#but also the black and white works to represent nancy's choices | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

americangodstalk · 4 years ago

Text

American Gods: My opinion and review of season three’s finale

SPOILERS AHEAD SPOILERS AHEAD!

I took notes while watching the episode so I can give you my exact thoughts here.

This episode has two good things. Only two.

The first was that they started to drop off some Shining vibes at the Center of America. Honestly, I was all for it. The Shining is the embodiment of the creepy hotel, and one of my favorite works, The definition of the anomalous, haunted, evil hotel. And the Center of America is supposed to be the Overlook hotel but for the gods. A creepy, dangerous place where they can break down into pure madness or oblivion if they are not careful. Too bad they did not continue and explore this more. You can see the difference between the old seasons and this one because in this one, they mix up together two different moments of the book in one episode: the Center and the vigil. In the old seasons, it would have been two different episodes to give enough screen time for each of these moments/chapters to be adapted faithfully and entirely.

Two, the Technical Boy’s storyline. It was still too short for my taste, but I admit, they handled the revelation pretty well. Not establishing him as an Old God, but as a bridge between the Old and the New, that’s pretty clever, and making him the first and most powerful of the New, I roll with it. It also makes sense given World’s identity that he would usurp and overthrow who would have been the true leader of the New Gods. My main concern with this that they would have presented Technical Boy as dating back to the prehistoric times, which would have been very problematic for the lore (especially since the New Gods are described as an American phenomenon. And among the “things” we saw in artefact 1, was the first printing, most precisely the European first printing. Anyway)

Now for the rest and the bad parts...

I was ultimately pissed off at how they treated the passing of the body of Mr. Wednesday. It is not a “Norse tradition”, or not one I know of. The vigil thing, now that is done in accordance to the laws of the divine Old Gods, true. But in the novel it was clearly established that what happened at the Center of America was something that was bound by divine rules. RULES not traditions. That was the only thing the technical boy and Mr. Nancy agreed on. It wasn’t a matter of cultural tradition.

As I mentionned before, the Center of America scene lacked tension. It wasn’t just a place where the god were “powerless” in the novel: it was a place where they could not attack each other because they were too careful surviving on their own. It was a place of danger, of tension, where the technical boy was starting to become mad. And here? Czernobog has sex with the receptionist. Which is another thing that disturbs me: not only is it unfitting with the setting (again, the gods are on such an hedge that they normally couldn’t be that relaxed or casually have sex like that), but it is also unfitting with the character - it is Mr. Wednesday that is a seducer who enjoys charming (literaly) young girls to get a bit of worship now and then. He is the lecherous guy, not Czernobog.

There are VERY UNFORTUNATE implications with Shadow’s choice between divinehood and humanity. Because here, humanity is represented as black slaves, while divinehood is represented by a white man - even more a white European entity. Very, VERY unfortunate implications here.

And what the hell is going on with Shadow’s character here? This is not the Shadow I know of, this is not the Shadow of the novel or even of the previous seasons, this is not even the Shadow of post-AG material! Since when does Shadow desires godhood? Since when does Shadow crave power and wants to become a leader? Who the hell is this?

I still don’t get the fucking point of SHARD. What the hell is that? Especially since Mr. World is clearly Loki. In the novel, the natural tensions between Old and New were enough to draw on the war. The New Gods weren’t some kind of brainwashers invaders trying to puppet humans. I don’t even understand what Shard even is. Hell, in the novel the New Gods even carefully avoided to call themselves outright gods despite being ones, to differentiate themselves from the Old ones.

On a similar note, I realized something else with Lakeside (since it reappears). Many watchers were annoyed at Lakeside, feeling it fake, not understanding why such a town would be considered peaceful or idyllic. And it makes sense, because for most of the screen time, Lakeside showed us to turn on Shadow, accuse each other and hide secrets. In the novel, Shadow spent time with more of the people in town. He bonded with more people than Chad, Hinzelmann and Marguerite. There was much more a sense of welcoming and hospitality there. So again, they rushed it. If they wanted to make a season about Lakeside, develop the town fully.

And poor Bilquis. She just doesn’t know what to do anymore. Oh, let me correct that: the writers don’t know what to do with her anymore. Ever since the ending of season 1 (which is technically the beginning of season 2, since they clearly reused the scripts left by Fuller and Green), she has been just wandering around, and even now... her character just leads nowhere. That’s what happen when you have a tertiary character of two scenes become a central one. Why not introduce some of the dozens of other divine characters, huh?

And if there is a season 4, they better up their stakes, because so far the number of gods, both Old and New, on screen, has been dwindling massively. You wouldn’t believe America is filled with deities, huh? At least for the Old Gods they’re more numerous, but the New? Media/New Media is gone without a trace, these new things of Shard we can’t even identify are also out of the picture, the Caretaker disappeared, most of the Agency are just children, Technical Boy took on the role of many of the other New Gods (like gods of radio and the telephone), Money (whoever he is since his character is still confusing) isn’t even on board... Is it just Mr. World, Tech Boy and a bunch of children now?

And I am not convinced about the Norns speaking and acting here. In the novel they were much creepier. Here, for fuck’s sake, one of the Norns looked at the ground before stepping down the frontdoor. That ruins the entire mystic mood!

Let’s talk a bit about the vigil stuff, shall we? Outside of the fact they removed a lot of what made this beautiful (Ganesh isn’t here, Ratatosk isn’t here, Jesus isn’t here either, nobody’s fucking here), they also did something I believe to have again ruined the ritual. Here, Shadow is tied to the tree by branches - not by ropes. The tree animates itself and ties Shadow. This is bad. Why? Because in the novel there was an ambiguity, and that’s what made the power of that scene. You didn’t know if what Shadow saw was supernatural events, real gods, or if it was a sun/thirst/hunger-induced hallucination. That’s what made it even holier, since it was precisely this same ambiguity that ruled the old religions (was it a drug hallucination, or truly a god speaking through the priest’s voice?),

Finally I do not know what to think of the reveal of Mr. Wednesday’s death being a con, to revive himself... The sacrifice of a son wouldn’t restore Odin to his former glory, at least no by the book’s lore, it would certainly merely bring him back to life maybe, but that’s it. We all know what he truly needs to return to his all-powerful glory. I think the reveal of Wednesday as a cruel con men is also too early. This season built up Wednesday as a figure to root for, with a good and compassionate side. You can’t just ruin it all by the end of the season. It has already been ruined by season 2 and the end of season 1. Wait until season 4 for it... if there is one.

So yeah... all in all what I have to say is. Missed opportunity. Stick to the book.

#american gods #spoilers #season 3 #finale #review #television series #stick to the book

16 notes · View notes

aion-rsa · 4 years ago

Text

The Star Trek: The Original Series Episodes That Best Define the Franchise

https://ift.tt/eA8V8J

By the time my generation got to watch Star Trek: The Original Series, the episodes often were being presented in top-ten marathons. When I was ten-years-old, for the 25th Anniversary of Star Trek, I tape-recorded a marathon of ten episodes that had all been voted by fans as the best-ever installments of The Original Series. Later, I got lucky and found Trek stickers at the grocery store and was able to label my VHS tapes correctly. But do I think all the episodes that were in that marathon back in 1991 were really the best episodes of all of the classic Star Trek? The short answer: no. Although I love nearly every episode of the first 79 installments of Star Trek, I do think that certain lists have been created by what we think should be on the list rather than what episodes really best represent the classic show.

This is a long-winded way of saying, no, I didn’t include “Amok Time” or “The Menagerie” on this list because, as great as they are, I don’t think they really represent the greatest hits of the series. Also, if you’ve never watched TOS, I think those two episodes will throw you off cause you’ll assume Spock is always losing his mind or trying to steal the ship. If you’ve never watched TOS, or you feel like rewatching it with fresh eyes, I feel pretty strong that these 10 episodes are not only wonderful, but that they best represent what the entire series is really about. Given this metric, my choice for the best episode of TOS may surprise you…

10. “The Man Trap”

The first Star Trek ever episode aired should not be the first episode you watch. And yet, you should watch it at some point. The goofy premise concerns an alien with shaggy dog fur, suckers on its hand, and a face like a terrifying deep-sea fish. This alien is also a salt vampire that uses telepathy that effectively also makes it a shapeshifter. It’s all so specifically bonkers that trying to rip-off this trope would be nuts. Written by science fiction legend George Clayton Johnson (one half of Logan’s Run authorship) “The Man Trap” still slaps, and not because Spock (Leonard Nimoy) tries to slap the alien. Back in the early Season 1 episodes of Star Trek, the “supporting” players like Uhura and Sulu are actually doing stuff in the episode. We all talk about Kirk crying out in pain when the M-113 creature puts those suckers on his face, but the real scene to watch is when Uhura starts speaking Swahili. The casual way Uhura and Sulu are just their lovable selves in this episode is part of why we just can’t quit the classic Star Trek to this day. Plus, the fact that the story is technically centered on Bones gives the episode some gravitas and oomph. You will believe an old country doctor thinks that salt vampire is Nancy! (Spoiler alert: It’s not Nancy.)

9. “Let that Be Your Last Battlefield”

There are two episodes everyone always likes to bring up when discussing the ways in which Star Trek changed the game for the better in pop culture’s discourse on racism: “Plato’s Stepchildren” and this episode, “Let that Be Your Last Battlefield.” The former episode is famous because Kirk and Uhura kiss, which is sometimes considered the first interracial kiss on an American TV show. (British TV shows had a few of those before Star Trek, though.) But “Plato’s Stepchildren” is not a great episode, and Kirk and Uhura were also manipulated to kiss by telepaths. So, no, I’m not crazy about “Plato’s Stepchildren.” Uhura being forced to kiss a white dude isn’t great.

But “Let that Be Your Last Battlefield,” oddly holds up. Yep. This is the one about space racism where the Riddler from the ‘60s Batman (Frank Gorshin) looks like a black-and-white cookie. Is this episode cheesy? Is it hard to take most of it seriously? Is it weird that Bele (Frank Gorshin) didn’t have a spaceship because the budget was so low at that time? Yes. Is the entire episode dated, and sometimes borderline offensive even though its heart is in the right place? Yes. Does the ending of the episode still work? You bet it does. If you’re going to watch OG Star Trek and skip this episode, you’re kind of missing out on just how charmingly heavy-handed the series could get. “Let that Be Your Last Battlefield” is like a ‘60s after-school special about racism, but they were high while they were writing it.

8. “Arena”

You’re gonna try to list the best episodes of Star Trek: The Original Series and not list the episode where Kirk fights a lizard wearing gold dress-tunic? The most amazing thing about “Arena” is that it’s a Season 1 episode of The Original Series and somehow everyone involved in making TOS had enough restraint not to ever try to use this Gorn costume again. They didn’t throw it away either! This famous rubber lizard was built by Wah Chang and is currently owned by none other than Ben Stiller.

So, here’s the thing about “Arena” that makes it a great episode of Star Trek, or any TV series with a lizard person. Kirk refuses to kill the Gorn even though he could have, and Star Trek refused to put a lizard costume in a bunch of episodes later, even though they totally could have. Gold stars all around.

7. “Balance of Terror”

The fact that Star Trek managed to introduce a race of aliens that looked exactly like Spock, and not confuse its viewership is amazing. On top of that, the fact that this detail isn’t exactly the entire focus of the episode is equally impressive. The notion that the Romulans look like Vulcans is a great twist in The Original Series, and decades upon decades of seeing Romulans has probably dulled the novelty ever so slightly. But, the idea that there was a brutally cold and efficient version of the Vulcans flying around in invisible ships blowing shit up is not only cool, but smart.

“Balance of Terror” made the Romulans the best villains of Star Trek because their villainy felt personal. Most Romulan stories in TNG, DS9, and Picard are pretty damn good and they all start right here.

6. “Space Seed”

Khaaaan!!!! Although The Wrath of Khan is infinitely more famous than the episode from which it came, “Space Seed” is one of the best episodes of The Original Series even if it hadn’t been the progenitor of that famous film. In this episode, the worst human villain the Enterprise can encounter doesn’t come from the present, but instead, the past. Even though “Space Seed” isn’t considered a very thoughtful episode and Khan is a straight-up gaslighter, the larger point here is that Khan’s evilness is connected to the fact that he lived on a version of Earth closer to our own.

The episode’s coda is also amazing and speaks of just how interesting Captain Kirk really is. After Khan beat the shit out of him and tried to suffocate the entire Enterprise crew, Kirk’s like “Yeah, this guy just needs a long camping trip.”

5. “A Piece of the Action”

A few years back, Saturday Night Live did a Star Trek sketch in which it was revealed that Spock had a relative named “Spocko.” This sketch was tragically unfunny because TOS had already made the “Spocko” joke a million times better in “A Piece of the Action.” When you describe the premise of this episode to someone who has never seen it or even heard of it, it sounds like you’re making it up. Kirk, Spock, and Bones are tasked with cleaning-up a planet full of old-timey mobsters who use phrases like “put the bag on you.” Not only is the episode hilarious, but it also demonstrates the range of what Star Trek can do as an emerging type of pop-art. In “A Piece of the Action,” Star Trek begins asking questions about genres that nobody ever dreamed of before. Such as, “what if we did an old-timey gangster movie, but there’s a spaceship involved?”

4. “Devil in the Dark”

When I was a kid, my sister and I called this episode, “the one with giant pizza.” Today, it’s one of those episodes of Star Trek that people tell you defines the entire franchise. They’re not wrong, particularly because we’re just talking about The Original Series. The legacy of this episode is beyond brilliant and set-up a wonderful tradition within the rest of the franchise; a monster story is almost never a monster story

The ending of this episode is so good, and Leonard Nimoy and Shatner play the final scenes so well that I’m actually not sure it’s cool to reveal what the big twist is. If you somehow don’t know, I’ll just say this. You can’t imagine Chris Pratt’s friendly Velicrapotrs, or Ripper on Discovery without the Horta getting their first.

3. “The Corbomite Maneuver”

If there’s one episode on this list that truly represents what Star Trek is usually all about on a plot level, it’s this one. After the first two pilot episodes —“Where No Man Has Gone Before” and “The Cage”—this was the first regular episode filmed. It’s the first episode with Uhura and, in almost every single way, a great way to actually explain who all these characters are and what the hell they’re doing. The episode begins with Spock saying something is “fascinating” and then, after the opening credits, calling Kirk, who is down in sickbay with his shirt off. Bones gives Kirk shit about not having done his physical in a while, and Kirk wanders through the halls of the episode without his shirt, just kind of holding his boots.

That’s just the first like 5 minutes. It just gets better and better from there. Like a good bottle of tranya, this episode only improves with time. And if you think it’s cheesy and the big reveal bizarre, then I’m going to say, you’re not going to like the rest of Star Trek.

2. “The City on the Edge of Forever”

No more blah blah blah! Sorry, wrong episode. Still, you’ve heard about “The City on the Edge of Forever.” You’ve heard it’s a great time travel episode. You’ve heard Harlan Ellison was pissed about how the script turned out. You heard that Ron Moore really wanted to bring back Edith Keeler for Star Trek Generations. (Okay, maybe you haven’t heard that, but he did.)

Everything you’ve heard about this episode is correct. There’s some stuff that will make any sensible person roll their eyes today, but the overall feeling of this episode is unparalleled. Time travel stories are always popular, but Star Trek has never really done a time travel story this good ever again. The edge of forever will always be just out of reach.

1. “A Taste of Armageddon”

Plot twist! This excellent episode of TOS almost never makes it on top ten lists. Until now! If you blink, “A Taste of Armageddon” could resemble at least a dozen other episodes of TOS. Kirk and Spock are trapped without their communicators. The crew has to overpower some guards to get to some central computer hub and blow it up. Scotty is in command with Kirk on the surface and is just kind of scowling the whole time. Kirk is giving big speeches about how humanity is great because it’s so deeply flawed.

What makes this episode fantastic is that all of these elements come together thanks to a simplistic science fiction premise: What if a society eliminated violence but retained murder? What if hatred was still encouraged, but war was automated? Star Trek’s best moments were often direct allegories about things that were actually happening, but what makes “A Taste of Armageddon” so great is that this metaphor reached for something that could happen. Kirk’s solution to this problem is a non-solution, which makes the episode even better. At its best classic Star Trek wasn’t just presenting a social problem and then telling us how to fix it. Sometimes it was saying something more interesting — what if the problem gets even harder? What do we do then?

cnx.cmd.push(function() { cnx({ playerId: "106e33c0-3911-473c-b599-b1426db57530", }).render("0270c398a82f44f49c23c16122516796"); });

The humor and bombast of “A Taste of Armageddon” is part of the answer to that unspoken question, but there’s also a clever lesson about making smaller philosophical decisions. In Star Wars, people are always trying to rid themselves of the dark side of the Force. In Star Trek, Kirk just teaches us to say, “Hey I won’t be a terrible person, today” and then just see how many days we can go in a row being like that.

What do you think are the most franchise-defining episodes of Star Trek: The Original Series? Let us know in the comments below.

The post The Star Trek: The Original Series Episodes That Best Define the Franchise appeared first on Den of Geek.

from Den of Geek https://ift.tt/3qfxnii

#aion-rsa #Den of Geek

11 notes · View notes

kaypeace21 · 5 years ago

Note

Jonathan Byers (For your character questions Ask)

favorite thing about them

He’s incredibly caring and selfless to his family. He’s extremely devoted to Will and Joyce (frankly taking on more than such a young guy should have to). At 17 he’s discussing helping pay for his mom’s mortgage . Then of course, Jonathan is a surrogate dad to Will in a lot of respects. In s1 it’s cannon that he cooks breakfast for Will, wakes him up, drives him places, works extra shifts to pay the house bills. Gives Will coded pep-talks about his sexuality. And sometimes calls Will (coded fatherly nicknames that dads give their kids)- like “kid, buddy, pal, and sport”. He’s paralleled to all the ST mom’s taking pics of their kids in their ghost busters costumes, as well. I love Jonathan. He pretty much sacrificed his entire childhood to be the father figure for Will, that Lonnie wasn’t. He did all of this since he wanted Will to have more than he did (aka a Dad).Jonathan in s1 even said in the past Joyce had “anxiety issues”. And tells Joyce, “This is not an okay time for you to shut down,” implying there has been times when she has shut down, and left him with the burden of caring for Will and herself . Joyce even apologizes in s1 for not being there for him as a kid ( cause she was too busy working). Many s4 movies emphasize Jonathan’s devotion to Will and knowledge that he sacrificed his childhood to do so .

least favorite thing about them

He constantly think he’s inadequate and often refuses help. Calling himself a “weirdo”. Not telling Joyce of the supernatural threat cause “she’s been through enough”. And constantly apologizing for not being there for Will- and blaming himself for what’s happened to him.

Like joyce said “you act like you’re all alone in this world. But you’re not!” And Bob reiterates his trust issues saying “I’m really getting through to them- well except Jonathan he’s a tough cookie to crack.” Murray also parrots this saying “trust issues, am I right? Something to do with your dad.” Jonathan has severe trust issues and I hope he heals from that .

favorite line

"You shouldn't like things because people tell you you're supposed to.”

brOTP

Obviously - my brOTP is Jonathan and Will.

OTP

Don’t really have 1. I used to ship jancy (still wasn’t fond of the camera incident though). I like jonathan and nancy but after s3 I think they may be better off not together . I like both but I think maybe they’re not the best fit together.

nOTP

if we’re talking about popular st ships of him like Jancy and I guess... stoncy & steve/jon? I’m mostly indifferent. I feel like nOTP’s are more vitriolic.

But I just feel like Jancy isn’t right for each other, in the long run.Nancy only apologized for claiming Jon was sexist but not for making fun of him for being poor and his dad leaving -calling him “oliver twist” (a poor orphan). Which clearly pissed him off since when he talked to her on the phone later he did a clap back referencing the book saying he was with ‘Fagin and the gang’. Which is similar to Mike apologizing for being ‘jealous of Max’ but not for the fact he lied (the reason for the breakup in the first place). The fact Nancy says “here comes the Oliver Twist routine AGAIN”. Implies Jonathan has tried to open up to her in the past but she dismissed it as just bellyaching. I just can’t really get over that. I don’t think either was completely in the right though. I talked about all the pairings (including jancy) and their parallels to other ships, in way more detail- here and why I don’t see them as endgame.

random headcanon

- Since Nancy says in s2 Jonathan likes reading Vonnegut. I think it may reflects a lot about Jonathan!

Vonnegut like Jonathan was born in Indiana- like jonathan.He was an atheist and a humanist and served as the honorary president of the American Humanist Association.Some quotes by him: “I am a humanist, which means, in part, that I have tried to behave decently without expectations of rewards or punishments after I am dead... purpose of human life, no matter who is controlling it, is to love whoever is around to be loved.”

A lot of his books critique society in a scifi form.

- In Breakfast of Champions (1973), Vonnegut vows to “clear [his] head of all the junk,” and race and racism are at the top of his list of “junk” to be cleared. In the book he critiques colonialism, and institutional and social racism predominantly focusing on the mistreatment of black people. “I think I am trying to clear my head of all the junk in there...I suspect that this is something most white Americans, and nonwhite Americans who imitate white Americans, should do. The things other people have put into my head, at any rate, do not fit together nicely, are often useless and ugly, are out of proportion with one another, are out of proportion with life as it really is outside my head.”

- Slaughter house 5 (1972) was based on his own experiences as a ww2 soldier. “It sees war as a tragedy so great that perhaps only the mask of comedy allows one to look it in the eye. Vonnegut is a sad-faced comedian. The book says Billy may be hallucinating about his experiences with the Tralfamadorians as a way to escape a world destroyed by war—a world that he cannot understand ( heavy Will foreshadowing). Even while Vonnegut admits the inevitability of death, with or without war, he also tells us that he has instructed his sons not to participate in massacres or in the manufacture of machinery used to carry them out”. The phrase “so it goes” represented the deep sadness and resignation to death- appearing with almost every death in the novel. This phrase become a popular mantra in the Anti-vietnam war movement.Mr. Vonnegut wrote at the end of the book, “was shot two nights ago. He died last night. So it goes. Martin Luther King was shot a month ago. He died, too. So it goes. And every day my Government gives me a count of corpses created by military science in Vietnam. So it goes.”

- In a letter from 1965, he also recommended a novel to his wife. ‘here is a really lovely book about it in my study -- on a top shelf. It's red, and it's called The ABZ of Love." “Indeed, the book was in many ways ahead of its time and of the era's mainstream, pushing hard against bigotry and advocating for racial, gender, and LGBT equality with equal parts earnestness and wry wit.”

-his novels also had a lot of gay characters and this caused a lot of controversy at the time.

Reflecting how he’ll probably be supportive of Will- which was foreshadowed in s1 when he was encouraging Will not to behave a certain way cause his homophobic dad wants him to.

unpopular opinion

probably Jancy not being endgame

song i associate with them

-’should I stay or should i go’ . obvious cliche choice, i know.

favorite picture of them

Hmm... I’m not sure. I just find Jonathan & will exchanging looks with each other and laughing precious.

#jonathan byers #will byers #nancy wheeler #joyce byers

85 notes · View notes

aithrauniverse · 4 years ago

Text

Chapter 9-Aithne

We had bad news, and— actually, we just had bad news.

Great. Now we were trapped in a goddamn house. A creepy and ancient one at that. (And for the record, it wasn’t fun. At all.) Picking up the card from the table, I read out,

“Each riddle is related to

The others, like a smaller clue

You have minutes thirty to solve

The puzzle, and you must resolve

The problem, or you’re stuck inside

But still, push your worries aside

You’ll have an hourglass to know

When time’s up, now, ready, set, go!”

A holographic hourglass materialized and began counting the minutes down.

“What are we waiting for?” I exclaimed. “Chop chop! Let’s go find stuff! Time’s ticking!”

Astra picked up the first clue placed on the table. Reading it to herself, she mused,

“You’ll find me on the mantel shelf

I give off light all by myself

But nothing works the same way here

Look for the friend of puppeteers.”

“Seems easy,” Laila said, “Just look for a marionette.”

“Marry who now?” I raised both eyebrows.

“A puppet,” she sighed.

We hunted for that damn puppet for a good two minutes before Astra exclaimed, “I found it!” Hurrying over, we looked down. Sure enough, a Victorian-style doll lay in a sitting position, its beady eyes eerily staring up at us and its strings completely tangled.

“Yup. Creepy as I expected,” I remarked. “Now for the second clue. Where is it?”

“I think we’re missing something,” Laila muttered, “Ah!” She walked over to the mantel, grabbed an ordinary-looking flashlight and walked over.

“We don’t need a flashlight,” I objected. “It’s bright enough already.”

“This probably doesn’t release normal light,” she switched it on. A beam of dark violet, almost black light, shot out. “It’s UV light. Made to decode messages. And if I’m not wrong, there should be one somewhere...” she pointed it towards the puppet, “...here.” Words previously invisible bloomed onto the doll’s skirt, sprouting out like fresh ink.

Laila picked up the doll with one hand and held the flashlight steady with the other. She began to read out,

“Good job, you’re not dumb after all

But science will help you down the hall

Now think— what lives a thousand times?

And tells the tales of heinous crimes?”

We remained silent for a minute, wondering what it could be. Then it hit me. “Guys, I saw a Nancy Drew book on the shelf when we were looking for that puppet,” I realized. “This is what they could be talking about! It does talk about crimes, and the only thing that can live a thousand times is a story!” Dashing off to the living room, with Laila and Astra hot on my heels, I picked up the book. Dusting it off, I was about to open it, when Astra stopped me.

“Wait,” she pointed out. “There’s a note stuck in it.” Yanking the (ew, hot pink) Post-It out, she looked at it, clearly confused.

“4 1 53 60

90 –1

9 53 75?!”

“How’s that even a clue?” I was so confused and annoyed, I wanted to kick a hole in the stupid wall. But then Astra pointed something out.

“Look, there’s something else on the back,” she said. “There’s a picture of the Periodic Table. Maybe there’s some sort of pattern..."

Astra flipped the paper multiple times before exclaiming, “Gotcha! These numbers represent the atomic numbers on the table.”

“But what about the ‘-1’?” Laila asked.

“Uh... about that... oh! That could be used to stand for an anion. Anions have one less proton than electron, which has a symbol e. Now all we have to do is line them up with the symbols..." Astra trailed off.

“‘Behind The Fire’! The clue is behind the fire!” I burst out.

“But how are we going to put our hand through the fire?” Laila asked. She had a point there.

“Maybe it’s not a real fire,” Astra smiled, “Like the hourglass; it isn’t real, but we can still see it! A hologram, see?” She put her hand through the crackling fire, making Laila sputter in disbelief. She pulled out a note, her hand unscathed. Peering over her shoulder, I announced, “Oooh, a limerick! Here goes...

“Great work, you’ve followed through

Now here, I present the fourth clue

It’s tossed up high

As the paddle flies

And bounces on the table blue.”

“What bounces high...?” Laila pondered for a while, “Oh! Of course! It’s a ball!”

“Which ball?”

“How many balls do you think a room has? Just find the ball!”

“What do you mean? This isn’t a real room!”

“Okay, fine, but it’s easy to find a bouncy ball, no? Just find the light ones – like a…”

“Uh, guys, one problem,” Astra laughed nervously, pointing towards the left. “There’s a whole bucket of ping-pong balls.”

“... ping-pong ball...” Laila trailed off.

“Well, then, we just find the one with a note in it, don’t we?” I smiled. “Time to smash some ping-pong balls.”

As I found out, smashing table tennis balls was incredibly time-consuming. And boring. CRAZY boring. Seven minutes had passed, and still no sign of the note. “Guys, we only have eighteen minutes left,” Astra urged. Then, as I stepped on another ball, I saw it. That elusive note. Yanking it out, I passed it to Laila, “Would you care to do the honors?”

She took it and smiled, “Finally, a haiku.

“Darkness swallows you

Then you hit the switch, hopeful

Where is light set free?”

“Alright, haikus are officially my least favorite type of poems,” Astra groaned. “So mind-boggling..."

“Wait, I think I’ve got this one,” I interrupted. “I think... it’s a lamp! I saw a ceiling lamp in the ‘kitchen’. But how are we going to get the note?”

“We stack,” Astra smirked.

Another assumption I had made was that stacking ourselves on top of one another was easy. Again, I was proven terribly wrong. Laila was the tallest and strongest, so she stood below. I climbed on top of her and Astra, being the smallest, scrambled on top of me. In theory, it should have been like climbing stairs. But oh no, it was not. It was much more awkward.

At one point, Laila grumbled, “Aithne, your foot is in my face!” And she did not take kindly to my suggestion:

“Then get your face off my foot!” (Hey, maybe she hadn’t read Aru Shah yet. Or she was grumpy that my foot was in her face. Yeah, probably the second one.)

“It’s supposed to be on my shoulder!”

“I’m telling you, you should really take a look at what Astra is doing to my head! Woah... wha— Laila, stand still! I’m falling!”

“Why are you guys constantly shifting your weight between my shoulders—?”

“Astra, how DOES your hair reach me? Cut it – Laila! What the h—”

“No cursing, Aithne!!” Astra scolded, waving her arms.

“Wait, don’t move!! I’m losing balance!” Laila leaned to one side, our human tower swaying.

“I’m moving because you are!! Agh—!”

One and a half minutes (and a lot of cursing that was probably just me) later, Astra neatly hopped off my back, the note in hand. I rather unceremoniously fell to the floor, wincing as I rubbed my sore butt. Laila stretched. “Aithne, lose some weight,” she joked. I stuck my tongue out at her in response,

“It isn’t just me! Astra is heavy too!”

“But—"

Astra shushed the both of us and read out the (hopefully) final note,

“Two doors lie ahead of you

They’re colored white and red

Pick the right one, and you’ll pass on

Wrong choice, restart instead.”

There was also a footnote that read: ‘Even if you restart, the timing will remain.’

“Well, we’d better make the right choice then,” I tried to lighten the pressure. However, it didn’t help. The pressure was so thick that, forget a knife, you couldn’t even cut it with a freaking sword.

Then I remembered something I had heard last time from a Hindu friend of mine. Apparently, white was an inauspicious color. It represented things like asceticism and death and was reserved for mourners and widows... It represented giving up worldly desires. However, red was considered lucky... it was believed to represent sensuality and purity... saffron powder was applied on their foreheads on auspicious occasions... so does that mean should we choose red?

“Guys, I think we should choose the red door,” I decided. “In Hindu myths, white stands for things like death and red, purity and luck-bringing. This may make me sound very superstitious, but I think we should open the red door.”

“Sounds like what I said in the first room. Still, we trust you,” Laila said and gripped the handle. I silently prayed and covered my face as the door swung open, not daring to open my eyes. Slowly, I cracked them open and shifted my hand.

“Guys, we— we did it!”

#fiction #fiction story #fictional #fictional story #storywriting #writing #stories #story #writer #writers of tumblr #writers #school project #aithnEeEeEEEeEeeEEeEEee

2 notes · View notes

hachama · 6 years ago

Text

Democratic debate analysis

I’ve read the transcripts. I read the fact-checkers’ analysis. I have ranked them.

Due to the size of the field, I’ll be splitting my analysis into four groups. This first one will be the Please Do Not Make Me Vote For Them group:

Ryan, Hickenlooper, Williamson, Bennet, Delaney, O’Rourke, and Biden.

Under the break, I’ll be analyzing their debate performance, how effectively they represented themselves on the issues, and how much I hate them, in reverse order of preference. Let’s begin.

20) Biden

Biden is so… so out of touch. Even the moderators asked if he was out of touch, and when the moderators of a debate you’re participating in think you don’t know what you’re talking about? For a career politician, that has got to hurt. Frankly, they were right. Biden thinks that the reason people can’t pay their student loans without sacrificing everything else they want to do with their lives is because we’re not earning more than $25k a year, that freezing payments and interest until the graduated student crosses that threshold would magically make everything ok. If he were right, there’d be no Fight for 15. A $15 minimum wage, assuming full time hours, is more than $30k per year.

His response to accusations of racism was to point to his “black friend,” former President Obama, which… dude. You’ve got to know better than that by now. Please tell me you know having been the first and only black President’s VP does not immediately absolve you of being an old white guy who worked with Southern Segregationists against integrating schools.

His entire platform seems to be “remember when I was a senator/the vice president? Wasn’t I great, back when I had ideas and did things?” and I gotta say, No. No, you weren’t that great, Joe. Even his closing comments were lackluster, talking about “restoring the soul of America,” and “restoring the dignity of the middle class,” and “building national unity.” His answers to simple questions were, frankly, terrible.

Joe, what would you do, day one, if you knew you’d only be able to accomplish one thing with your Presidency? Thanks for asking, I’d BEAT DONALD TRUMP! Joe. Joe, that’s how you get to Day One. Unless you mean “grab him by the collar, haul him out on the White House lawn, and bludgeon him with heavy objects,” you’re not answering the question. Joe, which one country do you think we need to repair diplomatic ties with most? NATO! Joe. Joe, NATO is more than one country. I just… *sigh*

To his credit, Biden trotted out many of the same old campaign promises Democrats have been making for as long as I can remember. Closing tax loopholes, universal pre-K and increased educational funding, let Medicare negotiate prescription drug prices. These are tried and true campaign promises because they’re things we can all generally agree we want. But they’re old, a lot like Biden. They’re not the bold solutions we need. His newer ideas all sound pretty moderate and old, too: free community college (not 4 year public university), creating a public option for healthcare so people can choose between insurance companies and Medicare, rejoining the Paris Climate Accord, and instituting national gun buybacks. His suggestion of requiring all guns to have a biometric safety is also a vague gesture in the direction of a solution.

Biden is too old, too timid, and too arrogant to understand that he’s got nothing to offer in an election where Millenials and Gen Z are going to be the largest portion of the electorate.

19) O’Rourke

Beto, or as I like to call him, Captain Wrongerpants, got off to a roaring start by giving a non-answer in two languages. This incredible display of pandering, and wasting precious time, made him seem pretentious and obnoxious in twice the number of languages most politicians aspire to.

Possibly more than any other candidate, O’Rourke completely failed to answer any question he was asked. He presented a few good ideas, saying that he sees climate change as the most pressing threat to America and calling for an end to fossil fuel use. He supports universal background checks and reinstating the assault weapons ban. He wants comprehensive immigration reform, to reunite families separated by the Trump administration, and to increase the corporate tax rate.

Unfortunately, he wants to increase the tax rate from the new-for-2019 level of 21% to a lower-than-2018 28%. He wants immigration reform to protect asylum seekers, but thinks other immigrants should “follow our laws” and makes no guarantee to decriminalize undocumented border crossings. Like Biden, he supports healthcare “choice,” meaning that for-profit healthcare would continue in this country until everyone, in every city, state, county, and cave, can be convinced that insurance companies don’t care about them.

In short, O’Rourke reaches for relevance and relatability, and lands in pretension and centrism.

18) Delaney

John Delaney is the first candidate on my list to have been caught in a bald-faced lie by Politifact. Good job, John. His lie, by the way, was about Medicare for All. He claimed that the bill currently before Congress required that Medicare pay rates stay at the current levels, and that if every hospital in America had been paid at Medicare levels for all services, every hospital would have to close. The truth? The Medicare for All bill does not require that pay rates stay at current levels, and even if it did no one knows what effect that would have on the country’s hospitals. There is no data to support his assertion, even if he was right about the terms of the legislation being considered.

Unsurprisingly, John is another healthcare “choice” advocate. I think I’ve said enough about why this position doesn’t fly for me, so I won’t rehash it again.

In a discussion of family separation, he interjected that his grandfather was also a victim of family separation, which must make him feel so relevant. He also referred to company owners as “job creators,” a lovely little conservative talking point, and claimed that America “saved the world,” in some vague appeal to American Exceptionalism. He also agrees with Nancy Pelosi about not pursuing impeachment proceedings.

On the “I don’t hate him quite as much as Beto and Biden” front, he’s in favor of tax breaks for the middle class, increasing the minimum wage, funding education, family leave policies, a carbon tax (which he imagines would fund a tax dividend paid to individual citizens, rather than, I don’t know, paying for green infrastructure development?), thinks China is our biggest geopolitical threat, and is scared of nuclear weapons (a very sane, reasonable position, really).

If you want to pick a candidate based on who your moderately conservative uncle will yell about least if they win the White House, Delaney might be your guy. If you want to pick a candidate based on issues like student loan debt and healthcare, keep looking.

17) Bennet

I had never heard of Michael Bennet before the debates. In fact, I just Googled him to find out his first name. After the debates, though? You guessed it: I hate him.

His closing statement was an appeal to the American Dream. He thinks there are too many people in America to make a single payer healthcare system work. Asked to identify one country to prioritize diplomatic repairs with, he named two continents. And he believes the world is looking to America for leadership.

However, he did rate higher than three whole candidates, and here’s why: He supports a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants. He wants to end gerrymandering and overturn Citizens United. He wants to expand voting rights and electoral accessibility. He considers climate change and Russia to be the biggest threats to America, and he didn’t use any obvious racist dogwhistles. He’s from Colorado, so he’s kinda proud of the state’s marijuana legalization and reproductive health policies, but he’s way too quick to see partnership with private businesses as the ideal path forward.

16) Williamson

Oh man. Marianne Williamson. I almost threw something every time she opened her mouth. She is like a walking, talking, uninformed Tumblr guilt trip post. At a nationally televised debate, she asked why no one was talking about… something. I didn’t write it down in my notes because I would have had to gouge out my own eyes if I had. According to Google, she is a self-help speaker and that explains So Much.

In her closing statement, Williamson claimed that she would be the candidate to beat Trump, not because she has any plans, but because she will harness love to counter the fear that fuels Trump’s campaign. I am not making this up and I wish I was.

She claimed that Americans have more chronic health issues than anywhere else in the world, and attributed this to all sorts of factors, starting with diet and chemical contamination and extending, I assume, to solar activity and Bigfoot. According to Politifact, the only American demographic with a higher incidence of chronic illness than other countries is senior citizens, and I’m going to guess that has a lot more to do with our crappy healthcare system than it does a lack of detox teas.

When asked what policy she would enact if she could only get one, she said that on her first day in the White House she’d call the Prime Minister of New Zealand and tell her that New Zealand is not the best place in the world to raise a child, America is.

When asked which one country she’d make a diplomatic priority, she said “European leaders.”

By now you must be wondering how she rated higher than the bottom four, and I can sum it up in eight words: She supports reparations and the Green New Deal.

Please, please do not make me vote for Marianne Williamson.

15) Hickenlooper

John Hickenlooper is the former Governor of Colorado, and proudly takes credit for everything good that has ever happened in the state. He is also proud of being a small business owner, a statement that makes me immediately suspicious of any politician.

To his credit, he supports “police diversity,” a charmingly non-specific term that could mean one gay Latine nonbinary single parent in an otherwise entirely white male department, or could mean he wants the demographics of the police force to match the demographics of the population being policed. He also considers climate change a serious threat, and China. The best thing he said all night? He supports civilian oversight of police, a policy which has improved police relations with citizens.

Sounds pretty good, right? Wrong.

He also supports ICE “reform,” as if there is anything redeemable about that agency, and thinks that the worst thing the eventual Democratic candidate could do is allow their name to be connected to anything socialist. He said it twice, it wasn’t an accident.

14) Ryan

That brings us to the last of the worst, Tim Ryan. Tim here cannot stop using conservative dogwhistles, like talking about “coastal elites,” and saying that acknowledging differences between people is divisive. He is a basic ass white boy in the worst, most boring sense.

He wants to bring about a green tech boom, supports decriminalizing border crossing, supports gun reform, and thinks China is a serious threat to America. He also thinks that, in addition to dealing with the issues that allow school shootings to happen, we need to address the trauma kids are growing up with as a result. Unfortunately, he thinks that school shooters are misunderstood victims of bullying.

His confrontation with Tulsi Gabbard was very instructive and possibly the most damning exchange all night. He mis-identified the terrorists who attacked the World Trade Center as being “the Taliban” (they were Al-Qaeda) and said that our military forces have to “stay engaged” for… stability? I guess? As a veteran, I’m with Tulsi on this one: that’s not acceptable.

#politics #democratic debate #there is not enough wine for this

10 notes · View notes

nellygwyn · 7 years ago

Text

Harlots Season 2, Episode 1 & 2, thoughts

I watched the first two episodes of Harlots Season 2 and the main thought going through my mind is ‘AAAAA EVERYTHING HAPPENS SO MUCH” but here are a list of more specific and lucid thoughts. SPOILERS UNDER THE CUT:

Episode 1

Characters we don’t seem to have anymore: Marie-Louise (she’s left, leaving Mags £50 out of pocket), Betsy, Daniel Marney. There are a plethora of new characters, though,

Justice Josiah Hunt is a REALLY interesting new character to me. He genuinely thinks he is doing good and occasionally, he had periods of sympathy and reason (re: when he spoke to Lydia Quigley about the violated, mutilated body of a girl found a few nights earlier). However, in the next breath, he is having Violet branded and potentially transported for stealing a tiny amount of money from a notorious drunkard. @marieduplessis and I were discussing that he may be based on Henry Fielding who was not completely devoid of true morality, but he certainly was no saint.

Speaking of both Lydia and Violet, the episode begins with them both being thrown in jail. Violet is to be transported, though Amelia is intervening for her, and Lydia faces the House of Correction if she fails to pay her fine. However, Mags and Nancy were accidentally present during Lydia’s sentencing and Mags declared she was a kidnapper and responsible for many rapes.....so now she and Nancy are trying to prove their accusation to send Lydia to the gallows. Lydia, meanwhile, contacts all her “friends” (I say this loosely considering the only reason she has them in her grasp is because she blackmails them with their own secrets) in the aristocracy to help get her out of her predicament. This is where Lady Isabella Fitzwilliam, as well as Lord Fallon, come in. I liked this touch as bawds often had friends in high places to bail them out.

Violet’s storyline thus far is reminding me of Moll Flanders, though in Moll’s case, she was sent to the gallows for her petty theft.

I LOVE Charlotte and Lady Fitz’s budding relationship. It wasn’t much in this episode, which is fine, I think Lady Fitz should remain a background character, but their conversation was cool. I think Lady Fitz likes her a lot. And I do actually think Lady Fitz is heavily based on Georgiana Cavendish, because not only is she potentially going to be sapphic, but she has major issues with gambling.

Lady Fitz has very specific problems of her own, mostly concerning the fact her brother (her CREEPY brother, so I hope this doesn’t turn into an incest storyline) holds the purse strings on her own fortune. Also, Liv Tyler’s English accent is really good. She lives here with her husband and kids now so that probably explains it. I can hardly tell she isn’t British.

I HATE that Mags and Will have broken up. I’m tender about break ups right now anyway, but I also feel it was a little bit....ooc for Mags to be so jealous of Harriet. Harriet and Will, of course, have no sort of romance at all but Mags seemed to believe they did which didn’t seem Very Her. She’s too confident in herself??? Of course, this was a last straw for Will; he has been maligned by Mags before. I hope they get back together. Poor little Jacob didn’t want his dad to go.

EMILY LACEY AND CHARLIE!!!! Emily seems to want to testify against Lydia but she wants to keep it from Charlie. God, they have such a cool relationship. They just love to have fun. I thought it was hilarious, too, when they came across Lydia’s dildo in her private things.

I love Charlotte Wells so much. I have such a strong affinity to her, especially now that she’s really going it alone. She’s so iconic. Makes me tres emosh to see her on screen, I feel like I’m being represented.

Lucy is still around and I’m excited to see how her storyline progresses. She doesn’t feature super heavily in episode 1, though I do have to comment on two things. 1) I loved her conversation with Will, where she said “I know you didn’t fuck Harriet” and he said “Coarseness doesn’t look well on you,” which is true as I think a lot of Lucy’s bravado is a front. 2) She’s started wearing sackback dresses now which is AMAZING. Love these new fashion choices.

MAJOR SPOILER: Lord Fallon (and the Spartans, presumably) murdered Kitty. Took her to Ranelagh Pleasure Gardens instead of taking Lucy, probably raped her (which is so sad considering what she told Lucy about how she lost her virginity in the first place), and then dumped her dead body on Mags’ doorstop for Fanny to find. I am DISGUSTED.

“Historical advisor: Hallie Rubenhold“ DOUBT

Episode 2

Opening the episode with Mags sewing up Kitty’s slit throat was so.....powerful. What a symbol of all the sex workers who did die and do die at the hands of clients in brutal, degrading ways.

Fanny is so angry and I feel it. She’s even starting to see through Armitage’s façade of being nice to her but not very kind to other women. When he told her that Kitty was just another dead street girl, her lividness was palpable. I hope she gets some justice, Kitty was like a sister to her.

Amelia helping Violet is sweet, of course, but I don’t know how I feel about her suggestion to Josiah Hunt, that Violet should work for him instead of facing slavery in the Colonies. I know Amelia means Violet to become Josiah’s maid, rather than a slave, which is infinitely better but........Don’t Trust Like That (especially since, if Violet tries to leave Hunt’s employ, she’s just gonna be sent right back to prison). Amelia means so much good though. I love her. She uses Christianity the right way.

Lydia’s out of jail, since Charlotte came to pay her fine, and she’s not impressed by Charlie and Emily’s behaviour in her house whilst she was locked up. In this scene, she calls Charlotte her true heir. I wonder how furious she’s going to be when she finds out that Charlotte is actually working to bring her down, in the same way everyone else is.

“She was guilty.....of being poor. The worst crime you can commit!”

“There’s no evidence strong enough to condemn a white wig. And none too weak to hang a whore”

To be honest, I am loving this growing class consciousness!!!!

I hate Lord Fallon, I hate Lydia Quigley, I hate all their rich friends who love murder and kidnap and rape. I hate them all!

Nancy, poor Nancy...her anger at Kitty’s death leads her to go up against the law and in return, she faces a public whipping. I think this is one of the worst punishments, other than being tied to the pillory post, in 18th century England.

I think Lucy is suspicious of Lord Fallon, at least a little bit so I’m not sure EXACTLY why she’s trying to catch him as a keeper. Maybe she thinks his money outweighs his creepiness, especially since she sends the money he gives her as a kind of deposit to Kitty’s daughter.

There’s a lovely scene near the end of the episode where Florence and Amelia take some soup with Mags, Fanny and Lucy at Mags’ house. Florence makes a comment about Kitty’s “ungodly gash” (meaning her slit throat) and everyone, including Florence, starts to laugh at the unplanned double entendre. Was so lovely.

So, we know Lydia is a creep and has some kind of hold over anywhere who comes under her spell but I genuinely hope Charlotte doesn’t become tied up in the web. I know she’s planning to take her down but Lydia still seems to be running rings around her.....maybe Charlotte feels wanted and needed for the first time in her life. Which I get. But Do! Not! Trust! Lydia! Quigley!

Emily is starting up her “House of Exotics.” Harriet is her first girl, I think she’s going to have a new character, Cherry Dorrington, in there too (who is a little person). Plus, there is a new black sex worker, but I don’t know her name yet, so I reckon she will also be living there. How exciting! I hope we get a few more women who aren’t white and/or able-bodied because of this.

For anyone wondering: here is where I watched Episode 1, and here is where I watched Episode 2.

#harlots spoilers #long post

8 notes · View notes

lokirupaul · 3 years ago

Text

Lokiru Paul : OPINION GUEST ESSAY: How to Raise Kids Who Won’t Be RacistJuly 15, 2021

OPINION GUEST ESSAY: How to Raise Kids Who Won’t Be RacistJuly 15, 2021

Credit...Fran Caballero

By Melinda Wenner Moyer for THE NEW YORK TIMES

Ms. Wenner Moyer is a science journalist and the author of the forthcoming book “How to Raise Kids Who Aren’t Assholes,” from which this essay is adapted.

If race is largely a social construct, then teaching children about it will only perpetuate racism — right? Wrong: Studies show precisely the opposite. Open conversations about race and racism can make white children less prejudiced and can increase the self-esteem of children of color.

If states ban the teaching of critical race theory, as conservative lawmakers in many are attempting to do, or if schools don’t provide consistent education about racism and discrimination, it’s imperative that parents pick up the slack.

Even if we don’t want them to, children do notice differences in race and skin color. And that means that attempts to suppress discussions about race and racism are misguided. Those efforts won’t eliminate prejudice. They may, in fact, make it worse.

So-called colorblind parenting — avoiding the topic of race in an effort to raise children who aren’t prejudiced — is not just unhelpful, it actually perpetuates racism. That’s because racism isn’t driven solely by individual prejudice. It’s a system of inequity bolstered by racist laws and policies — the very fact that opponents of teaching critical race theory are trying to erase.

Some people, especially white people like me, may shy away from talking to their children about race, either because they’ve been socialized to treat the subject as taboo or because they fear that instilling an awareness of race is itself problematic. That’s a privilege that nonwhite families often don’t have — racism is a fact of life that many can’t ignore. While parents of white children may be able to choose if, when and how they have these conversations, parents of children of color often have no choice but to discuss the subject as it arises.

Parents may believe their children are too young to learn about topics like prejudice, discrimination and violence. But it’s possible — advisable, actually — to have age-appropriate conversations about race and racism throughout children’s lives, including when they are very young.

I asked more than 80 parents about how they think their children view race. Many said their children are oblivious to skin color. Yet research strongly contradicts this notion. Babies as young as 3 months old discern racial differences, and they prefer looking at faces that share their caregivers’ skin color.

Racial awareness and prejudice continue to develop during the preschool and grade school years. A 2012 study showed that many white parents of preschoolers believed that their children harbored no racial prejudice. When the researchers tested the children, though, some said they wouldn’t want Black friends.

Children learn from what they see. They notice that in American culture, race and power intersect in a clear way. Children may observe, for instance, that all but one president has been white, that many of the wealthiest people are white and that more working-class people are people of color.

When children aren’t presented with the context required to understand why our society looks the way it does, “they make up reasons, and a lot of kids make up biased, racist reasons,” said Rebecca Bigler, a developmental psychologist who studies the development of prejudice. Children often start to believe that white people are more privileged because they’re smarter or more powerful, Dr. Bigler says.

Parents should explicitly challenge these wrong assumptions and explain the role of centuries of systemic racism in creating these inequities. Brigitte Vittrup, a psychologist at Texas Woman’s University, and George W. Holden, a psychologist at Southern Methodist University, found that white children whose parents talked with them about race became less prejudiced over time, compared with children whose parents didn’t have such conversations.

Another study co-written by Dr. Bigler found that white children who had learned about racial discrimination had more positive attitudes toward Black people than children who were not exposed to that curriculum. The same researchers later found that classroom discussions about racial discrimination also had a positive impact on Black children.

Indeed, children of color also benefit from conversations about race and racism. In particular, Adriana J. Umaña-Taylor and Nancy E. Hill at the Harvard Graduate School of Education found that when families of color regularly talk about their culture’s values and traditions, children develop a strong sense of identity and pride, and they fare better in terms of self-esteem, psychological health and academic success.

But talking about race isn’t enough. Parents should also foster respect for diverse cultural backgrounds by ensuring their children interact with people who are different from them. If you can choose where you live or where your children go to school, it helps to prioritize diversity. And consider the curriculum: Children who hear teachers talk explicitly about race are better at identifying bias than students who are given vague messages about kindness and equality.

At home, choose books, TV shows and movies with characters from a variety of backgrounds — and discuss the characters’ race and ethnicity with your children. When all of the characters are white, acknowledge it. Start a conversation about why that might be the case, and why it’s not representative of the world we live in. Point out racist tropes in books, movies and TV shows when you see them.

Encourage your children to be friends with children of different races, too. “Friendships are a major mechanism for promoting acceptance and reducing prejudice,” explained Deborah Rivas-Drake, a psychologist and educational researcher at the University of Michigan. But if you’re white, don’t expect people of color to do the labor of educating your children about race.

If you’re like me, you may struggle with conversations about race, but they get easier. If your children comment on someone’s skin color, instead of shushing or scolding them, explain the science of skin color — that we all have a pigment in our skin called melanin that protects against ultraviolet radiation. Your melanin levels depend on how much your parents have and on where your ancestors lived.

If your children make racist or insensitive comments, gently probe for more information before responding. “Get a sense of what they understand it to mean from their perspective,” said Howard C. Stevenson, a professor of urban education and Africana studies at the University of Pennsylvania. “Where did they hear it from? How is it being used in the social context they’re in? Then you have a better angle to how you can speak to it.”

These conversations can feel awkward, but remember that whatever your children don’t learn about race from you, they’ll learn from the media, their friends or their own imaginations.

Racism won’t end until parents — and children — see prejudice, recognize its perniciousness and unravel the system that fuels it.

Melinda Wenner Moyer (@lindy2350) is a science journalist and the author of the forthcoming book “How to Raise Kids Who Aren’t Assholes,” from which this essay is adapted.

0 notes

levelbar · 7 years ago

Text

7 Aspiring Lawyers of Color Want You to Pay Attention to the DA Race

This piece was written by the seven Scholars in the 2018 LevelBar cohort.

No position in America, no single individual has a bigger impact on the criminal justice system ― including police brutality, but the whole crisis of mass incarceration in general ― than your local district attorney.

--Shaun King, founder of the Real Justice Movement

Lady Justice might hold the scales, but there are surprisingly few checks and balances in our U.S. criminal justice system. While judges have recently been the focus of media attention, another figure in the courtroom wields similarly unchecked power over the impartment of justice, yet we don’t seem to pay her the same attention. One single person has complete authority to decide which crimes are to be prosecuted, what charges will be filed, and whether a child will stand trial as an adult. Likewise, she decides who receives a plea deal. One person can recommend probation over prison and decide whether or not a police officer must answer for his or her crimes. That often-overlooked figure is the District Attorney, and her reach is unparalleled.

No law mandates the DA to pursue certain cases. In fact, there is no clear oversight of the DA’s decisions. The responsibility to limit or oversee a district attorney rests solely upon ALL OF US. Only the voters have the power to hold district attorneys accountable to the highest standards of integrity, fairness, and compassion. In 2002, about 79,000 more residents in San Diego county voted for governor than they did for district attorney, meaning many of us have willingly given up the most important tool to influence our criminal justice system. By emphasizing both the power of our vote and the role of the DA, we take a step forward toward reforming the current justice system.

If you’ve never had a run-in with the law, it may seem easy to ignore to the race for district attorney, but the stakes are too high for young people of color to do so. According to the NAACP, “the United States makes up about 5% of the world’s population and has 21% of the world’s prisoners.” Representing 32% of the population, African Americans and Latinos made up 56% of the prison population in 2015. African American men in particular, are being incarcerated at five time the rate of white men. In a report submitted to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, the American Civil Liberties Union writes, “These racial disparities result from disparate treatment of Blacks at every stage of the criminal justice system, including stops and searches, arrests, prosecutions and plea negotiations, trials, and sentencing. Race matters at all phases and aspects of the criminal process, including the quality of representation, the charging phase, and the availability of plea agreements, each of which impact whether juvenile and adult defendants face a potential LWOP sentence.” Further details of the report demonstrate the active role that the district attorney, as the lead prosecutor, plays in creating these disparities:

Racial disparities in sentencing also result in part from prosecutors’ decisions at the initial charging stage, suggesting that racial bias affects the exercise of prosecutorial discretion with respect to certain crimes. One study found that Black defendants face significantly more severe charges than whites, even after controlling for characteristics of the offense, criminal history, defense counsel type, age and education of the offender, and crime rates and economic characteristics of the jurisdiction.

Available data also suggests that there are racial disparities in prosecutors’ exercise of discretion in seeking sentencing enhancements under three-strikes and other habitual offender laws. For instance, a 1995 legal challenge revealed the racially biased role of prosecutorial discretion in the application of Georgia’s two-strikes law. Georgia prosecutors have discretion to decide whether to charge offenders under the state’s two-strikes sentencing scheme, which imposes life imprisonment for a second drug offense. They invoked the law against only 1 percent of white defendants facing a second drug conviction, compared to 16 percent of Black defendants. As a result, 98.4 percent of prisoners serving life sentences under the law were Black. In California, studies similarly show that Blacks are sentenced under the state’s three strikes law at far higher rates than their white counterparts.

The evidence that prosecutors contribute to systematic inequalities in criminal justice is nothing short of damning. It is clear that “equality under the law” is far from reality, and yet, we as voters fail time and time again to exercise our power to bring our country closer to this ideal. When officials are elected by the people, they must conform to the values of the electorate. Right now, we’ve shown our leaders that we are complicit in racial inequality, that we don’t value justice or equality, and that we will continue to elect them despite their racist sentiments and actions. What message will you send with your vote?

Many of us already know the lifelong impact of convictions. This impact compounds itself not only on people of color but on immigrants as well. It is all too common that formerly incarcerated individuals encounter unreturned calls for interviews and are denied public services or assistance and immigration relief. Those convicted of a felony are ineligible to vote in many states, contributing to a cycle of disenfranchisement and recidivism. Only racially diverse prosecutors who respect human rights above all else can remediate this crisis in the penal system. The District Attorney influences the level of prosecution, sways police action, and dictates the sentencing for the person being prosecuted. Therefore, the DA race is inescapably important. No matter where you live, it is in your best interest to be informed of what the DA’s track record has been within your community.

As today’s immigrant population faces attacks from the highest levels of the government, the DA race gives us an opportunity to respond. The DA’s prosecutorial choices can lead to even greater threats of deportation. Such was the case for Roland Sylvain, a Haitian immigrant who faced deportation from the U.S. due to a “aggravated felony” conviction which stemmed from his use of a false name while receiving a speeding ticket. Harsh prosecution practices are part of the current war on the immigrant population and our choice for DA directly impacts the lives of individuals and the integrity of families.

The authors of this piece all reside in Alameda County. For the fiscal year 2017-2018, 17% of Alameda county’s budget went towards incarceration and responding to crime. That number becomes disproportionately high when you compare it to the 1.2% of the county’s budget that went towards prevention services for at-risk youth. We would like to see a significant shift in these statistics. The upcoming election for the District Attorney in Alameda County involves two democratic candidates, Pamela Price and Nancy O’Malley. Pamela Price has been running her campaign as a progressivist as well as a reformist. Her goal is to unseat the incumbent District Attorney Nancy O’Malley by incorporating a humanitarian approach of “justice with compassion.” Incumbent O’Malley runs with support that relies “heavily on police unions, attorneys from all over the bay area,” Governor Jerry Brown, and Senator Kamala Harris. O’Malley has been denounced by the East Bay Citizen, who opined that “Price’s campaign has been boosted by an outpouring of support from progressives in Alameda County, who believe O’Malley is ambivalent toward convicting police officers for wrongdoing.” The election is complex, as many powerful figures endorse O’Malley despite her less progressive appeal. Senator Harris has, according to Rockridge Patch, “formerly worked with O'Malley in the Alameda County District Attorney's Office before becoming a district attorney herself in San Francisco,” which may explain her endorsement of DA O’Malley. However, in addition to the substantial support O’Malley is receiving, Rockridge Patch has also acknowledged that “billionaire George Soros backs challenger Pamela Price.” This endorsement from Soros might level the playing field, giving Price the chance to compete, or weaken her campaign due to public distrust of billionaires and large individual donors.

The election of a District Attorney requires a fundamental evaluation of our values. We must make an informed choice. To be complicit in these races is to ensure the status quo. It is to say that we do not feel empowered to choose who we elect to hold our community and, importantly, our police accountable to the law. To vote can mean so much more. It can voice the pain of millions of American residents, especially those groups most disproportionately entwined in the criminal justice system. It can make clear that we not only expect but we demand that our prosecutors act without bias in choosing which cases to indict, plea deals to offer, and sentences to recommend, that they hold police officers to the highest of ethical standards and stand firm in prosecuting them to the fullest extent of the law when they abuse their authority. We cannot stay silent in underscoring the importance of electing not only a just DA in areas with high concentrations of people of color, but a just DA who has the boldness and courage to ensure that her functionaries are just as well. A vote can demand that no one be above the law and that everyone be treated equally under the law, one county at a time. What are your values? Do you know the values of the District Attorney whose sole discretion determines the direction of justice for your community? Why not?

Juan Martin Cabrales : “As the son of immigrants and a person of color, I care about the DA race because of the influence the office holds over my community. For several years I have worked professionally with numerous immigrants and can attest to fact that families have been torn apart due to low level crimes. A DA who is informed about the severe consequences certain convictions have on an individual’s immigration case is extremely important. Minor crimes such as possession or petty theft can create a catastrophe for a family unit. Our DA should be compassionate towards individuals who clearly do not pose a threat to the community. Furthermore, the DA has the power to sign certifications of cooperation, which are required for an immigrant obtain certain immigration benefits, such as a U Visa for victims of crimes. The DA race is a vital role in the criminal justice system and we should do our parts to be informed on the power they hold and who it will effect.”

Ausjia Perlow : “When I was younger, I always valued fairness above all and was taught that the American justice system did as well, that justice was blind treated everyone fairly. This illusion culminated in my aspirations to practice law. That naivete has since been replaced with a determination to be a changemaker, one who meaningfully brings that system closer to the ideals of equality and fairness that we purport to hold so dear. One of the easiest ways that we can all accomplish this is simply by electing District Attorneys who are also committed to being changemakers. We need more people willing to reject the status quo and to instead to adopt new methods to strive toward these higher aims of fairness, compassion, and justice.”

Gabriela Arroyo : “As a person color I have always felt unrepresented in politics. I also feel that the experiences of people of color are not taken into consideration properly, thus when DAs use their discretion they are not always aware of the impact their decision has on a person who is already at a (structurally) racial disadvantage. Therefore, It is essential to make changes by electing DAs who can relate and understand the communities that they are involved with. DAs should be able to understand the full effect of a cyclical approach, and should hold values that incorporate rehabilitation, reintegration, and community-based programs.”

Kimberly Anne Verzano : “Race, power and privilege are factors that perpetuate the problem of structural inequalities within the American Legal Justice System. As a woman and a first generation Filipino American, I understand and relate to the struggles that people of color face. Minorities are not always at the forefront of power but are more often crushed by those who possess it. Historically, people of color have been exploited for their labor or victimized by the legal system because they cannot afford exceptional legal aid. In the 21st century, police brutality especially in Oakland is a major contributor to social injustice. The police need to be held accountable and the only way we can do this is by electing the right District Attorney [DA]: someone who is aware of the racial inequality within the American Justice System and is willing to be the main advocate for underprivileged communities. Take Oakland, for example, a city of diverse cultural backgrounds, where minorities from impoverished communities have been disproportionately represented. Historically, Oakland’s reputation in incarceration has heavily been focused on specific minorities such as Black and Brown bodies.”

Ashley Lopez Figuera : “I care about the DA race because the District Attorney’s decisions help determine the fate of my Latino and immigrant community. Is it one filled with fear of authority? Or with a sense of safety and tolerance? Can I see people from disadvantaged backgrounds beating the odds and rising to powerful positions? Or wasting their untapped potential in a jail cell? I want my loved ones to have an equal opportunity to live life to the fullest, and I am sure you do too.”

Feven Ezra : “The DA race is the most important sector in this primary election simply because of the effects it brings to the Alameda County. Without an individual with integrity and understanding of the community in which they operate, the city that I live in will not encourage and support the folks that have lived here for generations but rather will accommodate people and corporations that choose to criminalize and equate humans with profitable gains. I am eager to participate in the 2018 DA elections because I want to decriminalize the youth and people of color that are facing incarceration for petty crimes.“

Hideyasu Kurose : “When I was living in South Central, people of color from my neighborhood were arrested, sequestered, and ultimately incarcerated on a moment by moment basis. I recall that many were labeled gang members and profiled as gang members but these hard-working men and women were simply blue-collar workers lacking sufficient funds to pay basic parking fines, car registration, or exorbitant tax assessments. Functionaries of the LA District Attorney would ensure that these hard-working men and women spent the maximum amount of time in prison so that their resolve would be broken prior to their trial. There is no doubt that many among them who had never encountered gang members before, certainly encountered them in LA County jail. Therefore, the rapid apprehension and incarceration of my neighbors by the LA County DA’s office not only promoted prejudice, it fueled gang recruitment by putting hard-working men and women of color in prison side-by-side with established gang members. If poor people could afford bail, then gang exposure awaiting trial would be limited but as the searing op-ed of Kamala Harris and Rand Paul in the NY Times confirms, most poor people of color cannot afford bail.”

#levelbar #district attorney #election #oakland

1 note · View note

orbemnews · 4 years ago

Link

Gucci is Staying in Trump Tower The day President Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris were inaugurated in Washington, D.C., Melania and Donald Trump stepped off Air Force One in South Florida, bound for the confines of the Mar-a-Lago Club in Palm Beach. He wore a typically boxy suit of indeterminate origin. She wore an orange and blue, boldly patterned $3,700 Gucci caftan that came with as much symbolism as the famous “I really don’t care, do u” jacket she put on back in 2018 on a trip to visit children at a border detention center in Texas. With its relaxed lines and orange hexagons recalling a David Hicks carpet, the new dress telegraphed the idea that Mrs. Trump was entering into a new role as a person of leisure, seemingly without a care. It also was a worldwide advertisement, unwitting or not, for a brand that has substantial ties to the Trump business. For the past 14 years, Gucci has leased 48,667 feet at the base of Trump Tower in Midtown Manhattan, making it the building’s biggest commercial tenant. Other companies that leased space with the Trumps have downsized their spaces or not renewed their leases. One is Nike, which in 2018 shut down its Niketown location at 6 East 57th Street — a building around the corner from Trump Tower that the Trump Organization has a 100-year ground lease on — and opened a new flagship, the so-called House of Innovation, five blocks south. (A spokeswoman for Nike then declined to address to Forbes whether the move was political.) In 2019, the Industrial and Commercial Bank of China decreased its presence in Trump Tower. Tiffany, which temporarily took over the Niketown space in 2018 while its flagship was being renovated, is not renewing its lease next year, Bloomberg recently reported. But in 2020, Gucci renegotiated and extended its lease, according to two people with knowledge of the deal, both of whom requested their names not be used because they are not authorized to speak about it. The luxury company received a reduction in rent in exchange for agreeing to extend its lease beyond 2026. Trump Tower got to keep a highly desirable tenant: a brand that has boomed since the designer Alessandro Michele took over creative direction in 2015, whose presence in the building helps counter the idea that its namesake is nothing more than a “poor person’s idea of a rich person,” in the words of Fran Lebowitz. The players involved, however, are not talking about it publicly. Four days after receiving a detailed list of questions about the deal, a representative for Gucci called to say that a statement was on its way within the hour. A little more than an hour later, the representative called back to say the statement would not actually be arriving after all. The Trump Organization did not respond to two requests for comment. One possible reason: According to the person who has seen the new lease, Gucci required people at the Trump Organization to sign confidentiality agreements regarding its terms. Still, the deal was worth it to the Trumps for reasons that extend beyond symbolism. Numerous luxury brands occupying prime Manhattan retail spaces have renegotiated leases during the coronavirus pandemic as foot traffic dropped off. Others have simply subleased their spaces. That was what Ralph Lauren did at its Fifth Avenue location last November, renting 28,300 square feet to the fast fashion retailer Mango for what the Real Deal reported was $5 million — which is $22 million less than Ralph Lauren pays for it. In recent years, revenue from “The Apprentice,” Mr. Trump’s former reality show on NBC, dried up. Debt payments across the Trump business are coming due. That has turned the retail space in and around Trump Tower into a lifeline, becoming what Susanne Craig and Russ Buettner wrote in The New York Times last January is likely his empire’s most dependable and “greatest long-term money producer.” A filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission in 2012 related to the Trump Organization’s finances described Gucci as taking a 20-year lease back in 2006. Gucci paid $384.40 per square foot each month in rent. This amounts to an annual base rate of $18.7 million and accounts for about two-thirds of the total $29.53 million the Trump Organization earns annually from its commercial tenants there, according to the filing. Gucci’s discretion notwithstanding, it’s far from clear that news of the renegotiation might affect sales. The fashion industry tends to be politically liberal, but sometimes business is just business and aesthetics outweigh politics. Oscar de la Renta bounced between first ladies with diametrically opposed worldviews. James Galanos pledged his allegiance to Nancy Reagan despite the catastrophic neglect of AIDS by her husband’s administration. In 2019, Bernard Arnault, whose company LVMH owns Tiffany, was joined by Mr. Trump at a Louis Vuitton factory in Texas and posed with him for photographs. But Mr. Trump’s divisive behavior, especially since the pandemic began and the election, has bolstered the resolve of activists denouncing him. Brands are more sensitive than ever to the threat of boycotts. Companies including Nike and Twitter have aligned themselves with the Black Lives Matter movement. The latest incarnation of Gucci was more racially inclusive than most high-end fashion brands. Shortly after Mr. Michele became its lead designer and began doing away with an haute and self-consciously snobby aesthetic for an ironic, referential style that could perhaps be described as Etsy Luxe, the company did an ad campaign with all Black models. But it has also misstepped. In 2017, it was called out for releasing a jacket that looked remarkably like one designed decades before by Dapper Dan, a.k.a. Daniel Day, a Black couturier in Harlem. In response, the brand reached out to him, placing him in an ad for its men’s tailoring and collaborating with him on a luxury boutique. Soon after, it announced an initiative called Gucci Equilibrium, intended in part to improve diversity and inclusion in the company. But in 2019, Gucci pulled an $890 sweater criticized for evoking blackface from the market. And its leadership team, along with that of its parent company, Kering, remains dominated by white men (Kering does have one Black board member). Although the decision by Gucci executives to renew the lease at 725 Fifth Avenue came before protesters with confederate flags stormed the Capitol back in January, Mr. Trump’s associations with white supremacists was hardly unknown in 2020, said Kailee Scales. Ms. Scales is the former managing director of the Black Lives Matter Global Network and a principal at ThnkFree Global Strategies, a boutique company that guides brands such as Amazon and Sprite on marketing strategies involving social justice issues. “This is a time,” she said, “where brands, organizations and individuals around the world are reckoning with racial equity and working to address and dismantle the systems that led us to witness one of the most horrifying moments in history — the murder of George Floyd.” Consequently, she said, it was “an odd choice” for Gucci to continue to intrinsically link itself to a man who has “blatantly refused to disavow white supremacy” and “built political equity by promoting racist birther conspiracy theories.” Ms. Scales’s opinion was shared by Shannon Coulter, who started the “Grab Your Wallet” campaign, which organized boycotts against SoulCycle and New Balance after people with ownership stakes at those companies donated substantial sums of money to Mr. Trump’s campaigns. In an interview, Ms. Coulter said that she had intentionally left Gucci and Nike off the boycott list. “We were pretty generous because we knew they had signed leases before his campaign,” she said. The decision by Gucci to renew in 2020 was something altogether different. “It’s disgusting,” she said. “They are essentially doing business with a white supremacist. That’s what that decision means.” Still, few people directly involved with the fashion world seem eager to address the possible controversy. Editors such as Samira Nasr of Harper’s Bazaar, Nina Garcia of Elle and Anna Wintour of Vogue have positioned themselves as stewards of racial justice. But they also rely on Gucci for advertising. Representatives for them all declined to comment. Mr. Day did not respond to a request for comment. Jeremy O. Harris, the author of “Slave Play,” has had a contractual relationship with the house since November 2020. In general, such arrangements involve wearing a brand’s clothes at public appearances and getting to keep them afterward. “I take a lot of pride in my relationship with them, having met the people and seen how they really listen and are trying to change,” he said in an interview last Friday. And “while there are few real estate moguls who have risen to the level of semi-fascist leader like Trump, from what I do know, they are pretty much all deeply compromised people.” Still, Mr. Harris acknowledged, “this is complicated.” Luckily, he added, “I really only go to the Wooster Street store.” Ben Protess and Vanessa Friedman contributed reporting. Source link Orbem News #Gucci #staying #tower #Trump

0 notes

khalilhumam · 4 years ago

Text

Keeping his promises? Black presidential appointments in the Biden administration

New Post has been published on http://khalilhumam.com/keeping-his-promises-black-presidential-appointments-in-the-biden-administration/

Keeping his promises? Black presidential appointments in the Biden administration

By Nicol Turner-Lee, Kathryn Dunn Tenpas, Ph.D As the Trump campaign’s legal challenges sputter to a near halt, presidential observers are eager to turn to the season’s parlor game of choice: speculation over who will get the “big jobs” in the next administration. Typical prospects include high-dollar donors, senior campaign advisers, and those who have a long personal or professional history with the president-elect. But during his acceptance speech in Philadelphia, President-elect Biden acknowledged the groundswell of support from Black voters throughout the election process when he stated, “…especially for those moments when this campaign was at its lowest—the African-American community stood up again for me. They always have my back, and I’ll have yours.” Taken by itself, this statement can either suggest that the incoming administration will heavily focus on the policy issues affecting Black Americans (e.g., pandemic, joblessness, police brutality, etc.), appoint Black leaders to senior-level positions at agencies, or a combination of both. Early Cabinet selections and the composition of the Biden transition team suggest that achieving racial and gender diversity is indeed a goal. Not since President Clinton has such attention been given to diversity in presidential appointments. Seven Cabinet positions were filled by Black leaders during the two terms of the Clinton-Gore presidency. The Biden administration can be equally diverse and have his legacy extend beyond Cabinet positions. To date, Janet Yellen, Avril Haines, and Linda Thomas-Greenfield have been announced as key Cabinet and Cabinet-level picks. Last week, Alejandro Mayorkas was announced for Secretary of Homeland Security, the first Latino to lead the agency. The transition teams are also comprised of more than 46% people of color, which offers a pool of potential candidates to be considered for other senior leadership positions. But will the Biden-Harris presidency also recognize and reward the loyalty of Black voters, especially Black women, by appointing them to high-level positions from Cabinet secretaries to other senior roles in his administration? Last week, Congressman James Clyburn (D-SC) called out the early waves of presidential appointments for not including Black Americans in more high-ranking positions. The Congressional Black Caucus is advocating that Biden select the former Obama Secretary of Homeland Security, Jeh Johnson, to be the first Black Defense Secretary in history. However, this recommendation is being challenged by some progressives and white women who prefer to go in a different direction. Enacting more formal and transparent processes in the selection and hiring practices for the nearly 1,200 Senate-confirmed appointments across the federal government may address competing opinions, especially those guided by race, gender, and ideology. We gathered relevant data on the first 100, 200, and 300 days of Senate confirmations from the last three former presidents Bush, Obama, and Trump. We examined racial/ethnic composition and gender breakdown of Senate-confirmed appointments to provide an expectations benchmark for the incoming administration. We conclude with four proposals to encourage diversity in hiring throughout the course of the Biden-Harris administration, starting with the establishment of a White House Office on Diversity and Inclusion. Biden could have the most diversity in his Cabinet since President Clinton Figures 1 and 2 demonstrate the racial/ethnic diversity and gender composition of Senate confirmations during the first 100 days from the Bush, Obama, and Trump administrations. Taken together, roughly 72 percent of all appointees were white individuals and 73 percent were men, showing that if President-elect Biden can achieve 30 percent for both racial/ethnic diversity and inclusion of women, his efforts will be pathbreaking. Figure 1 Figure 2 But like his predecessors, President-elect Biden will certainly have a mammoth task on his hands as he seeks to balance the ideological differences of the country and achieve diversity among his presidential appointments. In addition to the concerns from Black lawmakers, civil rights organizations are questioning both the process for selection of Senate-confirmed positions and their lack of involvement in the decision-making of qualified Black appointees. Whoever President-elect Biden selects will also undergo some level of scrutiny if the Senate is controlled by Republicans after the Georgia run-off elections in January 2021. A Republican-controlled Senate may either adamantly reject progressive nominations, avoid diversity altogether to maintain the white identity politics of the previous administration, or comfortably approve Blacks and other people of color to dismiss potential concerns about diversity. A Republican-controlled Senate can also choose to selectively scrutinize certain nominees for whatever reason. That is why having clear expectations and transparent processes to identify and select Black and other diverse candidates are starting points for the Biden administration to achieve diversity and acknowledge the role of Black voters in his victory. Four approaches to bringing more Blacks into senior-ranking Cabinet positions To get started, the Biden-Harris administration might consider the following proposals that position diversity and inclusion at the center of their decision-making:

Establish an inaugural Office of Diversity and Inclusion in the White House whose aim is to develop criteria for diverse hiring and retention, along with a formal public dashboard to let the American public know how many people of color (by race and ethnicity) and women are being appointed to key leadership positions.

Adopt formally the use of the “Rooney Rule”, which was conceived by the National Football League in 2003 that requires interviews with candidates of color for head jobs in coaching and general management. In 2017, Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) required the practice in the hiring of House Democratic congressional staff. Since 2018, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) has incorporated the practice into the Senate Democratic Diversity Initiative, which aims to ensure the representation of demographically under-represented groups. Since 2017, the Initiative—which is fully staffed—issues progress reports on their retention of diverse talent.

Keep breaking new ground. The incoming administration has already set precedents that even Clinton did not generate. Selecting Senator Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) as the first woman of color to become vice president will be remembered by every little girl of color who desires to achieve her level of leadership. Janet Yellen, Brookings senior fellow and former chair of the Federal Reserve Board, will be the first woman to lead the Treasury Department. Alejandro Mayorkas, a Cuban American, will be the first Latino secretary of homeland security and can overturn some of the egregious Trump- and Obama-era immigration policies. Who will be “the firsts” among Black Americans in key leadership positions to pay some homage to their community’s massive voter turnout and add their voices to the most senior-level national discussions?

Avoid solely placing Black candidates into positions traditionally set aside for them, especially those primarily serving certain demographic groups. Our review of the data suggests that since the Bush administration, Blacks have traditionally been appointed to Secretary positions in the following agencies: Departments of Housing and Urban Development, Health and Human Services, Education, Transportation, and Veterans Affairs. Under Obama, two Black Americans held key roles as the nation’s Attorneys General, and Bush appointed two Blacks to serve as Secretary of State. Aggressively considering Black appointees for other federal agencies will discredit the assumption that leaders of color (and women) are profiled into certain jobs or not readily available and qualified for such leadership positions. The candidates are out there. Organizations like the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies have been identifying Black talent for a range of positions in the federal government and is most recently pivoting their work to positions in the incoming administration.

The world is watching as more names are announced for this next administration. At Brookings, we are watching too as we monitor the appointments at pivotal moments in the administration’s first year. In a politically and racially fractured nation, moving toward increased representation of all leaders by race, gender, sexual orientation, and ideology does not occur by accident. More importantly, diversity should not just focus on representation. Rather, investments in diverse talent not only help make America stronger and more resilient, but it gets us closer to our constitutional mandates, resulting in a more perfect and inclusive union. Special thanks to Noah Montemarano and Mishaela Robison for expert research assistance.

0 notes

generalpaperstranger · 4 years ago

Text

Biden taps Neera Tanden to head OMB, picks all-female senior White House press team

WILMINGTON, Del. — U.S. President-elect Joe Biden will have an all-female senior communications team at his White House, reflecting his stated desire to build out a diverse White House team as well as what’s expected to be a return to a more traditional press operation.

Biden campaign communications director Kate Bedingfield will serve as Biden’s White House communications director. Jen Psaki, a longtime Democratic spokeswoman, will be his press secretary.

Four of the seven top communications roles at the White House will be filled by women of colour, and it’s the first time the entire senior White House communications team will be entirely female.

U.S. President Donald Trump upended the ways in which his administration communicated with the press. In contrast with administrations past, Trump’s communications team held few press briefings, and those that did occur were often combative affairs riddled with inaccuracies and falsehoods.

Site: https://www.disability-benefits-help.org/node/14645

Trump himself sometimes served as his own press secretary, taking questions from the media, and he often bypassed the White House press corps entirely by dialing into his favourite Fox News shows.

In a different area of the White House operation, Biden plans to announce a number of his top economic advisers this week. He’ll name Neera Tanden, the president and CEO of the liberal think-tank Center for American Progress, as director of the Office of Management and Budget, according to a person familiar with the transition process granted anonymity to speak freely about internal deliberations.

In a statement announcing the White House communications team, Biden said: “Communicating directly and truthfully to the American people is one of the most important duties of a President, and this team will be entrusted with the tremendous responsibility of connecting the American people to the White House.”

He added: “These qualified, experienced communicators bring diverse perspectives to their work and a shared commitment to building this country back better.”

Site: https://www.disability-benefits-help.org/node/14676

Bedingfield, Psaki and Tanden are all veterans of the Obama administration. Bedingfield served as communications director for Biden while he was vice-president; Psaki was a White House communications director and a spokesperson at the State Department; and Tanden served as a senior adviser to Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius and helped craft the Affordable Care Act.

Others joining the White House communications staff are:

— Karine Jean Pierre, who was Vice-President-elect Kamala Harris’ chief of staff, will serve as a principal deputy press secretary for the president-elect. She’s another Obama administration alum, having served as a regional political director for the White House office of political affairs.

Site: https://www.disability-benefits-help.org/node/14692

— Pili Tobar, who was communications director for coalitions on Biden’s campaign, will be his deputy White House communications director. She most recently was deputy director for America’s Voice, an immigration reform advocacy group, and was a press staffer for Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y.

Three Biden campaign senior advisers are being appointed to top communications roles:

— Ashley Etienne, a former communications director for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, will serve as Harris’ communications director.

— Symone Sanders, another senior adviser on the Biden campaign, will be Harris’ senior adviser and chief spokesperson.

Site: https://www.disability-benefits-help.org/node/14700

— Elizabeth Alexander, who served as the former vice-president’s press secretary and his communications director while he was a U.S. senator from Delaware, will serve as Jill Biden’s communications director.

After his campaign went virtual due to the coronavirus pandemic, Biden faced some criticism for not being accessible to reporters. But near the end of the campaign, he answered questions from the press more frequently, and his transition team has held weekly briefings since he was elected president.

The choice of a number of Obama administration veterans _ many with deep relationships with the Washington press corps _ also suggests a return to a more congenial relationship with the press.

Also joining the Biden administration as economic advisers, according to a person familiar with transition plans who was not authorized to speak on the matter:

— Brian Deese, a former Obama administration economic adviser, is expected to be named to head the National Economic Council.

Site: https://www.disability-benefits-help.org/node/14737

— Princeton University economist Cecilia Rouse, who served on the Council of Economic Advisers during the Obama administration, is expected to be named to head the Council of Economic advisers.

— Heather Boushey, the president and co-founder of the Washington Center for Equitable Growth, and Jared Bernstein, who served as an economic adviser to Biden during the Obama administration, are also expected to be named to the Council of Economic Advisers.

As head of the OMB, Tanden would be responsible for preparing Biden’s budget submission and would command several hundred budget analysts, economists and policy advisers with deep knowledge of the inner workings of the government.

Her choice may mollify progressives, who have been putting pressure on Biden to show his commitment to progressive priorities with his early staff appointments. She was chosen over more moderate voices with roots in the party’s anti-deficit wing such as Bruce Reed, who was staff director of President Barack Obama’s 2010 deficit commission, which proposed a set of politically painful recommendations that were never acted upon.

Site: https://www.disability-benefits-help.org/node/14742

U.S. President-elect Joe Biden on Monday tapped Obama-era officials for top national security and economic roles, signalling a stark shift from the Trump administration’s “America First” policies that disparaged international alliances and favoured deregulation and tax cuts.

The picks include former Secretary of State John Kerry to take the lead on combating climate change. Biden is also expected to choose Janet Yellen, who was nominated by former President Barack Obama to lead the Federal Reserve, as the first woman to become treasury secretary.

Biden’s emerging Cabinet marks a return to a more traditional approach to governing, relying on veteran policymakers with deep expertise and strong relationships in Washington and global capitals. And with a roster that includes multiple women and people of colour — some of whom are breaking historic barriers in their posts — Biden is fulfilling his campaign promise to lead a team that reflects the diversity of America.

The incoming president will nominate longtime adviser Antony Blinken to be secretary of state, lawyer Alejandro Mayorkas to be homeland security secretary and Linda Thomas-Greenfield to be ambassador to the United Nations. Avril Haines, a former deputy director of the CIA, will be nominated as director of national intelligence, the first woman to hold that post.

Site: https://www.disability-benefits-help.org/node/14771

Thomas-Greenfield is Black, and Mayorkas is Cuban American.

They “are experienced, crisis-tested leaders who are ready to hit the ground running on day one,” the transition said in a statement. “These officials will start working immediately to rebuild our institutions, renew and reimagine American leadership to keep Americans safe at home and abroad, and address the defining challenges of our time — from infectious disease, to terrorism, nuclear proliferation, cyber threats, and climate change.”

In the weeks ahead, Biden could also name Michele Flournoy as the first woman to lead the Defence Department. Pete Buttigieg, the former Indiana mayor and onetime presidential candidate, has also been mentioned as a contender for several Cabinet agencies.

In making the announcements on Monday, Biden moved forward with plans to fill out his administration even as President Donald Trump refuses to concede defeat in the Nov. 3 election, has pursued baseless legal challenges in several key states and has worked to stymie the transition process.

Site: https://www.disability-benefits-help.org/node/14853

Trump said Monday that he was directing his team to co-operate on the transition but vowed to keep up the fight. His comment came after the General Services Administration ascertained that Biden was the apparent winner of the election, clearing the way for the start of the transition from Trump’s administration and allowing Biden to co-ordinate with federal agencies on plans for taking over on Jan. 20.

The nominations were generally met with silence on Capitol Hill, where the Senate’s balance of power hinges on two runoff races that will be decided in January.

The best known of the bunch is Kerry, who made climate change one of his top priorities while serving as Obama’s secretary of state, during which he also negotiated the Iran nuclear deal and the Paris climate accord. Trump withdrew from both agreements, which he said represented a failure of American diplomacy in a direct shot at Kerry, whom he called the worst secretary of state in U.S. history.

“America will soon have a government that treats the climate crisis as the urgent national security threat it is,” Kerry said. “I’m proud to partner with the president-elect, our allies, and the young leaders of the climate movement to take on this crisis as the president’s climate envoy.”

Site: https://www.disability-benefits-help.org/node/14861

Biden will appoint Jake Sullivan as national security adviser. At 43, he will be one of the youngest national security advisers in history.

Blinken, 58, served as deputy secretary of state and deputy national security adviser during the Obama administration and has close ties with Biden. If confirmed as secretary of state, he would be a leading force in the incoming administration’s bid to reframe the U.S. relationship with the rest of the world after four years in which Trump questioned longtime alliances.

Blinken recently participated in a national security briefing with Biden and Vice-President-elect Kamala Harris and weighed in publicly just last week on notable foreign policy issues in Egypt and Ethiopia.

He will inherit a deeply demoralized and depleted career workforce at the State Department. Trump’s two secretaries of state, Rex Tillerson and Mike Pompeo, offered weak resistance to the administration’s attempts to gut the agency, which were thwarted only by congressional intervention.

Although the department escaped massive proposed cuts of more than 30% in its budget for three consecutive years, it has seen a significant number of departures from its senior and rising mid-level ranks, from which many diplomats have opted to retire or leave the foreign service given limited prospects for advancements under an administration they believed did not value their expertise.

Site: https://www.disability-benefits-help.org/node/14870

Blinken served on the National Security Council during President Bill Clinton’s administration before becoming staff director for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee when Biden was chair of the panel. In the early years of the Obama administration, Blinken returned to the NSC and was then-Vice-President Biden’s national security adviser before he moved to the State Department to serve as deputy to Kerry.

A graduate of Harvard University and Columbia Law School, Blinken has aligned himself with numerous former senior national security officials who have called for a major reinvestment in American diplomacy and renewed emphasis on global engagement.

“Democracy is in retreat around the world, and unfortunately it’s also in retreat at home because of the president taking a two-by-four to its institutions, its values and its people every day,” Blinken told The Associated Press in September. “Our friends know that Joe Biden knows who they are. So do our adversaries. That difference would be felt on day one.”

Site: https://movietracker23.medium.com/biden-taps-neera-tanden-to-head-omb-picks-all-female-senior-white-house-press-team-7c39af8e1895

#news

0 notes