Let Me Fix That For You, Ken Ham

Ken Ham, president of Answers in Genesis and Creation Museum barker, is the creationist response to the equally annoying blow-hard of atheist circles, Richard Dawkins.  They both write a lot of books, give a lot of talks, and are terribly impressed with their own opinion.  One big difference, though, is that Mr. Ham has tickets to sell.  Currently in the fund-raising phase of his Young-Earth Creationist theme park centered around the Noah’s Ark of Genesis, Mr. Ham penned an opinion piece for Time’s online entity about the newly released bible-based epic, Noah, from director, Darren Aronofsky.

After reading his review, we, at Red Ink, were much surprised that such a scholar of biblical texts as Mr. Ham would deliver such a one-sided analysis of a film with so much potential for discussion and debate among skeptics and believers, alike.  In the interest of academic rigor, Mr. Ham, let me fix that for you.. 

1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Guest Post: Let Me Fix That For You, CodeBabes

Here at Red Ink we appreciate the work of fellow editors, taking up pens in the name of clear, concise writing.

Chem-diva and blogger @DrRubidium posted this masterful edit of CodeBabes.com “Philosophy Statement”. Posted here, with the good doctor’s permission, for your ….uh…. enjoyment.

20140426-122343.jpg

Leave a Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Let Me Fix That For You, SFWA

The January 2013 cover of the SFWA Bulletin was the final straw in series of sexist incidents within the ranks of the SFWA.   Mr. Truesdale jumps to the defense of artists from the burden of editoral censure.  Here, at Red Ink, we are great fans of editorial censure. Alyssa Rosenberg gave an excellent write-up in Slate.  After @Femme_Mal alerted us to Dave Truesdale’s 11-page “petition”, containing wikipedia references to Andrew Hamilton, a lengthy email transcript with then-president of the SFWA, a conversation with a real-live lesbian (presumably speaking for all women), and a quote from Charlton Heston.  You can read the whole thing HERE, but it is this bit (capped below) that caught our attention.

Click to embiggen

Click to embiggen

So, in a bit of a departure from our usual form, we turn our pen to the cover image in question (which Mr. Truesdale very rightly describes as “rather bland and generic”) to answer his question about whether it is quite up to snuff.  Is it worthy of gracing the cover of the premier professional publication of the SciFi and Fantasy writing world?  Taking Dave at his word, we take a look at the cover as a work of fantasy art.  Here, SFWA, let me fix that for you… 

Red Ink SFWA Cover

 

Female Armor BINGO (downloadable PDF) by OzzieScribbler (yours truly)<br /><br /><br /><br />As a special present for Bikini Armor Battle Damage first anniversary, I present to you: Female Armor BINGO!<br /><br /><br /><br />Feel free to use as a reference to quantify how ridiculous any female armor is.<br /><br /><br /><br />edit: Updated the link into downloadable PDF!<br /><br /><br /><br />Breakdown of all the squares under the cut.<br /><br /><br /><br />[[MORE]]<br /><br /><br /><br />For the record: the game refers to the context of wearing skimpy &#8220;armors&#8221; for battle (any other context, like cosplay, is excluded)<br /><br /><br /><br />Bikini/lingerie shapedLet&#8217;s just say that an outfit designed like this doesn&#8217;t deserve to be called &#8220;an armor&#8221;.<br /><br /><br /><br />Random patches of skin uncoveredReally disturbing when otherwise full-cover armor has random holes through which we can see (and easily damage) boobs, stomach or thighs.<br /><br /><br /><br />ThongIt would be stupid enough to use thong as underwear while going into battle, an armor with thong-shaped bottom half is just absurd.First of all, metal wedgie, OUCH. Second, your bare ass is possibly the best target ever.<br /><br /><br /><br />No head protectionThis problem usually applies to both genders, as many designers fear that character&#8217;s identity will get obscured. But once there are helmets, there&#8217;s a big chance they&#8217;d get defaulted as part of male gear. Because women aren&#8217;t women if you can&#8217;t see their hair, right?<br /><br /><br /><br />Looks nothing like the male version of the same outfitIf they&#8217;re supposed to be the same item, they need to have something in common. Doesn&#8217;t mean that they can&#8217;t be gendered in reasonable ways.<br /><br /><br /><br />Sharp ornamental edges that can pierce skinGranted, male armor tends to have ridiculous amounts of spikes too, but it appears that only women wear those directly on their skin, even though it&#8217;s potentially self-harming.<br /><br /><br /><br />CleavageBecause boobs aren&#8217;t there unless you can clearly see the cleavage. Who cares if it invites enemy to aim at your heart?<br /><br /><br /><br />Looks like a bra, gives no breast supportOnce there&#8217;s a bra/corset shaped part in the armor, it should at the very least function like an actual bra. Yet it barely ever does.Boobs just float in the air and once jiggled they go back to one place all by themselves. Outfit is there just to cover the nipples.<br /><br /><br /><br />High heelsRepat after me: &#8220;No one in their right mind wears high heels for battle. No one in their right mind wears high heels for battle. No one in their right mind wears high heels for battle. High heels are too fucking uncomfortable and unstable to fight in them!&#8221;<br /><br /><br /><br />No underwearRelated to Metal pieces worn directly on bare skin below. One would expect the bare minimum of padding under armor to be the basic underwear. Guess when the armor itself looks like a bra and panties it serves as underwear itself.<br /><br /><br /><br />Boob windowWhen a cleavage goes one step further and takes the shape of unnecessary hole over the boob area.<br /><br /><br /><br />Skin-tigh metalThe outfit, being an armor, is supposedly made from metal, but latches onto the wearer&#8217;s skin like a latex suit, or better yet: bodypaint. Bonus points to chafing if it&#8217;s chainmail.<br /><br /><br /><br />BoobplateBreastplate doesn&#8217;t need to be &#8220;fitted for female form&#8221; with twin bulges to put your boobs in. They actually weaken the armor in significant way. There are quite a few excellent articles on that matter.<br /><br /><br /><br />Thigh-high bootsPeculiarly female-exclusive part of costume design (men in the same costume tend to get knee-high footwear). Boots so tall don&#8217;t seem particularly comfortable, and definitely not easy to put on. And if they&#8217;re made of metal or hard leather, as armor should be&#8230; good luck with moving in those.<br /><br /><br /><br />Nipples that poke through metalSomehow the skin-tigh metal is so tigh that erect nipples show though it. Either that or the boobplate was molded with them. Creepy either way.<br /><br /><br /><br />Bared backMarginally less prevalent than Bared belly (below), but still very popular way of turning warrior lady into an easy target practice.<br /><br /><br /><br />Covers only nipples &amp; genitalsWhat&#8217;s&#8230; the&#8230; fucking&#8230; point&#8230;<br /><br /><br /><br />No pantsBecause nothing says &#8220;this character is definitely not male&#8221; than taking pants from them&#8230; and leaving them just in a g-string or a loincloth at best.<br /><br /><br /><br />Bared bellyGoes naturally with bikini-shape, but many other designs feature inexplicably uncovered midriff as well.Why should we protect this part, anyway? It&#8217;s not like there are squishy vital organs inside or something, right?<br /><br /><br /><br />CameltoeSkin-tigh outfit taken to the logical extreme&#8230; We already overemphasized the character&#8217;s breasts with boobplate, let&#8217;s take it one step further and make the outline of her vulva visible thanks to skin-hugging panties.<br /><br /><br /><br />Metal pieces worn directly on bare skinAll kinds of armor need a lot of padding!Even if a well-crafted chainmail doesn&#8217;t chafe, even if breastplate is comfortable, they will be of no use in fight unless something is worn unbeneath!Armor itself protects from slashing damage and redirects blows, while the padding absorbs the impact which would otherwise cause serious bruising or even internal bleeding.<br /><br /><br /><br />Almost naked for an adventure in cold climateSo not only is she fighting dragons in a bikini made of metal (or in this case, maybe fur), she does it in the middle of ice-cold tundra!Her people are immune to frostbites, you say? Funny the same-race guy somehow has a fur jacket, then. Seems legit.<br /><br /><br /><br />More metal used on boots/gauntlets than to cover vital organsIn the reality of life-or-death situations limbs are expendable. Deal with it.You can live without an arm or leg as long as your head and torso are intact. But apparently arms and legs aren&#8217;t as &#8220;sexy&#8221; as boobs and belly, so they get to be thoroughly covered more often by female armor.<br /><br /><br /><br />UnderboobRelated to the Looks like a bra, gives no breast support above.Sometimes known as &#8216;reverse cleavage&#8217;, it&#8217;s when boobs defy their own anatomy and the laws of gravity and stay perky at all times, even though there&#8217;s no support for their lower part and they should dangle freely.<br /><br /><br /><br />More advanced the armor = skimpierOh Skimpy High Level, the bane of many roleplaying systems. Where&#8217;s ANY logic in that? Nothing about this implies that high level armor is more protective. It breaks willing suspension of disbelief even if we accepted the existence of armor bikinis.<br /><br /><br /><br />Special thanks to everyone who agreed to consult me in creating this game! Ami from eschergirls, Tica from repair-her-armor, Ryan &#8216;Jabberwock&#8217; C., Jenny Islander and many of my friends who want to remain unnamed. Your revisions were a big help!

Inspiration for this post from this excellent Bikini Armor Bingo.  Download the original in PDF form HERE

Leave a Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Let Me Fix That For You, Thought Catalog

Thought Catalog, a digital publication that believes “all thinking is relevant”, published this post by Colton Ashbury – a self-described “NYC Writer” who has no other pieces of work attached to this name.  Whether this is a pseud or whether he is actually this brand-spanking-new remains to be seen.  In an effort to help young Colton on his literary way, we offer these edits.  And, in the spirit of his post, we’re not holding anything back.  Unlike the site, we at Red Ink do NOT have a “value-neutral editorial policy.” So let me fix that for you, Thought Catalog…

Download (PDF, 2.12MB)

Thanks, as always, to @DrRubidium for the consult.

1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Let Me Fix That For You, Nature

Nature News Edit

Click to embiggen.

[NOTE: As Henry Gee remains an employee of Nature, we address these edits to Nature collectively]

A letter to the editors of Nature  set off a series of interactions online that culminated in Nature editor, Henry Gee, revealing the identity of pseudonymous blogger, Dr. Isis (if you want to see the whole series of events, get thee to the Google).  In the due course of time, Nature and Henry Gee both have issued statements.  We at Red Ink hesitate to call them apologies, and they really should be.  So, in the interest of being helpful, let me fix that for you…

Senior Nature editor, Henry Gee’s “reflections”:

Download (PDF, 301KB)

Nature statement:

Download (PDF, 87KB)

 

4 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

The Unvitation – A LMFTFY Intervention

We, at Red Ink, are a bit frustrated with the language sometimes used in professional correspondence.  Kate Clancy posted an email exchange she had regarding a submission for … a thing.  Read her original post for context, but the upshot is that she got an invitation, a swift unvitation, and then a reinvitation (Now with extra added pressure!!). The back-and-forth is an object lesson for people that, sometimes, DUDE, we totally know what you’re really saying.  So, here, managing editors, let me fix that for you…

Download (PDF, 58KB)

And Dr. Clancy’s response (excerpted from her post):

Dear DCST,

Thanks for thinking of me (or rather, my thanks to PFS). First and most importantly, I am pleased to accept this.

Second, I am struggling to figure out how to say this, but I am going to be honest. If you want more women, telling the women you are inviting that you’ve been told you have to have more women, particularly said in a way that implies you are being forced to do it rather than are aware of and eager to eliminate gender disparities, does not promote a welcome environment for women. I hope you realize the impact of your statement towards those you invite, regardless of what was likely a benign intent.

Best,
Kate

The unvitation:

Download (PDF, 42KB)

After some lobbying on the part of Prominent Female Scientist, who suggested Dr. Clancy participate in the first place, this:

Download (PDF, 89KB)

Leave a Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Let Me Fix That For You, James Franco

James Franco, actor, novelist, a bunch of other stuff, with degrees in English from two major universities, is a regular contributor over at Vice.com.  His latest is a review of Blackfish**… or is it a critique… or a review… or a CRITIQUE???  It’s hard to say.  Which is the problem.  So, here you go, James Franco, let me fix that for you.

Download (PDF, 348KB)

**This edit is neither in support nor a critique of Blackfish (ironically).  At the time of this posting, Blackfish is available for viewing on Netflix.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Let Me Fix That For You, Joe Hanson

This edit originally appeared on The JAYFK on November 18, 2013.  An additional edit to the PBS response and Joe’s second apology can be found at The JAYFK, HERE.

Joe Hanson, host of the PBS webseries “It’s Okay to be Smart”, created a video that depicted (using bobblehead dolls) Albert Einstein harassing and then assaulting Marie Curie**.  Then Joe apologized.  Ish.

**I submit this video link for context, since the original was taken down, after many requests and a statement from PBS that it was not representative of the channel’s work or ethic.

Download (PDF, 369KB)

Leave a Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Let Me Fix That For You, Richard Dawkins

Richard Dawkins had an unfortunate incident with airport security.  You can read his original post, My honey trap: why doesn’t anyone believe in public-spirited concern?, wherein he relates the event in great detail, and has the opportunity to ponder the meaning of it all.

Download (PDF, 317KB)

Leave a Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Let Me Fix That For You, @huler

This edit originally appeared on The JAYFK on October 16, 2013.  Click each page for a larger view.

Huler 1 Huler 2 Huler 3 Huler 4 Huler 5 Huler 6

Leave a Comment

Filed under Uncategorized