Stats scares me so I'm putting in more effort and making it fun for myself.
Vibing in the park with bae listening to someone drum and sing in the background. Issa good day. https://www.instagram.com/p/Cf1nO55r1POUtQr-WTwJkIpQkQDuGcH_jteSsU0/?igshid=NGJjMDIxMWI=
Little over a month ago I decided to embark on a fitness journey and I've been really enjoying it. I'm taking the summer to be strict and lay the habit/urge to exercise in before school starts and I naturally have to scale back.
I debated even mentioning this, but after a long discussion with a friend yesterday I decided why not. I will not be posting pictures or probably anything else about it on social media. I will not be inviting or accepting comments on my weight except from a trusted few people- comments about muscle definition, however, will be accepted and even encouraged. I want to be strong like bitch that fights bears in the forest.
Anyway, the main point isn't even really for physical health although obviously that is a point of consideration and will be a side benefit. (Weight aside, I'm trying to manage my vasovagal syncope.) The main point is to to change my mental/emotional relationship with exercise and work on the accumulated weight trauma I've collected from being a living woman in a capitalistic society at the turn of Photoshop and social media, plus other things.
Little over a month later and I think I'm qualified to say it's going well. I feel better. I'm not following any specific exercise plan that anyone else laid out, I'm doing what feels right for me. I joined Crunch Fitness which has the openness and inclusivity of Planet Fitness without going the other way and shaming heavy lifters. (Plus I get a free month if I get referral credit for new members so HINT HINT.) I take gym classes and measure how my body reacts and otherwise do my thing. I take hikes and explore the area. I'm probably gonna start a fitness journal, which I can post pics of if anyone is interested. Considering doing like monthly challenges for funsies and whatnot. I know myself enough to know that I need external validation to boost my internal motivation and have been talking to specific friends and family about it, which makes me feel seen and loved and encouraged and accepted. Andres especially has been very supportive whenever I make him notice a tiny detail, which helps a lot.
Not really sure what the point of this post is except as a general life update and because I thought people might be interested. This will probably be the only time I even talk about it publicly.
Too cute for the gym or should I kick it up a notch? https://www.instagram.com/p/CfUKUSWrXuIfVe3eDSnn1tltNhYlBKu8ZR5WFc0/?igshid=NGJjMDIxMWI=
We saw this cute idea for a Target date night so @bazault and I are trying it out. https://www.instagram.com/p/Cerf1qVpWm3uK_08J0zkTf6PbdUz55gQt6f30Y0/?igshid=NGJjMDIxMWI=
My hair is top tier today and The World Must Know. https://www.instagram.com/p/Cb-g5iyrjlHnDlcCc7zK8GsX0kjCPADbu8Bi400/?utm_medium=tumblr
100% professional baker. https://www.instagram.com/p/CXcJYgxLR01FhQhiGbGyWdZFadH9FySyjfKb7g0/?utm_medium=tumblr
SUPER CRITICAL AND SUPER LATE NOTICE BUT PLEASE HELP WITH MY FINAL PAPER AND SHARE THIS THANKS. It's due tomorrow (12/10) but I only just got the idea and I can't find a paper/study that's recent and covers this topic. Three questions, very short, just know you'll be contributing to my grad school experience and therefore my impending mental breakdown thanks love you all byyyyeeeee.
Penultimate summaries before the semester ends, woohoo!
- This is by far my favorite of the chapters in the book; Trigger loses himself from a strictly “historian” perspective and instead allows himself to do a bit of editorializing. There’s a wonderful section (to me) where he’s talking about the politicization of archaeology and he claims, “The deliberate invention or misrepresentation of archaeological data for political ends – as may have happened with respect to the events leading, with loss of human life, to Hindu rioters demolishing the historic Babri Mosque in Ayodhya, India in 1992 – should entail the mandatory decertification of archaeologists who engage in such unethical practices and be classified as a serious criminal offense at both the national and international levels if it results in civil disturbances of harm to individuals.” Chef’s kiss to you.
- Also, his dig at the influence of Foucault is so lovely, considering how much we all know I hate Foucault.
- Last year the Roundtable at our museum was on the topic of pseudoarchaeology and I was having war flashbacks the entire time I read this section. Why must you betray me, Trigger?
- I also appreciated the complete roasting of neoliberal economics as being ahistorical.
- I should probably stop being surprised, anthropology really came into existence solely to provide scientific justification for racism and to stock cabinets of curiosity with looted goods, after all.
- Short and sweet, this one got right to the heart of the matter of archaeology as being a social science, which is something that has been brought up again and again over the course of different readings. I mean, shouldn’t we have an answer to that by now?
- Thank you for the super relevant and depressing end to my first semester as a graduate student. Intellectually I knew everything that was stated in the paper, but emotionally it just hit me as a wave of bruh, why. I actually distinctly remember when those major rankings dropped, as I was just starting to cement myself in my study and career as an archaeologist and switching from a history major to an anthropology one. Thankfully I knew going in that I was probably never going to be able to pay my bills so it’s not like my hopes and dreams were shattered by it or anything.
- Anyway, TL;DR, why we gotta fight, yo?
- The most salient point he makes regarding [the critique of cultural boundaries] is that they are constructed and to some degree artificial, although I never found that to be a particularly compelling argument when it came to denying an aspect of human culture? I mean, all parts of human culture are constructed and to some degree artificial, including language? That’s kind of the point, it’s not like they pop out of the snow like daisies or Disney Huns.
- Ah, Foucault. We meet again. Must you dominate the end of my first semester so?
- I almost feel like instead of calling this movement neo-Boasian, we could call it something like inverse culture history, since while it was Boas’ school of thought it clearly has an effect now and beyond just him. It’s specifically anti-structuralist, and in some ways anti-Foucauldian. Or actually, it’s also anti-Lévi-Straussian. It’s anti-binarism. That’s it, anti-binarism, that’s the name of the movement, I’ll take my Nobel Prize now.
- The biggest takeaway from the first two papers and that should be carried into these next two is that the Boasian school of thought has its limitations, mainly because Boas and the way he taught and the way he framed things wasn’t perfect. Which I mean, duh, he’s a human and unless he’s Lévi-Strauss or Bourdieu he’s not claiming perfection.
- These efforts to say that Boas wasn’t as progressive as he’s made out to be are just limiting the concept even more. The man literally died fighting against racism and Nazis, just because his work took place in the context of settler colonialism doesn’t discount the good that he did. Of course it took place in settler colonialism, so are we. Is all of our work to be discounted because we don’t have immediate or intimate control of the historical and political surroundings that we live in? I promise I will try not to let my Boas stan out too hard but it’s tough.
- As you probably expected, this is the paper that I took the most issue with. My first critique is that Audra Simpson labels her essay “Why White People Love Franz Boas” when I looked her up and she isa white people. If she means White PeopleTM then say that, don’t just discount yourself because it leads to this disingenuousness where I specifically looked her up because I thought she was Native.
givemealltheowls reblogged
remember when you were 10 and you would hang out with your friends in order to Look At The Computer together like you went to their house and experienced the information superhighway together. and then leave
Remember when your mum would go to visit her friend and she’d take you and you and her friend’s kid would be sent off to the computer room to go play some simple cannonball or arrow firing game on their computer while your mum and her friend hung out for like an hour and then you’d go home
givemealltheowls reblogged
for anyone else who was curious, according to @megasupernova888, the words are 不感症 (fukanshyoo, “sexual frigidity”) and 花粉症 (kafunshyoo, “hay fever”)
1) I am rebageling with more context
2) OP, your accent is splendid, your delivery perfect, I hope your 2020 is less terrible than the rest of ours
- I’ll just start off by saying I really didn’t understand this. Granted I had only had 7 hours of sleep in 60 hours when I had read this, but regardless it seemed unnecessarily complicated and biology heavy for something that was meant for an archaeology class.
- Okay fine, this is where I just admit that most of the readings from this week were confusing. This is what happens when you assign us something based off of Foucault and Bourdieu.
- A lot of it is spent criticizing the selectionist school as being too hardline in the selection process, as that discounts a wide variety of human behavior (looking at you, “I Live To Argue” Dunnell.)
givemealltheowls reblogged
Best and worst things to discover at a dig?
Worst is a body that shouldn’t be there.
_Areid
Conversely, best is a body that should.
Absolute worst case scenario: You find a body that should be there but when you come back it’s gone
“Guys? Where’d she go?”
She’s behind you
Me [beating at the bog body with a shovel]: WE. DIDN’T. TAKE. SITU. PHOTOS. YET. Get back in that hole! You can go for a walk after.
The fact that I can picture myself and pretty much all of my archaeologist colleagues grabbing a shovel and doing this last bit just makes it that much funnier.
mia7437
god this has to be one of the dumbest things i spent 5 minutes on but it sprouted fully formed in my brain the second i saw this post
(sorry for quality i’m drawing on a mouse)
That episode of Time Team you didn’t see.
You know you fucked up when archaeologists drop their coffee. Always take photos before you take a break, just in case the dead come back to life and destroy your trench!
OH MY GOD
- His mention of Bourdieu’s study of the olive gathering in Greece with regards to posture inferring gender implications had me rolling my eyes, though, especially since I didn’t even buy it in that convoluted piece of gibberish that passes as writing.
- This analysis of the color paradigm is fascinating, although it does make me wish I had read it myself. Regardless, I could see the trouble in it right away: if you’re going to ask your respondents to choose colors that are of greatest importance in North America, of course you’re going to come to certain conclusions that are inherently biased. That’s just bad science, that is.
- (This is from class but) "Well now that you admitted a familiarity with Bourdieu-" "Familiarity and Bourdieu are oxymorons."
- Also, her mentioning sociologists owning the study of American culture struck a chord, as that is what I pretty much thought until I hit college. Sociology was for studying one’s own culture/American culture and anthropology was for studying other cultures. Duh. If only lines and cultures were so easily divided, huh?
- Can I say ironically that I actually seemed to understand Foucault better than Bourdieu? That’s not saying much because I still had trouble, but there’s that.
- In a way this is just another look at his delve into oppositions, which goes back to binaries. Why does everyone love binaries?
- I definitely had difficulty with this reading, but after reading the other authors I understand it. Sort of. I mean I understand it as a power dynamic, I have no idea what Foucault is trying to say about it.
- Pierre Bourdieu has never met a comma he didn’t like, huh? Is he like, aware of other forms of punctuation or…?
- I truly did not understand this one at all, but I guess I’ll give it a shot. Bourdieu defines the practical sense as a “quasi-bodily involvement in the world which presupposes no representation either of the body or of the world, still less of their relationship.” I took this to be just pure gibberish, to be honest, but he defines it and states the best example is what we call ‘a feel for the game,’ this supposed instinct that allows people to participate more or less within a certain field.
- He then somehow transitions from that to talking about the opposition from the sexes and the subjugation women put themselves through via the example of picking olives and the different societal structures involved, which honestly I reread like five times and I don’t know how he got from the first to the second.
- I’m aware he’s not actually stating this as something desirable, just as the way things currently are, but what a load of sexist bullshit.