Quote

It’s being framed that she shut down the show for 10 minutes,“ Mac said, "and I posit that the ‘shut down’ was part of the show. She wasn’t a plant but it’s my point of view that the things that happen in the space between the start of the show and the end are actually the show. How does her heckling help us understand activism, civil rights, mob consciousness, individualism, institutionalized racism, privilege, and community? These are all themes of the show, which she helped us highlight.”

copperbadge:

strangeselkie:

copperbadge:

kiralamouse:

gooseweasel:

If anyone tries to tell you that Shakespeare is stuffy or boring or highbrow, just remember that the word “nothing” was used in Elizabethan era slang as a euphemism for “vagina”. 

Shakespeare has a play called “Much Ado About Nothing”, which you could basically read in modern slang as “Freaking Out Over Pussy”. And that’s pretty much exactly what happens in the play. 

It’s also a pun with a third meaning. There’s the sex sense of much ado about “nothing”, there’s the obvious sense that people today see, and then there’s the fact that in Shakespeare’s day, “nothing” was pronounced pretty much the same as “noting”, which was a term used for gossip. So, “Flamewar Over Rumors” works as a title interpretation, too.

The reason we call Shakespeare a genius is that he can make a pussy joke in the same exact words he uses to make biting social commentary about letting unverified gossip take over the discourse.

So like.

A truly accurate modern translation would be “I Cunt Believe He Said That”?

@copperbadge YOU GO AND SIT AMONG THE MUSTARDS  AND THINK ABOUT WHAT YOU’VE DONE

I truly feel the ghost of Shakespeare has never been more proud of me. 

“There’s a double meaning in that.”

Quote

The submitted work *may not* be related to an existing linear television program or series, but *may* be derivative of, or related to, material from other media such as books, graphic novels, movies, theater, games or similar works.

Emmy Submission Rules, Category 45 OUTSTANDING ORIGINAL INTERACTIVE PROGRAM

http://www.emmys.com/sites/default/files/Downloads/2018-rules-procedures-v4.pdf

That time when (perhaps) “Welcome To Sanditon” led to the Emmys making a rules clarification 🙂

Quote

It felt important to all of the writers on the staff that we approach it with, first of all, with respect. Because there are presumably going to be people watching it who were directly affected by that day, having lost loved ones, or friends, or family. But also we wanted to try to recapture that experience, that almost everybody that remembers that day had, of being outside it, of not knowing exactly what was happening. And there was a panic inherent in that. And we really get that, in particular though Ali Soufan, who’s half a world away, and cannot figure out what’s happening. And slowly over the course of the day it starts to dawn on him, “I think I lost my friend, I think I lost my mentor.” And to me, that captures something really fundamental about that day, through one of the characters we’ve come to know and love, rather than getting involved in some kind of re-created action sequence downtown. It just felt so wrong to us to go that route.

someroguishgambit:

badscienceshenanigans:

blacksentai:

White dudes have this thing where they believe your best friend in the world can have opposing political ideas. You’re supposed to be able to have healthy debate and disagreeing shouldn’t harm your friendship.
That’s gross and stupid. Its really easy to say that when all your disagreements are theoretical. Its easy to say when none of the laws passed actually effect your life. Fighting with your best friend about corporate regulations, school charters, educational funding, abortion, health care, voting restrictions, drug laws, taxes and all sorts of stuff is cool and lively because none of it is going to actually leave you in a bad spot.
Its different for the rest of us. I can’t be friends with you if you think I shouldn’t be allowed to vote. We can’t be friends if you think my friends shouldn’t have the ability to designate whatever gender they want and have that be legally recognized. We can’t be friends if you think I don’t deserve health care. Or if you think native children should be ripped away from their cultures and people. We can’t be friends if you think closing down health care clinics in an attempt to end safe legal abortions is a good thing.
All these theoretical political ideas and lively debates effect real people, and I won’t be friends with someone who disagrees with me on them. Because disagreement means you don’t see me or a whole bunch of my friends and family as human beings worthy of rights and respect.

When people moan about how politics use to be “civil” what they’re really complaining about is the entry into the debate of the people those policies actually effect. Bit hard to be “civil” when it’s your livelihood or your bodily rights on the line

Quote

Citizenship is itself the primordial kind of injustice in the world. It functions as an extreme form of inherited property and, like other systems in which inherited privilege is overwhelmingly determinant, it arouses little allegiance in those who inherit nothing. Many countries have made efforts, through welfare and education policy, to neutralise the consequences of accidental advantages such as birth. But “accidental advantages” rule at the global level: 97% of citizenship is inherited, which means that the essential horizons of life on this planet are already determined at birth.