pinkcookiedimples:

lagiaconde:

jaimie foxx wears a trayvon martin shirt to the BET awards.

the headlines:

image

image

image

macklemore mentions trayvon martin during his acceptance speech at the AMA awards.

the headlines:

image

image

image

the message: PoC are racist crybabies until a white knight notices the issue and plays champion.

This isn’t even surprising

(via marinashutup)

We need to talk about Anne Frank

historicity-was-already-taken:

As of this writing, John Green’s The Fault in Our Stars has sold over one million copies, and holds a place on several bestseller lists. The film adaptation of the book has made over two hundred million dollars in the domestic and foreign market. The book and the movie tell the story of two terminally ill American teenagers, and both contain a scene where the protagonists, Hazel and Augustus, share a kiss in the Anne Frank House. John Green made the following statement regarding the scene:

“Anne Frank was a pretty good example of a young person who ended up having the kind of heroic arc that Augustus wants—she was remembered and she left this mark that he thinks is valuable—but when he has to confront her death, he has to confront the reality that really she was robbed of the opportunity to live or die for something. She just died of illness like most people. And so I wanted him to go with a sort of expectation of her heroism and be sort of dashed.”

Here, Green makes it clear that he reads Anne Frank’s death as being from an illness like “most people,” like his protagonist. In doing so, he erases the circumstances under which she contracted typhus. “Most people” are not Ashkenazic Jewish teenage girls who contracted typhus in a concentration camp during the Holocaust. This fundamental erasure of the context of her death allowed him, those involved in the cinematic adaptation, and yes, a large portion of his readership, to accept the use of Anne Frank and her death as a prop in this American YA love story. Indeed, when further called on the issue, Green stated:

“I’ve been getting this question a lot. I can’t speak for the movie, obviously, as I didn’t make it, but as for the book: The Fault in Our Stars was the first non-documentary feature film to be granted access to the Anne Frank House precisely because the House’s board of directors and curators liked that scene in the novel a great deal. (A spokesperson recently said, ‘In the book it is a moving and sensitively handled scene.’) Abraham H. Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League and a Holocaust survivor, had this to say: ‘The kissing scene in ‘The Fault in Our Stars’ in the annex of the Anne Frank House is not offensive or against who Anne Frank was. What Anne communicated in her diary was hope. She celebrated life and she celebrated hope.’ Obviously, the Anne Frank House and the ADL do not have a monopoly on Anne’s life or her legacy, but their opinions are important to me.”

I take issue with this response. Here, Green is divesting himself of responsibility for the scene, and communicating to his critics that he is not to blame, because the Anne Frank House board of directors, curators, and a Holocaust survivor approved of it. In other words, he is drawing these peoples’ assumed authority to silence criticism, and to avoid taking responsibility for the filmed version of a scene he created.

The Anne Frank House, for all the wonderful work it does, is a museum. Like all museums, it must work to attract and reach out to potential patrons. In other words, museums have to advertise because they require patrons and revenues to exist. Therefore, I read the official approval of the Anne Frank House simply as a targeted attempt to reach out to and attract a pool of untapped, younger patrons. They chose to support the filming of a sympathetic romantic scene about terminally ill teenagers in their institution to reach out to young people. While that is a sound business decision, I would argue that it’s hardly an ethical one for the Anne Frank House, an institution devoted, as per their website, to:

“the preservation of the place where Anne Frank went into hiding during the Second World War, and to bringing the life story of Anne Frank to the attention of as many people as possible worldwide with the aim of raising awareness of the dangers of anti-Semitism, racism and discrimination and the importance of freedom, equal rights and democracy,”

to support the filming of this scene. For, in Green’s own words, that scene had nothing to do with the context of Anne Frank’s death, and therefore, it did nothing to bring Anne Frank’s story to life. And it hardly raises awareness of contemporary European anti-Semitism.

As for the ADL, I very much agree with Mr. Foxman’s assessment of Anne Frank. However, what she celebrated in her life and her writings have little to do with what she has come to mean in within public memory of the Holocaust of European Jewry. Her narrative has been used by nations and educational systems to the extent that for many, she is the Holocaust; she is the face of the Holocaust. But what we inherit from her isn’t the experience of the Holocaust. That experience, and her death at Bergen Belsen take place outside the pages of her diary. Readers are never forced to experience the Holocaust through her eyes; they are able to embrace the tragedy of the Holocaust through her story while remaining removed from its experiential realities. Thus, Anne Frank becomes the Holocaust without forcing anyone to experience it. Her name can be invoked to summon tragedy, without forcing anyone to feel it.

While Anne Frank may be the face of the Holocaust of European Jewry, the memory of the experiential reality of the Holocaust is male. The way we conceptualize and remember the concentration camp experience is constructed by male narratives. More Jewish men survived the Holocaust than Jewish women. Due to attitudes towards education in the interwar period, more male Jewish survivors had the education and literary capital needed to craft enduring narratives of their experiences than did female Jewish survivors. There are three foundational male Holocaust survival narratives: Night by Elie Wiesel, Survival in Auschwitz by Primo Levi, and Maus by Art Spiegelman about his father’s Holocaust experience. Never have I seen those three men and their narratives used as a joke, or a meme, or a cheap narrative device, or as self-promotion by an American pop star.

These men are revered, and their narratives taken extremely seriously. And none of them, none of them have been used in a prop in a story about terminally ill gentile American teenagers. They survived, in perhaps the type of heroic arc a John Green protagonist would yearn for. Yet Augustus doesn’t look to them. He doesn’t share a kiss with his girlfriend at Auschwitz. He shared a kiss with her in the Anne Frank House.

Anne Frank is not a prop. She is not a symbol, she is not a teenager who happened to die of an illness, and she is not one of the canonical Jewish male survivors. She is one of many millions of Jewish women and girls who were industrially murdered like livestock, incinerated, and left in an unmarked grave. That is the story of the Holocaust of European Jewry, and that is the story of the persecution and murder of all Europeans (the disabled, Romani, Irish Travelers, homosexuals, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Communists) who failed to fit into Nazi racial and ideological constructs.

And we would all do well to remember that.

If you choose to reblog, please reblog as text (link leads to visual guide of how to do so). Thank you!

frequently asked questions
ask historicity-was-already-taken a question

Language Police

racismschool:

This is a systematically encouraged way to stop engaging in a conversation when you know you are going to lose the argument. Once you have started your policing, you can then blame the other person for being “Angry” or “Not nice.” If your entire point of contention is that of a kind word, you should never engage with anyone, anywhere, at any time. 

Language policing is a trick used by the weak minded. Nothing more. Nothing less.

This is easily provable. Keep an eye on discussions that cross your dash. Note the next time someone does some form of Language Policing. Did they do it near the beginning of the conversation and make their rules of engagement clear? No, it’s far more likely that they were in the belief that they were correct in whatever their view point. Once it was challenged and on it’s way to being proven false, the policing appeared. 

I see several problems with Language Policing:

  • Who sets these rules?
  • If the rules are not mutually agreed upon by all parties, the rules are null and void.
  • Language policing implies that a person’s point is somehow less valid if said in a tone or in a phrase that someone else deems unacceptable. 
  • Anger does not stop truth from being true. Nor do angry words, loud voices or the Caps Lock key. 

Language Policing implies that one person is on a higher level than another based solely on wording. You can not claim to want to engage in discourse while announcing that you are better than those that oppose you. You can not have a conversation, one that you deem “Civil” or otherwise, while also believing that you somehow have the intellectual high ground based on nothing more than a turn of phrase.

As a matter of fact, I tend to believe the opposite true.  Language policing seems to encompass one of two justifications. One, that a person will somehow be more willing to accept what you are saying if you say it with a smile. Two, that anger is a sign of a lessor being and because of this, that person no longer deserves your “Time.”

An actual intellectual can make their point. Period. No matter your word usage, no matter your kindness or anger. A person that has an actual point, can make it no matter their opposition or the tone their opposition uses. Facts, opinions and even judgments are no more or less valid or invalid if said with a “Fuck you” attached. 

If you were to smile and kindly tell me that I am pretty while also hitting me in the face with a wooden bat, my nose wouldn’t be any less broken. Any pain caused, wouldn’t be lessened and my anger wouldn’t be any less valid because you were “Nice” while you did it. 

Kindness does not eliminate truth. Anger does not eliminate truth.

If you find that you need a person to speak to you in a specific way in order to converse with them at all, you should make that known before you get into any discourse. That way, when the person reminds you that you do not get to dictate actions or emotions, you will know that this person is not someone you can control and you can move on to someone who will fall for your act.

That is what it’s about after all. Control. Your need to “Police” language is an effort to make your opposition seem “Less than” while setting yourself up as the “All knowing” director of the conversation. You are trying to force your way into having the upper hand. If your point is a valid one, you won’t need to police anyone, ever.

No one person get’s this power over another. If you feel you deserve this, you should remove yourself from all verbal/written human contact. 

Black Women and Twerking: Why Its Creators Face Bigotry That Miley Cyrus Never Will

gradientlair:

Twerking, just like everything else that is specifically known to Black women is the latest thing for Whites to try to appropriate while simultaneously trying to police and shame its originators for doing it at all. Whites (and some Blacks as well) are approaching it with the typical White supremacist approach of overly applauding and worshiping whomever is the latest popular spoiled irritant of a White human being to try to do it, which in this case would be Miley Cyrus. Unlike when something Black men, or both Black men and Black women created/do is appropriated, where some Black men are bothered by the appropriation (i.e. The Harlem Shake), once it’s specific to Black women, some Black men no longer care and applaud and worship any and all non-Black (and especially White) women engaged in the appropriation. The latter is also a facet of White supremacy (and male privilege).

While the sheer act of someone who isn’t Black woman twerking doesn’t bother me theoretically, I don’t like its practical manifestation in a White supremacist society. The typical worship (by EVERYONE, even including some Black women) of anyone who isn’t a Black woman doing it, the mocking of Black women’s distress about it and indulging in entitlement and arrogance about the appropriation is the problem. It’s never just people “having fun.” Their “fun” always comes at a huge price for Black women (and Black culture)—reinforcing race and gender hierarchies.

Cultural appropriation itself is a cycle and also a tool of psychological warfare and erasure in a White supremacist society. As Paulo Freire writes:

The oppressor consciousness tends to transform everything surrounding it into an object of its domination. The earth, property, production, the creations of people, people themselves, time—everything is reduced to the status of objects at its disposal.

Once the conversation is about Black women and twerking, the bigotry comes out in full force. I do not accept this bigotry.

No, I do not accept the sexism—the belief that something of interest to women irrespective of male attention or valuation/devaluation is automatically stupid and not worth doing or discussing.

No, I do not accept the misogyny—the notion that twerking can only be self-degrading since it cannot exist for any purpose outside of the dehumanizing gaze of men who choose to only see women as sexual objects, not full human beings engaging in a creative dance with a long Black history.

No, I do not accept the misogynoir—the notion that Black women twerking is “lewd” and “degrading” but White women doing (or trying to do) the exact same dance is “cute” and “classy” and that they should cash in, in attention, praise or actual money (i.e. teaching classes) on twerking while pretending that they do not know the racial double standard here. White privilege is why they can both appropriate and feign ignorance over the magnitude of what this appropriation is. White privilege is why they can continue to dehumanize Black women (while some simultaneously demand loyalty to a White supremacist feminist agenda, versus the intersectional feminism/womanism that we know) by pretending that we are solely objects to emulate—costumes to put on out of interest and then take off if situations get too sticky or portraying a certain form of Whiteness becomes more important or profitable. (See: Justin Timberlake, the male version of this).

No, I do not accept the misogynoir and predictable hypocrisy by Black men—the same ones who were angry about Whites appropriating The Harlem Shake (since Black men do this dance too) but write Black women off as “jealous” for commenting on the double standard regarding twerking (since Black men view this as a dance for women). Male privilege. The same ones who only have an issue with Whites when it is perceived to specifically impact Black men or all Black people, versus solely Black women, are the type of Black men that I’m speaking of. The same ones who endlessly excuse racism from famous White women (but never from a White man of any status) simply because they chase and sleep with non-famous White women are the type of Black men that I’m speaking of. 

No, I do not accept the racist sexist classism—the idea that only “poor” and “ghetto” Black women dance this way, thus making it a “shameful” dance unless absolutely anyone of a different social status does it.

No, I do not accept the ageist sexism—the idea that only women of a certain age should dance this way and anyone arbitrarily too young is being a “whore” and anyone arbitrarily too old is being “immature.”

No, I do not accept the framing through the politics of respectability—the idea that this “shames” Black women in front of White people, and nothing matters more than the White gaze (which is racist because of WHO we are, not WHAT we do or do not do, anyway) and the pathway to White approval, which never comes nor should be a goal in the first place.

No, I do not accept the Christian theist idea, shaped by patriarchy, sexism and misogynoir—that somehow twerking—a dance with African roots no less—is somehow “evil” and thus wrong, when it is in fact White supremacist religious views, originally force-fed, now willingly embraced, that shapes Black intraracial opinions on dancing and writes off anything with Black roots, especially precolonial roots as “evil.”

No, I do not accept the White supremacist feminist rhetoric—that autonomy over one’s person, expression and sexuality as a woman, should only apply to White women, and in the case of Black women, doing the same thing is “unfeminist” (not a real concept in the first place as it implies feminist absolutism as a destination, not the journey and praxis that it is) or anti-feminist (which would only be true if feminism is solely gendered White supremacy). I reject the idea that Black women should exist solely as objects for White women to emulate or disdain while simultaneously shaming, to mask their White supremacist thought and endless White privilege, especially considering the history of Black bodies as objects of White power, profit and pleasure.

A part of Alice Walker’s definition of womanism includes “loves dance” because of the very freedom that comes with creative and cultural expression with meaning and history, that’s also fun and includes the confidence that comes with physical, sexual and emotional autonomy.

How rare is it for twerking to be discussed…or actually anything involving what Black women do, think, say, write, create, believe or are…without bigotry, and sloppy, one-dimensional bigoted ideas as the basis of the discussion or the “critique?”

For Miley, appropriation is “fun” and games; Black women are costumes or “big booty hos” to her, not human beings. For Whites and Blacks/other people of colour, it can be viewed this way too, without context and disregarding the truth because of White supremacy; it allows such ignorance. I don’t have the luxury of disregarding the truth since I, as a Black woman, am the target of such bigotry. And, it will never be acceptable.

Related Posts: White Responses To Black Creativity, Regarding The White “Harlem Shake”, White Women and White Privilege: Telling Them NO

I keep seeing people use the term “TRAP” to describe a transgender female… And it is SO INFURIATING!

lethal-lovesick:

Even a few trans-friendly blogs are using it to tag photos of trans individuals.

Several trans people on the net have this to say about the term (an amalgam of various comments I have found):

Transsexuals try to pass for their real genders to be themselves and camouflage themselves from transphobes who may want to kill them for being transsexual, not to trap straight people attracted to non-trans members of their gender.


"The entire trap thing is a stinking pile of transmisogyny. It undermines our identity and attempts to invalidate the gender we live as. It is the root of the trans-panic defense and generally offensive to every trans person I know. The whole thing is so that straight dudes don’t have to deal with the fact that they are actually attracted to a transperson.

"TL;DR we fucking hate it."


"I hate that one. I am not a ‘trap.’ This is mostly done by men who are terrified of finding out that a pretty girl might have a penis, which in turn threatens masculinity, etc., etc.

"It makes it seem like my entire identity is wrapped up in ‘fooling’ straight men. Which, no."


"…I’m a trans woman and I find it pretty offensive. I date men, and I’m constantly struggling against the idea that I’m somehow out to trick them into sleeping with a guy.

"The whole trap meme pretty much boils down to the exact same attitude, treating trans women like they’re really men, and anyone who was attracted to the woman in the picture has been tricked or trapped.

"I don’t think it’s funny, and that attitude is not only horribly demeaning, but downright dangerous in that it encourages people who find out I’m trans to feel that they’re right in feeling trapped or tricked."

and

"…The idea that trans women are fooling men into sleeping with a man is what leads to so many trans women being beaten or killed when people find out their status."

It is so sickening to see people okay with this term, especially transgender individuals, who are directly harmed by this stereotype.

People are claiming it is a term brought about by anime/manga to describe cross-dressers (VERY different from transgender individuals, aduh) who trick men into sleeping with them under the pretense that they are females. THAT right there is proof enough that the term comes with a negative connotation!

Why continue using it?! Bring an end to it!

JESUS.

My response (written hastily and out of anger. If any of it is wrong, let me know. Please to not reblog and insult me, I was doing my best to have conherent thoughts in the face of such an insult @ 3am. Everyone makes mistakes - allow my to correct it.):

All of you dumb fuckers need to get one thing straight: TRANSGENDER individuals and CROSS-DRESSERS are not the same. nor are TRANSVESTITES synonymous.

Let’s go to school:

I am a transgender female. I know of which I speak. Here goes::

TRANSGENDER: an individual born one SEX who mentally identifies with the OTHER. Their GENDER is, say, female, while their biological SEX is male. GENDER does NOT equal SEX. One is mental, one is biological. Get that straight NOW. (ant. CISGENDER).

TRANSVESTITE: an individual who gets sexual gratification from wearing the clothing of the opposite sex. Most often men wearing female clothing. Can be gay, straight, bisexual, cisgender, transgender etcetcetc. But the term ONLY applies to one who GETS OFF wearing articles of clothing of the other SEX.

CROSS-DRESSERS can be transvestites but are nore commonly viewed as entertainers: DRAG QUEENS, etcetc. Heightened, exaggerated femininity in most cases, but some just like to dress up for the hell of it, be it sexual or not.

USE these terms CORRECTLY.

A cross-dresser not offended by TRAP is perfectly normal, because they essentially ARE traps, if you;re going out of your way to have sex with straight men. You are cisgender (in most cases) and idenfity as male! You are not identifying as a female, stuck in a male’s body (in some cases) trying to be with a man. You could never understand the level of rejection, fear, and isolation a transgirl feels at this!

TRANSGENDER individuals are the ONLY ONES who have the RIGHT to claim if a term is offensive to them or not. I see people saying “Oh, I’m a crossdresser, trap doesn’t offend me.”

NO SHIT DUMB ASS, because you are not directly hurt by it does not mean a thing. It is widely used IN ENGLISH to refer to transgirls. SO They are the ones allowed to be offended by what is OBVIOUSLY a very derogatory word, said with derision and used as transphobic hate defenses.

That’s like a white person saying “Nigger doesn’t offend me” or even if it does, WHO CARES. You could NEVER comprehend the fear, dysphoria, etc that one person has when they are enduring the struggles attributed to them by that one powerful word.

It is just a word, but it has SO MUCH power to wound.

I do not give a fuck if it is a term in Japanese cartoons that STILL fetishize and OBJECTIFY this minority group: Listen to how people say it in ENGLISH, the way it is said, and THEN tell me it is innocuous. You will be WRONG.

Pull your nerdy ass face out of a goddamn manga and do some real research before you even make a single comment about a term and what it refers to/who is offends. Stop reading these books that humiliate, objectify, fetishize and victim-blame trans individuals. It promotes harmful stereotypes and facilitates trans-misogyny. END IT. 

LINK.

Tomorrow I’ll be co-hosting an important panel discussion on the science and myths of Ebola. By now you would’ve likely read hundreds of scary headlines about the Ebola outbreak in West Africa, with lots of hand-wringing about why “Africa” isn’t being quarantined already. Perhaps you saw Donald Trump say that American medical staff should not have been let back into the USA to get treatment? Did you hear about the “top secret” cure that greedy scientists/ policy-makers aren’t sharing? Maybe you saw reputable media like The New York Times dutifully creating panic with headlines about Americans visiting hospitals thinking they had Ebola (but actually just had the flu)? Or the right-wing arguments that Latin American migrants are crossing over to the USA and bringing the disease? And what about the pigs - can they make us sick? They did in the Hollywood movie Contagion! Is “the Government” holding back science about aerosol transmission of Ebola? So much to fear, but what can we believe?
The fact is… most of what the media is reporting is incorrect.
Ebola is not airborne. It is transmitted by close contact with blood and bodily fluids and secretions (not by coughing or merely by touch). This is why Ebola is spreading in developing nations with inadequate healthcare. 
My co-host, molecular biologist Dr Buddhini Samarasinghe, and I will be talking with virology expert Professor Vincent Racaniello and Infectious Disease Epidemiologist Dr Tara C. Smith. They’ll talk about what Ebola is, how it’s transmitted, how the current epidemic might be contained, and we’ll also talk about some of of the media-driven misconceptions about the virus. We’ll discuss why an outbreak in developed nations is unlikely and we’ll cover the socio-economic factors sustaining the epidemic in poorer nations.
Head to our Science on Google+ event page to read more. I answered a question about whether Ebola might spread through the upcoming Hajj pilgrimage to Mecca (highly unlikely) and why the United Nations says travel bans are not necessary. You can also despair over the various conspiracy theories being espoused, which our Science Moderators like biochemist Professor Rajini Rao are patiently dispelling. 
We’ll broadcast on Monday 7.30AM Australian EST time (that’s Sunday 2.30pm USA Pacific or 10.30PM UK). You can watch our video later at your leisure on our Science on Google+ YouTube Channel, Science Hangouts.
Learn More
Can’t wait until tomorrow and want to read a little ahead? We republished an excellent introduction about Ebola by biologist Maren Hunsberger. Tara has also written a couple of easy to understand explanations on why Ebola is not airborne and an historical perspective on Ebola responses. Watch Vincent lead a discussion about why the epidemic has spread and how it might be curtailed.
See you tomorrow for a sensible chat about the science and social policy responses to Ebola! High-res

Tomorrow I’ll be co-hosting an important panel discussion on the science and myths of Ebola. By now you would’ve likely read hundreds of scary headlines about the Ebola outbreak in West Africa, with lots of hand-wringing about why “Africa” isn’t being quarantined already. Perhaps you saw Donald Trump say that American medical staff should not have been let back into the USA to get treatment? Did you hear about the “top secret” cure that greedy scientists/ policy-makers aren’t sharing? Maybe you saw reputable media like The New York Times dutifully creating panic with headlines about Americans visiting hospitals thinking they had Ebola (but actually just had the flu)? Or the right-wing arguments that Latin American migrants are crossing over to the USA and bringing the disease? And what about the pigs - can they make us sick? They did in the Hollywood movie Contagion! Is “the Government” holding back science about aerosol transmission of Ebola? So much to fear, but what can we believe?

The fact is… most of what the media is reporting is incorrect.

Ebola is not airborne. It is transmitted by close contact with blood and bodily fluids and secretions (not by coughing or merely by touch). This is why Ebola is spreading in developing nations with inadequate healthcare.

My co-host, molecular biologist Dr Buddhini Samarasinghe, and I will be talking with virology expert Professor Vincent Racaniello and Infectious Disease Epidemiologist Dr Tara C. Smith. They’ll talk about what Ebola is, how it’s transmitted, how the current epidemic might be contained, and we’ll also talk about some of of the media-driven misconceptions about the virus. We’ll discuss why an outbreak in developed nations is unlikely and we’ll cover the socio-economic factors sustaining the epidemic in poorer nations.

Head to our Science on Google+ event page to read more. I answered a question about whether Ebola might spread through the upcoming Hajj pilgrimage to Mecca (highly unlikely) and why the United Nations says travel bans are not necessary. You can also despair over the various conspiracy theories being espoused, which our Science Moderators like biochemist Professor Rajini Rao are patiently dispelling. 

We’ll broadcast on Monday 7.30AM Australian EST time (that’s Sunday 2.30pm USA Pacific or 10.30PM UK). You can watch our video later at your leisure on our Science on Google+ YouTube Channel, Science Hangouts.

Learn More

Can’t wait until tomorrow and want to read a little ahead? We republished an excellent introduction about Ebola by biologist Maren Hunsberger. Tara has also written a couple of easy to understand explanations on why Ebola is not airborne and an historical perspective on Ebola responses. Watch Vincent lead a discussion about why the epidemic has spread and how it might be curtailed.

See you tomorrow for a sensible chat about the science and social policy responses to Ebola!

"Transmormon"

Eri Hayward shares her story of being a transgender woman in Utah, USA. She is of Japanese descent and was raised in a Mormon community, where she says she didn’t get an “opportunity to learn about things that were different,” like the support available to her as a transgender woman. This short documentary includes Eri and her parents reflecting on what it was like to understand her gender identity. She initially “came out as gay” but her story reflects that at the time this was a stepping stone “to be myself, which is a woman.”

Eri also talks about the difficulties of claiming her own sense of beauty and the moment when she learned about what it means to be transgender. She was visiting her grandmother in Japan, when her grandmother pointed out a parade of transgender people and said, “Oh, this is all about you!” Later, Eri is shown talking with family and friends about her upcoming sex reassignment surgery over a barbecue.

Both Eri and her parents discuss their desire for their Church to make transgender members feel included, including the right to a temple marriage. Eri notes that her faith has been, at times, a source of alienation, as she often feels uncomfortable at Church, but also a source of strength during her transition. 

"I think that really being so uncomfortable in my body for the longest time helped me really separate what are physical things and what are my spiritual components. I don’t think I succumbed to my body. I think I succumbed to my spirit and what it needed.

It was just letting go and letting the picture come into focus without me trying to force it to be something that it’s not. But when it comes down to it, the only thing I can believe in is the relationship between me and God. “ 

This is really beautifully told story about intergenerational family connections and spirituality of transgender people of colour.

brutereason:

“Allyship is not supposed to look like this, folks. It’s not supposed to be about you. It’s not supposed to be about your feelings. It’s not supposed to be a way of glorifying yourself at the expense of the folks you claim to be an ally to. It’s not supposed to be a performance. It’s supposed to be a way of living your life that doesn’t reinforce the same oppressive behaviors you’re claiming to be against. It’s supposed to be about you doing the following things:
1. shutting up and listening
2. educating yourself (you could start with the thousands of books and websites that already exist and are chock full of damn near everything anyone needs to know about most systems and practices of oppression)
3. when it’s time to talk, not talking over the people you claim to be in solidarity with
4. accepting feedback/criticism about how your “allyship” is causing more harm than good without whitesplaining/mansplaining/whateversplaining
5. shutting up and listening some more
6. supporting groups, projects, orgs, etc. run by and for marginalized people so our voices get to be the loudest on the issues that effect us
7. not expecting marginalized people to provide emotional labor for you”

No More “Allies” |


You can do it, it’s exciting… it’s understanding the universe and it’s being connected to the universe and making the world a better place.
- Candy Torres, Engineer.

What are you doing to celebrate the 45th anniversary of the Apollo 11 Moon Landing? Spend it with us at STEM Women, and a veteran woman engineer of the space program! In 8 hours, we’ll be talking with Candy Torres, a Puerto Rican engineer who went from being one of only 10 women in her astrophysics classes at Rutgers University, to getting a job at Princeton University to work on the Copernicus OAO-3C Satellite and later, as a software programmer for NASA.
Candy was a STEM trailblazer from an early age. She had a firm dream to join the space program, but she encountered much push-back from her family and friends in the Bronx, where she was born. Latina women were simply not meant to have a career in STEM, or so she was told, let alone dream of contributing to the space race.
At age 14, Candy joined the Civil Air Patrol and she was flying a plane before she could drive. She encountered sexism early on, however, when she learned that girl cadets were not allowed to participate in some training sessions. She tells CNN: “We were supposed to go find a businessman who was lost in the woods, but the girls were not allowed.” 
This attitude continued. At university in the 1970s, her classmates were less than welcoming of women. She tells CNN: “They were definitely not happy about having women in the class… I didn’t have any kind of support system. I didn’t get to know any of the other women, and the guys basically ignored me.”
Overcoming exclusion based on her gender and ethnicity, Candy would go on to use her computer programming skills to organise files for NASA. She later went on to work at Johnson Space Centre on software for the Space Shuttle as well as the International Space Station. She worked on various other space programs over the years, such as human factors.
Candy has been featured in various high-profile publications like The Atlantic, where she noted: "People don’t realize how many thousands of us worked on these programs… I loved being part of something big, and I knew that I had worked hard to be there." 
Candy has continued her work in recent years by educating the public on space history, and supporting the inclusion of minority women in space programs. She is passionate about encouraging Latino youth to pursue engineering and science. She tells Latino USA that her message to Latina and other minority women is about being passionate, curious and tenacious. 
Join us as we chat to Candy about her amazing journey through various space programs, and hear her advice for young girls and women who want to follow in her footsteps. We’ll be live on Sunday 20th July 2014 at 2.30 PM Pacific/ 10.30 PM UK or Monday 7.30 AM Australian EST. Check out our Event page for more details, including a link to our YouTube video if you want to catch up later. High-res

You can do it, it’s exciting… it’s understanding the universe and it’s being connected to the universe and making the world a better place.

- Candy Torres, Engineer.

What are you doing to celebrate the 45th anniversary of the Apollo 11 Moon Landing? Spend it with us at STEM Women, and a veteran woman engineer of the space program! In 8 hours, we’ll be talking with Candy Torres, a Puerto Rican engineer who went from being one of only 10 women in her astrophysics classes at Rutgers University, to getting a job at Princeton University to work on the Copernicus OAO-3C Satellite and later, as a software programmer for NASA.

Candy was a STEM trailblazer from an early age. She had a firm dream to join the space program, but she encountered much push-back from her family and friends in the Bronx, where she was born. Latina women were simply not meant to have a career in STEM, or so she was told, let alone dream of contributing to the space race.

At age 14, Candy joined the Civil Air Patrol and she was flying a plane before she could drive. She encountered sexism early on, however, when she learned that girl cadets were not allowed to participate in some training sessions. She tells CNN: “We were supposed to go find a businessman who was lost in the woods, but the girls were not allowed.” 

This attitude continued. At university in the 1970s, her classmates were less than welcoming of women. She tells CNN: “They were definitely not happy about having women in the class… I didn’t have any kind of support system. I didn’t get to know any of the other women, and the guys basically ignored me.”

Overcoming exclusion based on her gender and ethnicity, Candy would go on to use her computer programming skills to organise files for NASA. She later went on to work at Johnson Space Centre on software for the Space Shuttle as well as the International Space Station. She worked on various other space programs over the years, such as human factors.

Candy has been featured in various high-profile publications like The Atlantic, where she noted: "People don’t realize how many thousands of us worked on these programs… I loved being part of something big, and I knew that I had worked hard to be there." 

Candy has continued her work in recent years by educating the public on space history, and supporting the inclusion of minority women in space programs. She is passionate about encouraging Latino youth to pursue engineering and science. She tells Latino USA that her message to Latina and other minority women is about being passionate, curious and tenacious. 

Join us as we chat to Candy about her amazing journey through various space programs, and hear her advice for young girls and women who want to follow in her footsteps. We’ll be live on Sunday 20th July 2014 at 2.30 PM Pacific/ 10.30 PM UK or Monday 7.30 AM Australian EST. Check out our Event page for more details, including a link to our YouTube video if you want to catch up later.

My next instalment of the #SociologyOfTrolleys: There are many studies on why *online* shopping trolleys are abandoned (poor website design; lack of incentive or commitment by customers; and so on), there is little attention given to the reasons why people abandon shopping trolleys in everyday life. 

Researcher Franck Cochoy has done some research on how shopping trolleys shape shopping behaviour (for example, by visually representing the volume of our spending by virtue of how full our trolleys are). But this research does not examine abandoned carts.

Many people think that trolleys are abandoned because kids are using them to push each other around. As such wayward trolleys are often seen as an act of social deviance by young people. In my forthcoming posts I’ll look at how abandoned carts are policed both informally at the community level and more formally through rewards and penalties (it’s actually a lucrative business). The truth about shopping trolley “deviance” is less about youth and more about social class. 

#sociology #visualsociology #trolleys #shopping #shoppingcarts #shoppingtrolleys #youth #deviance #socialscience #class #society #culture High-res

My next instalment of the #SociologyOfTrolleys: There are many studies on why *online* shopping trolleys are abandoned (poor website design; lack of incentive or commitment by customers; and so on), there is little attention given to the reasons why people abandon shopping trolleys in everyday life.

Researcher Franck Cochoy has done some research on how shopping trolleys shape shopping behaviour (for example, by visually representing the volume of our spending by virtue of how full our trolleys are). But this research does not examine abandoned carts.

Many people think that trolleys are abandoned because kids are using them to push each other around. As such wayward trolleys are often seen as an act of social deviance by young people. In my forthcoming posts I’ll look at how abandoned carts are policed both informally at the community level and more formally through rewards and penalties (it’s actually a lucrative business). The truth about shopping trolley “deviance” is less about youth and more about social class.

#sociology #visualsociology #trolleys #shopping #shoppingcarts #shoppingtrolleys #youth #deviance #socialscience #class #society #culture