“As a means of navigating the Internet, or setting the tone for academic discussion, the trigger warning is unhelpful. Once we start imposing alerts on the basis of potential trauma, where do we stop? One of the problems with the concept of triggering—understanding words as devices that activate a mechanism or cause a situation—is it promotes a rigid, overly deterministic approach to language. There is no rational basis for applying warnings because there is no objective measure of words’ potential harm. Of course, words can inspire intense reactions, but they have no intrinsic danger. Two people who have endured similarly painful experiences, from rape to war, can read the same material and respond in wholly different ways.”—FINALLY
“To use privilege requires admitting to privilege, requires moving beyond guilt and accusation into creative action. Unused privilege becomes a weapon in the hands of our enemies.”—Audre Lorde, in a letter to Gay Community News. (via fuckyeahlesbianliterature)
its the year 2021. you download designer drug for your 3d printer off the bit torrent network. you go to get the drugs out of the printer but instead of drugs it printed a cop. Youre under arrest
afraid of the future
fortunately you ran out of plastic filament halfway through the job so the cop is grey and thin and misshapen and easy to escape, but you go back later that day and the half-cop is still there, screaming, and you have to kill it and bury it in the backyard, and now you don’t like getting high any more because you think the ghost of the half-cop will haunt you.
Sherry Turkle, who does the dirty work in tech sociology of asking what the digital world is doing to our souls, talked to me about online entertainment quizzes (y’know, the Buzzfeed/Zimbio ones) and how they’re just one more way we’ve become full-time identity performers on the Internet.
I'm starting a project to try to end misogynist online harassment.
Are you a woman (or person of any gender) who has suffered anonymous online harassment? I’m starting a project about this subject and am looking for people willing to be involved. It will take very little effort on your part. If you’re interested you can email me at sophcw at gmail dot com. Please share!
What we are wearing is political and has really high stakes! The conditions of production of the actual materials we wear are life and death, and the consequences we all face for how we use clothing, grooming and style to craft our appearances are life and death. I’m thinking about racist laws that have attempted to ban sagging pants in some jurisdictions or use certain colors of clothing as methods to identify and criminalize youth of color for purported gang membership. I’m also thinking of the long history of sumptuary laws, and the horrific regulation of gender-related clothing and grooming items that trans prisoners are constantly fighting. Fashion is definitely a political question.
It’s interesting because fashion and style is a site of liberatory feelings at times—moments of pleasure, mutual recognition, belonging, escape, and rebellion. But there is also the broader context of extreme violence and coercion in which we dress ourselves. There is the constant danger of feeling wrong, being punished, and being stared at. These two elements are often happening simultaneously. I think about this when I engage with people who I know are making choices about their appearances that are both highly endangering and also feel urgently important or wonderfully expressive. It is amazing how much so many people risk to wear their look. Certainly, many trans people exemplify this, risking extreme violence walking around offending gender norms and being beautiful.
this entire article is blowing my mind. it is so much of what my work is about, and it makes me feel all warm and fuzzy to read more and more articles like this one, to see that work is being done by others in impressive passionate ways.
“This tension between intellectual work and economic survival is thoroughly mundane and generally taken for granted by those who negotiate it every day; but to look at the history of the past thirty years or so is to be struck by the degree to which the social, cultural, and political trajectory of American life is bound up with this most ordinary of conflicts. During that time, the conditions of intellectual work have radically changed, as a culture operating on the assumption of continuing—indeed increasing—abundance has given way to a culture of austerity.”—From the first paragraph of “Intellectual Life in the Culture of Austerity,” a little-read but highly relevant Ellen Willis essay from 1999. I immediately thought of this piece when I heard about the new book “MFA vs. NYC,” a new essay collection about the different ways writers make and will make money. (via ellenwillis)
“You just don’t invade another country on phony pretext in order to assert your interests. This is an act of aggression that is completely trumped up in terms of its pretext. It’s really 19th century behavior in the 21st century.”—
John Kerry, U.S. Secretary of State, about Russia’s response to the fascist coup in Ukraine, on NBC’s Meet the Press, March 2, 2014
JOKE OF THE WEEK from the mouthpiece of the the U.S. administration that invaded Libya, threatens to bomb Syria, regularly massacres civilians with drones, proclaims its right to assassinate anyone anywhere anytime, is re-colonizing Africa, continues to occupy Afghanistan, etc.
Thanks to Tanya Gilbert
I wonder if Kerry’s speechwriters realize that they just wrote his epitaph…
posting this quote again just because it’s so breathtaking
i mean seriously the level of cynicism required to say this with a straight face makes the hamfisted bluster and cartoon evil of bush/cheney seem straight-up guileless by comparison. kevin spacey wishes he was this cold-blooded. wouldn’t have guessed kerry had it in him.
“My third grade teacher called my mother and said, ‘Ms. Cox, your son is going to end up in New Orleans in a dress if we don’t get him into therapy.’ And wouldn’t you know, just last week I spoke at Tulane University, and I wore a LOVELY green and black dress.”—
Interesting, starkly honest piece on an incredibly important subject. We need to, as a culture, move beyond the flat duality of addict/sober, just as we need to recognize that the legality of drugs has nothing to do with their safety and that “the war on drugs” is really a war on minorities and the poor.
“If we think of True Detective as a parody in these terms—that it nods toward certain conventions only to manipulate and muddle their strictures and codes—it might coax us out of our pursuit of trajectory and meaning, and ultimately help us appreciate the show more on its own terms. “I think we’re doing a good job of telling the story that this genre demands,” series creator Nic Pizolatto told the Daily Beast. “I think we’re also poking certain holes in it and looking at where these instincts begin, both in the type of men that Hart and Cohle represent—and in ourselves as an audience.””—Stop trying to “solve” True Detective.
emilygould said: Because I wasn’t a broke writer when I rented that apartment, I was an employed editor. And I didn’t blow $200K in 6 months, I lived on $170K for four years. Pretty sure bankers who make that much money every month are giving NYC a bad name, actually
Ah, ok, I misremembered the details of your article. I mean, I have seen people linking to your piece and saying things like “this is why New York is bullshit, I could never afford to live there, etc.” which is frustrating because I feel like that’s a big misconception, it’s actually not that expensive to live here. Sorry to spread more misconceptions.
Everyone identifies with powerful men onscreen, and nobody wants to identify with neglected wives and disposable sidepieces.
This is another really good one, too, from my fave Molly Lambert, although it honestly doesn’t make me much more disinclined to switch over to Top of the Lake instead (and yeah, I said instead, because do you know how many hours there are in a day?). I still am not onboard with the general adoration of Rust as this antiheroic speaker for women, regardless of how well Michelle Monaghan plays her character. Like, okay, so the sympathetic male protagonist speaks to one female character as though she’s a person, we did it!!!!!
I deeply support the portrayal of complex (not always “strong”) female characters, and I do appreciate the aesthetics of this show, but Maggie Hart won’t have the chance to be Carmela Soprano, or a Betty Draper, because this is an eight-episode arc, not an 86- or 78-episode one. There’s no chance of a Joan-and-Peggy moment here, because there’s simply no time for it — everything has to be in service of the larger plot, which is ultimately about the complexity of Rust and Marty (and secondarily about the complexity of Maggie, but only insofar as her complexity applies to them).
It’s true, we don’t know whether this is going to end up being a show about complex, brooding white boys, or one about something profoundly deeper than that, because it’s not over yet. I haven’t been able to put my finger on my exact issue with it just yet, either, which is why I haven’t written anything myself, but the slobbering celebration this show has immediately gotten, bolstered by the strongly bullshit “not every show has to be P.C.” defense, still deeply unsettles me in a manner external to the show’s intended eerieness. I’ll get to the point eventually — probably. (h/t sophie)
I thought Molly Lambert’s point was more about how TD’s character’s misogyny is a comment on/deconstruction of the typical misogyny of these kinds of characters/shows. I kind of am starting to think the whole show is supposed to be the unraveling of this genre anyway (hence the possibly ironic title). I really like it, anyway, and I usually have low to zero tolerance for macho bullshit. I mean, they take the character who at the beginning has the most potential for “likability” (Marty) and show over a few episodes how his lack of self-awareness and need to constantly hold himself up to an impossible standard of masculinity has made him a monster. Obviously, I would love if there were more shows about women being awesome, or complicated, or whatever, but I think this is a really important show in demonstrating how patriarchy damages men as well, making them into “sulky teenagers” or filling them with “secret rage” that comes out in very dangerous ways (not to say that we’re supposed to sympathize with the characters for this either).
I also really liked this piece by Amanda Marcotte who believes that the “inability of the main characters to really see women is going to be their downfall.”
But regardless of what happens, I really like the show. I don’t know if I believe “shows don’t have to be PC” but I also don’t with anyone who thinks this show is just a hyper-masculine circle jerk.
Ok, the only thing I really thought about the Emily Gould piece was WHY WOULD YOU PAY $1700 FOR AN APARTMENT IF YOU’RE A BROKE WRITER???
This shit is giving NYC a bad name. If you come to live here as a broke writer maybe you should take a $600 room in a shared apartment in (perfectly nice) Sunset Park or something?
Also I’m pretty sure that if I got $200k I wouldn’t blow it in like six months or whatever. But who knows, not criticizing her choices, just saying I don’t think it’s representative of what has to happen if you are a broke writer living in NYC who gets a break.
the idea of the technological singularity is late capitalism’s most brilliant move because it plays off any criticism of capitalism’s use of technology to disenfranchise and oppress by basically saying that technology under late capitalism just hasn’t progressed enough so we need to double down on it to save ourselves
it’s like if someone was stabbing you and you said “stop stabbing me” so they came up with this bullshit idea that said if you just get stabbed enough, all your stab wounds will be miraculously healed so the solution is actually to increase the size of the knife and the rate of stabbing
In QS, as in other areas of contemporary life, human-relationship data points are rarely emphasized, or fully acknowledged. Tracking milestones in relationships and communities, like birthdays, anniversaries, holidays and rituals, is often a feminine-branded behavior. While your boss isn’t necessarily expected to remember that next week is your birthday, or your partner’s, their assistant probably does have this type of expectation. How often is what gets branded “nagging”, either maternal or spousal, just a ritual in data gathering?
“Whether as victim, demon, or hero, the industrial worker of the past century filled the public imagination in books, movies, news stories, and even popular songs, putting a grimy human face on capitalism while dramatizing the social changes and conflicts it brought. … With work increasingly invisible, it’s much harder to grasp the human effects, the social contours, of the Internet economy.”—George Packer on the invisibility of work and workers in the digital age: http://nyr.kr/1mvEmhf (via newyorker)
“He walked out in the gray light and stood and he saw for a brief moment the absolute truth of the world. The cold relentless circling of the intestate earth. Darkness implacable. The blind dogs of the sun in their running. The crushing black vacuum of the universe. And somewhere two hunted animals trembling like ground-foxes in their cover. Borrowed time and borrowed world and borrowed eyes with which to sorrow it.”—
“As a child I felt myself to be alone, and I am still, because I know things and must hint at things which others apparently know nothing of, and for the most part do not want to know. Loneliness does not come from having no people about one, but from being unable to communicate the things that seem important to oneself, or from holding certain views which others find inadmissible.”—
Carl Gustav Jung, Memories, Dreams, Reflections (via liquidnight)
jesus i am starting to relate everything i see/read to true detective