#narrow margin 1990 | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

kohntarkosz1899 · 11 days ago

Text

THEY'VE DONE IT, THE MAD LADS HAVE DONE IT

After a 20-year winless streak, that finished last September 5th after a 1-0 victory against Liechtenstein at home in the town of Serravalle, it seemed that it was the biggest joy the San Marino national team, known as the "worst national team in the world of football" could get.

But today, they wrote the biggest page of their footballing history, that goes back to their first official match in 1990 against Switzerland and was constantly filled with harsh defeats, mainly because of the fact that, having a population of around 30.000 inhabitants, the resources are limited, and they mostly can only count with amateur or semi-pro footballers.

Until this edition of the UEFA Nations League, they had only ever won one friendly match, 1-0 against Liechtenstein on April 28th, 2004.

After the before mentioned second win in the Matchday 1 of the Group D1 of the Nations League, they suffered a defeat by a narrow margin of 1-0 against Gibraltar on Matchday 2, but they overcame it by achieving a last-minute 1-1 draw last Friday, in their third game of the group stage, reaching the last matchday against Liechtenstein in the capital Vaduz with chances of being promoted to League C. That would be, undoubtedly, the biggest feat in Sammarinese footballing history.

And indeed, it was. After a stunning middle distance shot from the Liechtensteinian midfielder Aron Dele during the first half, the hopes for the Sammarinese seemed to be waning.

But right after the beginning of the second half, a great play left the midfielder Lorenzo Lazzari in front of the box, and he didn't hesitate to put the ball in the net to put things back even and get his first goal ever with the Nazionale shirt. In the 66th minute, a penalty was awarded to San Marino and the striker Nicola Nanni safely exchanged it for a goal.

It was the first ever time in history that San Marino was coming back from a defeat, and that historical comeback was sealed by one of the Sammarinese legends, Alessandro Golinucci, to put the final result of 3-1 in favor of the Titani.

After the final whistle, the feat was celebrated with the always faithful Brigata Mai 1 Gioia (San Marino's tireless supporters group) as if they had been champions of the world, and rightfully so.

Aside from the historic promotion to League C, they achieved:

-their FIRST EVER away win

-their FIRST EVER comeback

-their FIRST EVER TIME scoring three goals in the same match

-their FIRST EVER TIME winning two matches in a UEFA competition

-(still not confirmed, but very likely) escaping the dead last spot of the FIFA ranking

Closing this with a personal note. As a supporter myself, for the last 10 years, this feels truly like winning the World Cup. The almost unsurmountable level difference between these guys and the big European teams might make most people think "is it even worth it? It's a team of clerks and accountants, which are clearly inferior in virtually every aspect of the game, playing against professional footballers playing in the top leagues".

But once you start noticing the sacrifice, the struggles they make to represent their home country, no matter how small, always with dignity and honor despite the adverse results, you realize this means the world to them. And to everyone of us who can feel identified with their struggles. And tournaments like the Nations League give the opportunity to these teams to play against similarly ranked teams, and achieve more feasible and positive results. It just makes it all worth it.

And after all these years of waiting, I can assure you all, it was worth all the wait to enjoy this feat, for everyone. For the players, for the managers, for the federation, and for the fans, who felt touched by their story and took the decision to support them from everywhere in the world, no matter the uncountable defeats, the infinite frustrations and the incommensurable helplessness.

TODAY, SAN MARINO WON, WAS PROMOTED, AND MADE HISTORY. Today, the world of football is a better place.

FORZA SAN MARINO 🇸🇲🇸🇲🇸🇲

#san marino #san marino nt #nations league #football #soccer #uefa nations league

7 notes · View notes

longitudinalwaveme · 11 months ago

Text

Nerdy Pet Peeves

AKA things that people say about the Flash and the Rogues that bug me when found in supposedly-informative lists or videos.

"Barry/Wally is an inferior copy of Wally/Barry!" This one is usually just a lead-up to an internet flame war, and ignores that the two characters are both distinct, interesting, and likable in their own right. It's also just objectively not true (except when applied to adaptations, which have a bad habit of blending the two characters together). This isn't to say that people can't like one better than the other, or even dislike one, but to claim that either character is objectively unworthy of being the Flash/existing is a bit much.

"Barry was/is boring." I like Wally a lot (he is my favorite Flash, although by an extremely narrow margin), but I can't agree with people who claim that Barry is boring, or was boring before the retconned-in death of his mother. He wasn't. As white-bread as he seems, Silver/Bronze Age Barry Allen was a deeply weird individual. He had weird friends (like Albert Desmond, an ex-supervillain, and his 12-year-old neighbor), weird and dorky hobbies (collecting comics being the most notable), and did very weird things (like dressing up as a supervillain basically just to troll the Rogues, which @gorogues has some good scans of). He also has a solidly-written relationship with Iris (at least in the Bronze Age; not so much in the Silver Age) and actually has a number of really solid and emotional stories. I think a lot of the reputation Barry has as being boring stems from the fact that Cary Bates' run on the character, which did a lot to establish his more idiosyncratic character traits and emotional range, isn't published in reprints very often. As such, most modern fans don't know about Barry as he was written in that time period, and miss out on his more interesting character beats. Although I may be biased by the fact that I love Silver and Bronze Age comics.

"Captain Cold is a knock-off Mr. Freeze." Even setting aside the massive differences in their appearances, personalities, and backgrounds, Captain Cold debuted in 1957. Mr. Freeze didn't appear as Mr. Zero until 1959, and didn't become the Mr. Freeze most audiences are familiar with now until BTAS in the 1990s. So if anyone is a knock-off, it's Mr. Freeze, not Captain Cold (though the two are very distinct and I don't think either of them is a rip-off).

"Heat Wave is a knock-off Firefly." Again, the two are massively different in appearance, personality, and backstory, and, while Firefly does technically predate Heat Wave, he didn't start using a flamethrower until the early 1990s, at which point Heat Wave had been around---using his heat gun---for nearly 30 years. Before that, Firefly had light-based powers.

"Trickster is a second-rate Joker." Different powersets, different backstory, totally different personality, and different goals. Trickster is a barnum and a showman; Joker is a twisted comedian. Just because they're both vaguely humor-themed does not make them the same character.

"Heat Wave is boring/didn't age well." I've seen this opinion in a few different places, and it baffles me. Heat Wave is plenty interesting. He had a bit of a rough patch in the New 52, but other than that he's pretty consistently had good stories, his character has been firmly established, and his backstory is really interesting (and suitably grimdark for those people who think comics need to be "mature"). Is it just because his costume is mostly kind of monochrome? Or because his heat gun isn't as flashy as some of the other Rogues' weapons?

"Trickster is the Flash's Joker/a homicidal maniac." This one is basically entirely the fault of adaptations, which do keep turning the Trickster (specifically, James) into the Joker in all but name. In the comics, the Trickster is many things, but he is not a homicidal maniac. It's one of the things that separates him from the Joker. I love Mark Hamill (even as the Trickster), but he's not playing the Trickster from the comics, and it bothers me when people apply the traits of the TV Tricksters to their comic counterpart.

"Captain Boomerang is lame/stupid." Does it make total sense that a normal guy who throws boomerangs can fight the Flash? No. Does it matter? No. This is comics we're talking about; they're inherently kind of silly. That's what makes them so fun---and why Captain Boomerang is so great. Also, Digger is way more skilled, more deadly, and more ruthless than he gets credit for. He's actually one of the scariest Flash villains when his back is to the wall. @gorogues, you probably have some good scans of impressive Digger feats. Also, if you apply the logic used to judge Captain Boomerang as lame, then characters like the Joker are also, objectively, kind of lame.

"Ha ha ha, the Top spins! LOL! What a stupid villain." He has telekinetic powers and tried to blow up half the world in his first appearance. Plus, he's a ghost who can possess corpses, and can be downright terrifying when he wants to be. I don't know why people have such a hard time taking him seriously. It's not like his costume is that much weirder than Sinestro's. Or Lex Luthor's purple-and-green battle armor. Thankfully, this one does seem to have become less common than it used to be.

Similarly, "ha ha, the Golden Glider skates! That's silly!" In the Bronze Age, Lisa was the scariest Rogue of them all, and arguably came the closest to achieving her goals. The fact that she ice skates does not negate the fact that she was absolutely deadly, and would have fit right in with the darker modern era of comics. And her costume's not even silly looking! This opinion seems to have become less common of late, but unfortunately it has, in part, been replaced by....

"The Golden Glider is the nicest of the Rogues/nicer than her brother." This one is the fault of the comics themselves, since they've been writing her this way for about a decade at this point. So this one is less a criticism of people online and more a criticism of DC's writing decisions for the Golden Glider. Lisa is more than Captain Cold's cute little sister. She is capable of functioning on her own, and this perception of her as being nothing but generally cute and nice (and led into crime by her brother!) kneecaps her as an independent character. The fact that Cary Bates, who was writing during the 1970s and 1980s, is still Lisa's best writer is a little sad.

People who confuse/conflate Eobard Thawne and Hunter Zolomon, or describe Zolomon as though he's the version from the 2014 TV show rather than the more nuanced character from the comics. This happens more than it should, especially in lists and videos that are supposed to be explaining the Flash, and it just adds fuel to the fire that is people confusing them.

"The Rogues were lame until Geoff Johns started writing them." Geoff Johns was a great writer for the Rogues, and did develop a lot of their backstories, but the Rogues were just as great in the Silver and Bronze Ages, and Roscoe and Lisa were actually much better in that era than under Johns' pen (especially since Johns hated Roscoe). There are tons of good Rogues stories from earlier eras, and I think that they're vital to understanding the characters (especially poor Sam, who has had maybe three good stories since he was brought back to life in 2011).

"Captain Cold is the only Rogue that matters." This usually isn't stated precisely in this way, but I see this general sentiment quite frequently. This idea seems to assume that the Rogues are Len's henchmen, rather than his teammates, and therefore that they aren't interesting or important in their own right. Some of this can be laid at the feet of Geoff Johns, who really, really, really loved Len and seemed to not put as much time or effort into characterizing the other Rogues. I also think Joshua Willaimson's run was rather bad about this, as it portrayed Len as a pretty absolute, selfish leader and seemed to imply that the other Rogues were evil primarily because of his orders/influence. Even Johns' run didn't do that!

"The Rogues are only a threat to the Flash as a group." Again, this one can probably be attributed at least in part to the fact that most modern comic runs never show the Rogues operating independently, but historically they were all threatening and capable in their own right when fighting the Flash. Teaming up made them more threatening, but they were capable on their own.

"Sam (the first Mirror Master) is boring." This one is kind of true, but only if it's in reference to the post-Flashpoint version of the character. Pre-Flashpoint Sam, who also frequently gets called boring, was the most dynamic Rogue in the entire Pre-Crisis era, and was anything but boring. He was showy, cocky, dynamic, clever, and extremely entertaining. Silver/Bronze Age Mirror Master is the most fun you can have reading Pre-Crisis Flash.

People who confuse Evan and Sam, or Axel and James. Admittedly, DC hasn't been helping matters any by combining them into weird hybrids so much, but when writing an informative list about Sam, one should make sure that you're not including backstory elements than only apply to Evan, and that you're not attributing some of Evan's more violent activities, addictions, or eldritch powers to Sam. Similarly, when talking about the Trickster, make sure that you don't give Axel's backstory to James (or vice versa).

"The Rogues are lame/joke villains/aren't capable of fighting the Flash." This opinion isn't nearly as common as it once was, but it still pops up from time to time. It's as though the Rogues' costumes and names are preventing people from realizing that they're very capable combatants.

#flash comics #flash rogues

19 notes · View notes

lboogie1906 · 4 months ago

Text

Mayor Howard Nathaniel Lee (born July 28, 1934) is a politician who served as Mayor of Chapel Hill, North Carolina (1969-75). He was the first African American mayor elected in Chapel Hill, and the first African American to be elected mayor of any majority-white city in the South.

He was born to Howard Lee and Lou Temple outside Lithonia, Georgia. He began his freshman year at Clark College, he graduated from Fort Valley State College.

He was drafted into the Army during the summer of 1959 and completed basic training at Fort Benning. He received medical corpsman training at Fort Sam Houston, before being stationed at Fort Hood. He organized two sit-ins in the town of Killeen to protest segregated public facilities. The second sit-in was reported back to Fort Hood, and he was stationed in Korea the next week.

He moved to Savannah, Georgia, where he served as a juvenile probation officer, and married Lillian Wesley (1962). They moved to North Carolina in 1964, where he earned an MSW from UNC Chapel Hill. He joined the faculties of Duke University and North Carolina Central University.

In February 1969, he announced his mayoral candidacy. The ensuing election saw a record 4,734 votes cast. He won by a narrow margin but was re-elected twice.

In 1976, He sought the Democratic Party nomination for Lieutenant Governor of North Carolina. He was defeated in the primary runoff. He was appointed as the Secretary of the North Carolina Department of Natural Resources and Community Development.

He was elected to the North Carolina Senate (1990-94 and 1996-2002). He concentrated particularly on issues affecting public education.

The North Carolina State Board of Education elected him as its chairman. He was appointed as the new executive director of the NC Education Cabinet. He had to give up his seat on the Board of Education. He served as a member of the North Carolina Utilities Commission. He and Lillian Lee were nominated as “Town Treasures” by the Chapel Hill Historical Society He founded the Howard N. Lee Institute, which “focuses on erasing the achievement gap and improving academic performance for minority males.”#africanhistory365 #africanexcellence

2 notes · View notes

nickgerlich · 9 months ago

Text

Take A Hike

It has been a rocky year for many companies, thanks to their visible support of marginalized groups of customers. In our supposedly enlightened times, there are still people who find it difficult to just overlook what they don’t like. When I saw news of REI’s recent new unisex clothing line, I knew there would be an uproar.

Not because I wanted to see one. I just knew it would happen, because the outdoor equipment and retail company used verbiage that was bound to upset some. When you use words like “nongendered,” you know what’s going to happen next.

And boy howdy, did it ever. I checked REI’s Facebook page, and there were a lot of minds exploding, people threatening never to come back, and overuse of the laughing face emoji. Cue the over-reactors, and prepare ye to duck.

Naturally, there were people who did not read the attached article that explained their rationale. It’s not like they are making the entire store nongendered. Not at all. They will still have men’s clothing and women’s clothing. But they will also have a small line of activewear that is aimed at both, not in a shoving-down-your-throat kind of way that detractors love to decry, but just simple recognition that some things truly can be unisex.

As I have made clear before, I love REI. We just shopped the Orlando store yesterday, several hours before I stumbled upon this news item. I had even remarked to my wife about some hydration running vests about why would there even need to be men’s and women’s versions, other than possibly color variations. Oh, the cultural influences here. We have color-coded so many things, but all arbitrarily.

Now before I continue, I do recognize there are numerous biological differences between the sexes, and it is possible that women, whose shoulders tend to be narrower than those of men, might truly need a somewhat down-sized running vest. I get that. The same goes for backpacks, the kind needed to do the Appalachian Trail, as my sister-in-law is preparing to do this summer. And I also know that when it comes to pants, our builds are very different.

But what if it is just running clothes, like shorts and t-shirts? REI has gone out of its way to allay sizing fears by showing on a chart exactly what each item’s size might mean if you are a man or a woman.

REI is known for its popular #optoutside hashtag, as well as being among the first retail chains to stay closed on Black Friday. It urges both its employees and customers to go take a hike or something fun, rather than dive into the stress of holiday shopping. But the chain has also faced headwinds of late, and has endured two rounds of layoffs as it battles to maintain profitability.

I love REI’s store operations. Their liberal return policy means I can return something up to a year later, even if I have used it. The 10% patronage dividend for members is a great bonus. Currently, it costs $30 for a lifetime membership to get this benefit. I have been a member since the 1990s, and don’t remember if it even cost anything to join then. I just get my annual dividend every February, and then go shopping again, which is precisely the kind of store loyalty they seek.

The takeaway, once again, from the current uproar is that no matter what you do in the digital era, it is humanly impossible to please everyone. Furthermore, since the chasm between left and right is widening, it means you are going to get some negative reactions that are just vulgar. And, that kind of hatred can come from either side of the aisle.

I wish REI well with this new line of clothing. I also hope they can survive their current problems. They are striving to do good things, and if ever I see them or anyone else doing something with which I disagree, I will lean back onto my mantra: If you don’t like what you’re seeing, don’t look.

As for the current naysayers, I think they too should take a hike. Holler at me if you ever want some company. Just leave the negativity at home.

Dr “It’s Time To Roll” Gerlich

Audio Blog

#marketing #REI #retail #unisex

3 notes · View notes

notforemmetophobes · 2 years ago

Photo

Narrow Margin (1990) - M. Emmet Walsh as Sgt. Dominick Benti

Of course M. Emmet Walsh and Gene Hackman could catch one here.

Also J.A. Preston and Kevin McNulty could catch a D too.

[photoset #2 of 2]

#Narrow Margin #actor #Gene Hackman #M. Emmet Walsh #J.A. Preston #Kevin McNulty #american actor #suit & tie #sitting #screenshots #movie

25 notes · View notes

seph7 · 1 year ago

Text

J.T. Walsh as Michael Tarlow in Narrow Margin (1990).

He looked good. I do love it when he wears a red tie. He was so softly spoken in this film, however briefly he was in it.

#j.t. walsh #jt walsh #Michael Tarlow #Narrow Margin #character actors #underrated actors

4 notes · View notes

inspobyradhika · 10 days ago

Text

The Evolution and Impact of Beauty Standards

In a world increasingly shaped by media and technology, beauty standards have taken on a life of their own, influencing how individuals view themselves and others. These standards, though ever-changing, often reflect the cultural, societal, and even political climate of the time. But as they evolve, their implications for self-esteem, identity, and diversity have become more profound.

A Historical Perspective on Beauty Standards

Beauty standards are not new; they date back to ancient civilizations. In ancient Egypt, symmetry and kohl-lined eyes were the epitome of beauty, while the Renaissance era celebrated fuller figures as symbols of wealth and fertility. Fast-forward to the 20th century, and the ideal fluctuated from Marilyn Monroe’s curvaceous figure to the waif-like aesthetic of the 1990s, popularized by supermodels like Kate Moss.

These shifts reflect changing societal values, but they also highlight how exclusionary these ideals can be. More often than not, these standards represent only a narrow slice of humanity, leaving many to feel marginalized.

The Role of Media and Social Platforms

Today, media—particularly social platforms like Instagram and TikTok—plays a pivotal role in shaping beauty standards. Filters, photo editing apps, and curated feeds set a high bar for "perfection." While these platforms offer opportunities for self-expression, they also amplify unrealistic expectations.

The pressure to conform can lead to harmful consequences, including body dysmorphia, low self-esteem, and a growing obsession with cosmetic enhancements. Studies show that young people, especially teenagers, are particularly vulnerable to these effects.

A Growing Emphasis on Inclusivity

In recent years, there’s been a significant push toward inclusivity and diversity in beauty. Brands are broadening their product ranges to include all skin tones, and campaigns now feature models of all sizes, ages, and abilities. Movements like body positivity and skin positivity are gaining traction, challenging traditional norms and celebrating authenticity.

The Path Forward

To counteract the negative impact of beauty standards, education and media literacy are crucial. Individuals must learn to differentiate between curated images and reality. Moreover, continuing to celebrate diverse definitions of beauty will help dismantle harmful stereotypes and encourage a healthier relationship with appearance.

As we navigate a world dominated by visuals, the key lies in embracing individuality and fostering environments that celebrate everyone’s unique beauty.

1 note · View note

lifestyle-hub · 3 months ago

Text

A Crime to be 'Ugly'?: A Look at one of America's Most Cruel Laws

Image Credit: Polina Tankilevitch

Being 'ugly' was indeed a punishable offense in some cities in America for much of the 19th and early 20th centuries. Imagine walking down the street, minding your business, when a police officer stops you because your appearance doesn't fit societal norms. It sounds absurd, but this bizarre chapter in history reveals a disturbing truth about how society once treated the most vulnerable.

The Origins of the 'Ugly Laws'

The so-called 'Ugly Laws' were first introduced in San Francisco in 1867 and quickly spread to cities like Chicago, Denver, and New Orleans. Officially titled the “Unsightly Beggar Ordinance,” these laws targeted people with disabilities, disfigurements, or other physical differences. The justification? Such individuals were considered “unsightly” and therefore not fit for public view.

These laws were rooted in a complex web of social fears and prejudices. During the late 19th century, America was experiencing rapid urbanization and immigration. The influx of people, coupled with the harsh realities of industrial life, brought poverty and illness into public spaces in a way that was difficult to ignore. Instead of addressing the root causes of poverty and disability, cities chose to hide the symptoms by criminalizing the visibility of those who didn’t meet arbitrary standards of physical appearance.

A Law Enforced With Brutality

The enforcement of the Ugly Laws was often brutal. In Chicago, for example, the ordinance stated: “Any person who is diseased, maimed, mutilated or in any way deformed so as to be an unsightly or disgusting object, or an improper person to be allowed in or on the streets, highways, thoroughfares, or public places in this city, shall not therein or thereon expose himself or herself to public view.”

Violators were fined or even jailed. But beyond the legal penalties, the real punishment was the stigma and shame imposed on those who were already marginalized. These laws reinforced the idea that certain bodies were less worthy, less human, and less deserving of public life. They institutionalized the belief that beauty equated to value, a notion that still echoes in today's society.

The Real Victims: Who Were They?

The victims of these laws were primarily people with disabilities, but they also included the poor, the elderly, and anyone who did not conform to narrow standards of physical beauty. A person with a visible disability or someone simply aging naturally could be fined, arrested, or shunned. It was a cruel reminder that public space was reserved for those who fit a specific mold, often white, wealthy, and able-bodied.

These laws also disproportionately affected immigrants, who were often viewed with suspicion. In cities where the laws were enforced, the very people who had come to America seeking better lives were often those targeted and harassed under the guise of public decency.

The Slow Path to Repeal

The Ugly Laws did not disappear overnight. It wasn’t until the mid-20th century, as attitudes towards disability and public health began to shift, that these laws started to be questioned. In Chicago, the ordinance remained on the books until 1974, a shocking testament to how deeply ingrained these prejudices were.

The repeal of the Ugly Laws coincided with the rise of the disability rights movement, which fought for the recognition of people with disabilities as full citizens deserving of dignity, respect, and access to public spaces. Activists like Judith Heumann and groups like the American Coalition of Citizens with Disabilities played a crucial role in shifting public perception and advocating for legal changes that would eventually lead to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990.

A Legacy of Exclusion

Although the Ugly Laws are gone, their legacy lingers in the ongoing stigmatization of people with disabilities and differences. Society still grapples with issues of accessibility, representation, and equality. Public spaces are often designed with the “ideal” body in mind, leaving those who don’t fit that mold to navigate a world that wasn’t built for them.

Moreover, the obsession with physical appearance continues to shape social interactions, media portrayals, and even professional opportunities. While we no longer have laws explicitly banning “unsightly” individuals from public spaces, the underlying bias that fueled the Ugly Laws remains in many forms.

Reflecting on the Past to Build a Better Future

The Ugly Laws serve as a stark reminder of the dangers of a society that values appearance over humanity. They reveal how easily prejudice can be codified into law and how those laws can shape public attitudes for generations. As we reflect on this dark chapter in American history, it’s crucial to remember that progress is not inevitable. The fight for a more inclusive, just society requires constant vigilance and a commitment to challenging the biases that still exist.

Signing out, kad

References

1.The Unsightly Beggar Ordinance: The Origins of Ugly Laws - JSTOR

2. Chicago's Ugly Law - Chicago History Museum

1 note · View note

i-love-movie-posters · 11 months ago

Text

Narrow Margin

1990 directed by Peter Hyams

#movie poster

1 note · View note

apokryphonmuseum · 1 year ago

Text

The Sokal Affair

In the world of academia, few incidents have caused as much controversy and debate as the Sokal Affair. Named after physicist and writer Alan Sokal, the affair was a hoax that involved the submission of a bogus academic paper to a leading cultural studies journal.

The 1996 paper, titled "Transgressing the Boundaries: Towards a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity," was intended to expose what Sokal saw as a trend towards postmodernist thinking in academia that he believed had gone too far.

The paper was accepted and published, despite containing an absurd mishmash of scientific jargon, postmodernist buzzwords, and nonsensical claims. Sokal had intentionally written the paper to expose what he saw as a lack of rigor and critical thinking in the humanities, and his actions would spark a heated debate about the nature of truth, knowledge, and the relationship between science and the humanities. This event would become known as the Sokal Affair, and it would go down in history as a defining moment in the culture wars of the late 20th century.

At its core, the Sokal Affair was a scathing critique of postmodernism, a movement that had gained considerable influence in the humanities and social sciences in the decades leading up to the 1990s. Postmodernism rejected the idea of objective truth and instead argued that knowledge was constructed by language and social context. According to postmodernists, science was no more valid than any other form of knowledge, and the scientific method was just one among many ways of understanding the world. This rejection of scientific authority and the privileging of subjective experience over objective facts had made postmodernism a popular target of criticism from scientists and rationalists who saw it as a threat to the scientific enterprise and to the very idea of truth itself.

The Sokal Affair was not the first time that postmodernism had come under attack from the scientific community, but it was perhaps the most high-profile and influential. Sokal's hoax exposed what he saw as the flaws and weaknesses of postmodernist thought and ignited a fierce debate about the nature of truth, knowledge, and the role of science in society. In the years that followed, the Sokal Affair would be studied, analyzed, and debated by academics and scholars from a wide range of fields, and it would continue to shape our understanding of the intersection between science and the humanities.

The Sokal Affair sent shockwaves through the academic world, sparking intense debates about the nature of truth, knowledge, and the role of science in society. In the aftermath of the scandal, Sokal became something of a hero to those who saw him as standing up for scientific rigor and objectivity in the face of postmodernist relativism. Others, however, accused him of being a bully who had unfairly targeted a group of scholars who were already marginalized and struggling for recognition.

Despite the controversy surrounding the Sokal Affair, it had a profound impact on the intellectual landscape of the late 20th century. The debate it sparked helped to clarify and sharpen the arguments for and against postmodernism and paved the way for a new era of interdisciplinary collaboration between scientists and humanists. In some ways, the Sokal Affair can be seen as a turning point in the culture wars of the late 20th century, a moment when the debate over truth and knowledge moved beyond the narrow confines of academic circles and into the broader public sphere.

The Sokal Affair reminds us, whether in the sciences or the humanities, that we must always be willing to subject our beliefs and assumptions to rigorous scrutiny, and we must be willing to change our minds when the evidence demands it. The Sokal Affair may have been a scandal, but it was also a powerful reminder of the importance of intellectual integrity and the pursuit of truth.

0 notes

eishii1 · 1 year ago

Text

Urgency for Equality in the Brandon Teena Story (Reflective Essay)

"How I Broke, and Botched, the Brandon Teena Story," by Donna Minkowitz's takes readers on a captivating intellectual exploration into the intricate web of culture, gender, sex, and law. Minkowitz's meticulous examination reveals the pervasive ignorance and prejudice that engulfed transgender issues during the 1990s, providing invaluable insights into the often-misunderstood and marginalized experiences of transgender individuals. Through her masterful storytelling, she portrays Brandon Teena as a victim ensnared in a society marred by gender identity "confusion," serving as a powerful reminder of the urgent need to challenge stereotypes, foster empathy, and raise awareness about the diverse tapestry of gender identities.

Furthermore, Minkowitz's introspection on her own comprehension of gender adds a profound layer of depth to her narrative. As a cisgender woman, she confronts her initial lack of knowledge and openly admits to holding perceptions that deemed transgender individuals as "inauthentic." However, her personal odyssey of self-discovery dismantles these preconceptions, leading her to question the rigidity of gender constructs and embrace the fluidity and authenticity inherent within every individual's gender identity. This epiphany becomes a poignant reminder that gender defies fixed definitions and exists as a multidimensional spectrum encompassing a vast array of expressions and lived experiences.

In the fabric of Minkowitz's essay, the intricate interplay between gender and sex emerges as a recurring theme. Initially delving into Brandon Teena's assigned "biological" sex as an attempt to comprehend his transgender experience and challenge societal pressure that enforces rigid gender norms, Minkowitz lays bare society's obsession with categorizing individuals solely based on physical attributes. Through her profound analysis, she uncovers the inherent dangers of such an approach, as it often erases an individual's authentic gender identity. Minkowitz's personal growth and exploration lead her to understand that gender identity roots itself in an innate sense of self, effectively challenging the undue emphasis placed on biological determinism. This significant realization prompts a critical examination of the distinction between sex and gender identities, urging society to transcend narrow categorizations and embrace the diverse tapestry of human experiences.

Furthermore, Minkowitz delves deeply into the legal aspects surrounding Brandon Teena's case, unearthing a system marred by systemic failures and deeply ingrained transphobic biases. Her meticulous scrutiny reveals disturbing injustices, ranging from mishandling of evidence to leniency granted to the perpetrators due to pervasive prejudices. These revelations serve as a stark reminder of the urgent necessity for equitable treatment and comprehensive protection of transgender individuals within the legal system. Minkowitz's essay acts as a powerful catalyst for change, shedding light on the flaws and biases that contributed to Brandon Teena's tragic fate and compelling readers to acknowledge the ongoing work required to ensure justice, equality, and inclusivity for marginalized communities.

In conclusion, through her personal journey of growth and introspection, Donna Minkowitz inspires readers to critically examine their own biases, assumptions, and societal norms. Her compelling storytelling acts as a clarion call, urging society to actively cultivate a more inclusive, empathetic, and just world for individuals of all gender identities. By transcending the confines of ignorance and prejudice, Minkowitz's essay invites us to embark on a transformative path towards creating a society that celebrates and embraces the beautiful diversity of human experiences.

0 notes

drew-pinard · 2 years ago

Text

Ozploitation Films

Ozploitation films are exploitation films, a category of low budget horror, comedy, sexploitation and action films made in Australia after the introduction of the R rating in 1971. You may have heard of a few of these or maybe have even seen some yourself, such as Mad Max.

Exploitation film is a type of cinema, often cheaply produced, that is designed to create a fast profit by referring to, or exploiting, contemporary cultural anxieties.” Examples include films about drug use, nudity and strip tease, sexual deviance, rebellious youths or gangs, violence in society, xenophobia, and fear of terrorism or alien invasions. Since the costs of production is so low for these types of films it allows for quick turnarounds, enabling the exploitation film to address issues of high topicality. This also gives the films a ragged and rickety look that often fits the marginality of their topics. One thing you older people may remember especially if you grew up in New York City at the time are Grindhouses. “A small core of urban skid row grindhouses played exploitation films constantly. But the best market for these films consisted of regular theaters, in cities or small towns, that periodically took a break from Hollywood product to play a racy and profitable exploitation movie.” A grindhouse or action house is an American term for a theatre that mainly shows low-budget horror, splatter, and exploitation films for adults. There were named this for the fact that they could bang out movies back-to-back at a very low cost of admission. These movies could be a lot of fun to watch sometimes for the extra use of gore and the fact that they stayed away from what general Hollywood was doing at the time. Ozploitation films peaked during the same time of the Australian new wave. Some of the most popular films at the time include, The Cars That Ate Paris, Road Games, and Long Weekend.

of the most prominent directors at the time where people such as Mark Hartley, Vincent Monton, and Tim Burstall. “Australian horror film production trebled from fewer than 20 films in the 1990s to over 60 films between 2000 and 2008. According to one researcher, "global forces and emerging production and distribution models are challenging the 'narrowness' of cultural policy – a narrowness that mandates a particular film culture, circumscribes certain notions of value and limits the variety of films produced domestically.”

#ozploitation #exploitation #movies

1 note · View note