Silver Tongue

Dec 09

jalathas:
“I just needed this on my blog in its pure and full format.
”

jalathas:

I just needed this on my blog in its pure and full format.

(via gearholder)

clientsfromhell:

I run my own video production company and I had a meeting with a man who runs his own accounting company. We started talking about projects he needed. Essentially, he had a huge list of tasks that he wanted me to do, which was great.

Client: I would like to have someone as a one stop shop set up. How would you like to get paid? Let me start by saying I don’t like doing contracts so I can pay you weekly if you want.

Red flag, alarm bells:

Me: I’m much more comfortable working with a contract. Maybe have a think about that and we’ll touch base next week to see if you’re still interested.

I tried getting in touch several times the following week, with no response. Several weeks later I get this message:

Client:   We were wondering if you could take some photos for us this Saturday.

It was Thursday, which was pretty short notice for my schedule.

Me: I’m certainly interested, but I’d very much prefer to set up a contract for the work. Could I swing by and get that signed before Saturday? And if that’s too short a notice, can we reschedule the shoot day?

They didn’t reply. The following week, after the proposed shoot, I got this email.

Client: Thank you for coming out and meeting us last week.  We appreciate the work you are willing to do; however, the timing with everything isn’t going to work out for us.  We wish you the very best of luck in your career.

There are two possibilities here: one, they really needed that shoot done on that Saturday (which I doubt because they didn’t get back to me at all in time); two, they were hoping they wouldn’t have to pay me and that’s why they were waffling on signing a contract.

Either way, bullet dodged.


> Want to know if freelancing is for you?

(Source: clientsfromhell)

[video]

invisiblespork:

mjalti:

men: *decided women weren’t allowed attend schools, study sciences, or have access to higher education*
men: well if women are so smart then how come there aren’t many contributions from women in history huh

This post means well, but still erases women’s contributions in the same way men have. The truth is that women have made so many contributions to history and science despite men denying them access, but that men have either taken credit for those accomplishments or, when they couldn’t, completely divorced that accomplishment from the woman so that no one remembers them.

In fact, this happens so often that there’s even a name for it. It’s called the Matilda Effect which is defined as “the systematic repression and denial of the contribution of woman scientists in research, whose work is often attributed to their male colleagues” but which applies to other fields as well and goes doubly for women of color. How about just a few (certainly nowhere near all) women who contributed to science? And this is just science, not even history in the larger sense.

I’m too tired to keep going but how about Jane Goodall, Sally Ride, Rosalind Franklin, Rachel Carson, Elizabeth Blackwell, Dorothy Hodgkin, Shirley Ann Jackson, Kalpana Chawla, Maryam Mirzakhani, Flossie Wong-Staal, Alice Ball, Ida Tacke, Ester Lederberg, Mileva Maric?

The absence of women in history is man made.

Men: *erases women accomplishments*
Men: well if women are so smart then how come there aren’t many contributions from women in history huh

(via theclockworkpony-deactivated202)

[video]

(via tamascotchi-deactivated20190101)

[video]

(Source: coaltar-of-the-deepers, via dan-mcneely)

rcktpwr:

letshearitforthisclown:

victorias secret: theres a pussy under there

under where?  

(Source: graynard, via dan-mcneely)

[video]