Perched on the toilet with his book, Vincent is feminized by sitting instead of standing as well as by his trashy tastes; preoccupied by the anal, he is implicitly infantilized and homosexualized; and the seemingly inevitable result is being pulverized by Butch with a Czech M61 submachine gun.
Fraiman, Susan (2003). Cool Men and the Second Sex (New York: Columbia University Press).
The anarchists’ slogan, “Destroy what destroys you,” is aimed at mobilizing the base, young people in prisons and reformatories, in high schools and training centres. It reaches out to all of those in the shittiest situations. It is meant to be spontaneously understood, and is a call for direct resistance. Stokely Carmichael’s Black Power slogan, “Trust your own experience!” means just that. And the slogan is based on the insight that in capitalism there is absolutely nothing that oppresses, tortures, constrains, and burdens that does not have its origin in the capitalist mode of production, and that each oppressor, in whatever form he may appear, is a representative of the class interests of capital, which makes him the class enemy.
Rote Armee Fraktion, The Urban Guerilla Concept (via slutty-stoner)
"Each oppressor, in whatever form he may appear, is a representative of the class interests of capital, which makes him the class enemy."
When people can see with their own eyes that a talented person made a great fortune fair and square, they tend not to resent it.
That’s Harvard economist Gregory Mankiw, going another round in the unending class warfare discussion we’ve all been having of late, in a New York Times piece entitled “Yes, the Wealthy Can Be Deserving.”
Mankiw has some fun examples, like Robert Downey Jr., E.L. James, LeBron James, and Steve Jobs. These are all people, he thinks, who deserve their astronomical salaries because they possess great skill or talent, or because they do something that society deems very valuable or take great risks.
And, Mankiw argues, no one should be angry about these salaries because not only do the rich deserve their wealth, but they’re also paying a lot of money in taxes that benefit all of us (who are by extension, I suppose, deserving of our lack of wealth).
But this whole notion of someone deserving wealth or poverty seems so misguided to me in no small part because of the utter capriciousness with which a) talent gets doled out and b) society assigns value to various skills. Mankiw isn’t even going the traditional route of claiming that these people work harder than the rest of us; he’s relying on the facts that they’re exceptional and that they pay their fair share back to all of us to make the claim that they deserve their wealth.
What he’s arguing, in short, is that the rest of us who aren’t exceptional don’t really mind when we see someone who is exceptional getting paid for their talent … as long as the person isn’t in finance or banking or something like that. We resent those people, but we don’t resent actors and athletes, and so Mankiw wants us to start thinking about CEOs as being akin to athletes and actors: Better than the rest of us schlubs in some important way that justifies their earnings and explains our lack of earnings.
For my own part, I don’t resent any of the (many, many, many) people who make more money than I do. But I also won’t buy the claim that there’s something intrisically better about them when I compare them to me or to people who aren’t doing as well financially as I am. What seems more likely to me is that under different circumstances we’d all wind up in different places on the economic ladder and that kind of messes with the whole notion of what someone deserves.
It is one of humanity’s enduring mysteries why some individuals, such as ourselves, rise from unpromising origins to such dizzy heights when so many others, like you, are failures. This book aims to answer that question for the first time – by drawing on bits of research that happen to fit our thesis, emails sent to our daughter and Google searches.
So why do some groups outperform each other in America? What has made us both brilliant lawyers, bestselling authors (and one of us a devastatingly attractive Tiger Mother), while you struggle along on welfare benefits? One simple answer is that we are both shameless, publicity-hungry individuals who pretend to court controversy, while you are gullible, reactive losers. But that is not an area we intend to explore too deeply.
Cards Against Humanity is a card game that embraces awkwardness and abandons civility. The game is a delightfully depraved version of Apples To Apples that the company describes as a “party game for horrible people.” As avid players, The Noun Project team is happy to be counted among these horrible people. Recently, the Cards Against Humanity designer, Emily Haasch, made some icons based on the game’s cards. We spoke with Emily to learn more about how this icon collection came to be and learn about the relationship between design and games.
The Noun Project: Thanks for meeting up with us, Emily. To start, describe the Cards Against Humanity for the people who don’t know about it.
Cards Against Humanity: Cards Against Humanity was created by eight friends from high school for a New Year’s party. It was a big hit with their friends, so they created a site where people could download and print the card game for free. In 2011, they crowdfunded a professional quality version of the game through Kickstarter. Since then, we’ve released a few expansion packs. We’re also really involved in the gaming community. We partner with other game designers and support their projects, like Werewolf, Samari Gunn and Ridiculous Fishing. And, part of our office is a co-working space where we rent desks to all creative friends of ours, including a photographer, some writers, illustrators, and other designers.
TNP: What do you look for in games that you’re going to support?
CAH: We look for something that’s unique. But, we also want something that’s playable and can appeal to many different people. The beauty of Cards Against Humanity is that it’s not really a gamer’s game - it’s something that everyone can play. It’s played by fraternity guys and moms and dads and professional young people - this diversity is very rare in the gaming world.
TNP: From a designer’s perspective, tell us about the overlap you see between design and games.
CAH: There’s a lot of UX involved in games. And, there’s an emphasis on storytelling in games. These things inform the player how they’re going to navigate their way through whatever experience they’re about to have. There are a lot of interactive design principles involved.
TNP: What inspired Cards Against Humanity’s visual design?
CAH: It’s intentionally very minimalist, which is kinda crazy for the gaming world. We refer to the aesthetic as The Swiss Design Dungeon™. It was a reaction against the traditional, illustrative style that you see a lot in games. We created something very simple and very direct that lets people use their own sick, twisted imaginations to create the imagery.
TNP: How did the idea come about to create icons based on Cards Against Humanity cards?
CAH: It came about recently when we were thinking of ways to refresh what we were doing. We created these little buttons and patches that we could give away at conventions and I had this idea of putting icons inspired by popular cards on these products. Iconography fits really well within The Swiss Design Dungeon™. As I was designing the icons, I thought, “What if I submit these ridiculous icons to The Noun Project?” I didn’t know if you would accept them because our game is not exactly family friendly.
TNP: We love them. Plus, they’re really expanding the world’s visual language.
CAH: Yeah, it’s true. Now, when somebody out there needs a Falcon With A Cap icon or Jazz Hands icon, they’ll be able to find it.
TNP: How did you go about designing these icons?
CAH: I had to pick ones that were relatively visual. There are some cards that can’t be visualized and others that you just don’t want to visualize because they’re so…sick and depraved. Some of the cards are based off of crazy metaphors and it took a couple sketches to get through. But others, like Blood Squirting Lizard, are pretty direct.
TNP: Did you look for inspiration for the icon style?
CAH: No. I don’t want to be influenced stylistically. I wanted to contribute a different style of iconography to The Noun Project.
TNP: What advice do you have for other folks designing icons?
CAH: Represent something unique in your icons. Go beyond the standard UI set. The world is more than just UI icons. I’ve done this in my own icon designs and it makes things interesting for you. It’s also good to keep your guidelines simple. You want to create something that will make an impact whether it’s very small or very big.
TNP: However hilariously offensive that impact may be. So, what’s next for Cards Against Humanity?
CAH: We’re in the midst of releasing some more expansion packs. I’ll be working on finishing some games for our Tabletop Deathmatch Contest and redesigning the main site. We’re always working on partnerships with other game makers. There will be a lot of interesting stuff coming in the next few months.
You can download icons from Cards Against Humanity Collection at http://www.thenounproject.com/cah
To learn more about Cards Against Humanity, visit http://cardsagainsthumanity.com
More of Emily Haasch’s work can be found on her website, http://www.emilyhaasch.com