5218 stories
·
14 followers

The misogyny is coming from inside the newsroom!

1 Share

I think the nature of the reporting on the two candidates screamed for itself, and yes that was incredibly frustrating. As were things like the pundits’ post-election head scratching about how tRump might have won. Or – God help us – the New York Fucking Times smugly informing us that as Responsible Citizens we had to give it money so that it could Expose the Truth about tRump.

What’s frustrating now is fact that some members of The Exalted Brotherhood of Naysayers, Tuttutists & Chillax Ladyers wouldn’t admit the misogyny was coming from inside the newsroom – much less that it would influence the election results – until there were multiple allegations of someone behaving like the priapismic boss in a Benny Hill sketch.

Making Corroborated Reports of the Display of Pseudo-sexual Aggression Towards Women Against Multiple Men the bar for what constitutes proof of rampant misogyny in an industry sets the bar conveniently high for people who want to pay lip service to the idea that Misogyny is Bad, and then go back to ignoring it. Or engaging in it.

FacebookTwitterGoogle+Share

Read the whole story
skittone
23 hours ago
reply
Share this story
Delete

British water utilities admit they use divining rods to find leaks

2 Comments

Ten out of 12 water utilities in the United Kingdom admitted that their technicians use divining rods to find underground leaks or water pipes, according to an investigation by science blogger Sally Le Page.

Dowsing is a centuries-old technique for locating underground water. Someone searching for water holds two parallel sticks—or sometimes a single Y-shaped stick—called divining rods while walking in an area where there might be water under the surface. The branches supposedly twitch when they're over a water source.

Needless to say, there's zero scientific evidence that this technique actually works better than random chance. But Le Page got a bunch of UK water companies to admit that their technicians still employ the superstitious practice.

Le Page heard from her parents, who live in Stratford-upon-Avon, that a technician from their water company, Severn Trent Water, had been using a divining rod to decide whether to do work in the area. Curious, Le Page tweeted at Severn Trent's Twitter account to see if the utility really had technicians using the age-old technique.

"We do have some techs that still have them in the van and use them if they need to," the company tweeted. "However, we prefer to use listening sticks and other methods."

Curious, Le Page sent inquiries to 11 other major water companies in the UK. Amazingly, 10 of them confirmed that their technicians sometimes use divining rods to detect leaks, while just two—Northern Ireland Water and Wessex Water—said they never use the technique.

This didn't sit well with Le Page.

"You could just laugh this off. Isn't it a bit silly that big companies are still using magic to do their jobs," she wrote. "Except if they get it wrong, that could mean the difference between an entire town having safe drinking water or not."

Read the whole story
skittone
1 day ago
reply
Wow.
Share this story
Delete
1 public comment
satadru
2 days ago
reply
WTF UK?
New York, NY

Which beer would you like? IPA, please wɪtʃ biə wʊd juː...

2 Comments and 4 Shares


Which beer would you like? 
IPA, please 
wɪtʃ biə wʊd juː lʌɪk? 

(source)

Read the whole story
skittone
3 days ago
reply
Ha.
Share this story
Delete
1 public comment
jepler
2 days ago
reply
if it doesn't work at first, give it a minute to sink in
Earth, Sol system, Western spiral arm

What “Soft on Crime” Means (Read: Vote for the Child Molester)

1 Share

Donald Trump wants Alabamians to vote for Roy Moore, child molester. Of Doug Jones, Roy Moore’s Democratic opponent, who as of this writing has not been accused of molesting children, Donald Trump can offer this: “I can tell you one thing for sure we don’t need a liberal person, a Democrat, Jones, in that seat.” Among other things, Trump, who self-describes as among America’s most presidenty presidents and who also self-describes as a sexual assaulter, tells us that he’s “looked at (Jones’) record” and finds that Jones is “terrible on crime.”

I know very little about Doug Jones’ policies. What I do know about Doug Jones is that he went out of his way to prosecute racists who murdered four teenage black girls killed in the infamous 16th Street Baptist Church Bombing in Birmingham in 1963.

In an of itself, this does not make Jones qualified to be the next person to represent Alabama in the United States Senate — although it certainly outpaces the qualifications of many sitting U.S. Senators. (See, among many, Johnson, Ron.)

But even for a demonstrably racist person like Donald Trump, the utter mendacity involved in calling Doug Jones “soft on crime” and then pivoting toward tacit endorsement of a child molester is — well, I guess it’s Trumpian. He is who he is — an inveterate opportunist and spineless racist who lacks any semblance of integrity and empathy. And yet the continual exploding of lines that most decent people wouldn’t think to cross sometimes, even now, manages to take someone as jaded as I am aback.

 

FacebookTwitterGoogle+Share

Read the whole story
skittone
3 days ago
reply
Share this story
Delete

🚨 Time to Make Noise to Save Net Neutrality

1 Share
For nearly the entire year, I've been warning about the urgent threat to Net Neutrality posed by Donald Trump's appointed FCC chair, Ajit Pai, who routinely makes the mendacious argument that Net Neutrality is "bad for business" to justify eroding equal internet access.

The moment his threat could become reality has arrived.

Cecelia King at the New York Times: FCC Is Said to Plan Repeal of Net Neutrality Rules.
The Federal Communications Commission is preparing a full repeal of net neutrality rules that require broadband providers to give consumers equal access to all content on the internet, putting more power in the hands of those companies to dictate people's online experiences.

Ajit Pai, the chairman of the F.C.C., plans to reveal a sweeping proposal to scrap the net neutrality rules on Tuesday, according to two people familiar with the plan, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the details are not public. The rules, created during the Obama administration, prohibit broadband providers from blocking, slowing down, or charging more for the delivery of certain internet content. The proposal will be presented in a December meeting of F.C.C. commissioners and is expected to pass in a 3-to-2 vote along party lines.

A rollback of net neutrality regulations would represent a significant victory for broadband and telecom companies like AT&T and Comcast and would amount to a strike against consumers. When the rules were passed in 2015, they underlined the importance of high-speed internet to the lives of Americans and the need to more strongly regulate the communications service like a utility, as essential as electricity and the telephone.

But under a repeal, companies like AT&T and Comcast may be able to charge people higher fees to access certain websites and online services. The companies may also be able to prioritize their own services while disadvantaging websites run by rivals.

...In addition, Mr. Pai plans to reverse a decision from the Obama administration that declared broadband be treated like a utility, the people said. That classification had opened the door to many more regulations for broadband providers.
This is just dreadful news.

As I have previously noted: "Net Neutrality is an access issue. Who has access to information, and what kinds of information. One of the most dangerous potential outcomes of subverting Net Neutrality is that media with the broadest potential audience — i.e. kyriarchy-upholding garbage, which makes money hand over fist — will be the most cheaply accessible, while specialized media — i.e. kyriarchy-challenging material, which struggles to turn a profit — will be the most expensive, since media producers invested in social justice don't tend to get rich from their work."

And as Shaker Ignatius Cheezburger noted in the comments of that piece: "The other concern being that if the ISP happens to endorse or support certain political or cultural views as a matter of corporate policy, that ISP can now selectively filter certain content for priority delivery that is in keeping with their views and other content that runs contrary to those views for lower priority delivery, or no delivery at all. For example, NARAL or Planned Parenthood suddenly finds its alerts and updates getting bounced from all of its members within the ClearChannel family. Not good. Not good at all."

Consider the many ways that people access political and/or organizing information: Websites, apps, social media, streaming services. All of these could be subject to reduced accessibility if Net Neutrality is rescinded.

That also means, if you haven't figured it out yet, that there could be major disruptions to a community like this one. My ability to continue to deliver information to my readership could be easily throttled by any ISP who decides they don't like what I'm saying. Your ability to continue to access that information could be easily thwarted by providers charging you exorbitant access fees.

Progressive online writers and activists could find ourselves with no way to make a living anymore.

That's not a bug; that's a feature.


MAKE SOME NOISE. This is our last chance.
Read the whole story
skittone
3 days ago
reply
Share this story
Delete

What We Mean by "Believe Women"

1 Share
"Believe Women" does not mean, and has never meant, that men accused of sexual harassment and/or assault should meet legal or professional consequences without investigation or adequate process.

People are having the same fucking problem with Believe Women as they do with Black Lives Matter. They are rejecting the obvious rhetorical structure that it's a plea for something as much as an argument for what is right and true (but is nevertheless not currently the prevailing view).

The reason we say Believe Women is because women are disbelieved as a default.

It's about changing our perspective; about not reflexively treating victims of sex crimes differently from victims of all other crimes, in a way that significantly disadvantages them and meaningfully advantages sexual predators.

It's about a critical realignment that puts the focus on justice for survivors rather than abetting abusers.

Victims, especially women, are regarded as liars by default. That must change.

That's what Believe Women is all about.
Read the whole story
skittone
3 days ago
reply
Share this story
Delete
Next Page of Stories