Items of interest come across recently in my feed-reader. Lots of retrospectives as the year draws to its end. What did I miss? Leave your own interesting links in comments.
- Linksplosion: End of year epic linkage edition
- Axial tilt and the numinous
- FWD Retrospective Week: Accessibility Edition
- There's no crying in Galt's Gulch
- Who Will Rape Me?
- Eating Disorders, the Media, and Skepticism
- The Bechdel test: it’s not about passing
- The Humorless Feminist Doesn’t Know What to Do With This
- How Dare You Atheists Exist?
- Sady Doyle (Tumblr)
– Chally revisits some of her favourite posts of 2010
– “I recall being taught that one reason Washington attacked on Christmas was specifically because (English) American colonists didn’t celebrate the holiday. The German Hessian mercenaries did, though, and so would be hung over and vulnerable when Washington and his army made their surprise attack. In other words, at the time of the Revolution Christmas was unAmerican.”
– great collection of accessibility articles
– “I’ve been writing about this sickening spectacle of Wall Street millionaires and their serious emotional and psychological problems since the beginning of the meltdown. It’s one of the most interesting sociological stories of this era and it reveals that far from being the macho, swashbuckling Galtian heroes of Wall Street myth, these Masters of the Universe and nothing more than spoiled little rich boys who throw tantrums when they aren’t treated like pampered little princes.”
– If you haven’t read Andrea Grimes’ piece yet, don’t miss this chance
– “And that’s all the research mentioned in Radford’s article. So is it a myth that images in the media are linked to body image as he claims? I’m not convinced, seeing as of his three citations, one is fairly irrelevant and two solidly rebut his claim. In fact, as much as I love Radford’s work and consider him a friend, I have to admit that I’m blown away by how out-of-context those quotes are. Some of those sentences are buried in page-long paragraphs, surrounded by the evidence that refutes what Radford is trying to assert.”
– “Female characters are traditionally peripheral to male ones. That’s why we don’t want to hear them chatting about anything other than the male characters: because in making them peripheral, the writer has assured the women can’t possibly contribute to the story unless they’re telling us something about the men who drive the plot. That is the problem the test is highlighting. “
– “It may surprise my spamd00d and his ilk to hear this, but I absolutely support their choice to boycott American women. In fact, I wish they would expand their noble cause and boycott EVERY woman.”
– “Just a reminder before we go on: We’re talking about playing “Jingle Bells” in a Christmas parade. You can’t get any less controversial than this. It’s like a freaking Norman Rockwell painting. How much more sweet and agreeable could you be? Okay, yes, they were playing “Jingle Bells” on vuvuzelas. But that doesn’t seem to be the point. The point seems to be that atheists, simply by existing, and being public about our existence, are offensive, mocking, provocative, hateful troublemakers.”
– “I think we pat ourselves way too much on the back for our Internet feminisms, our various righteous comments and blog posts and blog wars, and forget to ask ourselves what impact our statements are having on anyone who doesn’t already read feminist blogs.”