Pentax Gang! Represent!
fgm878 on the left and manacrystals on the right! check them out for your erotic/riot grrrl needs!
Content should be clearly attributed, let me know if it isn't.
Pentax Gang! Represent!
fgm878 on the left and manacrystals on the right! check them out for your erotic/riot grrrl needs!
Lucas at my studio #5
Looks like Lucas has some good taste…
And yet such astoundingly tasteless tattoos! Wow.
They’re not real tattoos…
Well, I guess that’s encouraging, but why on earth put them on for a photo shoot? Sorry, I guess seeing people wear symbols of pretty severe gang violence for fashion gets (ho ho) under my skin.
They have no fixed meaning, whilst they are associated with violence they may be interpreted in any other way. Fashion has a long history of appropriation just as camouflage has a military history and has now become a staple of the fashion industry. Maharishi, famous for it’s ‘house’ camoflages has even gone so far as to recycle Military uniforms and ‘cleanse’ them in buddhist style ceremonies, in an attempt to extricate them from their previous context perhaps.
I see no reason that Tattoo culture should not be re-appropriated in the same way especially as the above tattoo has such varied interpretation available. Personally I am not keen on Tattoos and especially facial ones. It is very reductive of me but i feel that nothing exists outside the text…
Add to that the antagonistic anti-establishment nature of the Odd Future crew and you have some provocative content. Rise to it if you want.
(Source: terrysdiary)
Among the most effective chants of the O.W.S. protesters has been a simple message: “The whole world is watching.” The chant is powerful because it is true. This is the age of the smartphone and the live-feed. And so, in New York on Monday night—or rather, at one o’clock on Tuesday morning—when Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly deployed thousands of cops to clear O.W.S. out of Zuccotti Park, they did so under the deepest cover of darkness, and they forbade the press from seeing what they were doing.The N.Y.P.D. descended on the park with deafening military-grade LRAD noise canons and several stadiums’ worth of blinding Klieg lights, and while they worked, they drove journalists steadily back further and further from their area of operations. (Even the airspace over southern Manhattan was closed during the raid to prevent news helicopters from filming, making a mockery of claims, by the mayor and the police, that they were keeping reporters at bay for their own safety.) A number of journalists who attempted to stand their ground, identifying themselves to the police and insisting on their long-established legal right to work, were treated like protesters—roughed up, shoved, put in choke holds, pepper-sprayed, and otherwise manhandled, and at least seven reporters (including four who’d sought refuge in a church, and one from the New York Post, which has been calling for such a police operation against O.W.S. for weeks) were among the nearly two hundred and fifty people arrested during the crackdown. So was a City Councilman, Ydanis Rodriguez, who was taken into custody blocks from the park, and bloodied in the process.
The paramilitary-style eviction of O.W.S. from Zuccotti park was not our Guernica; it wasn’t our Tiananmen Square, nor even our Tahrir Square—as Nicholas Kristof of the Times, and many other commentators not so firmly in the media mainstream, have suggested. Thankfully, the Occupy encampments across America, and the state power arrayed against them did not represent anything like the forces of revolution or of oppression that we’ve seen in those foreign uprisings. That is precisely what makes the police violence that has become such a common spectacle so troubling: protest is an essential American democratic tradition, and you don’t have to support the protesters (or oppose the dismantling of their camps) to condemn its forcible stifling.
Of course there have been piecemeal incidents of violent criminality (vandalism and assault) by protesters; and, in confrontations with police, some have fought back. But the conduct of the overwhelming majority of Occupy activists has been highly disciplined in its adherence to the rigors of nonviolent civil disobedience. So why have we had to watch police—who are our employees, operating in our name— slamming and dragging unresisting men on the street, kneeling heavily on people’s heads while binding their wrists too tightly in flexicuffs, and pepper-spraying already captive women in New York; billy-clubbing peaceable demonstrators and dragging them brutally around by their hair when they offer their wrists to be arrested in Berkeley; and tear-gassing and flash-banging them at Occupy Oakland? […]
In a democracy, a mayor who believes he can shut down the press at will is not defending public safety; and a mayor who believes the police can be unleashed to manhandle the citizenry without answering for it cannot claim to be on the side of law or order.
Read this ish
