sometimes I get shouty and 140 characters just won't cut it.
Every single post on Thought Catalog seems to be simultaneously a packet of memory extracted from my mind via a pensieve and the summary of a session with my therapist that I needed to have had 3 years ago all wrapped up in a 500-word package of goodness. How do they do it?
The Herd & friends, including my new hero in life and awesome Sky’High, did a special Reconciliation Week Like A Version and I adore it.
The whole thing is amazing but this bit from Ozi Batla really struck a chord with me:
… symbolism’s weak medicine for grievous injury
False smiles front false idols hiding discrimination
A feel good slogan, some self-congratulation
Empty statements while the hangman’s ghost is still waiting…
I know there are people that are supposed to be on the same side as I am who I really dislike and I know that I should thank them for getting the message out on issues I really care about but they drive me batshit cray cray because they are only doing it for themselves and their message is so empty and it creates complacency and inaction because people think they’ve done enough because they forwarded some fucking email and clicked like on a Fb status and created “awareness” but all it does is tick off a little bit of First World Middle Class Guilt and IT DOESN’T ACTUALLY DO ANYTHING AND FUCK!!! YOU GUYS IT JUST MAKES ME SO MAD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Yes I am talking about Get Up and Sarah Hanson-Yawn.
Anyway I’m going to shut up and try to do something constructive with my rage like eat a whole block of (fair trade) chocolate okay bai.
Please pardon this self indulgence of late-night, quarter-life-crisis angst.
Actually. No. Fuck it. I don’t need your pardon. This is my godsdamn intertubes thing and I’ll whine if I bloody well want to and you don’t even have to be here.
It’s a futile effort to describe the indescribable. But attempt I will.
There are these moments in my life when thoughts swirl so destructively through my head that I feel completely incapacitated. I basically cannot, and sometimes do not, function as a human being.
Everything is so overwhelming that all I can do to stop the panic is to hibernate into a safe, protective catatonia.
Rage, sorrow, helpless, despair, heartbreak, gratitude, desire, promise, guilt, conflict, confusion, fear.
It is impossible to turn one way without being pulled in another direction with different thought; then another again; and again.
When merely the act of putting one foot in front of the other becomes physically impossible because of paralysis from TOO MANY FEELINGS.
When everthing explodes to a bizarre nothingness that is actually filled with all you want to escape, but cannot.
When you’re too tired to act but too wired to hide from it with sleep.
This is one of those times.
Wow. I need to be permanently DRUBK.
(Source: winifredjay)
OK so I’m a bit obsessed with the Internet and I love Teh Law, and I love to LOL, so all of the above makes Law School Memes pretty much the greatest thing that has ever existed in my life (aside from like my mum, obvs).
RELATED: today I was doing research for an asylum-seeker judicial application and I had to read Dreamtech International Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Taxation [2010] FCAFC 103 a tax law case (that was relevant to the question of the introduction of new evidence) that made me giggle a lot:
TAXATION – luxury car tax – whether a stretched Hummer fell within the definition of ‘car’ in the A New Tax System (Luxury Car Tax) Act 1999 (Cth) – whether construction of the word ‘limousine’ was a question of fact or a question of law within s 44(1) of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth)
Paragraph 1 of the judgment summarises the case as follows:
…The dispute concerns whether a Krystal Hummer H2 motor vehicle, stretched to carry 14 passengers, (the Hummer) and imported by the Appellant, is a “limousine” for the purposes of subpara (b) of the definition of “car” in s 27–1 of the A New Tax System (Luxury Car Tax) Act 1999 …
LAWLZ!!!!!111
Remember when Samantha Brick wrote that trolly op-ed saying how women hate her because she’s beautiful? (I won’t link to it because I’m posting mobi and CBF.)
And then people said she’s actually kinda ugly and there was a big debate about feminism and beauty and stuff and then she went on TV and was like “OMG SEE PEOPLE ONLY SAY I’M UGLY BECAUSE THEY SO JELLY I’M SO HOT!!!1”
Sorry, lady: women don’t hate you for how you look. Women hate you because you are a horrible human being with an ugly soul who puts other women down by your facile acceptance of patriarchy.
In discussing a very smart lady presenting a history show, who Brick believes is “too ugly for TV” and needs a damn makeover already, Brick ACTUALLY SAYS: “Television is a medium where you must be prepared to do anything to get on, and it is a given that you pay meticulous attention to your physical appearance first and foremost.”
If Samantha Brick was a good person, she wouldn’t be accepting this and requiring the rest of us to conform to this.
If Samantha Brick was a good person, she would be pointing out that this is only the case because we live in a society where women are still objects judged by archaic norms set out by swinging dicks whose sons basically still run the world, rather than human beings who are more than their avatar (ht James Cameron).
If Samantha Brick was a good person, people wouldn’t hate her.
And she’s just proved the arguments of people who responded to her previous piece by asking if maybe people hate her because she’s a jerk.
QED.
(Commentary about the Daily Mail’s setting-up of female writers by analysing the subbing and image captions in that piece are for someone else. But let’s face it: she deserves what she’s gonna get for this.)
2 notes