1. inherentlygloomy:

    the-barricades-shall-rise:

    poorrichardsnews:

    image

    Remember the headline from this Guardian article from 2009?

    image

    The article even came with its very own predictive graph to scare people:

    image

    Yeah, well, turns out that this prediction was just wrong. In fact, virtually every prediction made by alarmists over…

    "But the Right doesn’t have any science to back up their claims against global warming!"

    hefftatious

    General point: if you are not a scientist, stick to not being a scientist.

    Oh please.  Ross McKitrick (of that new study) is an economist, not a meteorologist, geologist, or any kind of natural scientist.  He’s also a weathered opponent to climate change.

    Now I won’t give you a regression analysis of his graph, but I can tell you that’s not what that green line is.  That line is drawn from a single point to another without respect to context.  In fact that line wasn’t even drawn by McKitrick.

    Fortunately for me, Anthony Watts was kind enough to lead back to the source of that graph, which allows anyone to make a wide variety of plots.  But let’s just go a couple years back in time to 1990.

    Astonishingly we find that the temperature at the very start of 1995 was at quite the peak.  And if we back up another couple decades,

    The “new study” is an example of cherrypicking your dates to create the statistical result you want to find.  It also exploits the high amount of year-to-year noise seen in average global temperature.

    That Guardian article that warned of impending temperature hikes in the next five years?  That was about El Nino, which, surprise, is difficult to predict, and altogether distinct from manmade causes of global warming.  Now they’re warning it’s going to come this year, so the Guardian may well have been on the right track, just off by five or six years.

    Nevertheless even a 19-year stable period doesn’t take away from the unprecedented warming that happened for decades before.

     
  2. 14:02

    Notes: 93

    Reblogged from sosungalittleclodofclay

    image: Download

    nativeamericannews:

Oklahoma State Fans Hold ‘Trail of Tears’ Banner for College GameDay
ahoma State University football fans have sparked outrage for a sign they created to hold during ESPN’s GameDay football-preview show.The Oklahoma State Cowboys play the Florida State Seminoles tonight in a game in Arlington, Texas.

Often I feel sorry for people who get unexpected media outrage, but to write this you have to be either extremely stupid or extremely creepy (and I’m not leaning toward the former).  There’s no naivete excuse here.

    nativeamericannews:

    Oklahoma State Fans Hold ‘Trail of Tears’ Banner for College GameDay

    ahoma State University football fans have sparked outrage for a sign they created to hold during ESPN’s GameDay football-preview show.
    The Oklahoma State Cowboys play the Florida State Seminoles tonight in a game in Arlington, Texas.


    Often I feel sorry for people who get unexpected media outrage, but to write this you have to be either extremely stupid or extremely creepy (and I’m not leaning toward the former).  There’s no naivete excuse here.

    (Source: indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com)

     
  3. 11:45

    Notes: 414

    Reblogged from freemenofcolor

    The primary causes of poverty lie not in individual behavior at all, but in specific social and historical structures, in forces outside any single person’s control. If you haven’t lived it or even seen it firsthand, there’s almost no way to imagine it. Living in the ghetto, one faces problems with public housing, family violence, drug and alcohol abuse, the drug trade, negligent landlords, criminals, illness, guns, isolation, hunger, ethnic antagonisms, racism, and other obviously negative forces. Even forces that might seem positive in other circumstances- the law, the media, government, neighbors, police- can, in the ghetto context, make life miserable for the poor. And one has to contend will all of these forces- any one of which might be overwhelming- all at once, without a break. Turn to deal with one problem, and three attack you from behind. Experience a little unexpected bad luck, and you find yourself instantly drowning. The cumulative effect of the ‘surround’ is more than the sum of any of these individual forces. There is simply no space to breathe.

    American society has generally tried to confine private charity and governmental assistance to the ‘deserving’, while insisting that the ‘undeserving poor’ improve their character as a condition for receiving relief. Like many people in our individualistic culture, the poor ultimately blame themselves for their lack of success, and can easily lose whatever self-confidence they have been able to muster. What little public assistance exists is often administered in ways that make it difficult to move back into the world of self-sufficiency, especially when self-sufficiency is defined as a series of exhausting jobs that don’t pay a living wage. The causes of ghetto poverty do not lie in the individual behavior of inner city African Americans, but lie primarily in forces outside their control. It is up to them to do what they humanly can; it is up to the rest of society to change existing programs and create new ones to allow everyone to enjoy a decent standard of living
    — Urban Injustice: How Ghettos Happen by David Hilfiker, M.D, xii & xv,  69, 58, & 128 (via twentyfirstcenturyvagabond)
     
  4. 00:27

    Notes: 168629

    Reblogged from pelicancity

    mercurykiss:

gentlemanbones:

camerapits:

themiracleofmusic:

oh.

Actually, I think the kid is playing Minecraft. Which is essentially digital Legos.
Two generations of creative people, just different methods of expression. Let’s not shit on the digital age as much, ‘eh?

You know what’s great about Minecraft?
You don’t get lacerations from stepping on it.

You know what’s great about legos?Your shit doesn’t get blown up because a green penis snuck up on you.

/gamerule mobGriefing = false

    mercurykiss:

    gentlemanbones:

    camerapits:

    themiracleofmusic:

    oh.

    Actually, I think the kid is playing Minecraft. Which is essentially digital Legos.

    Two generations of creative people, just different methods of expression. Let’s not shit on the digital age as much, ‘eh?

    You know what’s great about Minecraft?

    You don’t get lacerations from stepping on it.

    You know what’s great about legos?

    Your shit doesn’t get blown up because a green penis snuck up on you.

    /gamerule mobGriefing = false

     
  5. 00:25

    Notes: 5

    Reblogged from sosungalittleclodofclay

     
  6. 00:13

    Notes: 503030

    Reblogged from sosungalittleclodofclay

    sosungalittleclodofclay:

    nakedly:

    you are not fat
    you have fat 
    you also have fingernails 
    you are not fingernail 

    you best trim your fingernails though. can’t let them just grow and grow and become a disgusting mess

    I just imagine that every time OP sees someone called fat they think they’re literally being called, well,

    I think most people have a pretty firm grasp on the concept that people are not fat (noun).

    On the other hand, a remarkable amount of the body is composed of lipids, not least of all the membrane of every cell you’re made of.  The human body is 12% lipids (sneakily cites Wikipedia’s source), which is third after water (65%) and proteins (20%).  Although phospholipids and glycolipids aren’t arguably the same thing as the triglycerides in your body fat, but they’re close.

    Speaking of which fingernail is made of keratin, which is a protein.  As protein is the most abundant type of organic molecule in your body, by OP’s logic it may well be more appropriate to say “you are fingernail” than to say “you are fat.”

     
  7. 17:23 1st Sep 2014

    Notes: 1405

    Reblogged from sosungalittleclodofclay

    image: Download

    disneyvillainsforjustice:

disneyvillainsforjustice:

notallfeminists:

So, only criticize men. Even if women deserve criticism, do not criticize them. Only men. link
This is a real article, people!

You have got to be kidding me… I have not read the whole article yet, but will attempt to after my shower. This little blurb though… Seriously? Don’t criticize a woman just because she is a woman? I know I am personally very defensive and protective of women, but I do not believe in the slightest that they should be immune from all kinds of criticism. They are people and are still subject to being criticized for their views and stuff.- Mod Helga

Is this about Zoe Quinn? Y’know…I’m getting REALLY sick of people defending what she did. I don’t even care that she cheated - that shit is personal. I care that she used sex as a tool just to progress herself at the expense of others. Of course the first thing I found when I searched her name were countless articles defending her, one even saying they wished more people did this - that MORE people took the most selfish and destructive means to accomplishing what THEY want at the expense of the emotions of others. But no. You don’t want PEOPLE to be more like Quinn - you want women too. But here’s the thing. If we saturate the market with female devs who got there through scandal and cheating and lying, and leave behind the female devs who are decent fucking human beings, then that is how we get, well, the current market ruled by “free to play” and companies who often don’t give a shit about you (I’m looking at you EA). Selfishness is the PROBLEM not the fucking solution. But onto the main point, DON’T PERPETUATE THIS IDEA THAT YOU CAN’T CRITICIZE WOMEN. FUCK. THAT. Seriously, for all this harping about “damsels in distress” and how women can do anything, there sure are a lot of feminists who get really angry if you’re critical of a woman. Not of woman in general. Not of feminism. Of a person and their personal actions. And that’s fucking bullshit. Just for kicks I found the article this is from in which he claims “Well none of this is proven, and it’s just an angry ex, and blah blah blah”. The article itself even recognizes that many of the people angry at Quinn supported huge projects to promote women in the gaming industry - and yet still goes on to defend Quinn saying “Well it’s only ALLEGED that she tried to sabotage their project”. And it makes you wonder how much of a resume of horrible shit a person has to produce before you stop saying “alleged” and start thinking that maybe, just MAYBE she is an actual horrible person and realize that yes, WOMEN ARE FULLY CAPABLE OF BEING HORRIBLE PEOPLE. If criticizing women like Quinn are going to “drive women away from gaming” then clearly we as women do have a long way to go, but personally I think we have tougher skin than that, and more importantly, most women aren’t going to do the shit Quinn does. You can’t compare her to female devs that got there the honest way. - Mod Dawes Sr. 

There is one thing about the Zoe Quinn scandal I’d like to see, and that’s more pressure on the individual men she slept with who gave her professional favors.  These are the guys breaching their professional responsibility, a responsibility they have to us.
And by all means turn your anger against people like David Auerbach and Will Wheaton and that creator of Fez, and those 8 or whatnot writers who published articles attacking evil misogynist manchild gamers on the same day.  Though I know it won’t stop anyone from crying “harassment of women” just because you’re calling out men.

    disneyvillainsforjustice:

    disneyvillainsforjustice:

    notallfeminists:

    So, only criticize men. Even if women deserve criticism, do not criticize them. Only men. link

    This is a real article, people!

    You have got to be kidding me… I have not read the whole article yet, but will attempt to after my shower.
    This little blurb though… Seriously? Don’t criticize a woman just because she is a woman? I know I am personally very defensive and protective of women, but I do not believe in the slightest that they should be immune from all kinds of criticism. They are people and are still subject to being criticized for their views and stuff.
    - Mod Helga

    Is this about Zoe Quinn? Y’know…I’m getting REALLY sick of people defending what she did. I don’t even care that she cheated - that shit is personal. I care that she used sex as a tool just to progress herself at the expense of others. Of course the first thing I found when I searched her name were countless articles defending her, one even saying they wished more people did this - that MORE people took the most selfish and destructive means to accomplishing what THEY want at the expense of the emotions of others. 

    But no. You don’t want PEOPLE to be more like Quinn - you want women too. But here’s the thing. If we saturate the market with female devs who got there through scandal and cheating and lying, and leave behind the female devs who are decent fucking human beings, then that is how we get, well, the current market ruled by “free to play” and companies who often don’t give a shit about you (I’m looking at you EA). Selfishness is the PROBLEM not the fucking solution. 

    But onto the main point, DON’T PERPETUATE THIS IDEA THAT YOU CAN’T CRITICIZE WOMEN. FUCK. THAT. Seriously, for all this harping about “damsels in distress” and how women can do anything, there sure are a lot of feminists who get really angry if you’re critical of a woman. Not of woman in general. Not of feminism. Of a person and their personal actions. And that’s fucking bullshit. Just for kicks I found the article this is from in which he claims “Well none of this is proven, and it’s just an angry ex, and blah blah blah”. The article itself even recognizes that many of the people angry at Quinn supported huge projects to promote women in the gaming industry - and yet still goes on to defend Quinn saying “Well it’s only ALLEGED that she tried to sabotage their project”. And it makes you wonder how much of a resume of horrible shit a person has to produce before you stop saying “alleged” and start thinking that maybe, just MAYBE she is an actual horrible person and realize that yes, WOMEN ARE FULLY CAPABLE OF BEING HORRIBLE PEOPLE. If criticizing women like Quinn are going to “drive women away from gaming” then clearly we as women do have a long way to go, but personally I think we have tougher skin than that, and more importantly, most women aren’t going to do the shit Quinn does. You can’t compare her to female devs that got there the honest way. 

    - Mod Dawes Sr. 

    There is one thing about the Zoe Quinn scandal I’d like to see, and that’s more pressure on the individual men she slept with who gave her professional favors.  These are the guys breaching their professional responsibility, a responsibility they have to us.

    And by all means turn your anger against people like David Auerbach and Will Wheaton and that creator of Fez, and those 8 or whatnot writers who published articles attacking evil misogynist manchild gamers on the same day.  Though I know it won’t stop anyone from crying “harassment of women” just because you’re calling out men.

     
  8. 22:38 31st Aug 2014

    Notes: 44834

    Reblogged from daniphantomgone

    iwriteaboutfeminism:

    Saturday morning, over 1,000 people march for justice for Michael Brown. 

    August 30th.

     
  9. image: Download

    hokuto-ju-no-ken:

rimjets:

the most real tweet ive read all day tbh

Thing is, though, actual researched and meaningful feminist criticism and commentary tends to be relatively well received and sparks meaningful discussion. When the face of “Feminist Criticism” in gaming is Anita, of course it’s going to be a big “WTF” because it’s some of the most poorly written, poorly presented and poorly constructed criticism out there.
I take issue with people who dismiss any negative response to Anita’s “criticism” as “ahurdur internet sexism” because, honestly, her “criticism” is flawed. It ignores context, it cherrypicks and purposefully misrepresents information to suit the point she wishes to make. She does not offer criticism. What she does is seeks out examples to back up the statement she was already prepared to make.
And even then she undermines the whole purpose of her series by not really offering any sort of insight or commentary, rather reading off a laundry list of things she didn’t like that fits the trope the video is about and a number of times the examples she shows have been misrepresented and shown without context to twist them to fit her point.
People are not again criticism of representation, portrayal and execution in gaming. People are not inherently against feminist criticism of games or even against criticism of games from an artistic view.
What people are against is shitty, poorly researched and biased criticism.
Also, I think it’s time people stop pretending that people take issue with Anita herself. And I mean this on both sides of the fence here. People against her need to stop pretending they don’t have an automatic dislike of anything she produces because of how questionable her actions have been and how manipulative her “criticisms” have been.
And people in support of Anita need to stop pretending that her arguments are without fault and that all of the criticism she receives comes from misogyny. People need to stop pretending that she is infallible.
I’ve seen very civil, well spoken and thought out counter-arguments to Anita’s criticisms from all sorts of people. Feminists, bullheaded gamers, men and women alike. But the common theme is that they’re almost always disregarded as just “being against Anita!!!!! sexism!!!!”
I truly and earnestly want to see feminist criticism of video games, their stories, their representation, etc. I believe it’s an important discussion to have and I believe it’s something that everyone should, at the very least, be aware of and take into consideration.
I do not believe that Anita is the one to do it, though. I feel she has done an awful job thus far and has created this bizarre sort of mentality that as long as someone is a victim of harassment what they have to say is valid and true and should not be questioned. It’s created a breed of people in gaming culture who will blindly accept whatever is said and blindly defend it when the whole point of the criticism is to encourage a critical and thoughtful evaluation of the games we play and enjoy.
Ultimately, I truly regret donating to the Tropes vs Women kickstarter because not only does she take forever and a half to produce a single episode but her criticisms have been incredibly insulting and prove that she’s not putting in the amount of research or thoughtful analysis that she would have us believe she is. I feel that her brand of feminism is not one that should be held up as the kind to judge and critique media. It’s a very shallow, sex-negative and, if I may be so bold, femininity-shaming kind of feminism.
I mean, hell, look at her proposal for a game idea. Look at what she considers to be “better ideas”.
They ultimately boil down to “okay, just take what the male character already is… and make it female!”. What she proposes is not better variety and more respectful representation of women but is actually just “well just make it a girl”.
Literally to take Mario and Link and swap their heads with Peach and Zelda’s. To present them in the same way masculinity is presented while shaming “traditional” femininity as “weakness” in female characters.
And honestly, I truly wish people didn’t just eat it all up just because it’s an easy to digest “yay look I’m supporting feminism without actually putting much thought into it! Anita knows what’s she’s doing!” cookie.
Also, when it comes to journalism? Yes. Yes gaming journalism SHOULD be held to higher standards. No more of this “bloggers when they fuck up, journalists when they want respect” garbage. No more of this clickbait bullshit. Either gaming journalists produce content that is deserving of the respect and thoughtful consideration it wants or be disregarded as the jokes they currently are. 
tl;dr the issue “gamers” have is not with feminist criticism but with those who currently represent “feminist criticism” and how poor and shallow it is.

It’s a non-sequitur anyway.  Even good feminist criticism has nothing to do with artistic competence.  Nor is feminist criticism somehow particular to “artistic media”; feminists criticize everything.  This is absolutely fine.  As feminism is both a political stance and a worldview, they’re entitled to talk and judge what they interact with.  What’s not fine is suggesting people have to bow down to it.  You want feminist journalism, well, you’ve got plenty of it already.  We don’t need feminism suddenly inside our popular magazines anymore than we need the Christian right or (as a bipartisan gesture) environmentalism.

    hokuto-ju-no-ken:

    rimjets:

    the most real tweet ive read all day tbh

    Thing is, though, actual researched and meaningful feminist criticism and commentary tends to be relatively well received and sparks meaningful discussion. When the face of “Feminist Criticism” in gaming is Anita, of course it’s going to be a big “WTF” because it’s some of the most poorly written, poorly presented and poorly constructed criticism out there.

    I take issue with people who dismiss any negative response to Anita’s “criticism” as “ahurdur internet sexism” because, honestly, her “criticism” is flawed. It ignores context, it cherrypicks and purposefully misrepresents information to suit the point she wishes to make. She does not offer criticism. What she does is seeks out examples to back up the statement she was already prepared to make.

    And even then she undermines the whole purpose of her series by not really offering any sort of insight or commentary, rather reading off a laundry list of things she didn’t like that fits the trope the video is about and a number of times the examples she shows have been misrepresented and shown without context to twist them to fit her point.

    People are not again criticism of representation, portrayal and execution in gaming. People are not inherently against feminist criticism of games or even against criticism of games from an artistic view.

    What people are against is shitty, poorly researched and biased criticism.

    Also, I think it’s time people stop pretending that people take issue with Anita herself. And I mean this on both sides of the fence here. People against her need to stop pretending they don’t have an automatic dislike of anything she produces because of how questionable her actions have been and how manipulative her “criticisms” have been.

    And people in support of Anita need to stop pretending that her arguments are without fault and that all of the criticism she receives comes from misogyny. People need to stop pretending that she is infallible.

    I’ve seen very civil, well spoken and thought out counter-arguments to Anita’s criticisms from all sorts of people. Feminists, bullheaded gamers, men and women alike. But the common theme is that they’re almost always disregarded as just “being against Anita!!!!! sexism!!!!”

    I truly and earnestly want to see feminist criticism of video games, their stories, their representation, etc. I believe it’s an important discussion to have and I believe it’s something that everyone should, at the very least, be aware of and take into consideration.

    I do not believe that Anita is the one to do it, though. I feel she has done an awful job thus far and has created this bizarre sort of mentality that as long as someone is a victim of harassment what they have to say is valid and true and should not be questioned. It’s created a breed of people in gaming culture who will blindly accept whatever is said and blindly defend it when the whole point of the criticism is to encourage a critical and thoughtful evaluation of the games we play and enjoy.

    Ultimately, I truly regret donating to the Tropes vs Women kickstarter because not only does she take forever and a half to produce a single episode but her criticisms have been incredibly insulting and prove that she’s not putting in the amount of research or thoughtful analysis that she would have us believe she is. I feel that her brand of feminism is not one that should be held up as the kind to judge and critique media. It’s a very shallow, sex-negative and, if I may be so bold, femininity-shaming kind of feminism.

    I mean, hell, look at her proposal for a game idea. Look at what she considers to be “better ideas”.

    They ultimately boil down to “okay, just take what the male character already is… and make it female!”. What she proposes is not better variety and more respectful representation of women but is actually just “well just make it a girl”.

    Literally to take Mario and Link and swap their heads with Peach and Zelda’s. To present them in the same way masculinity is presented while shaming “traditional” femininity as “weakness” in female characters.

    And honestly, I truly wish people didn’t just eat it all up just because it’s an easy to digest “yay look I’m supporting feminism without actually putting much thought into it! Anita knows what’s she’s doing!” cookie.

    Also, when it comes to journalism? Yes. Yes gaming journalism SHOULD be held to higher standards. No more of this “bloggers when they fuck up, journalists when they want respect” garbage. No more of this clickbait bullshit. Either gaming journalists produce content that is deserving of the respect and thoughtful consideration it wants or be disregarded as the jokes they currently are. 

    tl;dr the issue “gamers” have is not with feminist criticism but with those who currently represent “feminist criticism” and how poor and shallow it is.

    It’s a non-sequitur anyway.  Even good feminist criticism has nothing to do with artistic competence.  Nor is feminist criticism somehow particular to “artistic media”; feminists criticize everything.  This is absolutely fine.  As feminism is both a political stance and a worldview, they’re entitled to talk and judge what they interact with.  What’s not fine is suggesting people have to bow down to it.  You want feminist journalism, well, you’ve got plenty of it already.  We don’t need feminism suddenly inside our popular magazines anymore than we need the Christian right or (as a bipartisan gesture) environmentalism.

     
  10. 14:59

    Notes: 22

    Reblogged from sosungalittleclodofclay

    sosungalittleclodofclay:

    “We can’t expect the president to do everything. But we can expect him to do something.”

    He Has a Dream

    She makes an interesting point.  In less than a year and a half Obama will be walking out of the Oval Office.  He has nothing to lose by making the wrong move with Ferguson (short of attacking people with federal forces), but he could walk right in himself and potentially make a notable contribution to his legacy.  Everyone knows the president has a lot on his hands, but this is a pretty big domestic issue.