#90% of the content for this series I've found is 8+ years old and I'm crying

[ailius-suffers-through-art]

whoops I've been dead... anyways

Professor Layton content in this day and age??!?!?!

Perhaps a new animatic is on the horizon. If i can motivate myself to make it....

[ghostonly]

Disability, Cures, and the Complex Relationship Between Them

So, I've been thinking a lot lately about cures, just in general, as a concept. I've been watching the excellent videos of John Graybill II on Youtube, where he demonstrates his day-to-day movements as someone with Limb Girdle Muscular Dystrophy 2a, and updates every year to show how it progresses. I'm currently writing a character with LGMD and wanted to be sure I understand exactly how it impacts his daily life and movement limitations, so this has been extremely helpful, because there's only so much you can glean from a list of symptoms.

Quick Background on John Graybill II

John started this series in 2007/8, back when he was about 30 years old. He was diagnosed when he was 17, back in '95, and, when he started this series, he was very much fighting his LGMD, in a constant struggle, and angry with himself and the condition. In this, he directed a lot of toxic positivity at himself and became convinced he could defeat LGMD with positive thinking, healthy diet, etc.

Now, while I respect that there are positives to this (exercise and eating well is rarely a bad thing, and the stretches he does almost certainly have helped him to lengthen his time with mobility), there is also something to be said for accepting a physical disability for what it is. In later videos, he clearly had shifted that mindset toward something a bit more realistic. Where, in the beginning, he had been certain that he would somehow heal himself through positivity and such, he later says that may never happen, and he wants to enjoy doing what he can, while he can, instead of being in a constant battle with himself.

That being said, he does run an organization (I believe he runs it?) that seeks to fund research and find a cure for muscular dystrophy of this particular variety. And, while watching his videos from oldest to newest, I've been grappling with my complicated feelings regarding cures.

Why Are Cures a Complicated Topic?

The reason cures are a complicated topic is because, for a lot of us, cures are unlikely to ever be developed - at least not within our lifetimes and probably not within our children's lifetimes. Many physical disabilities and disorders are just too rare, too unknown, the cause unclear. For us, we have to just accept that this is something we have to live with, for better or for worse.

The other reason is that people are often proponents of seeking cures for things that don't need curing, such as autism. Obviously I haven't polled every autistic person alive, but I have known and read content from countless autistic people. I don't think I've ever found a single autistic person who wanted to be cured of autism. In fact, I would say most of them were pretty vocally oppositional toward the idea, for good reason. 90% of the difficulty that comes with being autistic comes from societal ableism and accessibility issues on a systemic level.

My Thoughts on Cures

I can't speak for everyone with incurable physical disabilities that are unlikely to have a cure developed, nor can I speak for everyone who's autistic, but, speaking for myself, talk of cures can be extremely uncomfortable to me.

I asked myself why. Because, in reality, there shouldn't be anything wrong with researching a cure for something like LGMD. It causes people great difficulty and often great pain. For certain variants, it causes early death.

And, after reflecting on my feelings for a long while, I think I've figured out why the word and the concept bothers me so much.

Cures Are Often Used as a Crutch for Ableism

There are, broadly speaking, two camps of people who want cures:

People who want to improve their quality of life, the quality of life of someone they love, or who want to prevent future generations from the difficulty they or a loved one have been dealt

People who are uncomfortable with disability and want it to go away

This is a venn diagram with a large overlap. The number of people who are purely in camp 1 is much smaller than you might hope.

Why Is Wanting to Get Rid of Disability a Problem?

Okay so here's why camp 2 is a problem. Let's say, for the sake of the argument, that every disability has a possible cure that just has to be found. Why is that a problem? Disability is bad, right?

Wrong! Disability is completely amoral - it has no goodness or badness. It just is. Ideally, some of the more painful disabilities could be cured to prevent pain and early death. However, the problem with viewing disability, in a vacuum, as bad, is that your opinion of the disability will inevitably rub off on the people with the disability.

When you view disability as an adversary, you view disabled people as a problem to solve.

Just as John Graybill II explains in one of his stair-climbing videos a few years into the series, he had spent so long trying to fight the progression of the illness, that he had spent every day in passive anger and frustration. He had forgotten to just enjoy his ability to climb stairs. And he said that he wished he could go back and just enjoy it - stop timing himself on his stopwatch and trying to beat his times. Basically, even as a disabled man himself, he had spent so long looking at his disability as a problem to fix, he hadn't been properly enjoying being a person and just living his life.

When you apply the same fix-it approach to someone who doesn't have a disability, it's equally easy for them to forget the personhood of the people with disabilities. Only, instead of it being directed at themselves, it is directed at others. They push their disabled loved ones to just try harder, just push harder and for longer, eat right, try this, do that, think right, take vitamins - if you just try hard enough, you can beat this!

Except... most of the time, you can't.

The idea that doing everything right will allow you to beat a chronic illness is just ableism in a scientific hat. You're afraid - of being disabled, of the consequences of disability, of someone you love being different, of them looking weird, becoming weird, being seen in public yourself or with someone disabled, of being uncomfortable, of having to put in more energy and effort into helping someone with special needs.

The list of things people are afraid of is endless, and the positive spin on that ableism is simply fighting to fix it.

Make it go away so that you don't have to deal with it anymore.

And then, when you take that approach and apply it to the countless disabilities that don't have cures and may never have cures, you end up with boatloads of people who are seen as problems to solve. They feel like a burden to their family and friends. They're pushed to do what hurts and will actually cause more long-term problems for them by forcing themselves to do things they shouldn't be doing - things that damage their bodies, which aren't meant to do those things anymore.

The Long-Term Consequences of Ableist Pushes for Cures

So back to that argument about all disabilities being curable with time: what's the problem with making some disabled people uncomfortable if, one day, all disability is cured and there are no more disabled people?

Well, the simple answer is this: that's never going to happen, and if you think that way, you're a eugenicist.

Even if every disability is curable with time, the ends do not justify the means - the means being to humiliate and degrade disabled people by treating them like problems.

And it would take decades, maybe even centuries, of those means to even reach the ends. But we'll stop that argument there, because there will never be an end to disability.

Why There Is No End to Disability

So, the thing about disability, is it will never cease to exist. Even if it was a good goal to have, which it isn't, it's never going to happen.

Disability is often caused by gene mutation. At one point, none of the gene mutations for our current physical disabilities existed. They developed. And, just as the current disabilities developed over time and with gene mutations, so will new and different ones. Even if we cured all of the current disabilities, there would always be new ones, likely developing as fast as we can cure the existing ones.

Additionally, a lot of disability is not congenital. People who are in accidents and lose legs will never be able to regrow those legs. Even if eugenicists managed to prevent any "deformed" babies from being born without limbs, people would lose them from accidents and infection, and all kinds of things.

In a world where all congenital disabilities were cured, what quality of life do you expect people in wheelchairs to have?

Because I think I can confidently say that, if everything congenital were cured, a day wouldn't pass before accessibility laws were thrown out the window. We would be returned to the days where disabled people are hidden away and can't leave the house - kept as shameful secrets by families who resent them, or shown off as paragons of strength and virtue when/if they're able to be fitted with a working prosthetic.

Neither of these outcomes is positive.

The Slippery Slope of Cure Ideology

So, on to another argument: there is a lot of danger in letting cure ideology go unchallenged.

I want to clarify again, that I don't think we should never research cures. I'm challenging, specifically, the social movement behind cures that is often driven by eugenicism and ableism.

So, why is it dangerous to let that exist? Well, let's look back at the reason I mentioned that people are in camp 2: they are afraid of being uncomfortable. They are afraid of what's different from them. They view difference as a problem to be solved - a disease or a disorder.

You can see this exact principle in action when people fight for a cure for autism. It's being fought for by the allistics who know people with autism, not usually the autistics themselves. It's being fought for by parents who are angry that their child is different or won't look them in the eyes. They see them as an obstacle to overcome, not as a person who has a different way of socializing. Even in the best case, where they see them as a person more than a problem, they are seen as a person with a wrong and disordered way of socializing.

Imagine, for a moment, that there was an allistic trait that people treated as disordered or wrong the way an ableist might treat hand-flapping or lining up toys. Let's take a direct comparison - something one does when they're happy - like laughing. Imagine, for a moment, that something you do when you're joyful, is treated like a maladaption. Perhaps, in this alternate universe, smiling is normal, but laughing is disturbing to people. You spend your life desperately trying to repress your laughter, hiding your joy, even though it's the most natural thing in the world to you. How would you feel hearing people chanting positively, with smiles, taking donations, running marathons and dancing, all for a cure for laughter?

Really, really, genuinely think about it.

Imagine living your entire life like that.

This doesn't just relate to autism.

The reason this ideology has to be challenged is not just by the concrete example of people trying to cure autism, it's the root of the ideology, that different is bad. That the majority being uncomfortable means the minority is wrong and needs to be fixed.

Is this ringing any other bells for you? Because autism isn't the only thing I desperately hope they don't find a genetic link for.

If fighting for a cure for anything people deem different and weird enough goes unchallenged, people will attempt to cure anything they don't like. Like being gay. Or being trans.

And I'm not talking about conversion camps that try to brainwash you into thinking you're not gay. I'm not talking about the abusive Christian approach, I'm talking about the eugenicist scientist approach.

If a genetic link were found or if there was some kind of actual biological difference, that could mean people trying to test fetuses for the "homosexuality gene" or whatever. It would give a concrete path for eugenicists to try preventing gay and trans people from ever even being born.

And, if that biological connection is found, how long do you think it would take for people to start excitedly pushing for a cure to "homosexuality" or "transgenderism"?

What is the point of this post?

It's food for thought.

I want, not only my abled followers, but my disabled ones as well, to reflect on how they feel about cures - about being cured or about curing others.

I want you all to ask yourself, am I in camp 1 or camp 2?

Your goal in supporting a cure should be to prevent death, to prevent pain that cannot be overcome through systemic support and accessibility, to help people live lives with quality.

Your goal in supporting a cure should never be to remove something that makes you uncomfortable. If you're abled, it should never be to make your life easier or alleviate your feelings of guilt, resentment, or stress. It should never be to make people normal, especially not people you care about.

And, on a final note, remember that the things you see in a disability you know nothing about may not have anything to do with reality. If you see a disability for the first time and you immediately wish for a cure for it, simply because it looks painful, maybe find out if it actually is first. Sometimes we attribute pain and misery to things that are no big deal to the people dealing with them. And, in doing so, we also attribute heroicism and virtue to the people dealing with them - which they did not ask for.

Don't make disabled people into a project. Don't use them as inspiration porn - putting them on a pedestal and using them as proof that "anything is possible."

Treat disabled people with dignity and respect.

Treat disabled people as people, with or without them jumping through every hoop you think will make them better.

Think about how fucking annoying it would be if, every time you got up from a chair in public, everyone stared at you, or even praised you for it. How uncomfortable would you be if no one ever saw you as yourself but as some kind of ambassador for strong, amazing people who are so so so cool because they can tie their shoelaces.

Think about how fucking infuriating it would be if every tenth person you walked past turned to you, looking sad, and said "god bless you."

Think about how old that would get, and how fast.

That's all. Just think about it.

[derkastellan]

Outlines and facts on the ground: Top-down and bottom-up stories

I come to this because I have read a lot of Sword Art Online lately, and if you ask me, the author, Reki Kawahara, is painting himself in a corner.

Originally Kawahara wrote a rather slim story about the world of SAO where people are trapped in a game that can kill them if they die in it. Ironically this story had been written as an entry for a contest but it didn't win - because it was too long. It got the attention of a publisher years later when another story of that author did win a contest.

Published on the web, and later as "light novels," the story grew, but the outline was there first. Later on Kawahara inserted more content into the story as short stories, and material from the longer and shorter stories was drafted upon when devising the episodes of the anime.

As such, the original SAO put down a top-down framework of key events. Side characters showed up, major character arc events that impacted the protagonist Kirito. I watched the whole thing as an anime and it had me confused - because of the credits. A character that didn't show up for a long time basically was a focus in the intro of the show, and it didn't make sense to me. Ironically, shortly after she actually came into focus, they changed the intro... I'm talking about Asuna - of course, I say, for all those who know the series.

In establishing a framework top-down, you can paint in broad strokes. And you can omit things. There's a risk inherent in doing so, and it has to do with pacing. There's a risk in nailing down your pacing. And a risk in nailing down your outline.

But as you fill in the gaps, and probably only then, you run into contradictions. Contradictions of your own making. And this is where we get to the bottom-up aspect. You see, Kawahara also wrote another series set in the world of SAO, called "Sword Art Online: Progressive". Its impossible goal is to tell the tackling of the murderous castle Aincrad - its 100 floors - by the players (and the protagonists), floor by floor. So far 8 books are out and translated, and these books managed to tackle a grand total of 7 floors. For comparison - in the top-down outline it is established (spoilers!) that the game is finished at the end of floor 75. So at this pace, the project might take 80 or 90 novels to complete. But that is not the main problem here.

The problem is that Kawahara made a fateful decision as he wrote SAOP - he not only introduced the heroine and protagonist foil in the first story (like originally), but made them decide to team up and tackle the game together. As the author says it in his notes, this causes contradictions he's willing to ignore: "Ultimately, I admitted to myself that it didn't feel right having anyone but Asuna at Kirito's side [...] Of course, I'm certain that some readers will not be able to accept the contradictions with what I've written before, and that's okay. But I will do my utmost to make sure that the choices I make line up with the established events as best as I can." (Reki Kawahara, "Sword Art Online Progressive 1")

I have strong suspicions why he did that. Looking at the protagonist, Kawahara seems to love playing him against other characters, predominantly female, and have that interplay, that back and forth. In the way he writes - and he wrote the protagonist - there is no story if there's no other, no one by his side. He would be a brooding loner. This would get old fast. Already, SAO is not a particularly light-hearted story. People die, get traumatized, are lonely, scared. But SAOP has managed to balance a lot of different things - lighthearted character interaction, world building, the whole detailing out of that world into stories, gradual character arcs hinting at the future.

And funny that. Every time I read it I get a feeling it will derail further from the top-down outline. A point that is heavily contested outline! To my surprise, really.

As anyone entering deeper into a rabbit hole, I found more SAO content, and a funny one is the series of stories called "Sugary Days" which depict the events after floor 74 when the leading couple get married in-game and experience a honeymoon, shortly before the climactic events that unravel the game. And end the first major plot arc of the series. Now, "Sugary Days" is partially written after certain installments of SAOP, referencing back to characters and events only having taken place in those installments that were shoe-horned into the original top-down outline already. So, one item feeds into another, and it's clear to me that SAOP is the new canon.

If that wasn't trouble enough, "Sugary Days" also contains "memories of the future" as I would term them - people thinking back, in vague terms, of things that have to happen to make the outline still correct (and the master of the storytelling) but that have not happened in the bottom-up story, SAOP, yet. You see, a major quest arc, supposedly taking place over floors 2-9, IIRC, with its own characters and impact on the whole, is still unfolding "right now" and has not been resolved. But Kirito (as the storyteller) and Asuna refer back to it - and the author outlines the consequence as the event that breaks them apart - into solo player and her joining a guild.

But will Kawahara really do that?

Therein lies the rub. A huge chunk of the charm of SAOP lies in the unfolding of the relationship between the two. Just as Kawahara was unwilling to separate them, or even incapable of writing a "solo Kirito" as an entertaining carrier of the story, he will be faced with the same decision every time the top-down outline would suggest he has to tear them apart.

You may say this is not a problem. Write it that way. Make events "on the ground" take a trajectory towards the outline. But bottom up that is not so easy! You see, when you write an outline, a lot of the contradictions are invisible. The lack of detail obscures them. It seems to me, however, that Kawahara followed a bottom-up approach to SAOP. He gave the characters certain traits, puts them in the story, and writes from those traits their way through the story. This makes for very satisfying reading. But it also means that they are no longer on fixed, top-down rails. Just as within the story itself the NPC AI, Kizmel the Dark Elf, supposedly fixed in place in the story by the game, leaves the rails and becomes a real character driven by her established motivations, on the meta-level the author seems to have a similar experience with his creations. To the AI the game logic and quest parameters should establish what happens next but they don't. And to the author the top-down should establish what happens next with these characters, but I really doubt he can continue the series in a satisfactory way and drive the protagonists apart for the sake of the outline. One or the other has to budge. (And it's not the only time that the game violates its own logic as a game and follows along with the decisions of players and AI characters. So agency is clearly a topic in the series, if not a meta-topic as well.)

You don't have to agree. But one of the "Sugary Days" installments, 16.7, in chapter 2, describes what a day of Kirito on his own in the game is like. And it's pretty much "grind, grind, grind." He doesn't really detail it, he gives Kirito's daily schedule. And it reads like a day at the office. Reading this expanded out would have the entertainment appeal of reading Kirito's quest log. And it works only because the author is in top-down mode. He wants to contrast "Kirito-as-before" with "Kirito-as-now" and to show him appreciate his luck, his love, his newfound happiness. But that also means there is a long period of drudgery and unhappiness, or a shallow depression, going on as if on rails. Something akin to going through the motions.

Now that doesn't make a riveting story anybody would want to read, and almost all SAO stories set in the Aincrad time period are nothing like that. They show stories that matter, warm the heart, drive character arcs, introduce characters. If we believe the top-down outline the author established in one place, these are exceptions amid the basic drudgery. And like the author said: He doesn't want to establish another character by the protagonist's side. And it's also clear why. Put anybody by his side long enough, suffering with him, sharing his highs and lows, and inevitably the question arises - so why is she (or he) not his love interest, his partner, the one that matters. You can't just leave a gap for several dozen floors (basically months, a year of in-story time) and say "Well, that didn't matter, because really Asuna is the one." You have to fill it, and bottom up it becomes clear that if you fill it with characters and these characters matter to the protagonist, other consequences follow as well. Love being one of them, even if it doesn't end up being a relationship involving sex. But the love between really good friends, "partners in crime," people who walk a risky path together.

It seems like Kawahara has something in common with his protagonists, and the conscious-subconscious divide he describes in them. They rationalize things away a lot that are all too apparent to everybody else. Inside the story everybody who knows them knows these two are in love, a team, and inseparable. And the reader, steeled with knowledge from the future, doubly so. But if the characters admit this to themselves it would lead them to admit this to each other and the top-down outline would finally collapse. But Kawahara is set on this collision course - because certain things inside the character arcs and motivations sets them on a given course, and while Kawahara is not shy to twist plots and create setbacks, he often overdoes it and then creates situations that to me, as reader, just drag on and are unconvincing. The question that actually intrigues me - how conscious is he of what he's doing? And will he compromise his story to "do it right" (in terms of the expectations of some part of his readership or give his own promises to readers) or will he follow what seems to be his - and his characters' - hearts? Clearly this seems to be a labor of love, the whole series. And what makes it fun for us - and the author it seems! - is this dynamic he created and keeps feeding, book by book.

There's a lot in common here with RPGs, really, and hope you as a GM and storyteller recognize this. For one, when you write an outline, you don't see the contradictions. They are not sticking out that much (though with experience they probably will more). You devise events that will likely happen and outline some NPCs that will appear but then you put the story in the hands of the protagonists and experience it bottom up. It's their decisions driving everything and I hope you will not simply gloss over their accomplishments or decisions and return to the outline when the story is going "off the rails." Follow it where it leads. "Play to find out." as they say.

You could say that authors are in control of their characters, but for good writing to happen, I'd say they have to build them bottom up. Don't just drag your protagonists through the story like a puppeteer. Imbue them with motivations, drives, and contradictions, and follow those. I even do that as a player, at least sometimes. I make decisions that put my character at risk for what he believes. Not because I think that makes good sense in terms of tactics or playing the game, but because I want it to be a character and not a miniature on a mat. So when I play an elven scoundrel with a hidden heart of gold, I will rush in where I should tread carefully if I see the actions of my fellow players violate my values. (Or I am risking to violate mine through inaction.) That's playing a role, a teensy-tiniest bit of method acting. That's what makes it more than a game. It's the other half of "role-playing game."

And for the GM it's the same. You put the world around the characters, but they do the decision-making, they are at the center of this story. A top-down outline is good but should be flexible, maybe even vague, to give them room to operate in. Too rigid and it is rail-roading. But you can even do without an outline, on the other hand. Just be careful and observe yourself. Are you trying to force the story because of an existing outline? Because outlines can be exciting and inspire larger stories than simply going bottom-up. But you have to decide when to ditch the outline and stick with your players. And all the time assign consequences to their actions.

Luckily, unlike the readers of SAO, the players typically don't know how the story "is supposed to go." So you can ditch the outline and try to rework it between sessions.

My fanboy heart might be broken in the future, or disappointed by a series petering out before its contradictions are resolved. But no matter how it goes, something has to give, and the decisions Kawahara makes will be, in a way, just as interesting on some level no matter what he choses. If he choses poorly, he kills the series. Or he leaves the rails, more or less obviously. And what would he really want? If he manages to pull it off convincingly, in a satisfying way for himself and me as a reader, I would be glad most of all.

Now don't do that to yourself, though. I know an outline can be a trap. Avoid being trapped. Think on your feet. Respect your "characters" - your players. Play to find out what happens!

[coll2mitts]

Top 10 YouTube Videos of 2022

I was asked to provide TV/movie recommendations from 2022, and honestly, I don't have a whole lot to say on traditional media this year. Instead, let's dive into something I'm trying to cut back on in 2023 - my YouTube obsession.

I am subscribed to over 500 creators, and I used to try to keep up with all of them. In the past few years I've realized that was a losing battle, especially with the gradual transition from short-form skit content to hour and a half long think pieces. Doesn't prevent me from trying, however, which has been to the detriment of my sanity and my sleep schedule. But now my debilitating addiction can benefit you! Here's a list of the top 10 videos that were released this year.

#10 SethEverman - metal drummer listens to ABBA for the first time

Starting off easy, here's Seth Everman playing drums to "Mamma Mia". I've listened to this dozens of times, it hits so hard.

#9 Scene Queen - Pink Hotel

Scene Queen is the perfect intersection of my musical tastes, blending pop and metal while embodying the antithesis of every pick-me girl. I wish she were around back when I was in college and that asshat Perez Hilton was drawing dicks on Lindsay Lohan's face, then maybe I would have processed my internalized misogyny wayyyy earlier. Also she's unapologetically gay as fuck, which we love to see.

#8 Ted Nivison - I Drove to Every Rainforest Café in North America

I haven't been subscribed to Ted long, but this was my gateway drug. This video is exactly as advertised, and it is a literal ride. As someone who didn't go to a Rainforest Café until I was well into my teenage years, I don't really have the nostalgia Ted clearly rode on for 10k miles in a Toyota Tacoma. But honestly, the Rainforest Cafes are the least interesting part of this masterpiece . Instead tune in for a tale of perseverance that tested a friendship to complete a truly innocuous quest.

#7 Pinely - The MrBeast-ification of Youtube

Onma island is buried a treasure chest.

Orr focuses on how click bait-y spectacle charity videos have overrun the platform, and in the creator's effort to keep high view retention, how they exploit the people they intend to help for internet clout. Its a subject I personally find fascinating as I struggle with consuming true crime content for the same reason - it's hard to shine light on a corrupt organization or violent perpetrator without exploiting the victims in some way.

His follow-up video, The MrBeast-ification of Money, analyzes the influence of these videos on how people perceive wealth and how MrBeast-esque content affects how children consider the value of a dollar. Awesome duo, check out both to get the full picture of Jimmy's influence.

#6 Worthikids - BIGTOP BURGER: DOWN

Back in 2019 before The Rise of Skywalker killed all the goodwill Star Wars had earned in my mind, I stumbled upon this video on twitter and lost my shit. "I will use the force to heal my broken body" is my inner monologue every time I drink coffee. I immediately found them on YouTube and subscribed.

Worthikids is so unbelievably talented, not only animating in their own art style, but recreating the old school stop motion Rankin/Bass aesthetic. Bigtop Burger is an ongoing series about a clown-themed food truck beefing with a zombie themed food truck, featuring the vocal talents of some of my other favorite creators like Chris Fleming and ProZD. It's completely chaotic and about the best thing I've ever seen. It was this video, however, that had me literally crying with laughter. I'm not going to spoil it because I want you to experience it fresh, but Chris' unhinged voice paired with the elastic animation style just fucking kills me.

#5 Todd in the Shadows - The Top Ten '90s Buses

Todd in the Shadows is no stranger to top 10 lists - I look forward to his annual Top 10 Worst and Top 10 Best Songs of the Year videos. When I saw this video show up in my subscriptions feed, I, for sure, thought it was a troll. I should have known better. This is legitimately a top 10 list of '90s busses. The Spice World bus makes an appearance. It's a gem.

Todd is one of my comfort youtubers. Sometimes when I'm working on stuff I'll boot up a Trainwreckords, One Hit Wonderland, or Cinemadonna playlist and just let it ride. His disgruntled analysis, while sometimes I don't always agree with cause musical tastes are unique and varied, is strangely soothing. It comes with side effects like knowing more about Cher and Gregg Allman than I ever wanted to know, like that they were married at all, but you take the good with the bad.

#4 Drew Gooden - I took Ninja's Masterclass and it ruined my life

Drew Gooden is one of the members of the conglomerate of media commentary youtubers that I follow (there are so many, legitimately, I have a problem, so much content, make it stop, I'm sure I'm going to forget some, it's inevitable, I watch too much YouTube, how do I get anything done?), but his analytical nature and sarcastic tone really resonates with me. I particularly enjoyed his retrospective on Lily Singh's talk show that addressed the struggle YouTube creators face when adjusting themselves to fit within the confines of traditional media and expand their audience while trying to keeping their existing fan base. He also has a knack of finding the weirdest movies.

This is one in a series of videos where Drew reviews educational scams provided by content creators. He had previously covered the pains some creators face with maintaining their relatability, and offering online courses seem to be the natural progression of how to transition that online success into corporate dolla dolla billz. It's depressingly hilarious how low-effort these endeavors are, which is only proven when Drew ultimately tries to follow Ninja's expert advice to become a Twitch superstar.

As someone who spent like 450 hours streaming on Twitch this year, Drew's attempt is a great encapsulation of how isolating that experience can be. If you are also a Twitch streamer, this is a must-watch.

#3 münecat - Web3.0: A Libertarian Dystopia

I found münecat a few years ago through other anti-MLM creators because of her thorough coverage of the LuLaRoe shit show. Her videos have only gotten more detailed since then, culminating in this mammoth summary on Web3.0. I have stayed willfully ignorant of all things blockchain since I was forced to listen to some dude talk about mining bitcoin at a party back in like 2017. Münecat has done all the heavy lifting here to get me up to speed on cryptobros pyramid scheme of their very own. Plus, her work always comes with a bonus music video at the end. Score!

Also, because of this gem of a video on Russell Hartley, I now own a "Gaslight me daddy" t-shirt.

#2 Jenny Nicholson - Evermore: The Theme Park That Wasn't

Jenny Nicholson has been one of my favorite creators on YouTube since I found a video of her roasting discount Halloween costumes. What her brand has evolved into is truly remarkable, providing commentary on books, movies, theme parks, fanfiction, and random finds like church Easter plays and whatever the fuck the Hallmark channel was doing on YouTube back in 2016. I now know more about The Vampire Diaries and Bronycon than any adult should. "My horny drawing of Twilight Sparkle is presented upon this long pillow with complete neutrality," lives in my head rent-free. Any topic she covers, whether I have any familiarity with it or not, is well-researched and presented in such a captivating manner that it makes you forget how long you've been watching the video. This one is almost 4 hours long and I've watched it in its entirety more than once.

Evermore is a "theme park" located in Utah that has undergone several changes since its initial announcement back in 2014. This video, which has a longer runtime than The Irishman, goes into acute detail about the man who cooked up the concept, the development process, its lackluster implementation, and the park's current operationally neutered state that leaves it with an extremely unstable future.

I don't know if YouTube is Jenny's main gig or not, but she should 100% be a script doctor or creative consultant. Her feedback is thoughtful and presented with purpose, not just for the sake of roasting (although she's also great at that). I'd want her to be my editor if my writing wasn't garbage lmao.

#1 Defunctland - Disney Channel's Theme: A History Mystery

If you're looking for exceptional quality YouTube content, look no farther than Defunctland. Starting out with videos focused on deprecated theme park rides, over the years they've expanded their repertoire to cover retro television shows, fast-food restaurants, and theme park management. Their series about Jim Henson is legitimately one of my favorite deep-dives on a creative. This documentary, however, may be their best work.

Defunctland has always done a phenomenal job balancing humor, history, and sentimentality in their videos. "Disney Channel's Theme: A History Mystery" is no exception, functioning as a love letter to unsung creatives whose impact is immense, but their identity hidden. By the end of this masterpiece I was crying for the legacy of a person I had no awareness of an hour and a half before. Kevin should be proud of his videos, because in the act of immortalizing the media and experiences that have influenced us the most, what truly stands out is their ability to tell the story in a way that is both effective and emotional.

Keep doing what you're doing, Defunctland. You're the best of the internet.

Also, for shits and giggles, my top-rated traditional media of 2022:

Movie: RRR

Music: Scene Queen - Bimbocore Vol. 1 and 2

Television: Shoresy

Game: The Frog Detective series and Psychonauts 2

Podcast: Ear Hustle

Book: If This Book Exists, You're in the Wrong Universe by Jason Pargin

Disclaimer: I follow a lot of excellent creators that did not make this list. If I posted every single video I liked this year we'd be here forever. If you want specific recommendations for creators in certain spaces, like crafting, beauty, animation, examining religious fundamentalism, etc, go ahead and ask me. But I think this is more than enough content to entertain you for the foreseeable future :)