Solarbird the Lightbringer leads the supervillain elfmetal band known as Crime and the Forces of Evil.
Reblogged from tinierpurplefishes  75,700 notes

shadesofmauve:

arabellesicardi:

Here is a side by side comparison of how The New York Times has profiled Michael Brown — an 18 year old black boy gunned down by police — and how they profiled Ted Bundy, one of the most prolific serial killers of all time. 

Source for Brown, Source for Bundy.

I’ve seen all sorts of these going around, and the more I read the smear job on Michael Brown, the more I desperately hope someone out there reading it has the half brain it takes to pick the damn thing apart, because they are reaching on every line.

"Problems and promise in his young life": ie, like any teenager ever.

"The police say…" : a thing which has been confirmed by the store owners to NOT HAVE HAPPENED.

"He lived in a community that had rough patches": Ferguson is largely black and lower income, and obviously just existing there means you’re guilty of something.

"Producing lyrics that were by turns contemplative and vulgar" : being a totally normal teen exploring a new productive creative outlet.

Now, I actually think it’s important not to dehumanize serial killers or terrorists or murderers, because we need to remember that ‘normal’ people can do awful things (….large amounts of police officers are currently springing to mind :|). But the transparent hatchet job on a murder victim is fucking crime against both journalism and basic human decency, and the New York Times should be bringing Brown’s family apologies on bended fucking knee.

Reblogged from kaijyuu  34,325 notes

In a study of children aged 2-5, parents interrupted their daughters more than their sons, and fathers were more likely to talk simultaneously with their children than mothers were. Jennifer Coates says: “It seems that fathers try to control conversation more than mothers… and both parents try to control conversation more with daughters than with sons. The implicit message to girls is that they are more interruptible and that their right to speak is less than that of boys.”

Girls and boys’ differing understanding of when to talk, when to be quiet, what is polite and so on, has a visible impact on the dynamics of the classroom. Just as men dominate the floor in business meetings, academic conferences and so on, so little boys dominate in the classroom - and little girls let them.

X  (via albinwonderland)

Working with children for over a decade, this is something I’ve noticed, actually. And for the majority, the little girls in my class and my co-worker’s classes all sit quietly and listen MUCH better than the boys do. Most boys don’t care to be quiet and sit still. And I don’t think this is an attribute of boys being “rowdier” or more “hyper” - believe me, the girls are JUST as off the wall as the boys if you aren’t telling them not to. It must be a learned behavior, and it must be enforced more with the girls so they know they can’t get away with it. You have no idea how many times in my career I’ve heard “boys will be boys,” and smiling parents as they tell me with a laugh, sorry, their son is “wild” and a “handful” as they introduce him to the class.

(via voicelikehelvetica)

And that’s how you do sexism.  That’s how it’s so effectively trained into every single citizen and indoctrinated as normal and right.

(via waltzy)

Reblogged from tinierpurplefishes  8,454 notes

And if Michael Brown was not angelic, I was practically demonic. I had my first drink when I was 11. I once brawled in the cafeteria after getting hit in the head with a steel trash can. In my junior year I failed five out of seven classes. By the time I graduated from high school, I had been arrested for assaulting a teacher and been kicked out of school (twice.) And yet no one who knew me thought I had the least bit of thug in me. That is because I also read a lot of books, loved my Commodore 64, and ghostwrote love notes for my friends. In other words, I was a human being. A large number of American teenagers live exactly like Michael Brown. Very few of them are shot in the head and left to bake on the pavement.

The “angelic” standard was not one created by the reporter. It was created by a society that cannot face itself, and thus must employ a dubious “morality” to hide its sins. It is reinforced by people who have embraced the notion of “twice as good” while avoiding the circumstances which gave that notion birth. Consider how easily living in a community “with rough patches” becomes part of a list of ostensible sins. Consider how easily “black-on-black crime” becomes not a marker of a shameful legacy of segregation but a moral failing.

Ta-Nehisi Coates, being amazing. (via politicalprof)

Reblogged from tinierpurplefishes  1,969 notes
medievalpoc:

jonomancer:

Brahmagupta, Indian mathematician (598 - 670), known as the “inventor of zero”. Picture from findinsideindia.com.
Brahmagupta was head of the astronomical observatory at Ujjain, a holy city in the Malwa region of central India. (Ujjain has been a center of learning since ancient times, and is known in Hindu tradition as the place where Krishna went to receive his education. The observatory of Ujjain was considered the prime meridian, as Greenwich England is today, making it the baseline for all astronomical observations.)From his observations he deduced that the moon is closer to the earth than the sun is, and that the earth and heavenly bodies are all spheres. His calculation of the length of the solar year is accurate to within about half an hour! But Brahmagupta is best known for his mathematical writings, and especially for developing the concept of zero as a number.In his great work Brahmasphutasiddhanta (“The Opening of the Universe”), Brahmagupta wrote:    When zero is added to a number or subtracted from a number, the number remains unchanged; and a number multiplied by zero becomes zero. Previous schoars had used various symbols as placeholders to show the lack of a number or digit. Brahmagupta was the first to treat zero as a number in its own right, something that could be used in calculations along with other numbers. In doing so, he extended the rules of arithmetic from the natural numbers to what we now call the integers, including zero and negative numbers. Here’s more rules from the Brahmasphutasiddhanta:    A debt minus zero is a debt.    A fortune minus zero is a fortune.    Zero minus zero is a zero.    A debt subtracted from zero is a fortune.    A fortune subtracted from zero is a debt.    The product of zero multiplied by a debt or fortune is zero.    The product of zero multipliedby zero is zero.    The product or quotient of two fortunes is one fortune.    The product or quotient of two debts is one fortune.    The product or quotient of a debt and a fortune is a debt.    The product or quotient of a fortune and a debt is a debt.(“Fortune” and “Debt” were Brahmagupta’s quite descriptive terms for what we’d now call positive and negative numbers.)This is one of those ideas that’s so simple that, from our vantage point centuries later, it’s hard to imagine anyone not understanding it, but people had been struggling along without zero for centuries. It must have taken a stroke of genius to realize that “nothing” is something!But he didn’t stop with negative numbers! The Brahmasphutasiddhanta also contains methods for:- Finding square roots, using an algorithm that Newton would rediscover centuries later!- Solving quadratic equations!- Trigonometry, including tables of sines and cosines!- Summing series of squares and cubes- Finding the area of cyclic quadrilateralsHis work holds up extremely well today. His approximation of Pi was correct to within a few hundredths. About the only place where modern mathematicians would disagree with Brahmagupta is his statement that 0 divided by 0 is 0, where today we leave division by zero undefined.Sources:http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Biographies/Brahmagupta.htmlhttp://www.famous-mathematicians.com/brahmagupta/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahmagupta

Math and Science Week!

medievalpoc:

jonomancer:

Brahmagupta, Indian mathematician (598 - 670), known as the “inventor of zero”. Picture from findinsideindia.com.

Brahmagupta was head of the astronomical observatory at Ujjain, a holy city in the Malwa region of central India. (Ujjain has been a center of learning since ancient times, and is known in Hindu tradition as the place where Krishna went to receive his education. The observatory of Ujjain was considered the prime meridian, as Greenwich England is today, making it the baseline for all astronomical observations.)

From his observations he deduced that the moon is closer to the earth than the sun is, and that the earth and heavenly bodies are all spheres. His calculation of the length of the solar year is accurate to within about half an hour! But Brahmagupta is best known for his mathematical writings, and especially for developing the concept of zero as a number.

In his great work Brahmasphutasiddhanta (“The Opening of the Universe”), Brahmagupta wrote:

    When zero is added to a number or subtracted from a number, the number remains unchanged; and a number multiplied by zero becomes zero.

Previous schoars had used various symbols as placeholders to show the lack of a number or digit. Brahmagupta was the first to treat zero as a number in its own right, something that could be used in calculations along with other numbers. In doing so, he extended the rules of arithmetic from the natural numbers to what we now call the integers, including zero and negative numbers. Here’s more rules from the Brahmasphutasiddhanta:

    A debt minus zero is a debt.
    A fortune minus zero is a fortune.
    Zero minus zero is a zero.
    A debt subtracted from zero is a fortune.
    A fortune subtracted from zero is a debt.
    The product of zero multiplied by a debt or fortune is zero.
    The product of zero multipliedby zero is zero.
    The product or quotient of two fortunes is one fortune.
    The product or quotient of two debts is one fortune.
    The product or quotient of a debt and a fortune is a debt.
    The product or quotient of a fortune and a debt is a debt.

(“Fortune” and “Debt” were Brahmagupta’s quite descriptive terms for what we’d now call positive and negative numbers.)

This is one of those ideas that’s so simple that, from our vantage point centuries later, it’s hard to imagine anyone not understanding it, but people had been struggling along without zero for centuries. It must have taken a stroke of genius to realize that “nothing” is something!

But he didn’t stop with negative numbers! The Brahmasphutasiddhanta also contains methods for:

- Finding square roots, using an algorithm that Newton would rediscover centuries later!
- Solving quadratic equations!
- Trigonometry, including tables of sines and cosines!
- Summing series of squares and cubes
- Finding the area of cyclic quadrilaterals

His work holds up extremely well today. His approximation of Pi was correct to within a few hundredths. About the only place where modern mathematicians would disagree with Brahmagupta is his statement that 0 divided by 0 is 0, where today we leave division by zero undefined.

Sources:
http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Biographies/Brahmagupta.html
http://www.famous-mathematicians.com/brahmagupta/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahmagupta

Math and Science Week!

Reblogged from caladri  112,049 notes

"Don’t take a nude pic if you’re a famous woman and don’t want it leaked."

mysharona1987:

"Don’t wear a hoodie if you don’t want to be mistaken for a criminal and shot."

"Don’t get drunk at a party if you don’t want to be sexually assaulted."

"Don’t argue with a cop if you don’t want to get killed."

"Don’t walk home by yourself if you don’t want to get raped."

Victim blaming 101: Everyone should live in fear from ever doing anything.

Reblogged from fullcontactmuse  33,568 notes

kwansimah:

ferenginar:

yungmethuselah:

If you think all Black people’s blogs are “social justice” blogs, you’re racist.

I read some newspaper article recently that pretty much summed up Tumblr and the responses to it this way—privileged people who come here are shocked to see marginalized people talking about their experiences, so they think everyone’s just obsessed with social justice, rather than talking about their own lives.

🙌thissss