hydeordie:

Top: Mert & Marcus for Stella McCartney 

Bottom: Marilyn Minter

Today is brought to you by the letter M.

I mean, if you’re going to be paying what I am sure is an extraordinary day rate for Mert & Marcus, at least get something better than a bad Minter rip off. 

If you think about it, a lot of these advertorial photographers day rates are well over $100k, why not hire the artist?* Or at least try? Or at least try to get something original? 

That is going to be today. I’m going to post my fantasy artist/fashion collaborations. 

*Besides the obvious that the artist doesn’t want to participate. 

kellymce:

abigaillphillips:

thepinakes:

My alma mater, San José State University SLIS, is changing its name to SJSU “School of Information.” Libraries aren’t dying, but library schools think they are. From their new “About” blurb:

"Graduates work in diverse areas, such as information governance, user experience…

My school at Florida State University changed its name from School of Library and Information Studies to School of Information a little over a year ago. It seems to be more of a branding tacit than anything else. There’s a great amount of prestige that comes with being an “iSchool”.

I’m not sure that library schools think libraries are dying so much as they want to be seen as “serious research institutions”(even though we always have been). The iSchool brand gives them that image. But this sort of thing seems cyclical. I’m sure the name will change again; there will be another shift. 

Well, and library school faculty generally aren’t librarians. That seems salient here. 

Just to add, UCLA has gone by Graduate School of Education and Information Studies for quite some time.

liblinks:

LLTG: Librarians Love Tim Gunn

(via thingspeopleasklibrarians)

the-elderscrolls:

Polish doctor that refused to perform abortion named a “hero”
Dr Bogdan Chazan was visited by an expecting mother (32 weeks into pregnancy), who already had 5 miscarriages before and was worried about her health. It turned out that the fetus had hydrocephalus, undeveloped brain and was missing many bones from its skull. The Doctor refused to perform an abortion and didn’t send the woman to another hospital which could do so (according to polish law, if a doctor doesn’t want to perform an abortion, he has to choose another hospital which will agree to do so). Chazan was named a “local hero” and “true warrior of Jesus in the name of life of the unborn” by many polish politicians and catholic activists. He used conscience clause as an excuse for his actions.
The woman gave birth to the child through a C-section. She and her husband spent 10 painful days watching their deformed child die a horrible death. When she finally decided to speak out, she said:
“During these 10 days, no priest, no pro life activist or even dr Chazan came to see the child, to ask if they can help. It was really hard to look at our child. We knew what was coming, but it was still very hard to cope with”
Congratulations, pro-lifers - another “life” saved, another “happy” child and “happy” family. 

the-elderscrolls:

Polish doctor that refused to perform abortion named a “hero”

Dr Bogdan Chazan was visited by an expecting mother (32 weeks into pregnancy), who already had 5 miscarriages before and was worried about her health. It turned out that the fetus had hydrocephalus, undeveloped brain and was missing many bones from its skull. The Doctor refused to perform an abortion and didn’t send the woman to another hospital which could do so (according to polish law, if a doctor doesn’t want to perform an abortion, he has to choose another hospital which will agree to do so). Chazan was named a “local hero” and “true warrior of Jesus in the name of life of the unborn” by many polish politicians and catholic activists. He used conscience clause as an excuse for his actions.

The woman gave birth to the child through a C-section. She and her husband spent 10 painful days watching their deformed child die a horrible death. When she finally decided to speak out, she said:

During these 10 days, no priest, no pro life activist or even dr Chazan came to see the child, to ask if they can help. It was really hard to look at our child. We knew what was coming, but it was still very hard to cope with

Congratulations, pro-lifers - another “life” saved, another “happy” child and “happy” family. 

(via thingspeopleasklibrarians)

“A Black man holding a wallet is more likely to be shot by the police than a White man holding a gun.”

In 2002, a study by Joshua Correll and colleagues, called The Police Officer’s Dilemma, revealed a phenomenon also known as shooter-bias 

The study found that people hesitated longer to shoot an armed white target (and they were more likely to accidentally not shoot). Participants were quicker and more accurate with black armed targets but there were more “false alarms” (shooting them when they were unarmed). These effects were present even though participants did not hold any explicit discriminatory views and wanted to treat all targets fairly

Read More

(via odinsblog)

These effects were present even though participants did not hold any explicit discriminatory views and wanted to treat all targets fairly”

You’ve got to be kidding me. That’s total bullshit. If you’re going to shoot an unarmed black person and then claim to not have discriminatory views …What a crock of shit. 

(via fat-queer)

got that a little bass ackwards there, I think…first the subject claimed no (explicit) racial biases, and THEN they took the test which proved that, yes, they *did* have (implicit) racial bias

TBH though, focusing on that part of the study is, for me anyway, nearly beside the point —it’s like burying the lede: A Black man holding a wallet is more likely to be shot by the police than a White man holding a gun. That sentence is troubling enough without reading beyond the word ‘police’

Like I almost don’t give af about the whys, that experiment is proof enough that racial bias causes unjustified shootings (as if anyone seriously needs more convincing) and I just want it all to stop before more Black people like me are shot for no other reason than the color of our skin

but…if we gotta examine that last sentence, there’s nothing problematic with it, unless you’re interpreting it to say that the participants (or the authors meant that the participants) were not racist

It didn’t say that, and that’s kinda the whole point of the study: will your (white people) actions really match up to your claims?

like why even bother running this experiment on people who ALREADY freely admit to being virulent racists? What would that even prove?

breaking it down:

A) “These effects were present even though participants did not hold any explicit discriminatory views”

translation: test subjects *thought* they aren’t racist because they don’t use the n-word or voted for PBO or some ish like that —a lot of racists actually believe those two things alone eternally exempts them from being a racist

B) “…and wanted to treat all targets fairly” again, what the participants said, allegedly thought, or claimed they “wanted” doesn’t really count after they took a test which blatantly exposed that their actions proved every bit as racist as the actions of…well, a racist

the “Read More” link (in the original post above) and it’s article about Kofi Adu-Brempong goes into it a little more and isn’t giving any white person a pass for being “not racist”    it just shows that implicit racial bias can manifest in the same way—and is frequently just as deadly—as explicit racial bias

(via odinsblog)

(via thingspeopleasklibrarians)