Suddenly Superfluous


Superfluous: –adjective
1. being more than is sufficient or required; excessive.
2. unnecessary or needless.
3. Obsolete. possessing or spending more than enough or necessary; extravagant.

(dictionary.com)

I jump on my computer to check my email and suddenly I'm superfluously perusing photographs and art, catching up on gossip, hunting for new anime and music.

Ask me anything

s3anc:

zerachin:

shingekigofuckyourself:

kingsindbad:

durbikins:

This is the biggest load of bullshit I’ve ever read and it’s not even from Kotaku.

this just in: white people invented anime

LMAO.

laughs until the sun expires

LMFAO

Source: durbikins

lightning8d:

wikatiepedia:

Nailed it.

 

Source: wikatiepedia

oyesiam1:

Thank you Ellen for showing as once again how to react to homophobia with class and humour.

x

Source: oyesiam1

kingofconeyisland:

ladyxgaga:

Gaga outside of her apartment in New York City a few moments ago.

Wow InuYasha looks great

Source: ladyxgaga

meant to be - mpolinar - YouTube →

A beautifully written song that deserves more attention.

Tagged: MelissaPolinar

Source: mazerin

sourcedumal:

gradientlair:

[trigger warning: misogynoir] D.N. Lee (@DNLee5), a Black scientist (her blog is called The Urban Scientist on Scientific American Mind) was treated in the most disrespectful way by a science publication, Biology-Online.org. They wanted her to blog for them. She inquired about what they wanted, the frequency and the pay. The editor advised her of the details and that there is no pay. She politely declined

Then their editor replied with “are you urban scientist or an urban whore?” 

The fuck?

A Black woman works hard to become a scientist only to be called a “whore” because she expects to be paid for her work. PAID FOR WORK, you know that neat thing that people all over America expects and one that America has a history of not always doing where Black women and Black people in general are concerned? Black women are regularly insulted when we fight back against labor exploitation or even simply say no, like she did. We cannot say no? I’ve been called every name in the book for this.

So not only is the well-engrained hatred of sex workers involved in this insult (because they’re paid for sex, which is outlandish to patriarchy since men feel they are owed sex), not only is there the misogyny that women in STEM face endlessly, but the way this person used her blog title in the insult to be “clever” also implies specific anti-Black misogyny or misogynoir

Did you ask why some Black women/women of colour and White women avoid STEM like a plague? Did you think it was the sexist myth that all women “can’t” do science and are “afraid” of math? Very few people recognize the gravity of the sexism and racism in STEM and how that (in addition to capitalism) actually shapes what degrees are deemed “useless" or not and even creates a hierarchy among the degrees deemed “useless.” Very few want to examine how the cycle below contributes to why some women opt out of STEM and why some women face so much abuse in STEM: 

Gender socialization → Sexism  → Misogyny  → Stereotype threat → Confirmation bias

The fact that this person would actually type the word “WHORE” in a professional email to someone they sought work from turns my stomach and makes me stabby as hell. 

I love her confident and nuanced reply in the video above. I LIVE! She deserves to be treated with respect and this publication with its misogynoir needs to re-evaluate themselves and the editor needs to be held accountable.

(I am not clear if she lost her blog position but her post about her experience was taken down from Scientific American Mind but elaborated on in a post on Isis The Scientist. Read more here: An Open Letter To Scientific American Mind And Why You’ve Lost A Reader #BoycottSciAm from someone who followed her situation.)

Wow. How fucking dare they. Sue they asses for real.

Source: gradientlair

thepeoplesrecord:

With little fanfare, Afghanistan War drags into 13th yearOctober 7, 2013
Monday marks 12 years since the U.S. invaded Afghanistan, and for a conflict that’s been seemingly forgotten by most Americans who’ve grown weary of war, it seems fitting that the anniversary should be overshadowed by a domestic story: the federal government shutdown.
More than a decade since the U.S. launched Operation Enduring Freedom on Oct. 7, 2001, there are still 54,000 American troops in Afghanistan. That is more, by far, than at any time during the first seven years of the war, yet these days, they garner scant news coverage. Most recently, Syria’s civil war and the use of chemical weapons as well as the federal government shutdown have buried Afghanistan news, even as Americans continue to die — four were killed were killed within a week in so-called insider attacks just at the end of September.
“There is a bloody war happening, and no one is talking about it,” said Ahmad Majidyar, an Afghanistan expert at the American Enterprise Institute and a frequent adviser to the U.S. Army.
The U.S. role is diminishing and casualties among members of the U.S.-led international coalition are down as the Afghan security forces take over more of the fighting. But Americans are still fighting — and dying.
With nearly three months left in 2013, at least 106 U.S. troops had died in Afghanistan as of Oct. 1, according to independent website iCasualties.org — more than during any of the first six years of the war. The military is whittling forces down to approximately 34,000 by February and the number of coalition bases has gone from a high of 800 to about 100 now. But combat troops will be there for another 15 months, so we are likely still a long way from the last U.S. casualty in Afghanistan.
Following the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, the U.S. sent in a small force heavily reliant on special forces able to quickly knock out the Taliban, who had sheltered the al-Qaida terrorists responsible for the attacks. But Osama Bin Laden escaped, along with many other al-Qaida leaders, and it would be nearly 10 years before the U.S. tracked him down, hiding in a safe house in neighboring Pakistan.
After several years of relative calm following then-President George W. Bush’s declaration of victory in Afghanistan in 2004 — a time when international troops were supporting nation-building efforts, and U.S. and world attention was focused on the continuing war in Iraq — the Taliban regrouped. They mounted a violent and effective guerrilla campaign that eventually pushed President Barack Obama to increase troop levels, sending a “surge” of 30,000 additional troops to the country in 2009.
Despite the surge, though, the Taliban remain entrenched, inflicting heavy casualties on Afghan forces — who have largely taken over security responsibilities from coalition forces — with little more than a year to go before all international troops are scheduled to leave.
Afghanistan is a topic seldom mentioned by the White House, and with public support for the military mission there having crumbled in the past few years, it’s easy to see why.
“President Obama talks about Afghanistan strategy maybe only once in a year,” Majidyar said. “When he does talk about it, he talks about the end of the war and talks only of positive things.”
A White House spokesman declined to discuss whether Obama is avoiding public discussion of Afghanistan, instead issuing a statement about negotiations over a bilateral security agreement to keep American troops in Afghanistan past the end of 2014.
Media interest in the war has been waning for years, driven by Obama’s silence on the issue since the end of his troop surge, said A. Trevor Thrall, a professor at George Mason University and the author of War in the Media Age, which explores the intersection of the military, media and public opinion in conflicts since the Vietnam War. Thrall said it isn’t the first time a president has tried to bury news about Afghanistan.
“Bush stopped talking about Afghanistan almost immediately after he shifted focus to Iraq,” he said. “Afghanistan was truly a forgotten war (when) Obama took over and it became it again after the surge was over. The result is the public really has no idea what’s going on there.”
In 2010, during the surge, it was hard for a reporter to find a cot at Kandahar Airfield in southern Afghanistan, with journalists from around the world packed tightly into a tent that served as a media center, even battling over access to electrical outlets. Now, it’s rare that embedded reporters even need to share a room at a major base.
The new challenge is getting approval to embed with troops at all, as the U.S.-led coalition has made it much more difficult, largely cutting off access to international troops on the battlefield at a crucial moment when NATO is handing more responsibility to Afghan forces.
U.S. Army Chief of Staff Gen. Ray Odierno, the former top military commander in Iraq, said the lack of public awareness worries him because international engagement is key to sustaining gains made in Afghanistan.
“If we continue on this [current military] path, I think Afghanistan can become a success story, and I worry that’s not being talked about at all,” he said.
Afghanistan was considered the “good war” with the just cause, the one everyone could get behind. With its clear links to the 9/11 attacks, as opposed to Iraq’s, based as it was later learned on faulty intelligence, the war in Afghanistan was much more popular at first, Majidyar said. Because of this, though, it also never generated the attention — or the outrage — of the Iraq war, which led to worldwide protests and heated debates of a kind never seen in relation to Afghanistan.
But now, many see Afghanistan as the foreign policy guest that has long overstayed its welcome.
America and its Western allies have gone from war fatigue to numbness.
There’s a “sense of exhaustion” among long-time Afghan hands in aid organizations and foreign service positions, who are often “tired and, in some cases, deeply fed up” with the situation in Afghanistan, said Graeme Smith, the International Crisis Group’s senior analyst in Afghanistan and author of “The Dogs Are Eating Them Now: Our War in Afghanistan.”
Public ambivalence about Afghanistan stems in part from the failures of the past few years, which, despite the surge of foreign troops, saw a sharp rise in casualties; violence remained above the pre-surge levels after the additional forces left, Smith said.
“The short attention span of the West is such that if the problem hasn’t been solved by now, maybe they figure it’s unsolvable, which is too bad because I think what Afghanistan needs right now is continued engagement,” Smith said. “In a lot of ways, a lot of Afghanistan’s future depends on whether Western nations feel guilty enough about the mess they made to stay involved.”
Smith, who, as a reporter with the Toronto Globe and Mail was the only Western reporter living in the violent southern city of Kandahar, said the relative calm seen today in that city, the Taliban’s spiritual homeland, shows the stakes of continued international involvement and the fragile state of military gains.
Source

thepeoplesrecord:

With little fanfare, Afghanistan War drags into 13th year
October 7, 2013

Monday marks 12 years since the U.S. invaded Afghanistan, and for a conflict that’s been seemingly forgotten by most Americans who’ve grown weary of war, it seems fitting that the anniversary should be overshadowed by a domestic story: the federal government shutdown.

More than a decade since the U.S. launched Operation Enduring Freedom on Oct. 7, 2001, there are still 54,000 American troops in Afghanistan. That is more, by far, than at any time during the first seven years of the war, yet these days, they garner scant news coverage. Most recently, Syria’s civil war and the use of chemical weapons as well as the federal government shutdown have buried Afghanistan news, even as Americans continue to die — four were killed were killed within a week in so-called insider attacks just at the end of September.

“There is a bloody war happening, and no one is talking about it,” said Ahmad Majidyar, an Afghanistan expert at the American Enterprise Institute and a frequent adviser to the U.S. Army.

The U.S. role is diminishing and casualties among members of the U.S.-led international coalition are down as the Afghan security forces take over more of the fighting. But Americans are still fighting — and dying.

With nearly three months left in 2013, at least 106 U.S. troops had died in Afghanistan as of Oct. 1, according to independent website iCasualties.org — more than during any of the first six years of the war. The military is whittling forces down to approximately 34,000 by February and the number of coalition bases has gone from a high of 800 to about 100 now. But combat troops will be there for another 15 months, so we are likely still a long way from the last U.S. casualty in Afghanistan.

Following the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, the U.S. sent in a small force heavily reliant on special forces able to quickly knock out the Taliban, who had sheltered the al-Qaida terrorists responsible for the attacks. But Osama Bin Laden escaped, along with many other al-Qaida leaders, and it would be nearly 10 years before the U.S. tracked him down, hiding in a safe house in neighboring Pakistan.

After several years of relative calm following then-President George W. Bush’s declaration of victory in Afghanistan in 2004 — a time when international troops were supporting nation-building efforts, and U.S. and world attention was focused on the continuing war in Iraq — the Taliban regrouped. They mounted a violent and effective guerrilla campaign that eventually pushed President Barack Obama to increase troop levels, sending a “surge” of 30,000 additional troops to the country in 2009.

Despite the surge, though, the Taliban remain entrenched, inflicting heavy casualties on Afghan forces — who have largely taken over security responsibilities from coalition forces — with little more than a year to go before all international troops are scheduled to leave.

Afghanistan is a topic seldom mentioned by the White House, and with public support for the military mission there having crumbled in the past few years, it’s easy to see why.

“President Obama talks about Afghanistan strategy maybe only once in a year,” Majidyar said. “When he does talk about it, he talks about the end of the war and talks only of positive things.”

A White House spokesman declined to discuss whether Obama is avoiding public discussion of Afghanistan, instead issuing a statement about negotiations over a bilateral security agreement to keep American troops in Afghanistan past the end of 2014.

Media interest in the war has been waning for years, driven by Obama’s silence on the issue since the end of his troop surge, said A. Trevor Thrall, a professor at George Mason University and the author of War in the Media Age, which explores the intersection of the military, media and public opinion in conflicts since the Vietnam War. Thrall said it isn’t the first time a president has tried to bury news about Afghanistan.

“Bush stopped talking about Afghanistan almost immediately after he shifted focus to Iraq,” he said. “Afghanistan was truly a forgotten war (when) Obama took over and it became it again after the surge was over. The result is the public really has no idea what’s going on there.”

In 2010, during the surge, it was hard for a reporter to find a cot at Kandahar Airfield in southern Afghanistan, with journalists from around the world packed tightly into a tent that served as a media center, even battling over access to electrical outlets. Now, it’s rare that embedded reporters even need to share a room at a major base.

The new challenge is getting approval to embed with troops at all, as the U.S.-led coalition has made it much more difficult, largely cutting off access to international troops on the battlefield at a crucial moment when NATO is handing more responsibility to Afghan forces.

U.S. Army Chief of Staff Gen. Ray Odierno, the former top military commander in Iraq, said the lack of public awareness worries him because international engagement is key to sustaining gains made in Afghanistan.

“If we continue on this [current military] path, I think Afghanistan can become a success story, and I worry that’s not being talked about at all,” he said.

Afghanistan was considered the “good war” with the just cause, the one everyone could get behind. With its clear links to the 9/11 attacks, as opposed to Iraq’s, based as it was later learned on faulty intelligence, the war in Afghanistan was much more popular at first, Majidyar said. Because of this, though, it also never generated the attention — or the outrage — of the Iraq war, which led to worldwide protests and heated debates of a kind never seen in relation to Afghanistan.

But now, many see Afghanistan as the foreign policy guest that has long overstayed its welcome.

America and its Western allies have gone from war fatigue to numbness.

There’s a “sense of exhaustion” among long-time Afghan hands in aid organizations and foreign service positions, who are often “tired and, in some cases, deeply fed up” with the situation in Afghanistan, said Graeme Smith, the International Crisis Group’s senior analyst in Afghanistan and author of “The Dogs Are Eating Them Now: Our War in Afghanistan.”

Public ambivalence about Afghanistan stems in part from the failures of the past few years, which, despite the surge of foreign troops, saw a sharp rise in casualties; violence remained above the pre-surge levels after the additional forces left, Smith said.

“The short attention span of the West is such that if the problem hasn’t been solved by now, maybe they figure it’s unsolvable, which is too bad because I think what Afghanistan needs right now is continued engagement,” Smith said. “In a lot of ways, a lot of Afghanistan’s future depends on whether Western nations feel guilty enough about the mess they made to stay involved.”

Smith, who, as a reporter with the Toronto Globe and Mail was the only Western reporter living in the violent southern city of Kandahar, said the relative calm seen today in that city, the Taliban’s spiritual homeland, shows the stakes of continued international involvement and the fragile state of military gains.

Source

tashabilities:

blackartdepot:

“Planting a vegetable garden beside a road is no longer a fineable action in Los Angeles.
In a major victory for TED speaker Ron Finley, otherwise known as the renegade gardener of South Central, the Los Angeles City Council voted 15-0 on Tuesday to allow the planting of vegetable gardens in unused strips of city land by roads. The council is opting to waive the enforcement of a city law that requires sidewalks and curbs to be “free of obstruction” in the case of vegetable gardens designed for community use. The city will stop enforcing this law immediately.
On the TED2013 stage, Finley described getting a citation for planting a vegetable garden on his curb.
“I live in a food desert, South Central Los Angeles, home of the drive-thru and the drive-by,” he said. “So what I did, I planted a food forest in front of my house. It was on a strip of land called a parkway. It’s 150 feet by 10 feet. Thing is, it’s owned by the city. And somebody complained. The city came down on me, and basically gave me a citation saying that I had to remove my garden, and the citation was turning into a warrant. And I’m like ‘Come on, really? A warrant for planting food on a piece of land that you could care less about?’”
After getting the citation, Finley circulated a petition. And the number of signatures he collected made an impact on Council President Herb Wesson. Last week, after two more urban gardeners were issued citations, Wesson raised the motion to amend the ”Residential Parkway Landscaping Guidelines” and stop fining for vegetable gardens. Many of his fellow council members agreed. As councilman Mike Bonin put it to the Los Angeles Daily News, “We deal with a lot of big issues, but this is one that helps shape community character.”
Finley himself was very happy with the change, and that he got a personal shout-out during the council session. ”I was pretty elated. It’s beautiful,” he tells the TED Blog. “It goes to show that one person can make a difference.”
His next battle: pushing for more vacant lots to be turned into community vegetable gardens, so people can learn the self-sufficiency of growing their own food. “It shouldn’t be abnormal,” says Finley.



YAY!

This cat is a REVOLUTIONARY get to it LA!

omg


I love this man!

tashabilities:

blackartdepot:

Planting a vegetable garden beside a road is no longer a fineable action in Los Angeles.

In a major victory for TED speaker Ron Finley, otherwise known as the renegade gardener of South Central, the Los Angeles City Council voted 15-0 on Tuesday to allow the planting of vegetable gardens in unused strips of city land by roads. The council is opting to waive the enforcement of a city law that requires sidewalks and curbs to be “free of obstruction” in the case of vegetable gardens designed for community use. The city will stop enforcing this law immediately.

On the TED2013 stage, Finley described getting a citation for planting a vegetable garden on his curb.

“I live in a food desert, South Central Los Angeles, home of the drive-thru and the drive-by,” he said. “So what I did, I planted a food forest in front of my house. It was on a strip of land called a parkway. It’s 150 feet by 10 feet. Thing is, it’s owned by the city. And somebody complained. The city came down on me, and basically gave me a citation saying that I had to remove my garden, and the citation was turning into a warrant. And I’m like ‘Come on, really? A warrant for planting food on a piece of land that you could care less about?’”

After getting the citation, Finley circulated a petition. And the number of signatures he collected made an impact on Council President Herb Wesson. Last week, after two more urban gardeners were issued citations, Wesson raised the motion to amend the ”Residential Parkway Landscaping Guidelines” and stop fining for vegetable gardens. Many of his fellow council members agreed. As councilman Mike Bonin put it to the Los Angeles Daily News, “We deal with a lot of big issues, but this is one that helps shape community character.”

Finley himself was very happy with the change, and that he got a personal shout-out during the council session. ”I was pretty elated. It’s beautiful,” he tells the TED Blog. “It goes to show that one person can make a difference.”

His next battle: pushing for more vacant lots to be turned into community vegetable gardens, so people can learn the self-sufficiency of growing their own food. “It shouldn’t be abnormal,” says Finley.

YAY!

This cat is a REVOLUTIONARY get to it LA!

omg

I love this man!

Source: beardybeardy

chocolatepussay:

dockterfrankensteez:

drfluffykins:

By メルルーサ.

I am in love.

I’m obsessed

Source: pixiv.net