nevver:

Louie

nevver:

Louie

July 30th with 1,259 notes - Reblog
The inescapable fact is that it takes a lot of money and time to be effortlessly chic. Paltrow and Lively are catering to a certain type of woman — usually upper-middle-class, often white, with cultural clout — who happens to be particularly susceptible to the “effortless” trap. It isn’t just about hair or clothes. The desire to come off like you aren’t trying too hard extends to most areas of life typically thought of as the domain of women. Home décor: “Those vintage end tables? Oh, I picked them up at a flea market.” (Don’t mention that it took months to find the perfect sofa, and it was so expensive it practically required a second mortgage.) Workout routines: “I just do a little yoga and try to take the stairs.” (Don’t mention the personal trainer.) Relationships: “We just click, you know?” (Don’t mention the couples’ therapist.) Outwardly, everything is easy.
Why Not Admit We Didn’t Wake Up Like This? - NYmag.com (via annfriedman) - July 28th with 103 notes - Reblog
Updates

I started a “real” job last week and one of my current assignments is to contact stores in Illinois and Indiana that sell dry ice.

July 22nd - Reblog
shored-fragments:

too real, too much

shored-fragments:

too real, too much

(Source: booksvscigarettes)

July 10th with 23 notes - Reblog
newyorker:

A cartoon by Farley Katz. For more cartoons from the magazine this week: http://nyr.kr/1qcNPgA

newyorker:

A cartoon by Farley Katz. For more cartoons from the magazine this week: http://nyr.kr/1qcNPgA

July 10th with 2,079 notes - Reblog
cestpasprudent:

Lauren Greenfield, 1992

cestpasprudent:

Lauren Greenfield, 1992

(Source: lookerlooker)

June 14th with 53,569 notes - Reblog

arbors:

Textiles from around the world at home in Charleston

June 9th with 635 notes - Reblog
It’s my paper, I can sass if I want to

It’s my paper, I can sass if I want to

June 4th with 4 notes - Reblog
3000 words between me and graduation

And the essay prompt is “Quo vadis, America?”

June 4th with 1 note - Reblog
18mr:

18mr:

A lot of folks are posting about the Tiananmen Square massacre today, of course. I thought we should share it too, but I wanted to write a little bit about what was explained to me about what happened in the spring of 1989 that the western media often overlooks.
I am a 1.5 generation Chinese American leftist. I was two when the massacre happened. My sister had just been born. My father, who immigrated from China to Hong Kong when he was a toddler to escape the Cultural Revolution, and then Hong Kong to the United States to go to college, tells me he was seeking work in China around this time.
Several summers ago, when we were traveling together in China, he told me about what he understood about Tiananmen Square from his perspective as a young, newly naturalized American citizen who still had deep ties to the motherland. He told me the sense of unrest was not just about state control of the media and politics, but a sense that the state was also imposing capitalist reforms on the Chinese economy without input from the people, and with clear preferential treatment for party cadres and others who had an “in” with the powers that be. Students were upset and anxious about what looked like unilateral decisions about the future that weren’t just about opening markets, they were about neoliberalising the country.
When I think about what’s happening in Istanbul, Turkey, I can’t help but think about this. When we remember Tiananmen Square, I hope we remember that this wasn’t necessarily about the struggle of democracy versus Communism, but that it was about people who wanted to take part in determining the future of their country, and who rejected nepotistic neoliberal reforms. Just like with the media narrative around Gezi, American audiences risk being turned around. A million people don’t turn out and go on hunger strikes against their own self-interest. There’s more to this story than meets the eye.
Remember Tiananmen, but remember it for what it was: young Chinese students and workers resisting their country “modernizing” in the age of Reagan, the godfather of neoliberalism. This is the same ideology that young Turkish students and workers are resisting in Istanbul. It’s the same ideology that has decimated the U.S. economy and that we resist when we say “another world is possible.”
When we ask why the Chinese government still hasn’t admitted that Tiananmen even happened, we should remember that China today is just as cutthroat and capitalistic in some ways as the United States is. They have delivered on neoliberalism, but in the style of an autocratic state, where nepotism and party connections had more to do with business success than anything. Students and workers in China in 1989 were emphatically saying no to this system.

So reblogging because this, because still relevant. Thank for sharing this reflection because the…capitalism-washing (?) of Tiananmen Square still grinds my gears.

18mr:

18mr:

A lot of folks are posting about the Tiananmen Square massacre today, of course. I thought we should share it too, but I wanted to write a little bit about what was explained to me about what happened in the spring of 1989 that the western media often overlooks.

I am a 1.5 generation Chinese American leftist. I was two when the massacre happened. My sister had just been born. My father, who immigrated from China to Hong Kong when he was a toddler to escape the Cultural Revolution, and then Hong Kong to the United States to go to college, tells me he was seeking work in China around this time.

Several summers ago, when we were traveling together in China, he told me about what he understood about Tiananmen Square from his perspective as a young, newly naturalized American citizen who still had deep ties to the motherland. He told me the sense of unrest was not just about state control of the media and politics, but a sense that the state was also imposing capitalist reforms on the Chinese economy without input from the people, and with clear preferential treatment for party cadres and others who had an “in” with the powers that be. Students were upset and anxious about what looked like unilateral decisions about the future that weren’t just about opening markets, they were about neoliberalising the country.

When I think about what’s happening in Istanbul, Turkey, I can’t help but think about this. When we remember Tiananmen Square, I hope we remember that this wasn’t necessarily about the struggle of democracy versus Communism, but that it was about people who wanted to take part in determining the future of their country, and who rejected nepotistic neoliberal reforms. Just like with the media narrative around Gezi, American audiences risk being turned around. A million people don’t turn out and go on hunger strikes against their own self-interest. There’s more to this story than meets the eye.

Remember Tiananmen, but remember it for what it was: young Chinese students and workers resisting their country “modernizing” in the age of Reagan, the godfather of neoliberalism. This is the same ideology that young Turkish students and workers are resisting in Istanbul. It’s the same ideology that has decimated the U.S. economy and that we resist when we say “another world is possible.”

When we ask why the Chinese government still hasn’t admitted that Tiananmen even happened, we should remember that China today is just as cutthroat and capitalistic in some ways as the United States is. They have delivered on neoliberalism, but in the style of an autocratic state, where nepotism and party connections had more to do with business success than anything. Students and workers in China in 1989 were emphatically saying no to this system.

So reblogging because this, because still relevant. Thank for sharing this reflection because the…capitalism-washing (?) of Tiananmen Square still grinds my gears.

June 3rd with 1,985 notes - Reblog