justacartoon:

turbomun:

In October of 2012, I was enrolled in one of my first serious animation classes, with a professor who I rather admired. I admired him so much, in fact, that I caught him outside of class time and asked him to review a few of my personal character designs. I…

sissyboi:

"One of our main goals now is to destroy the Human Rights Campaign, because I’m so tired of sitting on the back of the bumper. It’s not even the back of the bus anymore — it’s the back of the bumper. The bitch on wheels is back." - Sylvia Rivera

sissyboi:

"One of our main goals now is to destroy the Human Rights Campaign, because I’m so tired of sitting on the back of the bumper. It’s not even the back of the bus anymore — it’s the back of the bumper. The bitch on wheels is back." - Sylvia Rivera

descentintotyranny:

MSNBC Contributor Slams Network For Pro-Israel Coverage: ‘We Are Ridiculous!’
July 21 2014

An MSNBC contributor used her appearance on the cable news channel Monday to sharply criticize its coverage of the Israel-Hamas conflict.


During an interview on “Ronan Farrow Daily,” Palestinian journalist Rula Jebreal unloaded on Western media outlets, including MSNBC, arguing that influence from pro-Israel forces makes the news coverage more favorable to the likes of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
“Because of AIPAC, and because of the money behind it, and because of Sheldon Adelson, and because of all of us in the media. We are ridiculous. We are disgustingly biased when it comes to this issue," Jebreal said.
"Look at how many airtime Netanyahu and his folks have on air on a daily basis. Andrea Mitchell and others," she continued, referring to the MSNBC stalwart whose show airs right before Farrow’s afternoon program. "I never see one Palestinian being interviewed on theses same issues."
When Farrow pushed back gently and pointed out that Palestinian guests have been interviewed, Jebreal continued her criticism.
"Maybe 30 seconds! And then you have 25 minutes for Bibi Netanyahu, and then half an hour for Naftali Bennett and many others," Jebreal said.
Jebreal wasn’t done. She went on to call out NBC News for the recent kerfuffle surrounding Ayman Mohyeldin, the foreign correspondent who was abruptly pulled off the network’s coverage of the Israel-Hamas conflict last week.
Mohyeldin was eventually sent back to Gaza this weekend after his removal from the region — which NBC said was due to security concerns — sparked a fierce public backlash.
Jebreal, it turns out, is among the critics who believes Mohyeldin was taken off the story for political reasons.
"Listen, the Ayman Mohyeldin story, let’s talk about this. We are home and we can discuss this. Ayman Mohyeldin is covering the Palestinian side and we get upset," she said. "It’s too pro-Palestinian. We don’t like it. We push him back and thanks for social media that brought him in.”
The criticism clearly made Farrow uncomfortable, and he could only respond to Jebreal’s points with a vague counter.
"Point taken, but doesn’t it reveal equally our thinking that we now have Ayman Mohyeldin on air and I think there’s been very fair and balanced coverage?" he said.
"Yes, thanks to social media, and thanks for the pushback from the public opinion," Jebreal responded. "And I’m not saying that everybody is like this, but it’s one-tenth is given to the Palestinian voice and 99 percent of the Israelis voice. And that’s why the public opinion is pro-Israeli, which is the opposite in the rest of the world."

descentintotyranny:

MSNBC Contributor Slams Network For Pro-Israel Coverage: ‘We Are Ridiculous!’

July 21 2014

During an interview on “Ronan Farrow Daily,” Palestinian journalist Rula Jebreal unloaded on Western media outlets, including MSNBC, arguing that influence from pro-Israel forces makes the news coverage more favorable to the likes of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Because of AIPAC, and because of the money behind it, and because of Sheldon Adelson, and because of all of us in the media. We are ridiculous. We are disgustingly biased when it comes to this issue," Jebreal said.

"Look at how many airtime Netanyahu and his folks have on air on a daily basis. Andrea Mitchell and others," she continued, referring to the MSNBC stalwart whose show airs right before Farrow’s afternoon program. "I never see one Palestinian being interviewed on theses same issues."

When Farrow pushed back gently and pointed out that Palestinian guests have been interviewed, Jebreal continued her criticism.

"Maybe 30 seconds! And then you have 25 minutes for Bibi Netanyahu, and then half an hour for Naftali Bennett and many others," Jebreal said.

Jebreal wasn’t done. She went on to call out NBC News for the recent kerfuffle surrounding Ayman Mohyeldin, the foreign correspondent who was abruptly pulled off the network’s coverage of the Israel-Hamas conflict last week.

Mohyeldin was eventually sent back to Gaza this weekend after his removal from the region — which NBC said was due to security concerns — sparked a fierce public backlash.

Jebreal, it turns out, is among the critics who believes Mohyeldin was taken off the story for political reasons.

"Listen, the Ayman Mohyeldin story, let’s talk about this. We are home and we can discuss this. Ayman Mohyeldin is covering the Palestinian side and we get upset," she said. "It’s too pro-Palestinian. We don’t like it. We push him back and thanks for social media that brought him in.

The criticism clearly made Farrow uncomfortable, and he could only respond to Jebreal’s points with a vague counter.

"Point taken, but doesn’t it reveal equally our thinking that we now have Ayman Mohyeldin on air and I think there’s been very fair and balanced coverage?" he said.

"Yes, thanks to social media, and thanks for the pushback from the public opinion," Jebreal responded. "And I’m not saying that everybody is like this, but it’s one-tenth is given to the Palestinian voice and 99 percent of the Israelis voice. And that’s why the public opinion is pro-Israeli, which is the opposite in the rest of the world."

feminspire:

Lately, it appears that corporations and advertising agencies are jumping on theprogressive advertising bandwagon. Traditional advertising, which aims to promote consumption as the path to self improvement, is being replaced by ads that promote equality and justice for women and girls, LGBT…

Imagine yourself in a bar where a pickpocket takes money out of your wallet and with it buys you a glass of chardonnay. Although you would have preferred a pinot noir, you decide not to look that gift horse in the mouth and thank the stranger profusely for the kindness, assuming he paid for it. You might feel differently, of course, if you knew that you actually had paid for it yourself.

Persuaded by both theory and empirical research, most economists believe that employer-based health insurance is an analogue of this bar scene.

The argument is that the premiums ostensibly paid by employers to buy health insurance coverage for their employees are actuallypart of the employee’s total pay package– the price of labor, in economic parlance – and that the cost of that fringe benefit is recovered from employees through commensurate reductions in take-home pay.

Evidently the majority of Supreme Court justices who just ruled in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby case do not buy the economists’ theory. These justices seem to believe that the owners of “closely held” business firms buy health insurance for their employees out of the kindness of their hearts and with the owners’ money. On that belief, they accord these owners the right to impose some of their personal preferences – in this case their religious beliefs — on their employee’s health insurance.

Score it 1-0 in “Supremes v. Economists.”

In the ruling, the owner of Hobby Lobby, a chain of craft stores, gained the right not to include certain contraceptive goods and services in the insurance bought for employees, because use of these services conflicts with the owner’s Christian beliefs. Although the justices argue that their ruling is narrowly confined to contraceptive services, one must wonder what other items other business owners in the future may seek to jettison from benefit packages on the basis of this or that professed religious belief.

The ruling raises the question of why, uniquely in the industrialized world, Americans have for so long favored an arrangement in health insurance that endows their employers with the quasi-parental power to choose the options that employees may be granted in the market for health insurance. For many smaller firms, that choice is narrowed to one or two alternatives – not much more choice than that afforded citizens under a single-payer health insurance system.

Furthermore, the arrangement induces employers to intervene in many other ways in their employees’ personal life – for example, in wellness programs that can range from the benign to annoyingly intrusive, depending upon the employers’ wishes.

And what kind of health “insurance” have Americans gotten under this strange arrangement? Once again, uniquely in the industrialized world, it has been ephemeral coverage that is lost with the job or changed at the employer’s whim. Citizens in any other industrialized country have permanent, portable insurance not tied to a particular job in a particular country.

Nor has this coverage been cheap by international standards. American employers can be said to have played a major role in driving up health spending per capita in the United States measured in internationally comparable purchasing power parity dollars, to roughly twice the level found in other industrialized populations. As a recent article in the health policy journal Health Affairs reported, a decade of health care cost growth wiped out real income gains for the average American family during the period from 1999 to 2009.

The Supreme Court’s ruling may prompt Americans to re-examine whether the traditional, employment-based health insurance that they have become accustomed to is really the ideal platform for health insurance coverage in the 21st century. The public health insurance exchanges established under the Affordable Care Act are likely to nibble away at this system for small and medium-size business firms, especially those with a mainly low-wage work force.

In the meantime, the case should help puncture the illusion that employer-provided health insurance is an unearned gift bestowed on them by the owners and paid with the owners’ money, giving those owners the moral right to dictate the nature of that gift.

 

gqid:

Great piece on gendered pronouns in English, including more support for singular they and interesting historical information.

Capitalist 1: Hey, it's Pride month, should we do anything to support queer people?
Capitalist 2: I heard there's a shelter for queer and trans kids who got kicked out that's going to be closing soon due to lack of funding?
Capitalist 1: I was thinking more along the lines of an ad campaign where we just put our logo in rainbow colors.
Capitalist 2: That's a much better idea

YOUR WELCOEM OBAMA / BIRD / ProBirdRights - TEH DRAMTIC READING

trisshawkeye:

"When men say that they “love to see the woman underneath the makeup,” they’re not saying they want to see your leg stubble and greasy bangs—they’re saying they want you to be better at hiding your maintenance routine. Because the maintenance spoils the fantasy."

– Lindy West (via lavenderlabia)

batcii:

smoo told me to draw zutara week stuff so instead i drew some modern au gaang. sorry for my shitty handwriting.

gay-bondage69:

transschmuck:

cutevictim:

Jesus was a homeless Palestinian anarchist who held protests at oppressive churches, advocated for universal health care and redistribution of wealth, before being arrested for terrorism, tortured and executed for crimes against the state, now go ahead and explain to me why he’d vote conservative. I’ll wait.

i’m sorry that’s just the best sentence i’ve ever read

Canon Jesus is so much cooler than American Jesus.

"America was built on two monumental crimes: the genocide of the Native American and the enslavement of the African American. The tendency of official America is to memorialize other peoples’ crimes and to forget its own - to seek a high moral ground as a pretext to ignore real issues."

Mahmood Mamdani

I have never seen such perfect sentences.

(via yamesmooma)

thaumivore:

apparently i did a high school AU at some point???

thaumivore:

apparently i did a high school AU at some point???