(Source: thesubversivesound, via cuntofdoom)

thesubversivesound:

Libcom’s organising toolkit - guides to organising at work, in your local area and more.

• Workplace organising guide - Tips and advice guides for organising in your workplace.
• Community organising guide - Information, guides and tips on organising around issues which affect you and other people living in your local area.
• Housing guide - Advice on taking action to house yourself cheaply and know your rights
• Demonstrations and law enforcement guide - advice on organising and participating in demonstrations and direct action safely and effectively, as well as dealing with law-enforcement agencies and possible imprisonment.
• Media and publicity guide - How to get the word out about your group or campaign? There are two main approaches, which should both be used: using the mainstream and corporate media, and building your own independent media. This page contains advice on both.
• General organising guide - Basic information on running a political or campaign group democratically.
• Personal guides - Some advice on dealing with personal issues such as bailiffs, debt and crime.

(via cuntofdoom)

bruja-divina:

evepostapple:

Mood Boosting Yoga Sequence!

Feeling a little, meh?

This yoga sequence complete with two heart-openers is just what you need to release any pent up emotion.  In fact, Researchers from Boston University School of Medicine (BUSM) have found that yoga may be superior to other forms of exercise in its positive effect on mood and anxiety.  - Science Daily

Tips:

1. Be sure to engage in deep ‘Ujaay’ breathing or oceanic breath.  This form of breath enables the body to fully release
2. Before you begin, take 10-15 deep breaths in Child’s Pose with your head to the earth to ground down.
3. Repeat the sequence 5 times on either side and then sit in meditation or lie in Corpse Pose for at least 5 minutes afterward to allow for transformations to take place and settle.

Only thing that I’m stuck on is pose 9 to 10 what is the transition?

thisiswealthyprivilege:

This is a great food tip because if your power is out, or you are trying to save money on electricity, or your oven is broken or you don’t have one, this doesn’t need to be cooked. The trick is: massaged kale. Sounds weird, yes. But it’s a way to “cook” kale or collards or any other green that is too tough to eat raw. Read on, I promise it’s great.

If you can, get your hands on as much kale as possible. Wal-Mart sells it in huge bags for a couple of bucks. Wash (if you can, if water/bills are an issue, just skip the rinse. I’ve done it before) the kale, dry (hello, hoarding fast food napkins!) the kale, and sprinkle with salt in a bowl. With your hands, rub/massage the salt into the greens, until they reduce in size and get tender. They will taste amazing once they tenderize and are already seasoned. Kale is very filling, so you should be able to at least fill yourself up with this “recipe”. Not cooking the kale means quicker meal prep and faster time to get to the eating part!

If you can, adding any of these things will be pretty cheap and amazingly delicious:

• sunflower seeds (can get from most gas stations)
• oil (olive if you can) + vinegar + a pinch of sugar (again, fast food places are your source)
• red onion slices
• ultimate, not-cheap additions, if you can get them: a few apple slices or some cheese

I never buy ketchup or most condiments, for that matter. I just load up at fast food places, within reason.

<sup> makes words go like thi^iiiis.

<sub> makes them do thi_iiiis.

<small> makes words go little. The more <small> you have the smaller the word.

Same thing applieswith<big>.

<u> makes underlines.

Go here for Ｆｕｌｌ Ｗｉｄｔｈ.

…

} the—medium  :.

(Source: meenah-poly, via la-chica-pelada)

sonzaishiteruhime:

searchingforknowledge:

theuppitynegras:

downlo:

class-struggle-anarchism:

A map showing the 22 countries never to have been invaded by Britain.

from this article in the torygraph

“A new study has found that at various times the British have invaded almost 90 per cent of the countries around the globe. The analysis of the histories of the almost 200 countries in the world found only 22 which have never experienced an invasion by the British. Among this select group of nations are far-off destinations such as Guatemala, Tajikistan and the Marshall Islands, as well some slightly closer to home, such as Luxembourg.”

Britain has invaded 9 out of every 10 countries on this planet

The countries never invaded by the British:

Andorra

Belarus

Bolivia

Burundi

Central African Republic

Chad

Congo, Republic of

Guatemala

Ivory Coast

Kyrgyzstan

Liechtenstein

Luxembourg

Mali

Marshall Islands

Monaco

Mongolia

Paraguay

Sao Tome and Principe

Sweden

Tajikistan

Uzbekistan

Vatican City

Do you know which country is runner-up with military personnel in 153 countries around the world (that’s ~80% of the world rather than 90% like the Brits)? Take a wild guess.

Go damn Britain. 9 out of 10 countries? Really? Seriously? smh 

What a blood thirsty set of wretches tho.

Wow.

Now show me a list of countries never invaded by any European country.

(via genderbitch)

teachingliteracy:

lilbookofkell:

Paperback Swap - Trade books for free 

BookCloseOut - Bargin Books

Download Textbooks

75 Books Every Writer Should Read

20 Useful Free PDF ebooks for Designers and Bloggers

446 Places for Free Books Online

ReadPrint - Free Online Books

Millions of Free PDF e-books

The best places to get free books

Digital Classics

Books Should Be Free

Full Books

Free Classic Audiobooks

(via cuntofdoom)

jemimaaslana:

nekobakaz:

therealmrslovett:

earthfolk:

Because you don’t want to sound neolithic when you’re throwing a temper tantrum. 

Because everyone should have this on their blog

on my blog? I need this printed out and next to my computer

Must memorize…

(Source: aliceilluminated, via iced-chai)

healthiie:

 Headaches

The Tea: Chamomile, Ginger, Green, Feverfew

The Yoga: Extended Puppy Pose, Reclining Bound Angle Pose, Childs Pose

 Sore Muscles

The Tea: Black

The Yoga: Sphinx Pose, Cow Face Pose, Extended Side Angle Pose

 Head Cold

The Tea: White, Ginger, Green

The Yoga: Corpse Pose, Seated Forward Bend, Upward Facing Dog

 Gas and Bloating

The Tea: Peppermint, Lemon Balm, Fennel

The Yoga: Wind Relieving Pose, Half Lord of the Fishes Pose, Legs Up the Wall Pose

 PMS

The Tea: Guelder Rose, Chaste Berry, Skullcap

The Yoga: Bow Pose, Fish Pose, Head to Knee Forward Bend

 Back Pain

The Tea: Ginger, Rosemary, Black

The Yoga: Upward Salute, Cat Pose, Cow Pose, Plow Pose, Garland Pose, Sphinx Pose

 Depression

The Tea: St Johns Wart, Chamomile, Licorice, White

The Yoga: Corpse Pose, Childs Pose, Cobra Pose, Warrior I, Warrior II

 Hangover

The Tea: Ginger, Green, Peppermint

The Yoga: Bound Angle Pose, Half Lord of the Fishes Pose, Childs Pose, Easy Pose

 Nausea

The Tea: Peppermint, Ginger, Raspberry

The Yoga: Easy Pose, Childs Pose, Legs Up the Wall Pose, Reclining Hero Pose

 Insomnia

The Tea: Jasmine, Lavender, Chamomile, Peppermint

The Yoga: Corpse Pose, Supported Shoulderstand, Revolved Head to Knee

  Fatigue

The Tea: Green, Sage

The Yoga: Downward Facing Dog, Warrior I, Extended Side Angle Pose, Extended Triangle Pose

♥ If you’re pregnant you should ask your doctor before drinking medicinal tea or doing yoga.

(Source: recoverykitty, via sweonwitch)

remember-us-remember-perfection:

g0ggles:

I think this is the most concise summary of privilege I’ve seen yet

or any other privlage

(via all-about-male-privilege)

Myths About Industrial Agriculture | The Indypendent

—Vandana Shiva

(via cleanerlight)

(via genderbitch)

daintyblackpegasus:

• someone can not intend to abuse you, and still abuse you.
• someone can have your best interests in mind, and still abuse you.
• someone can love you, and still abuse you.
• you can love someone, and still get abused by them.

it doesn’t have to be ill-intentioned or spiteful or evil or even mean. 

they don’t have to be a stranger or someone you hate or even someone you dislike.

and you (i) don’t have to put up with it. 

(Source: slay-z, via genderbitch)

vasundharaa:

This is a resource post for all the Good White Person™s out there. You know, the ones who say things like “It’s not my fault I’m white! Don’t generalize white people!”, or “I’m appreciating your culture! You should be proud!”, or “Why do you hate all white people, look I’m a special snowflake who’s not racist give me an award for meeting the minimum requirements for being a decent human being”.

Well, if you are actually interested in understanding racism and how it ties into cultural appropriation, please read instead of endlessly badgering PoCs on tumblr with your cliched, unoriginal arguments and repeating the same questions over and over.

On White Privilege
aka don’t blame me just because I’m white:

• It’s Not My Fault I Was Born White: Basics of White Privilege x
• Racial Divide x
• Endless Examples of White Privilege x
• You Cannot Know What It’s Like To Be A Racial Minority x
• Intersectional Feminism x
• White Privilege Does Not Mean White People Have Perfect Lives x
• White Privilege and White Supremacy: A Presentation x
• You Will Never Experience Racism x
• Understanding White Privilege x
• White Privilege and Double Standards x
• Systematic White Ignorance x
• The Invisibility of White Privilege x
• The Luxury of White Privilege x
• White Privilege: The Harry Potter Analogy x
• Privilege Denial Bingo x
• Privilege and Cost x
• Check Your Privilege 101 x
• Whiteness x
• Whiteness is Not A Culture x
• White Privilege and Racism x
• Deeply Embarrassed White People Talk About Race x
• When White Anti Racists Talk About ~Their Struggle~ x
• White Privilege As A System x

On Reverse Racism
aka you are being racist against white people:

• Are White People Racially Oppressed x
• White People, the new Racial Minority x
• People Don’t Value Pale Skin!! x
• There Is No Such Thing As Reverse Racism x
• Racism vs. Not Racism x
• But White People Are Discriminated Against In Foreign Countries x
• The Myth of Reverse Racism: Why Cracker is Not N**** x
• Satire: A Step Wise Guide on Being Reverse Racist x
• Racism Against White People vs. Racism Against POCs x

On Cultural Appropriation
aka I’m just appreciating your culture:

• The Basics x
• Identifying Appropriation x
• But When We Wear It … x
• Why Can’t I Wear It (Hipster Headdresses) x
• Not Yours x
• If You Take The Bindi x
• White People Do It Better x
• Multiculturalism and Appropriation x
• Cultural Appropriation and Portrayals In Print Media x
• Diminishing the Cultural Significance of the Bindi x
• The Cultural Appropriation Bingo x
• Why We’re Fed Up of Your Responses x
• Identities Are Not Costumes x
• Hinduism And Appropriation x
• Religion and Privilege x
• Bindis Are Cool x
• Exotic India x
• What’s Wrong With Cultural Appropriation x
• Racism, Bindis and Ganesh Tattoos x
• BUT YOU’RE SPEAKING ENGLISH! x
• Cultural Appropriation Trolls x
• Guide to Being An Appropriating Douchefuck x
• New Age ~Culture Mixing~ x
• In case you’re tired of the prose, here’s poetry x
• Why You Shouldn’t Wear A Bindi x
• Appropriating and Sharing x
• Our Culture is A Punchline Until It’s a Trend x
• Homage Or Insult x
• Tattoos and Appropriation x
• Bollywood is Not Synonymous With Indian x
• College Party Costumes and Stereotypes x
• Dotheads x
• Bindis and Racist Humour x
• Hindu Iconography x 
• Misuse of Hindu Iconography x
• Your Appreciation Doesn’t Help Us x

Assorted Vials of White Tears and Miscellaneous Antidotes
aka I can’t change that I’m white/not all whites are racist/we are all humans:

• Unoriginal Arguments Refuted x
• Quick Checklist: You Might Be Racist If x
• Your Opinion Isn’t Necessary x
• I’m Not Responsible For My Ancestors x
• The Kumbayah Myth x
• Proud to Be White x
• Good White Person x
• We Don’t Hate White People x
• Brutality of Colonialism And Why You Can’t Tell Us To Forget the Past x
• People Who Claim Not To See Race Are More Likely to Be Racist x
• All Races are Beautiful Said the White Girl x 
• Race Blindness Is A Luxury x
• Well, You’re Racist For Calling Me Racist x
• I’ve Read About Its Significance, I Know What It Means
• Angry Because Someone Called You Racist x
• We’re Not All Like That x
• People Only Care About This Trivial Shit On The Internet x
• I Can’t Apologize for Being Born White, It’s Not My Fault x
• Why Can’t You Tell Me What I’m Doing Wrong x
• It’s Easy to Be Color Blind When You’re White x
• A Diagrammatic Guide To White Tears x
• Conversations I’m Sick Of Having With White People x
• Why Do You Hate White People x
• I’m Trying To Be Cultured x
• Sisyphean Conundrum x
• What is Your Problem x
• We Are All Human, We All Bleed Red x
• It’s Just A Bindi x
• How Not To Respond To Accusations of Racism x
• I’m Italian And 0.009% Native American x
• What White People Think Racism Means: A Venn Diagram x
• White Guilt x
• White Pride!!!111!!! x
• I Like *Insert Foreign Country* I Want To Live There x
• You Have So Much Hate, Fighting Fire With Fire Won’t Help x
• BooHoo, Don’t Call Me Racist x
• Not Everything Ended With Your Ancestors x
• The Racist Reaction x
• I Don’t See Why That Is Racist x
• Crummy Apologies x

Okay. I agree. I’ve been socially conditioned not to notice racism and recognize my privilege. What can I do?

• Listen x
• A Step Wise Guide x

I don’t care about this bullshit; you’re making a big deal out of nothing, go home and delete your blog:

• The Clueless White Person Bus x

(via deletingfreckledzombie)

vladislava:

desliz:

None of the men I’ve spoken to believe me when I point out that women don’t talk more than them and that we don’t interrupt them with our “banter.”

Seriously we don’t.

According to a study conducted by psychologist Don Zimmerman and sociologist Candace West in their “Sex Roles, Interruptions and Silences in Conversation,” study.

“…males interrupt females far more often than they interrupt other males - and much more often than females interrupt either sex.”

In fact, “in mixed-sex conversations, men ‘hold the floor’ more of the time than women, even when the women have higher status…” (pg. 210)

Deborah Tannan, a sociolinguists in the 1990s, did a study where she recorded two-and-a-half hours of conversation, noting that, “…men often do dominate their conversations with women by interrupting.”

Dominating conversations doesn’t stop at interrupting, even “stony silence,” is a pass for this. How? She gives an example:

“…she cit[es] a dialogue between a husband and wife in Erica Jong’s novel, Fear of Flying. Bennett, the man, remains stonily silent, while with mounting misery his wife Isadora begs him to tell her what she has done wrong. When he finally tries to leave the room, the scene ‘ends with her literally lowered to the floor, clinging to his pajama leg. But the reason his silence is an effective weapon is her insistence that he tell her what’s wrong. If she receded into silence, leaving the room or refusing to talk to him, his silence would be disarmed.” (pg. 211)

This obviously, can be dismissed as an exaggeration. It is, after all, a reference taken from a fictional account but also points out something that rings true: How interactions are defined by the participation of all parties involved. For starters, patterns of speaking and conversation styles taken on by most women usually contain “frequent use of qualifiers or hedges that decrease the assertiveness in the statement,” we also use what linguists Robin Lakoff calls: “empty” adjectives - adjectives that do not have connotations of power.

Other assessments show that it IS typically women who ‘hold onto’ men, in a very figurative way, when we converse with them. We are usually the one’s that try to keep the conversation going.

Pamela Fisherman, a sociolinguists who analyzed 52 hours of couples amongst themselves, concluded that women “work harder” to keep conversations flowing. In our attempts to do so, we are more likely to use tag questions (e.i: “phrases that can be used to obligate one’s partner to reply”), we give encouragement to continue a conversation and force interests more often to ensure the man knows we are being attentive.

In those moment when we DO initiate a conversation on a particular topic, they fail 64% of the time. In comparison to the men on the tapes whose topics successfully carried 96% of the time. This means that, “women had to keep bringing up new subjects all the time and mostly they fell flat.” (pg. 209)

The most notable way that men killed conversations was something as trivial, as minimal, as saying, “Um,” when the woman had finished speaking. The woman’s response? They “pursued whatever subject the men seemed willing to talk about.” (pg. 210)

What does this all come down too? It confirms a few things. 1) In mix-gender conversations, women typically, put the concerns and interests of men first. 2) In mix-gender conversations, women still come across as less assertive and even, less convincing. (“studies have shown that the tentative style that women often use makes any speaker seem less convincing and believable,” and this becomes an issue when it trickles into work place perceptions, adding another layer to the glass ceiling: “Women [who] were not convincingly powerful in their style of speaking…were not put into positions where they must present themselves powerfully.”) 3) Men interrupt women more in conversations and all-in-all, dominate these conversations. In one way by the conditioned leeway women usually give them (e.i: we are expected and trained to be more polite and thoughtful of the feelings of others, this slips into conversation style as well. Lakoff specifies that we use “overly proper grammar and excessively polite speech,” most of the time). At the opposite end of the spectrum, men are more likely to cut off women through socialized feelings of entitlement a.k.a, a manifestation of male privilege.

[The trippy thing about “privilege” is that many privileged people cannot identify it until it is pointed out to them and when it is, it is usually met with hostility because their power and the cultural advantages the society gives them is being attacked. In context of these studies, it has to do with how the opinions of men are more valued, thus most men grow to internalize these beliefs and this is externalized through putting their views above that of women’s].

For the guys: You may not notice you’re doing it, but try to get in-tuned to how often you talk compared to how often the women in your life talk when they are conversing with you. Whose topics carry on the longest? Who interrupts who the most? Do you give unwarranted encouragement through verbal cues or body language? (e.g: nodding your head, giving “ahuhs” or throwing in tag questions). When awkward silence enters the conversation, whose the first to break it?

Experiences will differ from person-to-person. But all these studies, from the Fisherman and Tannen’s tapes to Lakoff and Kramarae’s observations (Dr. Cheris Kramarae pointed out that these speech patterns are also cross-cultural), there should be a gender-specific pattern to the conversation styles.

But at the end of the day: No, we do not talk more than you when we are talking with you.

Spencer, Metta et al. Foundations of Modern Sociology: Seventh Edition. “Gender Roles.” Prentice-Hall Canada Inc., 1996. (pg. 209-211)

I have literally started yelling at my male coworkers when they interrupt me, because it’s the only way to get them to stop. I’ve also had to do it for other women, because if they try to nicely imply that they would like to say something, they just get steamrolled. Giving men stern warnings that I’M NOT DONE before I pause to take a breath or let someone else reply is also useful, because that forces them to actually listen to what I’m saying and look for a stopping point instead of vaguely processing the gist of it and blurting out whatever they think is relevant, especially if they think it makes them look smart.

tl;dr men are more untrainable than dogs

this! this! this! this! (i can continue)

fuck being conditioned to sit across from men with questions prepared in advance about their lifestyle/hobbies, feign interest in their answers, only later realize that I was never asked anything about my own life and interests, and find it only slightly peculiar/frustrating but mostly normal (!!!) since 1988.

and fuck your “sometimes men are really nervous so they won’t ask you any questions on account of how nervous they are BUT THEY SHOULD STILL BE ENTITLED TO YOUR COMPANY, TIME, ENERGY, AND A SECOND CHANCE”

and fuck your “did you even consider the fact that maybe he was shy and didn’t know what to say to you? it seems like you were simply the more confident one and he just answered your questions and didn’t know what to ask you back”

(Source: gynocraticgrrl)

raisecain:

I have come across many writings recently that label Haraway as a standpoint feminist.

As much as Haraway discusses standpoint feminism (in the 80s), she presents it as one option that has materialized to interrogate the ideological phallocentric structures of society. Her “situated knowledges” cannot be conflated with “standpoint” because standpoint feminism is about a stable position of where to speak about oppressions from. Situated knowledges acknowledges the partial, messy, fluid perspectives we have that are constantly becoming.

“Marxist starting points offered tools to get to our versions of standpoint theories, insistent embodiment without disempowering positivisms and relativisms, and nuanced theories of mediation” (Haraway, 1991: 186).

But she goes beyond standpoint to stress partial identities & the notion of diffraction as a way to bridge an impasse in feminist thought between standpoint theory and constructivist feminism.

Through a partial viewpoint we can then be mindful current epistemological narratives and the relationship between subject and object that isn’t static and one-way. We must also have a commitment to truth that isn’t one single Truth but rather partial and messy and is accountable and interacts with us.

She asserts, “‘We’ don’t want a theory of the innocent powers to represent the world (1991: 187).” She is referring to the kind of traditional standpoint feminism that is taken up at her time, which says that women are better equipped and understand the world better than men because they are the ones oppressed. The way to create a feminist objectivity cannot be through ‘women’s experience’ as a singular analytical location. Haraway wants an epistemology of location, positioning and situating (1991: 186) The only way more truthful accounts of knowledge of the world can emerge is when seeing is always thought of in this way – located, active and specific. Knowing, seeing, witnessing, attesting, speaking that always come from a particular body located in a particular time and space, both literally and relationally. 

Haraway stresses that diffraction is a metaphor for the effort to make a difference in the world that will produce “effects of connection, of embodiment, and of responsibility for an imagined elsewhere” (1992: 295). Diffraction patterns record the history of interaction, interference, reinforcement and difference. Diffraction is about heterogeneous not homogenous history. In short, standpoint produces a homogenous history from the standpoint of (specific) women, and reinforces the very gender dualism that constitutes the male perspective they oppose.

From: Haraway, Donna. “The Promises of Monsters: A Regenerative Politics for Inappropriate/d Others” 1992: 295–337.

Haraway, Donna. Simians, Cyborgs, and Women: The Reinvention of Nature. New York: Routledge, 1991.

(via brujacore)