anonymous said:

(1/2) I'm totally for Griffon calling out the man policing her, however I think she took things a bit to far. It was one thing to chew out the man giving her a problem, even bringing some of the other patrons in on it, but when she went around with the poncho taking pictures with the guards, who I can only assume didn't cause her any problems, that's when the story started making me uncomfortable. I mean the way the story was told made it seem like the one man, and possibly one other guard,

(2/2) were even there for the incident. Why bring the other guards working there into something they may well haven’t agreed with. From what it seems those guards didn’t give her any problems, but Griffon felt it necessary to give them all a big “fuck you.” Perhaps it’s because I work with the general public but I really dislike when other people bring workers into a situation they weren’t apart of. Those guards were trying to make a living, but because they worked there they are all the bad guy

Idk it’s hard to tell without actually being there, but I don’t blame her for going off on the first guard (in fact I think that was awesome). I see your point that dragging other people into it who didn’t have anything to do with it isn’t cool but it’s hard to tell what the situation was with the other guards from Geoff’s 2 minute story.

Also I find it a bit galling that like… Griffon calling out body policing and sexism has gained more backlash and more inbox action than any of the guys saying something awful in ages. Like literally dozens of people have stormed into my inbox to defend these guards from Griffon taking their photo or being ‘too mean’ or whatever. So where’s the backlash when the RT guys do something awful, like the transmisogyny in the latest RT Recap or the racist joke about slavery in the Minecraft let’s play? Why is Griffon standing up for herself such a priority?

Oh wait, I know why.

Court rules Nestlé and other chocolate companies can be sued for using cocoa harvested by overseas child labor.


Read more here.

The decision was based on testimony from three former slave laborers that worked without pay, were given scraps to eat and were beaten and whipped by their overseers.

INVITE Nestle to discover our FRDM™ software and protect against slavery in their supply chain:!

State corrects historical oversight, brought to light by residents who watched the movie “Lincoln”

The 13th Amendment to the Constitution, which abolished slavery, was ratified in 1865. Lawmakers in Mississippi, however, only got around to officially ratifying the amendment last month — 148 years later — thanks to the movie “Lincoln.”

The state’s historical oversight came to light after Mississippi resident Ranjan Batra saw the Steven Spielberg-directed film last November, the Clarion-Ledger reports.

After watching the film, which depicts the political fight to pass the 13th Amendment, Batra did some research. He learned that the amendment was ratified after three-fourths of the states backed it in December 1865. Four remaining states all eventually ratified the amendment — except for Mississippi. Mississippi voted to ratify the amendment in 1995 but failed to make it official by notifying the U.S. Archivist.

Batra spoke to another Mississippi resident, Ken Sullivan, who contacted Mississippi Secretary of State Delbert Hosemann about the oversight. Finally, on Jan. 30, Hosemann sent the Office of the Federal Register a copy of the 1995 resolution, and on Feb. 7, the Federal Register made the ratification official.

According to the Clarion-Ledger, it’s unclear why the state never sent the U.S. Archivist its 1995 resolution. “What an amendment to have an error in filing,” Dick Molpus, who served then as secretary of state, told the paper.

aseantoo submitted to medievalpoc:

Unknown artist, possibly of the Brazilian School

Black Artist Completing a Portrait of a White Female Aristocrat

Brazil (early 1700s)

Oil on canvas

Philadelphia private collection

[x], [x]

I was thrilled at first to see this image - a pre-modern Black woman artist, portrayed at work! But then I saw this:

Although this black artist appears to be wearing a dress, it is likely to be a male figure. As the scholar Sheldon Cheek explains, the artist wears an earring and a silver collar, both common articles worn by black male servants/slaves in Europe during the 17th and 18th centuries, the collar traditionally indicating slave status. Women rarely, if ever, wore the silver collar. The artist also appears to be wearing a silver “shackle” on the arm.

Ugh. Pretty awful.

I think we should all be pretty critical of what’s written about this painting. Especially the part you’ve quoted above about how they have assigned the gender of the artist in the painting. I find it bizarre that something that is supposed to indicate enslaved status (not gender) somehow trumps this person wearing women’s clothing (that’s also a woman’s hat to the best of my knowledge).

The Americas, including Brazil, have a long tradition of transgender and third gender people. This is one of those images from the past that falls quite easily through the cracks because it is a collection of “exceptions”; it doesn’t fit nicely into categories that have been created and therefore, it’s more or less ignored.

If anyone’s hesitant to be critical, maybe you should also note that both the articles linked above make claims that slavery in Brazil was “less harsh” than other places. What???

How many of our assumptions are being projected onto this painting? Are the “contradictions” present in it a product of the painting itself, or is the problem with the categories we try to place it in? How many layers do we have to fight uphill through when we even look at this image? After all, History teaches us:

  • women weren’t artists
  • Black people weren’t artists
  • Black people were enslaved
  • Enslaved people didn’t do anything of worth
  • Transgender, genderqueer and third gender people didn’t exist before the 1960s
  • white people control how Black images are perceived, but not the other way around
  • gender must be immediately perceivable and fit into our categories of “male” and “female”

^ So this is the baggage we bring with us when we look at this image. We look at this painting, and we actively search for indicators that allow us to continue to believe the above assumptions.

If we take away those assumptions, if we try to move past them and see this portrait with new eyes, what are we left with? Whose History do we see here? Maybe it’s mine; maybe it’s yours.

Modern-day slavery, better known human trafficking, is one of the fastest growing crimes internationally, making it a huge problem facing humanity. There are currently more in the world than ever, both in numbers and per capita; in 2012, there were approximately 27 million worldwide and growing, with over 17,500 trafficked into the United States every year. Most of them are women and girls and many are used as sex slaves, but all of those trafficked are also used for labor among other heinous crimes for little to no compensation. more statistics: (x)(x)(x)

Even though the problem seems far away, there are slaves in every single country in the world; they may be in your very community. They affect your daily life regardless of their location, whether they be in your town or halfway around the world. They sew your clothes and assemble your electronics; they harvest your food and craft your jewelry. To see how many slaves it takes to lead your lifestyle, click here.

If you or someone you know is in danger: 

  • call (US): 1 (888) 373-7888
  • call (UK and Ireland): 0300 303 8151
  • text (US):  233733 (Text “HELP” or “INFO”)
  • submit a tip (worldwide): (x)

To learn more and donate, check out these anti-human trafficking organizations and campaigns:

The Half Has Never Been Told: Slavery and the Making of American Capitalism by Edward E. Baptist

Americans tend to cast slavery as a pre-modern institution—the nation’s original sin, perhaps, but isolated in time and divorced from America’s later success. But to do so robs the millions who suffered in bondage of their full legacy. 

As historian Edward Baptist reveals in The Half Has Never Been Told, the expansion of slavery in the first eight decades after American independence drove the evolution and modernization of the United States. In the span of a single lifetime, the South grew from a narrow coastal strip of worn-out tobacco plantations to a continental cotton empire, and the United States grew into a modern, industrial, and capitalist economy. Until the Civil War, Baptist explains, the most important American economic innovations were ways to make slavery ever more profitable. Through forced migration and torture, slave owners extracted continual increases in efficiency from enslaved African Americans. Thus the United States seized control of the world market for cotton, the key raw material of the Industrial Revolution, and became a wealthy nation with global influence.

Told through intimate slave narratives, plantation records, newspapers, and the words of politicians, entrepreneurs, and escaped slaves, The Half Has Never Been Told offers a radical new interpretation of American history. It forces readers to reckon with the violence at the root of American supremacy, but also with the survival and resistance that brought about slavery’s end—and created a culture that sustains America’s deepest dreams of freedom.