![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Feb. 7th, 2017
via http://ift.tt/2lhTDHu:
beautifulwhensarcastic:
Highschool AU in which Peggy is in a sports team and skinny!Steve wears her jersey jacket.
beautifulwhensarcastic:
Highschool AU in which Peggy is in a sports team and skinny!Steve wears her jersey jacket.
via http://ift.tt/2lhTEew:
tisfan:
bummblesbuzz:
boredpanda:
Bead Dragon Brooches By This Russian Artist Will Make You Want To Tame One
BEEPS
@everyworldneedslove
tisfan:
bummblesbuzz:
boredpanda:
Bead Dragon Brooches By This Russian Artist Will Make You Want To Tame One
BEEPS
@everyworldneedslove
via http://ift.tt/2kBIBxD:The FCC is stopping 9 companies from providing federally subsidized Internet to the poor:
h1ghtechl0wlife:
kerryrenaissance:
skoomapipe:
tikkunolamorgtfo:
fromchaostocosmos:
sale-aholic:
trump and the GOP want to take the Internet from poor people.
It is a method if restricting people’s access to information and knowledge.
As a librarian, this is unacceptable.
oh also shitty ??? a lot of big employers in low-income areas (usually big retail/fast food chains) have online applicationslegit you can’t get a paper application from some places anymore
so this is also limiting people’s goddamn job options
If they can keep the poor unable to access information and limit their ability to organize, they do not care if we starve and die incidentally. That may even be seen as a desirable side effect.
This is not an administration interested in diverting people with bread or circuses. Historically, that doesn’t end well for those in power, but they also seem short-sighted. And they cause a lot of suffering before they get dealt with.
this is indicative of a larger plan to restrict everyone’s ability to gather and get information via net neutrality considering dump trucks elect has a big raging one against net neutrality and is already working on fucking it all up. yes, right now.
a lot of organizing and most of the spread of information and eyewitness accounts of oppression spreads across the internet, not to mention ~dangerous ideals~ like that we could fight back instead of submitting. why wouldn’t fascists want to disrupt that?
this is awful, doesn’t matter how many baby boomers sneer that there’s programs to provide low income or free internet service bc they assume it’s all entertainment, the internet has become a necessity to live in the u.s. and they would most definitely see poor people suffering as a major bonus.
previously the culling of the poor has been quiet and socially acceptable, frequently with a built-in setup for non-poor people to brush it off. can’t afford healthcare? you’re not working hard enough (somehow.) die way younger than the other classes? should’ve eaten better! poor people can’t take care of themselves, we should probably make their choices for them, after all it’s OUR tax dollars. living in a bad situation or unsafe area? why don’t you just, like, move?
not to obviously mention the much greater populations of poc, disabled, and trans people who are poor. here’s a study from last year about how mogai people as a whole more frequently find themselves without enough food.
i think during this regime it’s going to become a lot louder. maybe non-poor people would like to stop shrugging it off their shoulders. there is literally no reason to introduce something like this other than to hurt already vulnerable people.
h1ghtechl0wlife:
kerryrenaissance:
skoomapipe:
tikkunolamorgtfo:
fromchaostocosmos:
sale-aholic:
trump and the GOP want to take the Internet from poor people.
It is a method if restricting people’s access to information and knowledge.
As a librarian, this is unacceptable.
oh also shitty ??? a lot of big employers in low-income areas (usually big retail/fast food chains) have online applicationslegit you can’t get a paper application from some places anymore
so this is also limiting people’s goddamn job options
If they can keep the poor unable to access information and limit their ability to organize, they do not care if we starve and die incidentally. That may even be seen as a desirable side effect.
This is not an administration interested in diverting people with bread or circuses. Historically, that doesn’t end well for those in power, but they also seem short-sighted. And they cause a lot of suffering before they get dealt with.
this is indicative of a larger plan to restrict everyone’s ability to gather and get information via net neutrality considering dump trucks elect has a big raging one against net neutrality and is already working on fucking it all up. yes, right now.
a lot of organizing and most of the spread of information and eyewitness accounts of oppression spreads across the internet, not to mention ~dangerous ideals~ like that we could fight back instead of submitting. why wouldn’t fascists want to disrupt that?
this is awful, doesn’t matter how many baby boomers sneer that there’s programs to provide low income or free internet service bc they assume it’s all entertainment, the internet has become a necessity to live in the u.s. and they would most definitely see poor people suffering as a major bonus.
previously the culling of the poor has been quiet and socially acceptable, frequently with a built-in setup for non-poor people to brush it off. can’t afford healthcare? you’re not working hard enough (somehow.) die way younger than the other classes? should’ve eaten better! poor people can’t take care of themselves, we should probably make their choices for them, after all it’s OUR tax dollars. living in a bad situation or unsafe area? why don’t you just, like, move?
not to obviously mention the much greater populations of poc, disabled, and trans people who are poor. here’s a study from last year about how mogai people as a whole more frequently find themselves without enough food.
i think during this regime it’s going to become a lot louder. maybe non-poor people would like to stop shrugging it off their shoulders. there is literally no reason to introduce something like this other than to hurt already vulnerable people.
via http://ift.tt/2lipS9n:
My story prompt for this week is “finding something that has been lost’
Anyone have any ideas for me??
My story prompt for this week is “finding something that has been lost’
Anyone have any ideas for me??
via http://ift.tt/2kMGOYI:
thejaded-feather replied to your post: My story prompt for this week is “finding…
funding or finding?
Finding. xD Thank you.
thejaded-feather replied to your post: My story prompt for this week is “finding…
funding or finding?
Finding. xD Thank you.
via http://ift.tt/2klP40V:
maxofs2d:
darksnowfalling:
warpedellipsis:
quasi-normalcy:
meariver:
huntokar:
quasi-normalcy:
No, I’m serious, if women all got together and went into electrical engineering or automotive repair en masse, then ten years later people would be talking about how it was a “soft field” and it would pay proportionately less than other fields.
Likewise, if men moved en masse to bedeck themselves in sparkles and make-up, then suddenly you’d get a bunch of editorials talking about how classy they look.
None of these things are inherently masculine or feminine; none of these things inherently elevate you or drag you down. But whatever women are seen to do is automatically seen as being inherently more frivolous than anything men do. And shaming women for not pigeonholing themselves into a narrow range of acceptable “masculine” behaviours is just going to result in the goalposts getting moved once again.
This is literally what happened to basically every field women have entered. The opposite happens when men enter. Computers used to be a “woman thing” until the guys who did it got really mad about how badly their job was viewed and realized they could fix it by forcing out women.
Also happened/ is happening with the fields of biology and psychology….
I honestly wonder how much of the backlash against public education in the last generation has been due to teaching becoming a woman-dominated profession.
Fashion used to be a men’s thing. Then women got involved in the late 17/1800’s, so men went the other way because it came to be seen as “frivolous” and “anti-intellectual” to care about how you looked. Add in the homophobia that arose around that time, bam, staid bland dress. Ditto leggings/tights, that are now called attention-whoring when on men they were required to show you cared about your figure and had the money to pay for such a fitted item.
People want to say misogyny doesn’t exist, that male privilege doesn’t exist. Look beyond “living memory” and you’ll find that’s what drives the “inexplicable reversals” society seems to make on many things. Hell, just look beyond your own society, and you’ll find out that what’s considered “for men” elsewhere is held in high esteem while here it’s scoffed at purely because it’s “for women”:
Skinny jeans are the height of masculinity in several east Asian societies, rather than being seen as “gay” in the USA because of their association with femininity.
Medical fields in Russia are valued like kindergarten teachers are here, because it’s women who are the doctors instead of men.
Love and romance are highly valued in eastern countries, because men are interested in it too—of course they would be, surely you want to share your life with someone? Here, it’s strictly a women’s subject.
The field of anthropology as a whole illustrates this.
Significantly higher proportions of females compared to males are currently entering the fields of archaeology and biological anthropology, and as this occurs, the prestige, funding, acceptance as valid kinds of science, etc, are fading quickly.
This has already occurred with linguistic anthropology and cultural anthropology. Cultural anthropology in particular went VERY quickly from being seen as a manly, scientific discipline (e.g., Franz Boas, Bronisław Malinowski) to being seen as a touchy-feely female thing.
Let’s examine a traditionally male-dominated role that is very well-respected, and well-paid, in many parts of the world — that of a doctor. In the UK, it is listed as one of the top ten lucrative careers, and the average annual income of a family doctor in the US is well into six figures. It also confers on you significant social status, and a common stereotype in Asian communities is of parents encouraging their children to become doctors.
One of my lecturers at university once presented us with this thought exercise: why are doctors so highly paid, and so well-respected? Our answers were predictable. Because they save lives, their skills are extremely important, and it takes years and years of education to become one. All sound, logical reasons. But these traits that doctors possess are universal. So why is it, she asked, that doctors in Russia are so lowly paid? Making less than £7,500 a year, it is one of the lowest paid professions in Russia, and poorly respected at that. Why is this?
The answer is crushingly, breathtakingly simple. In Russia, the majority of doctors are women. Here’s a quote from Carol Schmidt, a geriatric nurse practitioner who toured medical facilities in Moscow: “Their status and pay are more like our blue-collar workers, even though they require about the same amount of training as the American doctor… medical practice is stereotyped as a caring vocation ‘naturally suited‘ to women, [which puts it at] a second-class level in the Soviet psyche.”
What this illustrates perfectly is this — women are not devalued in the job market because women’s work is seen to have little value. It is the other way round. Women’s work is devalued in the job market because women are seen to have little value. This means that anything a woman does, be it childcare, teaching, or doctoring, or rocket science, will be seen to be of less value simply because it is done mainly by women. It isn’t that women choose jobs that are in lower-paid industries, it is that any industry that women dominate automatically becomes less respected and less well-paid.
http://ift.tt/1mcpdCy
maxofs2d:
darksnowfalling:
warpedellipsis:
quasi-normalcy:
meariver:
huntokar:
quasi-normalcy:
No, I’m serious, if women all got together and went into electrical engineering or automotive repair en masse, then ten years later people would be talking about how it was a “soft field” and it would pay proportionately less than other fields.
Likewise, if men moved en masse to bedeck themselves in sparkles and make-up, then suddenly you’d get a bunch of editorials talking about how classy they look.
None of these things are inherently masculine or feminine; none of these things inherently elevate you or drag you down. But whatever women are seen to do is automatically seen as being inherently more frivolous than anything men do. And shaming women for not pigeonholing themselves into a narrow range of acceptable “masculine” behaviours is just going to result in the goalposts getting moved once again.
This is literally what happened to basically every field women have entered. The opposite happens when men enter. Computers used to be a “woman thing” until the guys who did it got really mad about how badly their job was viewed and realized they could fix it by forcing out women.
Also happened/ is happening with the fields of biology and psychology….
I honestly wonder how much of the backlash against public education in the last generation has been due to teaching becoming a woman-dominated profession.
Fashion used to be a men’s thing. Then women got involved in the late 17/1800’s, so men went the other way because it came to be seen as “frivolous” and “anti-intellectual” to care about how you looked. Add in the homophobia that arose around that time, bam, staid bland dress. Ditto leggings/tights, that are now called attention-whoring when on men they were required to show you cared about your figure and had the money to pay for such a fitted item.
People want to say misogyny doesn’t exist, that male privilege doesn’t exist. Look beyond “living memory” and you’ll find that’s what drives the “inexplicable reversals” society seems to make on many things. Hell, just look beyond your own society, and you’ll find out that what’s considered “for men” elsewhere is held in high esteem while here it’s scoffed at purely because it’s “for women”:
Skinny jeans are the height of masculinity in several east Asian societies, rather than being seen as “gay” in the USA because of their association with femininity.
Medical fields in Russia are valued like kindergarten teachers are here, because it’s women who are the doctors instead of men.
Love and romance are highly valued in eastern countries, because men are interested in it too—of course they would be, surely you want to share your life with someone? Here, it’s strictly a women’s subject.
The field of anthropology as a whole illustrates this.
Significantly higher proportions of females compared to males are currently entering the fields of archaeology and biological anthropology, and as this occurs, the prestige, funding, acceptance as valid kinds of science, etc, are fading quickly.
This has already occurred with linguistic anthropology and cultural anthropology. Cultural anthropology in particular went VERY quickly from being seen as a manly, scientific discipline (e.g., Franz Boas, Bronisław Malinowski) to being seen as a touchy-feely female thing.
Let’s examine a traditionally male-dominated role that is very well-respected, and well-paid, in many parts of the world — that of a doctor. In the UK, it is listed as one of the top ten lucrative careers, and the average annual income of a family doctor in the US is well into six figures. It also confers on you significant social status, and a common stereotype in Asian communities is of parents encouraging their children to become doctors.
One of my lecturers at university once presented us with this thought exercise: why are doctors so highly paid, and so well-respected? Our answers were predictable. Because they save lives, their skills are extremely important, and it takes years and years of education to become one. All sound, logical reasons. But these traits that doctors possess are universal. So why is it, she asked, that doctors in Russia are so lowly paid? Making less than £7,500 a year, it is one of the lowest paid professions in Russia, and poorly respected at that. Why is this?
The answer is crushingly, breathtakingly simple. In Russia, the majority of doctors are women. Here’s a quote from Carol Schmidt, a geriatric nurse practitioner who toured medical facilities in Moscow: “Their status and pay are more like our blue-collar workers, even though they require about the same amount of training as the American doctor… medical practice is stereotyped as a caring vocation ‘naturally suited‘ to women, [which puts it at] a second-class level in the Soviet psyche.”
What this illustrates perfectly is this — women are not devalued in the job market because women’s work is seen to have little value. It is the other way round. Women’s work is devalued in the job market because women are seen to have little value. This means that anything a woman does, be it childcare, teaching, or doctoring, or rocket science, will be seen to be of less value simply because it is done mainly by women. It isn’t that women choose jobs that are in lower-paid industries, it is that any industry that women dominate automatically becomes less respected and less well-paid.
http://ift.tt/1mcpdCy
via http://ift.tt/2kO6Tqn:
lucifer-is-a-bag-of-dicks:
sepulchritude:
lucifer-is-a-bag-of-dicks:
concept: woman makes deal with demon to have it’s child in exchange for eternal life or some shit
woman then makes deal with witch and offers her first born for like, riches or something
woman dumps demon baby on witch, absconds with her winnings and leaves witch and demon fighting for custody
half demon baby grows up learning magic and visiting hell on weekends and every second christmas
does the woman act as a sort of vodka aunt who shows up sometimes to teach the child how to work the system?
“here you go timmy, have a new xbox. this year I’m going to teach you the ins and outs of magical tax evasion”
SHE DOES NOW
lucifer-is-a-bag-of-dicks:
sepulchritude:
lucifer-is-a-bag-of-dicks:
concept: woman makes deal with demon to have it’s child in exchange for eternal life or some shit
woman then makes deal with witch and offers her first born for like, riches or something
woman dumps demon baby on witch, absconds with her winnings and leaves witch and demon fighting for custody
half demon baby grows up learning magic and visiting hell on weekends and every second christmas
does the woman act as a sort of vodka aunt who shows up sometimes to teach the child how to work the system?
“here you go timmy, have a new xbox. this year I’m going to teach you the ins and outs of magical tax evasion”
SHE DOES NOW
"Give Me Back My Rhodey"
Feb. 7th, 2017 04:11 pmvia http://ift.tt/2llWKyS:
mikeymagee:
Notice that Tony doesn’t say “Give me back my partner” or “give me back my friend.” He says “Give me back my Rhodey” Which implies the special (and frankly, irreplaceable) space Rhodey occupies within Tony’s life. Tony was specific in his wording (Give me back my “Rhodey” and affectionate nickname, as opposed to “James” or “Rhodes”, a nickname which Tony uses in place of his actual name “James”)
Looking at Tony throughout the MCU, he’s dealt with betrayal, guilt, PTSD, and an overall anger that consumed most of his actions in the final act of CACW. With the destruction of the Avengers morale, the fact that Tony and Pepper are “on a break”, the guilt he feels for causing Ultron, and the endangerment of millions of people, the only thing Tony has left after the events of CACW is his “Rhodey”.
And seeing Giant man take hold of Rhodey during the airport fight was far more than just dramatic action, it was Tony Stark, for the briefest of seconds, seeing the only good thing left in his world being snatched from him. Which makes Rhodey’s fall even more impactful. It’s more than apparent that James Rhodes is the center of Tony’s entire world right now.
At the end of the film, after Rhodes’ fall, during the trial run of Rhodey’s new mechanical legs, you could clearly see Tony doting on Rhodes, Offering to help him be as comfortable as possible, willing to add any modifications Rhodey asked for (including a cup holder if Rhodey had asked for one).It wouldn’t surprise me if Tony insisted Rhodey stay with him in the mansion so he could keep an eye on his “Rhodey”
Of course, this affection (whether platonic or otherwise) is also shared by Rhodey (from searching through the entire desert to find Tony to making sure he was sleeping enough in IM3). What I find interesting about this role reversal is that Tony tends to overcompensate (again, going back to the scene where Tony was willing to make any modification Rhodes asked for) but Rhodey never blames Tony (or anyone for that matter) about his current situation, he jokes with Tony (Tony Stank) in an attempt to lighten an otherwise negative situation. Rhodey is upset/disappointed/sad about his current situation (“This is a bad beat”) but he never, ever, blames Tony. Which is something Tony would probably expect given his transgressions listed earlier. Think about that, Rhodey provided Tony with a brief reprieve from the guilt that had been building since Iron Man 1, and who else in the entirety of the MCU franchise has done that?
Not Steve Rogers, or Bruce Banner, or even Thor with his ideals of second chances (he did give Loki multiple chances to redeem himself, right?)
Throughout the MCU Rhodey is the one thing that hasn’t blown up in Tony’s face. He’s the one thing that Tony can still trust not to betray him, or keep secrets. Rhodey is the one person who doesn’t make Tony feel guilty about his past mistakes (and that’s quite a feat when your mistakes are easily the size of the entire planet.) Rhodey is so much more to Tony than just a “side kick.”
When Tony says “Give me back my Rhodey” what he means is “Give me back my world.”
mikeymagee:
Notice that Tony doesn’t say “Give me back my partner” or “give me back my friend.” He says “Give me back my Rhodey” Which implies the special (and frankly, irreplaceable) space Rhodey occupies within Tony’s life. Tony was specific in his wording (Give me back my “Rhodey” and affectionate nickname, as opposed to “James” or “Rhodes”, a nickname which Tony uses in place of his actual name “James”)
Looking at Tony throughout the MCU, he’s dealt with betrayal, guilt, PTSD, and an overall anger that consumed most of his actions in the final act of CACW. With the destruction of the Avengers morale, the fact that Tony and Pepper are “on a break”, the guilt he feels for causing Ultron, and the endangerment of millions of people, the only thing Tony has left after the events of CACW is his “Rhodey”.
And seeing Giant man take hold of Rhodey during the airport fight was far more than just dramatic action, it was Tony Stark, for the briefest of seconds, seeing the only good thing left in his world being snatched from him. Which makes Rhodey’s fall even more impactful. It’s more than apparent that James Rhodes is the center of Tony’s entire world right now.
At the end of the film, after Rhodes’ fall, during the trial run of Rhodey’s new mechanical legs, you could clearly see Tony doting on Rhodes, Offering to help him be as comfortable as possible, willing to add any modifications Rhodey asked for (including a cup holder if Rhodey had asked for one).It wouldn’t surprise me if Tony insisted Rhodey stay with him in the mansion so he could keep an eye on his “Rhodey”
Of course, this affection (whether platonic or otherwise) is also shared by Rhodey (from searching through the entire desert to find Tony to making sure he was sleeping enough in IM3). What I find interesting about this role reversal is that Tony tends to overcompensate (again, going back to the scene where Tony was willing to make any modification Rhodes asked for) but Rhodey never blames Tony (or anyone for that matter) about his current situation, he jokes with Tony (Tony Stank) in an attempt to lighten an otherwise negative situation. Rhodey is upset/disappointed/sad about his current situation (“This is a bad beat”) but he never, ever, blames Tony. Which is something Tony would probably expect given his transgressions listed earlier. Think about that, Rhodey provided Tony with a brief reprieve from the guilt that had been building since Iron Man 1, and who else in the entirety of the MCU franchise has done that?
Not Steve Rogers, or Bruce Banner, or even Thor with his ideals of second chances (he did give Loki multiple chances to redeem himself, right?)
Throughout the MCU Rhodey is the one thing that hasn’t blown up in Tony’s face. He’s the one thing that Tony can still trust not to betray him, or keep secrets. Rhodey is the one person who doesn’t make Tony feel guilty about his past mistakes (and that’s quite a feat when your mistakes are easily the size of the entire planet.) Rhodey is so much more to Tony than just a “side kick.”
When Tony says “Give me back my Rhodey” what he means is “Give me back my world.”
via http://ift.tt/2jYtTyE:thejaded-feather replied to your post “My story prompt for this week is “finding something that has been…”
Sometimes, it could be finding a lost person, or a lost connection
Indeed it could be.
salmonberries
replied to your post
“My story prompt for this week is “finding something that has been…”
could be finding a lost emotion? e.g. rediscovering a lost love after time away, finding inspiration after worrying it was gone forever, etc. etc. something angsty if that is appealing.
That’s an interesting idea…
kittyknowsthings
replied to your post
“My story prompt for this week is “finding something that has been…”
Spontaneously I had to think of the tumblr post that goes somewhat like this: “Imagine someone handing you a box with all the things you lost in your life” “Oh, my sense of purpose, there you are!” “Oh i knew I left all that potential somewhere” “My will to live, I haven’t seen you in 15 years!” “Kids, could you lighten up a little?”
Lol!
elvenavari
replied to your post
“My story prompt for this week is “finding something that has been…”
i think it’d be pretty hilarious if Cap’s shield disappeared for a bit.
Awww, Steve would be like a lost (angry, punchy) duckling. For some reason I’m seeing this as Baby Avengers. xD
Sometimes, it could be finding a lost person, or a lost connection
Indeed it could be.
salmonberries
replied to your post
“My story prompt for this week is “finding something that has been…”
could be finding a lost emotion? e.g. rediscovering a lost love after time away, finding inspiration after worrying it was gone forever, etc. etc. something angsty if that is appealing.
That’s an interesting idea…
kittyknowsthings
replied to your post
“My story prompt for this week is “finding something that has been…”
Spontaneously I had to think of the tumblr post that goes somewhat like this: “Imagine someone handing you a box with all the things you lost in your life” “Oh, my sense of purpose, there you are!” “Oh i knew I left all that potential somewhere” “My will to live, I haven’t seen you in 15 years!” “Kids, could you lighten up a little?”
Lol!
elvenavari
replied to your post
“My story prompt for this week is “finding something that has been…”
i think it’d be pretty hilarious if Cap’s shield disappeared for a bit.
Awww, Steve would be like a lost (angry, punchy) duckling. For some reason I’m seeing this as Baby Avengers. xD
via http://ift.tt/2kEn870:
castlesandmanorhouses:
La Conciergerie,
2 Boulevard du Palais, 75001 Paris, France.
http://ift.tt/1l2hNA6
La Conciergerie is a former royal palace and prison located by the seine on the west of the Île de la Cité. It is part of the larger complex known as the Palais de Justice, which is still used for judicial purposes.
castlesandmanorhouses:
La Conciergerie,
2 Boulevard du Palais, 75001 Paris, France.
http://ift.tt/1l2hNA6
La Conciergerie is a former royal palace and prison located by the seine on the west of the Île de la Cité. It is part of the larger complex known as the Palais de Justice, which is still used for judicial purposes.
