Boring description goes here...
Reblogged from goldstarprivilege  1,216 notes

Assimilationists want nothing less than to construct the homosexual as normal - white, monogamous, wealthy, 2.5 children, SUVs with a white picket fence. This construction, of course, reproduces the stability of heterosexuality, whiteness, patriarchy, the gender binary, and capitalism itself. If we genuinely want to make ruins of this totality, we need to make a break. We don’t need inclusion into marriage, the military, and the state. We need to end them. No more gay politicians, CEOs, and cops. We need to swiftly and immediately articulate a wide gulf between the politics of assimilation and the struggle for liberation. We need to rediscover our riotous inheritance as queer anarchists. We need to destroy constructions of normalcy, and create instead a position based in our alienation from this normalcy, and one capable of dismantling it. By

Toward The Queerest Insurrection  (via faggotviolence)

All of these things.

(via sexistentialisms)

strange how i can essentially agree with the sentiment, and yet still have to roll my eyes so fucking hard at the rhetoric

(via spinsterprivilege)

People that say this, say so from the comfort of their Western capitalist perches. Tell the lgbt persons in Zimbabwe, Jamaica, or any other nation where our right to exist s human beings is void, tell us to our faces that our want and need to be included in society is Assimilation that we want to be a part of White Gay Inc. Tell me to my face that me wanting a marriage and children is hurting The Cause. Fuck you all that co sign this shit I didn’t bleed so someone who hasn’t bled for this shit to call me Assimilationist. It’s easy to talk revolution on a full stomach.

As solidly middle class (trending towards upper middle class) white lesbians living in a liberal place, marriage isn’t something we prioritize or want.

But I know being anti-marriage is a privilege. And one day we might have to suck it up because even for us the legal and financial benefits might eventually be too hard to argue with.

Reblogged from badluckkitten  41 notes
rhrealitycheck:

At the end of May, Congresswoman Carolyn B. Maloney (D-NY) introduced a new version of proposed legislation that would require further research into the health effects of menstrual hygiene products.
Read more here. 

rhrealitycheck:

At the end of May, Congresswoman Carolyn B. Maloney (D-NY) introduced a new version of proposed legislation that would require further research into the health effects of menstrual hygiene products.

Read more here

Reblogged from thepeoplesrecord  386 notes
thepeoplesrecord:

The May of the masses: 25 years since Tiananmen SquareJune 4, 2014
Twenty-five years ago, a mass protest movement exploded across China’s cities, posing potentially the biggest challenge to China’s rulers since 1949.
The Tiananmen Square movement, as it came to be known, is now best remembered for the horrific massacre that ended it. On June 4, 1989, troop columns and tanks smashed their way into the heart of Beijing, killing hundreds if not several thousands of protesters. And thousands more died or disappeared in the repression that followed.
It is right to remember them, and mark the day, to remind China’s rulers of their crime. But it is equally important to remember what they were fighting for and the inspiration of the movement at its height.
China in 1989 was very different to China today. The economic reforms pioneered by Deng Xiaoping in the late 1970s had led to a substantial rise in living standards, most of all in the countryside, where the vast majority of China’s population still lived. These were accompanied by partial social and political reforms, which dismantled many of the petty controls over everyday life that had been the norm in the Cultural Revolution.
Those new freedoms had led some, particularly young workers and students, to demand much more, and the 1980s was punctuated by a number of student protests and demonstrations. Deng’s arrival in power had also been greeted with a short-lived “Democracy Wall” movement, in which young workers who had been exiled to the countryside during the Cultural Revolution published calls for greater freedoms. Both were to be important influences in 1989.
But more important was the changing economic climate. Gains of the early 1980s were threatened by inflation and job insecurity. The return of free markets meant that, when food supplies were disrupted, prices could rise very fast. By the start of 1989, urban inflation was higher than at any time since 1949.
Overheating in the economy and a consequent austerity drive also meant large numbers of factories shut down or laid off workers. The economic disruption led to semi-public arguments among China’s rulers.
This was a crisis of economic policy, driven by unbalanced growth rather than a slump, but it was still the worst crisis since 1949. Workers who had seen their lives improving now faced losing what they had won, and the ruling class was weak and divided. The scene was set for an eruption, but no one expected the size and scale of what happened.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -How It Began
The 1989 movement started with the death of leading politician Hu Yaobang, who had been one of Deng Xiaoping’s lieutenants, and was seen as responsible for many of the political reforms. While it began as a movement to honor his memory, it quickly developed into an attack on other politicians, and on official corruption in general, as well as calling for greater political and social freedoms.
It exploded far beyond the size of any previous protest. On the day of Hu’s funeral, 150,000 students and supporters occupied Tiananmen Square despite the government trying to ban them. The following weekend, there were solidarity marches in at least eight cities, with serious rioting in two.
The ruling Chinese Communist Party (CCP) attacked the students as “counterrevolutionary,” which only deepened the anger. The movement’s leaders sent students into the streets and workplaces to call on workers and citizens to join them.
The response was magnificent. On Thursday, April 28, some 150,000 people marched across Beijing, with workers making up half of the march. The march ended with calls for nationwide demonstrations on May 4, the 70th anniversary of an anti-imperialist student movement that had kick-started the nationalist movement of the 1920s, out of which the CCP had been born.
May 4 marked another step forward for the movement, with demonstrations in cities where nothing had previously happened, although in other cities, numbers were smaller than before. More importantly, after May 4, the initiative passed back to the government, with the movement’s leaders having no real idea of the next step.
That changed decisively with the launch of a student hunger strike in Tiananmen Square on May 13. It began with just 200 students, but within days, there were more than 1,000 participating, with thousands more sympathizers joining the camp.
The timing was brilliant—Russian President Mikhail Gorbachev was just about to make the first visit of a Russian leader to China since the Sino-Soviet split of 1962. This was meant to be a major diplomatic coup for Deng, with the two leaders appearing together in Tiananmen Square in front of cheering crowds. The students had ruined it.
The day Gorbachev arrived, there were half a million people in the square. The following day, a million, with workers marching into the square in organized groups from workplaces. The next day, 2 million. In at least four other cities, students organized sympathy hunger strikes, with 30,000 people camped out in central Shanghai alone. There were protest and sympathy marches in dozens of other cities across China.
Just as the movement was reaching new heights, a pan-Muslim movement broke out in western China, which saw the biggest-ever religious protests in China. The demonstrations were over the publication of an Islamophobic book and drew together Muslims of different nationalities across at least five provinces as well as in Beijing and Shanghai.
The government reacted very quickly, banning the book and organizing mass burnings of it. The two movements were separate, but the government’s swift response showed how fearful they were of any widening of the protests.
May 18 saw one final attempt to defuse the protests, with a televised meeting between government ministers and the student leaders. The ministers patronized the students, and the students in turn humiliated them. The following day, martial law was declared—troops began to move into Beijing, and the city erupted.
Source

thepeoplesrecord:

The May of the masses: 25 years since Tiananmen Square
June 4, 2014

Twenty-five years ago, a mass protest movement exploded across China’s cities, posing potentially the biggest challenge to China’s rulers since 1949.

The Tiananmen Square movement, as it came to be known, is now best remembered for the horrific massacre that ended it. On June 4, 1989, troop columns and tanks smashed their way into the heart of Beijing, killing hundreds if not several thousands of protesters. And thousands more died or disappeared in the repression that followed.

It is right to remember them, and mark the day, to remind China’s rulers of their crime. But it is equally important to remember what they were fighting for and the inspiration of the movement at its height.

China in 1989 was very different to China today. The economic reforms pioneered by Deng Xiaoping in the late 1970s had led to a substantial rise in living standards, most of all in the countryside, where the vast majority of China’s population still lived. These were accompanied by partial social and political reforms, which dismantled many of the petty controls over everyday life that had been the norm in the Cultural Revolution.

Those new freedoms had led some, particularly young workers and students, to demand much more, and the 1980s was punctuated by a number of student protests and demonstrations. Deng’s arrival in power had also been greeted with a short-lived “Democracy Wall” movement, in which young workers who had been exiled to the countryside during the Cultural Revolution published calls for greater freedoms. Both were to be important influences in 1989.

But more important was the changing economic climate. Gains of the early 1980s were threatened by inflation and job insecurity. The return of free markets meant that, when food supplies were disrupted, prices could rise very fast. By the start of 1989, urban inflation was higher than at any time since 1949.

Overheating in the economy and a consequent austerity drive also meant large numbers of factories shut down or laid off workers. The economic disruption led to semi-public arguments among China’s rulers.

This was a crisis of economic policy, driven by unbalanced growth rather than a slump, but it was still the worst crisis since 1949. Workers who had seen their lives improving now faced losing what they had won, and the ruling class was weak and divided. The scene was set for an eruption, but no one expected the size and scale of what happened.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
How It Began

The 1989 movement started with the death of leading politician Hu Yaobang, who had been one of Deng Xiaoping’s lieutenants, and was seen as responsible for many of the political reforms. While it began as a movement to honor his memory, it quickly developed into an attack on other politicians, and on official corruption in general, as well as calling for greater political and social freedoms.

It exploded far beyond the size of any previous protest. On the day of Hu’s funeral, 150,000 students and supporters occupied Tiananmen Square despite the government trying to ban them. The following weekend, there were solidarity marches in at least eight cities, with serious rioting in two.

The ruling Chinese Communist Party (CCP) attacked the students as “counterrevolutionary,” which only deepened the anger. The movement’s leaders sent students into the streets and workplaces to call on workers and citizens to join them.

The response was magnificent. On Thursday, April 28, some 150,000 people marched across Beijing, with workers making up half of the march. The march ended with calls for nationwide demonstrations on May 4, the 70th anniversary of an anti-imperialist student movement that had kick-started the nationalist movement of the 1920s, out of which the CCP had been born.

May 4 marked another step forward for the movement, with demonstrations in cities where nothing had previously happened, although in other cities, numbers were smaller than before. More importantly, after May 4, the initiative passed back to the government, with the movement’s leaders having no real idea of the next step.

That changed decisively with the launch of a student hunger strike in Tiananmen Square on May 13. It began with just 200 students, but within days, there were more than 1,000 participating, with thousands more sympathizers joining the camp.

The timing was brilliant—Russian President Mikhail Gorbachev was just about to make the first visit of a Russian leader to China since the Sino-Soviet split of 1962. This was meant to be a major diplomatic coup for Deng, with the two leaders appearing together in Tiananmen Square in front of cheering crowds. The students had ruined it.

The day Gorbachev arrived, there were half a million people in the square. The following day, a million, with workers marching into the square in organized groups from workplaces. The next day, 2 million. In at least four other cities, students organized sympathy hunger strikes, with 30,000 people camped out in central Shanghai alone. There were protest and sympathy marches in dozens of other cities across China.

Just as the movement was reaching new heights, a pan-Muslim movement broke out in western China, which saw the biggest-ever religious protests in China. The demonstrations were over the publication of an Islamophobic book and drew together Muslims of different nationalities across at least five provinces as well as in Beijing and Shanghai.

The government reacted very quickly, banning the book and organizing mass burnings of it. The two movements were separate, but the government’s swift response showed how fearful they were of any widening of the protests.

May 18 saw one final attempt to defuse the protests, with a televised meeting between government ministers and the student leaders. The ministers patronized the students, and the students in turn humiliated them. The following day, martial law was declared—troops began to move into Beijing, and the city erupted.

Source

Reblogged from fireblooms  273,266 notes

mechanicbird:

eroticmirotic:

timemachineyeah:

 

I’ve said this before and I’ll point it out again - 

Menstruation is caused by change in hormonal levels to stop the creation of a uterine lining and encourage the body to flush the lining out. The body does this by lowering estrogen levels and raising testosterone. 

Or, to put it more plainly “That time of the month” is when female hormones most closely resemble male hormones. So if (cis) women aren’t suited to office at “That time of the month” then (cis) men are NEVER suited to office.

If you are a dude and don’t dig the ladies around you at their time of the month, just think! That is you all of the time. 

And, on a final note, post-menopausal (cis) women are the most hormonally stable of all human demographics. They have fewer hormonal fluctuations of anyone, meaning older women like Hilary Clinton and Elizabeth Warren would theoretically be among the least likely candidates to make an irrational decision due to hormonal fluctuations, and if we were basing our leadership decisions on hormone levels, then only women over fifty should ever be allowed to hold office. 

Reblogging hard for that last comment.

I WANTED TO SAY THIS BUT THEN SOMEONE ELSE DID and I’m damn proud.

Reblogged from thepeoplesrecord  1,348 notes
thepeoplesrecord:

Indian burial ground paved over for million dollar housesApril 29, 2014
A treasure trove of Coast Miwok life dating back 4,500 years - older than King Tut’s tomb - was discovered in Marin County and then destroyed to make way for multimillion-dollar homes, archaeologists told The Chronicle this week.
The American Indian burial ground and village site, so rich in history that it was dubbed the “grandfather midden,” was examined and categorized under a shroud of secrecy before construction began this month on the $55 million Rose Lane development in Larkspur.
The 300-foot-long site contained 600 human burials, tools, musical instruments, harpoon tips, spears and throwing sticks from a time long before the introduction of the bow and arrow. The bones of grizzly and black bears were also found, along with a ceremonial California condor burial.
"This was a site of considerable archaeological value," said Dwight Simons, a consulting archaeologist who analyzed 7,200 bones, including the largest collection of bear bones ever found in a prehistoric site in the Bay Area. “My estimate of bones and fragments in the entire site was easily over a million, and probably more than that. It was staggering.”
No artifacts were saved
All of it, including stone tools and idols apparently created for trade with other tribes, was removed, reburied in an undisclosed location on site and apparently graded over, destroying the geologic record and ending any chance of future study, archaeologists said. Not a single artifact was saved.
Lost forever was a carbon-dated record in the soil layers of indigenous life going back approximately to the time the Great Pyramid of Giza was built in Egypt. It was, said several prominent archaeologists, the largest, best-preserved, most ethnologically rich American Indian site found in the Bay Area in at least a century.
"It should have been protected," said Jelmer Eerkens, a professor of archaeology at UC Davis who visited the site as a guest scholar.”The developers have the right to develop their land, but at least the information contained in the site should have been protected and samples should have been saved so that they could be studied in the future.”
The shell mound was first documented in Larkspur in 1907, but no one knew its significance until a developer decided to build homes, prompting an examination of the grounds.
Archaeologists brought in
The development was approved by the city in 2010, but the developer, Larkspur Land 8 Owner LLC, was required under the California Environmental Quality Act to bring in archaeologists to study the shell mound under the direction of American Indian monitors before it could build.
The developers hired San Francisco’s Holman & Associates Archaeological Consultants to conduct an excavation, and that firm spent the past year and a half on the site, calling in 25 archaeologists and 10 other specialists to study aspects of the mound. As required by the environmental act, their work was monitored by the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria, who were designated the most likely descendants of Larkspur’s indigenous people.
The American Indian leaders ultimately decided how the findings would be handled, and they defended their decision to remove and rebury the human remains and burial artifacts.
"The philosophy of the tribe in general is that we would like to protect our cultural resources and leave them as is," said Nick Tipon, a longtime member of the Sacred Sites Protection Committee of the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria. “The notion that these cultural artifacts belong to the public is a colonial view.”
But Eerkens and several other top archaeologists said a lot more could have been done to protect the shell mound. The problem was that the work was done under a confidentiality agreement, so little was known about it until March when some of the archaeologists discussed their work during a Society for California Archaeology symposium in Visalia.
Full article

thepeoplesrecord:

Indian burial ground paved over for million dollar houses
April 29, 2014

A treasure trove of Coast Miwok life dating back 4,500 years - older than King Tut’s tomb - was discovered in Marin County and then destroyed to make way for multimillion-dollar homes, archaeologists told The Chronicle this week.

The American Indian burial ground and village site, so rich in history that it was dubbed the “grandfather midden,” was examined and categorized under a shroud of secrecy before construction began this month on the $55 million Rose Lane development in Larkspur.

The 300-foot-long site contained 600 human burials, tools, musical instruments, harpoon tips, spears and throwing sticks from a time long before the introduction of the bow and arrow. The bones of grizzly and black bears were also found, along with a ceremonial California condor burial.

"This was a site of considerable archaeological value," said Dwight Simons, a consulting archaeologist who analyzed 7,200 bones, including the largest collection of bear bones ever found in a prehistoric site in the Bay Area. “My estimate of bones and fragments in the entire site was easily over a million, and probably more than that. It was staggering.”

No artifacts were saved

All of it, including stone tools and idols apparently created for trade with other tribes, was removed, reburied in an undisclosed location on site and apparently graded over, destroying the geologic record and ending any chance of future study, archaeologists said. Not a single artifact was saved.

Lost forever was a carbon-dated record in the soil layers of indigenous life going back approximately to the time the Great Pyramid of Giza was built in Egypt. It was, said several prominent archaeologists, the largest, best-preserved, most ethnologically rich American Indian site found in the Bay Area in at least a century.

"It should have been protected," said Jelmer Eerkens, a professor of archaeology at UC Davis who visited the site as a guest scholar.”The developers have the right to develop their land, but at least the information contained in the site should have been protected and samples should have been saved so that they could be studied in the future.”

The shell mound was first documented in Larkspur in 1907, but no one knew its significance until a developer decided to build homes, prompting an examination of the grounds.

Archaeologists brought in

The development was approved by the city in 2010, but the developer, Larkspur Land 8 Owner LLC, was required under the California Environmental Quality Act to bring in archaeologists to study the shell mound under the direction of American Indian monitors before it could build.

The developers hired San Francisco’s Holman & Associates Archaeological Consultants to conduct an excavation, and that firm spent the past year and a half on the site, calling in 25 archaeologists and 10 other specialists to study aspects of the mound. As required by the environmental act, their work was monitored by the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria, who were designated the most likely descendants of Larkspur’s indigenous people.

The American Indian leaders ultimately decided how the findings would be handled, and they defended their decision to remove and rebury the human remains and burial artifacts.

"The philosophy of the tribe in general is that we would like to protect our cultural resources and leave them as is," said Nick Tipon, a longtime member of the Sacred Sites Protection Committee of the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria. “The notion that these cultural artifacts belong to the public is a colonial view.”

But Eerkens and several other top archaeologists said a lot more could have been done to protect the shell mound. The problem was that the work was done under a confidentiality agreement, so little was known about it until March when some of the archaeologists discussed their work during a Society for California Archaeology symposium in Visalia.

Full article