I’ve been asked to be the equivalent of a non-religious godmother to a child that was born yesterday. I don’t know the proper term for this (being a godmother in my country is usually a religious thing and I’m not a member)
I’m sort of terrified but I said yes. My friend knows me and probably has many good reasons for her choice. I look forward to it.
"In accordance with the International e-Sports Federation’s (IeSF) tournament regulations, since the main tournament event is open to male players only. This is to avoid possible conflicts (e.g. a female player eliminating a male player during RO8) among other things."
What the actual fuck?
Reason #239519 I need Feminism. I hope Blizzard does something about this
God fuckin dAMMIT
If blizzard knows about this and doesn’t do anything or worse supports it I /will/ quit wow no matter how much I like it
to avoid possible conflicts (e.g. a female player eliminating a male player during RO8)
so you’re keeping women out of competitive gaming because…women might beat men at competitive gaming?????????????
in a competition???????????????
where the whole point is to beat your opponents?????????????
i’ve already paid for my computer spot at said event so i’m thinking about using this chance to go fart in the face of the trash responsible for this and go play video games at home
I wanted to go to assembly, but I guess that’s a no now.
If you ever feel like archaeological mysteries are impossible to solve without positing aliens, just remember that archaeologists ONLY JUST NOW realised that wet sand is easier to drag stuff along on than dry sand… and that this probably means Egyptian images showing people pouring water from vases in front of stone blocks as they were pulled are probably actually depicting the way those stones were pulled, not some religious ritual of “blessing the rocks”.
FYI in academia, “probably had religious significance” means “I haven’t got a clue what this is for”.
People who aren’t academics, but who have knowledge of things like spinning fibre, knitting, carving, smithing, building, hairdressing etc, keep on astounding academia by having insights into stuff they thought was a mystery.
"What is this thingy for?" "…ritual purposes. Definitely ritual purposes."
Also the always popular casual sexism of (largely male until fairly recently) archaeology. My favorite example always goes to textile production in ancient Greece and Rome (my field):
"They must have put looms in these small dark rooms," say the male archaeologists (specifically in reference to Pompeii, but you see it elsewhere too). "Men would never want to see women working and also we don’t really understand how textiles are made."
Places where large numbers of loom weights are actually found: the big open rooms with lots of light or in courtyards. This is always pointed out by female academics who have some experience with crafts.
And this is weaving, people! This is something that is still practiced commercially today, albeit not in the same way as it was in 79 AD! It isn’t some obscure craft that went out of practice a millennium or two ago. Same goes for spinning, knitting, any number of other crafts but especially the feminine ones.
On the other hand there are the non-scholars who are always surprised that pre-modern peoples managed to do anything, but especially anything that modern peoples also do; one of my ex-flatmates expressed extreme surprise that the Romans were capable of shaving. THE ROMANS. CAPABLE OF SHAVING! Imagine that. Roman razors were probably way sharper than my cheapo Bic woman’s safety razor.
"Ritual purposes…definitely ritual purposes."
Or the business about infrequent bathing, by citing medieval records of “this day my lady did have her bath” and pointing out how rarely this happened.
IMO putting it in the records was reference to the all-day fuss and disruption of a full-scale bath - getting out the tub, heating the water, carrying it up to fill the tub, carrying it down afterwards to empty the tub etc…
IMO My Lady (and my Lord) kept themselves clean on a daily basis with what we now call a sponge (or washcloth)-bath, and that didn’t cause enough bother to be worth noting down…
So true. Take a poem by Horace about a fox getting into a grain silo, eating a lot and then being too fat to get out the same way it came in.
Academics: But! Foxes don’t eat grain; that’s illogical. Horace probably didn’t know enough about animals to know that. So what we’re gonna do is we change the poem to say bird, and now it makes sense! YAY. WE’RE SO SMART.
Literally everyone who’s lived in the countryside (including Horace): you do know that where there’s grain, there are mice? And that foxes eat MICE????