1,000 hoodies: Really against racism? Fight MA's Stand your Ground bill!

Proud of my community today:  A thousand of us rallied and walked in support of Trayvon Martin and against racial profiling.

Yet, even as we took a stand, Sen. Stephen Brewer, D-Barre, was promoting a bill to legalize, in Massachusetts, the same Stand Your Ground legislation that made Trayvon Martin's death possible in Florida.  Read Dan Ring's article about it in the Republican.

Rep. Ben Swan, D-Springfield, is against the legislation,  but the bill has 30 co-sponsors, including Angelo Puppolo from Springfield.  It's an election year, after all, which is why Gov. Patrick introduced the Three Strikes legislation, which we also have to fight against-- HARD!!

Tomeka and Maggie from Arise-- photo; John Morris
How is it that so many people don't know who's pulling the strings on this and other legislation around the country to limit people's rights-- to vote, to be free of incarceration, to breathe clean air, to attend decent public schools-- the Koch brothers, DBA the American Legislative Exchange Council, which provides sample legislation, including Stand Your Ground, to legislatures around the country.  See the Nation's series on ALEC.

Walking and rallying is a first step.  Now on to the more mundane work of calling your legislator and letting him or her know: you vote!  And you oppose Stand Your Ground and Three Strikes.


street smart design. Soweto tomorrow, today...

Cocktail Party Invitations

I had a really great DIY project and post planned for today, but I left my optometry appointment this morning with more than a contact lens prescription. My pupils were HUGELY dilated from the drops they used, and I even had to wear these super ghetto old man sunglass shields behind my glasses because daylight was too much for my eyes to handle, not to mention a computer or phone screen. Couldn't even read my text messages!

Other than the usual cleaning and laundry I do on days off, I did sneak in enough time to whip up these invites. One of my good groups of girlfriends and I get together every month or two at someone's house. The number who attend varies, but consistently there's at least 6 of us. We take turns hosting so usually host once or twice a year, and next month I get to play hostess with the mostess. We drink champagne, eat delish food, and gab all night. My friend Meghan's hubby dubbed us the Champagne Mafia a couple of years ago and it has stuck ever since.

Anyways, the point of this post is that I LOVE actual invites. I do not judge if you invite me somewhere via facebook or evite, but I personally love the look and feel of an actual paper invite. For me, especially, they are super easy to whip up, and since I'm a lover of all things old fashioned, I appreciate the nod to the past in which things were amiably formal.

And, gosh, I'm starting to get embarrassed by my constant mention of the dollar store, but I got this set of 10 invites (paper, backing and envelope) for just $2 making these 20 cents a piece. Best of all, this set by Peter Pauper Press sells on their website for $10. Shabang! Oh Dollorama, how I heart you <3

Now I am off to get ready for Champagne Mafia hosted at girlfriends tonight! It her first time hosting and is sure to be smashing good time!

I Ain’t No Broken Window

Jenise Standfield from the Coalition on Homelessness in San Francisco posted this essay online today.  Springfield had its own Broken Window proponent, former police commissioner Edward Flynn, who would have his officers take pictures of homeless people, so this article struck home to me.

The person credited with coining the theory of Broken Windows policing died last month and people are starting to ask what Broken Windows are all about.  Those of us who have been identified as no more than a broken window are sick of it.
The Broken Window social theory holds that one poor person in a neighborhood (or, using social theorist James Q. Wilson words, “a vagrant or a drunk”) is like a first unrepaired broken window.  If the window is not immediately fixed, if the vagrant is not immediately removed, it is a signal that no one cares, disorder will flourish, and the community (warehouse) will go to hell in a hand basket.
For this theory to make sense, you first have to step far far away from thinking of people, or at least poor people, as human beings. You need to objectify them.  You need to see them as dusty broken windows in a vacant warehouse.
Wilson himself admits that his reasoning here seems unjust.  One drunk or vagrant suddenly becomes a score of drunks or a hundred vagrants.  They will destroy an entire community, and they will destroy an entire downtown business district and that is why we now have Business Improvement Districts with police enforcement to keep that neighborhood flourishing and poor unsightly people out of it. 
There are now over 1500 BIDs throughout the United States and Canada and their number are growing.
And we are right back to local laws we had under Jim Crow, Sundown laws, Ugly Laws and Anti Okie laws, local laws that profess to “uphold the locally accepted obligations of civility.” Such laws have always been used by people in power against those on the outside.   In other words, today’s Business Improvement District Broken Window policing is, at its core, a reincarnation of various phases of American history none of us are proud of.
Central to the argument is the need to adhere to “locally accepted obligations of civility.”   But who is setting these “locally accepted obligations of civility”?   Where is our “human civility”?
We have gone from the days where people could be told “you can’t sit at this lunch counter” to “you can’t sit on this sidewalk,” from “don’t let the sun set on you here” to “this public park closes at dusk” and from “you’re on the wrong side of the tracks” to “it is illegal to hang out” on this street or corner.
Of course a tired shopper can sit on the sidewalk to rest between stores and the people that lined up for two days waiting to get the new IPod can loiter and none of them will ever be ticketed, moved on or arrested. These are the civilized people, they are consumers. They are us.
The people these laws are enforced against are not us. They are them. And their mere presence makes us uncomfortable so therefore they are not civil and need to be replaced with someone more like those of us who set the locally accepted obligations of civility.

Jim Crow, Anti-Okie, Broken Window its all the same old wine just in a new bottle.
I guess history really does repeat itself and that’s sad.

Govan PoP-Up

The Glasgow Social Centre PoP's Up in Govan.

This Weekend the GSC is holding a PoP-UP Event at the pearce institute In Govan.

Friday: Film Showing: Wasteland 6.30pm

"Filmed over nearly three years, WASTE LAND follows renowned artist Vik Muniz as he journeys from his home base in Brooklyn to his native Brazil and the world's largest garbage dump, Jardim Gramacho, located on the outskirts of Rio de Janeiro. There he photographs an eclectic band of “catadores”—self-designated pickers of recyclable materials. Muniz’s initial objective was to “paint” the catadores with garbage. However, his collaboration with these inspiring characters as they recreate photographic images of themselves out of garbage reveals both the dignity and despair of the catadores as they begin to re-imagine their lives. Director Lucy Walker (DEVIL’S PLAYGROUND, BLINDSIGHT and COUNTDOWN TO ZERO) and co-directors João Jardim and Karen Harley have great access to the entire process and, in the end, offer stirring evidence of the transformative power of art and the alchemy of the human spirit."

“Beautifully captured, this portrait of a very proud and resourceful underclass rightly tugged the heartstrings of everyone who saw it.”

New York Times:
“We are not pickers of garbage; we are pickers of recyclable materials,” Tião, an impoverished Brazilian catadore, or trash picker, declares to a talk-show host in Lucy Walker’s inspiring documentary “Waste Land.

Saturday: Govan Together,

You are warmly invited to the final event of the Govan Together partnership. Events throughout the day to include:

- Seed Planting
-Film Screening
-Community Visioning
-Torchlight Procession

The evening will climax with a reconvening of the Parliament on Doomster Hill at Water Row.

Sunday: Banner Making, Sunday Lunch & "This Space Is Your Space" Discussion

-Banner Making: 11am

Have a cause, a group or campaign you'd like to tell the world about? Get involved in our banner making workshop. Lets all pitch in together! (Paints & Some Materials Available)

-Lunch: 2pm-3pm

-"This Space Is Your Space": 3pm-5pm
We're aiming to plan a series of PoP-Up Social Centres throughout 2012, and we'd like to know what you want, bring suggestions for workshops, talks, film screenings, or anything else you're passionate about.
This Space Is Your Space!

Occupy Glasgow Will also be in the Pearce Institute all and we STRONGLY encourage you to get involved with their discussions.
Occupy The Future!

The Right to Exist: Stand in solidarity with the most dispossessed on April 2

 Arise has been working with Fund Our Communities, Not War, and through them, all their connections with the Occupy Movement.  Yesterday, FOCNW sent out the following solidarity message, for which we are so grateful.  As we at Arise get more and more absorbed in the details of our rally, FOCNW took the time to step back and look at the big picture.  Thank you!

We have been inspired by the dramatic rise of the Occupy Wall Street
movement, and we are building this movement right here in Western
Massachusetts with the intention of overturning the grip of corporate
power on our lives.

The current economic crisis is affecting our region unevenly with the
city of Springfield one of the hardest hit. Among the most affected in
Springfield are people who either rent homes or who have been made
homeless. Springfield has been known as the "City of Homes" but
increasingly it is becoming the "City of the homeless" with the ongoing
economic crisis compounded by the loss of homes during the June 1, 2011

 The housing crisis in Springfield is not only a local issue. Under the
present economic system there is a perverse incentive to push people
living in poverty out of cities by replacing their homes with housing
that they cannot afford. We see this happening in cities across the
country such as New York City, Washington D.C. and Chicago.

 One solution to the housing crisis is to transform vacant buildings
into homes, apartments and single room residences, but this is not what
is happening. Instead, we see priority given to attracting people from
the professional class and wealthy people to spur "economic development"
- a common code word for the drive to build expensive townhouses,
boutique shops, and office parks designed for short-term profit. This
approach ignores the immediate needs of current residents and long term
community needs.

 This inhumane economic system results in the uprooting of people,
overflowing shelters, and countless children, families and individuals
with no place to call home. Those in power make decisions based on what
will increase profits, ignoring people living in poverty because they
can't help further increase "the bottom line".

 Solving this housing crisis requires a movement to fight for decent
housing as a basic human right. Although some of us are affected much,
much more than others, the most strategic way to change this system,
which threatens all of us, is to stand alongside those hurt the most by
it. These dire times contain within them the possibility of having a
much greater positive impact than most people imagine, as more and more
of us are awakened to the need to change an economic and political
structure that only benefits the tiny few.

We think it is important to stand in solidarity with the people who have
been most dispossessed by this economic system in Springfield, and with
the organizations that are providing leadership in connecting struggles
over housing with broader demands for fundamental social change.

 Most prominent among these organizations are Arise for Social Justice,
which is calling for a mass rally and march in Springfield on April 2,
and Springfield No One Leaves, which has endorsed this action and which
fights for the rights of people who face losing their homes to the
unjust foreclosure practices of greedy banks.

We need each other in order to challenge the priorities and policies of
increasing corporate and military control and to create the world we
want to live in. We ask people to heed the call of our friends and
neighbors in Springfield to gather on April 2 at noon in Court Square in
Springfield to show solidarity with those leading the fight for housing
rights. Together we will take the next step toward the transformation we

-       Ben Grosscup and Susan Theberge


*       City: Replace the housing lost in the tornado!
*       State: Make shelters available to all in need!
*       Feds: Fund housing, not wars!

For more info, contact: Arise for Social Justice (413)734-4948


Rides leaving from Amherst:

Meet at 10:45 AM; Depart at 11:00AM

LOCATION: Parking lot of First Congregational Church of Amherst on the
corner of Spring and Churchill Streets in Amherst
> .

Contact: Susan at stheberg@keene.edu stheberg@keene.edu>

Rides leaving from Northampton:

Meet at 11:15 AM; Depart at 11:30AM

LOCATION: Parking lot of Daily Hampshire Gazette at 115 Conz Street,

Contact: Paki at pakiwieland@gmail.com pakiwieland@gmail.com>

Dollar Store Spice Cupboard

My spice cupboard has looked like this for far too long.

I'm a bit of a cheapo and haven't found a nice spice rack (or even spice containers) that I like enough to spend the thirty plus dollars that they cost. And so, my spices stayed looking like this, which, in my somewhat OCD kitchen, is quite the eye sore.

After living with this mish mash for over two years (eek!), I decided I needed to do something.  Off I went to.... dum dum dum... wait for it..... wait for it...... almost..... okay, you guessed it... THE DOLLAR STORE (I seriously should have considered naming my blog "Dollar Store Design" or something like that, because, man, do I post a lot of dollar store stuff!).

I had purchased three of these little glass spice jars at the dollar store last summer and they were okay I guess. I only bought 3, so clearly I wasn't too enamoured with them- I just needed a functional container to put my bulk spices and herbs in.

On their own, these guys are pretty blah. But for $1 for 3, how can you go wrong. A little bit of makeup should pretty these up, so off to work I went! I bought 18 more spice jars at Dollorama and used Krylon metallic spray paint I had on hand to paint the lids (Is this foodsafe? Not sure, but the spray paint is only on the outside, so I'm keeping my fingers crossed). I did 3 light coats and they came out perfectly. I toyed with the idea of using blue spray paint but decided silver would give me the look I was going for.

And then, of course, came the labels! I'm a labeler, though and through. I had bought some Martha Stewart labels with the intent on doing something with them for my etsy shop, but that idea has been scrapped for now, which left me these pretty shaped (and best of all, CUT) kraft labels.

I spent $6 on the spice jars at Dollorama, $3 on the kraft labels at Staples, and that brings me to a whopping $9 for my spice cupboard! Such an improvement!

The plastic riser I got at HomeSense for $6 a few months back.

Ain't she purty? I'm just really happy I was able to get the look I wanted without spending a boat load. Move on over Williams Sonoma!

I'm sure some of you are wondering where all the "extra" spices went? Like the stuff that I couldn't squeeze into the jar? Well, I put the leftovers in some little craft bags I got at, yes, the dollar store, and used some old stock kitchen labels I had for them. They are in one of my handy white Dollorama bins.

 If you thought my dollar store kitchen makeover is complete, well, you'd be wrong! I've got some more posts coming up over the next few weeks, including my baking cupboard, my puppy cupboard, and my fridge among others. If anyone else has dollar store kitchen makeovers, I would love to see them! Always gathering inspiration from somewhere!
Tip Junkie handmade projectsIHeart OrganizingHookingupwithHoH  Linking up with: A Thoughtful Place

Promiscuity Data: Guest Post.

A while after putting up my first post of subject of promiscuity and divorce risk, I was contacted by an individual who wished to analyse the data further. That individual, whom I shall call INTREPID, was able to analyse several cycles of data from the National Survey of Family Growth with regard to the promiscuity effect on the risk of divorce.

As far as I'm aware the data that has been obtained is not available anywhere in the published literature. I'm not a statistician and cannot vouch for the veracity of the data but I believe the analysis was done truthfully and without bias. 

I want to publicly thank INTREPID for performing the task. I've had access to the findings for a while and have decided not to post them till now so that no trace could be linked to INTREPID. (The other reason was that I lost access to the account which contained the data and only recently was able to gain access to it) 

INTREPID provided a report on his findings which I reproduce in full below.


Following up on your post regarding the Heritage Foundation Study, I thought to explore the same
National Survey of Family Growth (NSFG) data and see if there’s more to the story. I think there is. Like the Heritage Foundation, I find a negative relationship between non‐marital sex and marital stability, but the relationship is more complex than the Heritage Study leads one to think. In particular, the effect of the number of pre‐marital sex partners on marital stability isn’t linear. Rather, it’s a U‐shaped relationship and invites some further exploration.

For starters, the chart below simply reproduces a finding from the Heritage Foundation study. I use the same axis definitions (as best I can tell) that the Heritage Foundation used (for the 1995 NSFG data). But I now add to it two further waves of the NSFG data (2002 and 2006/2008). The pattern is the same across study waves. An increase in the number of non‐marital lifetime sex partners is related to less marital stability. 

I should point out that my data display for 1995 is slightly different from that reported by the Heritage Foundation. I suspect the difference arises in how “sexually active” is defined. I defined it as ever having had sex. It’s not clear how the Heritage Foundation Study defined it. However, I’ve got some gripes with the above axis and definitions used by the Heritage Foundation. For example, the vertical axis showing “stable” marriages includes some marriages that I wouldn’t consider to be “stable.” Also, the horizontal axis includes some sexual relationships that, in my opinion, are unlikely to be clear  causes of marital instability but might instead be the effect of instability. Specifically…,

• Per the Heritage Foundation’s definition of “stable marriages”, second or third marriages that go on to last five or more years (at the time of the NSFG interview) would be considered “stable”. That is,  the Y‐axis could include some women who have divorced at some point and are poor representatives of “marital stability.”

• It’s likely not a big issue (nor is likely to correlate with non‐marital partner count), but marriages that ended with the death of a husband would fail to count towards the Heritage Foundation’s definition of a “stable marriage”.

• The causal direction isn’t clear. Women who have left a marriage (leaving the pool of those in “stable” marriage) may have increased their non‐marital partner count after leaving the marriage, not before the marriage or during it. A knee‐jerk interpretation of the chart, however, suggests that a high number of non‐marital partners leads to marital instability. Yet it may be that a rise in the number non‐marital lifetime partners follows marital instability. Once divorced, women might sleep around more.

• By looking at the count of non‐marital lifetime sexual partners, we count the sexual episodes of women who perhaps got married as virgin brides, then divorced and subsequently slept around before entering into a “stable” marriage (i.e., one lasting five or more years). From the viewpoint of one desiring to minimize his chances of ever experiencing divorce, looking at the number of non‐marital lifetime partners isn’t perfectly helpful. One ought to instead look at the number of pre‐marital sex partners and the rate of first marriages ending in divorce or separation. This is what Jay Teachman looked at in his paper: first marriages that ended in divorce or separation (marital dissolution)

So, for a more careful look at the effect of extra‐marital partner on marriage success, I create Chart 2 that focuses on divorce outcome (vertical axis) rather than the broader concept of a “marital stability” Specifically, Chart 2 below looks at the effect of non‐marital lifetime partner count (same horizontal axis as above) on the rate of first marriages ending in divorce at the time of the NSFG interview. In other words, and compared with Chart 1, the below excludes those women who may have been  divorced and then re‐entered back into a “stable” marriage by the time of their NSFG survey interview. The pattern looks very similar to that in Chart 1 (albeit reflected since the measure is marital divorce rather than marital stability). 

For an even further revelation, I create Chart 3 which improves upon the horizontal axis as well as the vertical one. The vertical axis is the same as in Chart 2 and looks at the rate of first marriages ending in divorce (same outcome measure that Teachman looked at). But the horizontal axis now groups women by their count of pre‐marital sexual partners as opposed to lifetime non‐marital sex partners:


This tells a different story from that in Chart 1. In my opinion, Chart 3 is more helpful than the  Heritage Foundation chart as it permits one to come closer to drawing a causal connection between partner counts marital outcomes. The most interesting element in Chart 3 is the U‐shaped relationship between pre‐marital partner count and divorce rates. This surprised me so much that I had to chart the 2002 NSFG data alongside to be  certain that the 2006/08 data wasn’t just a fluke, a sampling artifact. This chart most clearly shows that divorce rates are the lowest for those with zero pre‐marital partners. That part is unambiguous. Virgin brides are the least likely to divorce, all else equal. But why do  divorce rates rise with one or two premarital partners only to reverse and drop after two or more sexual partners? And next, why do divorce rates reverse and climb back up after the pre‐marital partner count goes into the double digits?

This is a very interesting finding that neither the Heritage Foundation Study nor Jay Teachman’s hazard model analysis examine. I’m not even sure they’re aware the relationship exists. I’m anxious to hear reader opinions on the drivers here. My own hypothesis is that a higher partner count (up to 5‐9 or so partners) is correlated with age and maturity in dating experience. Older women, and women with more dating experience, are more likely to have learned which personal qualities will work best for them in a marriage partner. As a result, such women choose more wisely and tend to experience lower divorce rates. Now, it also happens to be the case that older women have had more time and occasion for pre‐marital sex! Specifically, I suspect it’s not the 5‐9 pre‐marital sex partner count per se that drives the relative drop in the divorce rates, but rather it’s the maturity and experience that women have acquired while they’ve dated more men.

It’s too bad the NSFG doesn’t have a variable for something along the lines of “pre‐marital dating experience” or something similar to tease this out. I don’t believe that it does. The NSFG does, however, collect age and education data which I’ll look at in a future analysis. Indeed, my own quick look (not charted here) reveals that the age is positively correlated with partner count, offering some support of a dating maturity hypothesis. But it warrants some additional charts and analysis. …But this idea of partner count as a proxy for dating maturity doesn’t hold forever. On the right‐hand side of Chart 3, I suspect that some women with a high double‐digit pre‐marital partner count begin to make poor marriage candidates due to yet other personality traits. I suspect that some women who have had 21+ marital partners may also have a high need for variety‐seeking across mates such that marriage or settling down with one man might be considered boring. A resulting marriage, if it happens, is less likely to last.

To further understand partner count on divorce outcome, I need to show yet one more data result. The question I have is: does the divorce rate for women change if her pre‐marital sex partner becomes, in fact, her later husband? If one sleeps with one’s (otherwise virgin) female fiancé prior to the wedding, what’s the effect?

The table below contains the answer. I build this from the 2006/08 data (the 2002 data show a similar result). One can see that the divorce rate is nearly 50% for women who had only one pre‐marital partner and if that partner did not develop into her husband. The divorce rate falls to half the above rate (25.6%) if a woman later marries her first and only pre‐marital sex partner. However, both these divorce rates are higher than the divorce rate for virgin brides. Pre‐marital sexual experience with one’s future spouse does not beat out having no pre‐marital sex at all.


Distilling all the above, the practical advice for a single woman seeking to lower the risk of her first marriage ending in divorce is to remain a virgin bride. If she sleeps with even one person, her risk of divorce increases, at the very least, by roughly 10% (from 14.9% to a value of 25.6%). …And it could easily go higher. Indeed, her overall divorce risk could jump to 50%—which is higher than any value shown in Chart 3—if she doesn’t marry her first partner (and assuming she doesn’t go on to sleep with other pre‐marital partners). And moving on to sleeping with two or more pre‐marital partners doesn’t ameliorate her likely divorce rate over that of her having zero pre‐marital partners. The best option for a women seeking to lower her divorce risk is to remain a virgin bride (all else equal).

The practical advice from the man’s perspective is only a little less clear. A man never truly knows if  his dating partner is a virgin or not unless he sleeps with her—at which point he would only know that she’s not a virgin. (Sleeping with someone to determine their virginity is a destructive test!) But by definition, a man’s own risk of divorce is connected to his wife’s risk of divorce. Therefore, if he  suspects the woman he’s dating is a virgin, his risk of divorce (just like his wife’s) is lower if he  doesn’t have premarital sex with her and she remains a virgin bride. The question is what to do if he strongly suspects (or if she admits) that he wouldn’t be her first pre‐marital sexual partner. If she’s had just one pre‐marital sexual partner, then Chart 3 suggests that her risk of divorcing him is lower if he becomes her second pre‐marital partner (a roughly 40% divorce risk) than if she has sex with just one pre‐marital partner who isn’t her eventual husband (a 50% divorce risk as found from the Table). One could perhaps extend this logic to the case of a man considering a potential wife who’s had two, three, or even more pre‐marital sexual partners. However, the NSFG doesn’t collect the data needed to  extend the Table above and confirm. Besides, this train of thought related to a male’s pre‐marital sex  strategy sounds like an unfolding “tragedy of the commons” type problem. (The strategy that might be  optimum from a personal standpoint is sub‐optimal once everyone tries to pursue it. ) …In addition, we don’t yet know the effect of the husband’s pre‐marital sexual history on divorce outcomes. That  could have a bearing. These male data on divorce and pre‐marital sex are in the 2002 and 2006/08 NSFG and I’ll be looking at those data in the future.


Some comments:

The first thing that strikes me about this report is the confirmation that no premarital sexual experience powerfully and significantly lowers the risk of subsequent divorce. Whether or not you agree with the sexual revolution, I don't care, rather, it's that repeated analysis of the data confirms what common wisdom has always asserted; marrying a girl who has not slept around before is the best long term bet from a divorce-avoidance point of view.

Secondly, some of INTREPID's findings seem to contradict. In the last table, INTREPID  indicates that should a woman sleep with one pre-marital partner who later does not become her husband, her risk of divorce increases to near 50%, ye,t the 1 previous partner divorce risk, in chart 3, is listed at somewhere near 35%. If INTREPID can provide an explanation I can be contacted through the usual channels.

Thirdly, the Heritage Study is vindicated. Women who sleep around are far less likely to be in stable relationships.

Fourthly, The U Shaped graph is interesting:
  • I would go with the 2006/8 Figures more than previous ones. I understand that it was only in this cycle that ACASI interviewing was used. Here a computer prompts the questions and the responder enters the data into it. This way there is very limited face to face contact with the questioner and hence, the responder gains a greater degree of anonymity. Previous research has shown that women are prone to give "socially acceptable" responses when interviewed by a real life interviewer as opposed to answering anonymously.
  •  The graph is not controlled for age of marriage.  Girls who marry early will have less sexual experience than girls who marry much later. Age at marriage is a big predictor of divorce and  I imagine that the one to two non-marital partners category is inflated because of this effect.  It would be interesting to see what the age at divorce would be in this  group.
Other reader comments are invited.

Once again, a sincere thanks to INTREPID for all his/her work.

Stop criminalizing poor people! Rally April 2

End the Criminalization of Homelessness & Poverty!  Join Us!
 Monday, April 2, 2012
In Solidarity with the
National Day of Action for the Right to Exist
 Court Square, Springfield

Noon: Gather; 12:30: Music, speakers, then MARCH to Governor’s Office, 436 Dwight St. & Mayor’s Office

Why are the shelters full, when everywhere we see empty homes and buildings?
Why is the City of Springfield ignoring the housing needs of half of its people?

City: Replace the housing lost in the tornado!
State: Make shelters available to all in need!
Feds: Fund housing, not wars!

For more info, contact: Arise for Social Justice (413)734-4948

Cosponsors so far: Alliance for Peace and Justice, Anti-Racism Ministry Team of the First Congregational Church in Amherst, UCCWM American Friends Service Committee, PV Buddhist Peace Fellowship, Charles Hamilton Houston Inst. For Race & Justice , Community Labor Rebuilding Coalition, Craig’s Place, Fund Our Communities Not War, Grace Church Peace Fellowship, International Alliance of Inhabitants, Mass Alliance of HUD Tenants, Mass Coalition for the Homeless, Mass Law Reform Institute, Move On, Occupy Amherst, Occupy Western MA General Assembly, Out Now, Peace Pagoda, Picture the Homeless, Pioneer Valley Chapter of the Green/Rainbow Party, Springfield Bank Tenants Association, Springfield No One Leaves,Survivors Incorporated, UAW Local 2322, Unitarian Universalist Society of Amherst Social Justice Committee, Western Mass Jobs with Justice, WRAP

¡Poner fin a la penalización por falta de vivienda y por pobreza!

Día Nacional de Acción por el Derecho a Existir:
Lunes, 2 de abril en Court Square, Springfield
(fecha en caso de lluvia: 4 de abril)

Mediodía:      inicio de la recolección
12:30:   música, altavoces
Marchar a la Oficina del Gobernador
Marchar a la Oficina del Alcalde

¡Sin vivienda, todos vamos a ser criminales!

Por qué están llenos los refugios para desamparados, cuando en toda parte hay casas y edificios vacíos?

Por qué ignora la ciudade de Springfield las necesidades de la mitad de sus habitantes?

Nuestros exigencias:
La ciudad: Reponga las viviendas perdidas en el tornado!
El estado: Haga que los refugios para desamparados sean disponibles a todos los necesitados!
El gobierno federal: Financie las viviendas, no las guerras!

Contactar Arise for Social Justice (Levántate por la Justicia Social), 413-734-4948

The Soul Keepers.

I think this Miss Unkon look book is absolutely divine. I wish I had as much talent as some of the photographers I admire, have in their pinky finger. Can you just imagine whipping something like this up in your spare time and then getting paid to do it? Honestly... I wish I had invested more time in learning how to be better in photoshop whilst I studied graphic design. I would have been so much better off. 


Follow me on...

Bloglovin / Twitter / Instagram:socialemissions / Pinterest

FALLing In Love.

So if the first lot of Camilla and Marc Fall 2012 wasn't amazing enough for you, I expect nothing less then for this drop to just blow you away. It pretty much sums up everything I am loving right now about winter trends. Metallics, Pastels, Prints, Suits and Luxe jackets! Hello happiness, goodbye savings. Camilla and Marc, please find your self delightfully nestled in my wardrobe.. please. 
Images via Style.com

Follow me on...

Bloglovin / Twitter / Instagram:socialemissions / Pinterest