A blog from a young woman with a lot of evolving opinions.
You can expect this blog to focus on things like feminism, video games, autism, film and video, and books.
You can call me Bearpelt.
Let’s look at Bustle as compared to other websites that traffic in women’s media. Bustle is owned by rich white dude Bryan Goldberg and he poured $6.5 million into its creation. In contrast, Autostraddle is basically funded by creativity, hopes and dreams (and viewers like you). If Verizon wanted to slow down our speeds (and the speeds of sites like Bitch and The Toast and allllll those others that we all love so, so dearly) and put the speed that they’re really capable of behind a wall that only Bustle can afford, they can legally do that. Many of us close websites that don’t load. I always assume it’s over-designed or poorly coded or something, but in the future that might not be the case. The Pavlovian conditioning of users to go for better/faster websites will start to happen, and attention will be steered (even moreso than it already is) to websites backed by large corporations.
It’s also always possible that the people in charge of an ISP just don’t like queers. Ever had a company you work for block a website because of “homosexual content?” I have. Now imagine that the friendly folks over at Verizon or Comcast or AT&T are doing that to you in your house. They can now legally do that also. Imagine that your personal internet gods can block every competitor, every dissenting opinion — not just the stuff that is harmful or illegal, but just the stuff that is harmful for that corporation in some way. There’s going to be an appeal, but my faith that this will just right itself isn’t strong.
It blows my mind that after all this time you’ve spent on earth, nobody ever bothered to tell you that your eyes aren’t fucking brown.
They are copper against honey and sage and when they water they glow, two perfect orbs the same shade as nature after it rains.
You’re not as simple as they wanted you to be.
"you’re not as simple as they wanted you to be"
Women exist for my sexual fantasies and pleasures.
Junior Environmental Science Major (via shitrichcollegekidssay)
Really great assessment of privilege and how to manage it, made by Robot Hugs
Many things for me to think about. I stand in a position of considerable privilege and it’s only been recently that I’ve started examining it- or even really being aware that there is something to examine.
Many things to think about.
You can’t call something objectification if it was meant to make the person being objectified feel good!
Shit People Respond With (via shitrichcollegekidssay)
that is industrial strength stupid
Poverty is a beautiful creation. It takes wretched humans and makes them art.
Senior Art Major (via shitrichcollegekidssay)
omg that’s disgusting
Are you kidding? As a kid when we saw this in the theater (in Minnesota), the entire theater laughed their asses off.
Oh man, I totally missed that as a kid and it was great to rewatch it as an adult and find that line.
It’s so true, though. Minnesota’s got so many Scandinavians.
Look at Esmeralda tho, she like da fuck you smokin old man get out of my damn face, you creepy
No dudebros seriously every time you think that a girl is responsible for your bodily urges, you are Frollo
you are Frollo and you will die a fiery death
don’t be Frollo
people in 3rd world countries like brazil don't have shoes you arrogant fuck.
First 3rd world is a shitty term.
I mean no one is disputing industrialized countries’ privileges’ and shit or whatever. uhm but … there are definitely people in Brasil who have shoes who know what poverty is. ………….just like there are people in the states who have shoes who know what poverty is.
But I guess:
Having shoes = Can’t know what poverty is
One of my friends immigrated from a developing country and she states that “3rd world” is really problematic.
It has postcolonial connotations and also asserts an American imperialist view of the world (i.e. dividing the world into sectors which are American-centric and lumping various nation states into them).
She told me “developing nations” or “developing regions” is a better term because it captures problems within those regions without lumping in countries which are also developed.
First of all, before I can begin- Brazil is quickly becoming a global superpower and has a GDP very similar to Australia’s; a country I assume you would not consider “third world” because they are a British Commonwealth and speak english.
This is also a good time to point out the “#FirstWorldProblems” trend is also problematic- for along the same lines. the “first world” is not the only place with internet access - Those email scams you receive saying you have 5billion USD sitting in a Swiss bank account, and all you need to do to access it is give them $200 and/or your bank account number? Those largely originate in Sub-Saharan Africa; “third world”. The “first world” is not the only place with Starbucks- Brazil has Starbucks.
And of all the economic signifiers of poverty- you choose SHOES? Shoes have been something cultures have been weaving and creating for ages, back when things were positively “primitive”.
Maybe use advanced infrastructure or global economic strength or military capability or the purchasing power of your money in the economy as a standard of what qualifies as poverty- not something so ridiculous as SHOES.
And besides that- just as the original responder said, there are Americans without shoes, and there are Americans with shoes. There are poor people (pretty much) in every country in the world.
And yeah- developed/developing is the only dichotomy I’ve heard that most accurately encompasses the situation.
All of the above, and:
1st world/ 2nd world/ 3rd world dates to the Cold War; with the US, Canada, West Europe, Australia and a few islands making up the first. The USSR made up the second world. 3rd world was everyone else. So it definitely has colonial and postcolonial conotiations, and should be criticized.
If we’re going by economics, the more common term for the era is Developed Countries (DCs) and Least/Lesser-Developed Countries. Alternatively, High-Income countries, Middle-Income countries, low-income countries.
—There are going to be flaws with any tripartite division that purports to account for over 200 countries, especially when those countries are as diverse as China, Luxembourg, Haiti, and Yemen, for example.
So yeah, first world/third world distinction is a shitty awful propaganda racist neoliberal-justifying genocide-tolerating way to describe the world.
I have definitely come across people from “developing countries” that take issue with the term “developing country”, and I assume that they’d take issue with low, middle, and high income as terms as well. I know that no big grouping can be accurate, so I’ve tried to just drop all of them from my casual speaking and writing.
It’s harder to make sweeping generalizations now, but hey, what’re you gonna do.
Tldr but if it wasn’t address first second and third worlds refer to allegiances during the Cold War not industrial status.
What? Do people think everyone on tumblr is from “first world countries”?? I actualy am from Brazil, and this is very bizarre to me, like we don’t exist. Also, shoes? Yeah, shoes are fucking important and everyone who wants them should have them, but it is definitely an ignorant way to determine poverty. I’d guess a lot of homeless people have shoes. People who can’t afford food can have a pair of shoes. Anyway, most brazilians have shoes (lots of people who don’t though, but far from the majority). Even fucking poor people have shoes. People on tumblr should stop using others as poverty fantasies and acting like there aren’t poor people where they live.
so we know all these simple distinctions (1st world/3rd, developed/ing, etc) are obv pretty arbitrary. Each one has its supporters and detractors, for important reasons. But I tend to think that there’s limitations to thinking in a nation-centric way, because you miss key issues in power dynamics. I’m wondering if folks are familiar with the ideas in world systems theory? It’s pretty much as reductive as these other concepts, but I still think there is some value in the idea of core, semi-periphery, and periphery, depending on the what is being discussed. It takes the primary focus off nations (not excluding them at all) and refocuses it on power and economic/social capital flows. Anyway, might be useful.
Personally, even tho “developed/ing” nations wording is the convention right now, I think it’s super fucked up because it infantilizes economically poor nations and is also ahistorical, in that it erases histories and influence of vast economically robust civilizations that existed prior to conquest and colonization.
Oh, hey, wait, let me just add to this:
The term Third World was actually first coined by Jawaharlal Neru, the first prime minister of India at the Bandung Conference in 1955, which was a hella cool conference that one fourth of the world attended. The reason they gathered was because they were deciding what to do about the emerging superpowers (i.e. Russia and the United States) as they headed towards the Cold War.
Originally, what the term Third World meant was this rad non-alignment party where those who agreed to be part of the non-alignment party were saying, in order to avoid destruction of their countries if they aligned with either Communism or Anti-Communism, that they would band together to form their own parties and their own opinions and their own decisions on how to govern their countries.
The term Third World was originally a positive one, originally claimed by countries participating in the non-alignment party, and the formation of the term, and of the party, is a fantastic story that so often gets overlooked in textbooks.
Unfortunately, the term Third World has been commandeered by elitist white media with fetishes of the “poor country”, so now it has come to mean something entirely different and has completely erased in mainstream media the Bandung Conference and the non-alignment party and the stance they took.
I do agree that Third World is now, sadly, because of this, problematic because the media uses it to reinforce the stereotype that Third World equals poor via the coverage that they show, but it needs to be pointed out that the origins of the term Third World and the Bandung Conference are important points of history and politically fascinating.
You can read more here, including Nehru’s original speech declaring the non-alignment movement:
anon got fucking schooled
I'm going to kill you
This is just one of the eight hateful anonymous messages I have received in the last twenty-four hours after expressing my opinion that getting more upset over a person’s opinion of a fictional character than over a history of actual hurtful attitudes and behavior is an indication of a fucked up mentality.
Clearly I was so wrong about that.
Oh my god what the fuck is happening?
What opinion did you express? I mean fer fucks sake. Those fucking assholes, why don’t they get off anon and say that to my fucking face?
These are just some of the many ways members of the LGBT community identify themselves in a beautiful photo series from San Francisco-based photographer Sarah Deragon.
Deragon’s “The Identity Project” has taken her around the country as she “seeks to explore the labels we choose to identify with when defining our gender and sexuality.” Her portraits show the amazing diversity and vibance of a queer community that for too long has been defined by outsiders.
I don’t want kids but I sometimes think of hypothetical names for kids and I’m always like “wait do they have good nickname options” and “if they don’t fit the gender binary is this a neutral or easily gender-transitioned name?”
Oh damn, for some reason that’s the first time I thought about gender neutral names for future children. Cuz I’d like to have 2. Huh.
Well, I love the name Avery, and that’s gender neutral, so I got one, I think!
Avery is such a pretty name, I love it.
I’ve always liked Olivia, too, or Eve.