Why Time’s Millennials Cover Story Says More About Joel Stein Than It Does About Millennials

(via jumblejo)

suavebadass:

awesome-everyday:

shorterexcerpts:

thecallus:

theatlantic:

The Cheapest Generation: Why Aren’t Millennials Buying Cars or Houses?

What if Millennials’ aversion to car-buying isn’t a temporary side effect of the recession, but part of a permanent generational shift in tastes and spending habits? It’s a question that applies not only to cars, but to several other traditional categories of big spending—most notably, housing. And its answer has large implications for the future shape of the economy—and for the speed of recovery.

Read more. [Image: Kagan McLeod]

It’s safe to say that a decent number of Tumblr users are a part of the Millennial generation. So, tell us: Do you own a car or house? If not, why?

IT’S BECAUSE THEY HAVE NO DISPOSABLE INCOME YOU THUNDERING IDIOTS. Fucking preference has nothing to do with it. 50% of college graduates have no job! They all have the most student loan debt ever! What are you asking this question for?!

Also: housing is a good bit more expensive now.

My parents got a 15-year mortgage on a new house in the mid-70s. The house was $32,000. Average home price in that area now? $190,000.

So, home prices went up. Food prices went up. Health care prices went WAY UP. Rent prices went up. Higher education went up so damn high that some of us forgo that all together. Energy prices went up. Car prices went up.

Prices of prices went up.

We also pay cell phone bills, internet bills, data plans, text plans, online subscriptions, cable/satellite tv, netflix, DVR subscriptions — bills that didn’t even exist 30-40 years ago. We also use computers and smartphones and microwaves and other consumer electronics that didn’t exist 20-50 years ago.

We need medications and doctors and contact lenses and tampons and maxi pads and other things that cost money just to be alive and keep us healthy.

Most of us can’t afford to:

1. Get married and have a “Traditional” big wedding
2. Buy a house
3. Buy a new car
4. PLAN to have children
5. Take two, consecutive weeks of vacation.

Jobs that paid 50k in the late 1990s now pay between 30-35. Interest rates that favor consumers have gone down.

So I say, no. We are not choosing not to buy homes. We’re not choosing to take the bus in cities where there’s no good public transit. WE ARE NOT CHOOSING TO LIVE WHAT SOCIETY DEEMS AS AN UNDESIRABLE LIFESTYLE.

Don’t even get me started on the fact that these two people in the picture are young white hipsters. Young black and brown folks have been forgoing homeownership and buying new cars for decades, this shit isn’t new, pal. You’re just acting like this shit is new because it’s hitting white folks.

anyway, my point is: We are fucking broke.

Not to mention nowadays coming out of college most can only get unpaid internships. I’ve lost count of the number of places I found while job hunting offering nothing more but ‘the experience’ as if that’s going to magically pay the bills for me and my family.

The older generation constantly questions why we aren’t like them then tries to write us off as ‘lazy’ and ‘unmotivated’, when they’re the ones that tanked the economy and have put us millennials in this position in the first place.

Then because the economy is tanked, those older generation business owners decided to save money and instead of paying those college kids what they’re due (and if you have any sort of degree from anywhere, from a university or a community college YOU SHOULD BE GETTING PAID FOR YOU WORK) force them into free labor and tell them it’s ‘experience’ so you can add it to your resume for when that imaginary well-paying job comes along! 

We’re running around in circles like chickens with our heads cut off while they’re standing there watching us, holding our heads in one hand, the knife in the other and wondering what went wrong. 

milesjai:

Okpo Land
Okpo City, South Korea   

The park was shut down in 1999 due to many mysterious fatal accidents in the park. The last fatal accident that occurred before the park was shut down was when a young girl tragically fell to her death on one of the rides in the park. Immediately following the accident, the owner of the park disappeared and was never heard from again. Even though the park is extremely creepy and has an unsettling back-story, it doesn’t stop adventurers from exploring and venturing through the park.

Burkina Faso is one of the poorest countries on earth. Their economy relies heavily on their agricultural exports of mangos. We took it upon ourselves to update the design of their dried mango labels in an attempt to increase their sales.

Our intent was to give the new mango packaging a stylish edge over its competitors. The curved form of the new logotype compliments the vintage style illustration of the mango plant, creating a unique alternative to similar products in the market. Materials and print production were kept to a minimum to lower the cost over all production.

onlyalittlelion:

Please note that Scott is excellent at ferreting out plagiarism, particularly the incompetent, undergraduate variety in which the writing style veers from Late Caveman to Deconstructivist within a single paragraph.

Reminds me of the student who attended maybe a fourth of the classes all semester and then submitted a draft on Dante’s “eschatological vision.”  I still regret not making him stand up in front of the class and define “eschatological.”

euclase:

Sometimes I wish I could sit these actors down and buy them a beer and explain to them in firm but gentle tones that fangirls and fanboys are not as hysterical or ridiculous as they are so often played up to be.

I would tell them about this one artist who once designed a trueform Castiel, and how dozens of other artists were inspired by her, and everyone made a lot of art because of her. Or this other artist who once mapped out the inside of the TARDIS and how brilliant and inspiring that was. Or these other artists who became my friends because they were trying to recreate Eowyn’s dress. Or how one writer can create an alternate universe, and it’s so well-written that it blows every young adult fiction book I’ve ever read out of the water, and how literally hundreds of other writers and artists agree with me, and they create more stories and art because of it. Or how sometimes whole groups of writers get together and write series after series of stories based on their favorite shows, and how those series are so good that I would rather have them bound and on my bookshelf instead of the novels that are there now.

I wish the brilliance was louder than the insanity or hate or wank or anything else. I wish that, when people talked about fangirls and fandom, they didn’t have to explain or give excuses, or laugh, or roll their eyes, or feel awkward, or be forewarned. Because this the smartest, most exciting, most passionate creative engine I know of. I know it has its bad moments. But when it’s good, holy cow. I really wish I could just sit down with the actors and lay my hand on their arm and say, “You should see this.”

thebeggarandtheking:

queennubian:

She was once the a beautiful virgin shadow maiden of Athean. AfterPoseidon rapes Medusa in Athena’s temple, Athena punishes Medusa….making her the embodiement of death and damning her to a life of solitude.

What does this say about society then, and now?

Well, the myth that tells Medusa’s metamorphosis into a monster as a punishment by Athena is the patriarchal Roman version. The ancient Greek myth, which has closer ties to its progenitor, the Egyptian tale of Wadjet, tells us that Athena gifted Medusa with ugliness and the power to turn men to stone as a way of protecting her from further violations of her person. Even so, her ugliness was emphasized in the Roman retelling as a way to further demonize and disenfranchise Medusa (i.e. she only lashed out on men because she was too ugly to be loved by them, her ugliness forced her into seclusion from men, ugly women are bad, etc. ((I am ironically using abbreviations for Latin words here yes)).). As the original myth tells it, she lived in solitude because she did not wish to be around men after what Poseidon had done. And Athena gave her the power to never be at the mercy of a male again. So originally, Athena was pissed at Poseidon, not Medusa. And then, of course, the Romans took it one step further and had Perseus behead her (yay the vindictive old hag is dead) and give it to Athena for her shield.

But yeah, renderings of Medusa’s head appeared in the doorways of many women’s shelters in ancient Greece because she was a symbol of female empowerment, not a monster feared by men and women alike.

This brings me to my awkward segue into a cool essay on the subject: The Laugh of the Medusa by Helene Cixous actually touches on the system of misogynistic fear behind the Romanized version, but most importantly why women need to write their stories because this is the shit that happens when dudebros get ahold of them. It’s also an awesome overture to queer theories of writing. If you can read French, I highly suggest getting your hands on the essay as it was originally written, because Cixous’ voice is just incredibly inspiring when you read it as she intended it to be read. Also, the essay itself is worthy of criticism as it is not as intersectional as it absolutely needs to be. I feel I should add that before someone thinks I advocate the problematic things she says.

But now that I’ve totally digressed from my original point: It’s important that we’re always mindful to question the credibility of those telling us not only history, but also legend.

(I became absolutely exhausted halfway through this so forgive me if the connection I’m making between the original post and this essay is more arbitrary than I think it is at the moment)

warpfactornope:

izziethestrange:

irresistible-revolution:

bumblyforest:

The revolution will be liveblogged

endcomic:

parrotbeak:

irresistible-revolution:

ETA: please give proper credit if you cite this or any of meta, cos this stuff takes time and effort y’all.

So yesterday when I made this post, many people wanted to know why Voldermort’a pet snake being named ‘Nagini’ was racially problematic. I was surprised that people hadn’t considered this, but then again desi issues/culture are hardly visible in mainstream media. But today I kept getting anons either professing complete shock about Naagini’s* significance, OR telling me that my interpretations were wrong. So I decided to write this meta on Naagini, the HP verse and mythological snake symbols. But first I’m gonna give some you some backstory about why Naagini bothers me so much and how Rowling seems to have missed out on some cultural context.

One of my favourite stories as a child was the one about Buddha and Mucalinda, the Snake King. Shortly after attaining enlightenment, the Buddha is travelling through a forest when he gets caught in a terrible storm. The great serpent, Mucalinda, shelters the Buddha by spreading it’s vast seven-headed hood over him, and permitting the Buddha to sit on his coils. Many statues depicting this scene are found throughout Sri Lanka. There was one at the junction close to my school that I would always stare at. The sight of the Buddha serenely meditating under the protection of a huge and powerful cobra is a striking one that captured my imagination as a child. Years later, I’m still moved on a deep, wordless level by this image.

Read More

I’ll be the first to admit that I’m not very well read in terms of the histories of certain cultures. I’m not qualified to give commentary and it’s 4am so I probably shouldn’t attempt intelligent discussion anyway. But, yeah, I’m going to anyway.

In terms of representation, how many character’s have their cultural backgrounds and the implications of this discussed in the books? A lot of characters in the book could be of any race, nationality or colour you imagine them to be. Under representation seems to be more of a problem in the films. 

As for the cultural background of Nagini’s name (and this is just my opinion), if we must over analyse, perhaps her subjugation is a representation of globalisation and how different cultures are taking on more and more aspects of Western culture. A part of Voldemort’s soul is attached to Nagini, he relies on her as an extension of his life force. The West is reliant on other cultures for our consumerism (for things such as cheap manufacturing, imported goods, oil, raw materials). Neither us nor Voldemort actually NEED these things. 

J.k Rowling might not have been able to fit the cultural origins of the name and why Nagini is named Nagini into the book because maybe it just didn’t fit in anywhere. I’ve never written a whole book, I’ve not studied higher level English Lit, but I should imagine that it is pretty damn hard to keep everything straight in 7 books with so many characters, places, underlying themes and events and sub plots and each character’s emotions and reactions to each other and their reactions to each other’s reactions and. . you get the point.

I am in no means saying that it wouldn’t be interesting to read about why Rowling chose the name, I would love to hear why. But maybe there just isn’t a reason. A lot of authors pick names because they sound good rather than because of what they mean. Especially in children’s books, most of the readers aren’t going to know the meanings and cultural origins of names, much less look them up. I admit, I didn’t know about the significance of Nagini’s name until now, I hadn’t really put much thought into it. 

On that note, I think I’ll leave this be because I’ve probably either made no sense or insulted someone (there’s always someone, somewhere who will be insulted by everything). 

If you’re not well read then why are you attempting to shut down irresistible-revolution who knows their own heritage and culture better than you? what can you possibly add to this discussion beyond your own hot air?

representation in harry potter is laughable — there are no POC characters beyond secondary characters with no arcs of their own and who do not contribute to the story in a significant fashion. it’s a problem in the books and the movies—why are you trying to sugar coat it? or rather deny it?

saying they “could” be is not the same as it being canon. don’t conflate the two, and accept the fact that rowling wrote a story saturated in whiteness and appropriated narratives about racism for white characters—that’s just not cool.

Your opinion? Over-analyze? Why the fuck are you even rebutting irresistible-revolution if you supposedly don’t care that much? Why are you going out of your way to admit your own ignorance, and yet you’re still talking? Why aren’t you taking this moment to learn?

your red herrings about how supposedly vast and intricate and how hard it must be to keep everything straight is incredibly inane, trivializing, and oh yes, completely unnecessary and is nothing but a weak attempt to derail and invalidate irresistible-revolution. stop it. that’s not cool.

also your premise that ~*~ maybe there just wasn’t a reason ~*~ is bullshit. authors choose what they choose of their own free will, for their own reasons. There was a choice involved, and unfortunately, rowling made her choice rooted in racism, her own privilege, and her own ignorance. 

whose fault is it that rowling chose to make such a horrible choice? Rowling’s. That’s the thing about racism and appropriation — it becomes seen normative, taken as by the by, instead of for what it really is: a deliberate act of erasure.

that’s why it’s so insidious and that’s why irresistble-revolution’s meta is so important—and that’s why it’s incredibly rude of you to talk over irresistible-revolution even though, by your own admission, you don’t know much about it. Why are you twisting yourself into a pretzel to defend Rowling when you could be learning about why what Rowling did was problematic by sitting down, shutting up, and listening so that you yourself do not participate in and perpetuate this system of oppression?

Rowling fucked up. accept it. don’t apologize for it, and listen to people whom she has marginalized in her narrative.

221cbakerstreet:

detenebrate:

0xymoronic:

shitarianasays:

theeyesinthenight:

the-sonic-screw:

platinumpixels:

volpesvolpes:

unseilie:

sarahvonkrolock:

gaysexagainstawall:

them-days-was-olden-as-fuck:

The spread of the black death.

Poland

Poland, tell us your secret.

Poland is the old new Madagascar. 

If I remember correctly, Poland’s secret is that the jews where being blamed all over europe (as usual) as scapegoats for the black plague. Poland was the only place that accepted Jewish refugees, so pretty much all of them moved there. 

Now, one of the major causes of getting the plague was poor hygiene. This proved very effective for the plague because everyone threw their poop into the streets because there were no sewers, and literally no one bathed because it was against their religion. Unless they were jewish, who actually bathed relatively often. When all the jews moved to Poland, they brought bathing with them, and so the plague had little effect there.

Milan survived by quarantining its city and burning down the house of anyone showing early symptoms, with the entire family inside it. 

I reblogged this tons of times, but the Milan info is new.

Damn Italy, you scary.

Poland: “Hey, feeling a bit down? Have a quick wash! There, you see? All better”

Milan: “Aw, feeling a bit sick are we? BURN MOTHERFUCKER, BURN!!!!!”

Also, this might have something to do with it: from what I understand, O blood type is uncommonly… common in Poland. Something to do with large families in small villages and a LOT of intermarriage. The black plague was caused by a bacterium that produced, in its waste in the human body, wastes that very closely mimic the “B” marker sugars on red blood cells that keep the body from attacking its own immune system. Anyone who has a B blood type had an immune system that was naturally desensitized to the presence of the bacterium, and therefore was more prone to developing the disease. Anyone who had an O type was doubly lucky because the O blood type means the total absence of ANY markers, A or B, meaning that their bodys’ immune system would react quickly and violently against the invaders, while someone with an A may show symptoms and recover more slowly, while someone with B would have just died. Because O is a recessive blood type, it shows in higher numbers when more people who carry the recessive genes marry other people who also carry the recessive gene. Poland, which has a nearly 700 year history of being conquered by or partnering with every other nation in the surrounding area, was primarily an agricultural country, focused around smaller, farming communities where people were legally tied to, and required to work, “their” land, and so historically never “spread” their genes across a large area. The economy was, and had been, unstable for a very long period of time leading up to the plague, the government had been ineffective and had very little reach in comparison to the armies of the other countries around for a very very long time, and so its people largely remained in small communities where multiple generations of cross-familial inbreeding could have allowed for this more recessive gene to show up more frequently. Thus, there could be a higher percentage of O blood types in any region of the country, guaranteeing less spread of the illness and moving slower when it did manage to travel. Combine this with the fact that there were very few large, urban centers where the disease would thrive, and with the above facts, and you’ve got a lovely recipe for avoiding the plague.

Interestingly enough, as a result from the plague, the entirety of Europe now has a higher percentage of people with O blood type than any other region of the world. 

WHY IS THIS ALL SO COOL

When Tumblr teaches you more about the plague than 12 years of school ever did.

Just to throw a nod in, as a medieval historian, this is all credible, and is the leading theory as to the plagues effectiveness at this point. So. Enjoy your new knowledge!

aww yeah

knowledge

bookshop:

Note: this post was originally made in 2010 in response to Diana Gabaldon’s epic rant about fanfiction. The original version is still being updated. I’m reposting it to Tumblr by request, but if you have any additions, please feel free to drop a comment at LJ so they can be…

FIGURES OF LORE | death, various mythologies

The concept of death as a sentient entity has existed in many societies since the beginning of history. In English, Death is often given the name Grim Reaper and, from the 15th century onwards, came to be shown as a skeletal figure carrying a large scythe and clothed in a black cloak with a hood. It is also given the name of the Angel of Death (Malach HaMavet) or Devil of Death or the angel of dark and light stemming from the Bible and Talmudic lore. The Bible itself does not refer to “The Angel of Death”; there is, however, a reference to “Abaddon” (The Destroyer), an Angel who is known as the “The Angel of the Abyss”. In Talmudic lore, he is characterized as archangel Samael.

In some cases, the Grim Reaper can actually cause the victim’s death, leading to tales that he can be bribed, tricked, or outwitted in order to retain one’s life, such as in the case of Sisyphus. Other beliefs hold that the Spectre of Death is only a psychopomp, serving to sever the last ties between the soul and the body and to guide the deceased to the next world without having any control over the fact of the victim’s death. In many languages (including English), Death is personified in male form, while in others, it is perceived as a female character (for instance, in Slavic and Romance languages).

Every culture has their own depiction of Death, be it a personification or an entity — or even a god or goddess who represents as much. Such as the Keres (violent death) and Thanatos (death) in Greek lore. The Morrigan, in some texts, for Irish mythos. And so on.

withgodgivenass:

shuraiya:

aryashi:

cornetespoire:

jmandrake:

We’ve all seen the theories, repeated and twisted ad nauseum to fit nearly every children’s show. Angelica dreamed up the other Rugrats. Even the humans at Foster’s Home for Imaginary Friends were imaginary. The events that took place in Codename: Kids Next Door were just kids playing make believe. Phineas and Ferb exist only in Candace’s head. Ash Ketchum was just in a coma. Harry Potter dreamed Hogwarts because he couldn’t handle his abuse by the Dursleys. And on and on and on. 

There seems to be a compulsion among young teens and adults to reclaim these shows for themselves, and for them, that means placing these stories within a tragic context that better fits their worldview, a paradigm in which optimistic stories centered around children could not possibly, believably exist in the real world. When these theories crop up, they go viral, usually with accompanying comments uttered in reverent tones along the lines of “I can never look at this show the same way again,” as if the theory has pulled back the curtain and revealed The Truth about an innocent show that many internet users enjoyed as children. In other words, the theory becomes more valid than the text or the show itself. We substitute the humor, the hope, and the ideology of children’s fiction with run-of-the-mill “it was all a dream” psychological horror, and by doing so, we throw a giant middle finger to the critically important messages these shows convey. 

The whimsical tone of Rugrats centered around kids who never quite understood the adult world; they misconstrued words and events and spun their own ideas out of them, and it was a better world, simply because we as the audience were allowed to look at mundane adult things like taxes and car washes in fresh, ultrapositive ways. Phineas and Ferb is a joyously optimistic show about the power of invention and creativity, a world in which children are never asked to hold themselves back and are never cruel to one another. So many fantasy series allow us to find an essential truth of human experience, that hope and friendship and good will can overcome darkness, by showing us a world we can’t always see but is always there, just as Hogwarts is hidden from our Muggle eyes. These stories are equally as valid, if not more so, than our “adult” stories that show the world as a more brutal place. They can both be true, but stories only have the power that we assign to them. If we continue to insist that positive, hopeful stories are unbelievable, then we create a world in which those stories lose their power, and our world reflects that change. 

The stories we tell children shape our future. There’s a reason we need those happy endings, and it’s not because children are too weak to handle the “truth” about the world. It’s because we as a society need to be reminded that kindness and hope have power. Children need stories that allow them to be heroes, that value their insight, their ideas, and their narratives. We need stories that empower, not stories that dwindle away into hopeless cynicism. We do not need to insist that fictional stories cannot exist on their own terms, that even fantasy worlds must be fantasies within their own story. It’s backwards, it’s hopeless, it’s wrong-headed. These stories aren’t yours to claim. They aren’t yours to “correct.” These stories belong to children, and thankfully, they’re stories full of more hope and power than anything the internet could ever come up with. Why would you ever try to tear them down? 

GOD THANK YOU. Thank you so much for putting into words why I hate, hate, HATE the “omg it’s all a fake dream because in truth horrible things are happening, HOW DARK AND ORIGINAL” interpretation of fucking everything ever.

yes yes yes yes yes yes yeeeeeeees

oh my god OH MY GOD I WANT TO KISS YOU ON THE FACE THANK YOUUUUUU YOU YOU ARE MY FAVORITE PERSON IN THE WORLD RIGHT NOW

Honestly though?

Once a creator releases a work into the public sphere, s/he has to embrace the fact that it will always be open to alternative interpretation. Johnlock will be shipped if its fans want it to be shipped, regardless of whether or not Cumberbatch, Freeman and Moffat like it. Doyle could be turning in his grave at this very moment, and even he has no power over the re-workings of his creations at this juncture.

That’s the power of the fandom. The fandom creates works perceived to be in line with their chosen canon. They occasionally propose alternate theories (Harry, Neville and the Prophecy, anyone?) that may fit into the canon. Sometimes alternate theories clash, as they do with everything else. That is normal and to be expected.

Sometimes even the original creators disagree with the alternate theories the fandom proposes, but by that time, the theories can be too well-propagated to be stopped, even by the creators of the original source material. Ray Bradbury, writer of Fahrenheit 451, wasn’t writing against government censorship when he penned his nightmare world of book-burning; he was writing against new technology causing people to stop being interested in books (see: Mildred’s obsession with the wall-TV, causing her to refer to the characters as her family, even over Montag, who is married to her). But the former theory, that he was writing about state-sponsored censorship, had been spread far and wide by this time, and so it found legitimacy in this way. Not that Bradbury liked it, of course…but it was there. He had no power over it.

Now, back to the main point about dark re-imaginings of children’s shows. They’re but another fan theory. They’re not The Truth. Truth, in relation to the canon that fans feed on, is created by the creators of the canon. There’s nothing wrong with dark re-imaginings of children’s shows. Yes they’re edgy and cool and they might give you a bit of a scream/chill as you realise the implications that they have, but they’re not inherently bad. It’s just looking at things a different way.

We can have both. We can have all. If the canon is a magical lovely place where nothing bad happens and kindness and hope and heroism have power that its viewers are supposed to take lessons from and go into the real world with, in your view, then that’s perfect. Be that person. Be the glittering change you want to see in the world. Proudly declare to everyone around you that the reason you are kind and thoughtful towards people is because the Mane Six from My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic taught you so. Tell everyone you know that Harry Potter taught you to be brave against improbable odds. Tell everyone, I don’t know, that Tom and Jerry told you that you should never give up on your goals. Or something. They may laugh, the people around you you tell this to, but if you’ve got the spirit to back it up and the results they want to see, then you can rest assured they’ll shut up and leave you to your devices. It works, why should they try to fix what ain’t broke?

Hell, you don’t even have to tell people outright. Just keep the lessons you learn from children’s shows in your heart and keep on being good…you’ll inspire someone else somehow. And then you can lie in bed, happy with the knowledge that the world is a better place because you watched a show that taught you a thing that you’ve now taught someone else.

Gatekeeping behaviours telling us what we should/should not consider “backwards” or “hopeless” or “wrong-headed”, thus shutting out alternative interpretations one feels unsavoury, limits the scope with which we can view that which we consume. And that’s one thing I can’t get behind.

Listen up. I know the shit you’ve been saying behind my back. You think I’m stupid. You think I’m immature. You think I’m a malformed, pathetic excuse for a font. Well think again, nerdhole, because I’m Comic Sans, and I’m the best thing to happen to typography since Johannes fucking Gutenberg.