Portraits of Hindu women wearing jewellery; Madras; 1872. [X]
You can recognise many of the ornaments listed here in the portraits.
Portraits of Hindu women wearing jewellery; Madras; 1872. [X]
You can recognise many of the ornaments listed here in the portraits.
@DarkMatterRage #TwitterPoetry: LOST IN (TRANS)LATION
I went home to my family of origin this past week and found every interaction seasoned with politics. I decided to write some short #TwitterPoetry to capture those every day moments of intimacy that often go unnoticed but mean so much for us as queers going home.
For more poetry and politics follow us on twitter
If you are looking for something not-so-wholesome , that will make you chuckle,here’s something that will appeal to the you. As a desi pop culture fiend , you are probably familiar with the delightfully kitschy ‘Ideal Boy’ series.
It’s just been given the subversion remix.
“Adarsh Balak" is a precocious kid, whose activities are …less than ideal. Vandalizing walls with A for anarchy, offering his stressed out dad a joint, scoring a A+ in chemistry after his teacher takes a hit of acid, is all in a days work for him.
The series created by 23 yr old Priyesh Trivedi has been cropping up on various forums, quickly gaining cult status.
We have our eyes peeled ! What nefarious activities will Adarsh Balak be upto next?
Part (2/6) Dream girl, Hema Malini
What did the humanitarian ceasefire look like in Israel and the Gaza Strip? via @Benabyad
Recap: Hamas didn’t kidnap the 3 Israelis. Hamas abided by an 18-month ceasefire. Israel broke the ceasefire repeatedly, bombed Gaza, pummeled the West Bank, and murdered more than 1000 Palestinians.
Here is a short list of a few of the hundreds of examples of the media intentionally manipulating the public to support Israel’s recent offensive against Palestinians
July 24, 2014
- CNN journalist re-assigned from the region after tweeting that Israelis celebrating the death of civilians were scum.
- NBC journalist re-assigned after reporting too honestly on the situation on-the-ground.
- FOX News putting images of Gaza reduced to rubble with captions indicating (falsely) that it is damage done to Israel inflicted by Palestinian rockets. (image attached)
- The New York Times changing the headline about four children playing on the beach being killed by Israel to something that is intentionally vague/ambiguous.
- Diane Sawyer misidentifying photos of Palestinians in the conflict, claiming they are Israelis.
- MSNBC contributor Rula Jebreal calling out the network bias toward Israel and then having her TV appearances canceled as repercussion.
- Unfair coverage from the BBC which was protested widely in England.Please reblog or message with additions as you see/think of them and I will edit with the additions. I am sure we can create quite a large list of examples.
This is important. Hold media accountable. Publicly call out news outlets that are fucking up. Spread the truth beyond your circle of tumblr fans. Raise awareness and mobilize.
wearing: f21 croptop, vince camuto shoes, natasha necklace
makeup: smashbox photo ready illuminating primer, mac studio fluid fix nc42, buxom illuminator, nyx eyeshadow natural palette, nyx matte cream lipstain in copenhagen, anastasia beverly hills eyebrow pomade in dark brown, nyx matte bronzer, nars blush in liberte
#DetroitGazasolidarity #DetroitPalestineSolidarity #Palestine
(Shared on fb by Antonio Rafael)
Israel is about to unleash hell on the civilians of Gaza again, as if the last few weeks weren’t enough, or since the creation of the state of Israel. They killed 1,400 Palestinians in their last ground invasion of the besieged coastal enclave - between December 2008 to January 2009 - 300 of whom were children.
Make no mistake, Israel’s aim is to cleanse neighbourhoods - those are the words of an ex-Israeli soldier who took part in the assault. They went in and shot anything and everything that moved and they’re going to do it again.
Gustav Klimt, The Kiss (1907-1908) / Arctic Monkeys, Arabella (2013)
This week I read some more disturbing news about the Mary Kom project. The film’s producers first sought the help of a Hollywood makeup artist to give Chopra heavier eyelids so that she could develop more Asian features (one report used a very politically incorrect and outdated term, “Oriental look”).
That plan was dropped and now reports suggest that Chopra’s face (especially her eyes) will be given a CGI makeover during the post-production period. I cannot emphasise how bad all of this sounds and I am surprised that people from Manipur and other neighbouring states have not taken offence to this plan.
To me, the idea smacks of strong racist tones, almost at par with the time when Hollywood would apply black paint on the faces of white actors — going back to Al Jolson in The Jazz Singer (1927) and Peter Sellers in The Party (1968).
Hindi cinema is not known to be sensitive to race issues — from the Hawa Hawaii song to Mehmood (also with a darkened face) singing Hum Kale Hain To Kya Hua and Abbas-Mustan’s Race which, although set in South Africa, barely featured any black characters.
But Kom is a real person, with a real story, emotions and feelings. If filmgoers are interested in her story, they will watch the film no matter who plays the lead role. Hiring a potentially bankable Bollywood star and digitally altering her face to make people believe that she is from Northeast India, is an insult to Kom, actresses and the rest of the population from the region.”
Anonymous said: Why aren't you 'ready for hillary'? x
There are a couple of reasons.
1. She sat on the Walmart board for 6 years and then didn’t do anything when they waged war against the workers and their unions (X)
2. She voted in favor of the Iraq war (X)
3. She is into free trade agreements (even if she is formally against some of the policies, she still maintains that she supports the principles of them) (X)
4. She supports a border fence in Israel and wholeheartedly believes Israel deserves “safety and security” (X)
5. She supports performance based pay for public schools (X)
6. She also believes charter schools help failing public schools (X)
7. She wants to maintain US hegemony, increase the defense budget and she supports the death penalty (X)
8. She said, “I am adamantly against illegal immigrants” and supported the border wall (X)
9. She supported DOMA and thinks civil unions are good enough for “equal rights” (X) I’m not interested in marriage for us queers, but she is on the other side of the issue entirely saying that she is against marriage for same sex partners but is pro civil unions. The reason civil unions were created was to create a new way to oppress and otherize systematically.
10. She wants more police, vigil antes and harsher prison sentences (X)
I’m sure there are more. But honestly she’s very moderate and I see her being really exciting for the young dems because she’s a woman but ultimately her policies will reflect those of the old white dudes (and obama bc his policies aren’t anything to praise either) that came before her.
this is going to be a serious post because i’m really pissed off at my university and program right now so hold on. it’s really long and i’m not cutting it off because I want people to read it in full, but if it does make the rounds and get notes feel free to add a readmore for reblogging.
As background information: I am a student at Michigan State University in James Madison College on study abroad in Amsterdam. The program is Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity, and Sexual Politics in the Netherlands.
On our first day of class one of the guest lecturers was Gert Hekma, a prominent Dutch LGBT scholar and the author/co-author of a lot of the texts we are assigned for this class. His lecture contained multiple statements defending pedophilia and bestiality, and he stated that he personally is a political proponent of lowering the age of consent to sex in the Netherlands to 12 and loosening the legal restrictions on pedophiles. Many of the students were very uncomfortable with this lecture material and tried to talk to the professor about it afterwards, to dismissive responses. One student told me that she told the professor that she was uncomfortable with the lecture material, and the professor responded by saying that yes, Hekma really makes you realize how conservative you are. At discussion the next day, she (the professor) continually implied that it was a matter of examining our own biases and preconceptions that was causing people to become upset, and led the conversation to an attempt to deconstruct in detail why we perceive pedophilia as immoral.
I was very uncomfortable with this as well, but was unable to collect my thoughts in the moment well enough to say anything effective. However, the first written assignment was due today and I took the chance to write a segment about Hekma and his involvement in the program that I hoped would elicit the beginning of some type of serious response.
here is what I wrote:
This is a statement about Hekma as a lecturer and (I know a large) part of the program, and not an academic analysis of the content of his readings or lecture like journals are supposed to be, but I plan to discuss it at check-in and want to have my position in writing. I do not think that a lecturer who espouses the virtues or pedophilia, even rhetorically or in a purely subjectivist sense, is at all necessary or appropriate to hire or support in any scenario. It would be perfectly possible to find an opening lecturer who is equally radical and aggressively controversial in every other sense, but I was very uncomfortable being lectured to by someone who has actively participated in attempts to loosen laws restricting pedophiles and is therefore a proponent and enabler of child abuse. I do not wish to learn about LGBTQ issues, gender, or sexuality from someone who has such an evident and open lack of concern well-being of others in favor of interesting theoretical thought, when these are such morally loaded topics. I hope that this does not come off as arrogance or a refusal to learn, I do see the value in learning a degree of subjectivism and of using a shocking opening lecturer, but I think that there is a limit to what it is morally acceptable to subject to theoretical discussion. There is a possibility every year that someone on the trip could have been a victim of child abuse or come from an abusive environment and it is hugely disrespectful to subject anyone to sympathetic rhetoric about pedophiles, especially without adequate warning, for that reason as well. Using Hekma as the first lecturer, while it does achieve the spirited discussion that was the goal, also establishes the classroom as a hostile environment to survivors of assault or abuse, and that should be a more important concern than anything else. Using reading co-authored by Hekma after he has espoused such views in person is similarly inappropriate and hostile.
Again, I’m sorry if this comes off as ill-intentioned or arrogant, but I have strong convictions about this and would be happy to pursue it further if necessary or at all possible.
And here is what i got as a response:
Let’s definitely talk more about Hekma at check-in this week. I don’t think your comments seem arrogant or as though you are unwilling to learn at all, so please don’t worry about that. But I do think that your critique relies on a series on unexamined (or at least not fully examined) assumptions about the nature of consent, violence, and harm. My goal is NOT to get you to change your mind (as I said, I’m impressed by the level of you convictions, and I respect your opinion). But I hope that over the course of the program, you can subject some of your biases to scrutiny, thereby strengthening the argument you are making.
I am very unhappy with this response, I think that it is dismissive and that my intention was clearly to have a serious conversation about this and, if I get my way, to disassociate MSU from Gert Hekma completely, and not to ~~examine my biases~~ with regards to a proponent of child abuse.
I do not know what to do at this point, because I do not know if I will be able to get this professor to take me seriously and address my concerns in a concrete, non-theoretical way. This professor is not the one responsible for designing this trip or for bringing Hekma in, and the one that is is the associate dean of my residential college. I am going to email several trusted professors from other classes and ask if they have any advice given their experience in the university/academia, but other than that and ranting about it to my friends and parents I am at a loss about what to do. If anyone has any advice or knows how to approach this kind of issue with a university, please contact me and let me know, you can send me an ask on tumblr or an email to firstname.lastname@example.org
Thank you to anyone who takes the time to read this and hopefully help me out, it is a very frustrating situation.
ALL THIS BEING SAID- this is not meant as an attack on the program as a whole. I do think the program as whole is very worthwhile, Hekma’s involvement and the things immediately surrounding him are the only parts i have any problem with thus far, a program on LGBT policy is absolutely a good/necessary thing for MSU and JMC to have, and I do not mean to attack people who have gone on this program in the past or currently- I chose to go on it as well and have a personal investment in its success and good reputation. That’s a large part of WHY I’m upset at Hekma’s involvement when I feel that he is a morally objectionable individual.
I also understand that my professor may be deliberately restrained in text communications because she beholden to her employer, so I don’t mean this as a personal attack on her either, just an expression of frustration with the situation and with this particular response.
(Source: , via slowdisaster)