So, uh, anyone know anything about moving to Italy? There’s this Ph.D. programme I stumbled upon today that I can’t stop staring at…
So, uh, anyone know anything about moving to Italy? There’s this Ph.D. programme I stumbled upon today that I can’t stop staring at…
“Violin was actually the only instrument that I received any formal training on, everything else I learned by myself.”
…You guys know one of those is a cello and one is a bass, right?
(via daxterdd)
Source: darren-criss
1. White terrorists are called “gunmen.” What does that even mean? A person with a gun? Wouldn’t that be, like, everyone in the US? Other terrorists are called, like, “terrorists.”
2. White terrorists are “troubled loners.” Other terrorists are always suspected of being part of a global plot, even when they are obviously troubled loners.
3. Doing a study on the danger of white terrorists at the Department of Homeland Security will get you sidelined by angry white Congressmen. Doing studies on other kinds of terrorists is a guaranteed promotion.
4. The family of a white terrorist is interviewed, weeping as they wonder where he went wrong. The families of other terrorists are almost never interviewed.
5. White terrorists are part of a “fringe.” Other terrorists are apparently mainstream.
6. White terrorists are random events, like tornadoes. Other terrorists are long-running conspiracies.
7. White terrorists are never called “white.” But other terrorists are given ethnic affiliations.
8. Nobody thinks white terrorists are typical of white people. But other terrorists are considered paragons of their societies.
9. White terrorists are alcoholics, addicts or mentally ill. Other terrorists are apparently clean-living and perfectly sane.
10. There is nothing you can do about white terrorists. Gun control won’t stop them. No policy you could make, no government program, could possibly have an impact on them. But hundreds of billions of dollars must be spent on police and on the Department of Defense, and on TSA, which must virtually strip search 60 million people a year, to deal with other terrorists.
"Juan Cole, 08/09/2012
Juan Cole actually wrote this 4 days after a white terrorist, yes, terrorist, murdered 6 and injured 4 people at a Sikh gurdwara in Wisconsin. The terrorist who committed said crime spoke of an impending “racial holy war” beforehand and was a member of white supremacist/neo-Nazi hate groups.
(via sailorfemme)
See also: The religion of white terrorists is never, ever mentioned, even if their belief system is what spurred them to commit their terrorist act. For that matter, the political and ideological affiliations of white terrorists is considered irrelevant. Other terrorists are deemed representative of a religion and political ideology even where they did not take any action to declare their reasons for committing their terrorist act.
(via darksideofthemuse)
Not only everything beautifully stated above, but he’s the type of performer who gets into the emotion of the story through song, which isn’t a musical style that works well on an album. If at some point he wanted to do Broadway (and could find a role that suited him which most currently don’t), I think he would do that over a solo album any day of the week. But mostly I just agree with the rest of it, especially in regards to breaking out of the Kurt/self-penned box.
Source: wordplaying
i have no problem with pointing out that anyone of any gender can be an abuser, rapist, pedophile etc because that’s absolutely true.
but the problem with always emphasizing “yes but it happens to everyone, not just women (or people of colour, or trans* people, etc)!” is that it depoliticizes the issue.
violence is not an accident, it is reflective of social power relations that permeate society at every level
It doesn’t “depoliticize the issue.” It partially dismantles the argument you’re trying to make. There’s a difference.
Are rape and abuse about power and domination of the target? In 95% of cases, yes. (That 5% is reserved for cases where the perpetrator genuinely doesn’t know what they’re doing is wrong and would indeed stop if asked: they honestly believe consent has been given, most often in the category of “They’re both (equally) pretty drunk (but participating).”) But when a person says that all rape comes from men being taught they have all the power and that women are essentially their property that they can grab and have sex with at any time they (the men) want, that only accounts for one type of assault. Pointing out that assault happens in other permutations, including by individuals without privilege and to people other than women, punctures that theory of violence.
Because if it’s only about men being taught they are entitled to women, how does that explain female pedophiles? Or a man who rapes another man - either where the assailant is gay himself, or where he’s “punishing” the target? Or the female friend of mine who was raped by her then-girlfriend? Clearly none of these situations fit into the paradigm of “men are taught that women are theirs to have sex with whenever they want,” which means there has to be some other reason in addition to the one put forth above.
Violence is not an accident. But violence is also not something you can apply a one-size-fits-all explanation to.
(via daxterdd)
Source: commiekinkshamer