person:francis

L’Iran en ligne de mire. Par Francis Boyle
▻https://www.les-crises.fr/liran-en-ligne-de-mire-par-francis-boyle

https://www.les-crises.fr/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/0-39-300x179.jpg

Remembering refuge. Between Sanctuary and Solidarity

Remembering Refuge: Between Sanctuary and Solidarity is an oral history archive highlighting the stories of people from Haiti, El Salvador, and Guatemala, who crossed the Canada-US border to seek refuge.

The borders between #Detroit and #Ontario, #New_York and #Quebec sit on the lands of the #Mwami, the #Potawatomi, the #Anishnabek, the #Peoria, the #Haudnesonee, the #Huron-Wendat, the #Mohawk, the St. Lawrence #Iroquois, and the #Abenaki.

You are hearing a conversation between elders Ateronhiata:kon (Francis Boots) and Kanasaraken (Loran Thompson) of the Kahniakehaka (Mohawk) Nation in Akwesasne. They are sharing stories about the Canada-US border that crosses through their territories.

https://i.imgur.com/aKN3ODL.png

▻https://www.rememberingrefuge.com
#Canada #frontières #mémoire #USA #migrations #réfugiés #histoire_orale #audio #peuples_autochtones #Québec
ping @reka

Pourquoi la France est en pénurie de cortisone - Le Parisien
▻http://www.leparisien.fr/societe/sante/pourquoi-la-france-est-en-penurie-de-cortisone-23-05-2019-8078436.php

http://s1.lprs1.fr/images/2019/05/23/8078436_aea5f446-7d80-11e9-ab4e-611ccceac207-1.jpg

Comment s’explique cette pénurie ? L’Agence nationale de sécurité du médicament (ANSM) reconnaît « des tensions d’approvisionnement ces dernières semaines ». Les industriels du secteur pharmaceutique, qui ont été convoqués le 9 mai, évoquent, eux, « des retards pris dans la production des spécialités ». Certains observateurs estiment que les laboratoires traînent des pieds pour les délivrer, les marges sur ces #médicaments étant insuffisantes à leurs yeux.

#voilà_voilà #cortisone #big_pharma #santé

L’initiatrice de #Balancetonporc jugée pour diffamation
▻https://www.liberation.fr/france/2019/05/28/l-initiatrice-de-balancetonporc-jugee-pour-diffamation_1730223

C’était le 13 octobre 2017. Une semaine après l’explosif hashtag #MyHarveyWeinstein, deux jours avant la déferlante #MeToo. Ce jour-là, Sandra Muller, journaliste française installée à New York, lâche sur son compte Twitter : « #Balancetonporc ! Toi aussi raconte en donnant le nom et les détails d’un harcèlement sexuel que tu as connu dans ton boulot. Je vous attends. » Puis, quelques heures plus tard : « Tu as des gros seins. Tu es mon type de femme. Je vais te faire jouir toute la nuit. Eric Brion, ex-patron de Equidia. #Balancetonporc. » Son second message est rediffusé plus de 2 500 fois. Sandra Muller ne le sait pas encore, mais elle vient de créer ce qui deviendra l’emblème de la libération de la parole des femmes victimes de violences sexistes et sexuelles.

Un an et demi plus tard, la voilà poursuivie pour diffamation par l’homme qu’elle avait accusé. Eric Brion l’attaque pour s’offrir « l’occasion de se défendre devant un vrai tribunal » comme l’explique à Libération son avocate Marie Burguburu. Ce mercredi, la créatrice de #Balancetonporc sera jugée devant la 17e chambre civile du tribunal de grande instance de Paris.

A l’époque de la tornade médiatique, l’homme mis en cause par Sandra Muller avait préféré garder le silence, avant de faire le choix de s’exprimer, deux mois plus tard, dans une tribune publiée par le journal le Monde pour réclamer « le droit à la vérité et à la nuance » et présenter ses excuses. « J’ai effectivement tenu des propos déplacés envers Sandra Muller, lors d’un cocktail arrosé très tard dans une soirée, mais à une seule reprise. Elle me plaisait. Je le lui ai dit, lourdement. Et une seule fois, je tiens à le préciser. Je ne veux certainement pas me disculper de ma goujaterie d’alors. Je lui réitère ici mes excuses. » Aujourd’hui, le plaignant réclame 50 000 euros de dommages et intérêts et la suppression du tweet dans lequel son nom apparaît. « #Balancetonporc est un appel à la délation et c’est une délation mensongère », insiste maître Burguburu.

« Quelle mouche a piqué M. Brion pour qu’il change à ce point de stratégie ? » s’offusque de son côté Francis Szpiner, l’un des avocats de Sandra Muller, contacté par Libération. « M. Brion a reconnu avoir eu un comportement grossier et blâmable envers ma cliente. Au lieu de se faire discret, il l’attaque en justice. Ce procès est une "baupinade" ! » « Baupinade » en référence à Denis Baupin, l’ancien député écologiste qui avait décidé d’attaquer en diffamation six femmes l’accusant de harcèlement et d’agressions sexuelles. Et qui avait perdu en avril.

Son nom Francis Lalanne prête à rire et l’alliance jaune (la révolte par le vote) le soutien.
Quelques drôles de noms sur cette liste :
11. LE HÉRISSÉ Philippe
23. BRACQUEMART Franck
28. ILNICKA BOUCHER Julita
30. BELLAZAAR Zakia
61. LANGLUMÉ Didier
67. ROGNON Olivier
73. PROFFIT Alphonse
78. ABSOLU Annie
#gilets_jaunes

L’architecture Art-déco dans la province de Buenos-Aires

▻https://mlleaartus.wordpress.com/2018/08/12/francisco-salamone-ou-lart-de-larchitecture-fasciste

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c1/Portada_del_cementerio_de_Azul_-_Pcia_de_Buenos_Aires.JPG

Francisco Salamone (June 5, 1897 – August 8, 1959) was an Argentine architect of Italian descent who, between 1936 and 1940, during the Infamous Decade, built more than 60 municipal buildings with elements of Art Deco style in 25 rural communities on the Argentine Pampas within the Buenos Aires Province. These buildings were some of the first examples of modern architecture in rural Argentina.

Couloir sans fin n°9 au pays du pourtour romain
▻http://www.radiopanik.org/emissions/le-couloir-sans-fin/couloir-sans-fin-n9-au-pays-du-pourtour-romain

http://www.radiopanik.org/media/cache/7b/b5/7bb5b617cb427e1aa12cc98a3398638c.jpg

COULOIR SANS FIN 9 au pays du pourtour romain

Météo cosmique

et entretien avec Kang Byung ki

autour de l’oeuvre de Francis Bacon

Exposition collective à Barcelone jusqu’au 6 Juin 2019

▻http://www.tpkonline.com

Playlist :

Man in the planet – Red Zepoarin

DJ NS1 SHOW BUSINESS

BrianEno – Glitch

The stranglers – MenInBlack

Shellac-RidingBikes

SYA-RedDesert

CabaretVoltaire- Black Mask

Zack de la rocha – digging for windows here

the prodigy – invisible sun

Wheelchair killer truthsayers

trunks – easter eggs any1

p margin-bottom : 0.1in ; line-height : 115% ;

▻http://www.radiopanik.org/media/sounds/le-couloir-sans-fin/couloir-sans-fin-n9-au-pays-du-pourtour-romain_06732__1.mp3

Who Was Shakespeare? Could the Author Have Been a Woman? - The Atlantic
▻https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/06/who-is-shakespeare-emilia-bassano/588076

https://cdn.theatlantic.com/assets/media/img/posts/2019/05/0619_BOB_Shakespeare_Web/179e7cada.jpg

On a spring night in 2018, I stood on a Manhattan sidewalk with friends, reading Shakespeare aloud. We were in line to see an adaptation of Macbeth and had decided to pass the time refreshing our memories of the play’s best lines. I pulled up Lady Macbeth’s soliloquy on my iPhone. “Come, you spirits / That tend on mortal thoughts, unsex me here,” I read, thrilled once again by the incantatory power of the verse. I remembered where I was when I first heard those lines: in my 10th-grade English class, startled out of my adolescent stupor by this woman rebelling magnificently and malevolently against her submissive status. “Make thick my blood, / Stop up th’ access and passage to remorse.” Six months into the #MeToo movement, her fury and frustration felt newly resonant.

To hear more feature stories, see our full list or get the Audm iPhone app.

Pulled back into plays I’d studied in college and graduate school, I found myself mesmerized by Lady Macbeth and her sisters in the Shakespeare canon. Beatrice, in Much Ado About Nothing, raging at the limitations of her sex (“O God, that I were a man! I would eat his heart in the marketplace”). Rosalind, in As You Like It, affecting the swagger of masculine confidence to escape those limitations (“We’ll have a swashing and a martial outside, / As many other mannish cowards have / That do outface it with their semblances”). Isabella, in Measure for Measure, fearing no one will believe her word against Angelo’s, rapist though he is (“To whom should I complain? Did I tell this, / Who would believe me?”). Kate, in The Taming of the Shrew, refusing to be silenced by her husband (“My tongue will tell the anger of my heart, / Or else my heart concealing it will break”). Emilia, in one of her last speeches in Othello before Iago kills her, arguing for women’s equality (“Let husbands know / Their wives have sense like them”).
I was reminded of all the remarkable female friendships, too: Beatrice and Hero’s allegiance; Emilia’s devotion to her mistress, Desdemona; Paulina’s brave loyalty to Hermione in The Winter’s Tale; and plenty more. (“Let’s consult together against this greasy knight,” resolve the merry wives of Windsor, revenging themselves on Falstaff.) These intimate female alliances are fresh inventions—they don’t exist in the literary sources from which many of the plays are drawn. And when the plays lean on historical sources (Plutarch, for instance), they feminize them, portraying legendary male figures through the eyes of mothers, wives, and lovers. “Why was Shakespeare able to see the woman’s position, write entirely as if he were a woman, in a way that none of the other playwrights of the age were able to?” In her book about the plays’ female characters, Tina Packer, the founding artistic director of Shakespeare & Company, asked the question very much on my mind.

Doubts about whether William Shakespeare (who was born in Stratford-upon-Avon in 1564 and died in 1616) really wrote the works attributed to him are almost as old as the writing itself. Alternative contenders—Francis Bacon; Christopher Marlowe; and Edward de Vere, the 17th earl of Oxford, prominent among them—continue to have champions, whose fervor can sometimes border on fanaticism. In response, orthodox Shakespeare scholars have settled into dogmatism of their own. Even to dabble in authorship questions is considered a sign of bad faith, a blinkered failure to countenance genius in a glover’s son. The time had come, I felt, to tug at the blinkers of both camps and reconsider the authorship debate: Had anyone ever proposed that the creator of those extraordinary women might be a woman? Each of the male possibilities requires an elaborate theory to explain his use of another’s name. None of the candidates has succeeded in dethroning the man from Stratford. Yet a simple reason would explain a playwright’s need for a pseudonym in Elizabethan England: being female.
Who was this woman writing “immortal work” in the same year that Shakespeare’s name first appeared in print?

Long before Tina Packer marveled at the bard’s uncanny insight, others were no less awed by the empathy that pervades the work. “One would think that he had been Metamorphosed from a Man to a Woman,” wrote Margaret Cavendish, the 17th-century philosopher and playwright. The critic John Ruskin said, “Shakespeare has no heroes—he has only heroines.” A striking number of those heroines refuse to obey rules. At least 10 defy their fathers, bucking betrothals they don’t like to find their own paths to love. Eight disguise themselves as men, outwitting patriarchal controls—more gender-swapping than can be found in the work of any previous English playwright. Six lead armies.

The prevailing view, however, has been that no women in Renaissance England wrote for the theater, because that was against the rules. Religious verse and translation were deemed suitable female literary pursuits; “closet dramas,” meant only for private reading, were acceptable. The stage was off-limits. Yet scholars have lately established that women were involved in the business of acting companies as patrons, shareholders, suppliers of costumes, and gatherers of entrance fees. What’s more, 80 percent of the plays printed in the 1580s were written anonymously, and that number didn’t fall below 50 percent until the early 1600s. At least one eminent Shakespeare scholar, Phyllis Rackin, of the University of Pennsylvania, challenges the blanket assumption that the commercial drama pouring forth in the period bore no trace of a female hand. So did Virginia Woolf, even as she sighed over the obstacles that would have confronted a female Shakespeare: “Undoubtedly, I thought, looking at the shelf where there are no plays by women, her work would have gone unsigned.”

A tantalizing nudge lies buried in the writings of Gabriel Harvey, a well-known Elizabethan literary critic. In 1593, he referred cryptically to an “excellent Gentlewoman” who had written three sonnets and a comedy. “I dare not Particularise her Description,” he wrote, even as he heaped praise on her.

All her conceits are illuminate with the light of Reason; all her speeches beautified with the grace of Affability … In her mind there appeareth a certain heavenly Logic; in her tongue & pen a divine Rhetoric … I dare undertake with warrant, whatsoever she writeth must needs remain an immortal work, and will leave, in the activest world, an eternal memory of the silliest vermin that she should vouchsafe to grace with her beautiful and allective style, as ingenious as elegant.

Who was this woman writing “immortal work” in the same year that Shakespeare’s name first appeared in print, on the poem “Venus and Adonis,” a scandalous parody of masculine seduction tales (in which the woman forces herself on the man)? Harvey’s tribute is extraordinary, yet orthodox Shakespeareans and anti-Stratfordians alike have almost entirely ignored it.

Until recently, that is, when a few bold outliers began to advance the case that Shakespeare might well have been a woman. One candidate is Mary Sidney, the countess of Pembroke (and beloved sister of the celebrated poet Philip Sidney)—one of the most educated women of her time, a translator and poet, and the doyenne of the Wilton Circle, a literary salon dedicated to galvanizing an English cultural renaissance. Clues beckon, not least that Sidney and her husband were the patrons of one of the first theater companies to perform Shakespeare’s plays. Was Shakespeare’s name useful camouflage, allowing her to publish what she otherwise couldn’t?
Shakespeare’s life is remarkably well documented—yet no records from his lifetime identify him unequivocally as a writer.

But the candidate who intrigued me more was a woman as exotic and peripheral as Sidney was pedigreed and prominent. Not long after my Macbeth outing, I learned that Shakespeare’s Globe, in London, had set out to explore this figure’s input to the canon. The theater’s summer 2018 season concluded with a new play, Emilia, about a contemporary of Shakespeare’s named Emilia Bassano. Born in London in 1569 to a family of Venetian immigrants—musicians and instrument-makers who were likely Jewish—she was one of the first women in England to publish a volume of poetry (suitably religious yet startlingly feminist, arguing for women’s “Libertie” and against male oppression). Her existence was unearthed in 1973 by the Oxford historian A. L. Rowse, who speculated that she was Shakespeare’s mistress, the “dark lady” described in the sonnets. In Emilia, the playwright Morgan Lloyd Malcolm goes a step further: Her Shakespeare is a plagiarist who uses Bassano’s words for Emilia’s famous defense of women in Othello.

Could Bassano have contributed even more widely and directly? The idea felt like a feminist fantasy about the past—but then, stories about women’s lost and obscured achievements so often have a dreamlike quality, unveiling a history different from the one we’ve learned. Was I getting carried away, reinventing Shakespeare in the image of our age? Or was I seeing past gendered assumptions to the woman who—like Shakespeare’s heroines—had fashioned herself a clever disguise? Perhaps the time was finally ripe for us to see her.

The ranks of Shakespeare skeptics comprise a kind of literary underworld—a cross-disciplinary array of academics, actors (Derek Jacobi and Mark Rylance are perhaps the best known), writers, teachers, lawyers, a few Supreme Court justices (Sandra Day O’Connor, Antonin Scalia, John Paul Stevens). Look further back and you’ll find such illustrious names as Ralph Waldo Emerson, Walt Whitman, Mark Twain, Henry James, Sigmund Freud, Helen Keller, and Charlie Chaplin. Their ideas about the authorship of the plays and poems differ, but they concur that Shakespeare is not the man who wrote them.

Their doubt is rooted in an empirical conundrum. Shakespeare’s life is remarkably well documented, by the standards of the period—yet no records from his lifetime identify him unequivocally as a writer. The more than 70 documents that exist show him as an actor, a shareholder in a theater company, a moneylender, and a property investor. They show that he dodged taxes, was fined for hoarding grain during a shortage, pursued petty lawsuits, and was subject to a restraining order. The profile is remarkably coherent, adding up to a mercenary impresario of the Renaissance entertainment industry. What’s missing is any sign that he wrote.

From January 1863: Nathaniel Hawthorne considers authorship while visiting Stratford-upon-Avon

No such void exists for other major writers of the period, as a meticulous scholar named Diana Price has demonstrated. Many left fewer documents than Shakespeare did, but among them are manuscripts, letters, and payment records proving that writing was their profession. For example, court records show payment to Ben Jonson for “those services of his wit & pen.” Desperate to come up with comparable material to round out Shakespeare, scholars in the 18th and 19th centuries forged evidence—later debunked—of a writerly life.

To be sure, Shakespeare’s name can be found linked, during his lifetime, to written works. With Love’s Labour’s Lost, in 1598, it started appearing on the title pages of one-play editions called “quartos.” (Several of the plays attributed to Shakespeare were first published anonymously.) Commentators at the time saluted him by name, praising “Shakespeare’s fine filed phrase” and “honey-tongued Shakespeare.” But such evidence proves attribution, not actual authorship—as even some orthodox Shakespeare scholars grant. “I would love to find a contemporary document that said William Shakespeare was the dramatist of Stratford-upon-Avon written during his lifetime,” Stanley Wells, a professor emeritus at the University of Birmingham’s Shakespeare Institute, has said. “That would shut the buggers up!”
FROM THE ARCHIVES
October 1991 Atlantic cover

In 1991, The Atlantic commissioned two pieces from admittedly partisan authors, Irving Matus and Tom Bethell, to examine and debate the argument:
In Defense of Shakespeare
The Case for Oxford

By contrast, more than a few of Shakespeare’s contemporaries are on record suggesting that his name got affixed to work that wasn’t his. In 1591, the dramatist Robert Greene wrote of the practice of “underhand brokery”—of poets who “get some other Batillus to set his name to their verses.” (Batillus was a mediocre Roman poet who claimed some of Virgil’s verses as his own.) The following year, he warned fellow playwrights about an “upstart Crow, beautified with our feathers,” who thinks he is the “onely Shake-scene in a countrey.” Most scholars agree that the “Crow” is Shakespeare, then an actor in his late 20s, and conclude that the new-hatched playwright was starting to irk established figures. Anti-Stratfordians see something else: In Aesop’s fables, the crow was a proud strutter who stole the feathers of others; Horace’s crow, in his epistles, was a plagiarist. Shakespeare was being attacked, they say, not as a budding dramatist, but as a paymaster taking credit for others’ work. “Seeke you better Maisters,” Greene advised, urging his colleagues to cease writing for the Crow.

Ben Jonson, among others, got in his digs, too. Scholars agree that the character of Sogliardo in Every Man Out of His Humour—a country bumpkin “without brain, wit, anything, indeed, ramping to gentility”—is a parody of Shakespeare, a social climber whose pursuit of a coat of arms was common lore among his circle of actors. In a satirical poem called “On Poet-Ape,” Jonson was likely taking aim at Shakespeare the theater-world wheeler-dealer. This poet-ape, Jonson wrote, “from brokage is become so bold a thief,”

At first he made low shifts, would pick and glean,
Buy the reversion of old plays; now grown
To a little wealth, and credit in the scene,
He takes up all, makes each man’s wit his own

What to make of the fact that Jonson changed his tune in the prefatory material that he contributed to the First Folio of plays when it appeared seven years after Shakespeare’s death? Jonson’s praise there did more than attribute the work to Shakespeare. It declared his art unmatched: “He was not of an age, but for all time!” The anti-Stratfordian response is to note the shameless hype at the heart of the Folio project. “Whatever you do, Buy,” the compilers urged in their dedication, intent on a hard sell for a dramatist who, doubters emphasize, was curiously unsung at his death. The Folio’s introductory effusions, they argue, contain double meanings. Jonson tells readers, for example, to find Shakespeare not in his portrait “but his Booke,” seeming to undercut the relation between the man and the work. And near the start of his over-the-top tribute, Jonson riffs on the unreliability of extravagant praise, “which doth ne’er advance / The truth.”

From September 1904: Ralph Waldo Emerson celebrates Shakespeare

The authorship puzzles don’t end there. How did the man born in Stratford acquire the wide-ranging knowledge on display in the plays—of the Elizabethan court, as well as of multiple languages, the law, astronomy, music, the military, and foreign lands, especially northern Italian cities? The author’s linguistic brilliance shines in words and sayings imported from foreign vocabularies, but Shakespeare wasn’t educated past the age of 13. Perhaps he traveled, joined the army, worked as a tutor, or all three, scholars have proposed. Yet no proof exists of any of those experiences, despite, as the Oxford historian Hugh Trevor-Roper pointed out in an essay, “the greatest battery of organized research that has ever been directed upon a single person.”
Emilia Bassano’s life encompassed the breadth of the Shakespeare canon: its low-class references and knowledge of the court; its Italian sources and Jewish allusions; its music and feminism.

In fact, a document that does exist—Shakespeare’s will—would seem to undercut such hypotheses. A wealthy man when he retired to Stratford, he was meticulous about bequeathing his properties and possessions (his silver, his second-best bed). Yet he left behind not a single book, though the plays draw on hundreds of texts, including some—in Italian and French—that hadn’t yet been translated into English. Nor did he leave any musical instruments, though the plays use at least 300 musical terms and refer to 26 instruments. He remembered three actor-owners in his company, but no one in the literary profession. Strangest of all, he made no mention of manuscripts or writing. Perhaps as startling as the gaps in his will, Shakespeare appears to have neglected his daughters’ education—an incongruity, given the erudition of so many of the playwright’s female characters. One signed with her mark, the other with a signature a scholar has called “painfully formed.”

“Weak and unconvincing” was Trevor-Roper’s verdict on the case for Shakespeare. My delving left me in agreement, not that the briefs for the male alternatives struck me as compelling either. Steeped in the plays, I felt their author would surely join me in bridling at the Stratfordians’ unquestioning worship at the shrine—their arrogant dismissal of skeptics as mere deluded “buggers,” or worse. (“Is there any more fanatic zealot than the priest-like defender of a challenged creed?” asked Richmond Crinkley, a former director of programs at the Folger Shakespeare Library who was nonetheless sympathetic to the anti-Stratfordian view.) To appreciate how belief blossoms into fact—how readily myths about someone get disseminated as truth—one can’t do better than to read Shakespeare. Just think of how obsessed the work is with mistaken identities, concealed women, forged and anonymous documents—with the error of trusting in outward appearances. What if searchers for the real Shakespeare simply haven’t set their sights on the right pool of candidates?

Read: An interview with the author of ‘The Shakespeare Wars’

I met Emilia Bassano’s most ardent champion at Alice’s Tea Cup, which seemed unexpectedly apt: A teahouse on Manhattan’s Upper West Side, it has quotes from Alice in Wonderland scrawled across the walls. (“off with their heads!”) John Hudson, an Englishman in his 60s who pursued a degree at the Shakespeare Institute in a mid-career swerve, had been on the Bassano case for years, he told me. In 2014, he published Shakespeare’s Dark Lady: Amelia Bassano Lanier, the Woman Behind Shakespeare’s Plays? His zeal can sometimes get the better of him, yet he emphasizes that his methods and findings are laid out “for anyone … to refute if they wish.” Like Alice’s rabbit hole, Bassano’s case opened up new and richly disorienting perspectives—on the plays, on the ways we think about genius and gender, and on a fascinating life.

Hudson first learned of Bassano from A. L. Rowse, who discovered mention of her in the notebooks of an Elizabethan physician and astrologer named Simon Forman. In her teens, she became the mistress of Henry Carey, Lord Hunsdon, the master of court entertainment and patron of Shakespeare’s acting company. And that is only the start. Whether or not Bassano was Shakespeare’s lover (scholars now dismiss Rowse’s claim), the discernible contours of her biography supply what the available material about Shakespeare’s life doesn’t: circumstantial evidence of opportunities to acquire an impressive expanse of knowledge.

Bassano lived, Hudson points out, “an existence on the boundaries of many different social worlds,” encompassing the breadth of the Shakespeare canon: its coarse, low-class references and its intimate knowledge of the court; its Italian sources and its Jewish allusions; its music and its feminism. And her imprint, as Hudson reads the plays, extends over a long period. He notes the many uses of her name, citing several early on—for instance, an Emilia in The Comedy of Errors. (Emilia, the most common female name in the plays alongside Katherine, wasn’t used in the 16th century by any other English playwright.) Titus Andronicus features a character named Bassianus, which was the original Roman name of Bassano del Grappa, her family’s hometown before their move to Venice. Later, in The Merchant of Venice, the romantic hero is a Venetian named Bassanio, an indication that the author perhaps knew of the Bassanos’ connection to Venice. (Bassanio is a spelling of their name in some records.)

Further on, in Othello, another Emilia appears—Iago’s wife. Her famous speech against abusive husbands, Hudson notes, doesn’t show up until 1623, in the First Folio, included among lines that hadn’t appeared in an earlier version (lines that Stratfordians assume—without any proof—were written before Shakespeare’s death). Bassano was still alive, and by then had known her share of hardship at the hands of men. More to the point, she had already spoken out, in her 1611 book of poetry, against men who “do like vipers deface the wombs wherein they were bred.”

Prodded by Hudson, you can discern traces of Bassano’s own life trajectory in particular works across the canon. In All’s Well That Ends Well, a lowborn girl lives with a dowager countess and a general named Bertram. When Bassano’s father, Baptista, died in 1576, Emilia, then 7, was taken in by Susan Bertie, the dowager countess of Kent. The countess’s brother, Peregrine Bertie, was—like the fictional Bertram—a celebrated general. In the play, the countess tells how a father “famous … in his profession” left “his sole child … bequeathed to my overlooking. I have those hopes of her good that her education promises.” Bassano received a remarkable humanist education with the countess. In her book of poetry, she praised her guardian as “the Mistris of my youth, / The noble guide of my ungovern’d dayes.”
Bassano’s life sheds possible light on the plays’ preoccupation with women caught in forced or loveless marriages.

As for the celebrated general, Hudson seizes on the possibility that Bassano’s ears, and perhaps eyes, were opened by Peregrine Bertie as well. In 1582, Bertie was named ambassador to Denmark by the queen and sent to the court at Elsinore—the setting of Hamlet. Records show that the trip included state dinners with Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, whose names appear in the play. Because emissaries from the same two families later visited the English court, the trip isn’t decisive, but another encounter is telling: Bertie met with the Danish astronomer Tycho Brahe, whose astronomical theories influenced the play. Was Bassano (then just entering her teens) on the trip? Bertie was accompanied by a “whole traine,” but only the names of important gentlemen are recorded. In any case, Hudson argues, she would have heard tales on his return.

Later, as the mistress of Henry Carey (43 years her senior), Bassano gained access to more than the theater world. Carey, the queen’s cousin, held various legal and military positions. Bassano was “favoured much of her Majesty and of many noblemen,” the physician Forman noted, indicating the kind of extensive aristocratic associations that only vague guesswork can accord to Shakespeare. His company didn’t perform at court until Christmas of 1594, after several of the plays informed by courtly life had already been written. Shakespeare’s history plays, concerned as they are with the interactions of the governing class, presume an insider perspective on aristocratic life. Yet mere court performances wouldn’t have enabled such familiarity, and no trace exists of Shakespeare’s presence in any upper-class household.

And then, in late 1592, Bassano (now 23) was expelled from court. She was pregnant. Carey gave her money and jewels and, for appearance’s sake, married her off to Alphonso Lanier, a court musician. A few months later, she had a son. Despite the glittering dowry, Lanier must not have been pleased. “Her husband hath dealt hardly with her,” Forman wrote, “and spent and consumed her goods.”

Bassano was later employed in a noble household, probably as a music tutor, and roughly a decade after that opened a school. Whether she accompanied her male relatives—whose consort of recorder players at the English court lasted 90 years—on their trips back to northern Italy isn’t known. But the family link to the home country offers support for the fine-grained familiarity with the region that (along with in-depth musical knowledge) any plausible candidate for authorship would seem to need—just what scholars have had to strain to establish for Shakespeare. (Perhaps, theories go, he chatted with travelers or consulted books.) In Othello, for example, Iago gives a speech that precisely describes a fresco in Bassano del Grappa—also the location of a shop owned by Giovanni Otello, a likely source of the title character’s name.

Her Bassano lineage—scholars suggest the family were conversos, converted or hidden Jews presenting as Christians—also helps account for the Jewish references that scholars of the plays have noted. The plea in The Merchant of Venice for the equality and humanity of Jews, a radical departure from typical anti-Semitic portrayals of the period, is well known. “Hath not a Jew hands, organs, dimensions, senses, affections, passions?” Shylock asks. “If you prick us, do we not bleed?” A Midsummer Night’s Dream draws from a passage in the Talmud about marriage vows; spoken Hebrew is mixed into the nonsense language of All’s Well That Ends Well.
Stephen Doyle

What’s more, the Bassano family’s background suggests a source close to home for the particular interest in dark figures in the sonnets, Othello, and elsewhere. A 1584 document about the arrest of two Bassano men records them as “black”—among Elizabethans, the term could apply to anyone darker than the fair-skinned English, including those with a Mediterranean complexion. (The fellows uttered lines that could come straight from a comic interlude in the plays: “We have as good friends in the court as thou hast and better too … Send us to ward? Thou wert as good kiss our arse.”) In Love’s Labour’s Lost, the noblemen derisively compare Rosaline, the princess’s attendant, to “chimney-sweepers” and “colliers” (coal miners). The king joins in, telling Berowne, who is infatuated with her, “Thy love is black as ebony,” to which the young lord responds, “O wood divine!”

Bassano’s life sheds possible light, too, on another outsider theme: the plays’ preoccupation with women caught in forced or loveless marriages. Hudson sees her misery reflected in the sonnets, thought to have been written from the early 1590s to the early 1600s. “When, in disgrace with fortune and men’s eyes, / I all alone beweep my outcast state, /And trouble deaf heaven with my bootless cries, /And look upon myself and curse my fate,” reads sonnet 29. (When Maya Angelou first encountered the poem as a child, she thought Shakespeare must have been a black girl who had been sexually abused: “How else could he know what I know?”) For Shakespeare, those years brought a rise in status: In 1596, he was granted a coat of arms, and by 1597, he was rich enough to buy the second-largest house in Stratford.

Read: What Maya Angelou meant when she said ‘Shakespeare must be a black girl’

In what is considered an early or muddled version of The Taming of the Shrew, a man named Alphonso (as was Bassano’s husband) tries to marry off his three daughters, Emilia, Kate, and Philema. Emilia drops out in the later version, and the father is now called Baptista (the name of Bassano’s father). As a portrait of a husband dealing “hardly” with a wife, the play is horrifying. Yet Kate’s speech of submission, with its allusions to the Letters of Paul, is slippery: Even as she exaggeratedly parrots the Christian doctrine of womanly subjection, she is anything but dutifully silent.

Shakespeare’s women repeatedly subvert such teachings, perhaps most radically in The Winter’s Tale, another drama of male cruelty. There the noblewoman Paulina, scorned by King Leontes as “a most intelligencing bawd” with a “boundless tongue,” bears fierce witness against him (no man dares to) when he wrongly accuses Queen Hermione of adultery and imprisons her. As in so many of the comedies, a more enlightened society emerges in the end because the women’s values triumph.

I was stunned to realize that the year The Winter’s Tale was likely completed, 1611, was the same year Bassano published her book of poetry, Salve Deus Rex Judæorum. Her writing style bears no obvious resemblance to Shakespeare’s in his plays, though Hudson strains to suggest similarities. The overlap lies in the feminist content. Bassano’s poetry registers as more than conventional religious verse designed to win patronage (she dedicates it to nine women, Mary Sidney included, fashioning a female literary community). Scholars have observed that it reads as a “transgressive” defense of Eve and womankind. Like a cross-dressing Shakespearean heroine, Bassano refuses to play by the rules, heretically reinterpreting scripture. “If Eve did err, it was for knowledge sake,” she writes. Arguing that the crucifixion, a crime committed by men, was a greater crime than Eve’s, she challenges the basis of men’s “tyranny” over women.

“I always feel something Italian, something Jewish about Shakespeare,” Jorge Luis Borges told The Paris Review in 1966. “Perhaps Englishmen admire him because of that, because it’s so unlike them.” Borges didn’t mention feeling “something female” about the bard, yet that response has never ceased to be part of Shakespeare’s allure—embodiment though he is of the patriarchal authority of the Western canon. What would the revelation of a woman’s hand at work mean, aside from the loss of a prime tourist attraction in Stratford-upon-Avon? Would the effect be a blow to the cultural patriarchy, or the erosion of the canon’s status? Would (male) myths of inexplicable genius take a hit? Would women at last claim their rightful authority as historical and intellectual forces?

I was curious to take the temperature of the combative authorship debate as women edge their way into it. Over more tea, I tested Hudson’s room for flexibility. Could the plays’ many connections to Bassano be explained by simply assuming the playwright knew her well? “Shakespeare would have had to run to her every few minutes for a musical reference or an Italian pun,” he said. I caught up with Mark Rylance, the actor and former artistic director of the Globe, in the midst of rehearsals for Othello (whose plot, he noted, comes from an Italian text that didn’t exist in English). A latitudinarian doubter—embracing the inquiry, not any single candidate—Rylance has lately observed that the once heretical notion of collaboration between Shakespeare and other writers “is now accepted, pursued and published by leading orthodox scholars.” He told me that “Emilia should be studied by anyone interested in the creation of the plays.” David Scott Kastan, a well-known Shakespeare scholar at Yale, urged further exploration too, though he wasn’t ready to anoint her bard. “What’s clear is that it’s important to know more about her,” he said, and even got playful with pronouns: “The more we know about her and the world she lived in, the more we’ll know about Shakespeare, whoever she was.”
Related Stories

Such Ado: The Fight for Shakespeare’s Puns
Shakespeare in Love, or in Context

In the fall, I joined the annual meeting of the Shakespeare Authorship Trust—a gathering of skeptics at the Globe—feeling excited that gender would be at the top of the agenda. Some eyebrows were raised even in this company, but enthusiasm ran high. “People have been totally frustrated with authorship debates that go nowhere, but that’s because there have been 200 years of bad candidates,” one participant from the University of Toronto exclaimed. “They didn’t want to see women in this,” he reflected. “It’s a tragedy of history.”

He favored Sidney. Others were eager to learn about Bassano, and with collaboration in mind, I wondered whether the two women had perhaps worked together, or as part of a group. I thought of Bassano’s Salve Deus, in which she writes that men have wrongly taken credit for knowledge: “Yet Men will boast of Knowledge, which he tooke / From Eve’s faire hand, as from a learned Booke.”

The night after the meeting, I went to a performance of Antony and Cleopatra at the National Theatre. I sat enthralled, still listening for the poet in her words, trying to catch her reflection in some forgotten bit of verse. “Give me my robe, put on my crown,” cried the queen, “I have / Immortal longings in me.” There she was, kissing her ladies goodbye, raising the serpent to her breast. “I am fire and air.”

Spain’s Far-right Vox Received Almost $1M from ’Marxist-Islamist’ Iranian Exiles: Report | News | teleSUR English
▻https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/Spains-Far-right-Vox-Received-Almost-1M-from-Marxist-Islamist-Irania

It is unlikely that Vox’s hyper-nationalist voters know that their party scored a significant presence in Spain’s parliament mostly thanks to Zionists, Islamists and foreigners.

With the April 28 general elections in Spain over, the far-right party Vox gained about 10 percent of parliamentary seats, marking the far-right’s rising comeback into politics four decades after Francisco Franco’s dictatorship. While a less alarmist reading would say that the far-right was always there, hidden in the conservative People’s Party (PP), the fact that they are out in the open strengthens Europe’s wave of far-right xenophobic and anti-European advance.

The party appealed to voters in one of Spain’s most contested elections since its return to democracy, mostly basing its arguments against leftists politics, social liberals, migrants, charged mainly with an Islamophobic narrative. Emphasizing the return of a long lost Spain and pushing to fight what they refer to as an “Islamist invasion,” which is the “enemy of Europe.” One could summarize it as an Iberian version of “Make Spain Great Again.”

Yet while this definitely appealed to almost two million voters, many are unaware of where their party’s initial funding came from. Back in January 2019, an investigation made by the newspaper El Pais revealed, through leaked documents, that almost one million euros - approximately 80 percent of its 2014 campaign funding - donated to Vox between its founding in December 2013 and the European Parliament elections in May 2014 came via the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), a self-declared “Marxist” organization and an Islamist group made up of Iranian exiles.

However, this is where things get complicated. The NCRI is based in France and was founded in 1981 by Massoud Rajavi and Abolhassan Banisadr, nowadays its president-elect is Maryam Rajavi (Massoud’s wife). The Rajavis are also the leaders of the Mojahedin-e-Khalq (MEK). A reason for many to believe that the NCRI is just a front for the MEK, which over the past few decades has managed to create a complicated web of anti-Iranian, pro-Israel and right-wing government support from all over the world.

To understand MEK, it’s necessary to review the 1953 U.S. and British-backed coup which ousted democratically elected prime minister of Iran Mohammad Mosaddegh and instituted a monarchical dictatorship led by Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi.

The oppression carried out by the Pahlavi royal family led to the creation of many radical groups, one which was MEK, whose ideology combined Marxism and Islamism. Its original anti-west, especially anti-U.S. sentiment pushed for the killing of six U.S citizens in Iran in the 1970s. While in 1979, they enthusiastically cheered the seizure of the U.S. embassy in Tehran. After the Iranian Revolution, its young leaders, including Rajavi, pushed for endorsement from the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, but were denied.

So Rajavi, allied with the winner of the country’s first presidential election, Abolhassan Banisadr, who was not an ally of Khomeini, either. Soon Banisadr and MEK became some of Khomeini’s main opposition figures and had fled to Iraq and later to France.

In the neighboring country, MEK allied with Sadam Hussein to rage war against Iran. In a RAND report, allegations of the group’s complicity with Saddam are corroborated by press reports that quote Maryam Rajavi encouraging MEK members to “take the Kurds under your tanks, and save your bullets for the Iranian Revolutionary Guards."

The organization was deemed a terrorist organization by the U.S. and European Union for the better part of the 1990s, but things changed after the U.S. invasion to Iraq in 2003. This is when the U.S. neoconservative strategist leading the Department of State and the intelligence agencies saw MEK as an asset rather than a liability. Put simply in words they applied the dictum of “the enemy of my enemy is my friend.”

The U.S.’s dismissal of past crimes reinvigorated MEK’s intense lobbying campaign to have itself removed from terrorist lists in the U.S. and the European Union. MEK, which by the beginning of the 21 century had morphed into a cult-like group according to many testimonies from dissidents, moved from Camp Ashraf to the U.S-created Camp Liberty outside of Baghdad. And that’s when things rapidly changed.

According to the Guardian, between 2007 and 2012, a number of Iranian nuclear scientists were attacked. In 2012, NBC News, citing two unnamed U.S. officials, reported that the attacks were planned by Israel’s Mossad and executed by MEK operatives inside Iran. By 2009 and 2012, the EU and the U.S. respectively took it out of its terrorist organizations list.

Soon after it gained support from U.S. politicians like Rudy Giuliani and current National Security Advisor John Bolton, who now call MEK a legitimate opposition to the current Iranian government. As the U.S. neocon forefathers did before, MEK shed its “Marxism.” After the U.S.’s official withdrawal from Iraq, they built MEK a safe have in Albania, near Tirana, where the trail of money can be followed once again.

Hassan Heyrani, a former member of MEK’s political department who defected in 2018, and handled parts of the organization’s finances in Iraq, when asked by Foreign Policy where he thought the money for MEK came from, he answered: “Saudi Arabia. Without a doubt.” For another former MEK member, Saadalah Saafi, the organization’s money definitely comes from wealthy Arab states that oppose Iran’s government.

“Mojahedin [MEK] are the tool, not the funders. They aren’t that big. They facilitate,” Massoud Khodabandeh, who once served in the MEK’s security department told Foreign Policy. “You look at it and say, ‘Oh, Mojahedin are funding [Vox].’ No, they are not. The ones that are funding that party are funding Mojahedin as well.”

Meanwhile, Danny Yatom, the former head of the Mossad, told the Jersulamen Post that Israel can implement some of its anti-Iran plans through MEK if a war were to break out. Saudi Arabia’s state-run television channels have given friendly coverage to the MEK, and Prince Turki al-Faisal, Saudi Arabia’s former intelligence chief, even appeared in July 2016 at a MEK rally in Paris.

With Israel and Saudi Arabia backing MEK, the question of why a far-right movement would take money from an Islamist organization clears up a bit. Israel’s support of European far-right parties has been public. In 2010, a sizeable delegation arrived in Tel Aviv, consisting of some 30 leaders of the European Alliance for Freedom, gathering leaders such as Geert Wilders of the Netherlands, Philip Dewinter from Belgium and Jorg Haider’s successor, Heinz-Christian Strache, from Austria.

Yet for the U.S., Israel, and Saudi Arabia, MEK represents an anti-Iranian voice that they so desperately need, and that on the surface didn’t come from them directly. It is unlikely that Vox’s hyper-nationalist voters know that their party scored a significant presence in Spain’s parliament mostly thanks to Zionists, Islamists and foreigners.

#Espagne #extrême_droite #Israël #Iran #Arabie_Saoudite #OMPI #Albanie

Venezuela : peu d’informations sur les événements en cours.
Point à 14h30 (20h30 à Paris) : regroupements, utilisation de lacrymogène, un véhicule blindé a renversé des opposants, ailleurs (Puerto Ordaz) les véhicules auraient été éloignés des manifestants,…

Los acontecimientos más relevantes de este 30 de abril en Venezuela
▻http://www.el-nacional.com/noticias/politica/los-acontecimientos-mas-relevantes-este-abril-venezuela_280996

http://en-cdnmed.agilecontent.com//resources/jpg/4/4/1556636087944.jpg

Este martes el presidente interino de Venezuela, Juan Guaidó, hizo un llamado a materializar el cese de la usurpación. Guaidó se dirigió a la ciudadanía desde la Base Aérea La Carlota, donde anunció el alzamiento militar de los funcionarios de ese sitio y el respaldo a la causa opositora. 

Guaidó: “El cese de la usurpación es irreversible”
En la base militar también estuvo el dirigente opositor Leopoldo López, preso por motivos políticos desde el 18 de febrero del año 2014. 

El dirigente opositor aseguró que el grupo de políticos y militares que se alzó en esta misma jornada contra Nicolás Maduro ha mantenido comunicación con altos cargos del gobierno chavista.

López burló la condena de más de 14 años de cárcel que pagaba en su domicilio y se trasladó hasta la Base Aérea militar de La Carlota, en el este de Caracas, para acompañar al jefe del Parlamento, Juan Guaidó, quien junto con una centena de militares que se pronunciaron pidió a los venezolanos salir a las calles.

Leopoldo López dice que alzados y gobierno de Maduro se comunican
Luego del llamado de Juan Guaidó a la calle para apoyar el primer paso para el restablecimiento de la democracia, la ciudadanía se movilizó hasta el distribuidor Altamira, en la autopista Francisco Fajardo, así como a la plaza Altamira, en la avenida Francisco de Miranda. 

Desde el momento en que llegaron, los manifestantes se enfrentaron a bombas lacrimógenas arrojadas por funcionarios afectos a Nicolás Maduro para dispersar la movilización. 

Una tanqueta manejada por funcionarios castrenses arrolló a un grupo de manifestantes en el distribuidor Altamira. Hasta el momento se conoce que hubo un herido. 

Ciudadanos llegaron al Distribuidor Altamira en apoyo a Juan Guaidó
Funcionarios de Nicolás Maduro se manifestaron a través de las redes sociales en rechazo a las acciones de Juan Guaidó y de Leopoldo López para materializar el cese de la usurpación del gobierno de Venezuela. 

Nicolás Maduro aseguró en su cuenta de Twitter que la situación está bajo control. Dijo que se ha comunicado con los comandantes de las regiones estratégicas de defensa integral y las zonas operativas de defensa integral, que supuestamente le indicaron normalidad en las filas militares y le expresaron su lealtad. 

Delcy Rodríguez aseguró este martes que han “derrotado los golpes de Estado” y lo harán “nuevamente” con el alzamiento del presidente del Parlamento y también presidente interino, Juan Guaidó, quien recibió el apoyo de un grupo de militares de la Base Aérea La Carlota. 

Vladimir Padrino dijo este martes que los cuarteles del país están funcionando con «normalidad» y rechazó el pronunciamiento que hizo más temprano Juan Guaidó desde la base aérea militar. También acusó a la oposición de «buscar derramamiento de sangre» y la hizo responsable de «toda muerte que ocurra en las calles».

Ningún funcionario de Maduro, incluido este, ha ofrecido declaraciones televisadas en vivo. 

Maduro asegura que tiene bajo su mando a todas las fuerzas armadas
La comunidad internacional se ha manifestado con respecto a la situación que atraviesa Venezuela en estos momentos. Los presidentes de Panamá, Brasil, Francia, Estados Unidos, Colombia, Costa Rica manifestaron su respaldo a las aspiraciones democráticas de los venezolanos. 

El Parlamento Europeo apoyó la gesta de Guaidó, mientras que la Organización de Naciones Unidas pidió a todas las partes en Venezuela evitar la violencia. 

Comunidad Internacional apoya mayoritariamente el alzamiento en Venezuela

(note : les titres graissés correspondent à des liens vers les articles mentionnés)

« Les hommes se disent en crise mais ils possèdent 70 % des richesses mondiales et 80 % des terres de la planète ! » – Anti-K
▻https://www.anti-k.org/2019/04/16/les-hommes-se-disent-en-crise-mais-ils-possedent-70-des-richesses-mondiales-

L’identité masculine serait en péril, menacée par l’ « inquisition féministe » ou le « totalitarisme » de mouvements comme #metoo. C’est ce que répètent écrivains ou éditorialistes réactionnaires, jusqu’à des groupes haineux de « célibataires involontaires », se référant souvent à – ne rigolez pas – la virilité mythifiée des chasseurs préhistoriques. Ce discours ne date pas d’hier : il était déjà tenu dans la Rome antique ou à la fin du Moyen Âge, « dès que les femmes veulent s’affranchir des normes », nous explique Francis Dupuis-Déri, auteur de La crise de la masculinité, autopsie d’un mythe tenace. « La crise de la masculinité est une rhétorique politique visant à ré-affirmer la domination des hommes. » Entretien.

Basta ! : Que disent ceux qui affirment qu’il y a une crise de la masculinité ?

Francis Dupuis-Déri [1] : Les tenants de ce discours – que l’on peut croiser autant dans les grands médias, sur les forums internet que dans les discussions en famille – affirment que les hommes et les garçons vont mal, en tant qu’hommes, à cause de la féminisation de la société, et du féminisme en particulier. Il n’y aurait plus de modèles masculins. Les mères domineraient les pères. Parmi les symptômes de cette crise, on invoque les difficultés scolaires des garçons, le chômage des hommes, les difficultés des hommes à draguer des femmes, la violences des femmes contre les hommes, et tous ces suicides d’hommes poussés à bout par des femmes qui les ont rejetés. Il y a enfin le discours de certains groupes de pères séparés, qui affirment qu’ils vont mal à cause des tribunaux de la famille, qui seraient tous anti-pères.

On apprend dans votre ouvrage que la crise de la masculinité sévit depuis très longtemps. Des hommes s’en plaignaient déjà dans la Rome antique. Puis en France et en Angleterre à la sortie du Moyen Âge, et ailleurs en Europe ensuite…

J’ai été très étonné de découvrir, au cours de mes recherches, que la masculinité a toujours été en crise, et ce quelque soit le régime économique, culturel, religieux ou juridique. Dans la Rome antique par exemple, les femmes n’avaient pas de statut juridique autonome, elles appartenaient à leur père, puis à leur mari, au même titre que les esclaves. Elles n’avaient pas le droit d’occuper une fonction publique. Ce qui n’a pas empêché l’homme politique et écrivain Caton l’ancien, en 195 avant J.-C., de se sentir menacé par les femmes qui demandaient alors le droit de conduire des chars et de porter des vêtements colorés.
En 195 avant J.-C., à Rome, Caton l’ancien se sent menacé par les femmes qui demandaient alors le droit de conduire des chars et de porter des vêtements colorés

« Les femmes sont devenues si puissantes que notre indépendance est compromise à l’intérieur même de nos foyers, qu’elle est ridiculisée et foulée aux pieds en public », écrivait-il. Idem sous les régimes monarchistes européens de la fin du Moyen Âge. En France, où les femmes sont écartées du droit de monter sur le trône au 14ème siècle, les hommes s’inquiètent qu’elles portent des pantalons, ou se coupent les cheveux. En fait, il ne faut vraiment pas grand chose pour que les hommes se disent en crise. C’est d’ailleurs la raison pour laquelle ils sont – prétendument – continuellement en crise….

Les arguments fantaisistes ne manquent pas pour appuyer la thèse de la crise de la masculinité. Au Québec, les hommes seraient en crise à cause de leur défaite contre les Anglais. Aux États-unis à cause de la mécanisation. D’autres évoquent enfin la nostalgie du temps des cavernes…

Parmi les mythes invoqués pour expliquer la crise de la masculinité, il y a effectivement celui de l’âge des cavernes, temps au cours duquel les femmes restaient chez elles, dans leurs grottes, pendant que les hommes allaient chasser. Certains ouvrages de psychologie – qui ont un grand succès – se réfèrent à cet âge des cavernes totalement mythifié, pour expliquer qu’il serait dans la nature des hommes de diriger leur famille et leur couple et même d’user de leur force. Cela expliquerait aussi pourquoi l’homme ne répond pas à sa conjointe quand il regarde le sport à la télévision : il concentre toute son attention sur le téléviseur comme son ancêtre lointain qui observait la savane à la recherche d’un mammouth. En France, on retrouve des références à l’âge des cavernes chez plusieurs polémistes. Alain Soral, parle par exemple de la « division primitive » sexuelle du travail. Éric Zemmour évoque « notre passé d’homme des cavernes », « notre bestialité », « notre virilité ».
« Certains affirment que la vraie masculinité trouve son origine dans l’âge des cavernes et même dans la chasse au mammouth. Tout cela est ridicule et n’a aucune base scientifique »

Au Québec, nous avons Yvon Dallaire, psychologue, qui affirme que la vraie masculinité trouve son origine dans l’âge des cavernes et même dans la chasse au mammouth. L’homme aurait appris à être silencieux en chassant le mammouth alors que la femme aurait développé l’art de la parole à l’époque où elle se terrait avec les enfants dans la caverne conjugale. Tout cela est ridicule et n’a aucune base scientifique. Les vestiges archéologiques ne disent rien de la division sexuelle du travail. Qui s’occupe des enfants ? Qui va à la chasse ? Comment sont prises les décisions ? Qui les prend ? Y a -t-il un vote ? On ne saura jamais. On se base sur nos modèles familiaux, et on projette.

Vous défendez le fait que le discours sur la crise de la masculinité est un discours de dominants, et qu’un « état de crise » surgit à chaque fois qu’une domination est remise en question. Pouvez-vous préciser ?

La crise de la masculinité est déclarée quand les femmes ne sont pas ce que l’on voudrait qu’elles soient. Quand elles sortent des normes vestimentaires par exemple, ou de coiffure, ou qu’elles décident d’exercer un métier que l’on voudrait réservé aux hommes. C’est une rhétorique politique de culpabilisation des femmes. De par leur non respect des normes, elles provoqueraient de la souffrance, de l’angoisse, de la panique chez les hommes. Ce qui met les hommes dans un tel état peut être tout à fait anodin, comme nous l’avons vu. C’est un discours qui est à rapprocher du masculinisme, qui est clairement un contre-mouvement face au féminisme qui milite pour la liberté et l’égalité des femmes et des hommes.

Pourtant les faits sont têtus… Les hommes continuent de dominer largement les sphères politique, économique et culturelle. Cela y compris dans des sociétés présentées à tort comme « matriarcales »…

On entend souvent parler du Québec comme d’une société matriarcale, où les femmes auraient pris le pouvoir. Historiquement, cela s’expliquerait par le fait que les hommes quittaient le domicile familial pendant de longues périodes pour de lointains chantiers de bûcheronnage, laissant leurs femmes gérer seule la maisonnée et développer leur pouvoir. Mais ces prétendues matriarches n’avaient pas de salaire, pas le droit de voter ni d’être élues, pas le droit de divorcer ni d’ouvrir un compte en banque. Les hommes possédaient les banques, les terres agricoles, les moulins, les scieries. Ils étaient maires et curés, médecins et journalistes. Les mères imposaient donc le matriarcat depuis leur cuisine ? C’est vraiment un aveuglement volontaire.
« En 2016, le club select des milliardaires de la planète comptait 88% d’hommes »

Encore aujourd’hui au Québec, ce sont les hommes qui commandent la police, les entreprises, les universités, et qui gagnent le plus d’argent. Le pays a été dirigé par 36 premiers ministres, dont 35 hommes. Même si les femmes ont gagné beaucoup d’avantages, notamment dans nos pays occidentaux et qu’elles sont désormais des sujets juridiques, les hommes restent largement avantagés et détiennent encore la majorité des postes de pouvoir. En 2016, le club select des milliardaires de la planète comptait 88% d’hommes. Environ 70% de toutes les richesses mondiales sont entre les mains des hommes, et ils possèdent environ 80 % des terres de la planète !

Vous expliquez que les gens démunis et peu instruits sont les relais plus que les instigateurs de l’antiféminisme, lesquels sont plutôt blancs et fortunés. Est-ce que cette rhétorique de la crise de la masculinité ne renvoie pas, finalement, au vieux concept du bouc émissaire ?

Si, bien sûr. Les hommes qui affirment qu’ils sont en crise ne sont pas nécessairement les plus misérables de la société, au contraire. Ils appartiennent plutôt à l’élite intellectuelle et économique. Ils diffusent cette idéologie qui est ensuite reprise par les hommes de classes sociales inférieures. On a vu cela aux États-Unis au moment de l’élection de Donald Trump, où les jeunes hommes blancs déclassés socialement auraient eu besoin de prendre leur revanche, en élisant un homme blanc leur promettant qu’ils allaient être pris en considération. Ce mouvement des jeunes hommes blancs en colère est apparu dans les années 1980 aux États-unis, où le président Ronald Reagan accusait d’ailleurs les femmes d’être responsables du chômage des hommes, en leur prenant un travail qui leur serait normalement destiné.
« La rhétorique de la crise de la masculinité permet de faire porter la responsabilité de la détresse sociale, réelle, aux femmes ou encore aux immigrés »

C’est une logique qui permet de faire porter la responsabilité de la détresse sociale, réelle, aux femmes ou encore aux immigrés. Il semblerait plus logique que ces hommes en détresse dirigent leur colère contre le patronat et les banquiers, l’élite politique ou même les chefs syndicaux trop modérés. Qui prend les décisions économiques aux États-unis, comme en France et partout ailleurs dans le monde ? Qui signe les traités commerciaux, qui décide de délocaliser la production industrielle et de fermer les usines ? Ce sont en grande majorité des hommes. Dans ces conditions, il semble pour le moins inapproprié d’accuser les femmes.

Vous revenez également sur une insulte récurrente des tenants du discours de la masculinité : celle de « féminazie », pour désigner le mouvement féministe. Vous vous insurgez contre cette insulte, évoquant le fait que le terme de « mascunazi » serait plus approprié. Pourquoi ?

C’est effectivement une insulte que l’on croise régulièrement. On traite aussi régulièrement les féministes de « menace totalitaire », ou génocidaire, établissant un parallèle avec les mouvements politiques les plus meurtriers du 20ème siècle. Les hommes seraient victimes de ce pseudo-totalitarisme féministe. C’est une insulte envers les victimes du nazisme, et envers les victimes des violences masculines qui meurent par centaines chaque année. C’est aussi une insulte absurde, puisque le féminisme est sans doute l’un des mouvements politiques les moins violents du monde. Alors même que les femmes étaient privées de tellement de droits – et qu’elles le sont encore dans bien des régions du monde –, elles n’ont jamais mené de lutte armée. Ailleurs dans le monde, si des êtres humains avaient été privés de tellement de droits, on aurait facilement compris qu’ils mènent une lutte violente.
« Les hommes seraient victimes d’un pseudo-totalitarisme féministe. C’est une insulte envers les victimes des violences masculines qui meurent par centaines chaque année »

De plus, les mouvements néo-nazis portent et diffusent le discours de la crise de la masculinité. Anders Behring Breivik, le terroriste norvégien d’extrême droite qui a perpétré les attentats d’Oslo et d’Utoya qui ont fait 77 morts et 151 blessés le 22 juillet 2011, faisait largement état dans son manifeste de sa haine des femmes et des féministes. Et il est entré au tribunal en faisant le geste nazi. Dans ces conditions le terme de « mascunazi » me semble tout à fait approprié. La crise de la masculinité est souvent mêlée à un discours raciste : les hommes efféminés ne seraient plus capables de défendre leur patrie et leurs enfants. Et les femmes, encore elles, ne font plus assez d’enfants. Résultat : on serait « envahis » par des « étrangers » qui, eux, font des enfants. Sexisme et racisme se font souvent écho et l’appel à enrayer le déclin de la nation ou de la race est souvent lancé du même souffle que l’appel à stopper le déclin des hommes.

Vous évoquez enfin un discours de légitimation des violences faîtes aux femmes, lié à ce mythe de la crise de la masculinité. Pouvez-vous préciser ?

Ces dix dernières années, on a assisté en Amérique du Nord à des crimes commis par des hommes se revendiquant des « incels », ces célibataires malgré eux [contraction du terme anglais involuntary celibate, ndlr], qui tuent des femmes parce que d’autres femmes ont refusé d’avoir des relations sexuelles avec eux. On sait l’importance de l’impunité et du soutien d’autres hommes dans le passage à l’acte violent. Si l’on se trouve au sein d’un groupe – amis, collègues, pairs – qui tiennent des propos misogynes, estimant que tel comportement des femmes mérite une baffe, on se sent légitime à commettre des violences. Et avec les plateformes web, cet effet est démultiplié. On se retrouve avec des réseaux de discussion de plusieurs milliers de personnes où ceux qui commettent des meurtres contre les femmes sont présentés comme des héros, et des sources d’inspiration qu’il faudrait suivre. Quand des incels commettent des meurtres de masse, ils sont présentés comme des héros. Et on a un autre meurtre de masse commis quatre ans plus tard par un autre homme, qui se revendique du précédent assassin. Il y a une influence, un encouragement mutuel.

Slogan marketing présent dans les lessives de la marque Lenor (groupe Procter & Gamble) en 2009 / CC Laurent Neyssensas

Par ailleurs, la violence physique et sexuelle des hommes contre les femmes et les enfants est considérée comme un symptôme de la crise, car elle démontrerait que les hommes sont incapables d’autodiscipline et que la masculinité est hors de contrôle. C’est souvent ce discours qui est repris pour expliquer les meurtres conjugaux. Comme l’ont montré des universitaires féministes comme Mélissa Blais et Patrizia Romito, la psychologisation de la violence des hommes contre les femmes permet de la présenter comme une perte de contrôle de ces hommes en crise, alors qu’il s’agit en réalité d’une prise de contrôle et d’une ré-affirmation de la domination masculine [2].

Propos recueillis par Nolwenn Weiler

Il n’y a pas un seul black bloc, mais des black blocs, qui se forment à un instant T dans des manifestations puis qui se dissolvent avec elles.

Francis Dupuis-Déri, politologue

▻https://www.luxediteur.com/larticle-a-lire-pour-comprendre-ce-quest-vraiment-un-black-bloc

https://66.media.tumblr.com/efa95840c3ed8b2d51a9ee6215fe5fdb/tumblr_pqfhk1lsbN1vrof52o1_540.jpg

Titre pompeux à clics et timming au cordeau alors que tombent les BB sous l’action conjointe de la police prédictive et de l’extrême-droite délatoire : L’article à lire pour comprendre ce qu’est vraiment un #black_bloc : ▻https://www.francetvinfo.fr/economie/transports/gilets-jaunes/l-article-a-lire-pour-comprendre-ce-qu-est-vraiment-un-black-bloc_32540
Avec cette très belle définition du politologue Francis Dupuis-Déri :
"une sorte d’énorme drapeau noir, tissé d’êtres humains" qui m’a remis l’hymne black-bloc en tête : ▻https://youtu.be/lJpGHukH01M

« La tradition, chez les participants au black bloc, c’est ’on attaque le matériel, on ne fait pas de victimes’ », explique Sylvain Boulouque, historien spécialiste de l’anarchisme. Pourtant, deux épisodes récents semblent déroger à cette règle : les vitres brisées de l’hôpital Necker pour enfants pendant les manifestations contre la loi Travail à Paris et l’incendie d’une banque située dans un immeuble d’habitation, le 16 mars dernier, toujours à Paris. « C’est quelque chose que l’on ne voyait pas avant, remarque l’historien. Peut-être le fait de jeunes manifestants encore peu aguerris aux pratiques du black bloc. Cela montre en tout cas que le mouvement n’est pas uniforme. »

On le savait, malgré les efforts de décryptage et de recontextualisation, et malgré les excuses du Black Bloc, la dictature de l’émotion à écrit l’Histoire ; pourtant il y a eut de nombreux debunkages de cette distortion de la réalité manipulée :
►https://seenthis.net/messages/500286

A part ça l’historique est plutôt bon (sauf que le cortège de tête existe avant les manifs « Loi Travaille ») et je découvre une vidéo d’archive de Seattle que je ne connaissais pas : ▻https://youtu.be/pFamvR9CpYw

Un autre article super intéressant le complète : Pourquoi « gilets jaunes » et black blocs ont fini par faire cause commune avec un petit passage qui fait chaud au coeur sur la tendance locale de l’Educ Pop par le fait ?

A Nantes, j’ai même vu des black blocs calmer des « gilets jaunes » qui cassaient, en leur expliquant que, s’ils agissaient de la sorte, ils allaient se faire arrêter.

►https://www.francetvinfo.fr/economie/transports/gilets-jaunes/enquete-franceinfo-pourquoi-gilets-jaunes-et-black-blocs-ont-fini-par-f

Concernant ce dont je parle en intro, l’info est dans cet article à la plume assez dégueulasse, entre sensationalisme et amusement, en tout cas aucunement en phase avec la gravité de ce que cela dit : des jeunes qui se battent contre la montée en puissance de l’extrême-droite et qui sefont balancer par celle-ci appuyée avec zèle par la police ravie de re-coffrer une « figure » au passage et d’aller informer les médias :
▻https://www.europe1.fr/societe/gilets-jaunes-des-affrontements-entre-ultra-gauche-et-ultra-droite-pour-la-t
Il y a eut aussi des arrestations « préventives » ce matin à Paris, désolée l’info n’est que sur twitter pour le moment :

Paris #GiletsJaunes #Acte23 #ActeXXIII a Gare du Nord. 5 interpellations par la BAC au premier étage d’un bar. Il ne se passait rien. Incompréhensible.

▻https://twitter.com/4iiiN64/status/1119538506777464832?s=19

Sur la trace des derniers Néandertaliens: une empreinte de pas dans les dunes côtières du Pléistocène inférieur de Gibraltar.

La revue internationale Quaternary Science Reviews a publié un travail commencé il y a plus de dix ans, lorsque les premières dates utilisant la méthode OSL ont été obtenues. C’est alors que les premières traces d’empreintes laissées par les vertébrés ont été retrouvées. Au cours des années suivantes, l’effondrement naturel successif du sable a révélé d’autres matériaux et a permis une étude détaillée incluant de nouvelles dates.

Les nappes de sable dans les dunes rampantes au-dessus de la baie Catalan sont un vestige de la dernière glaciation, alors que le niveau de la mer était à 120 mètres au-dessous du niveau actuel et que se dressait un vaste champ de dunes s’étendant vers l’est depuis la base du Rocher. Les empreintes identifiées correspondent à des espèces dont on sait qu’elles ont habité Gibraltar à partir de matériaux fossiles. Les empreintes identifiées correspondent au red deer, à l’ibex, l’aurochs, le leopard et l’élephant. En outre, les scientifiques ont trouvé l’empreinte d’un jeune homme (de 106 à 126 cm de hauteur), probablement de Neandertal, qui date d’environ 29 000 ans. Cela coïnciderait avec les dates tardives de Néandertal de la grotte de Gorham.

S’il était confirmé que ce serait Neandertal, ces dunes ne deviendraient que le deuxième site au monde d’empreintes de pas attribuées à ces humains, l’autre étant la grotte de Vartop en Roumanie. Ces découvertes confèrent une importance internationale supplémentaire au patrimoine du pléistocène de Gibraltar, déclaré valeur de patrimoine mondial en 2016.

Following the last Neanderthals: Mammal tracks in Late Pleistocene coastal dunes of Gibraltar (S Iberian Peninsula) - ScienceDirect

https://www.sciencedaily.com/images/2019/02/190213100452_1_540x360.jpg

https://ars.els-cdn.com/content/image/S02773791.gif

Fernando Muñiz, Luis M. Cáceres, Joaquín Rodríguez-Vidal, Carlos Neto de Carvalho, João Belo, Clive Finlayson, Geraldine Finlayson, Stewart Finlayson, Tatiana Izquierdo, Manuel Abad, Francisco J. Jiménez-Espejo, Saiko Sugisaki, Paula Gómez, Francisco Ruiz. Following the last Neanderthals: Mammal tracks in Late Pleistocene coastal dunes of Gibraltar (S Iberian Peninsula). Quaternary Science Reviews, 2019;

DOI: 10.1016/j.quascirev.2019.01.013

#Paléolithique #Néandertal #29000BP #emprunte #Europe #Gibraltar

je cherche ce livre
Fonction : Responsable des services généraux
Organiser, Optimiser, Manager
Collection : Fonctions de l’entreprise, Dunod
Parution : février 2008
Laurent Maimi, Francis Parronchi

#Venezuela : un groupe d’avocats (dans l’orbite de l’Assemblée nationale vénézuélienne, dominée par l’opposition) empêche le transfert à un groupe privé des 10 milliards de dollars de PDVSA séquestrés aux É.-U. dans le cadre d’un contentieux avec Citgo, filiale locale de PDVSA.

Abogados evitaron que un grupo se adueñara de fondos congelados de Pdvsa
▻http://www.el-nacional.com/noticias/economia/abogados-evitaron-que-grupo-aduenara-fondos-congelados-pdvsa_278185

http://en-cdnmed.agilecontent.com//resources/jpg/9/2/1554658017829.jpg

Dos abogados y un economista venezolanos evitaron que un grupo de estafadores se hiciera con 10.000 millones de dólares que el gobierno de Estados Unidos había congelado a Petróleos de Venezuela. Norma Camero, Carlos Ramírez López y Federico Alves actuaron ante el Tribunal del Distrito Sur del estado de Florida para detener una acción que terceros interpusieron con la intención de quedarse con el dinero.

YouTube Executives Ignored Warnings, Let Toxic Videos Run Rampant - Bloomberg
▻https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2019-04-02/youtube-executives-ignored-warnings-letting-toxic-videos-run-rampant

https://assets.bwbx.io/images/users/iqjWHBFdfxIU/i4iG6lCmJAGA/v0/1200x748.jpg

Wojcicki’s media behemoth, bent on overtaking television, is estimated to rake in sales of more than $16 billion a year. But on that day, Wojcicki compared her video site to a different kind of institution. “We’re really more like a library,” she said, staking out a familiar position as a defender of free speech. “There have always been controversies, if you look back at libraries.”

Since Wojcicki took the stage, prominent conspiracy theories on the platform—including one on child vaccinations; another tying Hillary Clinton to a Satanic cult—have drawn the ire of lawmakers eager to regulate technology companies. And YouTube is, a year later, even more associated with the darker parts of the web.

The conundrum isn’t just that videos questioning the moon landing or the efficacy of vaccines are on YouTube. The massive “library,” generated by users with little editorial oversight, is bound to have untrue nonsense. Instead, YouTube’s problem is that it allows the nonsense to flourish. And, in some cases, through its powerful artificial intelligence system, it even provides the fuel that lets it spread.

Mais justement NON ! Ce ne peut être une “bibliothèque”, car une bibliothèque ne conserve que des documents qui ont été publiés, donc avec déjà une première instance de validation (ou en tout cas de responsabilité éditoriale... quelqu’un ira en procès le cas échéant).

YouTube est... YouTube, quelque chose de spécial à internet, qui remplit une fonction majeure... et également un danger pour la pensée en raison de “l’économie de l’attention”.

The company spent years chasing one business goal above others: “Engagement,” a measure of the views, time spent and interactions with online videos. Conversations with over twenty people who work at, or recently left, YouTube reveal a corporate leadership unable or unwilling to act on these internal alarms for fear of throttling engagement.

In response to criticism about prioritizing growth over safety, Facebook Inc. has proposed a dramatic shift in its core product. YouTube still has struggled to explain any new corporate vision to the public and investors – and sometimes, to its own staff. Five senior personnel who left YouTube and Google in the last two years privately cited the platform’s inability to tame extreme, disturbing videos as the reason for their departure. Within Google, YouTube’s inability to fix its problems has remained a major gripe. Google shares slipped in late morning trading in New York on Tuesday, leaving them up 15 percent so far this year. Facebook stock has jumped more than 30 percent in 2019, after getting hammered last year.

YouTube’s inertia was illuminated again after a deadly measles outbreak drew public attention to vaccinations conspiracies on social media several weeks ago. New data from Moonshot CVE, a London-based firm that studies extremism, found that fewer than twenty YouTube channels that have spread these lies reached over 170 million viewers, many who were then recommended other videos laden with conspiracy theories.

So YouTube, then run by Google veteran Salar Kamangar, set a company-wide objective to reach one billion hours of viewing a day, and rewrote its recommendation engine to maximize for that goal. When Wojcicki took over, in 2014, YouTube was a third of the way to the goal, she recalled in investor John Doerr’s 2018 book Measure What Matters.

“They thought it would break the internet! But it seemed to me that such a clear and measurable objective would energize people, and I cheered them on,” Wojcicki told Doerr. “The billion hours of daily watch time gave our tech people a North Star.” By October, 2016, YouTube hit its goal.

❞

YouTube doesn’t give an exact recipe for virality. But in the race to one billion hours, a formula emerged: Outrage equals attention. It’s one that people on the political fringes have easily exploited, said Brittan Heller, a fellow at Harvard University’s Carr Center. “They don’t know how the algorithm works,” she said. “But they do know that the more outrageous the content is, the more views.”

People inside YouTube knew about this dynamic. Over the years, there were many tortured debates about what to do with troublesome videos—those that don’t violate its content policies and so remain on the site. Some software engineers have nicknamed the problem “bad virality.”

Yonatan Zunger, a privacy engineer at Google, recalled a suggestion he made to YouTube staff before he left the company in 2016. He proposed a third tier: Videos that were allowed to stay on YouTube, but, because they were “close to the line” of the takedown policy, would be removed from recommendations. “Bad actors quickly get very good at understanding where the bright lines are and skating as close to those lines as possible,” Zunger said.

His proposal, which went to the head of YouTube policy, was turned down. “I can say with a lot of confidence that they were deeply wrong,” he said.

Rather than revamp its recommendation engine, YouTube doubled down. The neural network described in the 2016 research went into effect in YouTube recommendations starting in 2015. By the measures available, it has achieved its goal of keeping people on YouTube.

“It’s an addiction engine,” said Francis Irving, a computer scientist who has written critically about YouTube’s AI system.

Wojcicki and her lieutenants drew up a plan. YouTube called it Project Bean or, at times, “Boil The Ocean,” to indicate the enormity of the task. (Sometimes they called it BTO3 – a third dramatic overhaul for YouTube, after initiatives to boost mobile viewing and subscriptions.) The plan was to rewrite YouTube’s entire business model, according to three former senior staffers who worked on it.

It centered on a way to pay creators that isn’t based on the ads their videos hosted. Instead, YouTube would pay on engagement—how many viewers watched a video and how long they watched. A special algorithm would pool incoming cash, then divvy it out to creators, even if no ads ran on their videos. The idea was to reward video stars shorted by the system, such as those making sex education and music videos, which marquee advertisers found too risqué to endorse.

Coders at YouTube labored for at least a year to make the project workable. But company managers failed to appreciate how the project could backfire: paying based on engagement risked making its “bad virality” problem worse since it could have rewarded videos that achieved popularity achieved by outrage. One person involved said that the algorithms for doling out payments were tightly guarded. If it went into effect then, this person said, it’s likely that someone like Alex Jones—the Infowars creator and conspiracy theorist with a huge following on the site, before YouTube booted him last August—would have suddenly become one of the highest paid YouTube stars.

In February of 2018, the video calling the Parkland shooting victims “crisis actors” went viral on YouTube’s trending page. Policy staff suggested soon after limiting recommendations on the page to vetted news sources. YouTube management rejected the proposal, according to a person with knowledge of the event. The person didn’t know the reasoning behind the rejection, but noted that YouTube was then intent on accelerating its viewing time for videos related to news.

#YouTube #Economie_attention #Engagement #Viralité

" L’Unique et sa propriété " par Max Stirner (1845)
▻http://enuncombatdouteux.blogspot.com/2012/10/lunique-et-sa-propriete-par-max-stirner.html

Le Moi sans frein — que nous sommes tous de naissance et que nous restons toujours dans notre for intérieur — est dans l’État un criminel incorrigible. Quand un homme prend pour guides son audace, sa volonté, son absence de scrupules et son ignorance de la peur, l’État et le peuple l’entourent d’espions. 

Le peuple ? — Oui, braves gens, le peuple ! — vous ne savez guère tout ce que vous lui devez ! — le peuple est policier dans l’âme, et celui-là seul qui renie son moi, qui pratique le « renoncement » obtient ses suffrages.

La crainte de Dieu proprement dite est depuis longtemps ébranlée et la mode est à un « athéisme » plus ou moins conscient, reconnaissable extérieurement à un abandon général des exercices du culte. Mais on a reporté sur l’Homme tout ce qu’on a enlevé à Dieu, et la puissance de l’Humanité s’est accrue de tout ce que la piété a perdu en importance : l’Homme est le dieu d’aujourd’hui et la crainte de l’Homme a pris la place de l’ancienne crainte de Dieu.

Mais comme l’Homme ne représente qu’un autre Être suprême, l’Être suprême n’a subi en somme qu’une simple métamorphose, et la crainte de l’Homme n’est qu’un aspect différent de la crainte de Dieu.

Nos athées sont de pieuses gens.

#Nicaragua : ce lundi 1er avril à Bruxelles
▻https://www.cetri.be/Nicaragua-ce-lundi-1er-avril-a

Lundi 1er avril à 19h30 à Bruxelles, conférence-débat avec Francisca Ramírez, Mónica López, María Teresa Blandón, importante délégation féminine nicaraguayenne de la « Articulación de Movimientos Sociales - AMS » en lutte contre le régime Ortega-Murillo. Avec également Diego Coppens, le frère d’Amaya, leader étudiante belgo-nicaraguayenne emprisonnée au Nicaragua depuis le 10 septembre dernier. Présentation des intervenantes et informations pratiques : ▻https://www.cetri.be/La-crise-politique-au-Nicaragua-au (...)

#Le_regard_du_CETRI

/ #Le_regard_du_CETRI, #Le_Sud_en_mouvement, #Homepage_-_Actualités_à_la_une, (...)

Le nombre de #femmes qui vivent à plus de 45 min d’une #maternité a doublé en 20 ans
▻https://www.lemonde.fr/societe/article/2019/03/21/le-nombre-de-femmes-qui-vivent-a-plus-de-45-mn-d-une-maternite-a-double-en-v

https://img.lemde.fr/2019/03/20/0/0/2400/1200/1440/720/60/0/1204fd3_CenqE0r-CwJ9az6Enm44Ja2R.png

La mobilisation des élus et d’une partie de la population n’y a rien changé. Après Die (Drôme), Creil (Oise), Saint-Claude (Jura), Le Blanc (Indre), la maternité de Bernay (Eure) a à son tour dû définitivement fermer ses portes, lundi 11 mars, obligeant les femmes enceintes qui devaient y accoucher à se rendre à Lisieux (Calvados), à trente minutes de route, ou à Evreux (Eure) à cinquante minutes.En un peu plus de vingt ans, entre le 1er janvier 1997 et le 11 mars 2019, la France a perdu 338 maternités (413 fermetures et 73 ouvertures) sur 835. A l’issue de cette colossale refonte de la carte sanitaire, le nombre de femmes en âge de procréer se trouvant à plus de quarante-cinq minutes d’une maternité a plus que doublé, passant de 290 000 à 716 000, soit 430 000 de plus. Le nombre de celles se trouvant à plus de trente minutes a, lui, augmenté de près de deux millions, passant de 1,9 million en 1997 à 3,7 millions en 2019.

Ogawa Kazumasa’s Hand-Coloured Photographs of Flowers (1896) – The Public Domain Review
▻https://publicdomainreview.org/collections/ogawa-kazumasas-hand-coloured-flower-collotypes-1896

https://publicdomainreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/RP-F-2001-7-1557B-1-edit.jpg

RP-F-2001-7-1557B-1-edit

The stunning floral images featured here are the work of Ogawa Kazumasa, a Japanese photographer, printer, and publisher known for his pioneering work in photomechanical printing and photography in the Meiji era. Studying photography from the age of fifteen, Ogawa moved to Tokyo aged twenty to further his study and develop his English skills which he believed necessary to deepen his technical knowledge. After opening his own photography studio and working as an English interpreter for the Yokohama Police Department, Ogawa decided to travel to the United States to learn first hand the advance photographic techniques of the time. Having little money, Ogawa managed to get hired as a sailor on the USS Swatara and six months later landed in Washington. For the next two years, in Boston and Philadelphia, Ogawa studied printing techniques including the complicated collotype process with which he’d make his name on returning to Japan.

In 1884, Ogawa opened a photographic studio in Tokyo and in 1888 established a dry plate manufacturing company, and the following year, Japan’s first collotype business, the “K. Ogawa printing factory”. He also worked as an editor for various photography magazines, which he printed using the collotype printing process, and was a founding member of the Japan Photographic Society.

The exquisite hand-coloured flower collotypes shown here were featured in the 1896 book Some Japanese Flowers (of which you can buy a 2013 reprint here), and some were also featured the following year in Japan, Described and Illustrated by the Japanese (1897) edited by Francis Brinkley.

#Domaine_public

Faut-il déboulonner les statues qui glorifient la #France coloniale ?

Ils s’appellent #Marchand, #Faidherbe, #Bugeaud et ont fait la #gloire de la France coloniale du 19e siècle. Aujourd’hui, les #monuments érigés à leur #mémoire suscitent la #polémique et sont parfois vandalisés. De la gloire à l’#oubli, voire à la #destruction, petit tour d’horizon de quelques unes de ces #statues qui sont, parfois, aujourd’hui contestées.

https://www.francetvinfo.fr/image/75nawbosv-c8d4/1200/450/17197703.jpg

#Démocratie : #Marketing #politique pour les #pauvres ? Francis Dupuis-Déri
▻https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1wF5FMUtHDM&list=WL&index=14&t=3148s

Les femmes dans l’économie (4/4) : L’économie du patriarcat
▻https://www.franceculture.fr/emissions/entendez-vous-leco/entendez-vous-leco-du-jeudi-07-mars-2019

Le patriarcat est avant tout un système économique, qui repose sur l’exploitation des femmes dans le cadre de la famille. Comment l’analyse de cette …

https://cdn.radiofrance.fr/s3/cruiser-production/2019/03/20934045-50de-4ff6-adfb-5ad7343fef8f/838_gettyimages-1128224199.jpg

Meet Francis Malofiy, the Philadelphia Lawyer Who Sued Led Zeppelin
►https://www.phillymag.com/news/2019/02/11/francis-malofiy-led-zeppelin

https://cdn10.phillymag.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2019/02/Francis-Malofiy-portrait-838x1024.jpg

Francis Malofiy may be the most hated man in the Philadelphia legal community. He may also be on the cusp of getting the last laugh on rock’s golden gods.

#droit_d_auteur #musique #plagiat