Esoterica's avatar

Esoterica

iridessence
cypheroftyr:

iridessence:

iridessence:

PLEASE REBLOG THIS: Is there anyone in the Chicagoland area that wants a dog? I can no longer keep our dog Dablund because I’m going to live on campus.
He looks to be a poodle mix and I estimate that he is around 4 years old, give or take a few months. He loves attention, doesn’t seem to like other male dogs or small children and needs a family/owner with lots of patience.
I have more pictures upon request and I’m not asking for anything for him. If you can pick him up, that would be ideal. In a few days he’ll be given to a shelter.

UPDATE: in order to avoid him getting into the hands of people looking to make a quick buck by selling him to a testing shelter, I’m charging $25 for him. But if I know your tumblr well enough, he will be free.

OMG he looks like the dog I had growing up! She was a lab/cockerspaniel mix. Unfortunately I can’t take him, but signal boosting for local peeps who might be looking for a pup. 
Hopefully he won’t have to go to a shelter. Signal boost please!

cypheroftyr:

iridessence:

iridessence:

PLEASE REBLOG THIS: Is there anyone in the Chicagoland area that wants a dog? I can no longer keep our dog Dablund because I’m going to live on campus.

He looks to be a poodle mix and I estimate that he is around 4 years old, give or take a few months. He loves attention, doesn’t seem to like other male dogs or small children and needs a family/owner with lots of patience.

I have more pictures upon request and I’m not asking for anything for him. If you can pick him up, that would be ideal. In a few days he’ll be given to a shelter.

UPDATE: in order to avoid him getting into the hands of people looking to make a quick buck by selling him to a testing shelter, I’m charging $25 for him. But if I know your tumblr well enough, he will be free.

OMG he looks like the dog I had growing up! She was a lab/cockerspaniel mix. Unfortunately I can’t take him, but signal boosting for local peeps who might be looking for a pup. 

Hopefully he won’t have to go to a shelter. Signal boost please!

blue-author

Blog Post: WisCon: On transparency, jurisprudence, and responsibility.

blue-author:

The context of this post will be obvious to some people following me, and a complete mystery to others. The short version is that in 2013, a man named James Frenkel—then an editor at Tor, and a big name in the circles surrounding the literary-slanted sci-fi/fantasy con WisCon—was the subject of two formal harassment/abuse reports, which were part of an ongoing pattern of behavior going back decades.

Despite the presence of multiple unrelated formal reports and despite the feminist and progressive slant that WisCon has branded itself with, Frenkel was allowed to attend WisCon 38, where he gave the excuse for his presence that he was trying to “redeem” himself while also insisting that to not go would be to admit guilt.

If there is a single, simple reason why he wasn’t barred, it’s because no one had barred him. Supposedly, there was no policy or process in place to handle this. Since WisCon 38, committees were formed. Meetings were held. Decisions were made, and announced.

And while it’s now (provisionally) certain that he won’t be in attendance at WisCon 39, little else seems certain.

Other people have written about the specifics of the situation with WisCon, the history of James Frenkel, and what the decision (provisionally) and the way the case was handled implies.

My reason for making this post is to address something else. One phrase I keep seeing from those involved is “we’re trying to be transparent”, but this is one of the least transparent processes I have ever seen. I see the intention to be transparent, but I don’t see the resulting transparency.

And that’s because…

Without clarity, there can be no transparency.

There are two terms you might remember from elementary physics, when we first learned about light and the properties of matter: transparent and translucent. A transparent object is one that you can see through. A translucent object passes light through, but not with sufficient clarity to see what’s going on behind it. A house might have transparent windows in most of the rooms, but frosted ones—translucent ones—in the bathroom.

The difference is that when someone is in most rooms with the light on, you can look through the window and see who’s in the room and what’s going on, but when someone goes into the bathroom and turns on the light, you can at most make out a vague shape. You don’t know who’s in there or what’s going on.

Obviously, this is great for privacy, which is why the frosted windows tend to turn up in places like bathrooms.

The difference between transparent and translucent is clear, and by that I mean, the difference is that transparent surfaces are clear while translucent ones are not.

To put it quite simply: transparency without clarity is meaningless. It’s not transparent.

As an institution, WisCon is a multiplicity of entities. There is the corporate parent organization SF3, there is the volunteer/member-staffed Convention Committee (ConComm), there is a team for the convention tasked with Safety and a head of that team, there is a sub-committee tasked with overseeing a harassment policy (I’ve seen this group referred to as HarPolComm, and the fact that this name is sometimes used without explanation is as perfect an example of non-clarity as one could dream of), and there is a sub-committee that was convened specifically to deal with the reports of harassment by James Frenkel.

In a conversation about this topic, people party to the decision(s) made might refer to “safety” without specifying who they meant (a person? the team? the general concept?), or “the committee”, or “the sub-committee”. No matter how transparent they are being, they are not being clear.

The problem is exacerbated when someone who has been immersed in an ongoing closed conversation where a kind of shorthand understanding develops comes out and starts referring to these entities in the same off-hand way that they’ve grown accustomed to speaking of them. This is a great and recurring problem of the human condition: if we do not stop to consider the point of view of others, then we will always tend to take for granted anything that comes naturally to us or has become second nature. Or to put it more shortly, if I know what I’m talking about, then ipso facto, you know what I’m talking about.

We see this phenomenon in the statement released by the Frenkel sub-committee. My informal observation is that the farther someone was from the actual decision, the less likely they are to understand it in the same way that the drafters apparently intended. This is a serious red flag that the text does not say what the authors think it says.

There is a principle of game design/testing that I cleave to, which is that a tabletop game should always be tested by people who had no hand in its creation. If a perfect stranger can’t sit down with the rules and, with no prompting or hints except what’s in the pages of the book, play the game as written, then the game as written doesn’t work.

For purposes of clarity, the worst drafted line of the sub-committee’s decision on Jim Frenkel is the most important: WisCon will (provisionally) not allow Jim Frenkel to return for a period of four years (until after WisCon 42 in 2018).

The “provisionally” there could mean anything: he’s provisionally not allowed, the term is provisionally four years in the sense that it might be longer, the term is provisionally four years in the sense that it might be shorter. The lines meant to clarify it seem to imply the last possibility: This is “provisional” because if Jim Frenkel chooses to present substantive, grounded evidence of behavioral and attitude improvement between the end of WisCon 39 in 2015 and the end of the four-year provisional period, WisCon will entertain that evidence. We will also take into account any reports of continued problematic behavior.

Now, I’ve since been told that the whole point of the four year period is that he’s legally constrained from submitting such evidence until the end of the period, which seems like the opposite of what’s being conveyed here, which is the expectation that he should be spending the time between 2015 and 2018 making his case.

So we’ve got two very carelessly placed modifiers here, the initial “provisionally” and the phrase beginning with “between”. If you already know the intended meaning or you have the expectation that it will be something similar to this, you can read the sub-committee’s statement to mean that he’s definitely banned for a minimum of four years, and after that he must show substantial evidence of change before re-admission will be considered.

Without that context, the “provisionally” seems very menacing, and the whole thing appears very wishy-washy, with the next paragraph (that spells out that his re-admission is not guaranteed at any time) seeming like a mere addendum, and thus so much-behind covering.

However you parse it, we have a situation where three days after a decision was unveiled whose existence had been announced a week in advance, there is no clear consensus about what it’s supposed to mean.

Those of us who have asked have been unofficially told that the sub-committee is working on some clarifying language to release, but there has been no official announcement. Not even an “unofficial official” announcement posted in the LJ/DW communities, where most people read the initial wording of the decision.

Those I’ve asked about this have basically said that it’s not their place, as 1/5th of the sub-committee, to make such a statement.

This brings me to my next point.

Many hands make light responsibility.

I think I won’t be saying anything new or controversial when I say that a fundamental problem over the years in dealing with Jim Frenkel and other similar people and situations is that no one (at least no one in a position of power) wants to be responsible for the decision that so many people recognize as necessary.

As others have observed, an outbreak of norovirus one year that threatened the con was dealt with swiftly with effective countermeasures for future cons, and a newcomer to the con who came to troll by taking pictures without people’s awareness or consent and post them to the internet was banned without deliberation, handwringing, fanfare, or the convocation of a special committee.

But a man who occupied a position of importance in publishing, a man who was part of the local progressive scene, a man who had been part of WisCon for far longer than many of the people writing about this (myself included) have been aware the con existed… no one wanted to be the one to show him the door, or even to take a hard line with him.

This same phenomenon is probably responsible for the “confusion” about why he was allowed to attend WisCon 38 after having two formal reports lodged against him in conjunction with WisCon 37; no one wanted to be the one to give him the boot, but no one wanted to admit responsibility for not having done so.

The formation of select sub-committee tasked exclusively with The Problem of James Frenkel should have been the final answer to that problem, but we still see the same diffusion of responsibility, the same unwillingness to act. We see this in the blame being placed on other entities and previous incarnations of the current entities. We see this in the unwillingness of the sub-committee members—even ones who have been actively engaging with critics and disappointed members—to be the one to say, officially and on the record, “We’re sorry. We fumbled this. Another announcement will be forthcoming, we just really want to make sure we get it right.”

And we see it in how the sub-committee apparently approached its task, which was more concerned with creating a formal process that can be generalized to other cases than dealing with the specific case that was in front of them, and more concerned with deciding the disposition the two formal reports they had in front of them than the problem that had resulted in those reports.

This brings me to my third point, which is…

When lay organizations try to focus on jurisprudence, they end up focusing more on juris than prudence.

In cases like this (including this case), the concept of “due process” is often invoked. Other people—including lawyers and barristers—have explained how easily this goes awry, when laypeople try to imitate the outward flourishes of the legal apparatus without understanding their context and purpose.

If we follow the purpose of the narrowest entity involved—the sub-committee on James Frenkel—back to its point of genesis, we find that the ultimate purpose here is the safety and comfort of the membership of WisCon. We can trace back further to find that the purpose of WisCon is to be an inclusive, feminist-centered version of the literary/science fiction convention experience.

Some members of the sub-committee were evidently unaware of the larger context; others were not, but chose to focus on the reports that were on the table, even to the point that other information on other cases involving Frenkel that had been evidently solicited was apparently then disregarded.

Whatever the proximate cause of the sub-committee was, their ultimate purpose—the purpose of their purpose—was to see to the safety of WisCon’s membership. In focusing their deliberations and decision narrowly on the content of the two specific reports that resulted in their sub-committee being convened, they failed.

They failed in that their decision may be (again, clarification is needed) inadequate to the task of keeping a (sometimes potentially violent, and by “potentially” I mean that he literally threw a book at a woman’s head and missed) serial harasser of women out of the convention space, and they failed in that their conduct and communication has not done anything to repair the harm done or reassure those who have reason to fear more harm.

comment count unavailable comments

kyssthis16

why isn't it a problem when m.i.a raps? why is it ok to have chicano rap/asian rap/ etc? But as soon as white people try it you all lose your shit?

Anonymous

kyssthis16:

kkowka:

king-felicia:

kyssthis16:

That’s so cute and simplistic. Did you work on this question all week or…? No one cares when white people try to rap. We care when they don’t represent their authentic selves or are plain untalented. We don’t care that Eminem is white. He’s not out her performing sonic blackface, despite being from the Detroit Metro Area. Yelawolf sounds like a southern rapper because… he’s a southern rapper. Homeboy is from Alabama. His voice is his. Hell, we didn’t even care about Bubba Sparxxx. Homeboy is from Georgia. Plus, Ms. New Booty is still a bop, so.. *shrugs*

Iggy literally sounds like something out of Malibu’s Most Wanted. Protip: that movie was not a documentary. This sheila is claiming she’s in the “murda bidness”. Homegirl grew up in Mulllumbimby, New South Wales, on a fucking farm. What the fuck was she murdering? Chickens? The hopes and dreams of her parents? What? You tell me. But she is flagrantly being dishonest and unauthentic. She sounds like all the mediocre parts of some of the premiere lady rappers throughout the years. She ain’t as cool in her delivery as Da Brat. She ain’t as raw and bold as Foxy or Trina. She ain’t as cute or skilled as Charli Baltimore. Iggy is what happens when generally mediocre white girls think they deserve to win and people who don’t know better let them. 

Fuck this person, I hate how this has like 6k notes when its a pretty blatantly racist argument that I hear alllllll the time. Anyone that thinks of gangster rap (if you want to consider iggy that just due to the content of murda bidness and for the sake of the argument) as anything more than just a genre of music is fucking retarded. Saying that someone cant rap because they aren’t from a ghetto is like saying someone cant paint in a post impressionist style because they aren’t from the late 19th century. “Sorry you cant be a rapper due to circumstances completely out of your control, like not being born to a certain specific socioeconomic class”. I’m a white middle class kid but I’ve been listening to hip hop (specifically new york originated gangster rap) since i was 8 years old when Vol 2. Hard Knock Life dropped. If rap is your favorite genre of music and you feel inspired to rap then you have all the right in the fucking world to rap.

but, white people can’t be discriminated against? oh wait!
Someone should tell them that T.I is all over her and that’s a black guy making her win.

image

People who don’t know better includes Black men entrenched in misogynoir, sweetie. But nice effort. 

lilightfoot

They call us now. Before they drop the bombs. The phone rings and someone who knows my first name calls and says in perfect Arabic “This is David.” And in my stupor of sonic booms and glass shattering symphonies still smashing around in my head I think “Do I know any Davids in Gaza?” They call us now to say Run. You have 58 seconds from the end of this message. Your house is next. They think of it as some kind of war time courtesy. It doesn’t matter that there is nowhere to run to. It means nothing that the borders are closed and your papers are worthless and mark you only for a life sentence in this prison by the sea and the alleyways are narrow and there are more human lives packed one against the other more than any other place on earth Just run. We aren’t trying to kill you. It doesn’t matter that you can’t call us back to tell us the people we claim to want aren’t in your house that there’s no one here except you and your children who were cheering for Argentina sharing the last loaf of bread for this week counting candles left in case the power goes out. It doesn’t matter that you have children. You live in the wrong place and now is your chance to run to nowhere. It doesn’t matter that 58 seconds isn’t long enough to find your wedding album or your son’s favorite blanket or your daughter’s almost completed college application or your shoes or to gather everyone in the house. It doesn’t matter what you had planned. It doesn’t matter who you are Prove you’re human. Prove you stand on two legs. Run. Running Orders by Lena Khalaf Tuffaha

They call us now.
Before they drop the bombs.
The phone rings
and someone who knows my first name
calls and says in perfect Arabic
“This is David.”
And in my stupor of sonic booms and glass shattering symphonies
still smashing around in my head
I think “Do I know any Davids in Gaza?”
They call us now to say
Run.
You have 58 seconds from the end of this message.
Your house is next.
They think of it as some kind of war time courtesy.
It doesn’t matter that
there is nowhere to run to.
It means nothing that the borders are closed
and your papers are worthless
and mark you only for a life sentence
in this prison by the sea
and the alleyways are narrow
and there are more human lives
packed one against the other
more than any other place on earth
Just run.
We aren’t trying to kill you.
It doesn’t matter that
you can’t call us back to tell us
the people we claim to want aren’t in your house
that there’s no one here
except you and your children
who were cheering for Argentina
sharing the last loaf of bread for this week
counting candles left in case the power goes out.
It doesn’t matter that you have children.
You live in the wrong place
and now is your chance to run
to nowhere.
It doesn’t matter
that 58 seconds isn’t long enough
to find your wedding album
or your son’s favorite blanket
or your daughter’s almost completed college application
or your shoes
or to gather everyone in the house.
It doesn’t matter what you had planned.
It doesn’t matter who you are
Prove you’re human.
Prove you stand on two legs.
Run.

Running Orders by Lena Khalaf Tuffaha

(via grrspit)

catsbeaversandducks

catsbeaversandducks:

Post-it Notes Left on the Train

Writer and illustrator October Jones, the creative genius behind Text From Dog and these funny train commute doodles, is at it again with these hilarious motivational post-it notes that he leaves on the train and in other random places.The upbeat doodles, which star Jones’ adorable character Peppy the Inspirational Cat, convey positive and funny messages meant to motivate daily commuters. Whether you’re feeling the Monday blues or in need of some encouragement, Jones’ delightful post-it notes are sure to brighten your day and remind you just how awesome you are.

Via My Modern Metropolis 

(via brainingdaily)

micdotcom
dynastylnoire:

daniellemertina:

the-uncensored-she:

micdotcom:

Teen’s Auschwitz selfie reminds us all to think before posting online

If you needed more evidence that you should think carefully about what you put online, a girl named Breanna Mitchell has incited the Internet by tweeting a “smiling selfie” of herself at the remains of the Auschwitz concentration camp in Poland.
Posted in June, it only came to the Internet’s attention this month, when angry Twitter users reacted en masse to the perceived desecration of a memorial to human brutality.
But this isn’t just about selfies | Follow micdotcom


This girl’s a fucking dumbass.

Nobody would be mad if you took a smiling selfie on a plantation in the South. Of course, weddings literally happen on plantations so… 

Can we just talk about all the horrible pictures being taken at A Subtlety?
Can we talk about Plantation style weddings?
Can we talk about ghetto/black face parties at colleges?
I mean, white people hire photographers to take shots of them participating in apologetically racist shit on a regular basis but there is no outrage there outside of the black community.

dynastylnoire:

daniellemertina:

the-uncensored-she:

micdotcom:

Teen’s Auschwitz selfie reminds us all to think before posting online

If you needed more evidence that you should think carefully about what you put online, a girl named Breanna Mitchell has incited the Internet by tweeting a “smiling selfie” of herself at the remains of the Auschwitz concentration camp in Poland.

Posted in June, it only came to the Internet’s attention this month, when angry Twitter users reacted en masse to the perceived desecration of a memorial to human brutality.

But this isn’t just about selfies | Follow micdotcom

This girl’s a fucking dumbass.

Nobody would be mad if you took a smiling selfie on a plantation in the South. Of course, weddings literally happen on plantations so… 

Can we just talk about all the horrible pictures being taken at A Subtlety?

Can we talk about Plantation style weddings?

Can we talk about ghetto/black face parties at colleges?

I mean, white people hire photographers to take shots of them participating in apologetically racist shit on a regular basis but there is no outrage there outside of the black community.

WisCon…This is How You Fail | The Angry Black Woman

descentintotyranny

Israel destroys el-Wafa hospital as staff evacuates all patients

(via note-a-bear)

Washington Post

This is what you do when McDonald’s gives you free burgers for a year

sirwhindleton:

washingtonpost:

Remember Charles Ramsey, the hero behind the Cleveland kidnapping rescue?

image

McDonald’s promised Ramsey free burgers for a year after he said on TV that he’d gone to McDonald’s before rescuing the captive women and went to their aid with a half-eaten Big Mac in hand.

Ramsey said McDonald’s gave him $2,000 in gift cards. “I handed them out to every homeless person and kid I could find,” he said.

He continues to impress me.

I’m thankful for people like him

(via blueklectic)

Netroots or Bust

So this is the tiniest of fundraisers because we fell just a little bit short. If you can help, please do. Thanks in advance for even considering it!