If you are having a bad day, please unmute.
(Huskie puppy doesn’t quite get the howling thing. Sounds like a baby babbling.)
* day is fixed*
ok. i super needed this.
THIS. The whole world should watch this.
the older I get, the less patience I have for the idea that a story is inherently complex or #deep because it has a bittersweet or tragic ending, or that people who like for things to end on a happy note are simple-minded weaklings who can’t handle harsh realities and mature storytelling.
Look, shit is fucked. Life is a mess. Sometimes it’s a struggle to even come up with a reason to go on. I respect that media should be realistic and true to life, but fucking sue me, for once I just want to see the bad guys eat shit while the good guys ride off into the sunset and never have anything bad happen to them ever again. I don’t care if it’s unrealistic or implausible, that’s why it’s a fucking story. I have enough tragedy in my real life, thanks.
What I’ve seen often and what really needs to be addressed is how people on the left react to accusations that their friends and/or allies are doing things that are antisemitic. They’re quick to assert “conspiracies from the right (or relative right in the case of the Labour antisemitism issue),” “crying wolf,” “privilege (white Jews don’t have Jewish privilege and white privilege and experiencing antisemitism are not mutually exclusive),” and, of course, “Zionism.”
The problem here is in suppositions. Because someone is on the left, they assume everyone there is anti-racist and, by extension, against all forms of racism including antisemitism. But the thing is, it’s not that simple. This is why it’s so galling for Jews to hear Jeremy Corbyn say that he’s against “antisemitism and other types of racism” when we’re not questioning him on his commitment to fight other forms of racism. All racisms function in different manners with different stereotypes and different forms of marginalization. You can’t be “antiracist” and not understand that. You can’t be against “antisemitism” in principle and not in action. It’s the inaction that’s become very frustrating from a Jewish perspective. It’s the routine acceptance and denial of antisemitism on the left that is the problem, not whether Cobyn himself believes in antisemitic conspiracy theories or hates Jews qua Jews.
Take the situation at Oberlin College where various members of the faculty and student body have lined up to defend a professor who spreads antisemitic conspiracy theories on public social media while also teaching “social justice writing” classes. I have no doubt that the professor is antiracist in many areas, but she is an antisemite. She has not apologized, claimed that she is not antisemitic despite piles of evidence that she is, and people have acted angrily to the notion that she should even apologize. The anger at this point isn’t so much at the professor in question but at those who are lining up to defend her for her unrepentant actions, as if antisemitism is to be tolerated because the antisemitic speaker in question is valuable in other parts of the social justice fight.
The problem here is ultimately that a lot of people on the left believe that the fight against antisemitism no longer holds value or that, by virtue of Jews being “privileged” or “white” or Israel’s oppression of Palestinians they have somehow come to the belief that antisemitism is either no longer a problem or is no longer worth fighting. Tacit acceptance of antisemitic allies is bad enough, but defending them at the risk of normalizing their views is quite simply aiding in the spread and growth of antisemitism.
But we have reached a point where accusations of antisemitism are treated as more offensive than actual antisemitism and that means that Jews on the left will either need to start swallowing their bile and put up with the antisemitism or leave. It’s difficult to put your whole self into a movement that tells you that it won’t watch your back when you’re threatened no matter how much you want to support it.
“Are you really going to vote for Clinton just because she isn’t Trump?”
Yes? I would literally elect Chef Boyardee because he isn’t Trump.
My dear Americans:
When we here in Canada had our last election, we made a massive effort to vote strategically. There were even groups here who (since we don’t elect our PM directly but rather elect a ruling party) were literally going around making sure everyone knew who in their voting area was most likely to beat the Conservative candidate so that we WOULD NOT GET HARPER.
At the time I explained at length to many people how at that point, @tkingfisher‘s beagle Gir would make a better PM than Harper. Then I paused and thought, “hey, she lost a dog … relatively recently? In the last year? Was that the beagle? I can’t remember. … anyway it doesn’t matter, because her beagle would make a better PM than Harper even if said beagle were dead.”
You, my dear Americans, are now in this same position. Gir, all by himself with no advisors, would still make a better President than that POS, even if he were dead (the beagle, not that jerk; I am not sure that life or lack thereof would make much difference to that jerk’s presidency).
You are not voting for anyone at this point. You are voting against Trump.
Do not be a fucking moron and end up with Trump because you didn’t vote against him. Because Gir, even if dead, would make a better president. Do not mistake politics for a lifelong statement on your values. You will not benefit anyone or make any kind of statement by doing something that makes that piece of crap more likely to get elected, and every vote not cast for his best competition (that is, the person most likely to beat him, whoever they are!) is something that makes his election more likely.
Do not do this, my darling Americans.
Ideals are great. But so is long-term strategic thinking, and all of you young Americans reading me have many many years left of voting and doing your best to bring change and improvement to your country … unless you are foolish enough to let that jerk win.
In which case we all lose.
So please don’t be fucking stupid. Whoever the not-Trump nominee is, vote for them. Even if you don’t like them. Because you are not voting for whoever that is; you are voting against That Jerk.
SERIOUSLY. It’s worth noting, too, that there are actually a lot of parallels between the Canadian election and the one you guys are entering into now. We had our centrist candidate that a lot of people either outright hated or at the very least didn’t like and didn’t respect (yes, that was Justin Trudeau) and an older, somewhat charismatic socialist leader who was largely thought would win by a landslide. (That was Thomas Mulcair)
Except Mulcair, a lot like his American counterpart, fumbled key moments and key populations badly and the longer the election went on, the more people started drifting away to the Liberals. Who ended up winning by a landslide and, well, *shrug* it definitely worked out.
Now I’m not saying Hillary is going to win and magically transform into Justin Trudeau, but I am saying you’ve not really seen her as a leader yet. You’ve seen her work within the Senate and you’ve seen her carry out President Obama’s policies as Secretary of State (yeah, if you’re not pissed off at him for those policies, might want to ask yourself why) but as her own leader? Not so much. Not quite.
It doesn’t mean you won’t be freaking furious with her at times, or that she won’t do things that make your gut churn, but for the love of God, the fucking KKK endorses Trump. They’re excited by his candidacy.
Ever want a chance to save the world? Here’s your shot. Suck it up and vote against him.
That’s what we did. There were a shitton of hardcore NDP voters who should have voted for Thomas Mulcair (dodged a bullet there, lemme tell you) who sucked it up and voted for Justin Trudeau because they would not risk splitting the vote.
No matter who’s name you write in on the ballet.a
vote for anybody but the Democratic candidate in this election is a vote for Trump.
A few words of help for our American friends, eh? #USA #Election
Today is more or less the day that the Democratic nominee is decided.
It is in, in fact, very decisively going to be Hillary Rodham Clinton.
I can already feel the outrage that is about to pour out on this site: the conspiracy theories, the bungled attempts at “math” (which, btw, are almost always inaccurate or wrong), the ugly, sexist memes of HRC that we can all laugh at because hey, if it’s HRC, who gives a fuck?
But before you angrily typesmash into your keyboard about how the establishment is rigged and how the DNC better abide by the “will of the people” and hand the nom to Sanders on a silver platter, I’d like to ask you to take a deep breath and step back for a moment.
First, you need to accept that the fact that Sanders has come so far is a big fucking DEAL. Last year, he was an unknown. This year, he proved to be an excellent challenge to the Democratic establishment, and he’s already inspired dozens of copycats around the country to challenge establishment corruption. It’s a GREAT thing.
But let’s not pretend that he was/is a perfect candidate. I’d actually argue that him and HRC are probably no more and no less “corrupt” or “twisted” than the other. This was especially true in the last few weeks of the campaign, where he got especially ugly and weird, whether it was racking up no less than 639 pages of FEC violations (the irony) to not denouncing the violence and personal death threats sent to super delegates (how hard is it to JUST say “that’s not OK!”? i mean really) to falsely accusing HRC of FEC violations (spoiler: she has none). Honestly, if Tumblr had bothered to vet Sanders even a quarter as much as they did HRC, he would not be this site’s favorite grandpa.
But that’s all counterproductive now. So as tempting as it is, I’m gonna let it go.
Now I’m gonna say something controversial:
HILLARY CLINTON? SHE’S NOT A TERRIBLE PERSON.
There. I said it. What a shocker.
People go on and on about how Sanders got the millennial vote (and handily, at that), but what they always leave out is that HRC got literally EVERY OTHER demographic. Why?
No really, why?
Simple: she LISTENS to them. And then she translates what she’s heard into policy.
Her job isn’t to preach at the bully pulpit. She listens. There’s a reason why she doesn’t hold rallies of thousands, but has garnered the vote of top people at practically every demographic or movement , whether it was the mothers of the movement (incl travyon martin and sandra bland’s mother), the fuckING human rights campaign, planned parenthood, literally every minority vote EVER, and others.
And she turned those inputs into real policy. No for real. Go read her policy statements. They are the most well-researched, detailed, boring things ever. They are GREAT. Her inner policy nerd probs came out because her plans are the most well researched of any candidate possibly ever, and will also put you right to sleep because of how disgustingly long and well written they are.
Now ppl are gonna say “oh she panders” or whatever but yA KNOW WHAT?!?
She also fucking follows through. For real.
Let’s take a famous example: HRC was against gay marriage until like 2013!1!1
(so was Obama, but i mean whatever right? he’s a guy so we cut him slack)
Great. What a bitch.
Because once she came out in favor of gay marriage, SHE WENT ALL THE FUCKING WAY. She worked to EXPAND LGBT rights at the state department , and gave a historic speech at the Geneva Convention that “Gay rights are human rights and human rights are gay rights” , a move so fucking controversial and terrifying that it literally made anti-LGBT countries nervous.
HER FUCKING CAMPAIGN MANAGER, ROBBY MOOK, IS AN OPENLY GAY MAN. (and quite a hottie <3)
Also, she is the ONLY presidential candidate to have walked in a lgbt pride parade, EVER. (this pic is circa like 2002)
How’s that #throwbackthursday for ya?
My point is: she’s not right on the issues 100% of the time (wow she’s human?!? no wAY) BUT she will fight for the issues and get shit done.
So my plea is this:
Look for the good in HRC.
She’s a thoughtful person and a listener – those who know her have said that the former is in fact her best trait. Think she’s too center or right on your fave issues? FUCKING TALK ABOUT IT. Let her campaign know.
I’m not asking anyone to tattoo HRC on their chest or start phonebanking for her tomorrow or anything like that. (In fact, don’t, that’s weird as shit)
Vote for Bernie in whatever primaries are left and do not feel the need to suddenly become a living breathing campaigner .
This has been a tough, tough election and I get that it will be very hard to get over the negative image you have of HRC, but I trust that people are smart enough to get it done. So do it, I beg of you.
And finally, like every pretentious ass post on this website ends…
REBLOG. SPREAD THIS SHIT LIKE WILDFIRE.
There’s also the story Andrea Mitchell told tonight on MSNBC – about Hillary during her tenure as First Lady, traveling to China to give a speech about women’s rights, despite the resistance from the State Department. She hid the speech from them during the trip overseas, refusing to allow it to be vetted. There are dozens upon dozens of stories like that, before, during and after when she was last in the White House.
A lot of people either don’t remember or weren’t alive to know just how galvanizing, how much of a force Hillary was when Bill Clinton took office, and how unprecedented it was (outside of a few powerful examples, such as Eleanor Roosevelt) for a First Lady to be quite so strident and purposeful in matters of state – how much of a shock to the system it was to Washington. Hillary has always been controversial and a firebrand in her own way; she has always been despised by the GOP, which has thrown everything they have at her for almost 25 years but never taken her down. She has been tested, burnt, bowed but never broken. She’s been fighting for the issues she believes in since before she was Hillary Clinton. And she never stops working.
#listen. it’s true.#hillary clinton#ALSO#this is much less important and much more anecdotal but whatever it’s my Blog#i have known & heard HORRIFIC stories from people who worked for many many politicians at many many levels of government#and i have too!#and of all the ppl i ever heard stories about: hillary was hands-down the best boss and manager.#she was tough and competent and compassionate. she made a point of people not being in the office for more than 12 hours a day#except under rly extreme circumstances#which in DC is like UNHEARD OF but the fact is unless there’s a literal crisis going on#NOBODY NEEDS YOUR SLEEP-DEPRIVED CRAZY ASS IN THERE FOR 24 HOURS. YOU ARE NOT GIVING IT YOUR BEST#and hillary wants the best people. giving it their best. under the best possible conditions.#she doesn’t want you to LOOK like you’re giving it your best: she wants you to be CAPABLE OF giving it your best#and have the TOOLS TO DO SO#and isn’t that a great trait to have for the boss and manager of America?#also my friend who worked for her @ State tells a delightful story about her team getting called in to deal w/ some crisis at like 3am#and HRC shows up in a lavender sweatsuit#with her hair in a sticky-up Cindy Lou Who ponytail#and a watch for some reason on a shoelace around her neck#and is like “let’s do this”#so enjoy that visual. you’re welcome. (via sashayed)
If this isn’t enough to sway you, then please just consider this: a vote for Hillary is a vote against Trump. If that’s all it is for you, it’s still enough. Myself and so many others are genuinely afraid for our safety under a Trump administration. My overseas family is already asking if it’s time for me to leave America. This election has already affected how the world sees us, it has already hurt people.
A vote for HRC is a vote against Trump. That should be enough.
I know I’ve talked about this before, but I’m really sick of seeing writers who should know better say things like, “Tragedy is more compelling than stories where characters have a nice day and nothing bad happens!” without understanding why.
Tragedy is an effective story element when it’s a deviation from the norm. A character’s peaceful existence is disrupted by a catastrophic event that throws everything into chaos. The character now has to either develop so they can cope with the new status quo, or find a way to put things back the way they were. There’s a good story in that.
But when a character’s life is an unrelenting cavalcade of misery, another heaping dose of shit isn’t all that interesting. At that point, a compelling deviation from the norm would be said character having a nice day where nothing bad happens. And modern fiction is chock-full of misery porn, so by this logic, it’s no wonder the coffee shop AU is such a popular fanfiction trope.
Derek Hale getting a dog and putting his life back together is way more interesting than Derek Hale’s life getting worse for the 26th consecutive episode.
Creators like to hold up “everything is fine and nobody dies” as a sign that fanfic is bland and badly written, but if anything, it’s an indicator that mainstream fiction is bland and badly written.
you know, that luceno quote from labyrinth of evil gets posted all the time, but my favorite part is the bit that usually gets cut off.
“And you, Master. What does your heart tell you you’re meant for?”
“Infinite sadness,” Obi-Wan said, even while smiling.
[aka: don’t ever come talk to me about obi-wan if you’re not ready to talk about hope and faith, because that is his essential core; hope on the days when he can look up and still see Light, and faith for the days when he can’t. faith carries him across the clouded patches, to starry skies and potential, possibility – dizzying promises of rebirth. he is able to smile, even in his grief, because he accepts this for what it is, that the new world will not be for him, does not need to be for him – it is enough that the new world will be.
force knows none of them were created for a life of ease. to be bereft of all his mortal loves is a burden, maybe, but to be still in the Light – that is enough, for a jedi.]
How it should have happened tbh (✿◡‿◡)
What she says: I’m fine
What she means: In Legally Blonde, Elle only gets accepted because she’s hot and sent a video, but she had a 4.0 and got a 179 (out of 180) on her LSATS. Sure, her major was in Fashion Merchandising but that’s a business major, and the fake school she was at was supposed to be UCLA so she had a business degree from a major college, probably went to a great high school, had a 4.0, and a 179 on the LSATS and at that point she would have been automatically accepted so why did they make it sound like she was such a bad risk? She even had leadership experience as president of a major chapter of what is apparently a huge sorority, since Delta Nus are shown as everything from cheerleaders to senators. Harvard should have been desperate to take her. She should have been able to get in if she turned in a cocktail napkin with her name written on it. So why make up the bullshit excuse of “multiculturalism” to justify letting in an extremely qualified and highly driven candidate just for laughs? Elle Woods deserved to go to Harvard and she earned that place with academic excellence and not by being hot.
I love the way in the movie it makes out like Marius is one of the leaders of the rebellion, when in the book Marius is literally the goofy friend that says something dumb and everyone fondly rolls their eyes and goes ‘classic pontmercy’