titotito

jas0nwaterfalls:

manamana6672:

missespeon:

outofcontextarthur:

can we talk about how this fucking pbs show aimed at little kids easily talked about how anxiety is stressful but normal

Ok no but can we talk about this entire episode? 

It was called April 9th, and it was actually a response to the 9/11 attacks. It didn’t talk about the attacks themselves, but rather focused on teaching kids to deal with the all of the emotions that they might be feeling as a result. They set up a situation that might evoke similar emotions in children: a massive fire at the school.

Arthur’s dad was in the fire, so (as you can see above), Arthur is constantly worried about his dad’s safety.

Sue Ellen is grieving because her journal, which contained a huge amount of precious memories, was destroyed in the fire. Muffy is confused why she can’t just cheer Sue Ellen up by giving her a new journal.

Buster wasn’t at school that day, and feels confused and guilty that he isn’t sad about the fire like the other kids. He then befriends the school janitor, who has to retire due to an injury that, at his age, is pretty serious.

Binky actually saw the flames, and is constantly traumatized by the event. He doesn’t tell anyone because he feels like he would lose his tough-guy reputation if he admitted that he was scared.

The episode teaches kids that all of these emotions are perfectly normal and natural, that there’s not one right way to feel, and that even if it takes a while, things are going to be okay.

The thing that makes this show so great, in my opinion, is that it knows that kids are intellegent and strong enough to deal with these things if you present them in the right way. It doesn’t hide them, it doesn’t sugar coat them, it just presents them in a way that children can understand and shows them how to deal with them.

pretty incredible

agent-hardass
dederants:

thelesbianguide:

hotrufftrade:

sonofbaldwin:

#Facts

Think about this shit.

This is the third time the bill has failed, following defeats in 2010 and 2012.
The Paycheck Fairness Act would require employers to disclose payment and demographic information and prevent them from punishing workers who discuss their salaries. It would also allow civil pay discrimination lawsuits to be filed against employers.
Republicans opposed the bill, arguing it would encourage “frivolous” lawsuits and deprive women of workplace flexibility.- MSNBC
More reading: Here, hereStats: here and here

This says a lot about what the GOP is about, and the fact they’re deep in the pocket of Big Corporations. So deep they cannot dig their way out, even if they wanted to.

dederants:

thelesbianguide:

hotrufftrade:

sonofbaldwin:

#Facts

Think about this shit.

This is the third time the bill has failed, following defeats in 2010 and 2012.

The Paycheck Fairness Act would require employers to disclose payment and demographic information and prevent them from punishing workers who discuss their salaries. It would also allow civil pay discrimination lawsuits to be filed against employers.

Republicans opposed the bill, arguing it would encourage “frivolous” lawsuits and deprive women of workplace flexibility.
- MSNBC

More reading: Here, here
Stats: here and here

This says a lot about what the GOP is about, and the fact they’re deep in the pocket of Big Corporations. So deep they cannot dig their way out, even if they wanted to.

apersnicketylemon
chauvinistsushi:

treely3256:

hashtag-loser:

cloudcuckoolander527:

vaspider:

doctorblainewilliams:

thedoctorsherlock:

Why doesn’t this have a million notes?!

i love how the “did you drug them” has a little pit stop at “you’re evil”

As well it should.

I’ve reblogged this before but Imma do it again because a)it’s awesome and b) I have a specific voice when I say “Do not do the sex”.

This needs to be on a billboard and posters all around the world. Maybe even on menus are restaurants

Needs to be in bars

do not do the sex

chauvinistsushi:

treely3256:

hashtag-loser:

cloudcuckoolander527:

vaspider:

doctorblainewilliams:

thedoctorsherlock:

Why doesn’t this have a million notes?!

i love how the “did you drug them” has a little pit stop at “you’re evil”

As well it should.

I’ve reblogged this before but Imma do it again because a)it’s awesome and b) I have a specific voice when I say “Do not do the sex”.

This needs to be on a billboard and posters all around the world. Maybe even on menus are restaurants

Needs to be in bars

do not do the sex

agent-hardass
We praise people for being “naturally” smart, too, “naturally” athletic, and etc. But studies continue to show, as they have for some time now, that it is generally healthier to praise schoolchildren for being hardworking, than for being naturally gifted. We know now that to emphasize a child’s inherent ability places pressure on that child to continue to be accidentally talented, which is something that is hard for anyone to control. When the children who are applauded for their natural skills fail, they are shown to take the failure very personally. After all, the process of their success has always seemed mysterious and basic and inseparable from the rest of their identity, so it must be they who are failing as whole people. When students are instead complimented and rewarded for their effort and improvement, they tend to not be so hard on themselves. When they fail, they reason, “Well, I’ll work harder next time.” They learn that they are capable of success, rather than constantly automatically deserving of it, and they learn simultaneously that they are bigger and more complex than their individual successes or failures.

Kate of Eat the Damn Cake, The Stupidity of “Natural” Beauty (via theimperfectascent)

I lost whole years of my life to self-loathing and self-sabotaging because I couldn’t sustain being ‘gifted’.  Don’t make the same mistake.

(via mossonhighheels)

This is so, so important for teachers to understand. I try, in every report card, to focus on effort, not natural ability. And you know what? It makes a big difference in my classroom.

(via agent-hardass)
apersnicketylemon
fact-tory:

lookatthisfuckingoppressor:

smellyanne:

lookatthisfuckinradfem:

Well, you know…shit.

why would you pay someone for 26-51 weeks for doing nothing

you have a very, very odd definition of “doing nothing”.

Why would you pay someone for 26-51 weeks to care for a child (which is, as the previous comment states, in no way “doing nothing”)?
Allow me to answer that for you:
A study of 16 European countries from 1969-1994 found that “more generous paid leave is found to reduce deaths of infants and young children”; specifically, mathematical models found that
"a 10-week increase in paid leave is predicted to reduce infant mortality rates by between 2.5% and 3.4%,"
"a 10-week extension [in leave] is predicted to decrease post-neonatal deaths by 3.7 to 4.5% and child fatalities by 3.3 to 3.5%," and
"rights to a year of job-protected paid leave are associated with roughly a 20% decline in post-neonatal deaths and a 15% decrease in fatalities occurring between the first and fifth birthdays" (x)

A more recent study again of 16 European countries plus the USA and Japan found that “a 10-week extension in job-protected paid leave is predicted to decrease infant mortality rates, post-neonatal mortality rates, and child mortality rates by 2.6%, 4.1%, and 3%, respectively” but that these effects were not found if the leave was not job-protected or paid (x)
Women who receive pad leave are more likely to be employed, 54% more likely to report wage increases, and have a 39% lower likelihood of receiving public assistance and a 40% lower likelihood of receiving food stamps in the year after the child’s birth; men were also less likely to receive public assistance and food stamps if they received paid family leave (x)
"Maternity leave legislation in Europe effectively increases job protection and female labour market attachment" (x)
"An increase in leave duration is associated with a decrease in [post-partum] depressive symptoms until six months postpartum" (x)
"Shorter maternity leave (<12 weeks) was associated with higher maternal depression, lower parental preoccupation with the infant, less knowledge of infant development, more negative impact of birth on self-esteem and marriage, and higher career centrality" (x)
"Breastfeeding duration increased sharply, by over a month, and the proportion of mothers attaining the public health benchmark of 6 months exclusive breastfeeding increased by nearly 40% [after Canada increased the length of mandated paid maternity leave]" (x)
"Maternity leave led to small increases in birth weight, decreases in the likelihood of a premature birth, and substantial decreases in infant mortality for children of college-educated and married mothers, who were most able to take advantage of unpaid leave [in the US]" (x)
"Increased time with the child [due to mandated maternity leave in Norway] led to a 2.7 percentage points decline in high school dropout and a 5% increase in wages at age 30" (x)
"Children whose mothers return to work early are less likely to receive regular medical checkups and breastfeeding in the first year of life, as well as to have all of their DPT/Oral Polio immunisations (in approximately the first 18 months of life)" and "children whose mothers return full-time within 12 weeks are more likely to have externalising behaviour problems at age 4" (x)
Does that about answer it?

fact-tory:

lookatthisfuckingoppressor:

smellyanne:

lookatthisfuckinradfem:

Well, you know…shit.

why would you pay someone for 26-51 weeks for doing nothing

you have a very, very odd definition of “doing nothing”.

Why would you pay someone for 26-51 weeks to care for a child (which is, as the previous comment states, in no way “doing nothing”)?

Allow me to answer that for you:

  • A study of 16 European countries from 1969-1994 found that “more generous paid leave is found to reduce deaths of infants and young children”; specifically, mathematical models found that
    • "a 10-week increase in paid leave is predicted to reduce infant mortality rates by between 2.5% and 3.4%,"
    • "a 10-week extension [in leave] is predicted to decrease post-neonatal deaths by 3.7 to 4.5% and child fatalities by 3.3 to 3.5%," and
    • "rights to a year of job-protected paid leave are associated with roughly a 20% decline in post-neonatal deaths and a 15% decrease in fatalities occurring between the first and fifth birthdays" (x)
  • A more recent study again of 16 European countries plus the USA and Japan found that “a 10-week extension in job-protected paid leave is predicted to decrease infant mortality rates, post-neonatal mortality rates, and child mortality rates by 2.6%, 4.1%, and 3%, respectively” but that these effects were not found if the leave was not job-protected or paid (x)
  • Women who receive pad leave are more likely to be employed, 54% more likely to report wage increases, and have a 39% lower likelihood of receiving public assistance and a 40% lower likelihood of receiving food stamps in the year after the child’s birth; men were also less likely to receive public assistance and food stamps if they received paid family leave (x)
  • "Maternity leave legislation in Europe effectively increases job protection and female labour market attachment" (x)
  • "An increase in leave duration is associated with a decrease in [post-partum] depressive symptoms until six months postpartum" (x)
  • "Shorter maternity leave (<12 weeks) was associated with higher maternal depression, lower parental preoccupation with the infant, less knowledge of infant development, more negative impact of birth on self-esteem and marriage, and higher career centrality" (x)
  • "Breastfeeding duration increased sharply, by over a month, and the proportion of mothers attaining the public health benchmark of 6 months exclusive breastfeeding increased by nearly 40% [after Canada increased the length of mandated paid maternity leave]" (x)
  • "Maternity leave led to small increases in birth weight, decreases in the likelihood of a premature birth, and substantial decreases in infant mortality for children of college-educated and married mothers, who were most able to take advantage of unpaid leave [in the US]" (x)
  • "Increased time with the child [due to mandated maternity leave in Norway] led to a 2.7 percentage points decline in high school dropout and a 5% increase in wages at age 30" (x)
  • "Children whose mothers return to work early are less likely to receive regular medical checkups and breastfeeding in the first year of life, as well as to have all of their DPT/Oral Polio immunisations (in approximately the first 18 months of life)" and "children whose mothers return full-time within 12 weeks are more likely to have externalising behaviour problems at age 4" (x)

Does that about answer it?

theuntoldwants

strugglingtobeheard:

cynique:

popculturebrain:

Leading Men Age, Leading Women Don’t | Vulture

There are more charts if you click through.

I’m so glad this info graphic is going around, because so many people don’t realize how ageism and misogyny play hand in hand and how the sexualization of young girls play into this.

and how absolutely normalized it is via media such as popular film