Profile cover photo
Profile photo
Nicole Ickes
268 followers -
Time warping l'esprit de l'escalier.
Time warping l'esprit de l'escalier.

268 followers
About
Nicole's posts

Tablet just died. Thoughts on Pixel C or Samsung Tab A 10.1? Palm rejection and stylus, usability, updates speed, life? Anything else I should care about? 

I'm having trouble getting an answer so let's try here. My tablet is four years old, the Samsung n8013 Note 10.1 2012, running 4.1.2. I have looked for updated roms but they all have major bugs.

1.Does anyone know a) how I could put pure android on it (I can follow directions but I know nothing about coding) , or b) know of a more updated rom?

2.Failing that, I was going to get the Pixel 10 tablet, but with the Andromeda announcement, does anyone know if that tablet will be included in the rollover or left to die? Will android still get updates if it's not being included in the rollover? 

Two related things. My tablet is four years old, the Samsung n8013 Note 10.1 2012, running 4.1.2. I have looked for updated roms but they all have busted parts. I need to either update it somehow or replace it.

1. Does anyone know a) how I could put pure android on it (I can follow straight directions but I know nothing about coding), or b) know of a more updated rom?

2. Failing that, I was going to get the Pixel 10 tablet, but with the Andromeda announcement, does anyone know if that tablet will be included in the rollover or left to die? Will android still get updates if it's not being included in the rollover?

Post has attachment

I think the way we gave out participation trophies and told everyone that they did a good job, regardless of if they even put in any effort, is sort of similar to how men are told that they’re better than everyone else simply for being men. And when they get older, they’re told that their superiority depends on doing certain things (masculine stuff) and not doing other things (feminine stuff).

For participation praise, there’s no real difference between anyone, and we all know we’re getting praise for no reason. We know we can’t trust the praise. That’s why that makes people insecure, unable to trust their own abilities. For gender praise, though, there is a clear difference - - gender - - and so it makes sense that men would throw themselves into that difference and police it in order to maintain the benefit of gives them. That’s where toxic masculinity comes from.

But we also get the same feeling of insecurity and fake confidence, I think. If you show any lack in yourself and you were raised in trophy praise culture, then you believe that the failure is inherent in you rather than something that can be fixed. So you always project confidence instead of talking about problems, because any problems mean you will be ostracized and never allowed back in. That’s the same as what happens today to people who make mistakes: any one mistake shows your true incompetent nature, it’s never treated as just a mistake to be corrected.

Typed this on mobile, apologies for typos 

Post has attachment

The systems we have for “gender” and “sex” are horribly broken. Personally, I don’t know why we insist on making a fuss over “masculine” and “feminine” traits or why it matters what people’s crotches look like (jk we all know why) . I’d just as soon abolish both concepts.

But, society thinks these things matter, so we need ways to talk about them. Since the ones we have are screwed up, let’s make new ones.
The two systems should be separate, because they are separate. No more of these similar sounding words and related derivations. The concepts have nothing to do with each other, so neither should the words. It seems that most people generally think of most of this language as “gender” terms rather than physical sex/body terms. So, it makes more sense to redo the physical form terms than it does to overhaul all the gender stuff. There’s also many more gender terms than there are sex terms, so it’s also easier that way.

I know biology differs and that it actually matters much more what your hormones do and what internal organs you have, but society seems to only care what your outer bits look like at birth. Frankly, if we’re talking body form, your body form is going to change over time and that should be what matters. If you start out looking like you have “inside” plumbing, but later it turns out that yours works more like an “outside” plumbing person, so be it and no fuss to change the term used.

So, for “sex”, how about we call outside-having people “virgas”, inside-havers “intras”, and any combo of both “januarians”. If there needs to be more subtypes of the januarians, those can be invented--or even left alone if they already exist. 

Virgas comes from the latin for “stick”, since that seems to be the general characteristic of outside plumbing. Intras comes from the latin for inside, for inside plumbing. Januarian comes from the ancient Greek idea that the first humans were both male and female with two faces; the Roman god Janus had two faces, hence the name.

Thoughts?

For languages that have gendered grammar, does that have any relation to the the social concept or no?

Personal theory of sex and gender, probably cn for trans things and identity stuff. I'm not sure how robust/coherent this is, I've not tested it anywhere else yet.

I think gender has been conflated with sex and broadened to the point that it's basically useless. It was invented in the 1950s as a way to separate masculine and feminine from a person's sex, so that we could talk about the expectations we have of each sex separately from said sex--so that we could discuss gender roles. 

However, instead of liberating us from gender roles, we have merely tried to broaden the definition of each gender to the extent that "man" and "woman" now don't have any meaning. We say that the gender woman is still a woman no matter if she's in frills or if she's in a mudpit. There's nothing coherent about such a broad definition except to say that those women are females, are of the same sex. Gender has nothing to do with it anymore once you've made the category that big.

I don't think there's really any point to saying "she's still a woman" unless you're trying to invoke the things that women get access to: marriage, respect, etc. Those were the important things to women at the time that "gender" became a thing. Same for men: it was important that a feminine man still be a "man", so he could find a wife and be respected. It was not acceptable to deviate from that "gender", from that sex.

I think that's what gender has come to mean today: nothing but a synonym for sex, exactly what it was before it was invented. We've not liberated anyone, we've merely changed the fence from sex to gender. There's still things that each sex can't do, even though each can use many kinds of gender expression (masculine, feminine).

What I think may help is to give gender a real definition of its own, and to invent/label the other sexes and genders that exist. Two-party systems seem to be as bad for gender and sex as they are for politics. Although things are being invented for gender, and few are taking that well: "special snowflakes" is how they're laughed off. Sigh.

As for the definition of gender, I don't think calling it "the interplay between masculine and feminine" makes much sense when we've pretty much eroded everything that means, in calling a feminine male still a man and a feminine woman still a woman--both are feminine, surely they ought to both go by the same gender label? It seems that gender takes account of a person's genitals, not just their masculine/feminine socialization. If we go with that, then gender ought to be sex+sex socialization.

So then, you get people who chafe against their socialization, who accept it, and people who think they should have been in the other class (for example). People who chafe and are female would be butch, people who accept and are female would be cis woman, and people who think they should have been in the other class and are female are the trans men. I'd put the male ones here but I don't know the term for feminine males. I don't know if sexual orientation would throw another angle into these labels, making it three-axis instead of two. Frankly I don't think genitals ought to matter to gender (even if it does matter to sexual orientation), but society insists that it be part of it.

I think it's a bit odd that we yank out certain personality characteristics and call them "gender", but we give arbitrary importance to a lot of other seemingly pointless things too, so this isn't that unique a thing.

Who knows stuff about super pacs? 

I’m trying to find out what all they’re allowed to spend money on. I can start one that will function essentially as an antirape political PAC, for “employing” me, with the aim of taking down CMU, OCR, various other Title IX legal issues, helping victims, educating on consent, and other anti-rape stuff. 

I’m not sure if it functions like I need it to, though–all I’m getting is that it can spend on advertisements, but nothing on whether I can “gift” material things, employ myself, etc. All I can find is that I can’t give anything directly to candidates, which is okay for my needs.

I need a way to get around being literally employed so that I can keep my medicaid. If this is successful enough, I can then employ myself with it and buy my own insurance, but for now I can’t jeopardize that.

Even if it can’t function as employment for me, at least I could do something with all this dead time I have.
Wait while more posts are being loaded