Tru funk presents “Tasty beats Vol 3” and what a trunk of funk it is! Even though the sun eluded us this week, were continuing on with the summer party vibes regardless! We present to you our slice of the beat ridden pie that is this 5 track whopper” Dig Ma Bounce”.
Featuring one of Missy`s finest pellas from Get ya freak on, some cool as ice instrumentals from the late, great Desmond Dekker and a touch of Blackstreet & The Beatnuts thrown in for good measure. Its a bob to the bar bouncer, We hope ya dig, You stay classy… world.
Thank you to Tru Funk for letting us be apart of this release!
July Mixtape for Funk And Filth Catch me in August at the Funk And Filth Takeover with Hot Cakes and Instant Vibes Details Here… http://www.funkandfilth.com/2014/06/funk-and-filth-hot-cakes-instant-vibes-boat-party.html Grab Tickets Here…. https://shop.ticketscript.com/channel/web2/start-order/rid/LYUHG2AY Tracklist…. Intro B-Side-Going Deeper (Coming Soon) A.Skillz-Good Music Jem Stone-Top O’ The Town (Featurecast Remix Dub) Timothy Wisdom-Loopback Brother (Howla Remix) B-Side & Detta-Paper Bag (Dave Remix-Paper Back Edit) Monstafunk-Salmon Banger (Coming soon to Relative Dimensions) Zemerald-Tis Alright Hotline zero-Dribbly Dribbly Sound Toots & The Maytals-54 46 (KROSSBOW Remix) Father Funk & Howla-Got Swing? The McMash Clan ft. Kate Mullins-Swing Break Phibes-Heartache Is Dangerous (The Captain ReRub) Cray Daylight-Baby Gets Down Lack Jemmon-Hello World, Hello Lorde NineLives The Cat-LaLaLa (Will Styles Remix) Normski-Party Jam (Dubmental) Hong Kong Ping Pong-Right On Bucovina Jesswah vs Amp’l Beats-Senorita (Booty Bass Remix) Grinny Grandad-Swim Fish Outro
“For many of these women, the reading experience begins from a place of seething rage. Take Sara Marcus’ initial impression of Jack Kerouac: “I remember putting On the Road down the first time a woman was mentioned. I was just like: ‘Fuck. You.’ I was probably 15 or 16. And over the coming years I realized that it was this canonical work, so I tried to return to it, but every time I was just like, ‘Fuck you.’” Tortorici had a similarly visceral reaction to Charles Bukowski: “I will never forget reading Bukowski’s Post Office and feeling so horrible, the way that the narrator describes the thickness of ugly women’s legs. I think it was the first time I felt like a book that I was trying to identify with rejected me. Though I did absorb it, and of course it made me hate my body or whatever.” Emily Witt turned to masculine texts to access a sexual language that was absent from books about women, but found herself turned off by their take: “many of the great classic coming-of-age novels about the female experience don’t openly discuss sex,” she says in No Regrets. “I read the ones by men instead, until I was like, ‘I cannot read another passage about masturbation. I can’t. It was like a pile of Kleenex.”
This isn’t just about the books. When young women read the hyper-masculine literary canon—what Emily Gould calls the “midcentury misogynists,” staffed with the likes of Roth, Mailer, and Miller—their discomfort is punctuated by the knowledge that their male peers are reading these books, identifying with them, and acting out their perspectives and narratives. These writers are celebrated by the society that we live in, even the one who stabbed his wife. In No Regrets, Elif Bautman talks about reading Henry Miller for the first time because she had a “serious crush” on a guy who said his were “the best books ever,” and that guy’s real-life recommendation exacerbated her distaste for the fictional. When she read Miller, “I felt so alienated by the books, and then thinking about this guy, and it was so hot and summertime … I just wanted to kill myself. … He compared women to soup.””—
Here’s a fun thing you learn when you study literature: the western canon is not universally beloved. Those books are not the Truth any more than the New York Post is skilled journalism. The main reason they’re held in such high esteem is because they were written by boring white dudes with rage fantasies and boring white dudes with rage fantasies also happen to be largely in charge of deciding which books are deemed classics and taught forever in the American school system. So if your boyfriend tells you he loves Kerouac then you tell your boyfriend Kerouac was a fucking second rate hack who wrote Beat style because he didn’t have the skill or talent to write any other way, which is probably also why he just copied every adolescent male wanderlust story since the beginning of time. That shit’s derivative and boring.
“The reason women are turning you down for casual sex seems to be that, for one thing, a lot of you are calling them sluts afterward. Also, a lot of you aren’t bothering to try to be good in bed.”—Terri Conley, professor of psychology and women’s studies at the University of Michigan ( link )
“Ultimately, the idea that the United States can stand aside from global developments is as illusory as the notion, common among neocons and paleo-cons, that it could use military force to reshape the world to its design. With demons on the rise, our shrunken world needs the United States, however tattered its image, to stand up for the values and norms it claims to represent.”—John Cassidy on the problem with many Americans tuning out the chaos overseas: http://nyr.kr/1A6hIUG (via newyorker)
Documentary filmmaker Michael Moore, the director of films like Roger and Me and Bowling for Columbine, and his wife Kathleen Glynn are separating after 22 years. The proceedings have revealed to the public the extent of Michael Moore’s finances, including a large mansion in Michigan.
Let’s be absolutely clear: that question is ridiculous.
First of all, someone with a blue collar upbringing can most certainly attain great wealth over the course of their life and still maintain the composure, sensibility, and ideals they were raised with. That’s common sense. It’s called economic mobility, and it is something that Americans have felt great pride in throughout our history.
But let’s make something else abundantly clear: Michael Moore and other critics of our economic system do not oppose wealth.
Seriously. This has been a libel against all economic progressives, displayed prominently during the 2012 election when Mitt Romney and others accused President Obama of opposing the very idea of wealth and success (thus the obsession with taking “you didn’t build that” out of context). It’s the insult hurled at anyone who criticizes big money in politics: we are told that we are “jealous” of the Koch Brothers’ massive wealth, because why else would we say mean things about them?
And The Today Show bought completely into this frame, calling Moore’s politics “contradictory” with his big house and his full bank account.
But it’s not contradictory, because Michael Moore doesn’t oppose wealth. Senator Elizabeth Warren, another target of these claims, doesn’t oppose wealth. The millions of Working America members who take action to address income inequality don’t oppose wealth, pursuing wealth, or accruing wealth.
What we oppose, and will continue to fight against, is the following:
• The use of massive wealth to rig our democracy in your favor. We respect the right of Charles and David Koch to grow their business, to hire workers and put out a product. But in addition to running a business, they have spent hundreds of millions of dollars on lobbyists, think tanks, and a constellation of political organizations to insure their company’s success at the expense of others.
For instance, there’s nothing “free market” about the Kochs’ efforts to tax consumers of solar energy in an effort to keep them addicted to the petroleum they produce. If Apple lobbied for a law that would add extra taxes for Android users, there would be an enormous outcry. This isn’t different.
• The use of massive wealth to destroy the ladder of economic mobility that helped create that wealth in the first place. Anyone who runs a business has the right to manage their workforce as they see fit, within the bounds of the law. But businessmen like the Koch Brothers, Art Pope, Rex Sinquefield, and Dick DeVos don’t stop there. Through campaign donations, TV advertisements, lobbyists, and other tactics, they have tried (and often succeeded) in changing laws that protect workers’ rights, wages, and retirement. The DeVos family’s near single-handed funding of the “right to work” effort in Michigan is exhibit A.
Knocking rungs off of the ladder of economic mobility doesn’t create wealth, it destroys it.
Warren understood that when information was presented clearly to consumers–without tricks, traps, and hidden fees–they would be better able to select the products that worked for them. That understanding would allow Wall Street companies to compete on a level playing field, with the best plans and products winning. If that’s not capitalism, what is?
So can Michael Moore criticize inequality while enjoying economic success? Absolutely. Moore just happens to be one of those wealthy people who doesn’t feel the need to use his wealth to destroy others’ ability to become wealthy as well.
That’s not being contradictory, that’s being decent.
[The DIY underground] has no effective way to repel its own co-optation by parasitic marketers, no way to reach out to the unconverted, no way to mediate between the annihilation of purity and the danger of selling out, and finally no way to combat the political and economic machine that is the cause of the alienation it protests. By looking for cultural and individual solutions to what are essentially structural and societal problems, and locked into the contradiction of being wed to the society it hates, the underground inevitably fails.
“Synonyms are weird because if you invite someone to your cottage in the forest that just sounds nice and cozy, but if I invite you to my cabin in the woods you’re going to die.”—Michael Malkiewicz as Paul Brokovich, Practice Makes Perfect (via clusteroflust)