This mindset is exactly why creative shows of color don’t get to exist on television anymore. There’s an overbearing sense of entitlement that refuses to allow shows of color to thrive. How dare we even try?

People on the Internet Can Be Hella Racist Congrats to Issa Rae and the crew of Awkward Black Girl for their Shorty Award win in the category of “Best Web Show”! (Having given out quite a few awards in my day, I know exactly the kind of racism she’s talking about in her piece.)

Oh man, that’s awful that Issa went through that. As someone who was at the Shorty Awards Monday night, I can ensure you that she got nothing but praise inside the venue. (Also, her acceptance clip was funny.)  (via shortformblog)

ABG is easily one of my favorite shows, and not just within the realm of web shorts! What’s so obnoxious about this sort of reaction isn’t even the white people saying “well, I can’t identify with people who aren’t my color, so this show isn’t for me.” At least I know for sure I never want to talk to that person again. What’s really awful is people who don’t like this show (or any other poc-centered show) getting recognized as good outside its category of being a poc-centered show because it’s a “gimmick” or “needlessly political.”

This, to me, is one of the most obnoxious things about trying to discuss white privilege. So many (liberal!) white people consider poc, and white men consider women (of all shades), as intrinsically political subjects. The problem with this isn’t the assumption that they’re political (everyone is political), but the matching assumption that white people or, more often, white men are apolitical. To these people, if some art form contains a person of color, there is a political statement being made. If that art form clearly is not making a political statement, the question asked is “why use a nonwhite subject in the first place?” Too many people view this as pragmatic.

When Hunger Games came out (sorry to bring it up again), so many people flipped out about the two (were there two? I didn’t see the movie) black characters, and even after it was pointed out that in the book they were clearly not white, it didn’t really matter. The white viewer’s image of the movie was this basic fun experience, and suddenly the “producers,” because obviously involving black people in a movie is selling out (the level of irony in this sentiment is unfathomable), had to make it a “thing” by putting in black people.

This is one of the greatest continuous luxuries of privilege: to remove yourself from politics as you please, to enjoy being “normal” in a sense that no nonwhite citizen can enjoy, to live without expectations of your origins and your purpose.

(via shortformblog)

dodgehomburg:

storyofagayboy:

This is just disgusting… Read the fine print and join with me in leading my sinful life WITHOUT one of their Chick-Fil-A sandwiches! Pathetic!

Yea I stopped eating here after my friend told me precedes from each sale go to anti-gay groups/foundations

Look guys I go to NYU and I am not a Chick-Fil-A fan (they close on Sundays they’re so “Christian”) and tonight I met the girl who heads the petition to get Chick-Fil-A removed from NYU and I told her “good job.” Almost eleven thousand signatures!
But this is clearly not a real thing. No company, no matter how morally righteous they were, would write their definition of marriage on some awkward-looking flier. On top of that, they don’t hire university students! I’m not saying that Chick-Fil-A doesn’t engage in these hiring practices, but this is obviously a satirical poster.
What restaurant puts an awkward black & white picture of their popular food product on a HELP WANTED poster? And then places no contact information besides their press address?

dodgehomburg:

storyofagayboy:

This is just disgusting… Read the fine print and join with me in leading my sinful life WITHOUT one of their Chick-Fil-A sandwiches! Pathetic!

Yea I stopped eating here after my friend told me precedes from each sale go to anti-gay groups/foundations

Look guys I go to NYU and I am not a Chick-Fil-A fan (they close on Sundays they’re so “Christian”) and tonight I met the girl who heads the petition to get Chick-Fil-A removed from NYU and I told her “good job.” Almost eleven thousand signatures!

But this is clearly not a real thing. No company, no matter how morally righteous they were, would write their definition of marriage on some awkward-looking flier. On top of that, they don’t hire university students! I’m not saying that Chick-Fil-A doesn’t engage in these hiring practices, but this is obviously a satirical poster.

What restaurant puts an awkward black & white picture of their popular food product on a HELP WANTED poster? And then places no contact information besides their press address?

(via qwertybard)

beatonna:

Another page from this handy book on recognizing feminists
edit- some people think this is serious! but it is not, because of the fact that it is a joke

beatonna:

Another page from this handy book on recognizing feminists

edit- some people think this is serious! but it is not, because of the fact that it is a joke

stickyembraces:

Alice in post-structuralist land, #2

I’m very upset that I can only like and reblog this once

stickyembraces:

Alice in post-structuralist land, #2

I’m very upset that I can only like and reblog this once

(via propaganda-duende)

mohandasgandhi:

Little Change in Public’s Response to ‘Capitalism,’ ‘Socialism’ 
Little change? Hold on here…. While these numbers may not surprise you:

what is interesting is that 49% of individuals aged 18-29 have a positive view of Socialism while 43% hold a negative view. This is with 60% of the country holding a negative view of Socialism. In the 18-29 age bracket, 47% hold a negative view of Capitalism and 46% a positive view. Only 50% of the entire country holds a positive view of Capitalism.
The times they are a-changin’.

The thing is though, socialism means something like a basic welfare state in the public interpretation of the term, which is substantially less exciting (and less drastic) than support for real socialism. On top of that, young people have always generally been more supportive of socialism than old people.
All the same, though, that difference between age cohorts is huge, and encouraging (or terrifying if that’s your deal).

mohandasgandhi:

Little Change in Public’s Response to ‘Capitalism,’ ‘Socialism’

Little change? Hold on here…. While these numbers may not surprise you:

what is interesting is that 49% of individuals aged 18-29 have a positive view of Socialism while 43% hold a negative view. This is with 60% of the country holding a negative view of Socialism. In the 18-29 age bracket, 47% hold a negative view of Capitalism and 46% a positive view. Only 50% of the entire country holds a positive view of Capitalism.

The times they are a-changin’.

The thing is though, socialism means something like a basic welfare state in the public interpretation of the term, which is substantially less exciting (and less drastic) than support for real socialism. On top of that, young people have always generally been more supportive of socialism than old people.

All the same, though, that difference between age cohorts is huge, and encouraging (or terrifying if that’s your deal).

I just heard of the term “racialism”

which is the belief that

1. there are distinct races

2. there are significant differences between these races and these differences should influence policy decisions

3. but don’t worry, there’s no absolute better or worse race

Who the hell thinks that a veil of (false) intellectualism over their racism makes them not a racist? this is Top 5 Stupid

How come nobody told me that CommunismKills is Back?!

this is the best Christmas ever

In an effort to not bore my friends with politics, I've opted to bore you instead!

I'm American and I smoke more than I'd like to.

view archive



Send Love and Hate

Do my work for me!