public static float distanceFromCameraOfForemostKeyableIKNode;I prefer not to settle for mere “descriptive variables names” when I am perfectly capable of descriptive variable novellas.
Apparently java imposes literally no limit on variable name length so … note to self to use that for trolling some day.
I hear the Bee Movie script is available online, in case you have a nice variable to name.
Georgian dancers performing like warriors
Im ready to die
New study shows that Disney princesses don’t get to talk in their own movies
[Top image is from Beauty and the Beast, of Belle and Gaston. Gaston is talking and has his feet up on the table, directly on Belle’s book. Belle is looking at his muddy boots on her book, clearly unhappy.
Text below:
In Disney’s modern princess movies, men often speak more than women. The films from the ‘90s were particularly male-dominated.
Second image is of a chart comparing the percent of words spoken by women and men in Disney princess movies.
Snow White (1937)
Women: 50%
Men: 50%Cinderella (1950)
Women: 60%
Men: 40%Sleeping Beauty (1959)
Women: 71%
Men: 29%The Little Mermaid (1989)
Women: 32%
Men: 68%Beauty and the Beast (1991)
Women: 29%
Men: 71%Aladdin (1992)
Women: 10%
Men: 90%Pocahontas (1995)
Women: 24%
Men: 76%Mulan (1998)
Women: 23%
Men: 77%Princess and the Frog (2009)
Women: 24%
Men: 76%Tangled (2010)
Women: 52%
Men: 48%Brave (2012)
Women: 74%
Men: 26%Frozen (2013)
Women: 41%
Men: 59%Third image is a chart listing the number of speaking roles for men and women in the same movies (unlike chart 2, the figures may not be exact, as they are not directly listed within the article)
Snow White (1937)
Women: 2
Men: 10Cinderella (1950)
Women: 7
Men: 7Sleeping Beauty (1959)
Women: 6
Men: 7The Little Mermaid (1989)
Women: 7
Men: 12Beauty and the Beast (1991)
Women: 17
Men: 28Aladdin (1992)
Women: 2
Men: 21Pocahontas (1995)
Women: 3
Men: 12Mulan (1998)
Women: 10
Men: 21Princess and the Frog (2009)
Women: 7
Men: 24Tangled (2010)
Women: 4
Men: 16Brave (2012)
Women: 10
Men: 17Frozen (2013)
Women: 17
Men: 33Sources for both are Carmen Fought and Karen Eisenhauer]
Although they’ve been criticized for reinforcing conventional gender roles, Disney’s princess line is nevertheless the most high-profile female-led franchise of all time. And while Disney has gotten praise for creating more progressive princesses starting in the ’90s, a new study complicates the idea of Disney’s evolution: In almost every Disney princess film since 1989, the study finds, male characters get significantly more speaking time than female ones. The data comes from linguists Carmen Fought and Karen Eisenhauer, who previewed their ongoing study at recent conference. The Washington Post has a detailed breakdown of their findings.
Some of them don’t even get to be human in their own movies but you know
To be honest, my first reaction is to try and defend Disney princesses because they’ve many so much to me over the years, but there is rarely anything defensible.
Ruth “I am absolutely incapable of noticing when people are being hostile towards me” Fisher
i think it’s funny how men use myths of female inadequacy to cover for their own shortcomings.
like how women are supposed to be horrible drivers, when four out of five serious or fatal crashes in new york are caused by male drivers and research shows that young men (18-24) have a tendency to take high risks, over-evaluate their driving skill and disrespect the rules.
or how “women are stupid”, especially with regards to the debate of the wage gap, where men often claim that women earn less because they are less capable, when there are more women studying in higher educations, women are less likely to drop out of higher educations and are more likely to end up with a better degree than men.
or how men claim that women talk too much, when research shows that men talk 65% of the time within the family and are more likely to talk in long monologues, whereas women more often offer commentary. Men also are more likely to interrupt; in fact, during a political debate, the former (female) minister of state in denmark was criticized in the media and made fun of for interrupting the current (male) minister of state too often – study found that he had interrupted her 28 times, whereas she only interrupted him 13 times.
or literally uncountable other scenarios. the truth is, male pride today is so inflated and builds on so many lies that it would be laughable – hadn’t it been for the fact that these things affect women’s lives every day. these jokes mean that white women earn 78 cents to a white man’s dollar. they mean that women can be ridiculed even for the things they haven’t done. they mean that women, as a gender, are assigned less worth even in the fields where they succeed. they mean that women, as a gender, are devalued and disrespected in every aspect of their professional and private lives.
official-german-translationen:
Person A: Hello, Sir! How goes it you?
Person B: Oh, thank you for the afterquestion.
Person A: Are your already long here?
Person B: No, first a pair days. I’m not out London.
Person A: Thunderweather, that overrushes me, you see not so out.
Person B: That can yes beforecome. But now what other: My hairs stood to mountains as I the traffic saw. So much cars gives it here.
Person A: You are heavy on the woodway if you believe that in London horsedroveworks go.
Person B: Will we now drink a beer? My throat is outdried. But look, there is a guesthouse, let us there man go!
Person A: That is a good idea. Equal goes it loose, I will only my shoeband close.
Person B: Here we are. Make me please the door open.
Person A: But there is a beforehangingcastle, the economy is to. How sorry! Then I will go back to the hotel, it is already retard. On againsee!
Person B: Oh, yes, I will too go. I must become my draught to Bristol. Auf Wiedersehen!
Person A: Nanu, sie sind Deutscher?
Person B: Ja, sie auch? Das wundert mich aber. Ihr Englisch ist so hervorragend, dass ich es gar nicht bemerkt hätte...(Hätte das ja als Chat submitted, aber das geht scheinbar ja nicht)
do you guys have a story in your head and when you’re bored you just add more to it and continue from where you left off
Several, and they trace back to my early childhood even though massive shifts of plot, characters, etc have happened over time.
(Thoughts in response this post, and Ozy’s recent post on bihacking.)
“Dating” and “crushes” are socially-defined enough that I’m not even sure I was bisexual in high school.
Mayleaf-in-high-school would’ve had to do a nontrivial amount of mental restructuring to interpret her feelings for various girls as “attraction”. I would’ve felt weird dating a girl then. It wouldn’t have felt like “real dating”.
And then in college, I did that mental restructuring, and started to get crushes on girls frequently.
I guess “romantic attraction” is not just a set of feelings, but a set of stories you tell yourself about those feelings. (At least, that’s how it seems to work for me.) In high school, the Most Important Person In The World to me was my female best friend, and I used to frequently think about how much I loved her and how close I felt towards her – but I interpreted all of that as a natural part of us being Best Friends. When she told me that she was bi, and confessed romantic interest in me, I felt sad that I couldn’t reciprocate that.
But the only behavioral difference between my relationship with her and my relationship with my high school boyfriend was that Best Friend and I did not kiss on the lips. We spent lots of alone time together, shared our innermost thoughts and feelings with each other, held hands, cuddled all the time, kissed each other on the cheek – and I loved doing all of that with her. And had she asked to kiss me on the lips, I would have probably said yes and I would’ve enjoyed it.
But I’d have still thought of it as being “platonic”, and an expression our closeness as Best Friends. It would’ve felt weird to call it dating. I knew what romantic interest felt like – it felt like those crush-feelings I got for various male friends of mine – and it didn’t feel like what I felt for her. I would’ve kissed her and it wouldn’t have felt the same as kissing my boyfriend.
In college I began to “““question my sexuality””” – but all that really meant was that I tried telling myself different stories about the affection and admiration I felt for various girls. Instead of saying, “wow, that girl is so kind and charismatic and intelligent, I keep thinking about how awesome she is because I see her as a role model”, I would say, “wow, that girl is so kind and charismatic and intelligent, I keep thinking about how awesome she is because I see her as a role model and because I’m attracted to her.” And instead of just daydreaming about being like her, I’d also daydream about kissing her, and imagine myself in various silly romantic scenarios with her.
And once I started doing that, I started feeling the exact sort of feelings for girls that I’d felt for guys in the past. And now I identify as a Kinsey 3, and I have two wonderful girlfriends, and I’m very happy with all of this.
(Also, I’m low-key long-distance dating my high school best friend. I saw her in December and we went out for dinner together and kissed a lot and it was wonderful.)
I’m not sure whether to call this “bihacking”, or just “discovering my true romantic orientation”. But I did have to change something about my mindset before I could experience romantic attraction to girls.
(tagging @ozymandias271 for bihacking datapoint)
sorry, rambling ahead! I’m tired and this got away from me
Yes, yes, yes. Especially “romantic attraction is a set of stories you tell yourself about your feelings”. The internal narrative I construct about my feelings for various women has definitely changed dramatically in the past couple of years, partly because tumblr exposed me to more lesbians and bisexual women than I’d met IRL, with their own narratives. And I think that has changed my feelings about certain women, too – there’s a feedback loop between the stories I tell myself and the feelings I have, for me at least. To me, it doesn’t really sound true to say I realized I am bisexual; I think it’s closer to the truth to say that I have started reframing existing feelings of admiration, longing, and desire in terms of bisexuality, and that altered and (maybe) intensified the feelings. Is romantic/sexual bisexuality the best frame for those feelings? I’m still working that out.
I feel like the born-this-way narrative, even if you don’t subscribe to it, sneaks its way into everyone’s thinking – we all like to believe that however we feel now is how we’ve always felt “deep down”, that we were just denying it before, and by extension that the narratives we constructed in the past to explain our feelings are less legitimate than the current narratives. That’s on a personal level, but also on a societal level – for example we like to think that historically, gay people in deeply loving platonic relationships were lying to themselves and hiding from a hostile world. That was absolutely true for a lot of people, of course. But I bet there were also a lot of people we would term gay or bisexual today for whom the narrative of intensely loving platonic friendship actually fit their feelings well at the time, and felt right to them.
Another way of saying this, I guess, is that we both internalized heteronormativity – the fact that we didn’t attribute our feelings to same-sex romantic attraction is at least partly down to what we had been taught to expect from a relationship. But “internalized heteronormativity” sounds like something wrong or bad that needs to be corrected… I like the way this post talks instead about the story you tell yourself. It implies that it’s morally neutral for the story to change over time, that you’re not “fixing” or “breaking” yourself when you change it.
(I don’t want to go so far as to say heteronormativity is a morally neutral thing; it’s not. But I would go so far as to say that, for example, ex-gay people aren’t all deluded or lying to themselves; some of them are genuinely describing the world as they experience it after the story they told themselves about their feelings changed. And if that line of thinking causes us to listen to them more and dismiss them less, it only serves to increase the diversity of perspectives and to encourage us to believe people when they tell us their experiences. Which is a good thing.)
This is really interesting to me because of the similarity to seventies lesbian separatist discussions of becoming a lesbian– which is that they reframed the attraction they felt to women from “friendship” to “love”. A lot of what Adrienne Rich is getting at when she talks about the lesbian continuum is that you have that sort of platonic love-between-women, and for some women (and apparently you guys) it is possible to tell a story about it where it becomes romantic.
So it’s interesting for me to read about a couple people going through that basic experience. I wonder how common that is.
This is your occasional reminder that anyone who confesses a crush on me will end up receiving truly obscene amounts of affectionate squeeing and attention. Anyone. This has happened literally every time (out of >20 occasions).
You have been either warned, enticed, or some interesting flavour of both.
Have not confessed a crush, but can confirm that adorable squeeing is apparently a common reaction to being approached in Alisonder Hamiltons! 10/10, would contact again.
Six Feet Under OTP: Ruth and Arthur.
Omphaloskeptomai 