Moleskine = Bad

The whole 'men evolved to hunt, women evolved to gather' thing is total nonsense.

Evidence shows women have always hunted. They found a 9000 year old female hunter buried with weapons in Peru, and there’s a ton of other research showing women were just as involved in survival work as men.

Scientific American

The Theory That Men Evolved to Hunt and Women Evolved to Gather Is Wrong

The influential idea that in the past men were hunters and women were not isn’t supported by the available evidence

Ok

Your emotional reaction to an injustice is not the criterion you should be looking at to determine whether you are living up to your values, or the values you'd like to hold.

Your actual response, in words and in actions, and how that response impacts others, is what you should be evaluating.

Having a strong emotional reaction to injustice isn't a guarantee that you'll actually do anything about it. Sometimes people, distressed by their emotional response, choose not to see injustice so they don't have to feel that way. Sometimes people focus so much on their emotional response that Feeling Things is the extent of their interaction with that form of injustice.

Having a calm and rational-feeling reaction to something isn't a guarantee that you're actually seeing The Bigger Picture. It can just mean you aren't having a big emotional reaction; it doesn't mean you're actually being logical or that you're well-informed about a situation.

Sometimes people assume that their emotional reaction is enough to tell them what would help, and their completely uninformed attempts to help can make the situation worse. Finding out what would actually help takes work. Feelings can't do that work for you.

Having All The Right Feelings about something isn't activism, and not feeling an emotional connection to an injustice doesn't automatically mean you can't or won't contribute meaningfully to addressing or alleviating it.

Your feelings are only relevant to injustice if they help you to actually do something constructive, or if they get in the way of you doing anything constructive.

In and of themselves, they're just feelings. There's no moral or ethical aspect to them, any more than there is to hunger pangs or an itch. You don't need to feel guilty based on feelings alone, and you have no right to self righteousness based on feelings alone.

Your feelings don't help or hurt anyone; your words and actions do.

continuing the trend set by

dr seuss -- stole from Helen Palmer, his wife

paul klee -- stole from Hilma af Klint

andy warhol -- stole from Hilma af Klint

albert einstein -- stole from Milena Maric, his wife

cy twombly -- stole from Hilma af Klint

hayao miyazaki -- stole from Akemi Ota, his wife

leo tolstoy -- stole from Sophia Tolstoy, his wife

otto struve + henry norris-russell + ejnar hertzsprung -- stole from Cecilia Payne-Gaposchkin

george lucas -- stole from Marcia Lucas, his wife

f scott fitzgerald -- stole from Zelda Fitzgerald, his wife

john steinbeck -- stole from Sanora Babb

karl marx -- stole from Jenny von Westphalen, his wife

watson and crick -- stole from Rosalind Franklin

piet mondrian -- stole from Marlow Moss

jackson pollock -- stole from Janet Sobel

wolfgang amadeus mozart -- stole from his sister, Maria Anna (Nannerl) Mozart

felix mendelssohn -- stole from his sister, fanny mendelssohn

today i had the dubious honor of learning that william wordsworth stole entire passages out of the journals his sister, Dorothy Wordsworth, wrote.

"The Grasmere Journal and Wordsworth's other works revealed how vital she was to her brother's success. William relied on her detailed accounts of nature scenes and borrowed freely from her journals. This passage is clearly brought to mind when reading William's 'Daffodils', where her brother, in this poem of two years later, describes what appears to be the shared experience in the journal as his own solitary observation. Her observations and descriptions have been considered to be as poetic if not more so than those of her brother."

To anyone barking racism for pointing out brown men are dangerous

Just read this humble passage before you bark racism. And yeah, Indian men deserve the image of being rapists because they actually are.

Historical context is of course very useful for important things like Politics and Science and everything, but will also open your eyes to things like, uh... the way the clothing/textile/crafting industries try to use the word "natural" as an excuse to sell shoddy and bad quality goods and make you think that's normal.

God knows there are worse things going on in the world, but it really pisses me off when I see companies advertising "Real Shell/Pearl buttons!" like that's supposed to be some upscale selling point, and the buttons in question are the thinnest, roughest, most crudely-made buttons in existence... 🙄😒 "But they're made from Natural Materials! You can't expect Natural Materials to look refined and consistent like synthetic ones!" They are lying to you. THEY ARE LYING TO YOU! And I know this because I've seen "real shell buttons" from 100 or even 50 years ago. And most of them are sturdy and smoothly polished, of a consistent thickness, and sometimes even finely carved. The buttons on nice men's dress shirts? Those are the cheap, plastic IMITATIONS of what people expected actual mother-of-pearl buttons to look like! "Natural" isn't an excuse! Your product is cheap and badly and lazily made! And I'm so sick of this, because I see it EVERYWHERE. "Linen-look" has become shorthand for "coarsely woven fabric with visible slubs" and that drives me CRAZY because do you KNOW what kinds of linen I have seen??? Antique linen so light and fine and smooth you can't even SEE the weave unless you magnify it!!! A fragment of a linen damask tablecloth so smooth and glossy, it looks like SILK? 😭 (On that note, "dupioni silk" is so roughly woven that it would have been considered hardly fit to sell a century ago) "This fabric is woven of Natural Materials, so imperfections will be inevitable!" 🙃 No! 😀 You just made it cheaply and sloppily, and that was your choice! 😊

What's a book written by a woman that changed your life or that you consider a classic? Any genre, any language.

feeling empowered and actually having power are two very different things. women are usually offered the first one.

Excluding the crucial fact that office jobs pay you an income….if staying home to raise children and do chores and bake bread was really so much easier and more joyful than working in an office on some objective level, why aren’t men doing it? Why aren’t they chomping at the bit to be ~leisurely house husbands~ to a working wife? Why aren’t they stepping up to depend solely on someone else’s income in exchange for round-the-clock domestic labor, if it’s really as blissful and their propaganda suggests? Curious.

remember when we had "pizza rolls, not gender roles!" and now we have "actually some people need to identify with gender roles so they can feel gender euphoria. doing away with gender roles is discriminatory "