September 2, 2014

mooshoo:

T.J. and I’s favorite film from the Tribeca Film Festival finally has a trailer online. It’s called The Guard, and it’s one of the funniest movies that I’ve ever seen. (Here’s T.J.’s review of the film.) The film will open in L.A. and New York on July 28th and then have a limited release elsewhere shortly there after. I cannot recommend it enough.

It’s my favorite movie of the year.

fasterpussycatgifgif:

The Guard (2011). Dir. John Michael McDonagh.

The lad, deep in the Impenetrable Tomato Thicket.

mayahan:

Found Object Robots by Brian Marshall

(via tweesmallmaggie)

khaste-irooni:

Rabat, Morocco

khaste-irooni:

Rabat, Morocco

(via buddhabrot)

destination-singapour:

Valladolid, Yucatán, México

Why is it that people are willing to spend $20 on a bowl of pasta with sauce that they might actually be able to replicate pretty faithfully at home, yet they balk at the notion of a white-table cloth Thai restaurant, or a tacos that cost more than $3 each? Even in a city as “cosmopolitan” as New York, restaurant openings like Tamarind Tribeca (Indian) and Lotus of Siam (Thai) always seem to elicit this knee-jerk reaction from some diners who have decided that certain countries produce food that belongs in the “cheap eats” category—and it’s not allowed out. (Side note: How often do magazine lists of “cheap eats” double as rundowns of outer-borough ethnic foods?)

Yelp, Chowhound, and other restaurant sites are littered with comments like, “$5 for dumplings?? I’ll go to Flushing, thanks!” or “When I was backpacking in India this dish cost like five cents, only an idiot would pay that much!” Yet you never see complaints about the prices at Western restaurants framed in these terms, because it’s ingrained in people’s heads that these foods are somehow “worth” more. If we’re talking foie gras or chateaubriand, fair enough. But be real: You know damn well that rigatoni sorrentino is no more expensive to produce than a plate of duck laab, so to decry a pricey version as a ripoff is disingenuous. This question of perceived value is becoming increasingly troublesome as more non-native (read: white) chefs take on “ethnic” cuisines, and suddenly it’s okay to charge $14 for shu mai because hey, the chef is ELEVATING the cuisine.

When a white teenager named Steve Lohner was stopped by the police last month and refused to show his ID after carrying a loaded shotgun on the streets of Aurora, Colorado (the same city where a mass murderer killed 12 people and injured 70 others in a packed movie theater in July 2012), the teen walked away with nothing but a citation. But when a 22-year-old black kid named John Crawford picked up a mere BB gun in a Walmart store in Dayton, Ohio last week, customers called the police, who then shot and killed him. Here lies a racial disparity that’s difficult for honest people to ignore. How can black people openly carry a real gun when we can’t even pick up a BB gun in a store without arousing suspicion? The answer in America is that the Second Amendment doesn’t really apply to black people.

Keith Boykin: Does the Second Amendment Only Apply to White People? (via clambistro)

Shit, neither does the first. As demonstrated by the reaction to protesters in Ferguson. 

(via be-blackstar)

none of them damn amendments were written for us.. Y’all they still see us as commodities… NON-HUMANS… Vessels for profit.. Whether it’s the prison industrial complex.. Entertainment.. etc etc… We are supposed to produce capital.. WE ARE CAPITAL.. So these amendments will never apply to a commodity…

(via jcoleknowsbest)

(via pualrudd)

In the 1890s, when Freud was in the dawn of his career, he was struck by how many of his female patients were revealing childhood [sexual] victimization to him. Freud concluded that child sexual abuse was one of the major causes of emotional disturbances in adult women and wrote a brilliant and humane paper called “The Aetiology of Hysteria.” However, rather than receiving acclaim from his colleagues for his ground-breaking insights, Freud met with scorn. He was ridiculed for believing that men of excellent reputation (most of his patients came from upstanding homes) could be perpetrators of incest.
Within a few years, Freud buckled under this heavy pressure and recanted his conclusions. In their place he proposed the “Oedipus complex,” which became the foundation of modern psychology… Freud used this construct to conclude that the episodes of abuse his clients had revealed to him had never taken place; they were simply fantasies of events the women had wished for… This construct started a hundred-year history in the mental health field of blaming victims for the abuse perpetrated on them and outright discrediting of women’s and children’s reports of mistreatment by men.

― Lundy Bancroft

(via proletarianprincess)

read this carve it into your brains permanently etch it into your skulls r e a d  t h i s

(via miss-mizi)

i don’t know how to deal with this

(via transhumanisticpanspermia)

(Source: womensliberationfront, via tweesmallmaggie)