Sooooo I thought long and hard about what I’m giving up for Lent. And I have decided



It’ll probably be best since a good chunk of my free time is spent here lol. This will be last post before logging out. If you want to bug me I’ll still be on twitter @artistmaelee

See you lovelies on Easter!



Just glancing at the epic aerial shots above, you’d think they were captured by a professional photographer. 

In fact, these amazing photos were taken by Wei Gensheng, a crane operator currently working in Shanghai. 

Crane Operator Takes Stunning Aerial Photos of Shanghai

via SLR Lounge

2102. Shanghai From A Crane. Crane operator by day, aerial photographer by day too.

(Source: donpirulin)

apolloadama asked: One of the professors in my department just mentioned he got an email from JPER (Journal of Planning Education and Research) saying they now consider anything posted online as "previous publication," meaning they won't publish any articles that may have appeared, e.g., on someone's blog. This is exactly what you were talking about--gatekeeping of academic writing, keeping the circle small and privileged. It's a disgrace. Thank you for fighting the good fight here for all of us!!



I think it’s not really something your average person is going to know about at all, but it’s basically

to literally

stop/discourage things like this blog from happening.

It’s a circling of the wagons, so they can point to a project like this, which 1. is outside their purview for very good reasons and 2. wouldn’t get funding anyway because it’s “too confrontational”.

It’s so they can point to independent projects published online and say “oh, they’re just some wingnut working outside respectable institutions of learning”.

It’s making sure we never get payment or recognition for this kind of work. On the one hand, it might have the effect of stemming some of the rampant plagiarism that goes on, but what do you want to bet that this rule is going to get bent for people who fall IN the sacred circle of publishing within academic journals and maybe happened to lift their entire thesis from “some blog”? And that somehow this new rule will only affect people who’ve previously blogged academic journal-level material online because they were repudiated from publishing it there first? Because that’s already pretty much the established pattern.

That’s the funny thing about structural and institutional disenfranchisement: it’s this amazing coincidence that it seems to always only work in one direction; benefiting those who already have power and recognition, and further disenfranchising those who have neither.


he was before his time

(Source: afirahs)


全金色凤冠         Golden Phoenix Crown


全金色凤冠         Golden Phoenix Crown



You know what’s funny? I think a lot of people view these images as interesting because they’re “unrealistic” or specifically because they feature men of color, anachronistic. I do like them, but I just wanted to add something….

For each of these implied anachronisms, there is a real painting of a real Man of Color from European Art History. (The text for each image is a link to learn more!)

A French Gentleman, c. 1800

Toussaint L’Ouverture, c. 1790s

Alexander Pushkin, 1899

Portrait of Général Thomas Alexandre Dumas (father of author Alexandre Dumas)

Raden Syarif Bustaman Saleh, Javanese Aristocrat and Artist in the Netherlands, 1840

Olaudah Equiano, c. 1840s

Abram Petrovich Gannibal, c. 1690s

Chevalier de Saint-Georges, c. 1780s

Ira Aldridge, Victorian Actor, c. 1840

János Bihari, Composer, c. 1840

The Postillion of Erddig House, 1730

Jack Black of Ystumllyn, Wales, 1754

A Young Eastern European Man c. 1750:

P.S. my favorite from the OP is!!!


Feminism is having a wardrobe malfunction.

Does your brand of feminism remove barriers for women, or simply move them around? Does is expand options for women, or does it just shift them? You don’t liberate women by forcing them to choose option B instead of option A. What is comfortable for you might not be comfortable for someone else, and it’s entirely possible that what you see as oppressive, other women find comfortable or even downright liberating.

Before you think the girl in the middle is a strawman, let me tell you I used to be her, back in my misguided youth. I considered myself the standard to which other people should adhere. But that was stupid. It’s not up to me to tell people how to dress, and it’s much nicer to let everyone choose for themselves.

Some women would feel naked without a veil. Some women would find it restrictive. Some women would feel restricted by a bra. Some women would feel naked without one. Some women would feel restricted by a tight corset. Others love them. Some wear lots of clothes with a corset. Some only wear the corset and nothing else. What makes any article of clothing oppressive is someone forcing you to wear it. And it’s just as oppressive to force someone not to wear something that they want to wear.

So you wish you were Asian.


My parents came to the United States with a suitcase filled with things from their previous lives. They worked two jobs, seven days a week, while studying as full-time students to complete their education. My dad tells me stories about how he waited tables late into…

That said, stereotypes aren’t so much about people totally projecting things that completely aren’t there but about people having a framework with which they interpret things that actually are there. It’s not that racism causes people to see (for example) belligerent teenage boys where there are none, but that a white belligerent teenage boy is just seen as himself while a black belligerent teenage boy is part of a pattern, a script, and when people blindly follow the scripts in their head that leads to discrimination and prejudice. So yeah, it is a fact, I think, that I was a bit off-putting in my Jeopardy! appearance—hyper-focused on the game, had an intense stare, clicked madly on the buzzer, spat out answers super-fast, wasn’t too charming in the interviews, etc. But this may have taken root in people’s heads because I’m an Asian and the “Asian mastermind” is a meme in people’s heads that it wouldn’t have otherwise.Look, we all know that there’s a trope in the movies where someone of a minority race is flattened out into just being “good at X” and that the white protagonist is the one we root for because unlike the guy who’s just “good at X” the protagonist has human depth, human relationships, a human point of view—and this somehow makes him more worthy of success than the antagonist who seems to exist just to be good at X. So we root for Rocky against black guys who, by all appearances, really are better boxers than he is, because unlike them Rocky isn’t JUST a boxer, he has a girlfriend, he has hopes, he has dreams, etc. This comes up over and over again in movies where the athletic black competitor is set up as the “heel”—look at the black chick in Million Dollar Baby and how much we’re pushed to hate her. Look at all this “Great White Hope” stuff, historically, with Joe Louis. So is it any surprise that this trope comes into play with Asians? That the Asian character in the movie is the robotic, heartless, genius mastermind who is only pure intellect and whom we’re crying out to be defeated by some white guy who may not be as brainy but has more pluck, more heart, more humanity? It’s not just Flash Gordon vs. Ming the Merciless, it’s stuff like how in the pilot episode of Girls Hannah gets fired in favor of an overachieving Asian girl who’s genuinely better at her job than she is (the Asian girl knows Photoshop and she doesn’t) and we’re supposed to sympathize with Hannah. Okay, here’s one more comment from the Internet that kind of encapsulates it. The kind of un-self-awareness of what someone is saying when they say they’d prefer I not win because I try too hard at the game, work too hard at it, care too much about it, and that they’d prefer that a “likable average Joe” win. This is disturbing because it amounts to basically an attack on competence, a desire to bust people who work very hard and have very strong natural gifts down in favor of “likable average Joes”—and it’s disturbing because the subtext is frequently that to be “likable” and “average” you have to have other traits that are comforting and appealing to an “average Joe” audience, like white skin and an American accent.

- Arthur Chu to Ken Jennings (via pushinghoopswithsticks)

My duuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuude.

(via cordjefferson)

Science, Mr. White

(via nickdouglas)

I’m a HUGE Jeopardy fan (shut up) and I’ve loved watching Arthur Chu kick the game’s ass. He’s absolutely on the mark about all this stuff.

(via thebicker)

And it always comes down to white people favor whiteness over competence, then turn around and say everyone else needs to work harder if they want to get rewarded for their efforts…

(via bankuei)

As Jenny Yang and Angry Asian Man have been saying….CHU ON THIS!

(via fascinasians)