Artless Rambling

Here, have some awesome

6,234 notes

tarynel:

bootyscientist:

dudes will call you a ho if you go to church or a ho if never seen the inside of a cathedral

dudes will call you a ho for fucking one person, one hundred people, or for not having sex with them

my point is that if you’re gonna be called a ho regardless, at least do yourself a favor and be the ho that YOU wanna be

I am inspired.

(via gofuckyourselfsandiego)

28,862 notes

Last year, in total, British police officers actually fired their weapons three times. The number of people fatally shot was zero. In 2012 the figure was just one. Even after adjusting for the smaller size of Britain’s population, British citizens are around 100 times less likely to be shot by a police officer than Americans. Between 2010 and 2014 the police force of one small American city, Albuquerque in New Mexico, shot and killed 23 civilians; seven times more than the number of Brits killed by all of England and Wales’s 43 forces during the same period.

The explanation for this gap is simple. In Britain, guns are rare. Only specialist firearms officers carry them; and criminals rarely have access to them. The last time a British police officer was killed by a firearm on duty was in 2012, in a brutal case in Manchester. The annual number of murders by shooting is typically less than 50. Police shootings are enormously controversial. The shooting of Mark Duggan, a known gangster, which in 2011 started riots across London, led to a fiercely debated inquest. Last month, a police officer was charged with murder over a shooting in 2005. The reputation of the Metropolitan Police’s armed officers is still barely recovering from the fatal shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes, an innocent Brazilian, in the wake of the 7/7 terrorist bombings in London.

In America, by contrast, it is hardly surprising that cops resort to their weapons more frequently. In 2013, 30 cops were shot and killed—just a fraction of the 9,000 or so murders using guns that happen each year. Add to that a hyper-militarised police culture and a deep history of racial strife and you have the reason why so many civilians are shot by police officers. Unless America can either reduce its colossal gun ownership rates or fix its deep social problems, shootings of civilians by police—justified or not—seem sure to continue.
Armed police: Trigger happy | The Economist (via kenyatta)

(via fishingboatproceeds)

2,096 notes

the-old-folk-blues asked: Why is it that the ethnicity of your characters is so important to visual adaptions when you rarely, if ever, mention it in your prose?

neil-gaiman:

muchymozzarella:

neil-gaiman:

I don’t really understand the question. If the ethnicity of the characters wasn’t in the prose it wouldn’t be mentioned at all in the adaptations and nobody would care. If you are paying attention you will find all sorts of people in the books, with all sorts of backgrounds. 

And it probably came from comics, in which I could have someone drawn as being part of a particular race or ethnicity and then not have to have them talk about being part of that ethnicity, but simply get on with the business of being in the story and behaving as that person, with that point of view, which would include ethnicity, would behave.

It’s important because representation

And also because I was stupid enough to think Fat Charlie was white for the entirety of Anansi Boys until in hindsight I realized what having Anansi for a dad would obviously mean 

Neil may not always say explicitly what the characters’ ethnicities are but he implies them enough, and if you’re paying attention, you’ll be able to figure it out. 

And maybe this is difficult to understand but as someone who’s grown up a bibliophile, who was so bombarded by white characters that I default to Caucasian in my head even when the character is decidedly nonwhite, it’s important to shake off those years of idiotic Western/Caucasian-centricity by portraying characters as other ethnicities.

Exactly.