yeloson: (Default)

(c/p from Tumblr)

Some basic shit needs to be said.

Racism works on people treating you a certain way because they THINK you are something, based on how you look, and what they think people should be treated like.

Throughout various times in my life I have been assumed to be: Mexican, Filipino, Japanese, Iraqi Chaldean, White, Half Black, and probably a lot more no one ever told me.  But the thing is, depending on what people THINK you are, changes how they TREAT you, and there’s racism.

You didn’t have to do anything for this to happen to you, there’s society, it’s doing it’s thing, and you just happened to pop out with this particular gene expression and now you’re either getting shit, or getting benefits, or sometimes, one way or another depending on where you are, how you’re dressed/how your hair is, or what the current political climate is at the moment.

Obviously, though, that also depends on where you sit on the race appearance scale- people like me, who can be racially ambiguous… sit higher up on this scale than someone who is unmistakeably dark with unmistakeably kinky hair.

So, we got no control over how our genes came together, and we’ve got no control over larger society.

What do we have control over?  Whether we play the game and support the system or don’t support it.

When someone points out that the system exists, that lighter people GET more benefits (benefit of the doubt, taken at face value, wages, promotions, loans, housing opportunities, attacked less, arrested less), than darker people who get more fuck overs (dismissed, more violence, less wages, less opportunity, more abuse, worse healthcare, targeted legal violence)… and you pretend it doesn’t exist?  You, in fact, fight to keep that hidden?

That says you’re down with those benefits to you and costs to others.

Welcome to the land of White-Identifying.

Don’t be surprised when folks give you a hearty FUCK YOU because that’s what you just gave them. 

And this isn’t a theoretical - you just said everything they’ve been through, personally and first hand, all the shit their family has been through - doesn’t mean shit to you.   At that point, no one owes you anything in terms of politeness or manners - because you just cosigned on every act of violence and oppression.

One of the most common, passive aggressive BULLSHIT ways people do this is derailing.  The point of derailing that is the giveaway that it’s bullshit, is the point of dismissing the suffering of others.   If Black folks are talking about lynching, I can bring up the fact that Chinese were lynched as well, but if I a) claim that Chinese “had it worse”, or b) “Well, it’s not that bad, I MEAN CHINESE GOT LYNCHED TOO”…

Yeah, that’s not actually about expanding the conversation or adding history, that’s really boiling down to, “OMG, HOW DARE WE SPEND THIS MUCH EMPATHY CARING ABOUT BLACK PEOPLE!!!”

And that’s where you see folks get committed.  They’ll argue for days, because in their heads, even if they hate the idea of being less than white people on the racism scale, they’ve completely internalized the idea that they’re still supposed to be better off than Black folks.   This is where you see people talking about “Black people have enough already! What about…”

They always try to frame it as about talking about their own histories and struggles, but, ironically, instead of making their own conversations about it, they instead go and make sure to go interrupt other people’s conversations.   Because it’s not so much about telling the story as much as silencing other people’s discussions.

And then y’all turn around and say, “Well, I’m POC too! Why are you identity policing me?!? I thought you were against racism, how can you start including how I look in the conversation?!?”

It comes down to how you act - you’re acting white, which is making you “look white” as far as behavior is concerned.  You protect the oppressor, you ARE the oppressor.   You protect the whiteness, so you ARE the whiteness. 

You reaped the benefits on other people’s backs, you got the good deal, you get the badge of being “the good one” in the white people’s eyes, and you weren’t even being asked to choose, but you decided to make the choice ALL ON YOUR OWN that little bit of white approval, or at least the idea that “I’m better than those people” was MORE IMPORTANT, than the actual suffering of other people.

It’s never your fault you looked whiter, it’s absolutely your fault you acted whiter.

yeloson: (Default)
When you cut away the wrapper, appropriation is telling other people's stories for your entertainment & profit, not theirs.
yeloson: (Default)
Election year. Trayvon Martin. Rekia Boyd. Shaima Alawadi.Ramarley Graham.  OK shooter killing black folks.  Howard Morgan. Deanna Johnson running over black children.

Look America.  Your white supremacy issues?  Your hatred for black folks?  Your Islamophobia?  It's killing people.  You talk about "don't worry, the old generation will die off soon" but these ain't old people doing the violence.  And waiting for time to take them out while they're actively killing people? 

Instead of, you know, putting these people to trial?  Instead of, getting these people off the streets so they STOP MURDERING PEOPLE?   Instead of putting everyone who covers for them up for accessory to murder?

I'm not even going to address all the various slurs and hate phrases thrown in the last few years, but as a side note, it's not new that hateful language is usually a flag that violence is soon to follow.  And here it is, and we see you trying to do anything EXCEPT ACKNOWLEDGE THIS AS WRONG AND DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT?

It's not the old generation, it's lynching for a new generation.

ETA: 29 killed since Jan. , 18 unarmed:  http://hiphopandpolitics.wordpress.com/2012/04/06/29-black-people-have-been-killed-by-policesecurity-since-jan-2012-16-since-trayvon/

yeloson: (Default)
A bunch of tweets about magical POC stereotypes from Twitter:

Magical Negro characters (and Magical POC in general) not only help the white protagonist, they put their needs above their own.

Characters of color being focused around the needs of white characters is like how Bechdel test points to women built on men's needs in film

It's always interesting how focused they are on making POC "give blessing" to the white characters. Like some white guilt assuaging spell.

NDNs tell the white man it's ok their "time is over", the asian admits the white guy is a better ninja, (cont)

...the black person must admit the white guy has (soul/magic power/dance skills/etc.), ESPECIALLY with their dying breath.

It fuels a double dose of white privilege: "White people are just better at everything" and "POC exist to acknowledge & serve that"

Then we see that shit play out when white folks roll up into spaces, act a fool, wonder why no one is singing Kumbayah and praising them.

Then white ppl, "But aren't you HAPPY you got to have a POC in a movie SERVING a white person?!? Isn't it your DREAM?"

And apparently these stereotypes are so accepted, ppl don't get why folks are not happy with The Help, Avatar, Dances with Wolves, etc.

It says a lot to where the expectation is that we should dream to have the honor of dying for white people as a power fantasy.

And coming out of media, we see these supposed activist groups that can't understand why POC would want to put POC needs before their own.

"Oh, no, your needs don't matter. WHY would you want to focus on something so small as your freedom when you could be working FOR us?!?" OH

Media isn't mind control, but it is influence. And when all these movies tell the same story, a lot of people start to believe it true.

Like: black males are dangerous once they can walk. And they need to be shot in the back unless they unless Blackness WMDs from their backs.

Or that NDNs secretly really want to find a white person to pass all their knowledge onto, so white people should get up in their business.

Or that the bloodstained land was given freely and with smiles and the slaves who worked it were happy to serve...

I read a book on advertising & they pointed out- when you think McD's do you think of the last time you were there, or a commercial?

Many people think of the commercial, not the run down, janky place they go to. The fiction overwrote the reality in their memory.

This same thing is the fictions we tell over and over in mass media. Bias is built up by culture, and media plays a big part.

Media & celebs claim to always be about being "edgy" and new, but if you're repeating racist shit from 100 years ago? #Um

And yes, I hold writers and Hollywood to that- you know your craft. Either you're deliberately shaping it, or you're failing your message.

The fact that the magical POC is so widespread means a lot of folks are choosing the stereotypes & othering for the sake of white privilege.

Like I said earlier about the #TrayvonMartin murder - white delusions will be defended as more important than black lives.
yeloson: (pic#459017)
I've been thinking a bit about privilege, oppression, and how it plays out.

There's the classic Maslov's Hierarchy of Needs- the basics, food/clothing/shelter, then up to things like freedom and entertainment, etc. From the most basic needs to survive to the things which are necessary to thrive.

The way privilege rolls, is that some people's wants matter more than other people's needs.

"My freedom of speech matters MORE than you not being shot."
"My right to religious practice matters MORE than you not dying of horrible, treatable, medical conditions."

We're not even talking about two things on the same level of needs - where we can start really exploring ethics- we're just talking about "My less life necessary thing is more important than your MORE life necessary thing because you don't fucking matter."

Anyway, I've been thinking about this a lot, right now, because of Trayvon Martin. He's murdered. Not being shot is pretty much one of those basic needs to live. And the ways in which people are talking about this only highlight this issue.

For example- white people's "need" to have black people always appear non-threatening (mind you, non-threatening blackness is a series of ever-moving goalposts which cannot be met, short of not being black) MATTERS MORE than Travyon's need to have not been shot. White people's need to feel as if racism is over, and not have to deal with it, matters more than the fact there is a dead child.

That's on that, directly.

But shit like the Occupy folks jumping over the Million Hoodie protests? Again, white people's need to be the center of attention, over recognizing a horrible murder.

And that's what this is, and what we're going to see, throughout ALL Of this. They're going to claim reverse racism when anyone asks for anything resembling parity on Maslov's hierarchy of needs.

The backlash is going to be the fact that we, are caring TOO MUCH about a person of color.
yeloson: (Default)
Expanding a thought from Twitter.

So, according to the media and tons of people giving advice to POC is that the only sure road to success is hard work.

But when you see successful POC, or, specifically, successful black people, then the refrain is that the only way they could have possibly succeeded is unfair affirmative action.

The only way both of these could be true is if you subscribe to the idea that in the entire world of POC, no one has ever worked hard, and only white people work hard.

Of course, if that is true, then there is no point in telling POC to work hard, because you are believing it to be biologically impossible for them to do so for that many people to have NEVER worked hard.
yeloson: (Default)
There's a thing I see happen a lot, that helps lead to a wack internet.

There's this idea that if you run a discussion space, that you have to try to maximize the breadth of possible discussion topics, and ways of talking about a topic, that this is somehow necessary for "Free Speech", and therefore, moderation should be minimal.

What this misguided approach does, is lead to problems, in the form that sites become terrible places.

What do I mean?

Myth #1: Minimal moderation leads to breadth of opinion

Start with this flowchart: "So you're mad about something on the internet...

So, the most rational people do the best thing- they disengage. They leave your site, they stop contributing.

Everyone else who remains, ends up going back and forth, and ultimately, there's only two ways this can go:

1) Pile-on - the majority expresses their displeasure on the few, which could be useful if the few are asshats and the majority is fighting for civility and calling out bad behavior, and is shitty when it's vice versa.

2) The endurance test - the people who are dogged/obsessive, keep posting, and posting and posting. If you look back at the flowchart, not only is the problem that the odds are these people are terrible people, but even the good people at this point are likely simply repeating more and more obvious statements (or being further and further sidetracked into derailing) at trolls.

Notice that both breadth of opinion and quality of discussion die.

Myth #2 Continued debate leads to truth

This one is especially problematic, because it overlooks a core premise: that everyone involved is actually discussing in good faith and hoping to find the truth, instead of simply dickwaving, or worse, simply trolling for lols.

When you look at the scientific community, there's debate about some things, but other things aren't given the time of day... for example, the people who argue the Earth is flat. Do we really need more debate on this? Do we need to put our best minds to re-proving this?

No, we accept some people cannot be convinced and move on, so we can work on things that are worth discussion.

You can go to any public, mainstream site that is not, or barely moderated and find tons of racism, sexism, homophobia and idiocy. If unmoderated or barely-moderated discussion would naturally lead to truth, we'd be looking at Youtube comments for insightful commentary instead of being aghast at humanity.

Myth #3 Your site is not all the internet

"You're destroying free speech!".

Well, no, actually. Governments which block entire sites (that aren't, say, child porn or bomb making), or track everyone's emails, those are places that block free speech. Not being able to post on one site or forum, really doesn't block someone from going to any of the many other sites, or creating their own.

That said, it is worth noting, though, the difference between the silencing of voices like in Myth #1, where you let people shout down folks vs. actively banning people. The reason moderation works, generally, is that it lets someone use judgment as to whether the complaints are about being silenced by asshats or asshats being silenced.

For the moment being, I'm going to assume you actually want a space that isn't Asshatland (since, there's a lot of sites to compete with, and while the demand is high, the supply is even greater), so think about what you really want from your site and how you're going to go about getting it.
yeloson: (Default)
So, if having white actors always means more money, and therefore, is always a good idea, anyone want to explain to me why Memoirs of a Geisha didn't star white actresses starring in the lead roles in the movie?

Oh, maybe because the real formula is "Heroes = white people", "Hookers = POC", right? I think I'm just going to bring that up next time someone pulls out that bullshit logic.
yeloson: (Oh NOES)
While I wouldn't recommend Linux for anyone who wants to do anything beyond the most basic stuff (web, music, etc.), I will recommend that everyone burn a Linux Live Boot CD and keep it around.

A live boot CD will let you get your computer up and running if your OS gets jacked, you catch a ridiculous virus, your harddrive is damaged, or even dead. There's a lot of types of Linux which will run straight from your RAM, let you do some basic disk repairs if the HD is damaged, get the data off the harddrive or allow you to upload it somewhere else. You can still access the internet and email with a dead HD with many versions of Linux.

All you need to to do is pop the disk in, and boot to it (Most computers will have some kind of "press F12" or something to let you boot straight from a CD, otherwise, it's usually holding the C button).

If you want to have one around, this is what you do.

1. Download a CD version of Linux.

I use Peppermint because it's fast and has solid features*. For more features and included disk utilities, Mint will have you covered (Get the LXDE version at the bottom of the screen - it'll fit on one CD).

2. Burn the ISO to a CD

If you don't have a program for this, you can download an ISO burner. I'd have to dig up the one I use at work, but a quick cnet search for ones with lots of good reviews gives me ImgBurn and BurnRights.

And... that's it. If you've got a blank CD, most of the time is downloading the distribution of Linux and an ISO burner- the CD usually takes a few short minutes.

If you lack access to a CD burner and can wait a week or two, you can even buy the Live boot CDs for a pretty reasonable price: Peppermint OS $9.

*One caveat about Peppermint. The file manager is under "Accessories". Once you figure that out, you can access your files and get your data off the system if you need to.
yeloson: (Default)
Of Activists, Feminism, and Mammy Issues breaks down the whole expectation that black folks are somehow supposed to also go fight everyone else's battles as well as their own.

I think it's real interesting, clueless, and fucked up how many folks can't be bothered to learn something about black rights and the battles fought here, and simply buy into the McDonald's/American Kumbayah story that "Now all the black peoples are free and happy!" and imagine that, now everyone's sitting on beemers and Oval Office desks, and dammit, why aren't they helping anyone else?

The Reference to the Court of Appeals post puts it nicely:

The reference to ‘court of appeals’ is a metaphor for how (‘american’) Blacks are often expected to authenticate the suffering of non-Black people of color. For instance, I’ve read the work of diasporic South Asians who have faulted ‘american’ Blacks for not caring sufficiently about (or even supposedly participating in) the profiling of people-who-look-‘Muslim’ at airports. What gets erased is that, before Sept. 11, diasporic South Asians weren’t organized against racial profiling because it was Blacks who were (and still are) being racially profiled.

So ‘solidarity’ is always supposed to go in one direction, *from* ‘american’ Blacks *to* non-Black people of color. When non-Black people of color are in trouble, Black people are supposed to be front and center validating the struggle with their presence, even though non-Black people of color are only there for Blacks when it’s convenient.


There's a real split between "Get mine activism" and actual, equality & human rights activism. The former has a simple, fucked up goal - which is to get the same privileges as white men. Not to actually get equality for everyone, but just for themselves and maybe a few folks like them.

That mentality shows itself really quickly- they're only upset when it comes to power being used against them, but no one else, and unsurprisingly, accept that basic concept - that black people are supposed to be magical negros mammies for the cause subservient StepinFetchit "Allies" when they need it, though they remain silent in the face of police murder, economic targeting, focused relocation (who remembers Katrina?), and a host of other, goddamn-it's-blatant bullshit.

I had a conversation on Twitter awhile ago, pointing out the problems of how quick a lot of East Asian Americans are to buy into being #2 on the racial hierarchy system. If you have any understanding of racism, then it's pretty clear that your duty is to step up as an ally MORE if you've got privileges than it is expect more from the people with LESS or NO privilege.

And frankly, if you couldn't be bothered to know the people and listen to them who you're now asking for support? That you understand their history through the propaganda of the oppressors? Why should they ally with you?

There's no such thing as "equality for one" - either we all get it or it doesn't exist. "Get mine" greedy activism, in the end, only becomes the oppression it claims it's fighting, and in the end, supports it the entire way.

ETA: A nice commentary on willful ignorance with regards to black folks while demanding servitude in activism
yeloson: (Oh NOES)
Someone wrote a survival guide for the computer animation school I went to:

So as you read this, please pause,
for a second, and we’re going to go through a mental exercise to
determine if you smell bad....

1. Do you shower EVERY single day?
2. Do you wear deodorant EVERY single day?

Yes. It's that simple. These are the miracle secret keys to not
smelling bad. This is the wondrous and life-changing advice that I am
giving to you. If you smell bad, and you follow my advice, I just
changed your life.

Motherfucker, I just gave you the most important advice that anyone in
the whole world has ever given you. You may not understand the
profound importance of this advice.
yeloson: (Default)
I figured I should also cover the second most common thing full of misinformation: stretching.

How Adhesions Form

Every night, while you sleep, your body goes into general repair mode. There's a certain amount of cells that are dead and pulled out, and your body does a general repair cycle all around. This generalized thing includes laying down connective tissue - everywhere and without necessarily direction.

When you wake up, you've got this thin layer of connective tissue that's been placed throughout your body. You get up, you yawn, you stretch and you obliterate a good amount of that connective tissue. You go make breakfast or rush for a shower, etc. - all those movements take out some more of that tissue.

The stuff that's left over? It gets built up the next night, and the next night, etc.

Presumably, since you're not moving in a way to tear it back down, it's assumed you don't actually need that range of motion, and instead, you need stabilization, which is exactly what that connective tissue will give you, given enough time to build up.

It'll be strong, but it'll reduce your range of motion. (This also happens with injuries, but more on that later).

Stretching...basically

The biggest misconception is that greater range of motion is always a good thing.

Stretch to the range of motion you expect you'll need to use for your activities- not more than that.

The reality is that you're always doing a tradeoff between how much range of motion and the amount of work it takes to make your body functional AND safe at that range, otherwise, you open yourself up for injuries.

When you stretch, you're not just breaking up that adhesive tissue, you're not just stretching the muscles and corresponding tissues (tendons, fascia, etc.), you're also resetting the muscles to expect to be at that range and not automatically lock up to stabilize things.

You're turning off safeties to protect your joints.

Now, if you're also training your muscles to be strong at that extended range, and you're training your nervous system to coordinate firing all your stabilizers to handle that, great.

But you can see, that's a lot more work than just "stretching it".

You will also be able to identify qualified instructors or resources like books or websites based on if they give you those two other factors of how to strengthen and develop stabilizers.

When you do stretch, be gentle and don't bounce. Be willing to go partway, like 75-80% and then come back to it and see if you can get 90% and then come back to it later for a full stretch. Make sure you do some warm up for the movement you plan on doing so you didn't just relax the muscles without active stimulation.

Strength & Stabilizers

There's a lot of folks who can stretch themselves into extreme ranges... but can't get themselves out of it without using different muscles. While this is fine when you're stretching in a gym or at home, if you take a fall and find yourself in the same position, that lack of muscle strength means the shock will probably hit in a bad way.

So it's really important to have strength throughout the full range of motion you have.

Second, you also have to make your muscles "smart" - to be able to coordinate to work when something like that happens. This is where stabilizers come in. The trick to stabilizers is that it's a coordination between your brain and your muscles- you're training yourself to fire off many different muscles, in order to stabilize your joint and body.

This is why you might have someone who is very strong, can leg press their whole body weight with each leg... but has trouble standing on one leg- the issue isn't strength, it's firing different muscles in time to keep balance.

If you are going to do some stretching to increase your range of motion, be sure to follow it with some strength training and some stabilizer work..

Actually Stretching

There's also another issue that happens when we talk about stretching. Let's say you're doing the classic "touch your toes" kind of stretch. Typically this is supposed to be used to stretch the hamstrings.

Problem is, a lot of people end up stretching their lower back muscles and not their hamstrings in the process.

The body will take the route of least resistance- if your back muscles have more give, it'll do that. Not only will you have not stretched the hamstrings, enough of it, and you might have weakened the support from your spinal ligaments. (One of my teachers works with a circus school - it's pretty much accepted among contortionists that they will just have to suffer back pain from their work...)

When you're doing any actual stretching work, you should have a qualified person or information resource that can help you identify what you should be feeling and more importantly - what you SHOULDN'T be feeling, so you don't "cheat" the stretch or take yourself into places that might stress the joints.

Injuries and Stretching

The short bit on injuries basically boils down to three things:

1) Listen to your doctor and physical therapist- they're going to tell you what NOT to do to make it worse or re-injure, and that's the most important thing.
2) As soon as you're ok'd for movement, even if it's 1 centimeter, do it in order to help break up adhesions a bit and make it easier for you later on. Don't use weight until your PT ok's it.
3) Be very gentle with yourself. A ton of re-injuries happen in 3 weeks to 6 months after an injury. Go with less weight and less force and don't be surprised if progress is measured in weeks or months.

When you get injured, your body lays down that connective tissue everywhere - it's often called "scar tissue".

Movement breaks up the fibers that restrict movement and so it's useful to do that as soon as possible after inflammation has dropped and bruising is done- BUT LISTEN TO YOUR DOCTOR- if you completely separate your tendon- rest assured that scar tissue isn't going to be the big problem on your plate.

After an injury, for the rest of your life, you're going to have to be more careful about stretching and making sure to strengthen and stabilize the area- injuries don't really "heal", it's more your body slaps down enough scar tissue around it and fixes some muscle and calls it good. You've got permanent structural changes from your body making-do with what it could.

Focus on getting day-to-day range of motion and strength more than anything else. Then go slow and definitely be careful if you need to go beyond that.

Why is there so much general info that stretching is always good?

One of the key problems to fitness information in the US at least, if not elsewhere, is that most of it is promoted by "health missionaries" - the weight training folks like to say strength is everything, the cardio folks focus only on cardio... naturally there's a group who believes stretching cures all ills.

All of this also includes over-simplifications of each of those. Not knowing when NOT to do something is how people get hurt.

This kind of thinking is why we're getting a lot of studies which are mixed on a lot of these subjects- of course "sometimes it helps" "sometimes it hurts" is the response if you're randomly popping medicine out of a doctor's bag.

It's not as simple as "just stretching" - is the stretch appropriate to the activity? Is the range of motion appropriate? Are the correct muscles being stretched? Do the muscles have strength through the motion? Is the rest of the warm up appropriate? Is there a history of injury?

There's a lot of specifics that go into it, and you need to think about all of it to get the most out of stretching.

At least, if you get nothing else: Stretch only to the range of motion you expect to use in your activity, and make sure you have strength throughout that full range.
yeloson: (Default)
I keep seeing folks having questions about how to warm up... and sadly, a lot of misinformation on what it does or how you should do it.

So.

How Muscle Tears Happen

Your body has certain safeties built into it. One of them is that your body is designed to let your muscles take damage before your joints take damage- muscles heal easier than joints.

In each of your muscle bundles, there are "Golgi Tendon Reflex" nerves. These things measure how fast your muscles are moving relative to a joint. They exist to activate your muscles to force a "braking action" if something is moving fast enough it could damage the joint.

For example, kicking so hard your knee could flip backward.

Instead of having that, your body activates the antagonistic muscles (the muscles opposite of the movement) to lock up, as quick as possible. This can result in strains or full tears. This response happens at the spinal column- the nerve impulse doesn't even get up to the brain, so this isn't a conscious choice you can make. It's like the response to pull your hand out of a fire before you even feel the pain, same concept.

BUT.

Warming Up

A warm up is introducing your body to the motions, range of motion, and speed you expect it to perform at. You are resetting the Golgi reflexes to accept a wider range, higher speed than they'd normally be at.

In other words, you're turning off some safeties.

It means your muscles won't do that pull-tear thing, but it also means your muscles are expecting your brain to pay more attention and conscious control around not letting the joint move outside of acceptable ranges.

In order for a warm up to help your performance, it must involve similar or identical motion to what you intend to do.

You start light in terms of speed and force and increase to full speed and force, thereby getting the muscle spindles to turn down the instinctual responses and accept new settings. Using similar movement also means that blood is going to the same muscles that you will be using.

You may need to do some minimal stretching on your antagonistic muscles if they generally tend to be tight from stuff like, you know, sitting in an office all day, etc. - just enough that they're not impeding the primary movement.

What doesn't help

Doing unrelated movements

If you're going to do upper body weight training, jogging doesn't really help. Sure, it's getting you some cardio, and maybe loosing up some shoulder stuff from the bouncing and arm swings... but yeah, not specifically helping you.

Too much range of motion (NEVER DO THIS)

If you warm up by giving yourself a lot of stretches or movements that take your range of motion -greater- than what you plan on doing... you're setting yourself up for injury.

Remember how I said your resetting your muscle fibers to accept a bigger motion and turn off the safeties? When you reset it to take a much bigger range than what you're doing, you're turning off your stabilizing muscles - and increasing the odds of a joint injury.

Why does this/that/the other source say to do jogging/jumping jacks/stretches/etc.?

Getting literally "warmed up" feels good. It gets your brain and nervous system into, "Hey, we're going to DO STUFF" mode.

Thing is, not every activity needs the same kind of warm up. I'm thinking a lot of "warm up advice" is partially a push to get more people to do cardio. The other part of it is assuming people are doing general workouts which a general warm up makes sense.

But it's so simplified and generic, it's equivalent to saying "Take asprin" for any given medical condition - great when you have a minor ache or pain, not so great for many other conditions.

Which is why we keep seeing studies coming out about whether warming up or stretching actually prevents injuries or not. It's highly contextual on the activity and the type of warm up the person did- some warm ups will help certain activities, some will increase your odds of injury.

Cool Down

So, you reset your muscle spindles to do stuff, right? Might be a good idea to reset them again to go back to doing normal things.

If you were doing power/endurance training, it might be a good idea to gently stretch things to keep them from tightening up and cutting off blood flow. If you were doing lots of cardio, maybe slow down the body to normal walking and get it used to that idea, stretch a few things and swing around whatever limbs were being used less- get the blood a bit more evened out.
yeloson: (I see crazy people)
When a troll feels wronged by a statement of behavior*, they will then go on to act in a fashion that completely verifies the statement they are objecting to.

*Whether the statement was actually about them or they magically MADE it about them in troll-think.

Examples:

"I'm not stalking you! I'm going to look up your posts on another site and read them all!"
"I'm totally not racist! I'll silence any person of color who says otherwise!"
"Gamers never act brain damaged! I'll randomly spam a forum with non-sequitur statements that look like someone posting while high!"

Go on, I'm sure you can play along as well!

Hate

Sep. 15th, 2010 11:41 pm
yeloson: (Default)
I'm thinking about hate.  This Islamophobic hate shit is getting ridiculous.

1. Hate is about convenient targets.

This shit we're seeing?  It's not actually about Islam.  These people don't even know shit about Islam or the people who practice it.  If you asked them 10 years ago, they'd have no idea about anything, except maybe something to do with oil or Gaza and maybe a couple of airplane hijackings.  

It's not like a personal hate.  And even if they talk about 9/11, that's not it either, because that was NINE YEARS AGO.  There's no reason for hatred to get stronger, absent actual repeated attacks.  9/11 is an excuse.  This isn't about the attack.  This is about people being frustrated, and here's a convenient set of targets to take that frustration out on.

2.  How children bully

It's not like kids plan ahead who they're going to bully.  They just kinda figure out who holds the least status, that people care about the least, that they can pick on and no one will stand up for them or care for them.  A convenient target.

Once a few kids do it, then more kids jump in.  It's demonstrated who the target is, and then they know who they can go kick.

3. Mob mentality

Part of it is that it's about social status.  Pushing someone down means you're higher up than them.  Isn't that nice?  Part of it is it's a group thing - it's a "thing to do".

Right now? It's popular to hate on Muslims.  There's a lot of excuses, but that's all they are, excuses.  "I'm defending science!"  "Their religion is about violence!"  "Their religion is about changing the law to theocracy!"

Strangely, you'd think if these were the issues, the #1 concern for Americans, at least, would be the Christian right and the Tea Baggers- all of these folks have decades of attacking science in schools, in universities, and in government policies.  They've bombed abortion clinics and killed people.  They have repeatedly attempted to change laws, through direct action and perverse reinterpretation to remove freedom of religion... including the right to no subscribe to any religion at all.

Instead, we're to believe a minority religion in the US, with no cultural inroads into the mainstream US, or immediate political power is a bigger threat to our society?  Meanwhile Tea Baggers are actually winning political seats?

4.  The bigger problem

As much as this isn't about Islam, it's that this hate isn't based on actual reasons for hate, like having your family killed in religious wars - it's all manufactured hate... not even that, just painting targets and giving people excuses at this point.   The reason this shit is kicking off is the economy, really.  It's worse 9 years later because people are out of work, losing homes, and feeling like crap.

And, sure enough, once Islam stops being a target, they'll go find a new one, or an old one.  Latinos are pretty high up on the list with all the immigration raids.  And surely a high profile scandal will probably put black people back on the limelight.  Perhaps China, with it's growing economy?

A friend of mine once put it, "Niggerization" - who gets to be the one they'll treat the shittiest and put on target?  Her word stuck with me as much as the signs people had about "Sand Niggers" as soon as the war started.  Funny enough, it highlights it terribly well- it's not that the hate has ended, it just means a new group is put down in the same category.

5.  Well, we never meant to

And, naturally, once enough people have been killed, enough firebombings, lynchings, or whatever else will come of it, they'll say, "Oh, we didn't mean that, we don't <i>hate</i> them, we can't possibly be racist".  And, as far as emotionally, because the hate was actual, real hate, they'll consider it to be true- after all, they were just doing something fun, something to blow off steam, and those people don't really matter anyway.

Socialized sociopathy- a complete erasure of empathy for the targeted group, and you just do the actions of hate, not for hate, per se, but because it was a thing to do. 

This is basically the cycle we go through, over and over.  A mass genocide on the continent.  "We didn't -mean- to kill the Indians.  We had no part in it."  Slavery with hundreds of millions murdered.  "We didn't mean to kill the blacks.  We didn't -hate- them." etc.

Now it's the Muslims.  People too morally degenerate to think beyond the mentality of elementary school bullies, unwilling to take responsibility for the inevitable violence and murder that will follow, but all too glad to goad others into throwing the first stone.

After all, as long as you can tell yourself you didn't start it, and that you didn't "hate them", you're totally ok, right?

Who has the religion of violence that pushes us back to the Dark Ages again?

Ayup.

Sep. 15th, 2010 12:47 pm
yeloson: (Default)
I don't know enough physicists to say this is true, but it's a pretty excellent example of what I see with either mansplaining or white privilege in conversations...


 
yeloson: (pic#459017)
Geek Girls Rule, quoted for truth:


Here’s the thing. For many of the SF/F cons I’ve worked on, servers will fight over who gets to work that weekend, because we tip well. We know we’ll be back, we know they’ll be slammed and over-worked, so we tip well. Talking to my friend who works one of the coffee shops around the convention center, when it comes to PAX, they fight over who doesn’t have to work PAX, because you guys have given us the reputation of stingy ass mother fuckers. Service industry folks talk, and no one likes PAX because of this.


I was at that little discussion, and basically, when you get the average of 1 tip per 18 customers?

From people who a) flew across the country to b) buy $60 videogames?

To people who are taxed 18% above normal taxes because the state ASSUMES they get tipped every time?

Y'all make me glad I didn't go to PAX.
yeloson: (pic#459017)
It's always interesting when someone puts out a work that is racist, sexist, heterosupremacist, or otherwise fucked up and problematic... that when people point out the problematic elements - that the response goes like this:

1) Well, you people don't buy/read/watch this stuff (and therefore your money doesn't matter)
2) We NEED to include this stuff to sell (the rest of the world is bigots and they're our market)
3) You are being irrational oversensitive (Even though I just said in #2 that I'm totally willing to alter my artistic integrity for the sake of irrational market demands to make a profit)

But... once people start saying, "Well, I guess I won't buy/go see/support this work, and maybe other works by this person" THEN suddenly it turns to, "Why are you hateful people trying to put me out of business and starve me and my family? I'm so poor, I work so hard, etc."

Fascinating how our money doesn't matter enough to NOT include messages that have, and still do, get us beaten, murdered, raped, denied jobs, denied health care, education, arrested, etc. but if we decide to take our money elsewhere (after all, we aren't the "target audience") suddenly our money is capable of wrecking entire lives?

This usually also goes hand in hand with "Well, you're trying to censor me!"... which isn't actually true- your work is already out there and critical analysis of it is definitely not the same as enacting government law to remove it OR say, threats against your person to silence you.

Strangely, though, the idea of consumers exercising their free speech about what constitutes a good product or not, or exercising their right to choose what they want to buy or not buy, suddenly freedom is now a threat that must be stopped.

How convenient.

If you really are happy with the market you're targeting, it should never even be an issue when the people who were a "negligible profit" decide to take their money elsewhere.

Of course, what it turns out to being, instead, is that we have creators who:

a) are profiting on bigotry and promoting it
b) are too cowardly to accept the social consequences of it - if you promote bigotry, your work will be labeled as such, and so will you, whether you "believe in it or not".

This is why they focus so much on blaming critics, fans, and the public despite all the claims that they were making conscious market choices. Silencing the social consequences takes a higher priority than the supposed profits.

And if profit isn't the driving motive- then the bigotry is there just because that IS what the creator meant.

The phrase about not assuming malevolence where incompetence will do, actually isn't quite right here. Irrational malevolence is generally too incompetent to hide it's motivations- it reveals itself through it's attempts to defend itself.

If it were just a matter of money, either criticism wouldn't matter, or perhaps, there'd be adjustments to future works, after all, it's "what the people want".

But irrational bigotry? That needs defending.
yeloson: (Default)
I see a lot of folks use the argument that all forms of oppression are are really subsets and tools of classism...yet the regularity with which these same people show ignorance, and in fact, perpetuate racism, sexism, heterosupremacy, is a pretty good sign that they're not educated on any of these things well enough to talk about how they intersect with classism at all.

It's rather like wanting to fight terrorism and refusing to talk about violent extremist politics.

Tim Wise on the racism of liberals:

Perhaps the most common way in which folks on the left sometimes perpetuate racism is by a vulgar form of class reductionism, in which they advance the notion that racism is a secondary issue to the class system, and that what leftists and radicals should be doing is spending more time focusing on the fight for dramatic and transformative economic change (whether reformist or revolutionary), rather than engaging in what they derisively term “identity politics.” The problem, say these voices, are corporations, the rich, the elite, etc., and to get sidetracked into a discussion of white supremacy is to ignore this fact and weaken the movement for radical change.

....

To ignore the unique deprivations of racism (as with sexism, heterosexism, ableism, etc) so as to forward a white-friendly class analysis is inherently marginalizing to the lived experience of black and brown folks in the United States. And what’s more, to ignore racism is to actually weaken the struggle for class unity and economic transformation. Research on this matter is crystal clear: it is in large measure due to racism — and the desire of working class whites to maintain a sense of superiority over workers of color, as a “psychological wage” when real wages and benefits have proven inadequate — that has divided the working class. It is this holding onto the status conferred by whiteness, as a form of “alternate property” (to paraphrase UCLA Law Professor, Cheryl Harris), which has undermined the ability of white and of-color working people to engage in solidarity across racial lines. Unless we discuss the way in which racism and racial inequity weakens our bonds of attachment, we will never be able to forward a truly progressive, let alone radical politics.


(emphasis mine, Easy Reader bolding for you White Privilege Selective Readers out there)

I mean, for folks who are all about classism and labor, you'd think they'd go recruit and organize amongst produce pickers- after all, a lot of history in labor organizing and class issues revolves around these -same- people.

You might think you'd be up in arms about anarchist groups who claim to support the residents of Oakland against police violence - yet destroyed several small community owned businesses- the same ones that could have become supporters and locations for organization, AND then perpetuated the myth of black violence to the nation at the same time.

You might think folks promoting Class as a Grand Unified Theory of oppression would be the first out to organize gang members, and youth, groups quickly taken in to the penal system, working for less than living wages, and permanently shunted out of many jobs as people who could profit the most by destroying classism... Oh wait, you're busy talking about how violent the people who write about racism are.

That's not even getting into sexism, heterosupremacy, etc.

But it's always interesting to hear how these grand unified theories never involve having to give up their own privilege in the process.

Funny that.
yeloson: (Magical Feeling)
Post racial seems to mean "the era in which people stop saying anything to white people when racist shit happens" and not "the era in which people stop doing racist shit".

Somehow the Post Racial Era sounds a lot like slavery times.

Profile

yeloson: (Default)
yeloson

November 2012

S M T W T F S
    123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930 

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 21st, 2017 02:35 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios