Books, Beers and Ballpoints

Wonderful things by a terrible man

Yes yes yes

Eerie Cherry Blossom Art


imageimageThe concept behind this chilling creation by Yosuke Tan sees past students from Iwaki Sogo High School (Japan), using 27 litters of paint, leave their handprints on the windows and walls of the building to create a striking mural of cherry blossom trees. imageimageimageimage


(via artparty)


re: performance and conceptual art - the more i learn about yoko ono as an artist the more it makes sense that everyone sees her relationship with john lennon as a useless scene creature latching onto one of the most talented and original creatives of a generation. pop history just gets which was which very wrong

the-uncensored-she asked: So the feelings of a violent misogynist (Jane Doe) take precedence over the fact he ASSAULTED a female juvenile and female staff member? So we're to acquiesce to the demands of a violent individual with a history of misogynistic violence? Fuck that kid! He battered women and teenage girls, and all you can think of is "proper pronoun use"? Talk about fucked-up priorities but I can't expect any decency out of misogynists.












I hear your concerns, but I am indeed concerned with misgendering this person and treating them like they are a man. They should be treated then, like a violent young woman, which is what she is, a young woman. We don’t move violent young women to men’s facilities when they are violent. That is unacceptable. (IMHO) 

I’m more concerned with the girl who was assaulted and the female staff member who was assaulted by a 5’ 8” 180 lb young man who has a documented history of targeting females for violence.
In a 22 page memorandum by Superior Court judge Burton Kaplan that exhaustively details this violent young man’s long, well documented history of violence:

The CJTS director noted specific behaviors that made the respondent especially dangerous and difficult to secure: an inability to de-escalate, targeting of female staff, and smearing of feces. He stated that the incidents became steadily more aggressive and intense as the respondent increased in size and strength. Finally, he stated that he had not seen the same level of behavior in any other juveniles at the training school. [He] stated that CJTS staff are often assaulted, but that this is in the course of an intervention, when they are trying to break up a fight between residents. The respondent, in contrast, specifically targets staff members.

On November 21, 2013, the respondent pleaded guilty to assault on an officer and was committed delinquent to DCF for a period not to exceed eighteen months. She was then placed at the Meadowridge Academy, a therapeutic boarding school that provides specialized trauma-informed treatment services, in the girls dormitory. During her two month placement at Meadowridge, she committed multiple assaults, first pulling the hair and spitting on one staff member, kicking another, and attacking another student, pulling her hair and scratching and punching her. Then, on January 28, 2014, the respondent attacked a member of the Meadowridge staff and was discharged from Meadowridge and placed at the Connecticut Juvenile Training School on January 31, 2014.

The Meadowridge staff member, a resident counselor, whom the respondent assaulted on January 28, 2014, testified at length about her relationship with the respondent. They had a close relationship prior to the incident, going on outings together and talking regularly. They had a brief falling out when the staff member had to search the respondent’s room, but their relationship approved again prior to the assault. The assault occurred after the respondent was agitated and the assaulted staff member and another staff member were trying to calm her down. The respondent made threats that she would punch or cut the two staff members. The other staff member grabbed the respondent. She pull an arm free, which the assaulted staff member tried to hold down. The respondent then ripped at her hair and bit her, leaving puncture wounds. All three fell to the ground, after which the respondent, wearing army boots, kicked the assaulted staff member in the head, arm face, and ear. The assaulted staff member believes she was kicked six times. She estimated that the respondent weighed approximately 180 pounds and stood five feet eight inches, compared to her own 134 pounds and five feet five inches.

And from the end of the opinion:

The court finds that the respondent is too dangerous to be housed at either of the facilities operated by DCF. In addition, it is clear that being housed in solitude or near solitude, as the respondent is currently, is not in the respondent’s best interest. As stated above, the court does not credit the respondent’s suggestion that the DCF commissioner previously identified her as an appropriate candidate for the girl’s facility. Rather, as DCF contends, the commissioner discussed various actions committed by the defendant as demonstrating that there are dangerous juvenile girls within the system. The evidence submitted indicates that housing the respondent at the DCF girl’s facility would be just as difficult as housing her at the training school. There is ample evidence that she is dangerous around female staff and other female juvenile residents.

incase you didn’t get that last part There is ample evidence that she is dangerous around female staff and other female juvenile residents.

So female residents and female staff were DELIBERATELY subjected to violence by a known offender because it’s more important that a violent young man is treated “like a young girl” rather than protect the health and safety of females who have cis privilege and all that.

If you care about women and girls call the facility where this violent young man with a history of assaulting females was last housed and ask, “How is the girl who was assaulted doing, how is the staff person who was assaulted doing? Are they OK? What is being done to prevent them from being assaulted again by violent young males who feel “like a girl”? Do girls and female staff have a right to be protected from males who are known to target females for violence?

Connecticut Juvenile Training School (CJTS) - Pueblo Girl’s Program - 860-638-2408

1225 Silver Street, Middletown, CT 06457

Here’s the director of DCF:
Or write us at:
Commissioner’s Office
Department of Children and Families
505 Hudson Street
Hartford, CT 06106

The girls and woman who assaulted by this young man need a lawyer

This is the most ridiculous situation I’ve ever heard of. And this memorandum is correct, typically staff members are injured trying to break up fights between the inmates, usually staff intervention de-escalates the situation. I took a pool cue to the face once, but the young man choked back n his swing the moment he realized a staff member was present. The fact that this boy escalates in the presence of staff makes him very dangerous. In addition the smearing of feces indicates a very aggressive, very mentally ill person. The fact that he targets females, yet these so called activists claim he should be housed with his prey is both thoughtless and cruel.

You wanna check yourself thepeoplesrecord ?

ISSUE ONE: A violent person acted violently, in a way that is obviously not okay. I agree, it is not okay. 

ISSUE TWO: Said person is acknowledged as a trans girl, until they act in a not-okay way, and then they are presented as a man, pretending to be a girl. And it’s on that second issue that I disagree strongly with all the disgusting trans-hate spewed throughout this thread. I don’t believe ones gender identity is dependent on good, healthy, or not-abusive behavior. What you’re all doing is as abhorrent to me as when racist white people use racial expletives to describe criminals who are people of color because ‘they deserve it’.

To summarize: I agree, this woman assaulting people she’s housed with is DEFINITELY not okay. I do not agree: this makes her a man.

There are a lot of things I want to do after reading this thread (like cry or yell or disengage) but checking myself definitely isn’t one of them.

ISSUE ONE: You are a misogynist and are trying to “appeal to the norm” to hide the fact. Nice tactic there!

ISSUE TWO: Gender is garbage sex-based socialized oppression and you can sit and think on that if you need.

ISSUE THREE: You are comparing this act of sexist violence and then mistreatment of the problem to racism. That is disgusting and disrespectful of intersectionality. May I ask if you are white? Seriously.

This scum is a violent male, one who has VICTIMIZED FEMALES SPECIFICALLY and should be treated as such not put in a primarily female space or represented as part of the female sex. 

This is just ridiculous argument here. You argue that gener is socialized garbage and then use gendered, heteronormative vocabulary—the substantive socialized garbage—to modify a woman for the benefits of your argument. You de-gender and the gender Jane Doe. It’s explicitly sexist.

Moving a woman to a men’s facility is the sexist act here.

What I don’t get about this thread, save for maggotmaster’s participation, is that we’re talking about prison here. This isn’t a typical space. It’s most certainly not public space.

I don’t see how any radical feminist point of view can be in service of the police and prison and be taken seriously. Prison is a place that cultivates violence in general but always against the most oppressed and alienated members of the prison population, who also happen to be the most oppressed and alienate members of society. To single out Jane Doe for violence in the way their critics have done in this thread is to implicitly invest in the authority of the prison system and what for the prisoners is a police state. Moreover, the criticism assumes a natural order that must be obeyed and, more problematically, assumes that normative order somehow cultivates a safe place for prisoners. Like a women’s prison is not a safe place for any woman.

And why would we trust a police report to relay the facts. The report above reads to me like so many reports I read when working for the public defender. It reads like a convenient one-sided representation that illustrates bad facts against Jane Doe in a detailed manner without any discussion of any other facts. So often in this kind of reporting any mitigating facts are left out.

Gender /=/ sex.

Take care,


You’re not even addressing what I wrote. Your language is gendered—you used heteronormative words. You’re rhetoric is explicitly sexist. So, no, I think you need to take care. And my complaint has to do with ignoring the space in which Jane Doe is forced to live with other women and the reasons why violence exists in that space in the first place. For me to take your concerns seriously, I think I need to see you understand how the prison space itself is going to exacerbate in a persistent and consistent manner the misogynist culture that leads to violence against all women in the first place, but specifically the kind of violence a woman like Jane Doe experiences because they are different. And you are erasing that violence, denying it, because it doesn’t fit your polarized view of the discourse and biology. That’s your problem.

Prison is itself a kind of violence, which all of you are ignoring to suit your argument, which appears to be little more than arguing Jane Doe is a man or a boy or scum.

I agree that prison is ultimately oppression although I do not believe that this male should be released into the general population without proper treatment.

Notice how you’re dismissing the abuse of a women-female for that of a violent male who thinks he’s a women, sit down please and take care of yourself.


Look, I think you’re making the same point over and over. You think women can’t have penises. I think you’re rather wrong.

My concern is that no matter what your point of view is about what makes a woman a woman you’ve lazily implemented traditional gendered language about violence and bodies in your argument both against violence and against Jane Doe. Also, you don’t appear willing to admit what cultivates violence in prison and how it’s different than violence in public. You’ve represented Jane Doe as a violent person, but in a shitty manner—that is, as if it’s part of their character, as if it should go without saying that Jane Doe will represent a threat to women that they won’t represent to men. And we all know why you’ve done that. And it’s not a good reason.

I wonder why Jane Doe won’t pose a threat to men? I mean, if we’re not insinuating a misogynist’s worldview into the conversation. Fact is, you don’t really care about Jane Doe’s needs. I do. I sympathize. Their violent behavior is a response to something that they perceive as a problem enough to strike out, and I think we should understand that problem and work to alleviate it. My response to Jane Doe’s violence isn’t ever going to be: put them in prison and punish them, now. Fuck prisons. Fuck the police. I think the flimsy way violence is being implemented into the debate is harmful to women, never mind stupid. And it is in service of police and prisons, not has it yet been in service of women.

In my opinion, this is because there’s a grotesque use of typical rhetoric about violence that we get from victim advocacy via the police state and prison system, a victim advocacy that naturalizes violence against women in very bad ways and that demands the presence of police to protect certain kinds of women and imprison certain kinds of men. Also, the rhetoric privileges bad facts about the accused from a police narrative and devalues any narrative in support of the accused. For this binary to work in the current argument, Jane Doe must be transformed into that kind of man. Clearly, Jane Doe is not that kind of man.

I’m kind of done with this. I’ve made my point in three ways. I don’t really have anything else to add. I don’t like the argument because it implies we can use the cops to punish transgressive women with violence that will be perpetrated by men to back our claims about women and men.

Haha this racist piece of shit has a bunch of bullshit about being a communist and acknowledging their white privelege and then proceeds to fully support the use of the capitalist prison system to do institutional violence to a black person.

P.S. Jane Doe is a woman and you don’t know shit about biology if you think sex isn’t a social construct as well.

Do not read, as children do, to amuse yourself, or like the ambitious, for the purpose of instruction. No, read in order to live.

 Gustave Flaubert (via readersquotes)

*kicks over a table* Don’t tell me how to read you old dead coot! Guess you didn’t read enough to live since you’re so fuckin’ dead buddy!

(via nmscuri)

It’s all over people, pack it up, we’re done here

How to be succesful:

1. Do what you love and everything will work out.

2. Well not that, no one’s going to pay you for that.

3. Not that either come on, you don’t have the capital for it.

4. Ugh, ew, not that either, that’s just disgusting, what is wrong with you?

5. No I’m not a prude shut UP.

6. I’m pretty sure that one’s illegal.

New exercise regime involves cycling round an abandoned airport listening to the mountain goats, goal is to lose 10 kg and also the will to live.

  • Sext: I'll show you my most-played Mountain Goats songs if you show me yours.

Just finished ‘The Hanged Man’… 7 more major arcana cards left..! Maybe I’ll do the star next.. Or.. The tower.. #pamelacolemansmith #tarot #rws


Just finished ‘The Hanged Man’… 7 more major arcana cards left..! Maybe I’ll do the star next.. Or.. The tower.. #pamelacolemansmith #tarot #rws

(via snooopbloggyblog)