internet billboards

anonymous asked:

Namjoon really is the most respectable person I know of. He's constantly trying to educate himself and better himself and he's not any kind of racist or sexist or homophobic and if he is called out about being ignorant on something (like the gross things he's said in the past) he apologizes genuinely without making any excuses for what he did, and he's always used his platform to speak out about social issues, he really does just want to make the world a better place.

I want this plastered on every inch of the internet and written on billboards outside.

I’m so genuinely disgusted with how people treat such an incredible person who is constantly always working on finding ways to improve himself. and at this point there’s nothing more to improve on and people will still find something wrong with him

Important shit regarding net neutrality

(mirrored from fight for the future email)

Hi,

The FCC just fired the opening shot in the battle for the internet.

Despite the 1.2 million comments that the FCC received demanding that the net neutrality rule stay in place, the commission passed Chairman Ajit Pai’s plan to allow ISPs like Comcast and Verizon to control and censor what we do online.[1]

But all hope is not lost. The FCC vote today opened a new comment period, when the public can weigh in before the new rules go into effect.    

We’re launching an all-out push to do everything we can to stop this attack on the internet: pro-net neutrality billboards in key districts, a flood of comments into the FCC, rallies calling on the Senate to block Pai’s confirmation as FCC chair … Whatever it takes.

It’s not surprising that Ajit Pai pushed to destroy net neutrality – after all, his former employer, Verizon, and his pal Comcast have been trying to undermine our Internet freedom for years.

But Pai isn’t immune to public scrutiny. If we can generate a big enough public backlash, we can make the FCC reverse course before finalizing this rule.

The Senate also has the leverage to stop this. Pai’s term as chairman of the FCC expires at the end of this year, and then he is required to be reconfirmed by the Senate.[2] We need to cause such a clamor about the repeal of net neutrality that no senator would risk voting for Pai.

And we’re also going to remind Congress that they work for the American people – not for Verizon and Comcast – so that it doesn’t pass any laws that damage Internet freedom.

We’re not going to give up, and we’re ready for the fight. Our Battle for the Net site is still the hub for net neutrality campaigns online. We’re developing new tools every day to help activists fight for a free and open internet. We’ve mobilized dozens of groups and millions of people to stand up for net neutrality.

We’re not going to give up, but we need your help to win. Will you chip in to fight for net neutrality?

anonymous asked:

You're an extremely talented artist that could represent anything. Why do you choose to depict celebrities and iconic figures? I believe your artwork could have so much more merit and can contribute much more to society then just entertainment. You even have your symbol as the golden spiral, which I find rather smug for an artist who creates "fan art". I don't intend to offend, it just greatly bothers me to see such a talented artist create advertisement and I would like to know why.

Oh boy.

“Smug” is arbitrarily thinking that one entire genre of art is less than another. 

“Smug” is anonymous back-handed compliments that insult an entire group of artists while trying to police what I choose to make.

“Smug” is thinking that you bestow merit to art and decide its value or contribution to society — or that it needs to do that to begin with.

“Smug” is believing that advertisements are something that automatically lessens art when some of the best painters and works throughout art history, from Leonardo to Caravaggio to Rockwell and Leyendecker have worked in advertising for clients (churches included).

“Smug” is looking at my portfolio of hundreds of paintings over 3 years that cover dozens of genres, styles, subject matters, clients, and sits everywhere from the internet, to billboards, album covers, magazine covers, galleries, newspapers, movie posters, bus-sides, books, homes of friends, strangers, and celebrities, and still choosing to think that I am one thing — a thing that is just as valuable to me as everything I’m paid for professionally.

“Smug” is being a smug dicklet and throwing in “I don’t intend to offend” to cushion the smug dickletishness of it all.

“Smug” is not seeing a simplistic connection between realism in painting and the golden rule that is genre-irrelevant, but again insulting an entire group of artists while commenting on something you haven’t bothered to understand. 

But most of all, “Smug” is thinking that I, or any artist, owes you anything. We can make whatever we want, however we want to. I will keep making advertisements, I will keep making album covers, I will keep making posters for games and movies, I will keep making all that I’m hired to do and choose to take on, but I will also keep making fan art because despite the merit or value that you’ve decided it has — I want to — and that’s all the reason I need.

Take your soggy waffle compliments and fuck the fuck off. Viva la fan art.

anonymous asked:

Hi, I am a radical feminist but in response to one of your asks I would like to say that I don't understand how feminism is against femininity? I think feminism is meant to support women 100%. That's if if they are or aren't feminine. Doesn't matter. It's that women deserve to be who they are without persecution due to gender. Correct me if I'm wrong please. This is in no means meant to come across as rude I'm just genuinely curious. Thank you!

Hello!
Femininity is harmful to women because it entails a specific kind of behaviour which is generally pushing women to be submissive, meek/quiet, compliant, basically not aggressive or have any emotion that would come across as loud or draw any attention to ourselves. Femininity also includes modifying our appearance to what appeals to men. Liberal feminists tend to say “but we do it for ourselves”, but do we really? Where did the idea of the ‘ideal’ woman come from? Magazines, billboards, television, movies, all industries run by men. The images that come from them are projected and put there by men. This image of the ‘ideal’ woman implies that there is a standard we have to meet in order to be considered attractive and therefore worthy of their time. It implies that those that do not strive to be the ideal woman don’t take care of themselves, or are repulsive.
Steps taken by women to become this ‘ideal woman’ include wearing makeup to fit conventional standards of beauty, dressing ourselves to the right degree of sexually attractive enough for men, wearing heels which are actually very harmful to your feet and back all because ~fashion~. 
Consider the idea of a typically sexually attractive woman to men- large bust and butt, flat stomach, thin but not too thin, big lips, long hair. For all of those expectations there are surgeries to “fix” women.
Liposuction, botox, lip injections, breast implants, butt implants, extensions for your hair, now extensions for your eyelashes too! 
Typically femininity is something that (if you think about it) caters to men and their need to dominate and control women. 
Did you know in Lebanon there are loans you can take out specifically to get plastic surgery?

Femininity is harmful because women who do not comply with typical beauty standards are ostracized and shamed. They are made to feel repulsive, and told they are not ‘real’ women. It becomes something compulsory to live. You probably have noticed this yourself. When women and young girls especially are exposed to these standards and images continuously, they believe it is the norm and this impacts their self esteem greatly. If you don’t wear makeup, you aren’t seen as attractive- something increasingly important to be in this superficial society we live in, which eventually goes on to become harsher insults like- you don’t groom yourself, you don’t take care of yourself. Employers actually don’t hire women claiming they aren’t ‘professional’ enough if they don’t wear makeup. Women are insulted and ridiculed because they lack femininity. 

Now capitalism has turned femininity into a game of profit. The beauty industry is thriving because the self esteems of girls are going lower and lower with more unattainable standards of beauty being thrown at them everywhere you look. Advertising is everywhere, from the internet, to television, to billboards. It’s not hard to feel ugly when you don’t comply with their version of beauty.

It also has extremely negative effects on the health of young teens. Eating disorders and body dysphoria plague young girls and even women. Girls and women are constantly weight watching, trying to get to that unattainable idea of perfection that has been created by men.

While right now, femininity is necessary because other wise we wouldn’t be taken seriously, it is also important to raise awareness inform people of how femininity came to be.

It began with this:

 

which lead to this:

and now women spend thousands of dollars on beauty standards that are physically and emotionally harmful to them. 

Hope that helped!

I highly recommend you read Beauty and Misogyny by Sheila Jeffreys for more an indepth analysis! 

Feminism is meant to liberate women from the patriarchy which encourages these expectations and standards which lead women to believe there is a particular way to be a woman. It includes analyzing how women as a class are oppressed.

You might be talking about liberal feminism which does not analyze why women perform these actions, but rather say anything a woman chooses to do is her choice and hence should be supported in the name of feminism! This however, fails to include gender non conforming women who don’t like the choices they are presented, and also fails to analyze why we only have the choices we have, and whether or not they are harmful to us and/or oppress us and keep us at the bottom of the hierarchy.