7 things men get wrong about street harassment

Harassment is an unwanted, aggressive act of intimidation, whether it’s transmitted in person or online. However, many cite women’s mere existence as a “cause” of harassment, as if men are reactionary beasts without an iota of free will, decorum or respect. It’s also an act of petulance: Men want your attention, ladies, and they want it now.

Here are seven misconceptions about street harassment, and why they’re painfully, unambiguously wrong.

“It’s innocent, how does she feel unsafe?”

“While Quartey is proof that you don’t need to attend CalArts to have a successful career in the Los Angeles animation industry, there are advantages to attending CalArts if you’re absolutely sure that you want to work in the southern California animation industry. The industry in Los Angeles, both feature and television, has long used CalArts much like sports franchises use farm teams to develop talent. Industry artists who teach at CalArts often recruit students or recommend them for studio positions, and animation execs offer more shows to CalArts alumni than graduates of all other schools combined.

Four of Cartoon Network’s six current original series were created by CalArts alumni: Adventure Time, Regular Show, Uncle Grandpa, and Clarence. And on Disney Channel, every single one of their original series right now with the exception of Phineas and Ferb was created by an alumni of CalArts: Gravity Falls, Mickey Mouse, Wander Over Yonder, and Star vs. the Forces of Evil. This is not a judgment of the system (it is what it is) but rather an observation: if your goal is to get a TV show made in Los Angeles—especially at a major studio like Cartoon Network, Nick or Disney—you increase your odds significantly by attending CalArts.” -Cartoon Brew

Source: http://www.cartoonbrew.com/ideas-commentary/l-a-animation-artist-tired-of-explaining-to-fans-he-didnt-attend-calarts-108559.html

crimson-not-scarlet asked:

(1) Hey, I noticed today a painting in my history of art textbook which has a poc! I don't think you've posted it anywhere, so I thought I would bring it to your attention. It's the "oculo del soffitto" in the "camera degli sposi" by Andrea Mantegna, painted in 1473 (I think); there is a black man (or woman -frankly, it's not clear) with a turban - I asked my art teacher about it, and she said he was a doctor of the family. On the internet, though, they mostly say it was a slave woman.

(2) I don’t know which is true, but if you find something more, please make a post about it! (I really hope they are not a slave -especially since the only “source” I’ve found is “Oh well, they’re not white… they’re probably a slave.” which is def quite racist.) Thank you for your attention! (and sorry for my English - I tried my best but I’m quite sure I’ve made a few mistakes)  (Also I love your blog - though that went without saying!)


Here’s the detail of the oculus for reference:

There’s no reason to assume this person is enslaved. I have more posts about Andrea Mantegna on the blog here, and Italian renaissance paintings that feature people of color are far from uncommon. The same artist painted this Adoration featuring the Black King, Balthazar:

It’s important to realize that Italy was a massive intercultural and international center for trade during the Middle Ages and Renaissance. It’s also important to consider the fact that the reason we associate skin color with enslavement is because of American chattel slavery, and then this association gets projected backwards onto the past. That’s also why so many Americans have really intense misconceptions about the modern construction of race, anti-Blackness, and Roman slavery. It profoundly affects the way that these artworks are perceived and written about, including within academia.


Misconceptions About the Universe

Misconceptions About Ravenclaws Debunked

Nerds and teacher’s pets that study like crazy, get all A’s, and correct people’s grammar on Facebook

Believe it or not, school is not a Ravenclaw’s ideal environment. Sure, if a Ravenclaw finds a certain subject particularly interesting or if the teacher teaches it in an interesting way, they will give their absolute attention and might do well on tests due to their ability to absorb information when they want to. However, that all comes down to whether or not they’re good at test-taking, or anything that has to do with the school system. Ravenclaws often can’t stand being put into set parameters or strict systems. It can quash their creativity and desire to find new solutions to problems. 

Many Ravenclaws are too busy reading their own books to even pick up Catcher in the Rye, and therefore do not always have the best grades. If anything, the people who probably have the best grades are the Slytherins. Slytherins care about the grades, whereas Ravenclaws are focused on learning. They won’t study if they don’t think it’s worth their time.

As for people who correct other’s grammar on facebook, those people are assholes. Assholes correct people’s grammar on facebook. That asshole may possibly be a Ravenclaw, but it is certainly not a habit that all Ravenclaws participate in.

Misconceptions About Slytherins Debunked

Slytherins are evil, narcissistic, backstabbing, and only concerned with themselves

Wrong. Wrong wrong wrong. Ugh. Wrong.

Slytherins are very competitive, sure, but they aren’t hateful and backstabbing. Slytherins tend to actually have very tight-knit friendships. If you mess with a Slytherin’s friend, you’re gunna be in big trouble.That friend won’t necessarily be another Slytherin, but when you look at how they’re regarded by other houses, it’s not surprising that most of them would be. And believe it or not, there is nothing wrong with putting yourself first sometimes. 

Of course, these misconceptions tend to come from the behavior displayed throughout the Harry Potter books. There is one post that I stumbled upon awhile ago that I couldn’t refind that describes it so well. I did, however, find two other posts that do a pretty good job on their own of how unfairly Slytherins are treated by the other houses.



One scene that really irritated me was at the battle of Hogwarts. Voldemort threatens to kill them all, unless they hand in Harry Potter. Imagine this from their perspective. An army is marching on the school, an army that contains many of the students parents, and their options are either to give up some kid who never was kind to them, or to go out there and fight, possibly to the death, for a school whose population treated them like shit, against their own family members. The rest of the school fucking cheered when they were sent to be locked up in the dungeons, How fucked up is that? These are children. They are not obligated to be soldiers for people who never cared about them anyways, who boo them any chance they get.

Then of course there’s getting the house cup ripped out from underneath them–points that they clearly worked hard for and deserved- and given to Gryffindor because of a few kids. Can you imagine that? Working hard, finishing in first place, celebrating with your house at your table…and then getting the trophy torn away because of petty favoritism. And then everyone fucking cheers. Cheers that the house that earned the trophy didn’t get it because they didn’t like them. Fuck that.

Misconceptions About HufflePuffs Debunked

Hufflepuffs are losers that aren’t extraordinary in any way


I think the problems with most misconceptions about houses comes from the idea that all people fit perfectly into the guidelines for the personalities of each house. It comes out as “All Ravenclaws are geniuses; All Gryffindors are Brave; All Slytherins are successful; And all Hufflepuffs are… nice”

But that’s not what it comes down to. All the smart people are not in Ravenclaw. Not everyone in Gryffindor is a hero. People end up saying things like, “Well all of the smart, brave, and ambitious people are in the other houses, so it’s just ‘the rest of them’ that are left.” That’s not what houses are about.

Houses are strongly based on values. People who are put into Hufflepuff aren’t put there because they aren’t smart or brave or ambitious enough. They’re there because they don’t value those traits as much. What they value is dedication and selflessness. And there certainly isn’t anything wrong with that. 

And if you think about it, with Hufflepuffs being the friendliest house, they of course have the most friends. They will be friends with nearly anyone. Does that sound like a loser to you? They are people-oriented and charismatic social butterflies. They thrive off of making others happy. That’s amazing in its own way.

Also, I’d like to remind you that in the Goblet of Fire, the Goblet chose a Hufflepuff as Hogwarts’ champion. Out of all the students– from the adventurous Gryffindors to the ambitious Slytherins– the goblet chose a Hufflepuff to represent Hogwarts in a high-risk tournament, Cedric Diggory.

Cedric Diggory was a golden child. He was at Harry’s level of popularity, and not by some “chosen one” gimmick, but by his own personality. He is smart, charming, strong, selfless, brave and worthy enough to be the champion of Hogwarts. If it weren’t for Harry and his awful magnetism for evil schemes, Cedric would have won.

And people say Hufflepuffs are lame.


doirbles asked:

Hello! I've been very interested in Wicca for a little while now, and I'd really like to get into it- I've researched pretty much everything I can find within my power, and it seems right for me... Except I can't find myself believing in a God/Goddess or magic or *anything* as much as I want to. I just can't find personal proof which is enough to satisfy that nagging voice of doubt in my head. Do you have any tips or advice or some way of finding my own proof? (Meditation doesn't do it for me.)

I’m going to have to serve up a little bluntness here. I hope that it doesn’t offend anyone. It’ll probably loose me a few followers too…but there’s an adage about omelettes and eggs that I think would be relevant here. 

You will never get enough proof to completely shut down that little nagging voice in the back of your head. That would fall under the realm of ‘blind faith’. I don’t support the idea of blind unconditional faith. That nagging voice keeps us from thinking we are the next Willow from BtVS. 

You will never believe as much as you want to. There is always going to be a part of you that wonders if you are playing pretend or just being weird while waving around a stick of cinnamon in the vain hope of doing something no one can see. 

The fact is proof is a quantifiable tangible thing. It lives in the plane of numbers and biology and the visible spectrum of the everyday reality. Magic and Faith are not. They are somewhere else. We can try to use science to explain the things that happen, but often we reach into the realms of pseudo-science and metaphysics. 

If you want to believe, then you have to step back from the demand for proof. One of the most amazing people in my life said the following: “That moment when you suddenly believe in magic, or the God/Goddess is one that is completely personal. IT happens to different people at different times for different reasons. Keeping living, and looking for the wonders that are in the world, that’s how my eyes were opened.” 

I hope this helps. 

Explaining the Bro Code

#1 Bros before Hoes- While most people think that means your guys friend should always come first, that’s not true.
Bros in this doesn’t mean guys, it means close or old friends or friendships
Hoes in this doesn’t mean girls, it means new people or relations.
So what this is saying is that you should give the people who have been there for you for longer the right of way, rather than jumping from one friend to another. If they have been there for you, you should do the same back to them.

All Lies: Infographic Of 52 Misconceptions Debunked


is the infographic created by David McCandless

refuting 52 common misconceptions. I found it all rather questionable. Like, who is this David McCandless and what does he know? What is his AGENDA? Also, what does the

Monster Energy is the devil’s work lady

think about all this? Because if I trust anybody to get to the bottom of something, it’s her. She’s the kind of lady who can find clues where there aren’t any. I wouldn’t be surprised to find out True Detective was actually named after her.

(Information Is Beautiful via Geekologie)