Best products from r/TumblrInAction

We found 69 comments on r/TumblrInAction discussing the most recommended products. We ran sentiment analysis on each of these comments to determine how redditors feel about different products. We found 520 products and ranked them based on the amount of positive reactions they received. Here are the top 20.

Top comments mentioning products on r/TumblrInAction:

u/sleepykity · 2 pointsr/TumblrInAction

Indeed it is feasible! I must warn you, this will be a wall of text with no TL;DR version:( Also, I am not a philosophy major or something, I am however active in the humanities, let's put it this way without divulging too much.

So, the very first thing I personally think is of the utmost importance is this: in order to understand a part of the ancient greek culture (which would, by default, be your main focus, without it being the sole one), one has to get a feel (the feels!) of the culture on the whole. I say this, because ancient Greece is a sum of an enormous array of "separate" parts that together constitute the whole. Philosophy was of equal importance to mathematics, in fact they were taught as one body of knowledge, hence you have eg. Aristotle offering philosophical, as well as scientific observations and treatises. This extended also to everyday life, as an example: Sophocles was both a playwright (obviously), but he was also the treasurer of the erection of the Parthenon (ie. he budgeted Phidias and checked all others!), because of the athenian notion of civic virtue, which, in turn, reflected this "synthetic" culture.

The next point, and for me, a crucial one: approach this with earnestness, but also with joy and expect to be seduced and amazed. I mean this, when I say it is crucial, as personal as it may sound. The Greeks loved beauty and light and life. Their biggest virtues were kleos and schole. Kleos could be translated as glory and schole was their much loved and revered activity of having the time and freedom to take long strolls in beautiful landscapes and just absorb and observe and discuss with each other. This was a very serious and important, as it was pleasant, activity for them.

Those two points briefly discussed, here are some titles. I would recommend a wonderful book by W.K.C. Guthrie, called "The Sophists". It may seem that it is limited to well..the Sophists, however in his introduction he outlines the main philosophical schools that preceded the Sophists (ie. Pre-Socratic, Socrates/Plato etc), as well as describing the larger cultural frame that gave birth to them (s. also my previous points). The Sophists themselves are of great importance, they will give you all those persuasion tools, the pros and cons to use them etc etc etc that were talked about in the previous posts (that is, here on Reddit).

I think it will give you a very good start in understanding both the culture, as well as the individual schools, from which point onwards you could even start to read them one after the other. I would recommend to read primary sources (ie the original texts in translation, for that I can point you the MIT Classics Archive and the Fordham Internet History Sourcebooks, which have all the primary texts in good translations as well as some brief articles and intros, mainly Fordham).

Should you be interested in the ancient Greek civilization as a whole, a wonderful, albeit big book, is Andre Bonnard's "Greek Civilization". For the arguments against Greeks (in terms of racism, slavery, misogyny etc): Bernard Knox "The Oldest Dead White European Males" (which is also extremely pertinent to this sub-reddit, you will see why, if you read it).

So, this would be a rudimentary but good start a think. All books proposed are scholarly, but, trust me, they are a joy to read! And anything you want, tell me. I hope I was able to give you something of value:)

EDIT for hyperlinks (first time ever, so I hope it works!) and typos etc.


u/zzzyxas · 2 pointsr/TumblrInAction

Empathy plus economics.

I'm nonreligious, but my parents required me to attend church every Sunday growing up, regardless of my belief. I suspect that the pastor may have not believed entirely, because regardless of how much I believed in God, I could always take something away from his sermons. This (plus, perhaps, natural disposition) left me extremely empathetic to the plight of the less fortunate. I'm not sure how I'd be if I'd been brought up differently, but I certainly remember feeling strong emotions about reducing suffering in that Sanctuary.

What happens when you reduce the price of something? Well, it depends. There's a whole song and dance involving indifference curves and maximizing a utility function, but coming at it intuitively: it might be such a better bargain that I spend more money on it. Or, I might buy more of it in total, but since the price is reduced, this means I'm spending less money on it. Or, it might be a Giffen good, meaning that I buy less of it, since I can now afford to buy other things that I want more. Because of my background, my reaction to finding out there's incredibly effective charities with funding gaps means I have the first reaction.

I should probably also mention [flow](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flow_(psychology), since Csikszentmihalyi's book has lead me to believe that maximizing happiness tends to be very inexpensive. Biggest example: I don't own a car because I prefer biking to driving. The biggest difference between what I do and frugality is that my not spending money is a result of happiness-maximizing, which means it has exceptions. In particular, I play a classical instrument which costs about as much as a used car, if I performed more, it'd cost as much as a new car. But, beyond that, I spend almost nothing because doing things that cost money incurs a utility penalty, since I tend to find them less fun than freer stuff.

Oh, and the 10% comes from this blog post. When I reach extremely high levels of financial security, that number will likely increase to 50%, because of how charitable deductions work in my country.

tl;dr: after seeing how much good the best charities could do for so little, my natural reaction was to throw large amounts of money at them. As a bonus, it's literally impossible to make me feel guilty for not giving money to anything else or not being politically active.

u/Adwinistrator · 107 pointsr/TumblrInAction

I wonder what they think about pin-up art and "pin-up culture" in general. I realize this shirt is not exactly related to that, it's more of the 80's sci-fi metal scene, but the woman who made this seems to present that pin-up culture. Is that artwork misogynistic? Is it only for women to enjoy and use? Can a man have a pin-up tattoo, or is that supporting oppression?

I get that there's a point to being PC in the workplace, but I feel this has more to do with [ESA's] culture of allowing people to show their creativity and uniqueness in these mission launches and press conferences. Hell, [NASA] clearly had a massive PR boost to the public because of a guy's funky hairstyle! It's [the space agency's] job to set the tone, they can have it be like the old days, everyone in shirts and slacks, ties and horn-rimmed glasses (oh wait, those people were probably more sexist than the guy with the shirt).

In reality, if the goal of these social justice advocates is to empower and promote women in the sciences, they need to be focusing on the women who played an important role in this mission. I had to learn via /u/maxgarzo that one of the lead scientists on this mission was Kathrin Altwegg, and that instead of focusing on her achievements, they choose to just focus on a shirt as the reason women aren't in STEM...

From /u/maxgarzo's comment:

> Altewegg also has 23 publications to her name relevant to the Rosetta missions, in case you were curious. Why isn't anyone talking about these achievements? Why is it all about what Matt Taylor wore? Why isn't there a single blogger giving these women the credit they deserve?

> We now know what a comet SMELLS like thanks to this woman...

> She's written a fucking BOOK on the birth of comets.

> How does Kathrin Altwegg have 23 publications and two books to her name if sexist shirts keep women from entering tech????? Because it's easier to say men are keeping women out of tech than it is to give praise to the women already in tech. That's how. I'm sorry Kathrin. I'm sorry that instead of people looking to you and saying "You are a credit to the scientific community" they're effectively saying "You don't count because shirt".

*edited my point to reflect the different space agencies, and not just NASA. as /u/maxgarzo pointed out, this is a different culture than USA/NASA, which not many people (myself included) seem to realize.

PS: Maybe the perfect argument against this outrage is to use their own cultural relativism theories (it's not bad that they're OK with this, you cannot judge another culture you aren't part of).

u/regeya · 7 pointsr/TumblrInAction

EDIT: After a bit of digging, here's a link to an article they should have linked to. Choice pullquotes from Pollan:

> “[The appreciation of cooking was] a bit of wisdom that some American feminists thoughtlessly trampled in their rush to get women out of the kitchen.”

> Yet there he is again, in the New York Times Magazine, dismissing “The Feminine Mystique” as “the book that taught millions of American women to regard housework, cooking included, as drudgery, indeed as a form of oppression.” In the same magazine story, Pollan scolds that “American women now allow corporations to cook for them” and rues the fact that women have lost the “moral obligation to cook” they felt during his 1960s childhood.

I don't know. I know he's getting lots of hate because he dared to speak out against feminism...yet I know people my age where the woman of the household just flat out refuses to do housework. Her turn to cook? It better be in a can, or there better be some cash for going to a restaurant. She not only won't cook, she can't cook, and won't learn anything about it, and God help you if you'd like for her to wash your clothes while she does hers. And sometimes we're talking about married couples.

Yes, I also know guys my age who just flat out demand that she do all the housework...I'm sure that works out great for them.

EDIT: A couple of choice edits from another graf:

> When much-lauded food writer Michael Ruhlman writes, “I know for a fact [emphasis added] that spending at least a few days a week preparing food with other people around, enjoying it together, is one of the best possible things in life to do, period. It’s part of what makes us human [emphasis added]. It makes us happy in ways that are deep and good for us,” he’s writing from the point of view of a food writer, someone who enjoys cooking and has freely chosen it as his vocation. That’s a privileged position, and a frankly absurd one. To borrow Ruhlman’s wording, I know for a fact that plenty of people don’t like to cook and it’s not because they haven’t been properly educated or had the “revelatory” experience of eating an exquisitely ripe peach or a simple-yet-perfect slice of sole meunière. I know for a fact that plenty of people aren’t even that interested in the experience of eating, and I bet you do too: the absentminded friend who has to be reminded to bolt down a granola bar before heading to her after-work Italian class; the picky-eater sibling who, though grown, still happily subsists on spaghetti and bananas and diced red peppers. The term “foodie” was originally invented to describe people who really enjoy eating and cooking, which suggests that others do not. Yet today everyone is meant to have a deep and abiding appreciation for and fascination with pure, wholesome, delicious, seasonal, regional food. The expectation that cooking should be fulfilling for everyone is insidious, especially for women. I happen to adore cooking and eating, and nothing is more fun for me than sharing a home-cooked bowl of pasta puttanesca and a loaf of crusty bread with friends. Yet, I know for a fact that others would much rather go kayaking or read magazines or write poems or play World of Warcraft or teach their dog sign language. And, unlike Ruhlman, I don’t suspect them of being less than human.

Because having the leisure time to go kayaking or teaching your dog sign language (seriously???!?) totally aren't privileged activities. And expecting people to enjoy cooking is insidious? Really? I'm thinking that when he said that, he may have been speaking, or at least thinking, about this book.

EDIT3: Here's a pullquote from an article entitled, "Michael Pollan Says Men Need to Get Back Into the Kitchen, Stat":

> "If we're going to rebuild a culture of cooking," Pollan says, "it can't mean returning women to the kitchen. We all need to go back to the kitchen." He continues:

> "First, we need to bring back home ec, but a gender-neutral home ec. We need public health ad campaigns promoting home cooking as the single best thing you can do for your family's health and well-being."

I'm guessing the feminist blogs just overlooked that one.

u/SoulsIgnite · 6 pointsr/TumblrInAction

Okey, I'm actually very much a DC fan these days but I'll try to recommend some Marvel stuff.

>Spider-Man

This is a pretty decent Spider-Man guide that details some different starting points.. I'd also recommend The Superior Foes of Spider-Man which followed some of his villains and was incredible well-received in most circles.

>X-Men

All the current titles suck imo and they definitely don't make sense on their own so don't start with those unless you're feeling brave.

I'm personally a fan of the Wolverine and the X-Men comic from a few years ago, but it doesn't usually follow the main X-Men and isn't everyone's cup of tea, so you might not want to start there.

You could however start with Astonishing X-Men, a comic that does follow the more iconic members of the team and that's still pretty modern and fun to read.

>Avengers

Bendis' Avengers and/or New Avengers runs are decent starting points if you want to get to know the team a little. Modern stuff, not that hard to get into as far as I know. A lot of older Avengers comics aren't very good since they were kind of the B-team for a long time.

>Others

I'm a huge fan of Runaways, which follows a bunch of kids who discover that their parents are supervillains and decide that they need to do something about that. It's very self-contained compared to most comics which makes it easier to get into, and their live action series is debuting on Hulu this winter.

Mark Waid's Daredevil is also a fun/interesting read. It might be a little confusing at first but it doesn't require that much knowledge about stuff and it uses the medium incredible well.

Also, you might want to Google "read comics online" and look into that.

u/ItsJustASnip · 7 pointsr/TumblrInAction

Note: I am against ALL genital mutilation of females, males and intersex. Please don't interpret this post as supporting any of these crimes. Although I am stating medical and scientific research facts - it's called irony and sarcasm

Genital Autonomy for all - Intersex, Male & Female


> female circumcision has no medical benefits whatsoever
Not true:

Like male circumcision, there are plenty of peer reviewed studies that show female circumcision is not a barrier to sexual orgasm and enjoyment. Some studies show that orgasm and enjoyment are reduced; and some show no effect.

You'll often come across members of the medical community saying that FGM has no "health" benefits, and if women have their clitoris amputated, then their sex life comes to an end. Then they say that MGM has lots of "health" benefits and that men's sex life is not affected.

But it's a myth that many women who have suffered FGM are unhappy and cannot have great sex lives. That's why they queue up to have their daughters' circumcised. Plus there are many so-called potential "health benefits" - such as a 50% reduction in HIV/AIDS.

The visible part - the glans clitoris - is only a small part of the whole clitoris. So when a woman suffers partial or total amputation of the external clitoris when undergoing FGM, only a small part of her clitoris is removed. Thus she often can enjoy a full and satisfying sex life.

The truth about the female clitoris

Learn how large the female clitoris is; and how the external glans clitoris is just a small part of it:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/28/cliteracy_n_3823983.html
http://womenshealth.about.com/cs/sexuality/a/clitoraltruthin.htm

http://www.amazon.com/The-Clitoral-Truth-Secret-Fingertips/dp/1583224734

Female Circumcision & Health Benefits

"Stallings et al. (2005) reported that, in Tanzanian women,
the risk of HIV among women who had undergone FGC
was roughly half that of women who had not; the association
remained significant after adjusting for region, household
wealth, age, lifetime partners, union status, and recent ulcer."


http://www.iasociety.org/Default.aspx?pageId=11&abstractId=2177677

Note: when it's found that circumcising female genitals reduces HIV/AIDS it's called a "conundrum" rather that a wonderfully exciting "medical" opportunity to reduces HIV/AIDS. This deeply sexist attitude must cease.

"National Bureau of Statistics, Tanzania - 50% reduction in HIV/AIDS in women who have have parts of the genitals amputated:"

http://www.tzonline.org/pdf/femalecircumcisionandhivinfectionintanzania.pdf


"International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology" — a peer reviewed journal of international renown:

Female genital cutting in this group of women did not attenuate sexual feelings:

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2002.01550.x/abstract

"The Journal of Sexual Medicine" — a peer reviewed journal of international renown:

Pleasure and orgasm in women with Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting (FGM/C):

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17970975

"The New Scientist" (references a medical journal)

Female Circumcision Does Not Reduce Sexual Activity:

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn2837-female-circumcision-does-not-reduce-sexual-activity.html#.Uml2H2RDtOQ

"Journal of General Internal Medicine" — a peer reviewed journal of international renown:

Female "Circumcision" - African Women Confront American Medicine

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1497147/

Medical benefits of female circumcision: Dr. Haamid al-Ghawaabi

http://islamqa.info/en/ref/45528

"Pediatrics (AAP)" — a peer reviewed journal of international renown:

Genital Cutting Advocated By American Academy Of Pediatrics

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/102/1/153.short

Like male circumcision, there are plenty of peer reviewed studies that show female circumcision is not a barrier to sexual orgasm and enjoyment. Some studies show that orgasm and enjoyment are reduced; and some show no effect.

Genital Autonomy for all - Intersex, Male & Female

u/liatris · 2 pointsr/TumblrInAction

Dr. Thomas Sowell wrote an amazing book on this topic. The Vision of the Anointed: Self-Congratulation as a Basis for Social Policy

Sowell discusses the premise behind Vision of the Anointed

>Sowell presents a devastating critique of the mind-set behind the failed social policies of the past thirty years. Sowell sees what has happened during that time not as a series of isolated mistakes but as a logical consequence of a tainted vision whose defects have led to crises in education, crime, and family dynamics, and to other social pathologies. In this book, he describes how elites—the anointed—have replaced facts and rational thinking with rhetorical assertions, thereby altering the course of our social policy.

Also Intellectuals and Race

>Intellectuals and Race is a radical book in the original sense of one that goes to the root of the problem. The role of intellectuals in racial strife is explored in an international context that puts the American experience in a wholly new light.

>The views of individual intellectuals have spanned the spectrum, but the views of intellectuals as a whole have tended to cluster. Indeed, these views have clustered at one end of the spectrum in the early twentieth century and then clustered at the opposite end of the spectrum in the late twentieth century. Moreover, these radically different views of race in these two eras were held by intellectuals whose views on other issues were very similar in both eras.

>Intellectuals and Race is not, however, a book about history, even though it has much historical evidence, as well as demographic, geographic, economic and statistical evidence-- all of it directed toward testing the underlying assumptions about race that have prevailed at times among intellectuals in general, and especially intellectuals at the highest levels. Nor is this simply a theoretical exercise. The impact of intellectuals' ideas and crusades on the larger society, both past and present, is the ultimate concern. These ideas and crusades have ranged widely from racial theories of intelligence to eugenics to "social justice" and multiculturalism.

>In addition to in-depth examinations of these and other issues, Intellectuals and Race explores the incentives, the visions and the rationales that drive intellectuals at the highest levels to conclusions that have often turned out to be counterproductive and even disastrous, not only for particular racial or ethnic groups, but for societies as a whole.

u/UpstreamStruggle · 1 pointr/TumblrInAction

That's a good question. The fact is, despite what the majority of people think, after we factor out wealth, intelligence, and a host of other demographic variables there's still a clear bias against minorities in things like work-hires and academia. So we have these policies because without them a minority has to perform much better than someone else to get the same treatment. I know someone will probably say "well this funding calculator says the other way QED you're wrong, bro," and yeah I guess that's an exception, but it's an exception-by-design amongst a sea of non-exceptions. The research within schools is pretty clear that teachers and admin treat black kids worse (in fact, some studies find smart black males get the worst end of it all; theoretically, because they're seen as a threat). This book provides a good coverage of the research if you're genuinely interested. Or you could just google-scholar "hiring prejudice."

One of the tragedies of it all is that affirmative action, although 'needed', will never really be a long-lasting solution because people in power are sort of hard-wired to think the world is fair (you can see it by browsing this thread, and people on the net are generally more liberal than the average) even when told otherwise. The funniest example I've seen was a study where they rigged a game of monopoly; the 'winners', even when told it had been rigged, still believed they'd earnt their success. I can't recall the study anymore, but it's cited somewhere in that book if anyone cares.

This isn't my area of expertise, but if anyone has any follow up questions or counter-points I'm happy to answer them. I might get back right away, but my response also might be delayed by a week (as I'm supposed to be writing a a paper right now), but I promise to answer everything in turn.

u/ITALIANCOLOGNE · 17 pointsr/TumblrInAction

Googling the first sentence points to a dozen of tumblr blogs and otherwise completely insane shit that makes no sense. It's basically their #1 source yet they never tell where it's from.
The only website that actually wrote the title of the book was some MRA website.
It's apparently called Is Everyone Really Equal? and it's a typical social studies bachelor program text book for American bachelor programs.

The reviews are actually pretty funny. The top 3 quotes on amazon are:

  • "I feel the main goal of this book is to get everyone 'in line' with what the author's thinking is. "

  • "They do site certain so-called "facts" but many times they make a bold claim and provide no supporting evidence at all."



  • "It's an easy read." (guess because it's so shit)


    But the funniest review (5 stars) is from an "white, able-bodied, raised Christian, American man" who finds it "enlightening". Guess what he wrote...


    The best review (because most likely correct) is "[...] [that] the book is a radical feminist rant against men, to the point in which it says that men can't be discriminated, and that we contribute for all the bad in the world"

    The authors are Ozlem Sensoy and Robin DiAngelo.


    Robin DiAngelo thinks: "I am a white woman whose academic, professional, and personal commitment is to anti-racist practice, however, I don’t call myself an “anti-racist white” because I believe that it is for people of color to decide if, in any given moment, I am behaving in anti-racist ways. These are the issues and perspectives that guide my work."

    Sensoy's twitter: http://i.imgur.com/dMjcNtZ.jpg


    Also: I'm not entirely sure if I'm allowed to post the authors' names. On the one hand I think it might be against the rules but on the other hand it's literally something that can be looked up on the internet. However if it's against the rules I can edit it.
u/J2383 · 60 pointsr/TumblrInAction

Just looked up this misogynistic piece of shit book on Amazon to see what it was all about. Words cannot express how offensive this is, here's the description:

> Chad Eastham will encourage girls to be confident in who they are and Whose they are(J2383 note: it's a christian book, the 'whose' is in reference to God, hence the uppercase W, it's not saying that women are owned by men). Girls need to know that they are treasures to be adored and that how she feels about herself is how guys will treat her.

> Chapter titles add fun and interest to this life-altering message. Guys Like Girls Who . . .

> Wear Jeans (comfortable with who they are and Whose they are)

> Know the Future (understand there is a 96% chance this is not the boy they will marry so don't act like they are)

> Leave Us Alone (have their own hobbies)

> Can Spell (can say "no")

> Eat Tofu (live a healthy lifestyle)

u/TedInATL · 1 pointr/TumblrInAction

https://www.amazon.com/Operation-Chowhound-Glorious-Bomber-Mission/dp/113727963X

​

Operation Chowhound: The Most Risky, Most Glorious US Bomber Mission of WWII Hardcover – February 24, 2015

​

The true story of a little-known, yet remarkable World War II operation, which had all the hallmarks of a suicide mission.

Beginning with a crazy plan hatched by a suspect prince, and an even crazier reliance on the word of the Nazis, Operation Chowhound was devised. Between May 1 and May 8, 1945, 2,268 military units flown by the USAAF, dropped food to 3.5 million starving Dutch civilians in German-occupied Holland.

It took raw courage to fly on Operation Chowhound, as American aircrews never knew when the German AAA might open fire on them or if Luftwaffe fighters might jump them. Flying at 400 feet, barely above the tree tops, with guns pointed directly at them, they would have no chance to bail out if their B-17s were hit―and yet, over eight days, 120,000 German troops kept their word, and never fired on the American bombers. As they flew, grateful Dutch civilians spelled out "Thanks Boys" in the tulip fields below. Many Americans who flew in Operation Chowhound would claim it was the best thing they did in the war.

In this gripping narrative, author Stephen Dando-Collins takes the reader into the rooms where Operation Chowhound was born, into the aircraft flying the mission, and onto the ground in the Netherlands with the civilians who so desperately needed help. James Bond creator Ian Fleming, Hollywood actress Audrey Hepburn, as well as Roosevelt, Eisenhower, and Churchill all play a part in this story, creating a compelling, narrative read.

u/New_Ketone · 30 pointsr/TumblrInAction

This mirrors the argument of "if you eat meat, you believe in oppressing women." I had a friend who had a book about feminism and vegetarianism, called The Sexual Politics of Meat. I actually did think the book was interesting, and it made some interesting points about the weirdly sexual ways in which meat products could be advertised, as well as certain cultural practices surrounding the consumption of meat (the book was chocked full of drawings of "sexy" cuts of pork, etc, and brought up how men and women in certain scoieties were proscribed from consuming certain parts of animals).

But, like a lot of academic work, the author veered off into completely beyond reasonable territory, conflating meat eating in and of itself with the oppression of women.

I actually do think that there are arguments against our food system and it's heavy reliance on meat (and dairy, and eggs). The amount of water and grain that has to go into feeding these billions of animals is putting a great deal of strain on our resources. Seven billion people cannot consume lots of steak and ham and chicken.

u/LocalAmazonBot · 1 pointr/TumblrInAction

Here are some links for the product in the above comment for different countries:

Amazon Smile Link: http://smile.amazon.com/Defending-West-Critique-Edward-Orientalism/dp/1591024846/ref=sr_1_5


|Country|Link|Charity Links|
|:-----------|:------------|:------------|
|USA|smile.amazon.com|EFF|
|UK|www.amazon.co.uk|Macmillan|
|Spain|www.amazon.es||
|France|www.amazon.fr||
|Germany|www.amazon.de||
|Japan|www.amazon.co.jp||
|Canada|www.amazon.ca||
|Italy|www.amazon.it||
|India|www.amazon.in||
|China|www.amazon.cn||




To help add charity links, please have a look at this thread.

This bot is currently in testing so let me know what you think by voting (or commenting). The thread for feature requests can be found here.

u/EggheadDash · 10 pointsr/TumblrInAction

The last one is actually a female-positive book, and the thesis is something along the lines of "guys like girls who like themselves." Most of the book isn't even about what guys like, that's just on the cover to grab the attention of boy-obsessed tweens. The OP obviously didn't even skim the book.

EDIT: Here's an amazon link. If you don't want to click through, here's some of the chapter titles, followed by what the chapter is actually about:


  • Wear Jeans (comfortable with who they are and Whose they are)
  • Know the Future (understand there is a 96% chance this is not the boy they will marry so don't act like they are)
  • Leave Us Alone (have their own hobbies)
  • Can Spell (can say "no")
  • Eat Tofu (live a healthy lifestyle)
u/Ich171 · 2 pointsr/TumblrInAction

I googled that for you!

And there seems to exist such a Book.

Doesn't make the story automatically true though. Might still even be an interesting read...

u/pokemon_fetish · 13 pointsr/TumblrInAction

I know what you're responding to is dealing with America (which had it's own violent and racist suffragettes) but I highly recommend the book The Suffragette Bombers:Britain's Forgotten Terrorists that documents all of the instances of radical women planting bombs and starting fires, etc. in Britain. Some of these terrorists are still celebrated today and the fun part of it all is that many things seem to suggest strongly that women would have gained the franchise without the King's Horse trampling a mentally ill woman. Of course, like America, the vast majority of those fighting for "Votes for Women" really meant "Votes for Property Owning Women". This is one small aspect where I can agree with the "White feminism reeeeeee" people. Where they take it though, well shit. That's why this sub exists.

E: added amazon link to book.

u/Hypertroph · 1 pointr/TumblrInAction

It's a great ingredient, actually. You should try it some time.

u/[deleted] · 1 pointr/TumblrInAction

Actually. The Irish were slaves , not indentured servants. Although I'm sure there were some Irish who were

Good sources for research:

http://www.infowars.com/the-irish-slave-trade-the-forgotten-white-slaves/
http://www.amazon.com/White-Cargo-Forgotten-History-Britains/dp/0814742963


http://www.raceandhistory.com/cgi-bin/forum/webbbs_config.pl/noframes/read/1638

From this source is a nice quote:

"There has been a lot of whitewashing of the Irish slave trade, partly by not mentioning it, and partly by labeling slaves as indentured servants. There were indeed indentureds, including English, French, Spanish and even a few Irish. But there is a great difference between the two. Indentures bind two or more parties in mutual obligations. Servant indentures were agreements between an individual and a shipper in which the individual agreed to sell his services for a period of time in exchange for passage, and during his service, he would receive proper housing, food, clothing, and usually a piece of land at the end of the term of service. It is believed that some of the Irish that went to the Amazon settlement after the Battle of Kinsale and up to 1612 were exiled military who went voluntarily, probably as indentureds to Spanish or Portuguese shippers."

"The Irish slave trade began when James I sold 30,000 Irish prisoners as slaves to the New World. His Proclamation of 1625 required Irish political prisoners be sent overseas and sold to English settlers in the West Indies. By the mid 1600s, the Irish were the main slaves sold to Antigua and Montserrat. At that time, 70% of the total population of Montserrat were Irish slaves.

Ireland quickly became the biggest source of human livestock for English merchants. The majority of the early slaves to the New World were actually white.

From 1641 to 1652, over 500,000 Irish were killed by the English and another 300,000 were sold as slaves. Ireland’s population fell from about 1,500,000 to 600,000 in one single decade. Families were ripped apart as the British did not allow Irish dads to take their wives and children with them across the Atlantic. This led to a helpless population of homeless women and children. Britain’s solution was to auction them off as well."



There are a plethora of other sources to be had on google search. Its a very interesting topic that I enjoyed reading about!

Edit: black slaves cost 50 shillings, where as the Irish cost 5. Part of the reason was because the Irish were considered "dumb" and they could easily slip away and blend in with other white people.

Really, Irish history is fucking coated in blood, racism, prejudice, and stereotypes.

u/nubbinator · 0 pointsr/TumblrInAction

You should enjoy your Natural Harvest, both in food and in drink.

u/fahrenheitrkg · 10 pointsr/TumblrInAction

There kind of is a book...

Real Knockouts: The Physical Feminism of Women's Self-Defense.

Except, it's not a self defense book so much as a book about self-defense. You're not going to learn how to defend yourself by reading it, but the author might convince you that the feminist movement could focus on self defense as a strategy for physical equality.

u/Bill_H_Cosby · 0 pointsr/TumblrInAction

I remember that ama, the book is called "Natural Harvest: A collection of semen-based recipes"

Book

AMA

And dont worry, neither of the links are NFSW

u/Prof_Acorn · 0 pointsr/TumblrInAction

They weren't as "pure" as other whites, and were ridiculed in America for quite some time - some even being used as slaves alongside african slaves. If you played the recent game Bioshock Infinite you may have noticed how the Irish were objectified alongside blacks in the depiction of Columbia.

Also see:

"Irish Americans were not always considered white."

and

http://www.amazon.com/White-Cargo-Forgotten-History-Britains/dp/0814742963

Edit: The marginalization of the Irish really began during the Plantation of Ulster by the English, where King James stole Irish land and gave it to wealthy brits. Also, the Potato Famine wasn't because there wasn't enough food, but because the English stole it all.

u/CountedCrow · 3 pointsr/TumblrInAction

How about this?

"There's no such thing as 'reverse sexism' or 'reverse racism.' This is because either is defined as 'the belief that one (sex/race) is superior to another, with nowhere in the definitions there being any requirements of the sexist/racist being in a position of power. In fact the phrases 'reverse racism' and 'reverse sexism' are ducking fumb because they imply that sexism can only be against women and racism can only be against minorities."

There, that's a little less stupid.

And as for the comment, yes, if it's in a professionally printed textbook handed out by your university or school, it's pretty likely that it's true. However: this is kind of an exception, if the author can't be bothered to consult a dictionary.

u/TheLostSocialist · 5 pointsr/TumblrInAction

It should be this. I've a few excerpts from this book from a gender studies course I took, and the typeface and style of the various footnote boxes is the same I think.