A virtual hoard of the shiny things I find on the internet.

 

Instead of grappling with the fundamental principles that have wrought this system, however, popular culture has transformed it into a way of disciplining the women who manifest it most vividly. To call someone “basic” is to look into the abyss of continually flattening capitalist dystopia and, instead of articulating and interrogating the fear, transform it into casual misogyny. And that’s a behavior far more troubling — and regressive — than taking pleasure in all things pumpkin spice.

dontbreakveg:

Simple yet effective.

This very thing was quoted in my office this morning. It’s true.

The whole thing is a mess, and its messiness stems from the decision to slant the entire debate in favor of anti-registration by reducing it to only two choices: Freedom or tyranny. The fact that superheroes killed hundreds of people in Stamford at the beginning of the series is dropped as soon as it becomes narratively inconvenient for the anti-registration side.

lnthefade replied to your quote “To understand how CVS can wield this kind of influence over other…”

I think it’s pretty awful. What if there is no CVS near you?

I think what you’ll see happen is that the major national chain pharmacies are going to start dropping tobacco products as well. CVS/Caremark is like an 800-lb gorilla of pharmacy benefit managers. (The other big one is ExpressScripts, which merged with Medco a couple years ago.) This represents a huge chunk of customers. Plus the big pharmacy associations all oppose the sale of tobacco products in pharmacies. (Hence why I know all the people cheering about it- I spent 7 years working for the biggest and oldest pharmacists association.)

Insurers aren’t stupid- they know people will complain to their HR departments, who will renegotiate with their brokers and leave the insurer sucking up the cost, or they’ll switch plans if they buy insurance on the health exchange. It’s a far more competitive market for health insurance than it used to be, which is why insurers are already scrambling to set up tobacco-free networks. The only question is how long it will take for selling tobacco to become less profitable than NOT selling tobacco. 

This has been a long time coming- it’s sort of like smoking bans in bars- one jurisdiction has to show that it can work and doesn’t drive everyone out of business, then that opens the door for everywhere else. I think it’ll be that way- within a year or so you’ll start seeing at least national pharmacy chains dropping it, and then possibly grocery store chains with big pharmacy programs.

OR it could all backfire, insurers start going with ExpressScripts over Caremark for PBM services, and Caremark has to drop this requirement.

Either way, I doubt it will be a problem for long- I’m assuming there are indeed areas of America not completely saturated with CVSes- they’re like Starbucks in DC.

To understand how CVS can wield this kind of influence over other pharmacy chains, you have to understand how its business works. Most of us know CVS as the pharmacy chain with brick and mortar stores all across the country. And that is a big part of CVS’ business. But another big part of CVS’ business is Caremark, a pharmacy benefits manager. Caremark is a company that insurance plans contract with to run the drug side of health coverage, doing things like setting up a pharmacy network and determining co-payments. Most health insurers use pharmacy benefit managers and, in that world, Caremark is one of the biggest players. And CVS announced today that it’s bringing Caremark into the fight against tobacco, too. Caremark-managed health plans will now charge an additional $15 co-pay for any drugs picked up in a pharmacy that sells tobacco products,

CVS has a plan to strong-arm other pharmacies out of selling cigarettes - Vox

I know some people who are cheering like crazy over this.

The result is “Adorable-izing Hate,” a fledgling project turning negative internet commentary into cute artwork. In a blog post about the project, Brian explained how soothing she found the process and invited her followers to share their own experiences with hateful comments.

'Adorable-izing Hate' Is The Best Way To Deal With Spiteful Internet Comments

An article about turning internet hate into embroidery. Which I found via Rachel Held Evans, who started printing her hate mail and doing origami with it, while praying for the sender, as a Lenten practice.

It seems to me that while what it pretends to criticize is unoriginality of thought and action, most of what basic actually seeks to dismiss is consumption patterns — what you watch, what you drink, what you wear, and what you buy — without dismissing consumption itself. The basic girl’s sin isn’t liking to shop, it’s cluelessly lusting after the wrong brands, the ones that announce themselves loudly and have shareholders they need to satisfy. (The right brands are much more expensive and subtle and, usually, privately owned.)

Armed with this refined definition, I believe the term “douchebag” is the white racial slur we have all been waiting for. We have only to realize this. White privilege itself has blinded us to the true nature of the douchebag’s identity. But it’s been there all along.