Links of Great Interest 7/10/09

Share on Tumblr

Bored at work? Check out these links of great interest. ;)

The EPA is going to rebuild uranium contaminated Navajo homes.

FitSugar discusses the significance of bras in Brandi Chastain’s most famous moment. SweetMachine at Shapely Prose breaks down the complicated relationship between women and boobs. I especially appreciated her discussion of body types, class, and fashion.

Does True Blood hate gay people? You tell us. I know we have some Sookie fans reading along.

Lt Choi’s outing is grossly misinterpreted here. Want to help him out? Contact the Courage Campaign.

Comments

  1. Pocket Nerd says

    “Grossly misinterpreted” doesn’t begin to cover that little blurb; I’ve never seen a hatchet job so ably combine “vicious” with “short.”

    I skimmed the site a little further; for all the Jawa Report’s authors probably think of themselves as the “the Little Guys”—and therefore the heroes of the narrative—they’re actually the product of a culture built around their goals, their power, and their privilege. In other words, they aren’t jawas, they’re Imperials.

  2. The OTHER Maria says

    Plus, I’m hoping that if they show pingbacks, their readers will come here, read Choi’s interview and maybe get a different perspective.

  3. sbg says

    Somewhat ironically, I read that SP post one day after I’d had a total self-loathing meltdown. It really helped me put things into perspective, as do many, many of their posts.

  4. SunlessNick says

    What a can of bilge (the Choi article, not you). Left my comment, anyway.

    I haven’t seen True Blood yet, but the io9 article evokes misgivings I always have about “monster as minority” stories.

  5. Pocket Nerd says

    One commenter at SwampPolitics.com suggested all homosexual service members should “announce that they are gay, loudly” on July 4th.

    That might not be a bad idea. I spent six years in the service, and my experience suggests there are a loooooot of LGBT men and women in uniform. Certainly much more than the 3-10% you’d expect from a random sampling of society. Could the U.S. military ax, say, 15% of its ranks and stay functional? Particularly now, during a chronic recruiting shortfall?

    Alas, the arch-reactionaries who populate the highest ranks would certainly try. These are people who still complain openly about the integration of the Women’s Army Corps into the rest of the service.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.