Monthly Archives: September 2011





On January 12, 2010, one day after his 18th birthday, CAPA High School honors student Jordan Trent Miles was ambushed by three plain clothes Pittsburgh police officers, who failed to identify themselves and approached him aggressively. The officers did not say “Stop! Police!”, they jumped out of an unmarked vehicle, one of them yelling “Where’s your money? Where’s the drugs? Where’s the gun?” Miles, never before in trouble with the police and thinking he was being robbed, began to run, and slipped on the icy sidewalk. The officers overtook Miles and administered a brutal beating that left him unrecognizable, ripping dreadlocks out of his head, and continuing to beat him as he lay on the ground after their initial assault, stammering the Lord’s Prayer. There can be no explaining away or excusing what was done to Miles.

The police officers lied about what happened, claiming there was a bulge in his pocket they assumed was a gun but “turned out to be a Mountain Dew bottle”. No bottle was ever entered into evidence, and Jordan and his friends will tell you he doesn’t even drink the soda. The officers also attempted to claim a neighbor reported him as a prowler and attempted to bring assault charges against Miles, which were tossed out of court when the neighbor said she did no such thing. Despite all this, the City of Pittsburgh went on to reward these violent officers with a commendation and, during their suspension, paid them more than they earned while working. Meanwhile, the Pittsburgh DA has not brought charges and the Justice Department announced on May 4th, 2011 that it would not prosecute the three officers. The mayor and police chief announced on May 5th that the three officers would be returning to work.

“I feel that my son was racially profiled,” Terez Miles said. “It’s a rough neighborhood; it was after dark. … They assumed he was up to no good because he’s black. My son, he knows nothing about the streets at all. He’s had a very sheltered life, he’s very quiet, he doesn’t know police officers sit in cars and stalk people like that.”

this is exactly what i’m talking about.

look at the pathetic amount of notes on this. why can’t this get coverage? i don’t give a shit about another missing white girl.

Omg :-/

This… there are no words.

But there’s some good cops! Just a few bad eggs!

Do I really have to explain something we already all know is true?


Then allow me to say that we at FNB and #OWS refuse acknowledge anyone of you who were apart of that idiocy, as a member of this movement, if you attack anyone in any fashion. We stated from day one, that if you act in violence, you are not with us. That meant violence in any form, regardless if it was physical, mental, or indirect. We will not acknowledge anyone of you or allow you to claim affiliation with us.

Those who attack others do nothing but harm our solidarity. This is a serious movement, we have neither time nor patience for internet trolls or these childish games. So either be a part of the solution or step aside.


No wonder most protests in the US couldn’t fight their way out of a paper bag, when people with egos the size of yours decide to disown anybody who so much as slightly has fighting talk.

Here’s a tip: acting like a four year old goody-two-shoes about the reality and necessity of force to achieve political ends, especially from the disenfranchised proletariat, is a pretty guaranteed way to split a movement and achieve a total of jack shit.  You didn’t see MLK Jr disowning Malcolm X.

You think you have the solution?  This determined addiction to non-violence and a complete acquiescence to the demands of the bourgeois state from wishy washy wanker liberals like yourself is just a permanent part of the problem.  When you guys realise you have to be willing and able to fight for what you believe in, then you’ll start to achieve things.

Go fucking apeshit.

I don’t fully understand the whole Occupy Wallstreet protest



I hate Wall Street as much as the next person.  But the problem with Wall Street is corporatism.  Wall Street isn’t so much to blame as government interference and government intervention is to be blamed.

The government continuously bails out Wall Street by printing more money and giving it to them instead of just letting them fail.  Of course they are going to keep on doing the same things to make themselves richer and richer.  There is never any consequences to their actions. 

If the protesters were genuine about fixing the problem they would be protesting Washington.  Telling DC to stop their corporatism and do let the free market sort itself out with out government interference. 

They should be calling to End the Fed.

I want to see an Occupy Washington DC. 

^ Exactly what I’ve been thinking. Thank you for putting into words.

You know what I heard?  Capitalist systems only exploit you because governments tell you to, not because the bourgeois ideological hegemony revolves around the accumulation of greed and businesses are the means through which wealth is accumulated and the mass of workers are exploited.


Today might be the day that I give up,
Decide that I can’t take it anymore
Today might be the day that I walk free,
Dust off  my boots and sashay out the door

Cuz I’m tired of leaving
Tired of believing
That anybody’s anybody’s friend
I know a lot about being lonely
Being broke, and being homely
Empty houses
And always empty beds

Goodbye’s just a word for those with conscience
I’ve never been in the right place to ask
Some of us are always learning lessons
And some of us just learned to turn our backs 

Cuz I’m tired of leaving
Tired of believing
That anybody’s anybody’s friend
I know a lot about being lonely
Being broke, and being homely
Empty houses
And always empty beds

I’m tired of stealing
Tired of feeling
Like everybody’s someone elses’ friend
I know a lot about getting older
Getting bitter, getting colder
And marching my feet right  to the grave
Yeah, I’m marching my feet right to the grave


“[O]ne day… you will understand that there exist men and women such as us, without a face and without a name, who have abandoned everything, even their own lives, so that other children… can get up everyday without having to remain silent and hiding their faces to confront the world. When that day comes, we, those with no face and no name, will finally be able to rest under the earth. Dead, of course, but happy…”  (Subcomandante Marcos, EZLN)



Events of the past week have made it easy to see who is considered a criminal under the for-profit system known as capitalism.

Today, where are the architects of the war in Iraq, who lied about weapons of mass destruction and tortured people at Abu Ghraib? On book tours, or enjoying retirement.

What happened to the Wall Street gamblers who caused the foreclosure epidemic, forcing people out of their homes and crashing the economy? The government bailed them out — of course.

Yet, how were activists with the Occupy Wall Street movement treated as they marched on Sept. 24 through New York streets to protest war, unemployment and racism? They were tackled, punched, choked, tear-gassed, pepper-sprayed and arrested by the police.

Protesters expose role of the state





Finally some mainstream coverage (and not some hidden blog posts NPR) of the police brutality at the Occupy Wall Street protests.


this needs to be seen. america, it’s time to be heard.

This needs to be stopped. He said it’ll be forgotten unless someone is killed or seriously injured. Why must we wait until then? For fuck’s sake, if a police officer treated me in that way, if they forcefully subdued me on the ground as they did in this video – I would no doubt lose my leg, my ability to walk, or incur another pelvic fracture. Literally, that much unnecessary force can harm a healthy, fully-able individual, but god forbid they did that to a person with disabilities. Unfortunately, that’ll probably have to happen several times over before anything gets done/said about it in this pathetic country.

Normally I don’t reblog stuff like this, but…yeah =

And this was actually aired? Wow. The pressure is clearly increasing. Assuming it can be maintained, the harder they try to suppress it, the harder it’ll blow up in their faces.




“Police forces with some of the worst records of targeting black people have decided to stop recording the ethnicity of the people their officers stop and ask to account for their movements, the Guardian has learned.”

Visit for more information on Racism (White Supremacy).

Colour-blindness: a way to sound like you’re forward thinking and attempting to break down the barriers of racism.  What really happens is you simply become ignorant of the racial profiling, not that racial profiling stops.

Still.. this is a pretty nice step in the right direction.

No, this is entirely the opposite.  This is a step towards stop and ask to account no longer being demonstrably and statistically racist, instead just being racist without any accountability for the action taken.  That’s a step in the wrong direction, it’s a step to making the police forces less accountable for their actions.  It’s a step towards racism in the UK having even less awareness and being even less spoken about.


“Police forces with some of the worst records of targeting black people have decided to stop recording the ethnicity of the people their officers stop and ask to account for their movements, the Guardian has learned.”

Visit for more information on Racism (White Supremacy).

Colour-blindness: a way to sound like you’re forward thinking and attempting to break down the barriers of racism.  What really happens is you simply become ignorant of the racial profiling, not that racial profiling stops.

On the information sheet in a New York hotel, I recently read: ‘Dear guest! To guarantee that you will fully enjoy your stay with us, this hotel is totally smoke-free. For any infringement of this regulation, you will be charged $200.’ The beauty of this formulation, taken literally, is that you are to be punished for refusing to fully enjoy your stay.

Slavoj Žižek – First as Tragedy, Then as Farce (via cracked-kettle)




“Cultural appropriation is the adoption or theft of icons, rituals, aesthetic standards, and behavior from one culture or subculture by another. It generally is applied when the subject culture is a minority culture or somehow subordinate in social, political, economic, or military status to the appropriating culture. This “appropriation” often occurs without any real understanding of why the original culture took part in these activities or the meanings behind these activities, often converting culturally significant artifacts, practices, and beliefs into “meaningless” pop-culture or giving them a significance that is completely different/less nuanced than they would originally have had.”

Click through to read the whole thing!

hell yeah! I’m so glad you made this. that workshop yesterday was awesome!

Here’s an awesome zine to download and read. For anyone who needs an explanation why dressing up like Native Americans or explanations of why it’s oppressive to take things from other cultures w/o permission, this is a read for you.



Susan Sarandon and Michael Moore visited Liberty Plaza yesterday and spoke with occupiers there.

I don’t give a shit about celebrities (generally), but I guess it’s cool that they’re coming down and supporting. However, I wonder how far they will go to support the people. Are they willing to give up their positions of power that they’ve obtained by becoming/being upper class? Are they ACTUALLY willing to listen to people who are not upper class and not be on a high-horse because they’re celebrities?

When they’re willing to give up what they have and become one of the People and do what it takes to attempt to make things right rather than just showing up to gain “buzz” around them and their persona, then I’ll be completely down with them too. 

I don’t really know much about what Susan Sarandon gets up to, but Michael Moore is all buzz with very little real substance.  When I’d heard he’d turned up at Occupy Wall Street my response was very marginally departed from abject apathy.

The question should very rarely be “as a marxist should I be doing this job?” but instead almost always “as a marxist what can I make this job do?

(via theguywhoinventedfire)

Hahaha, this has gone from being a person’s review of a debate they went to with a general question, to a response by me, to a quote of me from that response, to the same quote but now misattributed!?

(via la-vie-est-politiques)

you really trying to copyright your single line quote? just saying.

(via materialismo-dialectico)

Copyright it?  No, but it’s generally good courtesy to not get things confused with who said what.  Both to respect the person who originally said it, and people who subsequently see it and want to know who said it.  In this instance it’s not something I particularly care about and not that serious a matter, but on my degree if I try and pass off another person’s words as my own it becomes plagiarism and a very serious matter.

However I was simply commenting on how I found the evolution of those post to be interesting.  Rather than saying “y don’t u respect meeee!?”


People of Europe: Rise Up

Below is a collection of articles and blog posts from feminists who are critical of the current SlutWalk phenomenon from various points of view.



I couldn’t help but cringe, once again, when Jarvis brought up the ‘personal empowerment’ argument as defense of the use and attempted reclaimation of the word, ‘slut’, saying that: “For me to call myself whatever language I want, if I find it empowering, for somebody else to say that that’s not a right choice, when this is my choice. I find that problematic.” I believe that, in this short quip, Jarvis sums up much of that what has made me uncomfortable with Slutwalk from the get-go. ‘If I feel personally empowered by my personal choice, then no one else should have anything to say on the matter. It affects only me,’ is not a strong argument for feminism.

SLUTWALK IS NOT SEXUAL LIBERATION by Gail Dines and Wendy J Murphy at

While the organisers of the SlutWalk might think that proudly calling themselves “sluts” is a way to empower women, they are in fact making life harder for girls who are trying to navigate their way through the tricky terrain of adolescence.

IN DEFENSE OF PRUDES by Tracy Clark-Flory at

But I also have zero interest in participating. I’m tired of the polarizing rhetoric: Are you a prude or a slut? You know what, I’m neither. I understand the concept of re-appropriating slurs, and that many people find it freeing and empowering. Also, political discourse doesn’t exactly lend itself to nuance and subtlety, so shocking slogans can be tremendously effective. On a personal level, though, this kind of reactive language can feel awfully limiting. I’m not a political caricature, and neither is my sexuality.


If SlutWalk truly wanted to bring attention to the systematic ways in which women are harmed by regressive and misogynistic thinking, they could have done the heavy lifting of reaching out and supporting black, poor and transgender women in New Orleans, for whom the word “slut” carries a criminal sex offender record. Instead, they force us to keep bearing the multiple burdens that come with not only being a woman, but also being a working class woman of color.

Had SlutWalk organizers considered New Orleans – or perhaps any city in the Northern Hemisphere where undocumented women possess a very real fear that a call to the police for any reason will result in her own deportation – they might have thought twice about sinking so much time and energy into their event. They might have had to listen to women of color, and actually involve them in visioning for what an equitable future would look like. Instead, they decided to celebrate a term not everyone is comfortable even saying. While I will not pretend to speak for women targeted in New Orleans, I doubt that the mere idea of naming themselves “sluts” would be welcomed. SlutWalk has proven itself to be a maddening distraction from the systematic and interpersonal violence that women of color face daily.

WHAT OFFENDS ME ABOUT SLUTWALK and MORE THOUGHTS ON SLUTWALK by Ada Farrugia Conroy at flash heart for the broken arted

slutwalk is a post feminist event. it is an event that assumes there is no patriarchal context that slutwalk exists within. the word ‘slut’ is hateful and violent and has never belonged to us. ‘slut’ belongs to rapists and misogynists and pornographers. there is no subversion in this. this action is not a threat.


I feel SlutWalk seems to perpetuate the thinking that rape is an outlet to channel sexual frustration (by such actions as 2 protestors on the Toronto march shout ‘keep it in your pants, fool!’). Rape is a tool to bully, violate, oppress and inflict severe physical and mental agony on their victims. It is a deeply rooted hatred, and not merely a man who can’t help himself when he sees a short skirt.

THE ULTIMATE SLUT by rmott62 at

If you want to know what it to be a Slut, a Slut without freedom of movement, freedom of speech, freedom of safety – then place yourself inside the skin of the Ultimate Slut. Women and girls inside most aspects of the sex trade are raped, battered and murdered whatever they wear, whatever environment they are placed in. What does any Slutwalk do that makes any practical difference to that?

SLUTWALK LONDON by Laura Woodhouse at The F Word Blog

However, unless I was in Toronto where the march was a direct response to a comment about “sluts”, I personally wouldn’t feel comfortable walking under the label. I have no interest whatsoever in reclaiming or reinventing a word that is used to attack and label women, let alone use it in reference to myself.


Lastly, I have found some of the SlutWalk approach most problematic related to an ahistorical understanding of women’s organizing. Ironically, or maybe not so much, SlutWalk advocacy has come at the expense of the feminist movement, demonizing a struggle that has many hard-won victories to its credit.

 TORONTO ACTIVISTS TAKE BACK THE SLUT by Jill at I Blame the Patriarchy

It turns out that ’slut’ isn’t just an adjective. It’s a character. A fictional character, beloved of patriarchal culture, who encrapulates eons of virgin/whore-fueled misogyny, and was invented to absolve violent dudes of rape behavior. Sluts are women deemed by the angry dude-mob to have so ineptly handled the duties of femininity that they must be shamed, mocked, and of course, fucked in perpetuity.


When I arrived on the lawn of Queen’s Park for the march, it took about 20 seconds for a sense of discomfort to set in. I looked around and felt profoundly out of place because I saw so few people of colour. To be clear, I attend rallies, protests, marches, lectures, and conferences all the time in Toronto and I can’t think of ever having had this feeling before.

 SLUT WALK: OFF MY CHEST by Anonymous at Musings and Moans

I am so tired of how little consideration is given to which peoples and which bodies are able to be publicly visible during protests and which are not. There was no talk about how our bodies as women of colour are hyper-sexualized and how that links to gendered, racialized sexual violence! There was no talk about why men of colour (who let’s be honest are over represented in mainstream media as perpetrators of violence) would not show up to a march of this sort, even if their politics were deeply rooted in ending violence against women!


In reality, capitalism mediates the feminist façade of choice by creating an entire industry that commodifies women’s sexuality and links a woman’s self-esteem and self-worth to fashion and beauty. Slutwalk itself consistently refuses any connection to feminism and fixates solely around liberal questions of individual choice — the palatable “I can wear what I want” feminism that is intentionally devoid of an analysis of power dynamics.

The question should very rarely be “as a marxist should I be doing this job?” but instead almost always “as a marxist what can I make this job do?

(via theguywhoinventedfire)

Hahaha, this has gone from being a person’s review of a debate they went to with a general question, to a response by me, to a quote of me from that response, to the same quote but now misattributed!?

Anti-abortion activists are fond of saying “The only difference between a fetus and a baby is a trip down the birth canal.” This flippant phrase may make for catchy rhetoric, but it doesn’t belie the fact that indeed “location” makes all the difference in the world.

It’s actually quite simple. You cannot have two entities with equal rights occupying one body. One will automatically have veto power over the other – and thus they don’t have equal rights. In the case of a pregnant woman, giving a “right to life” to the potential person in the womb automatically cancels out the mother’s right to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.

After birth, on the other hand, the potential person no longer occupies the same body as the mother, and thus, giving it full human rights causes no interference with another’s right to control her body. […] After birth its independence begs that it be protected as if it were equal to a fully-conscience human being. But before birth its lack of personhood and its threat to the women in which it resides makes abortion a completely logical and moral choice.

Why Abortion Is Moral, a good explanation of why common ethical arguments against abortion are horseshit

To summarize, if (1) you think zygotes/embryos/fetuses are people and that their rights to gestate trump the self-ownership rights of their mothers, then (2) you must concede that NO ONE has absolute rights to dispose of his/her own body as s/he wishes. That is, if you agree with the first point, then you’d also have to agree that someone without kidneys should be allowed to surgically attach themselves to someone with kidneys in order to live.

But if you refuse to make this second step, then you’re stating that only pregnant women should be denied full control over their own bodies. Which means you are basically suggesting that pregnant women have no more rights than incubators or brood mares—hardly an acceptable moral or ethical position.

(via downlo)

Good lawd, I’m gonna carve this in fucking marble.

(via tenderstatue)

I’ve noticed that its usually only people that have never been depressed or suicidal who get butthurt about suicide/death jokes


this is so true.

(via akagoldfish)

I dunno, I get a little upset when someone jokes about another human being ending their own life. Maybe I’m just a sensitive little butthurt girl though because I think that suicide is kind of serious. And yeah, I am depressed and have been suicidal. 

(via nenfea)

Or people who have recently had friends that committed suicide, or also people who are/have been suicidal that find jokes that appropriate suicide to be belittling and objectifying their emotions.  And comments such as spacebaw’s tend to just be a continuation of that rejection of the reality that is suicide rather than anything productive.

To put it another way: jokes about suicide are childish and damaging.  Don’t make them.  Don’t pretend you’re cool or breaking down barriers for making them, you’re just looking like an asshole.  If you make a quip and someone calls you on it, apologise and move on.  Don’t pretend your position is defendable.