In its original Latin use, the word genius was more readily applied to places — genius loci: “the spirit of a place” — than to persons, encoded with the reminder that we are profoundly shaped by the patch of spacetime into which the chance-accident of our birth has deposited us, our minds porous to the ideological atmosphere of our epoch. It is a humbling notion — an antidote to the vanity of seeing our ideas as the autonomous and unalloyed products of our own minds.
This is sheer nonsense from the jump. Americans don’t have, and have never had, any right to be free of shaming or shunning. The First Amendment protects our right to speak free of government interference. It does not protect us from other people saying mean things in response to our speech. The very notion is completely incoherent. Someone else shaming me is their free speech, and someone else shunning me is their free association, both protected by the First Amendment.
This is long (by Internet standards, so maybe 5 minutes?) but borders on a being a ribald savaging of a New York Times editorial. Bully for Ken White. He had me at the byline. If you’re not a fan of White, it’s still worth reading until the part I’ve quoted. If you read that far, you may just become a fan of White’s writing. (And of course there’s more of him quoted here too.)
ɕ
WPKM with Gabby St. Martin, Adrienne Toumayan, and Alice Popejoy →
What are the goals, challenges, and experiences shaping the Women’s Parkour Movement (WPKM) and its annual gatherings?
Volunteer organizers reflect on the balance between leadership, inclusion, and community building in parkour.
For me, the women’s parkour movement space is much, much more about the feeling of being accepted and valued for what it is and who it is that you are and whatever you’re bringing to the table.
~ Alice Popejoy (26:45)
Whether parkour companies are sharing more female movement because of guilt or social pressure, the fact that it’s happening and we’re seeing more of it is a good thing.
~ Gabby St. Martin (43:08)
The conversation focuses on the Women’s Parkour Movement (WPKM) organization, emphasizing the need for safe, empowering spaces for women and non-binary individuals in parkour. Gabby, Adrienne and Alice discuss the origins, leadership transitions, and ethos of the annual gatherings, highlighting the importance of fostering inclusivity, play, and body positivity. They share personal stories of discovering parkour and finding strength and community within women-centered spaces.
Challenges like representation, leadership diversity, and societal biases are explored, alongside positive trends in visibility and inclusion. The discussion touches on the broader implications of creating platforms that amplify underrepresented voices, with reflections on the impact of movements like “#MeToo” and strategies to build empathetic, inclusive communities.
Takeaways
Creating women-focused parkour spaces — fosters empowerment and community building.
Importance of inclusivity — ensuring spaces welcome women, non-binary individuals, and other underrepresented groups.
Volunteer leadership — highlights the dedication and personal sacrifices of organizers.
Play and creativity — emphasized as key elements of parkour practice in these spaces.
Challenges of representation — ongoing efforts are needed to improve visibility and leadership diversity.
Cultural shifts in parkour — moving toward valuing diverse styles beyond power and strength.
Addressing gender-based issues — from biases in coaching to ethical challenges in leadership.
The role of social media — visibility for women in parkour is increasing but requires further equity.
Most people to this day think of [the sciences and the arts] as so radically different from each other. But I want to posit a different way to look at it. It comes from what I think is a fundamental misunderstanding of art on the part of most people. Because they think of art as learning to draw or learning a certain kind of self-expression. But in fact, what artists do is they learn to see.
That’s a perfect turn of phrase from McKay. I love to find myself exposed to new people; those moments where I think, “that’s interesting!” are like single-serving sized friends (with hat tip to Chuck Palahniuk).
Most of us in life are tacticians, not strategists. We become so enmeshed in the conflicts we face that we can think only of how to get what we want in the battle we are currently facing. To think strategically is difficult and unnatural. You may imagine you are being strategic, but in all likelihood you are merely being tactical. To have the power that only strategy can bring, you must be able to elevate yourself above the battlefield, to focus on your long-term objectives, to craft an entire campaign, to get out of the reactive mode that so many battles in life lock you into.
It was a good book, the student told the 14 others in the undergraduate seminar I was teaching, and it included a number of excellent illustrations, such as photographs of relevant Civil War manuscripts. But, he continued, those weren’t very helpful to him, because of course he couldn’t read cursive.
People of a certain age know that cursive is no longer taught and that of course there must be people who can’t read or write cursive. But I certainly wasn’t clear on when the sun actually set. (Hint: Teaching of cursive ended in 2010.)
What struck me in this article was how Faust’s not knowing about the sunset of cursive knowledge sparked an interesting discussion among himself and the students in his class. Rather than rail against the cessation of cursive education, I’m left with interesting questions: I was taught a specific, super–simplified form of cursive. I know there are other styles, even hardcore calligraphy, which I can barely read. While there are lots of reasons trotted out for why cursive should be taught, maybe I should go through the effort of learning another form of cursive to put my efforts where my mouth has always been? If my cursive knowledge—for example—opens up my ability to access certain documents, wouldn’t it be better (my own argument goes) to learn another form, or to practice even more, to access even more?
To be a successful creator, you don’t need millions. You don’t need millions of dollars or millions of customers, clients, or fans. To make a living as a craftsperson, photographer, musician, designer, author, animator, app maker, entrepreneur, or inventor you need only 1,000 true fans.
After all, why do you want to marry someone hot? Evolution made you that way because hotness is a proxy for good genetics. Your genes want you to reproduce with someone hot so that you will produce lots of kids (who will have lots of kids). Your parents care who you marry because evolution tuned them to help you reproduce your genes (which are also their genes).
I truly love when someone does the deep dive trying to figure out “people.” Or dating or marrying or mating… somewhere there’s a popcorn meme. You know, where something is about to happen, and you just know it’s going to be an entertaining train-wreck— wait, why would a train-wreck be entertaining. Let’s go with: …and you just know it’s going to be entertaining to see someone learn just how complicated people are.
Reminder: “Love ya’! You’re one in a million!” …implies there are 8,000 other, equally awesome people that are interchangeable. Although I’d argue you should probably cut that in half based on biological distribution of gender. So, yes, you’re one of 4,000 . . . fine. Fine! I’m heading for the guest room.