf of bread that’s been preserved for thousands of years, and don’t get me wrong, that’s hella cool.  But honestly, I’m mostly struck by the unexpected news that “bread fraud” was apparently once a serious concern. Bread Fraud was a huge thing,  Bread was provided to the Roman people by the government - bakers were given grain to make the free bread, but some of them stole the government grain to use in other baked goods and would add various substitutes, like sawdust or even worse things, to the bread instead.  So if people complained that their free bread was not proper bread, the stamp told them exactly whose bakery they ought to burn down. Bread stamps continued to be used at least until the Medieval period in Europe. Any commercially sold bread had to be stamped with an official seal to identify the baker to show that it complied with all rules and regulations about size, price, and quality. This way, rotten or undersized loaves could be traced back to the baker. Bakers could be pilloried, sent down the streets in a hurdle cart with the offending loaf tied around their neck, fined, or forbidden to engage in baking commercially ever again in that city. There are records of a baker in London being sent on a hurdle cart because he used an iron rod to increase the weight of his loaves, and another who wrapped rotten dough with fresh who was pilloried. Any baker hurdled three times had to move to a new city if they wanted to continue baking. If you have made bread, you are probably familiar with a molding board. It’s a flat board used to shape the bread. Clever fraudsters came up with a molding board that had a little hole drilled into it that wasn’t easily noticed. A customer would buy his dough by weight, and then the baker would force some of that dough through the hole, so they could sell and underweight loaf and use the stolen dough to bake new loafs to sell. Molding boards ended up being banned in London after nine different bakers were caught doing this. There were also instances of grain sellers withholding grain to create an artificial scarcity drive up the price of that, and things like bread. Bread, being one of the main things that literally everyone ate in many parts of the world, ended up with a plethora of rules and regulations. Bakers were probably no more likely to commit fraud than anyone else, but there were so many of them, that we ended up with lots and lots of rules and records of people being shifty. Check out Fabulous Feasts: Medieval Cookery and Ceremony by Madeleine Pelner Cosman for a whole chapter on food laws as they existed in about 1400. Plus the color plates are fantastic. Holy shit.  Bread is serious fucking business. bread is STILL serious fucking business I recently had to deal with a sack of flour that had been half replaced with soap powder. No jokes. Another really good and informative book about bread’s significance and place in history is 6000 Years Of Bread! It’s fairly academic, but a fascinating topic and an engaging read. you guys found out the history of bread FOOD HISTORY IS THE FUCKING BEST SHUT UP DON’T EVEN LOOK AT ME food history is the fucking best shut up don’t even look at me ^Haiku^bot^9. I detect haikus with 5-7-5 format. Sometimes I make mistakes.Help me pay my electicity bills! Being robot is sometimes expensive thing. | PayPal | Patreon
Save
America, Bad, and Chicago: Barack Obama @BarackObama As we count down to the new year, we get to reflect and prepare for what's ahead. For all the bad news that seemed to dominate our collective consciousness, there are countless stories from this year that remind us what's best about America. 12/29/17, 11:09 AM Barack Obama @BarackObama Kat Creech, a wedding planner in Houston, turned a postponed wedding into a volunteer opportunity for Hurricane Harvey victims. Thirty wedding guests became an organization of hundreds of volunteers. That's a story from 2017. Couple postpones wedding, inspires help for Harvey victims click2houston.com 12/29/17, 11:09 AM Barack Obama @BarackObama Ten-year-old Jahkil Jackson is on a mission to help homeless people in Chicago. He created kits full of socks, toiletries, and food for those in need Just this week, Jahkil reached his goal to give away 5,000 "blessing bags." That's a story from 2017. 10-year-old's 'blessing bags' mission earns him national acclaim chicagotribune.com 12/29/17, 11:10 AM Barack Obama @BarackObama Chris Long gave his paychecks from the first six games of the NFL season to fund scholarships in Charlottesville, VA. He wanted to do more, so he decided to give away an entire season's salary. That's a story from 2017. Chris Long is playing for free, and has never been happier Barack Obama @BarackObama All across America people chose to get involved, get engaged and stand up. Each of us can make a difference, and all of us ought to try. So go keep changing the world in 2018. 12/29/17, 11:11 AM kawaiiaoiichigo: Thank You, Mr. President.

kawaiiaoiichigo: Thank You, Mr. President.

Save
Books, Facts, and Gif: o the Ningal ssful trading rsian Gulf Complaint about delivery of the wrong grade of copper About 1750 BC (Old Babylonian period) from Ur ME 131236 ian period) tatterdemalionamberite: peter-pantomime: comparativelysuperlative: prokopetz: thesparkofrevolution: blacktyranitar: thesparkofrevolution: jakovu: dama3: tastefullyoffensive: Babylonian era problems. (photo via tbc34) old school hate mail Imagine how pissed you have to be to engrave a rock Ok but there was this guy called Ea-nasir who was a total crook and would actually cheat people ought of good copper and sell them shit instead. The amount of correspondences complaining to and about this guy are HILARIOUS. Are you telling me we know about a specific guy who lived 5000 years ago, by name, because he was a huge asshole More like 4000 years ago but yes. Ea-nasir and his dodgy business deals. And we haven’t even touched on the true hilarity of the situation yet. Consider two additional facts: He wasn’t just into copper trading. There are letters complaining about Ea-nasir’s business practices with respect to everything from kitchenwares to real estate speculation to second-hand clothing. The guy was everywhere. The majority of the surviving correspondences regarding Ea-nasir were recovered from one particular room in a building that is believed to have been Ea-nasir’s own house. Like, these are clay tablets. They’re bulky, fragile, and difficult to store. They typically weren’t kept long-term unless they contained financial records or other vital information (which is why we have huge reams of financial data about ancient Babylon in spite of how little we know about the actual culture: most of the surviving tablets are commercial inventories, bills of sale, etc.). But this guy, this Ea-nasir, he kept all of his angry letters - hundreds of them - and meticulously filed and preserved them in a dedicated room in his house. What kind of guy does that? [ source ] Okay, but imagine from the other guy’s point of view. You send angry letters about how Ea-nasir shipped you half a ton of subpar copper, and then 3800 years later— History: you are without a doubt the worst business man ive ever heard of Ea-nasir: @binghsien
Save
Baby, It's Cold Outside, Christmas, and Definitely: Andrew Rannells @AndrewRannells I don't think any more people need to record Baby It's Cold Outside. I think we're good there girlwholovesturtles: bigbutterandeggman: teachingwithcoffee: It’s time to bring an end to the Rape Anthem Masquerading As Christmas Carol Hi there! Former English nerd/teacher here. Also a big fan of jazz of the 30s and 40s.  So. Here’s the thing. Given a cursory glance and applying today’s worldview to the song, yes, you’re right, it absolutely *sounds* like a rape anthem.  BUT! Let’s look closer!  “Hey what’s in this drink” was a stock joke at the time, and the punchline was invariably that there’s actually pretty much nothing in the drink, not even a significant amount of alcohol. See, this woman is staying late, unchaperoned, at a dude’s house. In the 1940’s, that’s the kind of thing Good Girls aren’t supposed to do — and she wants people to think she’s a good girl. The woman in the song says outright, multiple times, that what other people will think of her staying is what she’s really concerned about: “the neighbors might think,” “my maiden aunt’s mind is vicious,” “there’s bound to be talk tomorrow.” But she’s having a really good time, and she wants to stay, and so she is excusing her uncharacteristically bold behavior (either to the guy or to herself) by blaming it on the drink — unaware that the drink is actually really weak, maybe not even alcoholic at all. That’s the joke. That is the standard joke that’s going on when a woman in media from the early-to-mid 20th century says “hey, what’s in this drink?” It is not a joke about how she’s drunk and about to be raped. It’s a joke about how she’s perfectly sober and about to have awesome consensual sex and use the drink for plausible deniability because she’s living in a society where women aren’t supposed to have sexual agency. Basically, the song only makes sense in the context of a society in which women are expected to reject men’s advances whether they actually want to or not, and therefore it’s normal and expected for a lady’s gentleman companion to pressure her despite her protests, because he knows she would have to say that whether or not she meant it, and if she really wants to stay she won’t be able to justify doing so unless he offers her an excuse other than “I’m staying because I want to.” (That’s the main theme of the man’s lines in the song, suggesting excuses she can use when people ask later why she spent the night at his house: it was so cold out, there were no cabs available, he simply insisted because he was concerned about my safety in such awful weather, it was perfectly innocent and definitely not about sex at all!) In this particular case, he’s pretty clearly right, because the woman has a voice, and she’s using it to give all the culturally-understood signals that she actually does want to stay but can’t say so. She states explicitly that she’s resisting because she’s supposed to, not because she wants to: “I ought to say no no no…” She states explicitly that she’s just putting up a token resistance so she’ll be able to claim later that she did what’s expected of a decent woman in this situation: “at least I’m gonna say that I tried.” And at the end of the song they’re singing together, in harmony, because they’re both on the same page and they have been all along. So it’s not actually a song about rape - in fact it’s a song about a woman finding a way to exercise sexual agency in a patriarchal society designed to stop her from doing so. But it’s also, at the same time, one of the best illustrations of rape culture that pop culture has ever produced. It’s a song about a society where women aren’t allowed to say yes…which happens to mean it’s also a society where women don’t have a clear and unambiguous way to say no. I will never get tired of people actually paying attention to the actual meaning of this song.
Save
Facts, Period, and Respect: sadboi-syd the Ningal ssful trading Gulf Complaint about delivery of the wrong grade of copper About 1750 BC (Old Babylonian period). from Ur ME 131236 o sian an period) to tastefullyoffensive Babylonian era problems. (photo via tbc34) dama3 old school hate mail jakovu Imagine how pissed you have to be to engrave a rock thesparkofrevolution Ok but there was this guy called Ea-nasir who was a total crook and would actually cheat people ought of good copper and sell them shit instead The amount of correspondences complaining to and about this guy are HILARIOUSS blacktyranitar Are you telling me we know about a specific guy who lived 5000 years ago, by name, because he was a huge asshole thesparkofrevolution More like 4000 years ago but yes. Ea-nasir and his dodgy business deals prokopetz And we haven't even touched on the true hilarity of the situation yet. Consider two additional facts He wasn't just into copper trading. There are letters complaining about Ea-nasir's business practices with respect to everything from kitchenwares to real estate speculation to second-hand clothing. The guy was everywhere The majority of the surviving correspondences regarding Ea- nasir were recovered from one particular room in a building that is believed to have been Ea-nasir's own house Like, these are clay tablets. They're bulky, fragile, and difficult to store. They typically weren't kept long-term unless they contained financial records or other vital information (which is why we have huge reams of financial data about ancient Babylon in spite of how little we know about the actual culture: most of the surviving tablets are commercial inventories, bills of sale, etc.) Sale, etc.), mingtbes re comve of his angry letters- hundreds of But this guy, this Ea-nasir, he kept all them - and meticulously filed and preserved them in a dedicated room in his house. What kind of guy does that? Ancient Businesses Complaints
Save
Africa, Girls, and New York: Finland Sweden Iceland Russia Norway United Kingdom Canada Poland Germanyraine Kazakhstan France Mongolia Spain Italy orth acific cean United States North Turkey China South Korea Atlantic Ocean Afghanistan aq rnkistan Algeria Libya Egyp Mexico i Arabia India Thailand Mali Niger Nigeria Ethiopia zuela DR Congo, Kenya Indonesia Papua New Guinea Tanzania Brazil Peru Angola h Namibia Indian Ocean Botswana Madagascar South Pacific Ocean South Atlantic Ocean Australia Chile South Africa Argentina New Zealand thatsthat24: shitshilarious: queerqueerspawn: james-tiqueerius: queerqueerspawn: glampersand: glowcloud: kittiesinqueerland: robalyn: the highlighted area is where Jason Derulo knows what the girls want. london to taiwan. new york to haiti greenland is right out ummm no offense but new york to haiti should be measured as the area between the two latitudes, not the longitudes. this graph is incorrect and vastly underestimates the total region of the earth in which Jason Derulo knows what the girls want Even measuring that way, Greenland remains right out, as does the entirity of Brazil. Have we considered measuring by neither latitude nor longitude but in all area that would extend perpendicular from the diagonal of the two places?There are many different interpretations of the data, and until more is available, we ought not conclude anything at this point. In light of that, I posit this alternative map of regions where Jason Derulo is potentially claiming where he knows what girls want: As we can see, if we assume that model, the vast majority of the area where Jason Derulo knows what girls want is either open ocean (the Atlantic, the Mediterranean Sea) or sparsely populated (the northern Sahara, the northern Arabian Desert, various desert portions of Iran and Afghanistan, and the southern Tibetan Plateau). Four of the ten most populated countries on the planet have no territory in it (Nigeria, Brazil, Japan, and Indonesia), and two which do have relatively little territory in it (the US and Russia). It is suggested that for all his boasting, Jason Derulo does not know what a probable majority of the world’s girls want. Perhaps Jason Derulo’s intention was never to proclaim to be omnipotent to the interests of the female gender. Perhaps he was instead expressing his humanity, or the limits of his knowledge. I applaud Jason Derulo. Jason Derulo is not just another 2 dimensional character. Jason Derulo has depth.Jason Derulo has limitations and has come to terms with them. Jason Derulo knows Jason Derulo. Thats why he makes it a point to say his name so much. But again, Greenland is right out
Save
Alive, Being Alone, and Animals: THE "MODERN" SOCIETY Avocado Toast Houses the-iron-dragon-god: c-bassmeow: snapecrackelpop: c-bassmeow: Damn millenials Okay but like he had a point though? We, as a generation, waste a lot of money on dumb shit (like $5 coffees, eating out every day, and yes avocado toast). That’s not to say that we haven’t been dealt a really bad hand, economically speaking. But I really think we all ought to learn to tighten our purse strings a little bit…  While saving is indeed a good thing, this is not the reason we millennials cannot afford houses. Wages have been on the decline or stagnant for decades while the price of housing has skyrocketed. More and more jobs are being offered in cities where owning property let alone renting is impossible on your own. Whenever the poor want to “splurge” on let’s say a coffee or avocado toast (I have no idea what that is) it’s framed by the elite as some hedonistic, irrational splurge. It’s framed as if the rich are where they are because they were rational enough to save while the poor are just rabid wild animals who spend too much and refuse to save. The truth is that most Americans aren’t even saving there income… because they can’t.   (Graph courtesy of MotletFool the popular financial group) They literally can’t. Everything goes to the bills. If you look at the under 35 group, statistically speaking, millennials have a negative savings rate due to many barriers to entry that weren’t in place when our parents were alive and crippling college debt.  Even the generation above us is barely saving and these are people who aren’t burdened by college debt but instead many had to resort to credit cards to get by and thus have their own forms of debt. What’s left after the bills goes to making life bearable. I see nothing wrong with that. Poverty and lack of opportunity is not a function of the poor and middle class people being too stupid to save. They literally can’t save. Rational choice theory (the free market theory where anything bad that happens to you is solely a product of your bad choices and not society at large) can only go so far in explaining our position in the world. Saving is indeed good, but in order to stress saving… we must have adequate wages and a healthy economic environment that allow us the opportunity to save.  sidenote: The other irony about capitalism especially the American kind is that over 70% of our GDP is consumption, so that means the health of the American economy literally depends on us “wasting” money on stupid shit to boost corporations. SO it’s a very strange paradox -we get blamed for not saving enough because we are too stupid  yet we get blamed for not buying enough and ruining the economy… because we are too poor and stupid. No matter what we do the poor are always to blame! ….. FUCK !  ^I like this
Save
Alive, Being Alone, and Animals: THE "MODERN" SOCIETY Avocado Toast Houses snapecrackelpop: c-bassmeow: Damn millenials Okay but like he had a point though? We, as a generation, waste a lot of money on dumb shit (like $5 coffees, eating out every day, and yes avocado toast). That’s not to say that we haven’t been dealt a really bad hand, economically speaking. But I really think we all ought to learn to tighten our purse strings a little bit…  While saving is indeed a good thing, this is not the reason we millennials cannot afford houses. Wages have been on the decline or stagnant for decades while the price of housing has skyrocketed. More and more jobs are being offered in cities where owning property let alone renting is impossible on your own. Whenever the poor want to splurge on lets say a coffee or avocado toast (I have no idea what that is) its framed by the elite as some hedonistic, irrational splurge. Its framed as if the rich are where they are because they were rational enough to save while the poor are just rabid wild animals who spend too much and refuse to save. The truth is that most Americans arent even saving there income because they can’t.  (Graph courtesy of MotletFool the popular financial group) They literally cant. Everything goes to the bills. If you look at the under 35 group, statistically speaking, millennials have a negative savings rate due to many barriers to entry that weren’t in place when our parents were alive and crippling college debt.  Even the generation above us is barely saving and these are people who aren’t burdened by college debt but instead many had to resort to credit cards to get by and thus have their own forms of debt. Whats left after the bills goes to making life bearable. I see nothing wrong with that. Poverty and lack of opportunity is not a function of the poor and middle class people being too stupid to save. They literally cant save. Rational choice theory (the free market theory where anything bad that happens to you is solely a product of your bad choices and not society at large) can only go so far in explaining our position in the world. Saving is indeed good, but in order to stress saving we must have adequate wages and a healthy economic environment that allow us the opportunity to save. sidenote: The other irony about capitalism especially the American kind is that over 70% of our GDP is consumption, so that means the health of the American economy literally depends on us “wasting” money on stupid shit to boost corporations. SO it’s a very strange paradox -we get blamed for not saving enough because we are too stupid  yet we get blamed for not buying enough and ruining the economy because we are too poor and stupid. No matter what we do the poor are always to blame! .. FUCK ! 
Save
Being Alone, Matlock, and Tumblr: NOAM CHOMSKY: It's a pretty remarkable fact that-first of all, it is a joke. Half the world is cracking up in laughter. The United States doesn't just interfere in elections. It overthrows governments it doesn't like, institutes military dictatorships. Simply in the case of Russia alone-it's the least of it-the U.S. government, under Clinton, intervened quite blatantly and openly, then tried to conceal it, to get their man Yeltsin in, in all sorts of ways. So, this, as I say, it's considered-it's turning the United States, again, into a laughingstock in the world. So why are the Democrats focusing on this? In fact, why are they focusing so much attention on the one element of Trump's programs which is fairly reasonable, the one ray of light in this gloom: trying to reduce tensions with Russia? That's-the tensions on the Russian border are extremely serious. They could escalate to a major terminal war. Efforts to try to reduce them should be welcomed. Just a couple of days ago, the former U.S. ambassador to Russia, Jack Matlock, came out and said he just can't believe that so much attention is being paid to apparent efforts by the incoming administration to establish connections with Russia. He said, "Sure, that's just what they ought to be doing." So, meanwhile, this one topic is the primary locus of concern and critique, while, meanwhile, the policies are proceeding step by step, which are extremely destructive and harmful. So, you know, yeah, maybe the Russians tried to interfere in the election. That's not a major issue. Maybe the people in the Trump campaign were talking to the Russians. Well, OK, not a major point, certainly less than is being done constantly. And it is a kind of a paradox, I think, that the one issue that seems to inflame the Democratic opposition is the one thing that has some justification and reasonable aspects to it. c-bassmeow: Noam Chomsky’s piercing comments on the Democrat’s “Russia stole our election!” obsession. From an interview with DemocracyNow.

c-bassmeow: Noam Chomsky’s piercing comments on the Democrat’s “Russia stole our election!” obsession. From an interview with DemocracyNow...

Save
Being Alone, Matlock, and Tumblr: NOAM CHOMSKY: It's a pretty remarkable fact that-first of all, it is a joke. Half the world is cracking up in laughter. The United States doesn't just interfere in elections. It overthrows governments it doesn't like, institutes military dictatorships. Simply in the case of Russia alone-it's the least of it-the U.S. government, under Clinton, intervened quite blatantly and openly, then tried to conceal it, to get their man Yeltsin in, in all sorts of ways. So, this, as I say, it's considered-it's turning the United States, again, into a laughingstock in the world. So why are the Democrats focusing on this? In fact, why are they focusing so much attention on the one element of Trump's programs which is fairly reasonable, the one ray of light in this gloom: trying to reduce tensions with Russia? That's-the tensions on the Russian border are extremely serious. They could escalate to a major terminal war. Efforts to try to reduce them should be welcomed. Just a couple of days ago, the former U.S. ambassador to Russia, Jack Matlock, came out and said he just can't believe that so much attention is being paid to apparent efforts by the incoming administration to establish connections with Russia. He said, "Sure, that's just what they ought to be doing." So, meanwhile, this one topic is the primary locus of concern and critique, while, meanwhile, the policies are proceeding step by step, which are extremely destructive and harmful. So, you know, yeah, maybe the Russians tried to interfere in the election. That's not a major issue. Maybe the people in the Trump campaign were talking to the Russians. Well, OK, not a major point, certainly less than is being done constantly. And it is a kind of a paradox, I think, that the one issue that seems to inflame the Democratic opposition is the one thing that has some justification and reasonable aspects to it. c-bassmeow: Noam Chomsky’s piercing comments on the Democrat’s “Russia stole our election!” obsession. From an interview with DemocracyNow.

c-bassmeow: Noam Chomsky’s piercing comments on the Democrat’s “Russia stole our election!” obsession. From an interview with DemocracyNow...

Save
Being Alone, Matlock, and Yeah: NOAM CHOMSKY: It's a pretty remarkable fact that-first of all, it is a joke. Half the world is cracking up in laughter. The United States doesn't just interfere in elections. It overthrows governments it doesn't like, institutes military dictatorships. Simply in the case of Russia alone-it's the least of it-the U.S. government, under Clinton, intervened quite blatantly and openly, then tried to conceal it, to get their man Yeltsin in, in all sorts of ways. So, this, as I say, it's considered-it's turning the United States, again, into a laughingstock in the world. So why are the Democrats focusing on this? In fact, why are they focusing so much attention on the one element of Trump's programs which is fairly reasonable, the one ray of light in this gloom: trying to reduce tensions with Russia? That's-the tensions on the Russian border are extremely serious. They could escalate to a major terminal war. Efforts to try to reduce them should be welcomed. Just a couple of days ago, the former U.S. ambassador to Russia, Jack Matlock, came out and said he just can't believe that so much attention is being paid to apparent efforts by the incoming administration to establish connections with Russia. He said, "Sure, that's just what they ought to be doing." So, meanwhile, this one topic is the primary locus of concern and critique, while, meanwhile, the policies are proceeding step by step, which are extremely destructive and harmful. So, you know, yeah, maybe the Russians tried to interfere in the election. That's not a major issue. Maybe the people in the Trump campaign were talking to the Russians. Well, OK, not a major point, certainly less than is being done constantly. And it is a kind of a paradox, I think, that the one issue that seems to inflame the Democratic opposition is the one thing that has some justification and reasonable aspects to it. Noam Chomskys piercing comments on the Democrats Russia stole our election! obsession. From an interview with DemocracyNow.

Noam Chomskys piercing comments on the Democrats Russia stole our election! obsession. From an interview with DemocracyNow.

Save
Twitter, Bankruptcy, and Business: Vicente Fox Quesada . @VicenteFoxQue Trump may ask whoever he wants, but still neither myself nor Mexico are going to pay for his racist monument. Another promise he can't keep. 1/5/17, 10:33 PM 27K RETWEETS 46.6K LIKES Vicente Fox Quesada @VicenteFo.... 20h Sr Trump,the intelligence report is devastating.Losing election by more than 3M votes and in addition this.Are you a legitimate president? 3,851 37.9K73.9K Vicente Fox Quesada。@VicenteFox.. . 21 h ﹀ TRUMP, when will you understand that l am not paying for that fucken wall. Be clear with US tax payers. They will pay for it 6,147 다 147K 218K Vicente Fox Quesada @VicenteFox...-1d ﹀ Trump may ask whoever he wants, but still neither myself nor Mexico are going to pay for his racist monument Another promise he can't keep わ2,526 656K ·121K Vicente Fox Quesada @VicenteFox.. ·2d ﹀ Well done Trump. At the very end many jobs will come from forcing GM, FORD, to stay home. Why you don't do it in your own businesses 236 3,280 ·7,943 Vicente Fox Quesada @VicenteFox.. . 2d Those who do not learn from history (GM,FORD)will repeat the same mistakes.Losing competitiveness and facing bankruptcy. Who pays?tax payers 119 1,219 2,908 Vicente Fox QuesadaVicent... 12/11/16 The whole nation is trusting its security in a guy who rather he doesn't get briefed every day about it. A presidency is not a business eight years. Could be eight years -- but eight years. I don't need that.But I do say, "If something should change, let us know." Now, in the meantime, my generals are great are being briefed. And Mike Pence is being briefed, who is, by the way, one of my very good decisions. He is terrific. And they're being briefed. And I'm being briefed also. But if they're going to come in and tell me the 41. 109 608 1,149 Vicente Fox Quesada@Vicent... 12/6/16 In this era, IT has become a crucial thing in practically everything, but dictating political agenda through Twitter is nonsense 257 732 Vicente Fox Quesada@Vicent... .12/5/16v That's a good question for @realDonaldTrump, most of his apparel is produced abroad Jac Higgins @Vette73 @VicenteFoxQue Question for @realDonaldTrump : will the tax apply to his clothing line and Ivanka's jewelry as well? h 17 204 445 Vicente Fox Quesada e》 @Vicent...-12/5/16 v Business leaders ought to stand up to his bullying. Do not let his ideas become the end of trade and peace progress 23 138 He really came for Trump’s toupée
Save
Church, cnn.com, and Family: Vatican TV Rome CNN DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE 4 DAYS CALL FOR COMPASSION LIVE POPE: DIGNITY OF EVERYONE "OUGHT TO BE RESPECTED" N 3:32 PMPT TEAM AND LOCKER ROOM LEADER" SAINTS QB DREV NEwSR00M Atlanta 6:34 PM ET CNN DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE 4 DAYS LIVE SANDERS: I'M A VERY GREAT FAN OF THE POPE CNN IONAGE, ILLEGALLY SHARING SECRET INFORMATION, PROSTITUTION, AND F NEWSROOM CALL FOR COMPASSION 6:34 PMET HUFFPOST RELIGION At Synod Opening Pope Francis Reminds Evervone That The Catholic Church ls Against Gay Marriage Pope Francis reminds everyone that the Catholic Church is against gay marriage at opening of synod on the family Oct 04, 2015 REUTERS Philip Pullella 00:52 Pope Opens Synod, Calls for Welcoming Church But No Gay rj4gui4r: c-bassmeow: rj4gui4r: Sanders has said many times he disagrees with the pope on social issues [abortion, gay rights,etc.] but is a fan of the pope because of his pleas for economic freedom and the obsession with hyper-capitalistic values.   I don’t doubt that, but it seems to me like the Pope is just saying what he needs to say to appeal to each audience. When he’s in more progressive countries he talks about universal human dignity and open mindedness and so on. And yet when he’s speaking to conservative audiences, suddenly he’s reaffirming the Church’s conservative values. For someone who’s called a lot of people out on their BS, I just find it surprising that Sanders would praise someone with that kind of track record, but then again I guess the Pope isn’t running for office. But still, it rubbed me the wrong way. I do agree that many praise the pope more than they should since he is indeed conservative on many issues but once again Sanders has denounced the popes views on social issues many times on national television and even right after it was revealed he was invited to speak at the Vatican. But Sanders doesnt belong to this you must be exactly like me camp, and instead wants to work with the popes message of economic inequality which he is indeed sincere about. The Pope is no angel but he is the best pope in ages and Im an atheist admitting this lol 😂

rj4gui4r: c-bassmeow: rj4gui4r: Sanders has said many times he disagrees with the pope on social issues [abortion, gay rights,etc.] bu...

Save