My vacuum eats your noise

Your awesome Tagline

9,311 notes

I asked seven anthropologists, archaeologists, and historians if they would rather have been a typical Indian or a typical European in 1491. None was delighted by the question, because it required judging the past by the standards of today—a fallacy disparaged as “presentism” by social scientists. But every one chose to be an Indian. Some early colonists gave the same answer. Horrifying the leaders of Jamestown and Plymouth, scores of English ran off to live with the Indians. My ancestor shared their desire, which is what led to the trumped-up murder charges against him—or that’s what my grandfather told me, anyway.

As for the Indians, evidence suggests that they often viewed Europeans with disdain. The Hurons, a chagrined missionary reported, thought the French possessed “little intelligence in comparison to themselves.” Europeans, Indians said, were physically weak, sexually untrustworthy, atrociously ugly, and just plain dirty. (Spaniards, who seldom if ever bathed, were amazed by the Aztec desire for personal cleanliness.) A Jesuit reported that the “Savages” were disgusted by handkerchiefs: “They say, we place what is unclean in a fine white piece of linen, and put it away in our pockets as something very precious, while they throw it upon the ground.” The Micmac scoffed at the notion of French superiority. If Christian civilization was so wonderful, why were its inhabitants leaving?

Like people everywhere, Indians survived by cleverly exploiting their environment. Europeans tended to manage land by breaking it into fragments for farmers and herders. Indians often worked on such a grand scale that the scope of their ambition can be hard to grasp. They created small plots, as Europeans did (about 1.5 million acres of terraces still exist in the Peruvian Andes), but they also reshaped entire landscapes to suit their purposes. A principal tool was fire, used to keep down underbrush and create the open, grassy conditions favorable for game. Rather than domesticating animals for meat, Indians retooled whole ecosystems to grow bumper crops of elk, deer, and bison. The first white settlers in Ohio found forests as open as English parks—they could drive carriages through the woods. Along the Hudson River the annual fall burning lit up the banks for miles on end; so flashy was the show that the Dutch in New Amsterdam boated upriver to goggle at the blaze like children at fireworks. In North America, Indian torches had their biggest impact on the Midwestern prairie, much or most of which was created and maintained by fire. Millennia of exuberant burning shaped the plains into vast buffalo farms. When Indian societies disintegrated, forest invaded savannah in Wisconsin, Illinois, Kansas, Nebraska, and the Texas Hill Country. Is it possible that the Indians changed the Americas more than the invading Europeans did? “The answer is probably yes for most regions for the next 250 years or so” after Columbus, William Denevan wrote, “and for some regions right up to the present time.”

Quoted from the essay "1941" written by Charles C. Mann, about the major impact that Native Americans had on the Americas (ecologically and culturally) before white people invaded, bringing their diseases and shoving Christianity down the Indians’ throats and murdering them and banning their cultures.

Check out the whole piece (which is rather long). (P.S thanks to @cazalis for sending me this great link)

another excerpt:

Human history, in Crosby’s interpretation, is marked by two world-altering centers of invention: the Middle East and central Mexico, where Indian groups independently created nearly all of the Neolithic innovations, writing included. The Neolithic Revolution began in the Middle East about 10,000 years ago. In the next few millennia humankind invented the wheel, the metal tool, and agriculture. The Sumerians eventually put these inventions together, added writing, and became the world’s first civilization. Afterward Sumeria’s heirs in Europe and Asia frantically copied one another’s happiest discoveries; innovations ricocheted from one corner of Eurasia to another, stimulating technological progress. Native Americans, who had crossed to Alaska before Sumeria, missed out on the bounty. “They had to do everything on their own,” Crosby says. Remarkably, they succeeded.

When Columbus appeared in the Caribbean, the descendants of the world’s two Neolithic civilizations collided, with overwhelming consequences for both. American Neolithic development occurred later than that of the Middle East, possibly because the Indians needed more time to build up the requisite population density. Without beasts of burden they could not capitalize on the wheel (for individual workers on uneven terrain skids are nearly as effective as carts for hauling), and they never developed steel. But in agriculture they handily outstripped the children of Sumeria. Every tomato in Italy, every potato in Ireland, and every hot pepper in Thailand came from this hemisphere. Worldwide, more than half the crops grown today were initially developed in the Americas.

Maize, as corn is called in the rest of the world, was a triumph with global implications. Indians developed an extraordinary number of maize varieties for different growing conditions, which meant that the crop could and did spread throughout the planet. Central and Southern Europeans became particularly dependent on it; maize was the staple of Serbia, Romania, and Moldavia by the nineteenth century. Indian crops dramatically reduced hunger, Crosby says, which led to an Old World population boom.

Along with peanuts and manioc, maize came to Africa and transformed agriculture there, too. “The probability is that the population of Africa was greatly increased because of maize and other American Indian crops,” Crosby says. “Those extra people helped make the slave trade possible.” Maize conquered Africa at the time when introduced diseases were leveling Indian societies. The Spanish, the Portuguese, and the British were alarmed by the death rate among Indians, because they wanted to exploit them as workers. Faced with a labor shortage, the Europeans turned their eyes to Africa. The continent’s quarrelsome societies helped slave traders to siphon off millions of people. The maize-fed population boom, Crosby believes, let the awful trade continue without pumping the well dry.

Back home in the Americas, Indian agriculture long sustained some of the world’s largest cities. The Aztec capital of Tenochtitlán dazzled Hernán Cortés in 1519; it was bigger than Paris, Europe’s greatest metropolis. The Spaniards gawped like hayseeds at the wide streets, ornately carved buildings, and markets bright with goods from hundreds of miles away. They had never before seen a city with botanical gardens, for the excellent reason that none existed in Europe. The same novelty attended the force of a thousand men that kept the crowded streets immaculate. (Streets that weren’t ankle-deep in sewage! The conquistadors had never heard of such a thing.) Central America was not the only locus of prosperity. Thousands of miles north, John Smith, of Pocahontas fame, visited Massachusetts in 1614, before it was emptied by disease, and declared that the land was “so planted with Gardens and Corne fields, and so well inhabited with a goodly, strong and well proportioned people … [that] I would rather live here than any where.”

and another excerpt:

In as yet unpublished research the archaeologists Eduardo Neves, of the University of São Paulo; Michael Heckenberger, of the University of Florida; and their colleagues examined terra preta in the upper Xingu, a huge southern tributary of the Amazon. Not all Xingu cultures left behind this living earth, they discovered. But the ones that did generated it rapidly—suggesting to Woods that terra preta was created deliberately. In a process reminiscent of dropping microorganism-rich starter into plain dough to create sourdough bread, Amazonian peoples, he believes, inoculated bad soil with a transforming bacterial charge. Not every group of Indians there did this, but quite a few did, and over an extended period of time.

When Woods told me this, I was so amazed that I almost dropped the phone. I ceased to be articulate for a moment and said things like “wow” and “gosh.” Woods chuckled at my reaction, probably because he understood what was passing through my mind. Faced with an ecological problem, I was thinking, the Indians fixed it. They were in the process of terraforming the Amazon when Columbus showed up and ruined everything.

(via badass-bharat-deafmuslim-artista)

(via celynbrum)

Filed under history native americans

332 notes

Anonymous asked: Man, I actually feel compelled to look up whoever this Alcibiades dude is, you're so into him.

aporeticelenchus:

aporeticelenchus:

VICTORY

MY CUNNING PLAN HAS WORKED

(I probably have an Alcibiades intro post lying around somewhere, let me go check…)

To my deep distress I do not have an Alcibiades intro post lying around (besides the Mean Girls one, which though 100% accurate is perhaps not the most informative), and sadly I’m really busy tonight and don’t have the time for a proper introduction to the dick-smashing, flute-snubbing, spouse-seducing, silverware-stealing, asshole traitor golden-boy rockstar general of 5th Century Athens.

Here are the reeaaallllly basic facts. Alcibiades was raised by Pericles, the most famous politician of classical Athens, which made him obscenely wealthy and well-connected. He was also drop-dead, no-one-can-shut-up-about-it, historians-hundreds-of-years-later-are-still-gossiping-about-it, gorgeous. Unfortunately he also had a terrible temper and a reputation for bad YOLO-esque decisions (go figure).

He came of age during the Peloponnesian War and um, may or may not have sabotaged peace treaties between Athens and Sparta in order to keep the war going so he could win personal honor and glory, depending on whom you ask (tbh it’s plausible). He turned out to be both a wonderfully charismatic orator (despite his sharp tongue and cutesy lisp) and, more importantly, either a fantastically skilled or fantastically lucky (or both?) general, because he basically never lost a battle. As you can imagine, this made him a Person Worth Paying Attention To during the war. To cut a very long story short though, his political enemies accused him of…desecrating religious statues (desecrating is the polite locution usually used instead of “chopping the dicks off of” which I KID YOU NOT WAS THE ACTUAL CHARGE).

Alcibiades is found guilty and given the death sentence, so he flees Athens and moves to Sparta, where he promptly starts winning every battle for them and encouraging revolt among Athenian territories(hey Athens, WHAT DID YOU THINK WAS GOING TO HAPPEN?). Things are going great! Uuuuuuuntil Alcibiades knocks up the queen of Sparta. So he gets back to the fleeing and conquering and sleeping with people he shouldn’t (LIKE THE PERSIAN SATRAP’S BOYFRIEND WOW GREAT THINKING ALCIBIADES) and gets invited back to Athens in desperation and then kicked out AGAIN and basically he managed to be on like three different sides of the Peloponnesian War and got a reputation for being a super successful but not particularly principled general AND IT’S THE GREATEST.

The thing he’s know for besides the backstabbing and battle-winning and royal wife/boyfriend seducing is for being Socrates’ lover. Yes, that Socrates. Alcibiades was allegedly head-over heels for Socrates, which deeply baffled both the Athenian populace and generations of historians since (Alcibiades: hot, rich, ambitious, ruthless politician-in-training. Socrates: ugly weirdo who hates politics and spends his days wandering around the streets asking obnoxious questions about morality). Somehow, against all odds, these two jerks dated, and friends, it was beautiful. Disastrous, but beautiful. This means that Alcibiades turns up somewhat frequently in writings about Socrates, particularly in the Platonic corpus (despite the fact that I’m pretty sure Plato hated his guts).

Seriously though this is not even scratching the surface of his amazing disaster life. I don’t understand why this guy isn’t more talked about among classicists and philosophers and I’m doing my best to personally remedy this tragic oversight.

Filed under greek history history

5,179 notes

the-rehab:

In contrary to my sci-fi background sound post I’m now here to fill your medieval fantasy needs. Perfect for the fantasy writer or artist, and of course for dorks like me that likes to pretend I’m in some fantasy world.
Wear headphones!
RPG Campfire
Dragon’s Lair
Viking ship
Farm sounds
Medieval/fantasy battleground
Tavern by the fireside
Evening Bonfire
Fantasy Orc Camp
Tranquil Village
Sleepy Hollow Woods /Horse riding
Medieval market/festival
Medieval Warfare
RPG Ocean
Town w/ Blacksmith
In Battle
D&D cave background
Approaching an Orc Campfire
Magician’s Temple
Fantasy Sewer
In The Courtyard of the King
Medieval Port City Streets
Mage’s study hall
The Medieval Prison
Tamriel by foot
Ancient Forest Temple
Ambient Medieval/Fantasy Town Sounds
Medieval Tavern Ambience (with music)
Medieval tavern, inn sound effect
Ethmondyre Tavern Ambient
Trademeet (Village, Town, City), Ambient
Medieval city market sound effect
Medieval city sound effect - night
#3. Forest Night Time Sounds (Crickets, Frogs, Owls)
Forest Road Walking steps
Feel free to request themes in my ask box.

the-rehab:

In contrary to my sci-fi background sound post I’m now here to fill your medieval fantasy needs. Perfect for the fantasy writer or artist, and of course for dorks like me that likes to pretend I’m in some fantasy world.

Wear headphones!

Feel free to request themes in my ask box.

(via miggylol)

Filed under dnd rpg music reference resource

22,136 notes

DEBUNKING THE MEN’S RIGHTS MOVEMENT

plansfornigel:

DEBUNKING THE MEN’S RIGHTS MOVEMENT

POSTED BY
DEBUNKINGMRAS

POSTED ON
MARCH 12, 2014

What follows is a response to a popular list of claims and arguments made by men’s rights activists.

1. SUICIDE: Men’s suicide rate is 4.6 times higher than that of women’s. [Dept. Health & Human Services — 26,710 males vs 5,700 females]

Not for lack of trying: women attempt it three times as often. [1] Men are more likely to succeed because we are trained for violence, trained for emotional detachment, and trained to deal with problems ourselves rather than seeking help from others. Moreover, we are socialized with a sense of self-importance that can lead men to believe family members would be better off dead without them or to use suicide as a form of revenge against people close to them. The statistic given here also masks that many of these “suicides” were actually murder-suicides. In the United States, an estimated 1,000 to 1,500 people died in suicide attacks each year. [2] More than ninety percent of the offenders are men; nearly all the victims are female. [3]

2. LIFE EXPECTANCY: Men’s life expectancy is seven (7) years shorter than women’s [National Center for Health Statistics — males 72.3 yrs vs females 79 yrs] yet receive only 35% of government expenditures for health care and medical costs.

This is a curious statement. If women live seven years longer than men, it should be obvious why they receive more health support: because the oldest people in society are those that most need subsidized health support, and the oldest people are predominantly women. Furthermore, the insurance industry charges $1 billion a year more to women in health insurance each year for the same coverage plans men receive [4], and up to 53% more for the same individual coverage plan [5], despite women’s overall better health and despite receiving 23% less income then men. [6]

3. WAR: Men are almost exclusively the only victims of war [Dept. Defense — Vietnam Casualties 47,369 men vs 74 women]

The first thing to say is that if trained soldiers sent to engage in imperial wars of aggression can be called “victims” at all, then they are victims of those responsible for the wars in which they fought. And those responsible are men. All Presidents and Vice Presidents have been men. All members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff have been men. Both branches of Congress have always been dominated by men. Polls since Vietnam show that men have been the ones to support going to war, and the ones most likely to support wars currently in progress. [7] On every level of analysis it is men who are responsible for war, and to somehow blame male combat deaths on women is not only absurd, but insane. If we want to stop these deaths, we need to stop those who are responsible for them: the male politicians, male military personnel, male war contractors, and male warmongers who perpetuate them.

The second thing to say is that this is simply a lie. A study by researchers at the Harvard Medical School looking at wars in 13 countries, including the Vietnam War, found that of the 5.4 million people violently killed, more than 1 million were female. [8] This figure does not account for those women killed less directly through aerial spraying, inflicted poverty, or as the result of sexual torture by men. This also ignores male sexual violence during wartime. In Vietnam, for instance, it was common and accepted practice for soldiers to gang rape women and young girls, as well to kill a female following a rape. [9] Such was the frequency of the latter that the term “double veteran” was coined to refer to such perpetrators. [10]

4. WORKPLACE FATALITIES: Men account for more than 95% of all workplace fatalities.

The figure is 92% as of 2012. One important reason for this discrepancy is that men are inclined to select work that is dangerous in order to prove their masculinity to women, to other men, and to themselves. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the most dangerous professions in the United States are construction, transportation, and warehousing, all of which are male-dominated professions. [11] Men’s relative risk of danger is further increased through a relative lack of safety compliance. [12] Tellingly, the most common way for a woman to die in the workplace is to be murdered. [11]

5. MURDER: Men are murdered at a rate almost 5 times that of women. [Dept. Health & Human Services — 26,710 men vs 5,700 women]

Men also murder at a rate more than 9 times that of women. That men are often killed by other men is not a problem that women are responsible for. I can hardly imagine why that even needs to be said. In the United States in 2010, 1,095 women were killed by husbands or boyfriends, accounting for 37.5% of female murders. By contrast, only 241 men were killed by their female partners. [13] The smallness of this figure is particularly striking when we consider that 200,000 women in the United States suffer serious violence from male partners each year. [14]

6. CHILD CUSTODY: Women receive physical custody of 92% of all children of separation, and men only 4%. [Department of Health & Human Services]

91% of the time, custody is agreed upon or settled by parents themselves, usually without outside mediation. Mothers are more likely to receive custody because both parents usually understand that it is in the best interests of their children. In married two-partner households, women spend nearly twice as much time doing child care as their male partners. [15] Only 4% of custody cases go to trial and only 1.5% are resolved there. [16] In disputed custody cases, fathers win custody 70% of the time, [17] despite abusive men being among those most likely to fight for custody. [18]

7. JURY BIAS: Women are acquitted of spousal murder at a rate 9 times that of men [Bureau Justice Statistics — 1.4% of men vs 12.9% of women]

This is not a matter of “bias”: women are sometimes acquitted of murdering their husbands because their husbands abused them or their children. It is estimated that 1.3 million women are beaten by male partners in the United States every year, putting them in fear for their lives. [18] Every one of these women would be justified in killing her spouse or partner and receiving an acquittal. It is exceptionally rare for any man to experience a comparable level of terroristic threat from his wife.

8. COURT BIAS: Men are sentenced 2.8 times longer than women for spousal murder [Bureau Justice Statistics — men at 17 years vs women at 6 years]

As per above, many women receive lighter sentences for killing their husbands because their purpose in doing so was to stop physical abuse against themselves or their children.

9. JUSTICE SYSTEM BIAS: Women are assessed for Child Support on average at half the rate of men, yet are twice as likely to default on Child Support payments. Ninety Seven (97%) of all child support prosecutions are against fathers. [Census Bureau]

Women are assessed less often than men and default more often because women aged 18-35 have on average $0 in net worth. Many mothers simply have no means to pay child support. By comparison, white men of the same age have a median wealth of $5,600, and men of color have $1,000. [20] This wealth discrepancy also pressures young mothers who care for the welfare of their children to prosecute men for child support.

10. DOMESTIC VIOLENCE: Numerous credible studies from independent researchers report that women are the initiators of domestic violence in 58% of all cases, and cause physical abuse in almost 50% of all cases, yet women only account for 6% of all criminal proceedings in such matters.

It’s telling that you speak of “numerous credible studies” and carefully avoid citing any of them. I tried to find studies from any source making such claims, with no success. What I did find is the most recent report by the US Department of Justice, which found women suffer 805,700 physical injuries at the hands of partners each year, compared to 173,960 men. Moreover, the injuries suffered by women were more than twice as likely to be considered “serious”, defined as including sexual violence, gunshot and knife wounds, internal injuries, unconsciousness, and broken bones. To put that another way, partners inflicted 104,741 serious injuries on women, compared with less than 9,400 inflicted on men, a greater than 11:1 ratio. [14] Even those men who have been subject to partner violence have usually not taken it seriously. According to a study by researchers at the Medical College of Wisconsin, they were “significantly more likely than were women to laugh at partner-initiated violence”, while women “reported more fear, anger, and insult and less amusement when their partners were violent.” [21] It’s also worth noting that a number of these male injuries were incurred by male rather than female partners; according to a 2000 Department of Justice report, men living with male partners are at nearly twice the risk of “serious” violence as those living with women. [22] If women really are criminally prosecuted in 6% of domestic violence cases, then that figure sounds eminently reasonable.

11. CHILD VIOLENCE: Mothers commit 55% of all child murders and biological fathers commit 6%. NIS-3 indicates that Mother-only households are 3 times more fatal to children than Father-only households. Despite these compelling figures, children are systematically removed from the natural fathers who are their most effective protectors.

The first sentence is unsourced and not credible. According to one group of filicide [child murder] researchers:

Although some studies have noted that mothers commit filicide more often than fathers, other research has shown that paternal filicide is as common or more common than maternal filicide.

Reports of a higher proportion of maternal filicides most likely reflect the inclusion of neonaticides in some studies. [23]

In other words, there is no agreement as to whether mothers or fathers are more likely to kill their own children, but when mothers are seen as more likely, it is likely because infanticides are included in the results. According to the above researchers, the main motivation “may be the undesirability of the child,” and mothers under the age of 20 with a previous child are among those most likely to engage in such a murder. Young mothers without sufficient economic, family, or medical support may find there are no better options for themselves or for their other children. By contrast, fathers who kill their children are “often perpetrators of fatal-abuse filicide”, meaning that they batter their children to death. Some of the most common motivations for father filicide are “attempts to control the child’s behavior, and misinterpretation of the child’s behavior”. [23]

I’ve recently obtained a copy of the NIS-3 study, and while Table 5-4 does indeed provide data indicating that “Mother-only households are 3 times more fatal to children than Father-only households,” the provided footnote also says explicitly that the difference is either statistically insignificant or marginal, with p-values above 0.10. What that means is that the numbers, while provided, are statistically worthless and cannot be used to even hint at inferences. Meanwhile, the data from the NIS-3 regarding parental households that is statistically valid paints a very different picture. In every category, father-only households put children at a higher risk of harm than mother-only households. Risk of abuse is 71% higher, including a 68% greater chance of physical abuse. Risk of neglect is 28% higher, including a 32% rise for physical neglect, 67% rise for emotional neglect, and 14% rise for educational neglect. Risk of both moderate or serious injury is 40% higher.

That this is true is particularly exceptional when we pair this with data from the more recent NIS-4 study which found that households with a lower socioeconomic status were nearly 7 times more likely to involve neglect, including a nearly ninefold risk of physical neglect. Overally the safety of children in these households was classified as 5.7 times more severe than those of a higher socioeconomic background. [24] Single women with children are far more likely than men to live under conditions of severe poverty: both black and Hispanic women with children under age 18 have an average median wealth of $0, compared to $10,960 for black men and $2,400 for Hispanic men; white women with children have an average median wealth of $7,970, compared to an average of $56,100 for white men. [20] If economic justice for women was sufficiently advanced, we would expect the safety of mother-only households illustrated by the NIS-3 to increase still further. Given this information, to call fathers the “most effective protectors” of children is a hateful turn of phrase, suggesting that mothers wish harm on their children and only fathers can protect them. This in spite of the reality that children are far safer in the custody of their mothers than their fathers.

12. WEALTH: Women hold 65% of the total wealth in the USA [Fortune Magazine]

This is a ridiculous lie, and to their credit I can find no evidence that Fortune Magazine ever made such a claim.

Contrary to this claim, one Harvard University researcher found that men have an average net worth of $26,850, compared to an average of $12,900 for women. [25] That is to say, men on average hold more than twice the wealth of women.

References

[1] http://www.afsp.org/understanding-suicide/facts-and-figures
[2] http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/07/21/murder-suicides-are-in-a-class-by-themselves/2572133/
[3] http://www.jaapl.org/content/37/3/371.long
[4] http://www.nwlc.org/press-release/new-nwlc-report-discriminatory-health-insurance-practices-cost-women-1-billion-year
[5] http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/19/health/policy/women-still-pay-more-for-health-insurance-data-shows.html?scp=1&sq=women%20insurance%20costs&st=cse
[6] http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/03/07/the-wage-gap-between-men-and-women-has-grown-during-the-recovery/
[7] http://www.gallup.com/poll/7243/gender-gap-varies-support-war.aspx
[8] http://www.bmj.com/content/336/7659/1482
[9] Nick Turse, Kill Anything That Moves: The Real American War in Vietnam, pages 164-171
[10] http://www.waywordradio.org/double_veteran_1/
[11] http://pro.sagepub.com/content/41/2/1283.short
[12] http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfoi/cfch0011.pdf
[13] http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/expanded/expandhomicidemain
[14] http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/ipvav9311.pdf
[15] http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2011/06/15/a-tale-of-two-fathers/
[16] http://www.divorcepeers.com/stats18.htm#fn%201
[17] Joan Zorza, “Batterer manipulation and retaliation compounded by denial and complicity in the family courts” In M.T. Hannah & B. Goldstein (editors), Domestic violence, abuse and child custody: Legal strategies and policy issues
[18] http://www.nnflp.org/apa/issue5.html
[19] http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/ipvbook-a.pdf
[20] http://www.insightcced.org/uploads/CRWG/LiftingAsWeClimb-WomenWealth-Report-InsightCenter-Spring2010.pdf
[21] http://vaw.sagepub.com/content/8/11/1301.short
[22] https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/181867.pdf
[23] http://www.jaapl.org/content/35/1/74.full.pdf+html
[24] http://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/opre/nis4_report_congress_full_pdf_jan2010.pdf
[25] http://citation.allacademic.com//meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/1/0/9/2/6/pages109260/p109260-1.php

This synopsis was written by Owen Lloyd, a stay-at-home dad living on the Oregon coast. Hate mail can be addressed to him at owen.lloyd@gmail.com.

http://debunkingmras.wordpress.com/2014/03/12/debunking-the-mens-rights-movement-x/

(via roachpatrol)

Filed under feminsim reference

67,751 notes

gehayi:

queenofeden:

perplexingly:

Daughter of a gun (ノ´ヮ´)ノ*:・゚✧ No idea if such a thing existed but surely there had to be girls born on board in the Age of Sail?

*puts on obnoxious historian hat*
*clears throat*
there were actually tons of women and girls on board ships during the age of sail and it’s really cool history that no one!!! ever!!! talks about!!! 
like captains of merchant ships used to bring their wives and children on board for long voyages all the time (and of course there were plenty of well known female pirate ship captains, and women cross-dressing as men, and prostitutes that more people seem to know of)
there’s actually a really amazing story of one woman, Mary Ann Patten who was the wife of the captain of this ship called Neptune’s Car. Captain Patten decided that he wanted her onboard with him and she was super about this and learned all about navigation and sailing and everything. so this one voyage they’re going around the tip of south america when her husband gets sick and is bed ridden with a fever right as the ship sails into one of the worst storms any of the crew had ever seen and it looks like they might lose the ship or have to stop
so you know who takes over??? the first mate??? 
no.
MARY
she took over the whole crew and sailed that ship through freezing water and pack ice and had it coasting smoothly into the san francisco harbour like it was nothing. and she did this all at age 19. while pregnant.
at one point the first mate tried to get the crew to mutiny against her but they all rallied with her and told him to shut the heck up because she obv knew what she was doing.
there’s a great book about women in the age of sail called ‘female tars’ by suzanne stark that i cannot recommend enough and has way more amazing stories and insights about the myriad roles women and girls played aboard ship during that time period.
(sorry i totally didn’t mean to hijack your post i love all of your art and this is gorgeous i just got over excited sorry sorry sorry)

We need links!
Female Tars: Women Aboard Ship in the Age of Sail by Suzanne Stark
Hen Frigates: Passion and Peril, Nineteenth-Century Women at Sea by Joan Druett
Hen Frigates: Wives of Merchant Captains Under Sail by Joan Druett
Iron Men, Wooden Women: Gender and Seafaring in the Atlantic World, 1700-1920 edited by Margaret S. Creighton and Lisa Norling
Petticoat Whalers: Whaling Wives at Sea, 1820-1920 by Joan Druett
Sea Queens: Women Pirates Around the World by Jane Yolen
Seafaring Women: Pirate Queens, Female Stowaways and Sailors’ Wives by David Cordingly
The Captain’s Best Mate: The Journal of Mary Chipman Lawrence on the Whaler Addison, 1856-1860 by Mary Chipman Lawrence
Women Sailors and Sailors’ Women: An Untold Maritime History by David Cordingly

gehayi:

queenofeden:

perplexingly:

Daughter of a gun (ノ´ヮ´)ノ*:・゚✧ No idea if such a thing existed but surely there had to be girls born on board in the Age of Sail?

*puts on obnoxious historian hat*

*clears throat*

there were actually tons of women and girls on board ships during the age of sail and it’s really cool history that no one!!! ever!!! talks about!!! 

like captains of merchant ships used to bring their wives and children on board for long voyages all the time (and of course there were plenty of well known female pirate ship captains, and women cross-dressing as men, and prostitutes that more people seem to know of)

there’s actually a really amazing story of one woman, Mary Ann Patten who was the wife of the captain of this ship called Neptune’s Car. Captain Patten decided that he wanted her onboard with him and she was super about this and learned all about navigation and sailing and everything. so this one voyage they’re going around the tip of south america when her husband gets sick and is bed ridden with a fever right as the ship sails into one of the worst storms any of the crew had ever seen and it looks like they might lose the ship or have to stop

so you know who takes over??? the first mate??? 

no.

MARY

she took over the whole crew and sailed that ship through freezing water and pack ice and had it coasting smoothly into the san francisco harbour like it was nothing. and she did this all at age 19. while pregnant.

at one point the first mate tried to get the crew to mutiny against her but they all rallied with her and told him to shut the heck up because she obv knew what she was doing.

there’s a great book about women in the age of sail called ‘female tars’ by suzanne stark that i cannot recommend enough and has way more amazing stories and insights about the myriad roles women and girls played aboard ship during that time period.

(sorry i totally didn’t mean to hijack your post i love all of your art and this is gorgeous i just got over excited sorry sorry sorry)

We need links!

Female Tars: Women Aboard Ship in the Age of Sail by Suzanne Stark

Hen Frigates: Passion and Peril, Nineteenth-Century Women at Sea by Joan Druett

Hen Frigates: Wives of Merchant Captains Under Sail by Joan Druett

Iron Men, Wooden Women: Gender and Seafaring in the Atlantic World, 1700-1920 edited by Margaret S. Creighton and Lisa Norling

Petticoat Whalers: Whaling Wives at Sea, 1820-1920 by Joan Druett

Sea Queens: Women Pirates Around the World by Jane Yolen

Seafaring Women: Pirate Queens, Female Stowaways and Sailors’ Wives by David Cordingly

The Captain’s Best Mate: The Journal of Mary Chipman Lawrence on the Whaler Addison, 1856-1860 by Mary Chipman Lawrence

Women Sailors and Sailors’ Women: An Untold Maritime History by David Cordingly

(via mercurialmalcontent)

Filed under pirates history feminism reference resource writing

4,136 notes

koryos:

Dominance Behavior in Canids

I didn’t really even WANT to make a post about this.

The alpha-beta-omega model of wolf packs is dead in scientific literature, hammered into the ground, so to speak, and it’s been dead for over ten years. So why am I still hearing about it on TV and reading about it in articles? Why are popular dog trainers that encourage you to “be the alpha” still taken seriously?

I think the unfortunate truth is that the idea that there are strong and ferocious leaders in wolf packs and that you, too, can take on that role with your dog is just somehow appealing to people. Almost romantic, in the older sense of the word. And because of this, it makes money. It sells werewolf media. It sells dog training classes. Educational science channels that have no business promoting this false ideology keep it on board because it gets people watching.

If you couldn’t tell, I’m pretty fed up with the whole thing.

Okay, let’s talk about dominance, particularly what the word even means, because popular media does a terrible job of explaining it.

Read more…

Filed under wolves dominance writing reference

58,769 notes

roachpatrol:

voxclara:

savanna:

roman-numerals:

yiffstrider:

amporeon:

terraparticle:

amporeon:

IMPORTANT: So they had these cards in the women’s restrooms at this doctor’s office that I was at. I’m really happy that they put them in there because it makes it easier for a woman to escape an abusive relationship without the abuser expecting anything. It gives me hope when I see things like this.

Oh yes, because women are never abusers.

I never said that they can’t/ aren’t. I’m well aware that some women are. I was just trying to talk about a positive thing that I found in a restroom. Don’t turn my post into something that it’s not. God fucking damn it, it’s like you can’t talk about something positive on this site without someone trying to ruin it or twist the original posters words.

Thank you so much for the positive post, and the VERY true words at the asshole commenting on your post. This is the exact reason why I don’t like this website sometimes. Christ.

If you have to qualify Situation A with “but Situation B happens, too,” do you actually give a shit about Situation B? Or are you looking for ways to derail Situation A?

^

40% of domestic violence is experienced by men, do you suppose they also put these cards in the men’s restroom?

Wouldn’t seeing these cards in the restroom alert abusers that there were probably the same cards in the other gender restroom, possibly making them more violent and cutting off their partner even more from resources that could help them?

This seems ill thought out. Unless, of course, they are only in the women’s restroom. In which case they are ignoring 40% of domestic violence victims. I wonder why.

getting really tired of this 40% myth and how frequently everyone scrambles to believe it because they want to look reasonable and fair.

While some people may believe that there is a higher reported incidence of women experiencing violence by their male partners due to men underreporting when they are victims, the reality is the opposite. In 2008, 72 percent of the intimate partner violence against males and 49 percent of the intimate partner violence against females was reported to police.Catalano, Smith, Snyder, & Rand (2009). Bureau of Justice Statistics Selected Findings: Female Victims of Domestic Violence. U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, NCJ 228356.

Researcher Elspeth McInnes…  recounts some of her research that showed that when men talked about women’s violence against men, some cited abuse as not having a hot meal on the table, not having the children bathed before bed, or women spending money on gambling or shopping. At the more severe end of the spectrum, they nominated verbal and emotional violence as abuse. Then, a tiny minority documented physical abuse, and an even smaller minority named sexual abuse. 

“Women were talking about being run over, being drugged and raped at knifepoint, having their children dangled over high rise balconies till they did as they were told and of course you get verbal and emotional violence,” says McInnes. “When we were talking about physical violence against men, one of the worst examples was that she banged his head with the cupboard door – which isn’t good – but the sheer level of fear, harm and terror that women talked about was simply not present in what the men’s data showed.” 

The vast majority of domestic assaults are committed by men. Even when men are victimized, 10% are assaulted by another man. In contrast, only 2% of women who are victimized are assaulted by another woman.2

Two studies have found that at least 40% of police officer families experience domestic violence, (1, 2) in contrast to 10% of families in the general population.(3) A third study of older and more experienced officers found a rate of 24% (4), indicating that domestic violence is 2-4 times more common among police families than American families in general.

in conclusion while domestic abuse hotlines in men’s bathrooms would be great too, women are the majority of victims of violent, life-threatening domestic abuse by a lot more than 40%, and men are still the majority of perpetrators of violent, life threatening domestic abuse, even to other men and boys. this is not a remotely equivalent situation.

using abused men and boys to prop up the myth that women abuse men right back nearly as much is toxic, abhorrent nonsense. we need to cut it the fuck out. 

Filed under feminism domestic abuse reblogging for commentary

2,203 notes

Spelled with a "K": "So You Want To Work With Autistic Kids" Primer

jack-not-jacque:

Hi everyone, so I made a post a few days ago about putting together a list of links for my lab partner, who wants to work with autistic children. This is what I’ve come up with. Admittedly it’s more of an “introduction to neurodiversity advocacy” primer, but I think that should come with the job, really. If you’ve got any suggestions, do let me know!

(And sorry for the odd formatting- I can’t for the life of me figure out how to make nesting bullets, even when I enter the html)

TW: mentions (but no discussion in this post) of ableism, neglect, assault, murder, abuse, ABA. All links come with their own warnings unless otherwise noted. If you find one that doesn’t, or is broken, please tell me.

About Autism Speaks:

1. Rose’s master post

General Autism:

1. About autism
2. What it really means when someone says they’re autistic
3. Diagnostic criteria suggested by autistic people (more on what it’s like to be autistic)
4. Yes, That Too’s tips for parents
5. What I Wish I’d Been Made Aware of When My Daughter Was Diagnosed With Autism
6. Tantrums vs meltdowns and shutdowns
7. Stimming
8. Not an epidemic
9. Empathy and the Empath Quotient Test
10. Functioning labels
11. Person-first language
12. Cures
13. Ableism

“Classics” and others widely circulated among autistic self-advocates:

1. The Obsessive Joy of Autism
2. Don’t Mourn For Us
3. Quiet Hands and Grabbers (TW: ableism, abuse, R-slur in Grabbers)
4. The Cost of Compliance is Unreasonable (TW for teachers forcing a child to do something they don’t want to do, huge TW for link within post)

  • Similar, but not so widely spread, is The Influence of Others, a parent’s reaction to “Grabbers” (TW: ableism, abuse)

Therapy:

1. An Analogy (TW: trying to force someone out of autistic behavior)
2. On forcing eye contact
3. Doing “Nothing”
4. The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly: my Assessment of Our Experience with ABA
5. More of Rose’s thoughts

  • The post linked in the above (she changed her blog title, so “caffeinatedaspie” URL links don’t work)

6. An Open Letter to Parents Considering Intensive Behavioral Therapy for Their Child With Autism (TW: detailed descriptions of ABA methods, child’s PTSD)

  • And Part Two (the link kind of gets lost at the bottom, so I put it here too)
  • As disgusting as it is, a lot of people dismiss autistic voices on the topic of harmful therapy in favor of parents’ and child development professionals’ voices. The writers of this are both, so it may be useful to convince people with that attitude

7. A list of posts by others (I haven’t read these)
8. And more

Ableism (important to understand the prejudice autistic people face): (TW for ableism, neglect, assault, murder on this entire section)

1. Murders by parents and caregivers
2. Commentary on other people’s dismissal of murders
3. Transplant discrimination
4. Medical discrimination
5. The Pillow Angel (not autism, cerebral palsy, but important to recognize what people will do out of “concern” to a non-speaking person)

Books:

1. Loud Hands: Autistic People, Speaking

2. And Straight On Till Morning: Essays on Autism Acceptance
3. I Love Being My Own Autistic Self: a thAutoons Book
4. The Thinking Person’s Guide to Autism
5. Yes, That Too’s book list

Films:

1. Wretches and Jabberers

Autistic Self Advocacy Network (ASAN):

1. ASAN website
2. Their “Autism Acceptance Month” PSA
3. One of their videos (and amazing commentary about nonverbal communication at the bottom)

Good Blogs:

1. The Caffeinated Autistic (also goldenheartedrose on tumblr)
2. Yes, That Too (also yesthattoo on tumblr)
3. Autistic Hoya
4. Just Stimming
5. Radical Neurodivergence Speaking
6. Tiny Grace Notes (AKA Ask an Autistic)
7. ThAutcast
8. The Thinking Person’s Guide to Autism

Things recommended by people I follow (but that I haven’t really looked at personally):

1. Rose’s favorite blogs
2. Rose’s resource list
3. Yes, That Too’s list

Other resources:

1. The ‘askanautistic’ tag on tumblr- tag your post with this and autistic people who are willing to educate others will see your question

(via jumpingjacktrash)

Filed under autism resource reference

109,745 notes

jumpingjacktrash:

you know, a few of these — stand too close or far away, repeat words from their sentence, look at a point on their face that’s not their eyes — are things autistic people sometimes do.

apparently my disability counts as a prank. neat.

(Source: poyzn)

Filed under writing reference idea

171,175 notes

rifa:

maxkirin:

So, let me guess— you just started a new book, right? And you’re stumped. You have no idea how much an AK47 goes for nowadays. I get ya, cousin. Tough world we live in. A writer’s gotta know, but them NSA hounds are after ya 24/7. I know, cousin, I know. If there was only a way to find out all of this rather edgy information without getting yourself in trouble…

You’re in luck, cousin. I have just the thing for ya.

It’s called Havocscope. It’s got information and prices for all sorts of edgy information. Ever wondered how much cocaine costs by the gram, or how much a kidney sells for, or (worst of all) how much it costs to hire an assassin?

I got your back, cousin. Just head over to Havocscope.

((PS: In case you’re wondering, Havocscope is a database full of information regarding the criminal underworld. The information you will find there has been taken from newspapers and police reports. It’s perfectly legal, no need to worry about the NSA hounds, cousin ;p))

Want more writerly content? Follow maxkirin.tumblr.com!

HELLO

(via celynbrum)

Filed under writing reference resource

335,611 notes

puckling:

thatpersonyoutalkto:

bowlingalleymomma:

ourlifewithneo-x:

Some of these are real good, gonna have to try them. 

I love this

The person who’ll get the tooth fairy money though

For reasons that are unknown to me my parents decided to add sprinkles to mashed potatoes when we were little. I was 10 before I figured out that was kinda not the way most people ate mashed potatoes.

Also $5 a tooth? Damn, there’s been some tooth inflation since last I did that.

ETA Courtesy of my mother: You wouldn’t eat them, so I added sprinkles and you gobbled them up. Same for string beans, but a slightly different story of having a party in your belly. 

Filed under childcare children