Saturday roundup

Russia's intense outreach imperialism by other (i.e., religious) means.

The world needs sustainable farming.

In case you had doubts, it's safe to raise vegan children.

I blogged the other day about cultural appropriation, and I come down about where Robin Givhan does: it exists but not everything is it.

Creative people regularly dive into treacherous cultural waters. And they should be prepared for backlash. They should know what they are doing and be able to explain their choices. They should be sensitive and respectful.

And observers should remember that not every cross-cultural moment is cause for outrage. Jacobs’s models were a mixed group of women: black, brown, white. Should all the models have been black? Why? How would that validate pink dreadlocks? The clothes were a punk, street, cyber, sparkle fest. Hate the clothes or love them. But the outrage just seems like an exhausting exercise in misdirection.

Innovation takes a village:

Evolutionary biologist Joe Henrich of the University of British Columbia, who recently wrote a book on the role of culture in the success of our species, expects that will indeed turn out to be the case. “I think the idea that innovation depends on individual geniuses is misguided. History shows that inventions invariably build on earlier findings that are recombined and improved upon. Most of the things we use every day are inventions that no single human being could ever design within her lifetime,” he observes. “Rather than the product of individual innovators, these inventions can be thought of as the product of our societies. Innovations rely on individuals learning from others—in that way, human society functions like a collective brain.”

Astronauts and Olymic cyclists (and other women) don't need your mansplaining.

This woman actively talked to her sons about consent, but they still don't entirely get it. 

Women have a right to be complicated, too. Even before "Mad Men" came up, I thought of Don Draper (and also the TV version of Bill Masters) while reading this article. I also thought, the reason we're so turned off by Lena Dunham's character in "Girls" is because she's perfectly horrible. Is that necessarily a gender thing? Hannah H. is no Don Draper.

On maintaining your values and being single:

pursuing the things I genuinely care about is more important to me than hiding who I am to remain “datable” for a man who may or may not show up.

Dating in D.C. had been fine, meh, whatever. But despite my feminist sensibilities, I was lonely. No, I didn’t need a partner to be whole, and yes, I’d rather be Forever Alone than with the wrong person. But I’d never planned on being single THIS LONG.

On dating with cats:

Why do single women get judged for having cats? Society has a bad habit of scrutinizing women for how we live and whom we love. Replace “cat” with “dog” in any of the above instances, and I’d be considered hot — a catch even! — rather than crazy. If I were in a relationship, I’d be one half of a cute animal-loving couple.

And if I were a man, I’d be a magnet for women. What does America call a man with three cats? He’s just a man. Women are held to a different standard than men, and cats to a different standard than dogs.

Alicia keys on the tyranny of makeup. Her detractors prove her right.

I am willing to have a child if she grows up to be anything like this one.

This so reminds me of RM! He would always question me about what I did at work or what I did at work on a given day, and never got the hint that I had nothing to say on the matter.

There are people in DC who can afford exhorbitant tasting menus.