Empress of Mars: Undisputed @zebratron2084@awoo.space
- location
- all outdoors
- species
- F.O.U.S.
- mood
- bitey
- diet
- you
🔥💫🐯(火星虎)
ɪɴᴄᴇɴᴅɪᴀʀʏ ᴘʟᴀɴᴇᴛ ᴄᴀᴛʙᴇᴀsᴛ ʀᴇᴢᴇʏᴀ
read this, pitiful humans:
http://egypt.urnash.com/parallax/
Joined Jun 2017
re: cw: noo maf (mandatory cw for length)
@frameacloud Sorry to spam you, but this Peanuts comic also sums it up pretty well, both the content and the resulting frustrations...
re: cw: noo maf (mandatory cw for length)
@frameacloud And while this Feynman bit is about a different subject, I feel like it criticizes the same "airy-fairy" tendencies in 1970s STEM education... http://fy.chalmers.se/~f3aamp/teaching/wakalix.html
re: cw: noo maf (mandatory cw for length)
@frameacloud Money quote from one of the applied math GOATs:
cw: noo maf (mandatory cw for length)
@frameacloud Huh. I only saw a bit of New Math education, given NE Ohio is always about 20 years behind the times at best... but my Mom was a big advocate of using "math manipulatives" (i.e. physical objects meant to teach math concepts concretely) and such when she was teaching 2nd/3rd grade, and I think those are considered a part of it.
My impression is that New Math was more focused on exploring the underlying concepts of how math works—like place value, base systems, basic set theory, foundational concepts like the additive/commutative/distributive property, and such—rather than relying on rote methods like chanting one's times tables.
I'm really torn about it, honestly. For "gifties" who were already good at abstract reasoning, it was a blessing and a real eye-opener—I know I sure prefer to know WHY something works instead of just how. My love of math only grew from exposure to all this weird, borderline-philosophical stuff.
But I can easily how it would just be a bridge too far, for kids and parents who were of the "TEACHER?! WHEN ARE WE GONNA _USE_ THIS?" mentality (often for very understandable class/survival reasons) and just did not have the background to grasp New Math. The stereotypical criticism of "dammit, my kid knows the commutative property—sort of—but can't multiply 27×13" is not invalid. This is doubly true in a typical American public school that's barely equipped to even teach kids the basics, let alone esoterica...
@Leucrotta i like that last one 🐯
@Leucrotta Hmm, I wonder if I've finally found somebody who might actually care, if I deliver my whole spiel about what my favorite drinking games have in common...
(TL;DR: They should be as short as possible, e.g., drinking for "Hi Bob!" with The Bob Newhart Show, "Drink every time Vyv demolishes something" for Young Ones, or "Drink whatever the Archer cast is drinking, when they drink it*." Drinking games with multi-page lists are lame.)
*DO NOT ATTEMPT THIS ONE FOR YOU WILL SURELY DIE
re: lyricsposting
@LeDiva Oh THAAAANKS nice KIIIITTY! (*glaven*)
feelin bitey tbh 🐯
re: secret martian lore
@dodec We don't like how fast they go through socks. 🐯
@LeDiva Is it Smithereens, or the one with like Lindsey Lohan or Amanda Bynes or whatever? O;)
out-of-context theater, shitpost, abject nonsense, MST0K
"HAMOS: THE MANS OF FATE!"
secret martian lore
New headcanon: due to the relative lack of tigroid genomic diversity left by the 2200s, Martian DNA is actually about 15-20% housecat.
Asking Martians about rumors to this effect is like asking Klingons about their forehead ridges, i.e., a good way to find yourself dangling from a coathook.
But if you MUST know, that 15-20% is mostly Maine Coon and Norwegian Forest Cat, i.e., the BIGGEST AND BEST smallcat components available.
It's why we get along relatively well with Mooncats, though we'd never admit it to one of THEM. It's also why our fur doesn't need conditioner, it just looks fluffy and perfect every single day. *tosses her luxuriant metallic-red mane*
@kelseyhusky @LexYeen@snouts.online I didn't even know it was sick⸮ 😺
@LexYeen@snouts.online Oh great, wouldn't us editorial types just love one more thing for people to get wrong⸮
@LeDiva I've seen the "Um, Mortal Kombat, but..." one, but not the other two!
@001zlnv @Austin_Dern I'd add Sheila aka "Dr. Mrs. Guildmaster Attorney Frau Empress Postmaster General Sergeant Grand Panjandrum The Monarch" to that list too, honestly.
@001zlnv @Austin_Dern DICK MOVE, PHANTOM LIMB!
Yeah, I love that guy.
Empress of Mars: Undisputed
boosted
history of color gender signifiers (658 words, boost with CW, content warning for possible pronoun slur in thread)
Thread by @activationfxn starting with https://todon.nl/@activationfxn/102251491860764643
notes in square brackets added
----
Learned a thing today: The cultural expectations around the use of the colors pink and blue as gender signifiers originated in the U.S. at the turn of the last century.
----
Until the 1900s, U.S. babies were dressed the same regardless of whether they were AFAB or AMAB. They were all dressed in plain white dresses, and usually had long hair until a few years before adolescence.
----
This is a picture of Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1884. Such fashion for children was typical at the time. Check out those mary-jane shoes.
[
image description: A picture of FDR as a child, dressed in a frilly white dress and mary jane shoes with a feathered hat and long blond hair.
image: see https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Franklin-Roosevelt-1884.jpg
]
----
This styling was extremely practical. It was easy to see spills and stains on the white cloth, the clothing was easy to bleach, and the dress made it easy to change diapers.
----
[content warning: use of possible pronoun slur]
In fact, Americans in the Victorian era saw little difference to distinguish between AFAB and AMAB babies at all. Gendered pronouns weren't used for babies and toddlers; instead, babies were referred to as "it" or "baby." Imagine mothers in the 1800's complaining, "It cried all night!"
----
Putting gender-specific clothing on a baby or toddler was seen as incredibly skeevy by the Victorians. Parents still expected their babies to adhere to traditional gender roles when they grew up, but gender was strongly linked to sex. Dressing an AMAB baby in a little suit and tie might look adorable to many modern Americans, but it would be extremely cringe for a Victorian. Think "Toddlers in Tiaras."
----
This started to change in the early 1900s. People start putting their baby/toddler boys in masc clothing and giving them short haircuts with the goal to distinguish between "boys" and "girls" earlier. The reasons for this shift are somewhat unclear, but it's hypothesized that there was a "crisis of masculinity" at the turn of the century. Urbanization moved people from farms into cities, and it's thought that many men felt threatened by the huge shift in their gender role as they moved from traditional "masc" farm work to different occupations.
----
Pink and blue start to be used to code gender in the early 1900s. Pastels were thought of as "youthful" colors, and a wide variety of pink or blue baby blankets, clothes, and announcement cards were produced. But it hadn't yet been settled which color was for which gender. In 1927, the expectant Queen of Belgium had a nursery decorated in pink in anticipation of a baby boy.
----
After decades of ambiguity, the question seemed largely settled by the 1950s. Pink was for girls and blue was for boys. There's strong evidence that the capitalist drive for profit drove some of the promotion of gendered children's clothes. Before the pink/blue convention, parents could use the same wardrobe of white dresses for each of their children. With different colors for AFAB/AMAB babies, parents could no longer fully utilize hand-me-downs for each kid.
----
By the 1980s, advertisers had created such a strong association between pink and femininity that pink was "toxic" for boys and men. The fact that the opposite was less true, and that it was not considered humiliating for women to wear light blue, is a remarkable reflection of societal misogyny. You may remember that it was a big deal when men started wearing pink button-ups in the late 2000s. And we're only now letting go of the pink/blue gendering of children's clothes.
All of the above information was from the work of historians Jo Paoletti and Hanne Blank, and was shamelessly regurgitated from the podcast "Every Little Thing."
@Leucrotta Happy birthday!
Hmm, TMI questions... Who's the most problematic celebrity you still have a soft (or, um, hard) spot for?
- location
- all outdoors
- species
- F.O.U.S.
- mood
- bitey
- diet
- you
🔥💫🐯(火星虎)
ɪɴᴄᴇɴᴅɪᴀʀʏ ᴘʟᴀɴᴇᴛ ᴄᴀᴛʙᴇᴀsᴛ ʀᴇᴢᴇʏᴀ
read this, pitiful humans:
http://egypt.urnash.com/parallax/
Joined Jun 2017
