#also the theorists and analysts here are amazing!

[welshoot]

Ramshackle Dorm Thoughts

Just downloaded Twisted Wonderland (English version) and got part of the way through the prologue before my battery abandoned me. I thought it might be fun to do a touch of analysis/theorizing. I would like to state that I have lurked within the Twst fandom for a long time but, due to being unable to read or understand Japanese, had never actually played the game. Spoilers below cut, especially for new players that don’t know about all the past theorizing and what not the original fandom has done. (Oh and I promise I haven’t quit with Tears of Themis analyses, just haven’t found anything I want to work with right now.)

Alright, Ramshackle Dorm is pretty weird. Seriously, what is up with it? It’s old, haunted, and was abandoned  at some point supposedly because of the ghosts. But passed that we don’t know anything. Why are their ghosts? Why couldn’t the presumably magic capable students from before get rid of them? How old is it anyway? Is it older than Pomefiore? What we do know is the ghosts have similarities to Disney’s 1937 short Lonesome Ghosts (released the same year as Snow White). The dorm itself also has some similarities to the house seen in Lonesome Ghosts. Yuu and Grimm’s bedroom has similarities to Mickey’s bedroom shown in the 1936 short Thru the Mirror. (I would like to point out this short is older than Disney’s Snow White which was released in 1937. Whether or not that means anything I don’t know.) Thru the Mirror involves Mickey falling asleep after reading Lewis Carroll’s Through The Looking Glass. In the course of the short Mickey goes through a mirror and ends up in a backwards version of his house. A reflection if you will. He proceeds to have an adventure that, according to the Disney wiki, ends with him being chased by a jealous King of Hearts who saw him dancing with his queen. Mickey goes back through the mirror and ends up safe in his house. This does link back to the Wonderland part of Twisted Wonderland. Looking back at the dorm's similarities to Thru the Mirror and Lonesome Ghosts there are two connections. Mickey and they’re fairly old shorts. We don’t know how old Ramshackle dorm is in comparison to the other dorms, so age may not be a factor  here. But what about the Mickey connection? Could the Ramshackle dorm Mickey’s dorm? This is possible but also weird since all the others are villains and Mickey isn’t a villain.

Going back to the basics of Twisted Wonderland, we have seven dorms based on the Great Seven. The Queen of Hearts for Heartslabyul, Scar for Savanaclaw, Ursula for Octavinelle, Jafar for Scarabia, The Evil Queen (Snow White) for Pomefiore, Hades for Ignihyde, and Maleficent for Diasomnia. So if all those dorms are based on specific villains, what about Ramshackle? If you look at the names of the dorms themselves there’s often a clue, though it may be slight, within the name. So what about the name Ramshackle? There’s only a few buildings in disrepair that come to mind from Disney and none of them seem terribly likely. There’s the Horned King’s Castle from The Black Cauldron (Disney’s 25th film). This one would be an interesting choice especially since it’s the movie Disney tries to forget and Ramshackle seems to be the dorm NRC tries to forget. Kind of like “We Don’t Talk About Bruno” except it’s “We Don’t Talk About Ramshackle.” Another possibility is Fantasia (Disney’s 3rd film). The town from the “Night on Bald Mountain'' sequence is certainly dilapidated. This could explain why ghosts live at and come to Ramshackle dorm since Satan/Chernabog awakens ghosts during this sequence. Also, this ties back into the Mickey connection theory as Fantasia has one of the best known Mickey sequences ever, “The Sorcerer’s Apprentice.” One could even argue Mickey plays a mildly antagonistic role in this film, even sort of villainous if you look at it from the broom’s point of view. He axe murdered the broom and even made the movie go greyscale. Another point for Fantasia is the fact the movie is completely musically led and Twisted Wonderland is a Rhythm game at its heart of hearts.

Anyway, these were just a few thoughts of mine. I would love to hear other people’s thoughts about the Ramshackle dorm and what its deal is. Happy Playing!

[365days365movies]

February 24, 2021: Annie Hall (1977) (Part 1)

Well...Woody Allen.

I, uh...OK, look, I could get into the whole Woody Allen thing, but INSTEAD of me doing that, I’ll just say this: look into it. Because there is a LOT on this subject, and it’s controversial as HELL. At the end of the day, I’ll recommend this upcoming series on HBO, and just recommend that you look into it.

Because, uh...yeah, it’s not great. That’s all I’m gonna say, because I need to educate myself on it more as well. Instead, let’s talk for a few seconds about divorcing the art from the artist. But ONLY for a few seconds.

I understand why some of you might be surprised I’m doing this one. Because, again...Woody Allen. But, yeah, I always try to do my best to divorce the art from the artist. Because some people suck, but they still make nice things, or at the very least, things that should be open to interpretation and appreciation.

“Superfreak” is a classic song of 1981, and everybody’s heard at least some of it, but Rick James fuckin’ kidnapped two women and kept them in his basement, WHERE HE TORTURED THEM. Edgar Degas made beautiful paintings of ballet dancers, and was also A MASSIVE ANTI-SEMITE. And before he was (RIGHTFULLY AND JUSTIFIABLY) outed as a roofie-ing piece-o-shit...I grew up with - and genuinely enjoyed - this guy’s comedy.

And you can judge me for this, but...I still think his stand-up was and is genuinely funny, and I still appreciate the cultural impact that The Cosby Show had on society’s perception of African-American families, divorced from the stereotype of the ghetto. Fact of the matter is, works themselves deserve to be separated from the artist who made them. That’s my philosophy, and I’m sticking with it Entirely fine to disagree with me, by the way, I get it.

But in that spirit, I’m watching Annie Hall, despite its creators likely transgressions. After all, this is technically his magnum opus, and it’s a good look into the man himself. And so, with that in mind: Annie Hall! SPOILERS AHEAD!!!

Recap (1/2)

Alvy Singer (Woody Allen) is talking directly to us about his outlook on life, and his view on the potential future. He tells half of a joke, then an amusing anecdote, and a bit more until telling us that he’s broke up with Annie, and he’s still thinking about it, trying to figure out exactly where things went wrong. He goes back to the beginning, which is punctuated with flashbacks.

He grew up in Brooklyn in World War II, and a young Alvy (Jonathan Munk) is with his mother (Joan Newman) at the doctor’s. He’s depressed after learning that the universe will one day end after a period of expansion, and is having his first real existential crisis. I had mine around the same age, actually, went I learned that the Earth will one day get swallowed by the sun. And THEN came the realization that I’d be dead by that point. AND THEN came the realization that I’d die one day, and that was a WHOLE NEW crisis to...anyway.

He grew up under the Coney Island rollercoaster according to him (although his analyst says that he exaggerates), and that’s what he blames for his “nervous personality. He’s also got an active imagination, often blurring fantasy and reality. His Dad ran the bumper cars on Coney Island (a place that I’ve never been, but desperately want to go).

He continues on talking about his former schoolmates, and not really that well. While in class, young Alvy kisses a...little girl...ahem. And then, when reprimanded by the teacher, current Alvy notes that he was always...like that...and he also says this to the little girl, and they talk about Freud’s latency period, and Alvy said he never...had...one...that’s uh...that’s fuckin’ SOMETHING, now isn’t it?

OK, well, shoving that forcefully aside as hard as I can, Alvy wonders aloud on where his classmates now, and one of them says this:

This also involves a little girl saying she’s “into leather,” which is...awkward as FUCK, but WE’RE GONNA MOVE THE FUCK ON. Alvy recounts his paranoia, and was so even after he became a famous comedian (which we say after a VERY good joke about qualifying for the army as a hostage). He speaks to a friend, Rob (Tony Roberts) about potential anti-Semitism from a person in a passersby meeting, then heads to meet Annie.

Annie Hall (Diane Keaton) arrives at a movie theater, late and in a bad mood. The two are late to their intended film, argue briefly, then head to another film that they’ve already seen, The Sorrow and the Pity. In line, they’re in front of a man loudly soliloquizing on film, much to Alvy’s annoyance.

Annie and Alvy continue to argue a bit, while Alvy openly berates the casual film critic. In the middle, he talks to the audience about it, only to be followed by the crtiic himself, who also acknowledges the audience! Huh! Anyway, he’s a professor at Columbia, and starts continuing his line speech, this time on the work of Marshall McLuhan, one of the most important early media theorists ever. And then, Alvy brings out Marshall McLuhan (Marshall McLuhan) to debate him on it, only for Alvy to turn to the audience and wish aloud that life could really be like this!

I’m beginning to understand why people like this film. It’s metacontextual before metacontextuality was really a thing in film. It’s a fourth-wall breaking movie in some fantastic ways. But will it still hold its muster after breaking the fourth wall’s become so commonplace? we’ll see, I guess.

After a showing of the film, the two return home, and Alvy tries to initiate sex. But Annie’s not really into it at the moment, and Alvy complains that they used to have sex all the time, and it’s been a while since. So, I guess that retroactively awkward scene at the school was meant to foreshadow Alvy’s high libido, that will probably cause some conflict in the film. Anyway, Annie notes that Alvy once went through something similar with Allison, his first wife. Who’s Allison? Flashback!

Allison Portchnik (Carol Kane) is a graduate student in political science, working for a campaign that Alvy’s about to perform for. He’s nervous, as he’s going on after another comedian. She comforts him by saying that she thought he was cute, and he does well. But we flash-forward to a night after they’re married, shortly after the death of JFK, which Alvy’s obsessing over, entertaining various conspiracy theories.

However, Allison rightly points out that his obsession is simply a way for him to avoid having sex with her, which mirrors the present-day situation him him and Annie. Flash forward TO Alvy and Annie, and there are just lobsters...everywhere, on the floor in their kitchen. After that commotion, they talk about Annie’s past romances.

And by talk about, I mean they LITERALLY WALK THROUGH her memories. And I gotta say...I fuckin’ love this method of storytelling. One of her previous boyfriends is an actor (John Glover), and his over-dramatic prose sickens Alvy. We see a second marriage of Alvy’s to New Yorker writer Robin (Janet Margolin), who’s dragged him to a stuffy high society party of intellectuals that he has no interest in going to. Same her, Alvy. I bet the caviar’s canned.

He tries to initiate sex with her - in the middle of the party, mind you - and she turns him down. later, when they get to it in their apartment, she’s unable to, uh...reach satisfaction. From there, we flash-forward after that marriage ends to a tennis match with Rob, where he meets one of his mutual friends: Annie Hall.

And for the record, Annie’s pretty obviously got a crush on him, and she’s adorable as fuck. Also, that outfit, real talk...that outfit rules. She offers to give Alvy a list, during which he’s quite worried about her driving, but the two still get along well enough. Annie’s an amateur photographer, during a time period where photography is considered a relatively new art form. The two go to her apartment, and share familial anecdotes and personal stories about themselves. And as they talk, we also see a set of subtitles on top of each of them that betray their inner feelings and thoughts.

I do genuinely like the stylings of the movie, goddamn. This conversation leads to Alvy asking her out on a date, although they end up scheduling it after Annie auditions at a nightclub as a singer. And while it doesn’t go great, Alvy tells her she was fantastic, and they share a kiss before they head to dinner. They head to her place afterwards, and we cut to later that night, post-coitus.

And then, we get a flash-forward back to the next day, where the two are at a bookstore, and Alvy speaks on his personal philosophy of life.

I'm obsessed with uh, with death, I think. Big - big subject with me, yeah. I have a very pessimistic view of life. You should know this about me if we're gonna go out. You know, I - I feel that life is - is divided up into the horrible and the miserable. Those are the two categories, you know. The - the horrible would be like, um, I don't know, terminal cases, you know, and blind people, crippled. I don't know how they get through life. It's amazing to me. You know, and the miserable is everyone else. That's - that's - so - so - when you go through life - you should be thankful that you're miserable because you're very lucky to be miserable.

Iiiiinteresting.

Shortly into their relationship, they admit they’re in love (or “lurve”, as Alvy says). She moves in with Alvy, which he initially isn’t the biggest fan of, having been burned in two previous marriages And already, their relationship is showing a few bumps. Alvy’s also always trying to push her to take college classes, while she uses mariuana whenever they have sex, which Alvy doesn’t agree with.

But as they have sex one night, without the marijuana at Alvy’s urging, Annie’s mind wanders - LITERALLY.

This film...this film has a VERY unique style of visual storytelling, and I am HERE for it! Seriously, I genuinely love this method of storytelling and comedy, it’s extremely engaging to me.

Soon enough, Alvy gets an interview to write for a talk show host, which he ABSOLUTELY despises. But in doing so, he decides to go into stand-up for himself, and is actually quite successful at it! But before we get to that, we’re at the halfway point! See you in Part 2!

[merrikstryfe]

(THREAD) Today Donald Trump and Mike Pompeo unveiled the real nightmare scenario for the 2020 election—and the question of what Trump has legal authority to do has nothing to do with it. I hope you'll read on and retweet—as what I'm describing here is what America is heading for. 

1/ Autocracies aren't born in rule of law. They're not even primarily born in violence. Rather they arise *despite* rule of law—often on the strength of a benighted populism, in fact just the sort of populist movement Trump is building now over false fears of a "rigged" election. 

2/ The question isn't whether Trump has legal authority to move Election Day and thereby extend his presidency—he doesn't—but a different question: what happens if he just declares that he *does* have this power? And what if he can do so with a false *veneer* of legal legitimacy? 

3/ By October 31, Trump's decision not to combat COVID-19 (indeed to worsen the pandemic with every one of his words, actions, and decisions not to act), coupled with an incipient flu season, is likely to send America's COVID-19 data—infections, deaths—into its horrifying nadir. 

4/ Meanwhile, Trump has put a crony who's likely a witness in an ongoing federal criminal probe—a man who's a peer of perjurers (and worse) Michael Cohen, Elliott Broidy and Gordon Sondland—in charge of the United States Postal Service. Already, this crony is destroying the USPS. 

5/ If, on October 30, COVID-19 is cresting—as it likely will be—and the USPS is less able to deliver mail properly than at any point in recent history, as seems likely (and on Trump's end intentional), Trump's self-manufactured "case" for a national emergency will be at its apex. 

6/ Today, Mike Pompeo told us Trump lackey Barr—who has never refused the president anything, who appears to be a Trump co-conspirator in the Ukraine scandal, and who has already shown a penchant for violating the law—gets to decide if Trump can announce a change in Election Day.

7/ Note that each time I use the anodyne euphemism "change in Election Day," what I'm describing is in fact apocalyptic—an artificial extension of the Trump presidency corresponding with the end of American democracy and the beginning of Trump's reign as America's first autocrat. 

8/ Barr has already instructed OLC (the Office of Legal Counsel) to produce opinions that violate all existing law (for that matter, we saw that during the prior GOP administration, Bush's, as to torture). Barr can get the OLC to crush a CIA whistleblower—or change Election Day.

9/ I ask anyone reading this to simply play out the following hypothetical—the one I offer in the next tweet—which is "hypothetical" only inasmuch as it takes everything we know about Trump, Pompeo, Barr, COVID-19, and the USPS *right now* and projects it 90 days into the future:

10/ On October 30, Trump announces, with an OLC opinion "granting" him this power in hand, that he is moving the 2020 presidential election 120 days, after which time he will review the nation's ability to safely and securely conduct an election. He announces it via tweet and TV.

11/ Understand that this would be illegal—and wouldn't change election day. But that wouldn't be the point. The point would be to *convince Trump voters not to vote*. You may have to read the preceding sentence multiple times—it's counterintuitive unless you're a metamodernist.

12/ This thread isn't on metamodernism. All you need to know is that on the day in June 2015 Trump announced his candidacy, I published a HuffPost essay declaring that what made Trump dangerous was his ability to manipulate reality (in a way theorists connect to "metamodernism"). 

13/ The way to win an unwinnable election, using the sort of powerful reframing of events a certain way of thinking Trump instinctively (not intelligently or responsibly) employs, is not to turn out your voters... but *declare the election invalid once your voters don't show up*. 

14/ The purpose of the pre-election Trump announcement I am hypothesizing here would not be to help Trump *win* the 2020 election, but to convince so many Trump voters *not to vote* that the results of the election favor Biden by *so much* the election looks wholly illegitimate. 

15/ Imagine a scenario in which, with 3 branches of government—executive, judicial, legislative—you have the executive branch declaring the election was moved, the judicial branch (as yet) silent, and the legislative branch in chaos because no one in the GOP knows what to say/do.

16/ By convincing his voters to stay home—because he's "moved the election"—Trump will have caused every GOP member of Congress to *lose their reelection*, *forcing* them to back his play and say that the election was delayed and therefore Biden didn't actually win on November 3. 

17/ The result: an executive branch that says the election was invalid; half the legislative branch (the GOP half) saying the election was invalid; election results that *look* invalid (as Biden has won by 50+ points); and a judicial branch that hasn't—and can't—say anything yet.

18/ In that circumstance, what does "rule of law" even mean? You have a separation of powers issue—a conflict between branches of government—that the Supreme Court *must* hear, and because it's the most complex case ever heard by SCOTUS in US history, it's impossible to expedite.

19/ The mere fact that Trump would have enacted this constitutional crisis just 96 hours pre-election means SCOTUS *can't* speak on it pre-election, and the complexity of the case would throw into chaos *all* state election deadlines. Which is basically the point of Trump's plot. 

20/ All Trump needs in this scenario is (a) SCOTUS to move at its usual glacial pace, and (b) GOP-run states (states with GOP secretaries of state running their elections) to *refuse to certify election results* or *choose electors* until the Supreme Court has acted on the issue. 

21/ I'm not even sure *Trump* would be the plaintiff in this case—as he and his GOP allies in Congress (and GOP secretaries of state) would so adamantly declare the election results invalid they might wait to make the *Democrats* sue in federal court, making them look desperate. 

22/ And how magnanimous Trump will be! He and his GOP allies will offer to *negotiate* with Democrats in lieu of them filing a federal suit. Trump will say, "We have to wait until this invisible plague is under control. That's *all* anyone is asking here." It'll sound persuasive!

23/ Know what'll make it *more* persuasive? Election results so insane-looking—Biden 82%, Trump 15%—they'll make Egypt's el-Sisi blush. Biden will be half-inclined to *agree* with Trump on a do-over—knowing his term as an "illegitimate monarch" may be marked by historic violence. 

24/ Right now I need everyone in media; everyone on "legal Twitter"; everyone who's a professional political analyst to comment on this thread—or on your own feeds, it doesn't matter—explaining why this Trump plan wouldn't work. Why it isn't *exactly* what he's setting us up for.

25/ Understand that I didn't develop this thread out of some fever dream. All I did was take statements and actions by Trump, Barr, and Pompeo; the current status of COVID-19 and the USPS (and who controls each); and the way of thinking Trump has exhibited *since June 2015*. /end 

PS/ I understand—and empathize with, as a lawyer—those who reply, "Nah, he ceases to be POTUS on January 20th at noon." Again, that's the view that *law* determines if a coup is successful, not the brute force of populism and logistics—the logic undergirding Trump's actions now. 

PS2/ In the scenario I've described, yes, the law would suggest Biden—having won the election 82% to 15%; with less than 270 electoral votes; and with all GOP politicians and all GOP secretaries of state and most GOP voters saying he won a fake election—is the president. So what? 

PS3/ What would in mean—in that scenario—for someone to be "president"? And that's the question the five ultra-conservative justices of the Supreme Court would have to decide, probably on a timeline so glacial it couldn't be concluded effectively until early January 2021 at best. 

PS4/ More importantly, that's the question *Democrats* would have to decide—and would probably be deciding in the midst of historic Republican protests and threats of violence all across the country. Would *Democrats* consider it their best move to accept that election "victory"? 

PS5/ We learned in January '20 that impeachments are about politics, not law—though they're supposed to adhere to rule of law. In January '21 we may learn *elections* are *also* about politics, not law. What happens if Dems must allow a do-over to preserve the peace of our Union? 

NOTE/ This scenario works for Trump even if early voting depresses Biden's win to (say) 62% to 36%. It may even work without Barr aboard. It may work if the "don't vote" effort is homegrown, inspired and supported by Trump but not demanded by him. The premise itself is the thing. 

NOTE2/ The solution here is for America to publicly discuss this scenario *now*—and invalidate it. GOP politicians must agree to abide by the election results even if Trump convinces his voters not to show up. Barr must state clearly that Trump cannot legally "move" election day.

NOTE3/ Constitutional law experts must play out how SCOTUS would act. Election law experts must do scenario-planning on how misconduct by GOP secretaries of state could be thwarted. Dems must educate Republicans on who's POTUS on January 20 if SCOTUS is still working on a ruling. 

NOTE4/ Democrats must announce now that there'll be no "do-over" election—and anyone who opts not to vote is making a decision they must *live by*. Emergency assistance must be provided to USPS. Social media should deem Trump tweets on moving election day "election interference." 

NOTE5/ It's amazing to see responses saying "the military wouldn't allow it" or "Pelosi would be POTUS." Again, this sort of coup happens through *politics, rhetoric, and the reframing of reality with GOP pol/voter support*—it has nothing to do with law, violence or the military.

[xandreblueshifted-blog]

Imagine:

Some perhaps not so far distant future, watching with amazing clarity while picking up their radio communications or civil broadcasts (television). The drama unfolds, this life is not unlike our own and surprisingly similar; bipedal with two arms and two legs, and engaging in a life we might remark as simply a cultural difference to what we know.  They have beliefs and ideas we can relate to; religion, politics, love of music, art, and literature.  They have cast systems much like our own, both professional and political.  They have social hierarchies similar to ours with the more affluent reaping the majority of benefits and the fruits of the working casts that toil in a life that is destined to die in that labor with little to show for their effort.  They, the oppulant, rationalize that it is their birthright, similar to the plutarchs of Earth.  Various casts in academia or the arts, close but never as reaching as the unearned or inherited self-righteous and over privileged plutarchs reach or treasures, truly say and believe that theirs is a labor of love and to die in research or performance is not a waste of their life, but the fulfillment of their dreams. Meanwhile, those far below simply work as great cogs in the industrial machines; easily replaced, never missed, certainly never recorded or documented, and never achieving or actualizing a percentage of their dreams.

Social and economic disparity is not dissimilar to our own.  The wealthy invoke the religion of the masses that they themselves do not believe in; malignantly believable attempts to ingratiate and seduce those that work without end, all the while promising untold riches in an afterlife that they themselves know or at least believe doesn't exist.  This, the great illusion that keeps the unclean masses from living their lives for today, a well known even on earth method to keep the precarious balance of control, always works because even the lesser of us will succumb to a dream or false hope for more.  It’s no just human nature, but the nature of all life; sentience or self awareness not required.

We call them barbaric and unjust while the same drama unfolds daily on Earth, because they are not us and so we feel self-righteous to judge.  Various political parties arise on their world, much as on ours, with claims of seeking equality, but it's all a well intended and orchestrated illusion; just smoke and mirrors that serves as a similar opiate to the masses as religion. In practice, it's just another type of mass control and it works effectively and efficiently the more unaware and superstitious the populace and so while education is praised, in policy it isn’t practiced and often shunned, “belief is the evidence of that unseen,” becomes a catchphrase of the gullible and easily influenced, while demanding proof is discouraged amongt the masses.  Political parties also arise to further that agenda, and also to condemn one another just as on Earth, to keep the masses fighting amongst the masses... just as on Earth, so too in heaven.  The hypocrisy of the sacredness of life is an obvious platitude and illusion when it comes to healthcare and feeding those in need; it’s important because ancient religious texts of both their world and ours demanded it in a time when infant mortality was high.  In a world where the majority of resources go those they least require them, this hoarding of assets is yet another means of mass control.

War on their world, just as ours, is not just needed for negotiation but as a silent form of ethnic cleansing, just as much as it is a diversion and of course another control.  The true leaders of Earth realize a problem and quickly begin to edit the footage for fear of compromise in vain, for there will always be hackers and bootleggers.  World History proves that wars are rarely about opposing ideologies, resources, or which side upon which to crack the egg as much as it is a means to separate and segregate those with the least of means and to dispose of them;  they wrap those heroes in a flag of nationalism before they head to the front lines then silently ignore their passing and the grief of the survivors when the hero returns draped in that same flag.  On Earth as in the heavens.  The questioning the validity or need for such war is quickly and balefully reversed on the questioner as an insult to the flag and for those that died for a now meaningless piece of cloth;  absolutely it meant something in the wars of independence, but quickly lost its meaning when it was realized as yet another means of control and a diversionary tactic.  While the more scholarly and observant see this species, their history, and the progression of corruption to no different than us, such beliefs are cast into that ineffable and often mocked realm of the conspiracy theorist.  The truth would undermine the intricate web of lies and controls, and so the first step is to ridicule and when that fails, ostracize or shun, make them an enemy of the state, then finally imprison or execute and claim it an accident.  On Earth as it is in the heavens.

Overall, they are no more vile and uncaring than we are, no more advanced, and similarly they never attempted to harness that which makes even the lesser of us greater than those species that preceded us, or those we keep in private prisons for our entertainment; you’d call them zoos.  Their world, like ours, is consumed in the passive flames of the self-righteous; burning in effigy, consuming without end or direction, without pity, without sign of an end.  The fire can not be extinguished because doing so would require those with the most to exercise true altruism to those with the least; to lift up their equal brother or sister in the inheritance of the birthright of all sentient creatures:  to dream and to be able to seek a means to make those dreams a reality.

For forty years, it is an ominous spectacle and true to the more deviant natures in humankind, bets are made on the winners and losers.  In 40 years as we observe, as our technology improves and the ability to observe and listen more closely, we watch in perverse enraptured as the last of them spit out its last breath of life into the void of an uncaring, unforgiving universe.  No redemption, no avenging angel, just a world consumed in war of dominance and become an irradiated hell of their own making.  The self entitled privileged few are the last to die, but all the wealth in the universe can't save them from themselves.  While some do escape to other worlds, casting their seed to the winds and to the void as paupers they once fed upon, they similarly meet that quiet and pitiable paupers end.  Those whose sweat and blood they fed on in endless anthropophagy no longer exist for them to feed upon or serve them, and left to their own devices, all their plots and plans bring them no further than the systems edge; to freeze and sleep, to dream in the deserved hell they created for their brothers.

Here on Earth, we laugh and scorn them.  We revel in their folly, but no lesson is learned; it was for the uncaring and unlearned masses just entertainment.   Bloggers Blog, political analysts spin lies on what is seen.  All the while as we watched the Fermi’s proposed great-filter in action, nature, entropy, the elements play out its drama, the same games continue to play out.  “It won’t happen here because we are human and they were stupid aliens,” some blissfully and deliberately unaware will say.  Sixty years later, when the last survivors of the great failed experiment of sentience on Earth meets a similar end, there is no one left to laugh.  As in the heavens, so too on Earth.

Somewhere, far away, another observer remarks the spectacle.  All the while watching, cataloging, and scorning by yet another species not so dissimilar to us.  They too, blogging while paying tribute to their own false gods and false flags, and nationalistic dreams and zeal; the gods of their plutocratic overlords silently snicker knowingly.  So in the heavens, so too on our Earth.  No lessen is learned from those that seek fulfillment and riches only in the moment at the cost of the future.

While we are amused by the foibles and spectacle of the Kardashians or the Trumps, its just anesthetization and a type of control.  All the while, a very real truth is screamed at us from the universe every moment, but no one pays heed or listens.  Life is indeed sacred.  Sentient life more-so.  The miracle of our existence is indeed profound and could be called sacred.  To diminish it to a djinn that blinked us into existence insults the very struggle it took us to become what we are.  Magic and the supernatural thinking diminishes the blood of those that died to make our world.  Magic is not fun or being edgy, magic and the supernatural is a control and those believe in it are were never in control of it;  they volunteered to be slaves to it and accepted a bondage that was tens of thousands of years in the making.  So it is with most controls of the powerful, but none is more obvious because it is the most widely accepted.

Let not the millions and billions of the sovereign of this Earth dissuade you otherwise, because it only requires one very bad decision to end it forever.  Slavery comes in both voluntary and involuntary forms.  The voluntary ones distract and manipulate your emotions, and if this writing angers you, perhaps you should look for your collar and ask who your true master is;  somewhere unseen there will be a human behind that curtain.

[tcm]

Wherein Summer Intern Alexandra Greenway discusses this week’s Silent Sunday Nights pick: ASK FATHER (’19)

Hello!  It’s me!  I’m back and ready with another silent film to put on your radar: Harold Lloyd’s ASK FATHER (’19).  Much like last week’s MASTER OF THE HOUSE (’25), this one is for sure required watching – but for quite different reasons.  While MASTER OF THE HOUSE was a social masterpiece, ASK FATHER is one of Lloyd’s many achievements in slapstick, the tour de force of the silent era.  Like Keaton and Chaplin, Lloyd did all his own stunts, often putting himself in danger.  On one occasion, Lloyd blew off two of his fingers after what was mistaken for a fake bomb exploded in his hands while he was using the wick to light a cigarette.  For the rest of his career he disguised his deformity with a prosthetic glove which, although useful, was pretty noticeable.  

These stories are mind-blowing when compared to today’s film production, but the thing is – they’re pretty dime a dozen.   Chaplin, Keaton, and Lloyd all did their own stunts which – AGAIN – is AMAZING.  But what I think is most significant to recognize is how influential the camera work of these films is.  For a long time, film theorists have analyzed film by cataloging a film language. What does the light suggest about the mood? What does the editing suggest about the characters’ inner consciousness?  How does the soundtrack support or contradict the context of a scene?  These are the kind of questions most often posed by film analysts.  But silent film can point to a new way of understanding film, Gilles Deleuze’s ‘movement-image’.  

I’m not gonna get too heady here, I promise.  All I’m tryna do is emphasize the importance of slapstick in silent films to how we understand (and probably why we appreciate) movies.  Now, Deleuze (like many scholars) is a deep, heady, wordy guy.  He’s a philosopher, so his job is talking, thinking, and writing about the kind of stuff that most of us sort of nod along to in between more pressing concerns like, “how do I register for health insurance…?”. “what’s wrong with my foot?”, “is there a squirrel stuck in my wall or am I under demonic possession?”, etc.  In any case, he’s come up with this idea of a ‘movement-image’ as a way to re-think not only cinema, but our understanding of the world.  To Deleuze, cinema is not just a bunch of still images played in succession, it is a new way of viewing, a way of creating that is spontaneous and not necessarily causal.  The image does not build the movement, the movement defines the image.   Basically: gifs.  A gif (which is really just a capsuled version of video media) captures emotion that exists without context.  It’s not a photograph, but it’s not a video.  It’s a Deleuzian dream – so tell THAT to your professor who thought your inclusion of Mean Girls highlights in your final presentation was trite.  

Why do I bring all this up?  To point out that silent films are not fossils – they don’t belong in a museum/attic/basement/tomb/forgotten storage cube.  They are just as relevant - if not more relevant – than ever.  There’s a reason that a lot of gifs come from film – especially silent film.  The images are so striking, they evoke something intangible yet extremely visceral.  Silent films (perhaps like all relics) point us to the core of our film appreciation.  They are basic at times, but they are the building blocks of cinema, not to mention media in general.  Harold Lloyd is why we have Tarantino, Kubrick, Varda, Spielberg, et al.  So – like I said last week – we should savor them.  

Tune in to ASK FATHER this Sunday, June 18th, at midnight on TCM.  We’ll also be showing THE FIRST AUTO (’27), another can’t-miss from the silent era.  I’ll see you next week – and in the meantime, tune in to TCM for all the classic content your heart can desire.  

[fatfemme97-blog]

Boxing Day Facts

6 Amazing Facts About Boxing Day Relax, Hallmark conspiracy theorists: Boxing Day  in Europe isn’t some prank to confuse America. It’s a real holiday in the United Kingdom and other European countries that dates back to the days of Queen Victoria. Here are some facts to get you up to speed.

1. IT OCCURS ON DECEMBER 26TH. Boxing Day Facts is observed annually on December 26. If it falls on a weekend, the public holiday itself will be celebrated on Monday. It became an official holiday during the reign of Queen Victoria, though some historians trace its origins back much further—to medieval times. Today, it's largely an extension of the Christmas holiday and a big day for sporting events and shopping.

2. NO ONE REALLY KNOWS WHERE THE NAME ORIGINATED. Many historians think the holiday’s name is derived from the church practice of opening alms boxes the day after Christmas and distributing money to the poor. Historically, British employers followed the church’s lead by sliding workers and servants gifts or cash on December 26.

Others believe the "box" refers to the boxes of gifts employers gave to their servants on the day after Christmas. (In wealthy households, servants were often required to work on Christmas Day but given December 26th off in order to celebrate the holiday on their own.)

3. IT'S A BIG DAY FOR SHOPPING. Historically, Boxing Day's post-Christmas sales have long made it one of the U.K.'s busiest shopping days of the year. And while it still falls within the top five biggest shopping days of the year, the popularity of online shopping has reduced the overall spending people do on December 26.

“Fifteen years ago it was pretty much guaranteed that you would only get big sales a few times a year—Boxing Day and the big summer clearance," Bryan Roberts, an analyst at Kantar Retail, told The Telegraph in 2015. That is no longer the case.”  

“The Boxing Day facts sales are pretty much dead,” Roberts added. “Black Friday and Cyber Monday illustrate Christmas sales are starting earlier and earlier. There is a possibility prices will just keep on dropping in the run-up to Christmas. This makes the Boxing Day sales incredibly diluted."

4. THERE IS NO BOXING INVOLVED. Despite the name, British observances of Boxing Day involve no fisticuffs. For patricians, however, another sport rules the day: fox hunting. Though it's a long-held tradition, many animal rights activists and groups would like to see the practice done away with altogether. Especially since, technically, it's illegal. In the days leading up to Boxing Day, the International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW) is often very vocal in reminding citizens that "The chasing or killing of foxes and other British mammals with a pack of dogs was banned because the overwhelming majority of the UK public rejected this so-called 'sport' as cruel and abhorrent."

5. SOME OTHER COUNTRIES DO TAKE THE NAME MORE LITERALLY. In other countries, Boxing Day celebrations are more literal. Some former British colonies in Africa and the Caribbean celebrate the holiday with prizefighting events.

6. IN IRELAND, DECEMBER 26TH IS SOMETIMES KNOWN AS WREN DAY. Ireland sometimes refers to December 26 as Wren Day, a nod to an old tradition in which poor children would kill a wren, then sell the feathers to neighbors for good luck. In today’s celebrations, the wren is fake.

How to Celebrate Boxing Day Boxing Day, also known as St. Stephen’s Day, is usually celebrated on the day after Christmas (December 26) in the United Kingdom and other countries with British roots. Although its origin is unclear, a popular theory is that it stems from the medieval practice of churches opening their collection boxes for the poor on this day, and so charity is an important theme to this holiday. Learn how you can incorporate this and other customs to celebrate a traditional Boxing Day.

Volunteer for church functions. Find out if your church follows the tradition of collecting donations from the congregation and distributing them to the less fortunate on Boxing Day. Ask if they need any assistance. If they do, donate your time.

Donate your time elsewhere. Embody the spirit of charitability by giving and finding organizations who need volunteers for programs that day. Collect food and/or donations for a food drive. Assist in a soup kitchen. Donate blood. Contribute to improving the lives of others.

Plan ahead. Since charity is needed all year round, use Boxing Day to plan your calendar for the upcoming year. Search online for future events in which you could be of assistance. Plan a budget so you can donate to your favorite charities on a regular basis.

Tip people who provide you service. If you haven’t already, give a holiday bonus to your doorman, postal worker, delivery person, and anyone else who provides you with regular service.

Be a Wren boy. Buy a stuffed bird and a birdcage light enough to carry. Dress up in fancy women’s fashion. Parade around town and ask for donations from passersby on the street, customers at pubs and restaurants, or by knocking on houses from door to door.

Join the fox hunt. Although killing the fox has been largely criminalized, the fox hunt still endures as a popular Boxing Day tradition. Don the red jacket, mount your horse, and participate in the legal substitute of flushing out foxes with your hounds (without killing the fox) or chasing a human substitute instead.

Play football. Since football (or soccer, for you Americans) is such an important part of Boxing Day traditions as well as the overall culture of the countries that celebrate it, get out of the house and burn off some of those holiday calories. Organize a neighborhood pickup game. Challenge your family to a match. If you’re on a league team, set up a match with a local rival.

Attend games and races. Go to any one of the many horse races, soccer matches, and cricket matches scheduled on Boxing Day. Don’t worry about traveling; most teams make sure to play another that’s nearby so neither the players nor their fans have to go too far from home.

Take a dip. Participate in one of many icy swims organized on Boxing Day. Wear something absurdly fancy, take a plunge into the winter sea, and win a medal for bravery while warming back up in front of a beach bonfire with all the other daring souls. Many of these events raise money for charity, so consider it a good deed done!

Visit family. If your extended family is too large for you to see everyone on either Christmas Eve or Christmas Day, use Boxing Day to include them in your holidays. Have a formal holiday feast or keep true to the more relaxed spirit of Boxing Day and have a simpler get-together.

Spend time with friends. If you’ve already checked family off your list of holiday duties, feel free to make Boxing Day a time to spend with friends instead. Go to a sporting event or watch one at the local pub. Or just hang out together at someone’s home.

Keep it casual. Put the formality of the holidays behind you. Host a potluck where everyone’s free to get rid of their leftovers. Make it a pajama party if you want to make it even less formal and more inviting. Tune into the football marathon on TV, zone out, and be merry.

Go on an outing. Since sports and exercise are such a large part of Boxing Day, stay in the spirit and have the whole family get some exercise. Use this extra time together to go for a long hike through the woods or walk through the streets.

Attend a pantomime. Take the young kids to see this family-friendly piece of lively theater based on fairy tales, which is traditionally performed on Boxing Day. Sing along with the musical numbers and interact with the performers onstage.

Chase the sales. Take advantage of the more modern tradition of stores opening the day after Christmas, offering deep discounts. Go to larger chain stores and shopping malls, since smaller shops are more likely to remain closed for the holiday.

Make it a family trip. Retain some of the holiday spirit and make it an outing for the whole family. Include gift cards among your other Christmas presents to family so they can spend them the day after. Build a tradition of your own around the annual sales.

Stay true to Boxing Day’s roots. Since charity is considered to be an important aspect of the holiday, use the discounts to shop for others who may lack the means to afford even these sales. For example, buy coats, blankets, and other winter gear for the homeless.

[politicalfilth-blog]

Trumps Pivot That Will Bring On The End Of The U.S. Empire

We Are Change

Welcome back beautiful and amazing human beings, here at WeAreChange we often confuse a lot of people. To pinpoint our philosophy, we are here to get you to question your reality so that you can make up your own mind.

We are a fully independent broadcast news organization that is financed by you. I needed to say that before getting into the next subject of this video which is a very light topic which is of course “The diabolical, evil plot by bloodthirsty globalists to start a war, with the help of the mainstream media!”

More concisely we are going to be talking about Trump’s Afghanistan plan, the internal battles between Kushner and Steve Bannon, and how Henry Kissinger’s recent comments support ISIS. A few days ago I tweeted:

Some of the recent actions by the Trump administration show that this is increasingly likely. We’re getting alleged information that it was Ivanka Trunk and Jared Kushner is the reason that Donald Trump’s Chief Strategist Steve Bannon was removed from the White House.

Now Mr. Kushner, Ivanka’s husband has been very instrumental in the White House. He has business ties to George Soros and Goldman Sachs.

He is the one who called Lockheed Martin to get Saudi Arabia a better deal.

A few weeks ago it was this couple that got Trump to launch a military strike on the Syrian Government because “Ivanka watched a video of children suffering inside Syria.”

We hear that Steve Bannon called Jared Kushner a cuck and a globalist.

Even since his recent ouster, many analysts are saying this is a major win for the globalists. Finally, a lot more people are concerned about this globalist influence in Trump’s administration. This is something we have been talking about on this broadcast since the beginning of his presidency.

We are now seeing a more aggressive, more militarized, more war hawkish stance by this administration. Today they just slapped further sanctions on Chinese and Russian companies and individuals, supposedly so they will put pressure on North Korea.

These sanctions are a significant move one that is generally considered a form of economic warfare. The United States is more aggressive, stating that they need a Pre-emptive war on North Korea to stop a war. Which if you think about it doesn’t make any sense.

These latest developments show that the president does not represent the people of this country but a small number of individuals that are pulling the strings.

Donald Trump just made a major announcement about Afghanistan and what was his decision. Back in 2013, he agreed that we should withdraw from Afghanistan.

In 2011, he stated that we are wasting money in Iraq and Afghanistan, that Ron Paul is right.

and then he said

What did the man who said he wanted to be a non-interventionist, that promised to pull back the military troops, what did he do well, he totally flipped-flopped.

He just made the same excuses of his predecessor Barack Obama.

Trump has approved sending 4,000 additional troops to Afghanistan, and imagine my shock when he gave no timeline for withdrawal.

This is extremely frustrating as it makes almost no sense unless you look at what the media and government are not telling you. The United States has already spent over a trillion dollars in Afghanistan. 3600 Americans have been killed, and twenty thousand soldiers have been wounded. This occupation has been the longest conflict in the history of the United States now in its sixteenth year.

There are a number of reasons why we are in Afghanistan.  These include the Taliban who in 2000 managed to almost completely eliminate the worlds largest crop of opium and heroin production in under a year.

Ever since the United States took over the country, it has turned into a Narco State ruled jihadists and drug lords.

According to the United Nations, the war-torn nation provides 90 percent of the world’s supply of opium. You know one of the most addicting drugs in existence.

Afghanistan is also rich in natural resources rare metals that help run your computer and your cell phones.

People like McMaster, Lindsey Graham, and John McCain are celebrating this announcement. Which is ultimately a continuation of the same policies of Bush and Obama. Even the mainstream media is cheering him on, congratulating him on his bold new action plan against Afghanistan. Which is really the same old plan we have had since 2001, and they say I’m the conspiracy theorist.

People need to realize Donald Trump has just shifted toward total Neo-Con, he is now doing the same policies that never change no matter who is president.

We all need to wake up to this and stop being naive. It’s not just drugs and natural resources that the United States is after but also global hegemony. A big part of the new deal to everyone has a lot to do with Iran. Since Israel and the U.S. have aligned themselves with Saudi Arabia. They are the one’s that fund the Wahhabists, the pushers of Islamic terrorists against Iran. Saudi Arabia and Iran control most of the oil in the Middle East.   They have been fighting each other through various proxy wars.

One reason to leave troops in Afganistan is to make sure that Iran doesn’t gain influence over Afghanistan. Iran has been fighting off drug lords on the border with Afghanistan where all that opium and heroin is produced.

Henry Kissinger has come out saying that he would rather have ISIS than risk Iran becoming more influential in the Middle East.

Kissinger is one of the most influential American foreign policy advisors and a major globalist who is tangled up with various secret societies within the establishment. He advises Donald Trump, and Donald says he respects Kissinger dearly and has regular meetings with him. He is recommending to Trump not to destroy ISIS as that could lead to a radical Iranian empire. If we examine American foreign policy, we have seen them weaponize, fund, and support the radical Islamic terrorists known as ISIS to get rid of nation states inside of the middle east. Iran is one of the countries that are fighting against ISIS and these terrorists.

All of this conflicts with the real reason we went into Afghanistan in 2001 which was to fight terrorism. Terrorism is just an excuse since there are greater geopolitical stakes involved. These policies are detrimental to the people of the United States but are beneficial to bankers like Goldman Sachs and the military contractors and generals that surround Donald Trump. These policies are stupid and will not change even though Trump made promises to do so. This will eventually result in the decline of the United States and the destruction of our nation state.

So yeah, that’s what is happening from my perspective. Let me know if you agree or disagree in the comments.

I want to thank everyone who donates, and you are more important than ever before. No matter what I love you and thank you so much for being here, for your support and your viewership.

Patreon https://www.patreon.com/WeAreChange?a…

We gratefully accept Bitcoin too: 12HdLgeeuA87t2JU8m4tbRo247Yj5u2TVP

Donate on our site: https://wearechange.org/donate

FOLLOW WE ARE CHANGE ON SOCIAL MEDIA

SnapChat: LukeWeAreChange

Facebook: https://facebook.com/LukeWeAreChange

Twitter: https://twitter.com/Lukewearechange

Instagram: http://instagram.com/lukewearechange

WE ARE CHANGE MERCHANDISE

Rep WeAreChange merch proudly: https://wearechange.org/store

The post Trumps Pivot That Will Bring On The End Of The U.S. Empire appeared first on We Are Change.

from We Are Change https://wearechange.org/trumps-pivot-that-will-bring-on-the-end-of-the-u-s-empire/

[intersectionality-stuff-blog]

Giovanni Barrella

Sharon Marshall

3/27/17

FYW-1000c-505

                        13 Ways of Looking at Intersectionality, A Numbered Multimodal Multi-Genre Research Composition

 Tell a story

  It was a hot summer in New York and Chrystel, fresh out of college, is looking for work. She needed the work because she’s attending graduate school and needs the money to pay for tuition, She is trying to get her masters in finance. Majoring and even mastering in finance is a risky move. Why? Because America is a white supremacy and the business world is not only a predominately white world (The Black Man’s Guide to Working in a White Man’s World, Lamay Lathan) it is  also male dominated.  We all know from today’s economy how hard it is to get a job. How is this a problem? Well Chrystel is a colored woman, meaning she is a double minority which further increases the odds of being against her. However, it wasn’t impossible, just really difficult. That didn’t stop her, she believed she was more than qualified. She just graduated from McGill University, one of the top three universities in Canada, with an outstanding 4.0 GPA. Chrystel also had experience from her internship, working as consultant and analyst at Rio Tinto, which is a British-Australian multinational and one of the world's largest metals and mining corporations. She was brimming with confidence that she would get offers in New York. She took a leap of faith and landed face first. Companies were reluctant on giving her offers and when she did get one, the pay-grade was not up to par with what of her contemporaries. You would think with such an impressive resume that companies would line up. Doubt started to consume her. Maybe She had to go back to Canada where she studied, which she disliked to the heavy winter seasons or give up her dream all-together and return to homeland known as Haiti and rot there. She decided to try one last time, hoping all that hard work was not in vain. Chrystel later went to this company called Goldman Sachs. Goldman Sachs interviewed her and welcomed her with open arms. She is now currently living the dream, making money and living that gentrified life in Brooklyn.

 Write and extend an analogy or metaphor

 Intersectionality is like that one dorky kid you would never had given a chance to prove himself. Like that dorky kid, he is a person who is afflicted with many things that society would classify as weird and “unnatural”. Let’s not forget that the person is in fact a person and we should judge his ability or capability just from his appearance. Who are you to say whether or not that the dorky kid is unable to fit in with the rest of the world. Instead of helping him and improve, society shuns him and puts him in a corner, not even thinking of the possibility of giving him a chance because they deem him/her beneath them. They are so many preconceptions that people make and that leads to make the wrong decisions. You have no idea what that so called dork could offer to the world. Don’t belittle him because he looks and sounds different, embrace him and try to understand him and his point of view. By humbling yourself and give that person a chance you in turn will grow in mature into a fine human being. By ignoring the dork, you will breed hate and contempt. It is not his/ her fault that no one is willing to look at and notice him, so that person is left with two options. Either to stay in that corner and hate himself for having characteristics that society deems unworthy, or he has to give up his nerdy ways and become what society deems normal and natural. The answer should be neither, we, as society must accept the person as is.

1.      FACTS, STATISTICS, MEDIA

 http://everydayfeminism.com/2014/10/feminism-shouldnt-discuss-race/

https://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2013/10/04/issues-vs-identities-whats-better-for-progressive-social-change/

https://www.pinterest.com/djacademe/intersectionality-race-class-gender-etc/

                                             Signs

     Journal of Women in Culture and Society

     By Leslie McCall

      Guerrilla Girls: Estrogen Bombing - Yoko Ono's Meltdown

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYnTO5eed8U

  Intersectionality | Social Inequality | MCAT | Khan Academy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n2kUpKP18z8

 Kimberlé Crenshaw:

The urgency of intersectionality

https://www.ted.com/talks/kimberle_crenshaw_the_urgency_of_intersectionality

  http://www.aauw.org/2014/04/03/race-and-the-gender-wage-gap/

 https://katiespeak.com/2015/02/25/netroots-radio-after-show-equalpay-the-oscars-intersectionality-022415/

  Netroots Radio After Show — #EqualPay, the #Oscars, & Intersectionality — (02/24/15)

https://katiespeak.com/2015/02/25/netroots-radio-after-show-equalpay-the-oscars-intersectionality-022415/

 Quotes:

“My grandmother and my two aunts were an exhibition in resilience and resourcefulness and black womanhood. They rarely talked about the unfairness of the world with the words that I use now with my social justice friends, words like "intersectionality" and "equality", "oppression", and "discrimination". They didn't discuss those things because they were too busy living it, navigating it, surviving it.”  ― Janet Mock, Redefining Realness: My Path to Womanhood, Identity, Love & So Much More

Janet Mock is an American writer, TV host, transgender rights activist, author of the New York Times bestseller Redefining Realness, contributing editor for Marie Claire, and former staff editor of People magazine's website.

http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/tag/intersectionality

  “The main point about civility is...the ability to interact with strangers without holding their strangeness against them and without pressing them to surrender it or to renounce some or all the traits that have made them strangers in the first place.”  ― Zygmunt Bauman, Liquid Modernity

Zygmunt Bauman was one of the world's most eminent social theorists writing on issues as diverse as modernity and the Holocaust, postmodern consumerism and liquid modernity.

http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/tag/intersectionality

 5 Reasons Intersectionality Matters, Because Feminism Cannot Be Inclusive Without It

https://www.bustle.com/articles/117968-5-reasons-intersectionality-matters-because-feminism-cannot-be-inclusive-without-it

 Intersectionality: how gender interacts with other social identities to shape bias

http://theconversation.com/intersectionality-how-gender-interacts-with-other-social-identities-to-shape-bias-53724

 RHETORICAL ANALYSIS

                           For those who do not know, identity categories such as gender and race are more than often conflated. Due to these combination, it is easier to marginalize those who don’t follow the restrictions or confines of the most influential group. We as a society often ignore intragroup differences and this ignorance bolsters the margination of minorities, especially women of color.  By overlooking these differences, it creates tension between the groups. In Kimberle Crenshaw’s paper, “Mapping the Margins of Intersectionality”, she explores and exposes this intersectionality by analyzing cases that involves women of color.  Crenshaw makes the case that race and gender intersects” Concerns of minority women fall into the void between concerns about women’s issues and concerns about racism” (1282). The representation of women of color in our society demands to be closely analyzed through “representational intersectionality”. Crenshaw gave the example of the 2 Live Crew and their prosecution for obscenity. Although the people who were against the actions of the rap group had their fair criticism, Crenshaw took another perspective and focuses on the tolerance of violence against women of color. Crenshaw found it weird that the 2 Live Crew were prosecuted for obscenity because many other popular rap groups were doing the similar things. She considered that 2 live Crew being an all-black recording group played a role for them being the first recording group to be prosecuted. She proved her point by giving examples of other popular artists and groups such as Madonna, and she was ignored by prosecution. However, here lies the problem; In all this mess, the interest of the black women that were used for the performance were ignored. Since women of color are portrayed as self-objectifying, the images of the performers were used to leverage the prosecution case.  Crenshaw was very analytical during her entire piece, amazing how she suppressed her emotions. She gives clear examples and sends a dagger to conclude her points. Truly a brilliant mind capable of bringing a social revolution. "At this point in history, a strong case can be made that the most critical resistance strategy for disempowered groups is to occupy and defend a politics of social location rather than to vacate and destroy it" (1297).

      VISUAL ANALYSIS

                                        This image by everyday feminism demonstrates how blind society is to intersectionality, including fellow feminists. The image is supposed to promote awareness and proving that intersectionality exists and is an issue. The image starts with an argument between a genuinely concerned male who wonders why the movement is called Feminism rather than equalist or humanist and two feminists proving their point on why the movement is indeed called so. Later, after winning the argument, since women always win those, we see the white feminist being oblivious of the problems of her fellow black feminist. She asks her, presumably, friend, why should there be a black feminism. The white woman fails to see the disadvantage of not only being a woman but also being a black woman (lowering her chances of equal pay and employment).  This satire image pokes fun at people who are oblivious to the problem and shows a simple example of intersectionality. The image would be well received by those affected by the problem, mostly women of color and empowers them. The other party, those being oblivious, could enjoy the satire to some extent; willing that they have the sense of humor to do so. Since the image is just there to poke fun, I do believe it is a positive image overall. I don’t think, in my opinion, it disempowers the other party. The conclusion that I came to was that, it’s easy to feign ignorance of the effects of overlapping factors that would negatively affect people.

                                  It is easy to feign ignorance of the effects of overlapping factors that would negatively affect people’s daily lives. Most people act on self-interest, therefore, they are oblivious to problems occurring in plain sight. The image may be in fun and games, however, this is a real and serious issue that everyone turns a blind eye. Ignorance creates a negative atmosphere, because you may harm people without even knowing. The white feminist from the image is an example of it, she fails to be aware of her friend’s disadvantages. Intersectionality disempowers people, it makes their problems invisible to the public. It’s a cruel injustice because first of all unless you experience similar problems you won’t be able to relate. Second, because of so many different factors working against the affected, it is almost impossible to solve it yet alone deal with it in a day to day basis. Third, the factors that contribute to intersectionality were implemented by society. It is deep rooted in our society, meaning it’s harder to deal with. Intersectionality doesn’t care who it affects (unless you are filthy rich), It will hit minorities of all ages including homosexuals and I daresay trans-genders.

 Compare and Contrast

                                  Intersectionality is a touchy subject with people having various stances and views on the subject. Some give praise to Kimberle Crenshaw for exposing this so called invisible problem and deem her as an activist hero. According to Noah Wingard, he believes that intersectionality is indeed real and was more evident during the women’s march against Trump “Despite the success for the protest gaining significant visibil­ity for women’s rights issues, many were conflicted over the lack of representation for pro-life women, women of color, LGBT women, and other groups that have significance in women’s rights issues” (Why intersectionality in modern civil rights struggles is failing). He explained that intersectionality played a role in the dissatisfaction of most activists. Saying how the marches failed to represent the issues most of these people face.  some downright shut her down saying that the theory of intersectionality destroys the progress that the progressive movement have made. According to Jinna Ziller, she believes that intersectionality does not solve social problems such as racism or sexism, rather it perpetuates it “White or male should NOT translate to privileged because that IS RACISM and SEXISM. It is not different from what was done in the past, just because it is a new group being discriminated against doesn’t make it okay, it doesn’t make it not racism” (Women Against Feminism). Ziller believes that intersectionality is the new racism and sexism. She argues that intersectionality promotes infighting between feminist groups. It’s amazing to see how each opinion is an extreme, are for or against. There is no sweet spot.

Create an original mind map for your issue

  EXPERT OPINION

       Before I even begin on the analysis, I will write down reasons why I chose this source and why I consider important. The scholar I used for this piece is Ange-Marie Hancock and the topic is on her book, Intersectionality: An Intellectual History.  Ange-Marie Hancock graduated from Yale University and has wrote the award winning The Politics of Disgust and the Public Identity of the “Welfare Queen,”.  She is also a globally recognized scholar on the study of Intersectionality. In her book, Intersectionality: An Intellectual History, Hancock identifies two ways that intersectionality works. One as in "an inclusionary project designed to remedy specific instances of intersectional stigma or invisibility" (34) and the other as "an analytical project designed to reshape how categories of difference are conceptually related to each other" (34). Hancock tackled on “The Activist Roots of Intersectionality," where she revealed the "multiple and overlapping movements to end violence against women" and their mobilizations of intersectional logics. She also believed that History had a tremendous effect on shaping intersectionality. In which she says "We Are Named by Others and We Are Named by Ourselves", this means that Hancock believes that history has a relationship and is conjunction with intersectionality through social constructivism. This leads her to her conclusion that historical power led to intersectionality. How society continues to avoid and forget these problems (intersectionality) which further gives power to the problem. Which further gives proof to my point that ignorance is bliss.

   RESEARCH QUESTION DIALOGUE

 o   Research Question: How come people are blind to Intersectionality?

Gio: before you answer my research question, what is intersectionality?

Sources: Intersectionality is the interconnected nature of social categorizations such as race, class, and gender as they apply to a given individual or group, regarded as creating overlapping and interdependent systems of discrimination or disadvantage.

 Gio: Who came up with the term intersectionality and who is this person?

Sources:  The term was first coined by Kimberle Crenshaw, Crenshaw is an American civil rights advocate and a leading scholar of the field known as critical race theory.

Gio: why do we use intersectionality, what are the benefits?

Sources: When applied effectively, intersectionality is a powerful tool for analyzing and addressing rights violations. Using it to guide our thinking and work means we have to move away from single- Utilizing an intersectional approach means the difference between saving lives and further worsening people’s experiences of discrimination.

 Gio: Since intersectionality is the creation of overlapping systems of discrimination, it’s safe to say that only minorities are affected?

Sources: Yes, because the theory of Intersectionality is based on the concept that oppressive institutions within a society, such as racism, ageism, sexism, and homophobia.

 Gio: I see, so minorities experience intersectionality in their daily lives without even knowing. This must certainly happen in the workforce right?

Sources: Take a black men’s experiences in professional occupations for instance, they reap some benefits as males in male-dominated professions, but experience challenges as racial minorities.

 Gio: I saw you use black men as in an example, usually when I research about intersectionality it’s mostly about women of color, can you explain why?

Sources: Well, because women are treated unequal in the first place; they are treated more poorly when it’s a woman of color. Consider it a double minority.

 Gio: All right, then explain to me How does social context influence our perceptions of race, class, and gender?

Sources: How we think, discuss, or see things when it comes race, class, and gender depends on our experiences.  Recently, Penner and Saperstein find that survey interviewers sometimes classify the same person in a different racial group over time, depending on their other social statuses. Women are more likely to be reported as Black if they have received welfare. Having been incarcerated makes men more likely to be perceived as Black, but a suburban residence leads interviewers to identify people as white.

 Gio: Ok since intersectionality has discrimination as a basis, how does discrimination work?

Sources: Discrimination is not simply about race or gender or class. racial discrimination against Blacks also has gender-specific components that affect Black women but not Black men and vice versa.

 Gio: from what I have gathered, intersectionality also affects minorities of all ages? If so how do they experience it?

Sources: Sociologists using intersectionality have recently focused on age. Women are more concerned about looking old than men are; lesbians and Black women are less concerned than straight White women.

 Gio: You mentioned lesbians in that last answer. Care to tell me how does sexuality relates to home, work, and family?

Sources:  In the United States, we’ve witnessed increasing support for members of the LGBT community to have basic human rights. Intersectional approaches remind us that members of the LGBT community face pressures associated with their race, class, and gender identities. rurality, gender, and sexuality converge to privilege masculine performances of sexuality over feminine ones for White gays and lesbians. Participants talk about effeminate gay men not being compatible with rurality while more masculine lesbians are more likely to fit in.

 Gio: I see, so there should be an appeal toward intersectionality if everyone is involved?

Sources: Intersectionality encourages researchers, policy makers and social change leaders to              Move beyond single identities or group-specific concerns, which are ineffective in explaining the nuances of human lives; in this way, important information about the unfair impacts of politics and policies is less likely to ‘fall through the cracks.’

Gio: intersectionality, unlike other approaches, intersectionality is uniquely positioned to interrogate and understand human differences. Can you explain how Intersectionality differs from most approaches?

Sources: The intersectionality approach explicitly focuses on the relationships between factors and mutually constructed processes that create difference. As the examples at the end of this primer demonstrate, this allows for the generation of new and arguably more accurate information about any kind of problem or issue.

 Gio: If society comes to terms with intersectionality, what would be the benefit in adding it into policy?

Sources: Just as important as understanding what intersectionality is, and the principles that can inform an intersectionality-informed stance, is to demonstrate

what intersectionality does. In the appendices of this primer, there are resources

for those seeking to begin the process of understanding how to think about and apply intersectionality in research (Appendix A), policy (Appendix B), activism (Appendix C) and education (Appendix D). The examples below briefly describe the potential of intersectionality to transform three important issues of policy.

Gio: Since intersectionality is a touchy issue, who benefits from this?

Sources:  The correct question wouldn’t be who benefits but how can we use intersectionality to our advantage.

 Gio: Would you care to tell me of those advantages then?

Sources: The use of intersectionality will allow us to not only use one standpoint but also view things on a wider scale to make sure we don’t miss any cracks.

Gio: some say that intersectionality leads to infighting between groups, feminist groups in particular. Is there a reason why?

Sources: Yes, indeed, intersectionality does lead to some infighting between women in such groups. There have been many reports in which the groups fought amongst each other due to tension between them.

Gio: You mentioned tension. Can you elaborate on what causes such tension?

Sources: The tension would surely rise from not only the mention of intersectionality but also due to lack of awareness the women have for their fellow feminists.

Gio: I find it amazing that there would actually be ignorance between women striving to achieve equality for their gender and yet they fail to realize the disadvantages of their peers. Why is that? Sources: Well it is easy to feign ignorance when a problem directly does not affects you. Since they cannot experience the problem it is therefore become invisible to them.

Gio: How can we promote awareness for people afflicted with intersectionality?

Sources: The basic response would be to talk about it with your peers, however, that would only solve your problem and not society’s. To promote awareness would not only involve events but also demand change in the social structure of society.

Gio: The world would definitely be a better place if society has this awareness of intersectionality, wouldn’t it?

Sources: Yes, it would. However, that would be a difficult task. Solving intersectionality would also mean to solve discrimination which is a hard task by itself. It is not impossible but it is difficult task to pursue.

  WHAT ELSE DO YOU NEED TO KNOW, OR WHAT ELSE DO YOU WANT TO SAY?

        What I’m thinking right now is as a man how can I contribute to help women of color who are afflicted by intersectionality. You have to remember that all minorities such as blacks, members of the LGBT community and other minorities are affected by intersectionality. However, intersectionality mostly affects women of color due to many social constructs. Another thing is that why can’t people who are oppressed work together to achieve equality. We all experience one form of intersectionality one way or another, why can’t we use intersectionality to our advantage. Those in power won’t help because solving intersectionality would be to be on equal terms with them, and they wouldn’t like that. I believe that the only way for me to help since I don’t have any government power is to use my platform such as social media to advocate for those who don’t have one. I should listen more to unprivileged groups even when they are criticizing my own. This one may be a hard one, I have to be conscious of my pronouns and other gendered language. I have to also examine my use of metaphors so that I don’t offend anyone.

 CONCLUSION

             After all my research, I have received enough information to answer my research question which was why do people turn a blind eye to intersectionality? The answer was quite simple, nothing more than a couple of clicks on google couldn’t solve. Apparently, the reason why people tend to ignore intersectionality or even criticize is simply because it causes tension between people. It is just like racism if not worst, because like racism the opposing party will not able to empathize with the one affected. It is different than racism because unlike racism it is not only about skin color but other overlapping factors that seem invisible but has devastating effect.  Intersectionality does lead to many infighting, particularly between feminist groups. Due to those that feel marginalized within those groups, it creates fear and tension towards the white women. Many reports of straight-white females had left marches because they felt like they feel like they aren’t marginalized enough to be part of the group. Therefore, they ignore it and pretend it isn’t there. Because of intersectionality, white women feel like they need to “check their privileges”, which creates discomfort. Since humans dislike discomfort we turn a blind eye to it rather to solve it. Intersectionality is not saying that one oppressed group is better than any group. Rather, it is saying that oppressed person is a person too and deserves the same and equal treatment offered by the constitution and not fall between the cracks and plot holes of intersectionality. I do believe if we embrace the concept, we will certainly revolutionize society and bring forth change. You have to start from the ground up for this revolution.

 Works Cited        

Black feminism and intersectionality | International Socialist Review

Sharon Smith

http://isreview.org/issue/91/black-feminism-and-intersectionality

Bustle

Suzannah Weiss

https://www.bustle.com/articles/119061-6-ways-to-be-a-more-intersectional-feminist-beca

Contexts Quicklit 5 questions you need intersectionality to answer Comments

Contexts Magazine

https://contexts.org/blog/quicklit-5-questions-you-need-intersectionality-to-answer/

Du Bois review : social science research on race

Devon W.Carbado - Kimberlé WilliamsCrenshaw - Vickie M.Mays - Barbara Tomlinson

 Equality Network

http://www.equality-network.org/our-work/intersectional/

 http://everydayfeminism.com/2014/10/feminism-shouldnt-discuss-race/

https://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2013/10/04/issues-vs-identities-whats-better-for-progressive-social-change/

 Title: Framing Intersectionality   Year: 2011

hypatiaphilosophy.org

http://hypatiaphilosophy.org/HRO/content/intersectionality-intellectual-history

 Intersectionality | Social Inequality | MCAT | Khan Academy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n2kUpKP18z8

Intersectionality: how gender interacts with other social identities to shape bias

http://theconversation.com/intersectionality-how-gender-interacts-with-other-social-identities-to-shape-bias-53724

  Kimberlé Crenshaw on intersectionality: "I wanted to come up with an everyday metaphor that anyone could use"

http://www.newstatesman.com/lifestyle/2014/04/kimberl-crenshaw-intersectionality-i-wan

 Netroots Radio After Show — #EqualPay, the #Oscars, & Intersectionality — (02/24/15)

https://katiespeak.com/2015/02/25/netroots-radio-after-show-equalpay-the-oscars-intersectionality-022415/

 Newsela | What is intersectionality?

https://newsela.com/articles/lib-intersectionality/id/26478/

  The Arena: - Ange-Marie Hancock Bio

http://www.politico.com/arena/bio/ange-marie_hancock.html

 The Huffington Post

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/intersectionality/

 The Panther Online

http://www.thepantheronline.com/opinion/striving-for-intersectionality

 The Washington Post

Kimberlé Crenshaw

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/in-theory/wp/2015/09/24/why-intersectionality-can

   What Is Intersectionality And Why Is It Important? | Care2 Causes

http://www.care2.com/causes/what-is-intersectionality-and-why-is-it-important.html

  Vox

Jenée Desmond-Harris

https://www.vox.com/identities/2017/1/17/14267766/womens-march-on-washington-in