i don’t have time to go clothes shopping bc cheap clothes shops are all far from me
i’m afraid to buy pants or shoes online bc those parts of me are weirdly shaped
i need new pants and shoes for my prac teaching EVEN THOUGH I DON’T HAVE A PRAC TEACHING PLACEMENT YET
IT IS AN IDEA I HAD A WHILE BACK BUT IT IS ACTUALLY KIND OF FLESHING ITSELF OUT:
Manic Pixie Dream Girls as a narrative are kind of universally reviled, correct? I was thinking one day like, how do you make one AWESOME? Because movies featuring MPDGs are never ever about the MPDG herself, because she is not a person, she is an idea. And because we only see her through the eyes of fuckin Zack Braff or whatever, she is basically a blank slate.
My instinct is always to turn a blank slate character into something violent and dark and awful, so why not make her secretly terrifying??? Not in an existential way, but in a badass spysassin way.
BASICALLY MY MOVIE GOES LIKE THIS:
- blogs with less than 200 followers are getting deleted
- on new years day, everyone under the age of 18 must dress up like ronald reagan
- christmas is illegal
- the national u.s. currency has been changed from money to bread
- post limit is 1 post per day
- selfies are banned
- you can only follow 1 person. choose wisely
- baldness is illegal
The City Council announces the opening of a new dog park at the corner of Earl and Sommerset, near the Ralph’s. They would like to remind everyone that dogs are not allowed in the dog park. People are not allowed in the dog park. It is possible you will see hooded figures in the dog park. Do not approach them. Do not approach the dog park. The fence is electrified and highly dangerous. Try not to look at the dog park, and especially do not look for any period of time at the hooded figures. The dog park will not harm you.
Welcome To Night Vale, Pilot
just rediscovered Happily Ever After, the animated off brand Snow White sequel from 1993!
it was one of those Blockbuster movies, you know? that was like only ever at Blockbuster? kind of like Sandlot, but like, not good?
it’s about how Snow White has to rescue her prince because MALCOLM MCDOWELL (as the villain of the piece) has stolen him away
she hooks up with a group of Dwarfelles (the capitalization of this term is standard usage according to the wiki article) which includes CAROL CHANNING and ZSA ZSA GABOR
Carol Channing portrays:
Muddy: a Dwarfelle who has power over the earth it self, and as such performs such tricks as causing minor tremors and such. She feels most comfortable playing in the mud.
PHYLLIS DILLER PORTRAYS MOTHER NATURE
the most powerful force of good in this movie, having complete control over nature, as well as the ability to create creatures from potions she makes in her sanctuary. Upon Lord Maliss’ [EDITOR’S NOTE: MALCOLM MCDOWELL] attack on Snow White who is with the Seven Dwarfelles in Mother Nature’s garden, Mother Nature surrounds her corporeal self with massive amounts of electrical energy, and blasts Lord Maliss out of the air. She then creates a divide in the land with a flick of her hand so he can not get to them. She is then seen in the end magically transporting herself to Lord Maliss’ castle.
there’s nothing I can say, is there
"Teachers are often unaware of the gender distribution of talk in their classrooms. They usually consider that they give equal amounts of attention to girls and boys, and it is only when they make a tape recording that they realize that boys are dominating the interactions.
Dale Spender, an Australian feminist who has been a strong advocate of female rights in this area, noted that teachers who tried to restore the balance by deliberately ‘favouring’ the girls were astounded to find that despite their efforts they continued to devote more time to the boys in their classrooms. Another study reported that a male science teacher who managed to create an atmosphere in which girls and boys contributed more equally to discussion felt that he was devoting 90 per cent of his attention to the girls. And so did his male pupils. They complained vociferously that the girls were getting too much talking time.
In other public contexts, too, such as seminars and debates, when women and men are deliberately given an equal amount of the highly valued talking time, there is often a perception that they are getting more than their fair share. Dale Spender explains this as follows:
The talkativeness of women has been gauged in comparison not with men but with silence. Women have not been judged on the grounds of whether they talk more than men, but of whether they talk more than silent women.
In other words, if women talk at all, this may be perceived as ‘too much’ by men who expect them to provide a silent, decorative background in many social contexts. This may sound outrageous, but think about how you react when precocious children dominate the talk at an adult party. As women begin to make inroads into formerly ‘male’ domains such as business and professional contexts, we should not be surprised to find that their contributions are not always perceived positively or even accurately."-
As a teacher, I give girls what I hope is a lot of attention. I don’t know if I give girls their fair share, but I aspire to, especially after noticing that boys are willing to use their greater share of teachers’ attention to get girls who they feel aren’t being quiet and docile enough punished. I have therefore acquired a reputation for “caring more about the girls.” This has had two marked results: Some straight boys have gotten more hostile toward me, and most girls have gotten more confident around me. This makes me think I’m doing something right.
Longer thoughts on how this phenomenon relates to sexual harassment in classrooms, if you’re interested: The girls figured out I won’t report them if they hit boys who are sexually harassing them, I’ll only report the boys. This led to an increase in how often girls got the last word and boys got smacked in my classes, and, also, to a DECREASE IN HOW OFTEN GIRLS GOT SEXUALLY HARASSED. The sexual harassers seem to have been depending on the sort of “equal blame” and “retaliation is never warranted” and “don’t hurt others’ feelings” perspectives so many schools try to instill in kids; the sexual harassers were usually the ones bringing me into the situation by saying, “Miss, she hit me! You should write her up!” Once they figured out I was only ever going to respond, “If you don’t treat girls like that, they won’t hit you,” the girls got more confident and the sexual harassers largely shut the fuck up.
In schools, fighting against sexual harassment is often punished exactly the same as, or more severely than, sexual harassment — a lot of discipline codes make no distinction between violence and violence in self-defence, and violence is ALWAYS the highest level of disciplinary infraction, whereas verbal sexual harassment rarely is. Sexual harassers, at least in the schools I’ve been in, rely heavily on GETTING GIRLS IN TROUBLE WITH HIGHER AUTHORITIES as a strategy of harassment — creating an external punishment that penalises girls for and therefore discourages girls from fighting back. Sexual harassers are willing to use their greater share of floorspace to ask to get girls who won’t date them punished. By and large, teachers do punish those girls when they swear or hit. Schools condition girls to ignore sexual harassment by punishing them when they speak up or fight back instead.
Once the sexual harassers in my classes understood that girls wouldn’t be punished for rejecting them, they backed off around me. And there started to be a flip in what conversations I get called into — girls are telling me when boys are being nasty (too loud and dominant), instead of boys telling me when girls are being uncooperative (louder and more dominant than boys think they should be).
reblogging again for the wonderful commentary.
Hey, any of my followers in the American tornado zone? Everyone ok?
- love yourself like kanye loves himself
- believe in yourself like kanye believes in himself
- know you’re the shit like kanye knows he’s the shit