A student blows up at a teacher, drops the F-bomb. The usual approach at Lincoln – and, safe to say, at most high schools in this country – is automatic suspension. Instead, Sporleder sits the kid down and says quietly: “Wow. Are you OK? This doesn’t sound like you. What’s going on?”
He gets even more specific: “You really looked stressed. On a scale of 1-10, where are you with your anger?” The kid was ready. Ready, man! For an anger blast to his face….”How could you do that?” “What’s wrong with you?”…and for the big boot out of school. But he was NOT ready for kindness.
The armor-plated defenses melt like ice under a blowtorch and the words pour out: “My dad’s an alcoholic. He’s promised me things my whole life and never keeps those promises.” The waterfall of words that go deep into his home life, which is no piece of breeze, end with this sentence: “I shouldn’t have blown up at the teacher.” Whoa.
“‘Virgin’ meant not married, not belong to a man-a woman who was ‘one-in-herself.’ The very word derives from a Latin root meaning strength, force, skill; and was later applied to men: virle.”—
Monica Sjoo and Barbara Mor in the book “The Great Cosmic Mother -Rediscovering the Religion of the Earth” (via wine-loving-vagabond)
(I’m cutting down this quote to just the part I’m objecting to, since the rest either I can’t speak for orit is essentially correct.)
This etymology for the word virgin is completely wrong, the words virile and virgin have no common etymology. Virgin comes originally from the Latin virgo, which outright meant “sexually inexperienced”, itself coming from a suite of words based on the Latin word vireo, meaning “fresh” or “flourishing” (usually in botanical senses). Virile, on the other hand, comes from the Latin virilis, meaning literally “man-like” or “male”, coming ultimately from the root vir which refered explicitly to male things, ultimately dating back to the PIE root *uiHro meaning “freeman”. Neither one ever came from a root that generally meant anything like “strength, force, skill”.
One reason men despise the word “creep” so much more than any other insult is that it isn’trooted in misogyny. Jeremy Paul Gordon specifically compared the term to “pussy,” “douchebag,” and “asshole.” The first two words, when directed at a man, insult him by comparing him either to a vagina or a device used to clean one; their pejorative power lies in the way they feminize the guy who gets called one of these names. “Asshole,” as the historian Rictor Norton has suggested, is rooted in a derogatory term for men who allowed themselves to be anally fucked. A man who gets penetrated behaves like a woman and is labeled as feminine — a fate that we raise small American boys to fear more than almost anything else. (This is why, of course, words like “bitch” or “pussy” when used by one man to another, are so much more likelier to lead to blows than “dick” or “prick.” Men are unlikely to be enraged by references to their own anatomy, only to a woman’s.)
So if fear of the feminine is what gives male insults their power, why then is “creep” worse than “pussy?” The answer is that creep is the only insult that instantly centers women’s perceptions. To call a man a “pussy” is to make a comment about how his behavior appears; to call him “creepy” is to name how he makes women feel. If a man wants to disprove that he’s a “pussy,” all he has to do is act with sufficient macho swagger or courage to make the insult obviously inappropriate. But trying to disprove “creepy” involves trying to talk a woman out of an instinctual response to a potential threat, a much more difficult thing to do. Most men recognize (or eventually learn) that the harder they try to deny their creepiness, the creepier they appear.
Kickass Dad of the Day: When Stuart Chaifetz learned that his 10-year-old son, Akian, was being violent and disruptive in class, he was puzzled. He knew Akian, who has autism, to be mild-mannered and sensitive, and had a hunch that something more was going on. But after several meetings with a team of school officials created to help special-needs students, nothing changed. So Chaifetz did what any concerned parent would do.
On the morning of Friday, February 17, 2012, I wired my son and sent him to school. That night, when I listened to the audio my life changed forever. I heard my son being bullied by his teacher and aide. The six and a half hours of audio I had proved that my son wasn’t hitting the teacher because there was something wrong with him — he was lashing out because he was being mocked, mistreated and humiliated. His outbursts were his way of expressing that he was being emotionally hurt at school.
The New Jersey father has since launched a website full of damning evidence and aFacebook page, and he is petitioning the state to change legislation so that teachers who bully children are immediately fired. The aide has been fired, but the rest of the staff have merely been relocated.
“I seek a full and public apology from all those adults who were in my son’s class for what they did to him,” Chaifetz says. “It is also far past time that these issues are allowed to be hidden from public view.”
st patricks is also a great holiday i wear green like a good girl ;w;
*sigh* No, the only crimes punishable by death in England are treason against the crown and sea piracy. It’s also not illegal to be patriotic here, but if someone decides that you’re inciting racial hatred then they might be able to get you in trouble for that.
There were lots of people wearing St George’s crosses and Union Jacks on the days leading up to St George’s day. Not nearly as many as you see for the world cup, mind you, but then, there’s more football fans than patriots.
St. Patrick’s day is only a more popular holiday because you get to get blind drunk.
Actually you guys abolished the death penalty entirely in 1998. Most cases of those two crimes on May 20th when you ratified the 6th Protocol of the European Convention on Human Rights for all occasions except “in time of war or imminent threat of war,” and even during wartime on November 9th when you passed the Human Rights Act 1998. (It took another 8 years to abolish it in the Crown dependencies, but those all covered the nation proper.)
(Ed:Your primary tumblrs majored in two of these and now work in the field of a third.)
I’ll finish that thesis on Nietzsche someday…
yeah well fuck you too science
because literally everything i’ve ever considered majoring in is on this list
and i am majoring in film related junk so there!!! screw you i’m gonna be rich and famous and you’re gonna be boring and dumb
also i would like to ask WHERE THE FUCK YOU THINK SOCIETY WOULD BE WITHOUT HISTORY OR POLY SCI???
or art and literature for that matter but
no architecture WE AIN’T GOT NO BUILDINGS no journalists WE AIN’T GOT NO CONTEMPORARY KNOWLEDGE no film and art and literature YOU ALL DIE MISERABLE AND SOULLESS AND IT SUCKS THE END
Well, science has just issued a blanket condemnation of each and every one of my realistically viable career options.
…I am neither scientifically nor mathematically gifted.
Oh, goody. I suppose I’ll just go major in engineering, because it’s useful.
Smooches Drama and Theatre Arts on the mouth.
Like I didn’t know that going into it. Silly Science.
And here is the post. It links to a Daily Beast article that is sourcing a report released by the Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce.
Here is their snippet on methodology:
Data from the American Community Survey for the years 2009 and 2010 were pooled to provide a larger sample size for the estimates. The unemployment rates were then computed for each of the three groups by dividing the total unemployed with the total employed and unemployed. The earnings used are median earnings in 2010 dollars rounded to the nearest $1,000. The three groups are: recent college graduates (those between ages 22 and 26 with bachelor degrees), experienced college graduates (those between ages 30 and 54), and graduate degree holders (those with master’s degrees or higher and are between 30 and 54). Median earnings are based on those who worked more than 35 hours a week and at least 50 weeks a year. All calculations use the survey weights provided by the Census Bureau.
The Daily Beast article includes BLS numbers for estimated increases in jobs for each related field, and ranks the majors based on these levels:
Recent graduate employment
Experienced graduate employment
Recent graduate earnings
Experienced graduate earnings
Projected growth in total number of jobs, 2010–2020
I suppose the title of “Useless” says enough, but they don’t make any conclusions at the end of the article. But from looking at it, and reading the report from Georgetown, the numbers don’t lie. General majors (such as the Humanities), and art, literature and social majors will put you face to face with higher unemployment rates and lower median pay. That’s just the facts. That doesn’t say whether you should care about that or if that should change your mind, it’s just the truth of the situation.
From the paper:
What college graduates earn also depends on what they take. Median earnings among recent college graduates vary from $55,000 among Engineering majors to $30,000 in the Arts, as well as Psychology and Social Work. In our more detailed data—which drills into the broad categories to look at results for more individual, specialized majors—the variation is even more pronounced, ranging from $60,000 for Computer Engineering graduates to $24,000 for Physiology majors.
Isn’t that just because it’s a field with very little employment-opportunities and a lot of applicants?
I majored in English ;u;
That’s basically what NaS said along with their job fields being lower paying on average.
Also this is probably focused on the United States where the need for English majors is lower than a country where English is not a primary language and people are being encouraged to learn it for economic reasons.
Sadly English, History and Political Sciences are great for people wanting to be teachers, but teacher pay is crap - making them look bad as career choices despite the relative security of being a teacher (unless you really screw up or are in a state/region making huge budget cuts).
Then again if you’re the sort of person that would thrive in grad school then you will almost certainly be the sort of person for whom employment prospects are an irrelevant concern for going into grad school. No one gets a Masters or PhD for the money, because they quite simply aren’t cost effective (taking into account both increased salary potential for having the higher degree and income lost for being out of the workforce for 4-7 years depending on field plus, in the case of an unfunded program [most Masters programs and a few unlucky PhD programs], tuition costs).
Plus there’s the fact that…well, to illustrate, I’m going for a PhD in Mathematics. In terms of employment prospects, Mathematics is one of the best right now. There are “only” 2 graduates annually per new available position in academia, I believe something like 1.5 graduates overall.
Masters degrees are different, to be sure - and to be fair I may be wrong about cost ineffectiveness of a Masters degree, I think the income boost Bachelors to Masters may be enough in some fields to make up for the loss - but anyone that pursues a PhD for the money rather than a passion for the field is playing a fool’s game as it is.
(It’s still definitely something that should be improved, because just because money isn’t a top priority for a person doesn’t mean that they shouldn’t still be able to pursue employment in their chosen field. But quite frankly the problem is schools that accept too many graduates a) because of a need for TAs and RAs to cover positions traditionally held by professors thanks to the lower pay needed, and b) because any given professor, especially in some fields, requires multiple grad students in order to be able to do their research. It’s definitively not an issue with programs, about 70% of the fault or so can be laid purely on the feet of the graduate school system. The grad school bubble will collapse eventually, it’s only a question of time.)
Apologies again for last week, but the stream willbe happening today! We’re still midway through Episode 6 of Umineko no Naku Koro ni, and things are still very interesting. Hope to see people there! :D
If you are looking through google for information on the wonderful invention known as Plan B, Emergency contraception or the Morning After Pill- avoid Morningafterpill.org, which comes up on page 1 of ‘morning after pill’ searches
It is a actually a Anti-Abortion, Anti-Contraception site meant to shame women into thinking they are ending human life by using any method of emergency birth control. It is run by Catholics and gives an EXCESSIVE amount of misinformation about Plan B, going as far as to inform women they are Killing their child and this is simply not true.
Need a reputable site for Emergency Contraception info?
YOU BETTER START RUNNING FASTER, HONEY, BECAUSE YOU NEED TO LOSE ANOTHER 20 POUNDS BEFORE YOU GET AWAY WITH RUNNING IN A SPORTS BRA!
This comment, like most cowardly things, was not said to my face, but rather in passing as I ran past a group of guys on St. Patrick’s Day. I was running back to my apartment in Minneapolis, wearing shorts, sneakers, and a sports bra. They were presumably walking to a bar down the street, wearing shamrock beads, green Miller High Life t-shirts, and an eau de male privilege.
The circumstances leading up to this point had been anything but lucky. A nice afternoon of sipping iced tea on the rooftop veranda of a local restaurant with a former swimming friend had been suddenly halted after a more-belligerent patron of the same restaurant threw up all over me.
After the initial shock of being barfed on wore off, I had expected an apology — I am a patient and understanding person, and realize, too, that people make mistakes, especially in their judgment of “how much they can handle.” What I got instead was blame.
Why were you so close to me? I wouldn’t have thrown up on you if you weren’t sitting so close to me. And then he threw up on me again.
I was fuming, but remained rational. I was not going to let this jerk ruin my day — it was beautifully warm in Minneapolis, a rarity to be celebrated. So after asking around if I could buy a shirt from the restaurant (none in stock) or borrow an undershirt from a male patron (apparently, no one has been wearing undershirts since the 1960s), I took matters into my own hands. I was wearing sneakers. I was wearing a sports bra. I could easily throw my puke-stained shirt into a bag and run back to my apartment, only four blocks down the road, to change. I figured if I looked like I was on a run, no one would ask any questions. It was better than the alternative, anyway — having everyone in Minneapolis think that I had thrown up all over myself.
And it was on this run home when my body became the punchline: when someone who didn’t know me, this stranger, thought it appropriate to let me know what I could and could not wear, what I should and should not look like. He didn’t know anything about me: that I spend almost everyday at the pool training for Masters Swimming meets; that I am an MFA student who is working on her first book of poems; that I have devoted most of my life to helping others through sexual assault survivor advocacy work. He didn’t know how deeply I love my family, or how much I admire my friends, or how quickly I will respond to those in need of help. But he didn’t know any of this because he never asked. He didn’t know any of this because he didn’t care.
I allowed myself to get angry.
I stopped, turned around, and ran back to them. I confronted that coward.
“I’m sorry,” I said, putting my hands on my hips. I’ve always loved the support my love handles have given me. “Did you say something to me?”
“No,” he said, mumbling. He wouldn’t look me in the eye.
“Well,” I said, forcing eye contact, “I heard what you said. I had no idea I was dealing with an expert on woman’s bodies, because it appears to me that you have never seen a real woman’s body before. But let me tell you this — my body can, will, and does change. But what will never change is the fact that you are an asshole.”
And with that, I excused myself and ran back home.
Three strides in, I began to weep, not because of what this jerk said to me, but because a group of girls who had witnessed the entire thing from across the street. And they were clapping for me. And as much as it made me happy and proud and strong to tell off this guy, it made me sad to think why they were clapping:
Because they had probably been the victims of this misogynistic practice, too, and that I had probably vocalized something that they never had the chance to say aloud.
People believe that critiquing = not a good fan. Enjoyment of something is all or nothing. People believe that if they acknowledge something they love is problematic, then that means they are then bad people for liking something problematic.
But I mean, look at it this way. A person loves their cat. They LOOOOOVE their cat. But sometimes, cat will scratch you, or pee on your pillow or something that you really don’t like. Does this mean you are a bad person, because you love your wildly urinating cat? I don’t think so. But it is good to acknowledge that cat can be a badcat. And then maybe train it to not be a badcat. I mean, who likes to sleep with cat urine on their pillow, no matter HOW much you love that darn cat, right?
Women are being raped while serving and having their commanding officers tell them to “ignore and forget it happened” and when they press on about it, they are labeled as psychologically unfit for duty and booted from the military with no means of getting help or restitution for what happened to them.
Just a notice for everyone, there will be no Umineko stream tomorrow as I am out of town for the weekend at a conference. Apologies for the late notice! I’ll post this again tomorrow in case anyone misses this one.
You want to say Hi to the cute girl on the subway. How will she react? Fortunately, I can tell you with some certainty, because she’s already sending messages to you. Looking out the window, reading a book, working on a computer, arms folded across chest, body away from you = do not disturb. So, y’know, don’t disturb her. Really. Even to say that you like her hair, shoes, or book. A compliment is not always a reason for women to smile and say thank you. You are a threat, remember? You are Schrödinger’s Rapist. Don’t assume that whatever you have to say will win her over with charm or flattery. Believe what she’s signaling, and back off.
If you speak, and she responds in a monosyllabic way without looking at you, she’s saying, “I don’t want to be rude, but please leave me alone.” You don’t know why. It could be “Please leave me alone because I am trying to memorize Beowulf.” It could be “Please leave me alone because you are a scary, scary man with breath like a water buffalo.” It could be “Please leave me alone because I am planning my assassination of a major geopolitical figure and I will have to kill you if you are able to recognize me and blow my cover.”
On the other hand, if she is turned towards you, making eye contact, and she responds in a friendly and talkative manner when you speak to her, you are getting a green light. You can continue the conversation until you start getting signals to back off.
The fourth point: If you fail to respect what women say, you label yourself a problem.
There’s a man with whom I went out on a single date—afternoon coffee, for one hour by the clock—on July 25th. In the two days after the date, he sent me about fifteen e-mails, scolding me for non-responsiveness. I e-mailed him back, saying, “Look, this is a disproportionate response to a single date. You are making me uncomfortable. Do not contact me again.” It is now October 7th. Does he still e-mail?
Yeah. He does. About every two weeks.
This man scores higher on the threat level scale than Man with the Cockroach Tattoos. (Who, after all, is guilty of nothing more than terrifying bad taste.) You see, Mr. E-mail has made it clear that he ignores what I say when he wants something from me. Now, I don’t know if he is an actual rapist, and I sincerely hope he’s not. But he is certainly Schrödinger’s Rapist, and this particular Schrödinger’s Rapist has a probability ratio greater than one in sixty. Because a man who ignores a woman’s NO in a non-sexual setting is more likely to ignore NO in a sexual setting, as well.
So if you speak to a woman who is otherwise occupied, you’re sending a subtle message. It is that your desire to interact trumps her right to be left alone. If you pursue a conversation when she’s tried to cut it off, you send a message. It is that your desire to speak trumps her right to be left alone. And each of those messages indicates that you believe your desires are a legitimate reason to override her rights.
For women, who are watching you very closely to determine how much of a threat you are, this is an important piece of data.
“Free speech as a legal concept only guarantees you the right to speak. It doesn’t guarantee you the right to be heard, it doesn’t guarantee you the right to be agreed with, it certainly doesn’t guarantee you the right for your speech to not be challenged by someone else’s speech, and most importantly of all, it doesn’t mean you can’t suffer consequences if and when your free speech is used to cause harm to someone. Which is exactly what sexual harassment, racial slurs, and verbal bigotry are. That’s not censorship. That’s fairness.”—
When someone says "racist", what they mean is:There is a systematic, entrenched, system which treats white people as advantaged and privileged and people who are not white as inferior and disadvantaged. This means that although some progress has been made toward equalization of all races, we are still far from true equal footing for all people of all races. What is needed to help with this equalization is for you to realize that the privilege and advantage is still there, whether you mean to benefit from it or not. What is needed to help with this equalization is for you to realize that PoC need safe spaces. What is needed to help with this equalization is for you to help push for PoC history to be in schools. For the teachers to stop writing PoC students off as "going to amount to nothing". For the authorities to stop treating PoC as ten times more dangerous and criminal than white people when we're not.
What some white people hear "racist" what they hear is:You are a bad person. You are an evil person. You are a Klan member wannabe, even if you don't wear the white hood. You burn crosses on lawns. You use the N word even though you know black people don't like it. You would be like the ones who make the news, dragging PoC behind their vehicles, shooting them for looking "suspicious" and beating them up for fun if you thought you could get away with it. You would back up returning to slavery and segregation! You hate all people who are not white!
Why non-PoC want to be able to say the N word:They think it's just a mean, unkind, rude, unpleasant word. That's all. Nothing more. Sticks and stones. No different than honky or cracker.
Why the N word offends many PoC:It is not just a rude word like "dummy" or "stupid" or "asshole". It is a word that was used, for the duration of slavery and beyond, to keep PoC oppressed, and to remind them that if they stood up for themselves they would be whipped, beaten, attacked, mutilated, and KILLED. Let me repeat: KILLED. We fought hard for the right to be treated like HUMAN BEINGS. The N word is an indication that there are still many white people out there who don't think of us as HUMAN BEINGS and don't want us to be treated like HUMAN BEINGS. So it's not just "black people are being mean and not letting us say it." Cracker, by the way, does not mean little thing with salt on it that you put cheese on. It means the one who cracked the whip while PoC were slaves.
So think about these things before you start getting defensive at PoC. And think about why you're getting defensive. Think about why you want to deny the truth of other people's experiences when you have no way of having that experience yourself.
Why do you want to be able to say a word that is sending the message to PoC that you want them to be as they were during slavery and segregation times. If you don't want to send that message. If you don't sincerely feel that way, then there is no valid reason -- NONE -- to want to use the word.
Two and a Half Men co-creator Lee Aronsohn’s tells THR he doesn’t much care for lady-centric sitcoms. (via newsweek)
He applauded women like Whitney Cummings, Chelsea Handler and Tina Fey securing a voice to discuss formerly taboo subjects on TV.
“But we’re approaching peak vagina on television, the point of labia saturation,” he added.
The current female TV boom contrasts with Two and a Half Men mostly portraying women as bimbos, something Aronsohn isn’t about to apologize for.
“Screw it… We’re centering the show on two very damaged men. What makes men damaged? Sorry, it’s women. I never got my heart broken by a man,” Aronsohn earlier told the Toronto conference during a keynote address.