renouncer

katbutz asked:

I recently saw a "feminist" YouTuber post a comment calling MRAs "autistic" and "the special ed crowd." Have you and the other folk here seen similar ableism done in the name of feminism? I really resent it as someone on the Spectrum myself.

Wow I hadn’t heard of that, and I can 100% assure you that I do not support that. My feminism isn’t ableist and I would renounce the name if it ever was. However I do know that there are people out there that don’t think the same way and think they can use derogetory names and be just as bad as the people feminism is fighting, these people are not clear on the way that feminism is supposed to be spread, they do not respect others. Please don’t let them turn you away from a really great group of people.Thanks for sharing!

-The Daily Feminist 

8 people you (maybe) didn’t realize were Canadian

Whether you’re waving maple-bedecked flags for Canada Day or simply watching your Canuck friends do the same, you might not know all of the notable people who hail from the Great White North. Here are eight people you probably didn’t realize were Canadian…

  1. Ted Cruz: Controversial politician Ted Cruz is in the running to be the Republican Party nomination for the 2016 U.S. Presidential election – but was not, in fact, born in the United States. He comes from Calgary, Alberta – but was apparently unaware that he held dual Canadian-American nationality until a few years ago, and is apparently working to renounce his Canadian citizenship. 
  2. Jim Carrey: The rubber-faced comedian may be one of the biggest movie stars in Hollywood, but he hails from humble Newmarket, Ontario. His father was of French-Canadian descent, and Carrey was originally spelled Carré. He received U.S. citizenship in 2004, and holds dual citizenship. 
  3. Shania Twain: Born Eilleen Regina Edwards in 1965 (happy 50th in August, Shania!), the world-famous country singer comes from Windsor, Ontario, which is the southernmost city in Canada – indeed, more southerly than Detroit, Michigan, which sits across the Detroit River from Windsor.
  4. Pamela Anderson: The actress and model Pamela Anderson, best known for her role in Baywatch, became a U.S. citizen in 2004, she also retains her Canadian citizenship – having been born in Ladysmith, British Columbia.
  5. Drake: Aubrey Graham, better known as the rapper Drake, may have appeared on P Reign’s Dear America EP, but is actually from Toronto, Canada.
  6. Sandra Oh: Known around the world as Dr Cristina Yang on Grey’s Anatomy, Sandra Oh was born in Nepean, Ontario. Her parents moved to Canada in the 1960s, from South Korea.
  7. Cory Monteith: Before his sad passing in 2013, Cory Monteith was best known as the all-American sportsman and singer Finn in Glee – but Monteith was actually born in Calgary, Alberta.
  8. Alanis Morissette: Best known for her angsty 1995 album Jagged Little Pill (and inadvertently kicking off two decades – and counting – of discussion about the definition of ironic), Alanis was born in Ottawa – though, as of 2005, she holds dual Canadian and American citizenship.
There is something terribly, disastrously wrong with how white people tolerate racism among other whites, how we interact with people of color, how we interact with the Black Americans whose ancestors were enslaved by our ancestors. This is not something we can fix by promising to renounce racial slurs, nor even by promising to correct each other’s racist speech in private. The rot goes deeper.
bobby jindal 2016

as an Indian-American, it deeply saddens me that the first Indian-American presidential candidate is one who has renounced basically all of his Indian culture and identity just to become popular.

 it’s truly a shame, especially for younger Indian-Americans looking for Indian-American role-models. what is the message coming across?

 renounce your culture? that’s the only way you’ll be successful in America? sad.

Unnamed dragons in my offspring list used to bother me a little until I started to think of them lore-wise. Dragons who came into a new clan and have to earn their name. Dragons who have yet to seek out answers to their questions and have not found their name along the way. Dragons who renounced the concept of names because they feel they do not need them. Dragons who have something to hide.

Even if the unnamed dragons have no bio I start to make something up for them, and it’s pretty interesting.

I stood in one garden,
looking over the fence at another.
I thought I had to change my life or give up,
but I didn’t. Year after year

they kept growing into each other:
the dreamed into the real,
the real into the dreamed—the two gardens

sending their flexible, sinuous vines,
their tendrils and the unbuttoning blossoms,
ceaselessly over their borders.
—  From Not Renouncing by Tony Hoagland
Unpopular opinion

I don’t get what’s the fuss about tagging food? Fasting is supposed to be a test of your own endurance and faith, and seeing a donut won’t make you involuntarily go crashing into the kitchen looking for food.

Sure, it may make your journey harder, but our Prophet has taught us how to use Ramadan as a month for disciplining our intransigent passions, for renouncing our desires for self gratification and for practicing patient endurance in the face of hardships.

Please refrain from indulging rather than asking people to be more sensitive towards us. Ramadan Kareem :)

As we all know I renounced Pharrell as my father but I’m 100% sure that those red Sports bras and motion shorts are from American apparel so I can take something out of this moment

Rick Falkvinge, the head of the Swedish Pirate Party recently posted his explanation of why he thinks that the copyright system (worldwide, I guess? even though basically, each country does have slightly different laws) is “based on a colossal lie”. He wrote something that we think includes at least four logical and factual fallacies in four sentences (there are others in the piece, as well as some accurate statements but to go over all of them will make this even more tl;dr than it already is): 

The copyright monopoly is based on the idea of an exchange. In exchange for exclusive rights, the copyright industry supplies culture and knowledge to the public. It turns out that the entire premise is a lie, as untethered creators are racing to provide culture and knowledge anyway…Millions of creators – millions! – have publicly renounced their already-awarded exclusive rights by publishing under a Creative Commons license.YouTube alone receives 300 hours of new video every minute. 

Fallacy #1: Copyright is not an absolute monopoly (at least not under US law) so arguing that it’s a lie to say copyright grants the copyrightholder a monopoly is factually incorrect. In the US, we have “fair use”* which allows fanworks to exist, parodies to thrive, newspapers to quote books, films, and yes, fanworks, for purposes of news reporting, commentary and criticism, and a wide range of uses for educational purposes, like when teachers assign little kids to write their own ending to a tv show or film, or show clips from a film in a media analysis class, or make copies of a page or two of a book for classroom use. Fair use is not a license; it is a lawful use of copyright, and its existence means that copyright is not (at least in the US) a monopoly. We note that even if Falkvinge claimed copyright in his piece, we would be able to quote the paragraph above pursuant to the provisions and protections of Fair Use. Squee!

Fallacy #2: There is no such thing as “the copyright industry”. There are various industries that use copyright laws to protect what they’ve created - there are also millions of people who are not corporations and who not sellers of their works, who utilize the benefits of copyright law. Think of the women whose selfies were stolen from them last summer, when their accounts were illegally hacked; they owned the copyright in their selfies, and were able to use DMCA provisions on US-hosted sites to have the images removed, and the search results taken down from Google. Copyright laws are why they were able to do so. 

Fallacy #3 Millions of creators have not publicly renounced their exclusive rights via Creative Commons licenses; they have granted licenses under Creative Commons licenses. As Creative Commons says, “our licenses help authors keep and manage their copyright on terms they choose.” That’s not a renouncing of exclusive rights; that’s a method of controlling how others use one’s exclusive rights. And Creative Commons licenses only begin where Fair Use ends. It’s possible that a few thousand people (and companies) have renounced their copyright and placed their works in the public domain; at least in the US, all works created by or on behalf of the federal government are in the public domain, and many other countries have similar rules for the works they have created. 

Fallacy #4 Posting something onto YouTube doesn’t mean you’re not claiming copyright in it. Once something is fixed - ie saved to a hard drive, printed out, saved to the cloud - it’s protected by copyright; we’ve gone through the discussion so many times here, that posting something to Instagram, or YouTube, or tumblr doesn’t mean that it’s in the public domain; it just means that it’s publicly accessible. That’s not the same thing, legally, ethically or factually. How many times have we seen fanfic writers, fanartists, film-makers, cosplayers, crafters and podcasters fret - and/or take action - when someone has infringed on their copyright by commercializing their work without their permission? Copyright law is why they’re able to get irked - and take action, and (where appropriate) get paid for their creativity - when their works are commercialized without their consent. And just because you don’t want to get paid for one (or one hundred) specific things you’ve created doesn’t mean you don’t want to earn some income from some other thing(s) you’ve created. It’s not a zero-sum situation. 

If you want to check out another perspective on Falkvinge’s piece, click here for commentary from a UK IP law expert’s perspective: 

Copyright needs to be reformed. But we should not attack a strawman version of copyright because it will backfire on us.


* We at fyeahcopyright are working with thehpalliance to raise awareness of, and protect, fair use rights in the US (although anyone can support the project, no matter what country you’re in). Click http://fanworksarefairuse.org to learn more about why we’re seeking to eliminate negative stigmas about fanfiction, fan art, and other fan creations and legitimize such works in the eyes of mainstream media.