Michael Kaplan

the sinthome speaks

when fundamental fantasy becomes perceptible as sinthome

this is a variation of what Derrida called "circumfession." bragging (of one's masculinity) becomes confession (of rape) becomes denial (of crime) becomes defensiveness (of masculinity) becomes bragging—and around we go.

yeah…no

And it wasn’t an accident. Richard Butsch nicely shows how the mass media audience was deliberately constructed to function as a civic public

You don’t want to fast slowly

With 11 silver medals, the US is 1st in 2nd place

His job should be in jeopardy

Arteta must go. Enough

#ArtetaOut

No Bueno

Hincapie is more convincing than Gyökeres

What would it cost the #Bears to re-sign Braxton Jones for a year?

What is the point of Viktor Gyokeres?

but phrenology *sounds* so scientific!

I still don’t

Inshallah

Olympic athletes complaining about pressure is like engineers complaining about all the math

it will not be a dog, because Trump hates dogs and Noem will shoot it

this is excellent! might use it in my class when talking about the Radio Act

We don’t know, but I see no reason to think any of this is different with him than with any other player. And I’m reasonably confident he’d prefer to stay

isn't that normally the case? doubt another club will offer a longer deal, and his best chance at trophies is probably at Arsenal.

extend both, absolutely

Bukayo has become our talisman. and for good reason.

in her 2006 preface to the 15th anniversary edition of /Backlash/, Faludi describes this exact transformation, whereby the right-wing strategy she had analyzed in 1991 returns in the guise of "vibes" attributed to "the culture" as a result of supposed overreach by people demanding equality.

cover for what? he couldn't air the interview, or even use Talarico's photo. the whole piece was about the censorship.

let us all close our eyes and think of England

feels like a good time to write something about the rhetorical work being done by the word "backlash." it typically implies that the phenomenon in question is a force of nature, or caused mechanically by preexisting circumstances. nothing could be further from the truth.

it's not cover; it's the whole point of the segment. which is why it's important to watch it before wading in to "explain" what's going on. "I'm a big shot lawyer; let me tell you what the guy I didn't bother watching is trying to say" is bad form.

Colbert explains it pretty damn well himself.