Sending a big “FU” to the corporate side of the fashion industry.
As an increasingly successful fashion blogger, I have been targeted by several brands, large & small, one of which is quite a large corporation.
Because I am undermining a very important part of their money making system.
Today, the fashion industry is split in half.
You have Women’s fashion & Men’s fashion.
You will find designers here and there who produce androgynous designs but for the most part, the industry (brands & corporate companies) want designers who either design Men’s wear or Women’s wear, and follow a very gendered structure. Everything from the tailoring to the materials has to be specific to the binary boy/girl gender system.
This is why you can’t find feminine style’s of clothing tailored for the average males body type in any department store, thus creating a “mens” & “women’s” division.
Every time I modify the clothing I buy in department stores to fit my body type and then model it for people to see, not only am I inspiring people to step out of the box with their fashion choices, but I am merging two markets into one.
Why is this bad for corporations?
More markets equal more advertising and marketing opportunities which ultimately leads to more sales and more profit.
When I successfully inspire people to be less mindful about if they look like a girl or a boy, ultimately I am inspiring them to go against the gendered market system that brands and clothing companies make so much money off of.
I have received several hateful emails, discouraging my efforts as a fashion blogger. I was even asked by a large corporate clothing company to STOP buying their clothing and modifying it to fit my body type. They stated that by doing so, and sharing it with my audience that I was creating the illusion that gender did not exist, and that I am leading a bad example for society. …
A GENDERED SOCIETY CREATES A HUGE PROBLEM.
IT DIVIDES PEOPLE.
IT DISOLVES ANY & ALL ORIGINALITY.
FUCK YOU, to any clothing brand, company & corporation who’s got a problem with who I am, what I believe in & how I express myself.
This is just so important! Gendered clothing is such bullshit and I want more people to realize!!!
okay, yeah, this, but also, have you considered…those legs tho
ATTENTION FOR A SECOND, YO:
Real talk, this animal (the Ordovician Helmet crab, aka the Horseshoe crab, aka the Atlantic’s most at-risk shelled animal) is of a species that is close to 450 million years old. They are considered endangered, and often wash up on the shores of Long Island (this big lady crab was at TR park in Oyster Bay)
Note: these animals are often used to extract their blue blood and cure diseases. They help the ocean out big time. And they are one of the longest-surviving species on the planet. They’re washing up and people don’t think to/are scared to save them because of their deceivingly harmless barbs.
Take note, friends. Their barbs are NOT stingers. They cannot hurt you. Their pinchers aren’t pinchers, they’re just little legs that are actually really soft! The barb tail they have is actually what they use to stick into the ocean floor or the sand when waves knock them over or they flip onto their backs by accident. And you can help them out by flipping them back over very quickly and helping them scuttle back into the water if you see them struggling.
This is way important. Just call me the Sarah McLachlan of horseshoe crabs.
I used to see these cuties all the time whenever my dad took us out fishing. I didn’t realize they were endangered!
MY WHOLE LIFE IS A LIE
This is a blatant violation of trust
YOU LYING FUCKS I SPENT MY WHOLE LIFE ADMIRING THE BRICK LAYERS THAT ALWAYS LAY THE BRICKS NEAT AND PERFECTLY LINED UP HOLY SHIT I LOOK UP TO YOU HOW COULD YOU
I guess we shouldn’t mention this either then…
did u ppl seriously think that they would individually lay down thousands of bricks?????
He just shit on your whole life, bitch.
Can we talk about this for a sec?
This exchange was really important to me because I think Nina’s attitude here illustrates a HUGE problem with modern pop culture criticism.
Feedback regarding any work should always be delivered in a constructive way. The goal of any kind of evaluation is to point out what went right, what went wrong, and do so objectively, without bias, so that the recipient can improve himself/herself. Ideally, there should be no prejudice and (to a certain degree) no emotional attachment to the work being evaluated.
While the aesthetic value of a creative work is most certainly subjective, and the passions it evokes can also vary from person to person, the expression of a critic’s reaction to a work should be divorced from the emotional response he or she first received from that work so that the work can be examined within larger context, one extending beyond the scope of the individual person.
Reality TV has encouraged a style of criticism that rewards short-sighted snark and imprecise hyperbole over substantive commentary and fair-handedness. I’m thinking about Gordon Ramsey-style emotional outbursts where there’s cursing or violent shouting. I’m thinking about nasty rounds of Simon Cowell-brand sarcasm, where cute quips and degrading put downs become more important than delivering truly accurate, well-rounded criticism. I’m thinking about those judges who just scream and shout or clap their hands wildly or dance or throw out tired variations of “you killed it” or “that was the bomb” without really providing examples that illustrate what choices the artist made that were truly distinctive or superior. And frequently, when judges DO offer well-rounded criticism, they usually get booed for it by the audience even when it’s polite and accurate (I’m looking at YOU, Dancing with The Stars audience members!!!)
There’s no need for cruelty when providing a negative evaluation. And a positive evaluation needs more than exuberant gushing to be helpful. Both these styles lend themselves to emotional exhibitions that lack real, critical content. They may be better for TV ratings, but I think they also diminish the art of criticism. They perpetuate a culture where people listen to those individuals who are shouting the loudest, not those who might have the best ideas or clearer insights. It’s true that sometimes a pithy piece of snark can be insightful or clever, but most TV judges are a far freaking cry from Oscar Wilde!
In Nina Garcia’s case, she had her chance at express her scathing criticism in this clip, but she was so hell-bent on being as devastating as possible in her delivery that she could not even accept a humble “thank you” from this PR designer.
I don’t know what was going through Chris’ mind during this evaluation, but I believe his reply was meant as a subdued form of polite acceptance for Nina’s criticism. Even though Nina gave him this elaborate negative comment, he still respects her enough as a professional to take what she is saying constructively (even though it was never offered in the spirit of edification).
Nina doesn’t like his graciousness! She goes out of her way to make sure he feels insulted: ”That’s not a compliment.”
Chris responds with a curt, clarifying reply:
"I didn’t take it as a compliment."
Now THAT is my favorite kind of smackdown. It’s understated, subtle, humble, and completely turns the tables on the person who is supposed to have all the power.
I don’t know about other viewers, but after this interaction I was left with the distinct impression that it was not Chris’ understanding of Nina’s criticism that was lacking, but instead it is Nina’s authority as a critic that suddenly became questionable (at least in this one exchange).
Work it, Chris!
#3257024 why questionableliterarymerit is awesome <3
(Source: , via dollsandcrafts)
A mother helicopter tends to her newborn.
I wish you’d do some research before just spouting out any old crap. If you took two seconds just to LOOK at the picture, you’d see that it’s not a mother and her newborn. You can tell from the size and position of the rotors that it’s actually a hunting male. Also it’s a commonly known fact that whilst all helicopters are born with red tails, this fades to white in males, by the time they’ve reached adulthood. In females, the red has changed to a deep brown.
So this isn’t a lovely picture of caring parenting - in fact, this young ‘copter’s mother is probably dead, herself. There would be no way she’d leave her baby by itself at such a young age. The poor thing likely died mere moments after this picture was taken.
Have some respect.
You ignorant fool.
The common Red Tailed Boeing you’re basing your analysis on is endemic to Saudi Arabia, which has no climate zones even remotely resembling that in the picture. Helicopters being short range vehicles, there’s no way a Red Tail could be present in the picture above.
What you’re seeing is the red tailed variety of the Arboreal Russian UTair, which you’d know if you so much as looked at the distinctive markings on the parent’s flank.
The photo is a mother tending to her newborn as I stated, and you Sir have defamed the endangered helicopter with your inept observations. People like you who think Helicopters are dangerous hunting animals are why these noble beasts have been scrapped to near extinction. Arguments like yours are used to support the helicopter “blading” industry, in which millions of helicopters every year are deprived of their rotor blades and left to die of oil loss or starvation.
Support your local anti-blading protest group, and don’t listen to people like metalheadadam, if that’s even your real tumblr url.
No,it is you who are the fool here. You say it’s an arboreal helicopter, but no Russian Utair has ever been spotted out in the open in a tarmac environment before, and I think if this was the first photograph showing one, there’d have been some fanfare about it in National Helo-graphic.
I believe that what we can see here is the Lesser-Spotted Longbow, which, as has been very well-documented, has adapted itself superbly to urban life, and has also been known to disguise itself as other types of helicopter, in order to better stalk its prey. If you look at the smugness of the nose, you’ll see I’m right. Yes, the UTair is a peaceful contraption, but the LSL is a rapacious fiend, and should be removed from the world’s airspace completely.
You’re ignoring the clear signs here but the more important issue is your sickening disregard and characterization of the LSL as a “rapacious fiend.”
The LSL is a critical part of the airspace ecosystem. If there were no LSLs, then Piasecki H-21s would quickly grow out of control and soon the air would be downright cluttered with them. Do you want to live in a world where Piasecki noise sounds through the night at deafening levels? Where they land on the streets as you drive and on schoolyards where your children play?
Lesser-Spotted Longbows may seem dangerous but the fact is they kill less than five people a year across the globe. Piaseckis kill 80! And they crap all over the windshields of all those unfortunate enough to drive beneath them. Even still, we should not cull Piaseckis as some suggest, their meat is inferior and no significant research is to be done on their flesh. You’re operating from an old world point of view here, one that says mankind has the right, nay the duty to hunt and tame helicopters.
But the truth is, helicopters are our neighbors on this planet and they have every bit as much a right to it as we do. Support prohibition of industrial helicopter use, police helicopters and circus helicopters. Don’t eat helicopter meat. And donate generously to PETH, People for the Ethical Treatment of Helicopters.
Listen, PETH claim to be in support of helicopter freedom, but if you look at the statistics, you’ll see that is, in fact, a gigantic lie. People brought 652 sick helicopters into PETH’s “Care Hangars” last year, where PETH claim to repair and repaint them, and find them new owners. Of those 652, PETH dismantled and recycled 635 of them within one day, without even trying to find new owners for them.
You say we should support the prohibition of circus and police helicopters, but without the industries that have grown up around the many useful ways helicopters benefit our society, there would be many more wild helicopters, like the Piaseckis, in our skies, or roosting on the roofs of our homes and schools.
But that’s getting off topic. The LSL is still a menace, and although it helps to control the Piasecki population, there are other, more efficient ways to do that, without relying on the crudeness of nature.
Opening up factories to make clothes from helo skins, for example. Faux-helo has been all the rage on the catwalks for the last three years, and the designers have stated that they’d “love to get [their] hands on the real thing”. Paul McTarnabag said that “without the limitations of artificial fibres, [he] could create the most wonderful coats you’d ever see”.
Let’s be honest, here. Yes, it may involve some violent, painful deaths for certain, more… annoying breeds, but helicopters are basically vermin. Let’s make use of them.
"The crudeness of nature"
You lost me there. Nature is a perfect system where helicopters are concerned. It’s only humanity that throws the system out of balance. Before we came along, helicopters existed in equilibrium.
As seen in the opening of Disney’s “The Concorde King,” there’s a circle of life. Concordes and SR-71s prey upon the big 747s and Airbuses. Those in turn eat the Cessnas and puddle-hoppers, which feed on smaller helicopters and gyrocopters. When the Concordes die, they become fossil fuels which become jet fuels and which fuel the gyrocopters.
But when mankind tinkers with the system, it all goes haywire. A few rivet coats and meals of spicy Apache or Black Hawk aren’t worth it. And that’s not to mention the cruelty of foods like Chinook Gras, in which the noble aircraft are force-fueled to the point of illness so their filters can be harvested. Humankind needs to get out of the chopper business for good and focus on renewable sources of 3D printed parts and vegan alternatives, like Balloons, Zeppelins and Blimps. Human stomachs aren’t meant for heavier-than-air travel, as turbulence can convince anyone. Only lighter than air craft are meant for our fragile systems.
This is all a moot point for me as I don’t fly at all. I prefer a more natural means of transport- The whip driven dog-sled.
I have no words.