beauty implements

Good character does not come from all of the books you have read, the Ahadith you can quote or the Surahs you have memorized. Good character comes from understanding the beauty of Islam and implementing what you gain in everyday life. Good character comes with sincerity and doing everything you do for the sake of Allah. Don’t tell me you love Prophet Muhammad ﷺ when you are harsh to others. Don’t tell me you fear the Creator when you are horrible towards His creation. Be real with yourself. Look in the mirror. Who are you?

Why is there no Classism?

So, there are structures in place that preserve class. There are identities which are often termed in relation to structures of class. Class is articulated on a continual basis. Then why is there no such thing as classism? I can understand calling the notion of “classism” being incoherent a pedantic distinction, but I think explaining that there not only is a difference, but the nature of that difference (perhaps differance?) is important specifically because it allows for a development of why there cannot be a comprehensive structure of identity through class that will not eventually reinforce notions of capitalist violence.

There are so many examples wherein one finds affinity within struggle, identities that are defined both within and against their structural bounds, but to do so with class enters a series of implication about class that lead to the conclusion that class is the same kind of identity as any other. Articulations of gay pride, of black liberation, of national liberation struggles are all means by which one reacts to the violence of neocolonial, neoliberal hegemony. Conversely, these retain a danger of rearticulation like that described by Badiou in Black where he discusses the specific usage of black as a term of identity and the beauty of blackness as part of black liberatory aesthetics, and cautions about how this positive act can structure a larger acceptance of similar standards of hegemony within the articulatory act of creating this positive notion of black beauty. In effect, the notion of blackness as only worthy if beautiful, and only beautiful through a selective implementation of standards rooted in antiblackness, which are retained through this reversal. There are countless writings on this process and how it retains a great deal of complicated duplicity given the many levels of semiotics of beauty and the concept of beauty itself as a semiotic designator of goodness, and to repeat them would belabor the point. However, the predominant point here is that the retention of a violent structure in a process of naming it is entirely possible

Articulating “classism” as an idea implies that class has an identity of the same sort as any other, rather than one dependent on other structures of affinity. There are supporters’ groups in Europe with distinctly working class identities, and some teams even retain this in themselves. American sports, largely apolitical in aesthetics except for support of neocolonial armies, are even able to articulate some sort of working class identity around themselves. Both the Mets and the Yankees retain working class identities, and one sees an opposition between the cache of going to a Rangers game, and the way that many Islanders fans identify with a vanishing working class of Long Island. These identities are not formed in isolation: markers of class are often racialized such that a luxury brand can perceive a downturn in their image as they are taken on as a signifier of wealth by rappers as opposed to signifying a hegemonic articulation of luxury. Even within perceptions of the working class, one finds that there are racializations of identity, such as when Timberland responded to its popularity during the 90s as a result of hip-hop fashion by clinging to a notion of the working class structured by and identified with whiteness. When talking about notions of the “white working class” many have in fact accepted a subjectivity formed by white supremacy, such that one must first be white in order to realize or be situatioed within the working class.   

Even without a hegemonic structure that demarcates people as gay, some people will still engage in the same behaviors, in the same way. People will simply not be gay in the same sense because there is no such structure, there is no “being gay” to be. People will still love their friends, grow as they find those who share similar experiences of the body and of love, and those may mirror current gay communities, but it will not be by the necessity imposed externally by homophobia. The same is true of other identities specifically because while they are structured by external violence, there are communities within these repeated and continual structures of violence that have become meaningful themselves. While so many of them have been formed specifically due to the violence of antisemitism, this does not mean Jewish communities are only meaningful because of antisemitism. That liberation movements so often are built out of solidarity and community across structural affinities shows this persistence of culture in spite of outside pressure. We will not see a unilateral process where communities dissolve without these structures, although some indeed will because they are based in articulating themselves against these structures and their preservation would only lead to a rearticulation and reimposition of the structures in question. Class is an example of one specifically because of its relation to production and producing-production.

Saying something is “classist” because it exhibits preservation of class structure is simply noting it as a mechanism of class structure because class is defined by how mobility is only produced as an illusory aesthetic trapping of class, how expansion of the bourgeoisie is superficial and moreover is part of retaining the overall structure of violence necessary to continue the structuring of class, and that inroads made against class structure are overwhelmingly the result of attempts to resolve contradictions within late capitalism rather than create a meaningful process of transformation in regard to class. Creating an identity of class that one can then be “classist” against implies that there is more to class than one’s economic location within it, that the communities within must articulate themselves within class structure, and that there will be a loss of this without the violence of class.

Thus, it implies that there is a uniqueness to “working class” culture that must be preserved, or a “proletarian culture” that can only persist if those within it continue to be proletarian, that one can foster this culture of being a certain class. This additionally shows in notions of preserving a “middle class” that is alienated through structures of postmodernity from their labor, given relative luxury while in fact not understanding their connection to any structure of class, and moreover surviving thanks to the labor of both the proletariat in the first world and the proletariat within a more global, third-world structure of the proletariat. The notion of “classism” so often refers to imposed social immobility tied to other structures of violence rather than being any structure of violence itself, being part of preserving class through preserving that structure. Culture itself is in many ways a construction, and that the way in which working class identities are built around and through other constructions of culture itself relies on retaining notions of class as part of the culture at hand.

Effectively, as a term it obscures the way in which class society relies on an assemblage of violence fostered upon individuals through structures far greater than them, and thus functions to obscure the actual violence at hand.

“As we express our gratitude, we must never forget that the highest appreciation is not to utter words, but to live by them.” ~ John F. Kennedy

Beautiful reminder to implement in life.

30 Days of Prince of Tennis - Day 18

Your favorite episode/part of the story that doesn’t involve a tennis match

The New Prince of Tennis Specials Episode 1

We got some Atobe sky diving to school

On a Sunday

A day in the Sanada home wherein Sanada trains his concentration

We also meet Genichirou’s nephew, Sasuke.

Who manages to piss his uncle off within ten seconds.

The Oshitari cousins trying their luck at this raffle game.

Tezuka showing his appreciation for the gifts he gets by using them.

The Shitenhouji team bowling while suspecting that Shiraishi has a girlfriend.

But really he just got himself a pet beetle, Kaburiel.

But then Yukari comes in and tells Shiraishi something he should know about his beetle.

LOOK AT THE DEVASTATION IN THIS BOY’S beautiful FACE. Dork.

Yukimura implementing some new rules

Kirihara and Sanada following like the good teammates they are.

But I guess there are better ways to do that.

and on a side note, why would anyone assume that all skin whitening in east asian countries is due to ‘wanting to be white’? why is this the conclusion you immediately draw? i can at least speak for japan. 

it’s an ANCIENT beauty standard there that the ‘whiter your skin is the prettier you are’ and that’s why things like rice-flour on the face has been used for literally centuries when european-centric beauty standards weren’t even implemented… it’s an extremely damaging colorist stigma and it’s horrible but it still has nothing to do with ‘asians wanting to be white’. some people really have their heads up their ass but anyway

My Top 5 Films Of The Year So Far

Hello! Here are my top 5 favourite films of the year so far.

5. Life Itself - Steve James

I’m not sure if this is because I have a huge soft spot for both Roger Ebert and Steve James. But regardless, I loved Life Itself. 

This documentary shares and celebrates the life of legendary film critic, Roger Ebert with an enormous amount of respect and admiration, but never shies away from talking about the more unsavoury parts of Ebert’s life. From discovering and saving the life of Martin Scorcese, to Roger’s struggle with alcoholism. It’s all there. For a film about a film critic, huge emphasis on the art of film criticism isn’t really there. Don’t get me wrong! They talk plenty about Ebert’s talents as a writer and as a real appreciator of cinema, but the film realises and celebrates the fact that Roger was so much more than that. As Werner Herzog put it; ‘he’s the soldier of cinema’. And that’s the truth. He was a man who discovered so many talented young filmmakers whom without him, probably wouldn’t have careers. He made it possible for a wider demographic to appreciate film as the art form it is. And for close to ten years, he battled with cancer which took his away his capacity to speak, but continued to inspire and review movies just like he always did until the day he died. 

This is an incredibly touching film with a lot of care put into it. It doesn’t quite capture Roger Ebert’s demeanour, but hey, he was a bit of jerk and i’m sure it wouldn’t have been super respectful if he was treated as such. They mention it, but overall he’s depicted as a real inspiring figure, that I believe he was (mostly). I really enjoyed this film and for anyone who’s interested in film criticism or even just film in general, i’d strongly recommend it. I’m just sad he’s gone and would’ve loved to hear his thoughts on one of my films. 

Trailer

4. Locke - Steven Knight

I didn’t expect to love Locke as much as I did. Locke takes place entirely in one car, with one man, travelling from Birmingham to London. Sounds exciting, right? You have no idea.

We spend the entirety of this film peering through the glass of Ivan Locke’s car as he speeds down the motorway. Throughout this real-time journey, Welsh concrete pourer Locke played masterfully by Tom Hardy, talks on the phone to his co-workers, his family and sometimes himself as his life crumbles and disintegrates before his very eyes. Joining Hardy, we have a number of great british actors coming out of the loud speaker in Locke’s car. Olivia Coleman plays Locke’s tragically desperate and broken mistress, Ruth Wilson plays Locke’s gentle but distraught wife and Andrew Scott plays Locke’s goofy co-worker. All with incredible brilliance. It’s one thing to perform both visually and vocally, but to simply perform vocally is something completely different and to be able to convey such well drawn character just with your voice is a huge feat. It’s the nuanced performances from the entire cast that pull you into the film and never let you go. It’s a real movie of the 21st century when it comes to the way in which performances are brought to the viewer.

The entire film is drenched in pure atmosphere. The orange street lamps passing the car, the freezing cold air and the red and blue lights of cars going in different directions fill the screen to give you a real sense of where our protagonist is. Locke’s life changes drastically throughout this one car journey, and the scrambling of his mind is conveyed beautifully by director Steven Knight who implements many beautiful and thoughtful visuals as he drives. 

What really works about this film is just how gripping it is. Experiencing this journey in real-time makes us feel closer to the character and makes us really feel like we’re there, experiencing this turmoil. The film has a very different and flowing narrative that captures the viewer in an almost dream-like state all the way through. That is, if your dreams take place on the M25 and are full of tense phone calls with loved ones. If you like drama, i’m almost certain you’ll like this.

Trailer

3. Under The Skin - Jonathan Glazer

This is an interesting one. On first viewing, I wasn’t sure what I thought of Under The Skin. On second viewing, I loved it.

I’m just gonna say this now. There’s a good chance you won’t like this film. It’s a film full of surreal imagery, heavy-handed symbolism and a very thin plot. It’s a real film of interpretation. If you’re someone who needs to have a clear plot structure, then you probably won’t like this. If you’re like me and you love thinking intensely throughout a film and reading into it, then you might just love Under The Skin. It’s a film that many could easily interpret as 'pretentious’ but keep an open mind, because nothing’s pretentious as long there’s real meaning to what’s being presented to you.

Under The Skin stars Scarlett Johansson as what seems to be an extra terrestrial who’s recently arrived on our planet. Throughout the film we see this strange character travel through Scotland in a van, picking up hitchhikers and dealing with them in an incredibly surreal way. All while Johansson’s character begins to appreciate and experience humanity. That’s what I perceived the plot to be. That may not be the case for you. Which is one of the main reasons I loved this film. There aren’t many movies you can walk out of and say to your friend 'What do you think the plot was?’ or 'What do you think the message was?’. That’s really cool. The film challenges you to interpret it however you like and intern, becoming something completely different for each person. For me, an amazing film is one that transcends the screen. One that can seep into your being and your life. And intellectually, Under The Skin is just that. For days after watching, I still pondered the elements, piecing together the film I thought it was. That’s not too say the film’s just a montage of weird imagery. There’s a relatively clear narrative as we see Scarlett’s characters go from person to person and leading them to what appears to be their deaths. The film had just enough weight as a narrative but presented us with a lot to think about and come to a conclusion about ourselves.

The film is full of wonderful and bizarre imagery and Johansson fits right in. There’s something about seeing Hollywood star, Scarlett Johansson roaming the streets of Glasgow that just doesn’t seem right. And the film’s full of a lot of that. Uncomfortable and almost horrific imagery that you can’t quite wrap your brain around, at least while you’re watching. 

Under The Skin certainly isn’t for everyone, but it definitely was for me. I was incredibly uncomfortable disturbed throughout the film, but in a good way.

Trailer

2. The Lego Movie - Christopher Miller & Phil Lord 

Don’t you just love it when a film about Lego surprises everyone and turns out to be one of the most hilarious and well-crafted films of the year? I sure do.

I loved The Lego Movie from start to finish. Not just because it was funny, not just because it was visually beautiful and not just because it was incredibly self aware, but because it was a film that really had heart. The market for animated kids movies has become increasingly saturated over the years and you rarely see one that genuinely makes you feel good about life. But here, in 2014, we have a film that can inspire as many adults as it can kids. The best kids movies are always the ones that can be enjoyed just as much by the parents. I left the cinema (all three times) with a lovely taste in my mouth. A sense that everything in life, big or small, is awesome in it’s own way. And I think that’s brilliant. The Lego Movie did perfectly exactly what a kids movie should do. Not forgetting the fact that as a film, I think it’s beautifully crafted with great pacing and a lovely sense of adventure. Also not forgetting that writer and directors Chris Miller & Phil Lord, two people whom i’m a huge fan of, craft wonderfully bizarre jokes that land on one level for kids and on another, for the parents. And  finally forgetting the perfect performances from Chris Pratt, Elizabeth Banks, Morgan Freeman and Will Arnett. It’s the heart that got me the most with this wonderful film.

I straight up recommend this film to anyone. Whether you’re the biggest fan of Ingmar Bergman or Michael Bay, I reckon you’ll get something out of this film.

Trailer

1. Boyhood - Richard Linklater

I saw this film a week ago and I still haven’t gotten over it. The film made me explode with emotion in the auditorium and i’m still carrying the blast shards on me today. In short, I think it’s a masterpiece.

Richard Linklater’s Boyhood started shooting in 2002 with six year old Ellar Coltrane along with Patricia Arquette, Ethan Hawke and Lorelei Linklater. Over the course of 12 years, the crew rejoined the actors each year in order to create a seamless film in which we see a young boy called Mason grow into a adult before our very eyes. That alone is astonishing. But one of the things that’s so incredible about Boyhood is that, despite the incredibly interesting production of the film, it still stands as a fantastic piece of storytelling. Some would think that the 12 years thing would be a gimmick, but no. That aspect strengthens the film like nobody’s business and makes it something truly unique.

The film is almost three hours long, which with most movies, is a bit too long. But with this film, it just flies by. Witnessing Mason go from 6 to 18 in the span of three hours is one of the most seamless, immersive and beautiful things i’ve experienced in a cinema. We don’t just marvel as see a character change physically before our eyes. We marvel because we see a character change, grow, develop and become who he is before our eyes. The film captures childhood, being a teenager and approaching adulthood in such a real way, you can’t help but feel like it’s your life. Or at least, the life of someone you love. And that’s exactly how I felt. By the end, I cried. Not because I was sad, but because i’d witnessed a life. I’d witnessed the trials and tribulations of a normal kid and his family and now as I see 18 year old Mason speed down the highway into adulthood, I feel intensely happy and hopeful. I’ve never felt closer to a fictional character. The film captures the tone of every part of the early stages of one’s life perfectly. The naive perspective of the lives of your parents, the child-like thrill in collecting random objects, the sense of happiness when you’re with friends, when you fall in love for the first time and when you start to come to terms with who you are. Every stage is presented to you as it is, with simple but real cinematography and shots. Each song in the film corresponds to the time period in which the film is set, which only immerses you more. I loved the fact that in the early part of Mason’s life, the music played is often top 40 pop songs. But as he get’s older, that soundtrack is replaced by old classics. Which, for me at least, is certainly the case. The older you get, the more able you are to appreciate a variation of music. Not just what’s popular. There are so many little things like that that make the experience of Boyhood that much more incredible.

I’ve never watched a film and halfway through, began to feel nostalgic towards the beginning of it. The film captured a life and made you feel a part of it. Being the age I am, of course I could relate to it very easily, but I think anyone could. And I think EVERYONE should see this film. I’m pondering whether or not this film might be in my top ten of all time and something truly spectacular has to come around in order to knock it off my number 1 spot by the end of the year. I love this film so so much and i’m sure you will too.

Trailer

anonymous asked:

hey man, i'm the chick who posted my cousin's messed up beauty blender. please don't go talking shit on her family now because she's a kid who doesn't know how to take care of her stuff. shit's not cool, man. she's not unhygienic or gross or anything, she just literally didn't know how to look after it.

I’m sorry!! I didn’t mean to be rude! Especially to a child, I hope she’s ok! I was expressing my own fears! 

This story has been all over the media recently about a lady who was paralysed from bacteria in a makeup brush  so here’s a helpful makeup hygiene how to for any other people who missed out on being taught to clean their makeup, brushes or other implements(beauty blenders, powder puffs, any shared makeup). 

  • Makeup brushes can be washed in baby shampoo (if possible) or regular shampoo in a stretch. Make sure all product is gone on a tissue/towel. If I intend to use my brushes on another person I also soak them in rubbing alcohol.
  • Makeup like powder can be sanitised by spraying rubbing alcohol (I keep a small spray bottle filled with rubbing alcohol on my dresser always, but it’s not exactly safe for children so I googled alternatives and things like Witch Hazel, Vinegar and Hydrogen Peroxide came up but I can’t vouch for any, you’ll have to google their safety + effectiveness) onto the pan and letting it evaporate. It should not destroy your product. 
  • Lipsticks can be sanitised with a cotton pad soaked in rubbing alcohol. The same goes for retractable eyeliner/lipliner/concealer. (PLEASE do this at makeup counters and request your makeup artist at the counter do it if they don’t. This study found Staph, Strep and E.Coli on tester makeup)
  • Use metal spatulas/the sanitised end of your makeup brush to get cream products out of jars.

Makeup artists and makeup geniuses please add the things I missed so we can keep everyone healthy and hygienic!

anonymous asked:

How do I explain to a friend that reverse racism doesn't exist? She won't believe me on the basis that she has never experienced racism herself, so thinks it's no longer much of a problem and is equal for all skin colours.

A quick scroll through our blog should do it, otherwise the simplest way I can say it is this:

Reverse Racism does not exist.

Racism is a government or institutionalized. The dominant power (westernized or white people) implement laws, beauty ideals, etc that work against POC.

You cannot be racist towards white people because no matter where they go they are the dominant power. It doesn’t matter if they are the only white person in a room.

Also, saying reverse racism exists towards white people also admits that white people are the source of racism.

Also try google