[PLACEHOLDER]

Dear Anthropology and Sociology students:

-we don’t have a lot of money

-we often don’t have a lot of space

-and we move a lot more frequently than other generations might have

and that doesn’t even account for more severe realities, like abused women who lose everything they own when they are kicked out of their homes, or how poor young urban millenials of color are likely to fall behind on rent and be evicted - and yes that means losing all your physical possessions often including books. 

The only books I still have right now are my ebooks. I swear to god every single time someone condemns me for “not caring” enough about “real” books I want to turn around and slap them upside the head. I HAD REAL BOOKS. IT WAS A LUXURY. THAT LUXURY WAS FORCIBLY TAKEN FROM ME. I CANNOT AFFORD THE SPACE AND TIME IT TAKES TO OWN PAPER COPY BOOKS ANYMORE. ALL I OWN ANYMORE IS DIGITAL INFORMATION BECAUSE PEOPLE KEEP TEARING MY PHYSICAL POSSESSIONS FROM ME. 

When you meet millenials! Who are scared of owning physical things! It is likely because they moving sublet to sublet regularly. I know most of you know someone like this if you are not literally someone like this. You sort of maybe are out of your parents home but maybe not, and when you are out of your home or if you aren’t lucky enough to have parents that will let you stay at home, you stay on couches or live in someone else’s room while they’re gone and every couple of months to years you have to pack all your shit and leave. The providence of the poor is being hopelessly itinerant. 

Breaking The Male Code: After Steubenville, A Call To Action

Hey y’all! I’m Tina, a recent graduate in Biological Anthropology form the University of Cambridge. My research focuses on the evolution of human hair diversity - something which is severely under-researched, despite the fact that its one of the most visibly varying traits we humans have! 

I was offered a place to do my PhD at Cambridge, but alas, funding did not come through. I will reapply Cambridge, but I’ve also spoken to some really amazing Professors at Penn State and Harvard University who’ve encouraged me to apply to their graduate programs and work with them on this project, but I simply cannot afford the cost of applications before the deadlines , so I am crowdfunding over the next 10 days (check it out). 

My bachelor’s thesis was entitled Human Hair Diversity: Quantitative variation of hair fibre shape and pigmentation. The department liked it and awarded it a Starred First (82) and my supervisor and I are working on a publication for a peer-reviewed journal based on this research right now. I ended up finding a lot of interesting things that I’m dying to share with you all! (And hopefully I will be able to share that publication with you all in a few months)

To keep it brief, I’m interested in answering questions such as:

Why did humans evolve such a wide range of hair textures and colours?

Do certain textures/colours provide an evolutionary advantage?

Why did humans lose all their body hair but keep their scalp hair?

My BA thesis is a step in the right direction, but having the opportunity to dedicate an entire PhD to this would bring this field out of the dark ages. And I do not exaggerate when I say that, a lot of studies published in scientific journals will describe hair in categories such as “wavy”, “woolly”, “blond” “red” despite the fact that we have the methods to describe the detailed morphology and chemically structure of hair - and using these methods would be a much more objective approach to studying it!

But unfortunately, a lot of researchers use categories like the ones described above, or even worse they will divide hair into: “African”, “Asian” and “European” hair, completely ignoring anyone who does not fall into those categories and completely homogenizing the massive numbers of populations which fall within these vast geographic regions.

Answering questions about human hair diversity is part of understanding human phenotypic variation - essentially, it’s part of understanding why we look different. I plan to make sure the public can access and understand all of the work that I do + any relevant information on the evolution of human (hair) diversity through my website.

If any of this sounds interesting to you, there’s even more info on the website humanhairdiversity.com and I will be using the hashtag #HairEvolutionPhD across platforms, follow me on Tumblr, Twitter, Instagram and Facebook to hear more about it. And I would really appreciate it if you can support the campaign in any way you can, since I need to reach a minimum of £430 by the end (or I receive nothing), I can assure you that every little bit helps immensely! So, here is the crowdfunding page again.

NASA landed some kind of equipment onto a comet (you can read about it here).  It’s basically an incredible, unprecedented achievement and Matt Taylor helped do it.  He was being interviewed on it and this was what he was wearing:

If you can see the problem, which I admit took me a while to see, his shirt has some scantly clad women on it (something made and given to him by a female friend of his).  So everyone threw a hissy fit over it, ignoring a) one of the greatest achievements we’ve had, up there with Curiosity on Mars, and b) all the freaking women scientists that helped the mission too.  Instead, we all get to listen people pitch a fit over a shaped piece of cloth.  Mr Taylor has since issued a tearful apology

I have a serious issue with this, because I’ve been actively accused of being racist and homophobic for some of my writing. Let me give you the example, one of my writing projects takes place in the late 1800’s (1888 to be specific) in Philadelphia and in an alternate steampunk-ish history-has-been-altered reality. Does that mean I have to radically change the belief systems and social attitudes in that time period? Hell no. Now, granted, the issue was more about homophobia than anything,  (I argued flatly that Philadelphia had the largest free black population at that time period, so logically there is no real reason for my main characters to not interact with them, and there are plenty of times where they do) but I didn’t have any LGBT-whatever-letter-of-the-alphabet-has-been-added-to-the-acronym-today characters in it. Well, unless my characters have to go into the seedy homosexual underworld, there wouldn’t be, and I’m not writing a story that revolves around sexuality so none of my main characters are queer. Hell, it was illegal to be gay up until the late nineteen-seventies. That gives you an idea.

So fucking what if people want to write about the kings of Europe in a fantastical manner? Apparently, that’s racist now. I hope this guy realizes that there are probably people out there who do write stories as told from the perspectives of people of color during said time periods (PS. I’m having an unbelievably hard time finding information about people of color in Europe during the middle ages. The best I got was Muslims who converted to Christianity and the adventures of the Europeans into Africa, so I’m not going to argue anything flat out at this juncture. I’m also not going to argue I know anything about this, so kindly don’t call me an idiot. I have the humility to know I don’t know everything. Realistically? They were probably slaves, unless you’re going for the ‘Magical Negro’ trope. No, that’s not me being racist, that is the legit name of the trope. Look it up.) but let people write what they want for God’s sake.

People like this make me angry, because I feel it gives new writers the idea that if they write something with an all white, straight, cis (I fucking hate cis terminology but I have to bring it up) cast that no one is going to want to read it. I have a very colorful array of characters (pardon the pun) but that’s because I’m comfortable writing characters of different sexualities and racial backgrounds. Some people aren’t. It’s not because they’re racist.

But alas. One story, in late-Victorian Era Philadelphia has an entire cast of white, straight, cis characters. Apparently, I am a racist and a homophobe now. *slow clap*

You had the time and energy to go on this rant about how much your feelings are hurt by being “actively accused” of racism (wtf?), but you did NOT have time to click the source blog’s link for this and notice that it’s full of OVER 4,500 POSTS AND TWO YEARS’ WORTH OF RESEARCH into exactly the thing you claim you can’t find any information on but feel 100% COMFORTABLE ASSUMING that they were “PROBABLY SLAVES”???

You disgust me. You know what? Being accused of having been less than inclusive in your writing doesn’t necessarily say much about YOU, but this^^^^? This kind of response says pretty much all I need to know, which is basically another for the pile of creators who seem to think valid criticisms from marginalized people amount to oppressing YOU.

People are becoming more vocally critical of media that contributes to the overrepresentation of white characters, abled characters, straight characters and so on, and in turn questioning the dominant culture in the U.S. (and to a certain extent, in what we think of as “the west”). If you see oppressed or marginalized people who want to see themselves in books, films, games, shows, and art of all kinds as some kind of attack on you or your identity, you should REALLY be re-thinking your values and what you base your sense of identity on. Because if what you value and enjoy is contingent on exclusion and marginalization, that’s just plain messed up. And maybe you should get over your derision for any word that ends in -ism, because guess what? Some of us have to live under those -isms every day, rather than having the luxury of googling them.

P.S. “It was illegal to be gay” for the barest moment of the history of the entire world, in relatively few geographical areas of that same entire world. Do you think it was “illegal to be gay” in North America in 1400 B.C.E.? In Medieval China? The “seedy homosexual world”???? Yeah, that doesn’t reflect your bigoted views AT ALL.

This is why we need to support creativity that shows an actual understanding of just how big and diverse History really is, and just how massive “anything you can imagine” is. I’m tired of being disappointed, I’m tired of being insulted, and I’m sick and tired unto DEATH of “barbarians and savages”, “but everyone was slaves”, and “but that’s not Historically Accurate!!!” I’m tired of these “altered realities” that SOMEHOW don’t have room for me or people like me.

Stop blaming history for your lack of imagination and limited worldview, and OWN UP to your own creative choices, which apparently suck.

In 1944 a children’s book club sent a volume about penguins to a 10-year-old girl, enclosing a card seeking her opinion.

She wrote, “This book gives me more information about penguins than I care to have.”

American diplomat Hugh Gibson called it the finest piece of literary criticism he had ever read.

Source: twitter.com/imransiddiquee

VRZ 2  is a track bike frame with 3d printed titan lugs glued together with carbon fiber tubes. This method allows to build custom frames in a short period of time. You could change the geometry to what ever fits you best, then the lugs gets generated by a software. The generated 3D files are produced with laser-cuseing process. Afterwards the printed parts need to be finished and bonded to the tubes.

VRZ 2 BELT  Frame: VRZ 2 Tubematerial: carbon Lugmaterial: titanium (laser-cusing) Lugcoating: TIN, CRN, or TiCN+C Handlebar: Deda Pista Saddle: AX Lightness Seatpost: Vorwaertz TI+C 1 Steam: Vorwaertz Top 2 Crankset:THM CLAVICULA (GATES carbon belt) BB: BB86 THM Wheels: Lightweight RUNDKURS Tires: Conti 4000s Total weight: 4,9kg

If she’d taken people’s money and promised to give them golden eggs and the eggs were just stones painted with gold paint, that would make her a fraud and con artist.

The fact that she gets paid to say things you don’t like doesn’t make her a fraud.

Heck, even if she were objectively wrong about everything, it wouldn’t make her a fraud.

She didn’t ask for $100,000.

She asked for $6,000. 

She didn’t say that the videos would cost her $100,000, or promise to spend $100,000 on them. $100,000 represents the amount that people, of their own free will and according to their ability, collectively invested in her idea. She had a $100k vision. She had a $100k idea. That makes her lucky, but not a fraud. The fact that so many people were willing to throw that much money at a relatively untried and unknown woman on the strrength of her idea, of that idea, shows just how deeply what she was saying spoke to so many people. 

Which is how crowdfunding success stories tend to work.

Now, has it taken her longer than she expected to do it? Yeah, but there have also been some unexpected bumps along the road. Like having to deal with death threats and rape threats. Like having to defend her right to make the videos that people thought were worth it to a tune of $100k.

The fact that it’s taken her longer to complete the race when people are trying to kneecap her doesn’t make her a fraud.

If she totally failed to deliver any videos for some reason, this also wouldn’t make her a fraud.

"Fraud" means a specific thing.

She’s not “kind of a fraud”.

She’s someone who got more money than you think she deserves to say things you don’t agree with.

But you know what a hollow, petty complaint that would sound like.

Let’s say we’re comparing it to Ana Akana, as she uploads as regularly as most YouTubers. She can pump out at least 2 high quality videos per month, with all sorts of effects and extras, even more complicated than how Anita just sits there and steals videos from other people’s Let’s Plays, and just looks up stuff on tvtropes.com, without doing much research. Since Ana’s videos are about 4 minutes in length, that’s 8 minutes per month, and 94 minutes per year. Since Anita has taken 2 whole years, she SHOULD have 188 minutes up, AT THE LEAST. But she only has around 60 up. That’s less than a third of what she should have.

I honestly could care less about her getting more than she asked for. But”

1)She has enough to do the videos

2) She’s had enough time

I’m with you so far.

Now, continue and show me where the fraud comes in.

Because what I’m hearing so far is that you don’t think she’s worth the money she’s been given, or that she’s asking for.

And as far as I know, the system works, because as far as I know, she has no mechanism to extort this money from you, or anyone else who doesn’t believe she’s worth it.

This isn’t fraud. This is a thing that we call the “free market”. People just freak out a little when it’s divorced of its familiar trappigns. Do you know what there is in a frappe drink from Starbucks that is worth $5? Nothing. Not the ingredients, not the skill required to make it, not the time that goes into it comes close to justifying the cost. Even their drip coffee you can get for a buck is a few pennies worth of coffee and some water. 

Are they perpetrating a fraud? By any objective measurement, you don’t get what you pay for from Starbucks. Or many similar retailers.

But they can do it because people want Starbucks enough to pay that much for it.

Are those people saps? Are they suckers? You could make the argument.

But no one’s making you buy Starbucks. I mean, mostly. Their effect on the larger market around them can make them hard to avoid if you want certain products. The same is true of other similarly extortionate retailers.

But Anita Sarkeesian? If you don’t want to see her videos, you can avoid them. If you don’t want to pay for her videos, you can avoid them. It’s the freest form of free market. Heck, you could watch her videos AND pay nothing! 

Every single person who gives her money is making the decision for themselves what it’s worth to support her, what her labor and expertise and time and risk is worth. They’re making those decisions for themselves.

Oh no!

FLY, YOU FOOL!

If so, please let me know so I know to stop responding.

You told me in so many words that Anita Sarkeesian does not allow criticism. And yet here you are, criticizing her. Obviously there’s a bit of an incongruity between what you claimed and reality. Excuse me for using a little levity to point it out.

But now you clarify: she doesn’t allow you to comment on her videos directly.

And?

I’m pretty sure the game companies don’t let her upload her videos directly onto the ends of their games, either.

Not giving people a share of her platform is not the same as denying anyone a platform. You could make your own videos. You could do everything she did, but the way you want. You have the same freedom that she has.

Being slow to fulfill a promise isn’t remotely a scam. You’ve already admitted you are using that word wrong, which means your “argument” consists of “I DON’T LIKE HER AND SHE’S BAD AND MY FEELINGS ARE MORE IMPORTANT THAN FACTS AND RAR!”

So don’t talk to me about nonsense, okay?

Because you’ve been talking nonsense from the beginning.

Man.

You know how much money I gave Anita Sarkeesian? $0.

You know how many of her videos I’ve watched? None.

You know how much I are about what she thinks about video games? Honestly, not much, though I’m glad she’s talking about them.

The systems works. I am telling you. In this case, it works just fine. You have all the same tools she does. If she sucks so hard, it should be easy enough for you or anyone else to show her up.

Actually Anita Sarkeesian has been debunked countless times.

Anita Sarkeesian has been debunked. Not “Sarkeesian’s arguments have been debunked,” or anything like that. Sarkeesian herself, debunked.

Now, normally I’d say that’s just imprecise wording and we shouldn’t make a big deal out of it, but honestly in this case I think it’s revealing. The argument isn’t that Sarkeesian actually perpetrated fraud, or lied to get money, or anything. That argument would be vulnerable to, y’know, people pointing out that no one was coerced into spending money on her videos.

The claim is that Sarkeesian herself is, through some nebulous process, rendered false, fraudulent, illegitimate, invalid - “debunked.”

The target isn’t her arguments or her videos. The target is her.

It’s also an issue that has been coming up a lot again (or people are dragging medievalpoc into it :/) on Twitter and other social media venues, in regard to the whole Kingdom Come: Deliverance debacle, which I still personally do not give much of a crap about. Someone asked me a question, and I answered it. And that, apparently, was enough to start slinging death threats.

It’s become rather obvious that anyone who criticizes video games for any reason that relates to representation of anyone except straight white men is considered fair game for any kind of violent attack.

And honestly? It’s the kind of people who do this ^ sort of thing, who make excuses, who move the goalposts from discourse to personal attacks on human beings, who pretend as if this is some kind of “just desserts” or “playing the victim”, are what really allows the threats, harassment, and violence to continue. It enables and emboldens those willing to commit real acts of violence, because they see agreement and complicity in these statements. And I really think that the people making them know that.

I think people need to pay very close attention to the shape these conversations take. After all, why insert yourself into a conversation specifically to call the victim of a rather massive and notorious campaign of violence a “fraud and a con artist” if you’re not trying to somehow justify or condone them?

As I told you already six months ago, go back to your classes if you’re not interested in challenging the ways we teach whiteness-as-default in academia. Stop trying to make your satisfaction with the institutionalized racism in our education MY problem. As if throwing around terms like “hack afrocentrist pseudo-scholars” isn’t biased as hell, and as if everything you have ever had to say isn’t in defense of the idea that everything in the Ancient/Classical world was the product of whiteness. I already know what you learned in your classrooms, and I don’t care.

The documented fact that racial claims for Ancient/Classical cultural achievements have been wrangled about for quite literally centuries doesn’t prove anything about them, but it says a great deal about us. We exist in the context of visible and documented stripping of cultural achievements from Black peoples and cultures. In the words of Immanuel Kant:

The Negroes of Africa have by nature no feeling that rises above the trifling. Mr. [David] Hume challenges anyone to cite a single example in which a Negro has shown talents, and asserts that among the hundreds of thousands of blacks who are transported elsewhere from their countries, although many of them have even been set free, still not a single one was ever found who presented anything great in art or science or any other praiseworthy quality, even though among the whites some continually rise aloft from the lowest rabble and through superior gifts earn respect in the world. So fundamental is the difference between these two races of man.

That ^^ is WHY THIS CONVERSATION IS HAPPENING. Not because “people just want to know”. It’s because this entire supposed “debate” is product of scientific racism from the 18th and 19th centuries in Europe.

^^^That is what you’re defending.

The bottom line is that how WE would categorize Ancient Egyptians today is relevant only to sociocultural conversations; in the words of S.O.Y. Keita:

There is no scientific reason to believe that the primary ancestors of the Egyptian population emerged and evolved outside of northeast Africa.[…]The body proportions of ancient Egyptians generally are similar to those of tropical (more southern) Africans.

The funny thing is? I’m not the one making any racial claims for Cleopatra. What DID I do?

I posted a QUOTE from a book, saying that we don’t KNOW what skin color she had:

But all that matters to people invested in the whiteness of the past, is that there can be no ambiguity, nothing but easy answers that support centuries of racist thought and influence on every facet of Western academia.