James' World 2

Click the link below the picture

.

For years now, we have been bombarded with hand-wringing headlines proclaiming that the pandemic would set working mothers back a generation or drive them out of the labor market in droves, as the infamous second shift metastasized into a third, fourth, and fifth, requiring them to homeschool, cook, clean, and look after their children nonstop. But as New York Times columnist Paul Krugman admitted last month, “The Great Resignation now looks like a Great Misunderstanding.” More than three out of four women were part of the labor force in November 2021 — precisely the same percentage as in November 2018. Despite the viral QuitTok videos and lengthy meditations on “anti-ambition” or why work sucks, quitting is not financially feasible for most mothers. In reality, most women — especially those with college degrees who could afford child care —hung on, often by their fingernails, “and persevered,” according to Harvard economist Claudia Goldin. These women emerged from the COVID-19 hellscape with hard-won proof that, despite the crushing domestic burdens brought on by quarantine, they could be as efficient with flexibility as with fixed office hours. Some could even be more productive because of the time saved by forgoing commutes or having to show up simply to show their faces.

.

Photo-Illustration: Th Cut; Photos: Getty

.

.

Click the link below for the article:

.

__________________________________________

Click the link below the picture

.

If you’ve got a yearning to add a few more monsters, space explorers, magically gifted teens, supernatural detectives, alien translators, superheroes, cosplayers, and mages on missions to your summer reading list, look no further: io9 has got you covered with a giant avalanche of shiny new books for June!

.

.

.

Click the link below for the article:

.

__________________________________________

Click the link below the picture

.

Netflix, long branded as Hollywood’s disruptor, has lately looked to be in need of disruption itself. In April, the company revealed that it had lost customers for the first time in a decade, as rising subscription costs and increased streaming competition drove audiences away. Shares plummeted, as did shareholder confidence. Discussions began over plans to introduce ads and crack down on password sharing. Previously ordered projects, even those with A-lister support, were canceled to help reduce spending.

Enter Season 4 of Stranger Things, the sci-fi horror series that returned over the weekend after a three-year hiatus. In the weeks leading up to its latest season, critics speculated that the show would be the streamer’s best hope in reversing its misfortunes: It had been one of Netflix’s most reliable hits, as sure to draw eyeballs with each new installment as monsters are to escape the Upside Down. It’s the archetypal Netflix title, with a plot fueled by escapist, algorithm-friendly nostalgia, and a cliffhanger-ridden format that makes it highly bingeable. Besides, Netflix seemed to have gone all-in on everything Hawkins: The company reportedly spent $30 million per episode for the new season, and treated its rollout like an event, splitting the season into two parts and bloating each episode past hour-plus run times. The show’s 1980s pastiche catapulted it into the zeitgeist when the series began in 2016; now, in 2022, money would help it do the same.

The supersizing worked—according to Netflix, at least. The streaming platform reported Tuesday that Stranger Things 4: Volume One had garnered a staggering 286.79 million hours watched over the course of its first weekend, breaking the platform’s record for an English-language TV show. All three previous seasons also landed on last week’s top-10 list, accumulating almost 85 million hours of viewing from audiences around the world who were either catching up or rewatching.

.

Netflix

.

.

Click the link below for the article:

.

__________________________________________

Click the link below the picture

.

On the train to Laxton, I was facing backward, heading south from Scotland, with the fields of England rushing away from me. I searched their dark creases and their uneven hedges for something I didn’t know how to see, something I wasn’t even certain was visible. I was trying to locate the origins of private property, a preposterous pursuit. There in those hedges, I was looking for a living record of enclosure, the centuries-long process by which land once collectively worked by the landless was claimed by the landed. That land already belonged to the landed, in the old sense of ownership, but it had always been used by the landless, who belonged to the land. The nature of ownership changed within the newly set hedges of an enclosed field, where the landowner now had the exclusive right to dictate how the land was used, and no one else belonged there.

From my backward-facing seat, I saw a long stone wall on the crest of a cliff. “The Wall,” John Berger writes, “is the front line of what, long ago, was called the Class War.” Walls, fences, hedges, and ditches were all used to mark the boundaries of enclosed land, so that sheep could be kept there, or some other profit could be pursued. Enclosure is how nearly all the agricultural land in Britain came to be owned by less than one percent of the population. In “The Making of the English Working Class,” the historian E. P. Thompson writes that enclosure was “a plain enough case of class robbery, played according to fair rules of property and law laid down by a parliament of property owners and lawyers.”

.

Illustration by Rebecca Lee

.

.

Click the link below for the article:

.

__________________________________________