"Public health officials urged calm. This, combined with their overconfidence in modern medicine, led them to downplay the severity of the pandemic. Publications like the British Medical Journal counseled silence and inaction: one editorial said, “When epidemics occur, deaths always happen. Would it not be better if a little more prudence were shown in publishing such reports instead of banking up as many dark clouds as possible to upset our breakfasts?” An editorial in the Manchester Guardian echoed this sentiment: “Terror is a big ally of the influenza, and if the public state of mind can be steered out of the channel of fright a long, long step will have been taken to conquer the epidemic.” Overreaction was frowned upon,"
1918.
via Pandemics: A Very Short Introduction
47 notes
·
View notes
This pronoun rant from the 17th century:
See that, you corrupt heathens? If you use a plural pronoun to refer to a singular person then you are SINNERS. Yes, that's right: if you use the word "you" to refer to only a single person, you offend God Himself.
Note: I did not do that in this post, so I am still holy and pure.
[image transcript: Again, the corrupt and unsound Form of speaking in the Plural Number to a single Person, YOU to One, instead of THOU, contrary to the pure, plain, and single Language of Truth, THOU to One, and YOU to more than One, which had always been used by GOD to Men, and men to GOD, as well as one to another, from the oldest Record of Time, till corrupt Men, for corrupt Ends, in later and corrupt Times, to flatter, fawn, and work upon the corrupt Nature in Men, brought in that false and senseless Way of speaking YOU to One; which hath since corrupted the modern Languages, and hath greatly debased the Spirits, and depraved the Manners of Men. This evil Custom...]
Final note: this rant is spot on for modern anti-whatever douchewhippets. The extreme emotion, the full-throated condemnation, the bizarrely confident ignorance about history and language, the extreme and unregulated righteous anger... you know this isn't really about language.
7 notes
·
View notes
Okay, so apparently this is a poster from Dallas, TX, in November 1963.
I can't get over just how similar this language is to shit we hear today. Like, you could just slap Biden's picture on there and it wouldn't look out of place on Facebook.
6 notes
·
View notes
fleshing out the bloodfinch pantheon armed with information about semi-obscure catholic saints. i've created a saint called the cephalophore who is the patron of those who are wrongfully accused or punished and he's depicted with a disembodied head or an axe (because i'm obsessed with the implications behind martyrs being associated with what killed them) OR a set of scales tipped to the left
the latter is because then i also decided to create a counterpart, the rule-saint, who's associated with fairness and justice and cold hard truth (which are sometimes contradictory). she's depicted with a quill and a set of scales tipped to the right and she's the only saint who's always depicted looking straight ahead instead of off to the side and she's said to have been a midwife in her mortal life. supposedly, she also had a gift for knowing when people were lying to her
the rule-saint and the cephalophore are counterparts, not rivals - they can both be invoked for the same purpose, and they're often depicted together, each of them with one hand helping to hold up the scales, which are shown as balanced. the cephalophore is stubborn, righteous, and idealistic. the rule-saint is realistic, incisive, and pragmatic. both of them are necessary to achieve justice. neither of them has any time for nonsense. i'm obsessed with them
3 notes
·
View notes
me, talking to my friends from the mutual aid collective: yeah, obviously revolution begins not in destruction, but in gardens. destroying the exploitative system we live under is necessary, of course, and effective organizing especially by those who most need it will inevitably bring down state violence and we should be prepared for that in order to protect each other, but anarchism is not about violence. it is about building a community outside of hierarchies where everything is for all, and yes, fighting for it both in defense and through the very act of creation. still, it pisses me off so much that so-called leftists on Twitter were so comfortable making guillotine jokes to union organizers instead of learning absolutely anything that helps and applying it to their lives. like god, equating anarchism with just throwing bombs and nothing else is, counter-productively, exactly what the State wants you to believe anarchism is.
me, possessed by the spirit of Louis Lingg the second i see the basic principles of anarchism smeared by a useless left-of-lib: [...] It is not murder, however, of which you have convicted me. The judge has stated that much only this morning in his resume of the case, and Grinnell has repeatedly asserted that we were being tried not for murder, but for anarchy, so the condemnation is—that I am an anarchist!
What is anarchy? This is a subject which my comrades have explained with sufficient clearness, and it is unnecessary for me to go over it again. They have told you plainly enough what our aims are. The state’s attorney, however, has not given you that information. He has merely criticized and condemned, not the doctrines of anarchy, but our methods of giving them practical effect, and even here he has maintained a discreet silence as to the fact that those methods were forced upon us by the brutality of the police. Grinnell’s own proffered remedy for our grievances is the ballot and combination of trades unions, and Ingham has even avowed the desirability of a six-hour movement! But the fact is, that at every attempt to wield the ballot, at every endeavor to combine the efforts of workingmen, you have displayed the brutal violence of the police club, and this is why I have recommended rude force, to combat the ruder force of the police. [...]
While I, as I have stated above, believe in force for the sake of winning for myself and fellow-workmen a livelihood such as men ought to have, Grinnell, on the other hand, through his police and other rogues, has suborned perjury in order to murder seven men, of whom I am one. Grinnell had the pitiful courage here in the courtroom, where I could not defend myself, to call me a coward! The scoundrel! A fellow who has leagued himself with a parcel of base, hireling knaves, to bring me to the gallows. Why? For no earthly reason save a contemptible selfishness — a desire to 'rise in the world“ — to ”make money," forsooth.
This wretch — who, by means of the perjuries of other wretches is going to murder seven men — is the fellow who calls me “coward”! And yet you blame me for despising such “defenders of the law” such unspeakable hypocrites! Anarchy means no domination or authority of one man over another, yet you call that “disorder.” A system which advocates no such “order” as shall require the services of rogues and thieves to defend it you call “disorder.” [...]
I tell you frankly and openly, I am for force. I have already told Captain Schaack, “if they use cannons against us, we shall use dynamite against them.” I repeat that I am the enemy of the “order” of today, and I repeat that, with all my powers, so long as breath remains in me, I shall combat it. [...] You laugh! Perhaps you think, “you’ll throw no more bombs”; but let me assure you I die happy on the gallows, so confident am I that the hundreds and thousands to whom I have spoken will remember my words; and when you shall have hanged us, then — mark my words — they will do the bombthrowing! In this hope do I say to you: I despise you. I despise your order, your laws, your force-propped authority. Hang me for it! [x]
4 notes
·
View notes
I am not going to respond to the specific post, because it was otherwise making valid points about the way reduced production timelines in modern hollywood impacts costume design (it impacts all pre and post production, this is also why CGI seems to be getting worse, but camera work and stunt work doesn't, the actual filming process isn't super impacted but all the prep and the post-filming work are), but I just saw someone cite Cruela as evidence that the quality of film costumes has gone down
fucking cruela
this cruela.
(the petals on that skirt are hand sewn. there are more than 5,000 of them. the leather jacket was made by hand from scratch for the movie because jenny beavan couldn't find a jacket that matched her incredibly specific requirements. the epaulettes alone are tiny works of art. the outfit is on screen for a couple of minutes at most as part of a montage. she did not have to go that hard for a montage, but god i'm glad she did)
i'm all for talking about how condensed timescales and pressure from shareholders can result in costume designers and creators to not have the time and budget they need to make good costumes. i too think rings of power and the witcher both look like shit.
but fucking cruela?!
(yes that is all one garment which emma stone is really wearing. the train is 40 foot long.)
it's not the stupidest take i've seen on film costumes this year, but only because there are still people loudly insisting black panther 2 didn't deserve its best costume oscar because the costumes were all cgi. (none of the costumes were cgi).
i kinda thought the best costume oscar, vogue spread, display of the costumes at the new york fashion institute, and 47 handmade costumes for the main character alone spoke for themselves, but no, apparently these costumes are bad because they're not sparkly enough...
5 notes
·
View notes
Sometimes people will have theee most pedestrian “breakthroughs” of feminist consciousness and it’s like, women were talking about this decades ago, just go read their writings and stop with this weird navel gazing.
4 notes
·
View notes