xthegirlwithkaleidoscopeeyesx
havocados:

vegan-nature:

In this issue, National Geographic explains that with our world’s population expected to increase from 7 billion to 9 billion by 2050, we are going to have to double crop production if we are to feed everyone. They explain that slashing more forest to create cropland is not an option, as we have already caused too much deforestation for the purpose of creating grazing land for cattle. National Geographic argues that we must become more efficient with the way we produce food: “It would be far easier to feed 9 billion people by 2050 if more of the crops we grew ended up in human stomachs”, instead of being fed to farm animals. They explain, “For every 100 calories of grain we feed animals, we get only about 40 new calories of milk, 22 calories of eggs, 12 of chicken, 10 of pork, or 3 of beef.” The crux is that the smart action to take to feed the most people, would be to eat the grain directly instead of wastefully feeding it to farm animals. If you care about solving the problem of world hunger, then go vegan.

that’s great let’s do it
all in favor go vegan, the rest can fuck right off this planet

havocados:

vegan-nature:

In this issue, National Geographic explains that with our world’s population expected to increase from 7 billion to 9 billion by 2050, we are going to have to double crop production if we are to feed everyone. They explain that slashing more forest to create cropland is not an option, as we have already caused too much deforestation for the purpose of creating grazing land for cattle. National Geographic argues that we must become more efficient with the way we produce food: “It would be far easier to feed 9 billion people by 2050 if more of the crops we grew ended up in human stomachs”, instead of being fed to farm animals. They explain, “For every 100 calories of grain we feed animals, we get only about 40 new calories of milk, 22 calories of eggs, 12 of chicken, 10 of pork, or 3 of beef.” The crux is that the smart action to take to feed the most people, would be to eat the grain directly instead of wastefully feeding it to farm animals. If you care about solving the problem of world hunger, then go vegan.

that’s great let’s do it

all in favor go vegan, the rest can fuck right off this planet

xthegirlwithkaleidoscopeeyesx

tempeh-queen:

I’ve compiled a list of documentaries and lectures relating to veganism that can all be accessed free online, it’s rebloggable, and can also be accessed on my blog under the link “WATCH.” I have tried to cover as many different topics as possible. Feel free to add to the list,…

socimages
socimages:

Women very rarely commit corporate fraud. Not because they’re more moral than men, but because even crime is an old boys’ club. 
By Jennifer Schwartz, PhD
Women in the U.S. have made some monumental gains at work.  We’re now at least half the labor force and more women today are middle- and upper- managers in corporate America.  Even so, I wasn’t surprised to discover that women have not (yet) made similar inroads into high-level corporate crime.
Rather, it’s “business as usual” when it comes to who is responsible for orchestrating and carrying out major corporate frauds.
For the American Sociological Review, Darrell Steffensmeier, Michael Roche, and I studied accounting malpractices like security fraud, insider trading, and Ponzi schemes in America’s public companies to find out just how involved women were in these conspiracies.  The Corporate Fraud Task Force indicted 436 individuals involved in 83 such schemes during July 2002 to 2009.  We read and recorded information from indictments and other documents or reports that described who was involved and what they did.
I expected the share of women in corporate fraud to be low – definitely less than the near-half that are women among (low-profit) embezzlers arrested each year– like your bank teller or local non-profit treasurer.   However, I was surprised that women corporate fraudsters were about as rare as female killers or robbers – less than 10% of those sorts of offenders.  Of the 400+ indicted for corporate fraud, only 37 were women.
Most of these frauds were complex enough to require co-conspiracy over several years and a criminal division of labor.  Often, women weren’t included at all in these groups.  When they were, they were nearly always in the minority, often alone, and most typically played rather small roles.
The Enron conspiracy, for example, led to over 30 indictments; three were women and each played a minor role. The five women indicted among 19 in the HealthSouth fraud were in accounting-related positions and instructed by senior personnel to falsify financial books and create fictitious records.  Martha Stewart, rather than criminal mastermind of an insider trading conspiracy, committed “one of the most ill-fated white-collar crimes ever” in which she saved just $46,000 after receiving a stock-tip second-hand from her broker.
Women were almost never the ringleader or even a major player in the fraud.  Only one woman CEO led a fraud – the smallest fraud we studied – and two women with their husbands.  One reason surely must be that women are not as often in positions to lead these schemes.  However, even when we compared women and men in similar corporate positions, women were less likely to play leadership roles in the fraud.  Is there a “glass ceiling” in the white-collar crime world?
What most surprised me, however, was how little the women benefited from their illicit involvement.  The wage gap in illicit corporate enterprise may be larger than in the legitimate job market.  Over half the women did not financially gain at all whereas half the men pocketed half a million dollars or more.  The difference in illicit-gains persisted even if we compared women to their co-conspirators.  Males profited much more. Women identified “gains” such as keeping one’s job.
Even when women are in the positions to orchestrate these frauds, it’s likely that the men who initiate these conspiracies prefer to bypass women, involving them in minor roles when need dictates or when trust develops through a close personal relationship.  And women hardly initiated any schemes.  Women business leaders tend to be more risk-averse and apt to stress social responsibility and equity, perhaps making corporate fraud unlikely.
So, would having more female leaders reduce corporate crime?  We don’t know, but we think it’s likely.  Women executives tend to make more ethical decisions, avoid excessive risk-taking, and create corporate cultures unsupportive of illegal business practices.  Time will tell if, on the other hand, women moving up the corporate ladder increasingly adopt a wheeler-dealer, “dominance at all costs” corporate ethic.
Some may be a little disappointed that women either cannot yet or do not exercise their power over others to illegally advance their business (and personal) interests as men have been doing for generations.  There are moments when I catch myself “rooting” for a more successful pink-collar offender – and examples exist.  However, when I consider the destruction and havoc wrought on the U.S. economy and so many peoples’ lives by these financial crimes, I am reminded that this is not the way in which I hope women wield power when business leadership roles are more equally shared.
This posts originally appeared at the Gender & Society blog.
Jennifer Schwartz, PhD, is an associate professor of sociology at Washington State University.  Her research focuses on the gender and race demographics of criminal offenders, violence, and substance abuse.

socimages:

Women very rarely commit corporate fraud. Not because they’re more moral than men, but because even crime is an old boys’ club. 

By Jennifer Schwartz, PhD

Women in the U.S. have made some monumental gains at work.  We’re now at least half the labor force and more women today are middle- and upper- managers in corporate America.  Even so, I wasn’t surprised to discover that women have not (yet) made similar inroads into high-level corporate crime.

Rather, it’s “business as usual” when it comes to who is responsible for orchestrating and carrying out major corporate frauds.

For the American Sociological Review, Darrell Steffensmeier, Michael Roche, and I studied accounting malpractices like security fraud, insider trading, and Ponzi schemes in America’s public companies to find out just how involved women were in these conspiracies.  The Corporate Fraud Task Force indicted 436 individuals involved in 83 such schemes during July 2002 to 2009.  We read and recorded information from indictments and other documents or reports that described who was involved and what they did.

I expected the share of women in corporate fraud to be low – definitely less than the near-half that are women among (low-profit) embezzlers arrested each year– like your bank teller or local non-profit treasurer.   However, I was surprised that women corporate fraudsters were about as rare as female killers or robbers – less than 10% of those sorts of offenders.  Of the 400+ indicted for corporate fraud, only 37 were women.

Most of these frauds were complex enough to require co-conspiracy over several years and a criminal division of labor.  Often, women weren’t included at all in these groups.  When they were, they were nearly always in the minority, often alone, and most typically played rather small roles.

The Enron conspiracy, for example, led to over 30 indictments; three were women and each played a minor role. The five women indicted among 19 in the HealthSouth fraud were in accounting-related positions and instructed by senior personnel to falsify financial books and create fictitious records.  Martha Stewart, rather than criminal mastermind of an insider trading conspiracy, committed “one of the most ill-fated white-collar crimes ever” in which she saved just $46,000 after receiving a stock-tip second-hand from her broker.

Women were almost never the ringleader or even a major player in the fraud.  Only one woman CEO led a fraud – the smallest fraud we studied – and two women with their husbands.  One reason surely must be that women are not as often in positions to lead these schemes.  However, even when we compared women and men in similar corporate positions, women were less likely to play leadership roles in the fraud.  Is there a “glass ceiling” in the white-collar crime world?

What most surprised me, however, was how little the women benefited from their illicit involvement.  The wage gap in illicit corporate enterprise may be larger than in the legitimate job market.  Over half the women did not financially gain at all whereas half the men pocketed half a million dollars or more.  The difference in illicit-gains persisted even if we compared women to their co-conspirators.  Males profited much more. Women identified “gains” such as keeping one’s job.

Even when women are in the positions to orchestrate these frauds, it’s likely that the men who initiate these conspiracies prefer to bypass women, involving them in minor roles when need dictates or when trust develops through a close personal relationship.  And women hardly initiated any schemes.  Women business leaders tend to be more risk-averse and apt to stress social responsibility and equity, perhaps making corporate fraud unlikely.

So, would having more female leaders reduce corporate crime?  We don’t know, but we think it’s likely.  Women executives tend to make more ethical decisions, avoid excessive risk-taking, and create corporate cultures unsupportive of illegal business practices.  Time will tell if, on the other hand, women moving up the corporate ladder increasingly adopt a wheeler-dealer, “dominance at all costs” corporate ethic.

Some may be a little disappointed that women either cannot yet or do not exercise their power over others to illegally advance their business (and personal) interests as men have been doing for generations.  There are moments when I catch myself “rooting” for a more successful pink-collar offender – and examples exist.  However, when I consider the destruction and havoc wrought on the U.S. economy and so many peoples’ lives by these financial crimes, I am reminded that this is not the way in which I hope women wield power when business leadership roles are more equally shared.

This posts originally appeared at the Gender & Society blog.

Jennifer Schwartz, PhD, is an associate professor of sociology at Washington State University.  Her research focuses on the gender and race demographics of criminal offenders, violence, and substance abuse.

xthegirlwithkaleidoscopeeyesx

mentalalchemy:

teaseon:

ultrafacts:

For more posts like this, follow the Ultrafacts Blog!

The whole compiled list of useful links. More is to come! Follow today!

Here’s more!

lovelycharts.com – create flowcharts, network diagrams, sitemaps, etc.
e.ggtimer.com – a simple online timer for your daily needs.
coralcdn.org – if a site is down due to heavy traffic, try accessing it through coral CDN.
random.org – pick random numbers, flip coins, and more.
google.com/webfonts – a good collection of open source fonts.
homestyler.com – design from scratch or re-model your home in 3d.
join.me – share you screen with anyone over the web.
wetransfer.com – for sharing really big files online.
hundredzeros.com – the site lets you download free Kindle books.
polishmywriting.com – check your writing for spelling or grammatical errors.
marker.to – easily highlight the important parts of a web page for sharing.
whichdateworks.com – planning an event? find a date that works for all.
everytimezone.com – a less confusing view of the world time zones.
gtmetrix.com – the perfect tool for measuring your site performance online.
noteflight.com – print music sheets, write your own music online (review).
imo.im – chat with your buddies on Skype, Facebook, Google Talk, etc. from one place.
translate.google.com – translate web pages, PDFs and Office documents.
kleki.com – create paintings and sketches with a wide variety of brushes.
similarsites.com – discover new sites that are similar to what you like already.
wordle.net – quick summarize long pieces of text with tag clouds.
bubbl.us – create mind-maps, brainstorm ideas in the browser.
kuler.adobe.com – get color ideas, also extract colors from photographs.
ge.tt – qiuckly send a file to someone, they can even preview it before downloading.
tinychat.com – setup a private chat room in micro-seconds.
privnote.com – create text notes that will self-destruct after being read.
draw.io – create diagrams and flowcharts in the browser, export your drawings to Google Drive and Dropbox.
downforeveryoneorjustme.com – find if your favorite website is offline or not?
urbandictionary.com – find definitions of slangs and informal words.
scribblemaps.com – create custom Google Maps easily.
formspring.me – you can ask or answer personal questions here.
sumopaint.com – an excellent layer-based online image editor.
snopes.com – find if that email offer you received is real or just another scam.
typingweb.com – master touch-typing with these practice sessions.
mailvu.com – send video emails to anyone using your web cam.
timerime.com – create timelines with audio, video and images.
stupeflix.com – make a movie out of your images, audio and video clips.safeweb.norton.com – check the trust level of any website.

For more posts like this, follow the Ultrafacts Blog!

I just came.

xthegirlwithkaleidoscopeeyesx

Anonymous asked:

You can be vegan all you want, good for you, but not being vegan doesn't make someone a bad person. Not everyone in the world will convert to being a vegan so maybe y'all should stop being angry people and just get over it.

trans-vegan answered:

Of course the whole world will never be vegan, but I strongly believe that someday a majority of the world will be vegan. In fact, the world will have to go mostly vegan or we are screwed, anon. Veganism is the future, out of necessity, and the UN agrees.

Animal agriculture is destroying our world. 

No, not being vegan does not make someone a bad person… but if you’re aware of the slaughter you’re contributing to and you’re able to change that and choose not to, that is extremely problematic. Especially if you mourn the deaths of companion animals, but not the ones on your plate. 

trans-vegan:

we-are-the-survivor:

cleanbodyfreshstart:

agirlnamedally:

ihearthawthorneheights:

That’s it. I need to go vegan.

Super important post with lots of great links and resources. Give it a read! :)

Awesome post, please become enlightened!

Don’t go vegan,your depriving yourself of the minerals you need. Yeah you can do alternatives but it’s never enough. Why don’t we just treat animals and life like we used to? Eat the animal to survive,not to binge and waste. Just be kind to other life in general. I plan to substantial farm and maybe own a couple chickens

You are not depriving yourself of anything. You have no clue whatyou’re talking about, just like anon. It would be nice if you people would do research before you spoke, but you never do. 

Low income/poor vegans

Vegans recovering from eating disorders

Vegans allergic/sensitive to soy and/or gluten (+ soy information)

Disabled vegans

Vegans with autoimmune disorders, IBS, anemia, etc.

Homeless Vegans

Please add in or message me with any resources you’d like to see added to this list. Share if you can, and help dispel misinformation about living vegan. If you’re recently going vegan and you want some help, please feel free to message me or check out my FAQ on veganism.

WATCH WHAT YOU PAY FOR

WATCH WHAT YOU PAY FOR

Truth behind dairy

Truth behind eggs/chicken

Truth behind beef

Truth behind pork

Truth behind animal testing

Truth behind fur for fashion

Eating meat affects more than just you, it affects the planet, which is my home too, and I want it to be around for a long time. 

Veganism and the environment

Dairy plays a major role in creating climate change

Eating Vegan Is Efficient, Both Costly & Environmentally (Alternatively: Why Meat ISN’T Efficient)

(x)

Why is raising animals for food so inefficient?

  • 70% of grain and cereals grown in U.S. are fed to farmed animals
  • it requires 16 pounds of grain to produce 1 pound of meat

What does eating meat have to do with people starving in other countries?

  • every ounce of water, grain and resources that goes towards an animal who will ultimately be slaughtered is an ounce of water or grain that could have gone to those who so desperately need it. a study published earlier this year in the journal Environmental Research Letters analyzed the world’s agriculture resource data and found that humans cutting meat from their diets could play a significant role in combating world hunger. According to the researchers, 36 percent of the total calories that come from crops are allocated to farm animal feed, but only 12 percent of those calories actually make it to people’s dinner plates. The researchers concluded that if all of the world’s crops were directly consumed by humans, there would be approximately 70 percent more food available, providing sustenance for an additional 4 billion additional people.

Check out this article, in which the UN is urging a global shift towards a vegan diet 

And last but not least… this post that says where you can get EVERYTHING while vegan.

Now please stop spreading your ignorance. 

socimages
socimages:

In just one year the percent of Americans who see the criminal justice system as racist rose 9 points.
By Lisa Wade, PhD
According to polling by the Public Religion Research Institute, the percent of Americans who say that the criminal justice system treats black people unfairly rose by 9 percentage points in just one year.  In fact, every category of person polled was more likely to think so in 2014 than in 2013, including Republicans, people over 65, and whites.
The biggest jump was among young people 18-29, 63% of whom believed the criminal justice system was unfair in 2014, compared to 42% in 2016.  The smallest jump was among Democrats — just 3 percentage points — but they mostly thought the system was jacked to begin with.
America has a history of making changes once police violence is caught on tape and shared widely. One of the first instances was after police attacked peaceful Civil Rights marchers in Selma, Alabama. The television had just become a ubiquitous appliance and the disturbing images of brutality were hard to ignore when they flashed across living rooms.
The death of Mike Brown in Ferguson, MO, and the aftermath is the likely candidate for this change. If you do a quick Google Image search for the word “ferguson,” the dominant visual story of that conflict seems solidly on the side of the protesters, not the police.
Click to see these images larger and judge for yourself:

H/t @seanmcelwee.
Lisa Wade is a professor of sociology at Occidental College and the co-author of Gender: Ideas, Interactions, Institutions. You can follow her on Twitter and Facebook.

socimages:

In just one year the percent of Americans who see the criminal justice system as racist rose 9 points.

By Lisa Wade, PhD

According to polling by the Public Religion Research Institute, the percent of Americans who say that the criminal justice system treats black people unfairly rose by 9 percentage points in just one year.  In fact, every category of person polled was more likely to think so in 2014 than in 2013, including Republicans, people over 65, and whites.

The biggest jump was among young people 18-29, 63% of whom believed the criminal justice system was unfair in 2014, compared to 42% in 2016.  The smallest jump was among Democrats — just 3 percentage points — but they mostly thought the system was jacked to begin with.

America has a history of making changes once police violence is caught on tape and shared widely. One of the first instances was after police attacked peaceful Civil Rights marchers in Selma, Alabama. The television had just become a ubiquitous appliance and the disturbing images of brutality were hard to ignore when they flashed across living rooms.

The death of Mike Brown in Ferguson, MO, and the aftermath is the likely candidate for this change. If you do a quick Google Image search for the word “ferguson,” the dominant visual story of that conflict seems solidly on the side of the protesters, not the police.

Click to see these images larger and judge for yourself:

2

H/t @seanmcelwee.

Lisa Wade is a professor of sociology at Occidental College and the co-author of Gender: Ideas, Interactions, Institutions. You can follow her on Twitter and Facebook.