Your web-browser is very outdated, and as such, this website may not display properly. Please consider upgrading to a modern, faster and more secure browser. Click here to do so.
wtf are these posts from the bisexual community I’m seeing on my dash that completely erase the complexity of queer oppression
I guess I’m saying that Thompson and Carr, based on Wu’s description, both seem to define “Intelligence” as a discrete and measurable concept that exists outside of culture, when who is intelligent and what is intelligent behavior/speech/thinking/etc are all determined by largely constructed social standards.
Standards that are obviously changing with technology, in a massive cultural shift. It’s hardly “Are we more or less intelligent????????” Or “In what WAYS are we less intelligent???” It’s: What is our definition of intelligence now? What kinds of knowledge, expertise, and critical skills are considered valuable now? How are people and organizations responding to these new standards? What kind of changes will social and economic structures undergo?
And obviously the answer to these questions shouldn’t be “ppl are getting stupider, obvs” or “TECHNOLOGY IS POWER!!!! CYBORGS!!!” Ultimately older structures will be replicated, with some differences (for example, the poor will STILL have limited access to info and resources), so it’s hard to label these cultural shifts as “probably bad” or “largely good” or all centered around what technology alone, a separate entity from the culture that produces and uses it, is doing to us
Anne Frank was not bisexual; she didn’t identify that way? She was a child who was murdered in a horrific genocide before she was able to fall in love with any damn body. She experienced same sex attraction, sure. That doesn’t justify pasting current identity politics on a girl who lived- and died- 70+ years ago.
Like I don’t understand the implication in some arguments here that things need to be subversive to be powerful, and the resulting conclusion that labeling something less subversive is devaluing it
This is the reason people end up writing paragraphs and paragraphs arguing the subversiveness of something mad status quo- for example, “I am a cisgender woman who wears lipstick” - when the act’s value has nothing to do with whether or not it defies overarching social constructions, but individual needs, desires, and pleasures
This kind of act is not subversive, but valuable. The two are not necessarily correlated. Subversion and justice are not the same thing, either. I think this community needs to internalize the distinction between the two; it would make discourse on here much more coherent.
The shooting range was fun. I was VERY nervous at first: the constant loud noise, strangers I didn’t necessarily trust, fucking guns everywhere- but I gradually adjusted. I even got really good at shooting the target where the heart’s supposed to be.
I shot three kinds of guns (a 22LR, a 9mm, and a 45) and though I started with the less powerful pistols the 45 was just fucking nuts. The first time I shot it, I thought I might enjoy it because my friends were waxing on about how cool it was. I DID NOT ENJOY IT. I apparently turned to one of my friends with “a look of pure terror” immediately after I made my first shot. It’s a violent motherfucking machine, and it felt strange to use it so casually. I could feel the blast rattling my teeth and my entire skeleton; unlike the 22 and the 9 I could FEEL this gun was made to tear people apart. It was just a terrible sensation, fucking around with power like that. I didn’t want to touch that shit again, and refused to do so until my friends eventually coaxed me into picking it back up again. Once I became more confident, I learned it had the best aim, which surprised me because I found the 22 easier to shoot in more ways than one. Yet I made all of my best shots with the 45.
I’m still really rattled by how it feels to pull the trigger (of the 45, at least), but it was a valuable afternoon, and fun. I have learned new skills! I am a real Texan now. And I still think guns are essentially fucked up, if fun to shoot at plywood boards covered in paper.
A lot of people rushed to Target to purchase Valentines’ Day stuff this evening; all damn day I was running to and from the cash register. Amazingly, it wasn’t all dudes sheepishly slapping down a card, or parents getting last minute valentines for their kids to distribute in class.There were a lot parents and grandparents buying gifts for their kids?? ????????????? ?????????????????????????
Is this the future??? If I ever have kids are they going to complain about their parents not throwing $50 away on their ungrateful asses when all I’ll want to do is dote upon my future hypothetical wife? Chi, chi. Your gift this February 14th is the searing epiphany that your mom is never going to equate “buying shit” with “love,” along with a helpful pamphlet about the way capitalism bulldozes cultures and meanings to suit its whims/modes of production
For THIS Valentine’s Day- IN REALITY- I’m giving myself swollen feet from standing at a cash register all day
Also cashing my new paycheck
I’m always so skeptical when the mainstream makes a big show of supporting my rights. Are they doing it for business reasons, mostly? (Yes)
In a way the visual support of queerness re: the Olympics from many groups is nice, and also a sign that more people don’t have a stick up their ass about GLBTQA folk; hell, I do feel a tad safer the more commonplace it becomes. But it also reads like the most smug of masturbatory back pats. The US hasn’t passed tons of basics re: gay rights. The senate passed ENDA, but it hasn’t been voted on in the house yet (it wasn’t passed by any legislature when Obama made that hypocritical speech addressing Russia’s homophobia). And we repealed DADT, which ultimately supports the military industrial complex more than Actual Gay People (tm).
Also the US is plagued with burgeoning economic inequality which disproportionately impacts GLBTQA folk, some more than others (people of color, trans* folk)….. so we’re supporting this PROGRESSIVE!!! push for queer rights without addressing some huge systemic problems inherently related to our oppression, or even defining what the hell “solidarity” with queers entails other than getting “points” for non-queers’ liberalness, or which “rights” need to be addressed specifically or even what “gay” means, what kind of queers we’re really supporting with these easy, superficial gestures
But like thanks I guess, for making the Google page a rainbow. I’m critical, but hell, I AM happy that some bigoted-ass Americans are further shamed for being a “minority” with an “unpopular opinion” because Google had the audacity to put a rainbow on their front page… weep, y’all. Mumble something about how “you guess” freedom of speech exists. Bleach all of the Duck Dynasty merchandise you brought through my checkout lane because a gay touched your shit.
I wonder if anyone’s written a book about American culture’s discouragement of the extended family household. Like, how it’s tangentially related to/supported by consumerism and capitalism, wherein ppl are encouraged to live “on their own” in nuclear families lest they be accused of being something other than adults, and therefore purchase more items and resources for homemaking (both homes, objects and tools, food, as well as information and tradition re: homemaking lost when not living in a multi-generational household)
I know extended family households are not always desirable or feasible (say, in instances of abuse, or simple irreconcilable personality differences), but I define “extended family” VERY loosely; this can include a friend group, employee group, etc.
i dunno if anyone’s written that, actually
could it also be connected to urbanization (which is the term for everyone moving to the cities, right?)?
It could be connected to urbanization, but for the poor moving to the city usually meant living in cramped, over populated spaces where a lot of resource sharing was necessary, if not actively encouraged.
I think city living encourages group-living more than living in the suburbs/exurbs, though you’re right in that urbanization as a cultural shift started the removal of “traditional households” from the American status quo. I’m thinking it’s more likely that the suburban boom in the 1950’s and related construction of the “nuclear family” ideal popularized the set of American values I want to learn more about
BUT REALLY I don’t know for sure, I’m just making educated guesses, which is why I’d really like to find a book from an expert.
Page 1 of 13