Which boss level do you have to clear to get this kind of dropped gear?
Source: Weed wacker achieves level 99
Auto Added by WPeMatico
After eight years, Marijuana Pepsi Vandyck has earned her PhD in higher education from Cardinal Stritch University. And yes, Marijuana Pepsi is her real given name. From the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:
Her mother, Maggie (Brandy) Johnson, who still lives in Beloit, (Wisconsin) picked out her name and proclaimed that it would take her around the world. Her sisters, one older and one younger, got relatively common names, Kimberly and Robin.
Teachers, classmates, bosses and other people in Marijuana’s life pushed back against her name and teased her. Some suggested she go to court and change it. Some flat out refused to call her that or insisted on Mary, which she rejected.
As much as people blamed and judged her mother for the name, Marijuana credits her mom with making her the strong, balanced, entrepreneurial woman she is today…
But mostly she embraces the name as proof that you can overcome any obstacle in life and achieve your dreams…
It’s fitting that an African American woman who has gone through life as Marijuana Pepsi chose as her dissertation topic: “Black names in white classrooms: Teacher behaviors and student perceptions.”
“Yes, her name really is Marijuana Pepsi, and now she’s Dr. Marijuana Pepsi to you” by Jim Stingl (Milwaukee Journal Sentinel)
Kraft has a new product for kids: Salad “frosting.” It’s ranch dressing in a squeeze pouch. The plug (if it isn’t obvious): Kids don’t like salad but they do enjoy sugar, so trick ‘em into eating more greens with this special label, you sneaky parent, you.
If you’re curious about the morning routine of this parenting editor, I will tell you that a large portion of it involves scampering around the house, asking: “Has anyone seen a hairbrush?” (I say “a” hairbrush because we have about six of them lying around somewhere.) This has been a dumb, ongoing issue. I never have…
Yennihlecm Montevideo plays another Song of Ice and Fire. This one’s surpising and jaunty, at least until the end. Then, as with the TV series, we head into darker territory.
Author Naomi Wolf has a new book coming out titled “Outrages: Sex, Censorship and the Criminalization of Love“. It’s about the emergence of homosexuality as a concept and its criminalization in 19th-century England.
…the story, brilliantly told, of why this two-pronged State repression took hold—first in England and spreading quickly to America—and why it was attached so dramatically, for the first time, to homosexual men.
Before 1857 it wasn’t “homosexuality” that was a crime, but simply the act of sodomy. But in a single stroke, not only was love between men illegal, but anything referring to this love became obscene, unprintable, unspeakable.
In a BBC interview with Wolf, her host, historian Matthew Sweet, points out two serious problems with her work. First, she assumes “sodomy” refers to homosexuality, but a key example she uses was a child abuser.
Secondly, she assumes the 19th-century legal term “death recorded” (for example) means the convict was executed, when in fact it means the opposite: the sentence of death being merely recorded rather than carried out, because the prisoner was pardoned and freed. A term she thought signaled draconian punishment turns out to demonstrate leniency.
Here’s the tape. Sweet is polite and professional, and Wolf takes the news well, but it’s very painful listening.
Everyone listen to Naomi Wolf realize on live radio that the historical thesis of the book she’s there to promote is based on her misunderstanding a legal term pic.twitter.com/a3tB77g3c1
— Edmund Hochreiter (@thymetikon) May 23, 2019
Fortunate that it isn’t out yet (and perhaps not even printed, as the release date is a couple of months out) so Wolf and publisher Virago can fix it. But Sweet adds that the supposed execution of gay men in Victorian England is a “major plank” in the book, when in fact the last one took place years before her reign.
Some ideas do not get the praise they initially deserve. This was the case with Copernicus’ heliocentric solar system back in the 1500s, and it’s the case today with this brilliant burrito hack, brought to us by Reddit user shananies.
Recent headlines from satirical articles published at Reductress:
Vice interviewed Reductress co-founders and editors Sarah Pappalardo and Beth Newell about their approach to covering extreme anti-abortion legislation:
What does humor add to this conversation that straight news reporting can’t?
Pappalardo: Satire allows us to zero in on the hypocrisies built into the pro-life movement and the political strategies they’ve employed. It’s a way to shed light on less-talked-about subjects […] and hopefully make people feel a little less alone right now. And they aren’t: Pro-choice people are in the overwhelming majority right now. Nothing that happened or will happen in the Supreme Court was achieved democratically.
Newell: We’re able to push the logic of these bills further, which helps to highlight their absurdity. I think we all get a little too used to certain talking points, even when we disagree with them. This is a nice affirmation to ourselves of how incredibly flawed they are.
Before you read a book, take a blank sheet of paper and write down what you know about that subject. You can mindmap it, or you can write bullet points. Then read a chapter of that book. Now go back to that sheet and use a different color pen and fill in the gaps: what did I learn?, did I learn a different terminology?, can I connect it to what I’ve already read?
Before you pick up the book for the next chapter skim this sheet. It primes your brain for what you’re going to read. I think that’s a really effective way to not only build on the knowledge you have but to connect what you’re reading to the existing knowledge. It’s going to show you what you’ve learned because it’s going to be a very visual distinction. It’s going to be a different color of ink, and I think that allows you to connect to the book.
I often do this in the jacket of the book if I don’t have a physical piece of paper.
Image: Big Think/YouTube
Classic three-act narrative structure pic.twitter.com/AP4WgdxlN8
— Jack Seale (@jackseale) May 1, 2019
(via Daily Grail)