#I mean all of these things independent of each other I am not advocating for adoption and also romantic/sexual relationships | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

howtofightwrite · 11 months ago

Note

thank you for the clear, honest response! but i will admit to being caught off-guard since i wasn't suggesting the scenario from the protagonist's point of view at all, but rather from an antagonist or villain sort of perspective. i went in with the assumption that it was the less morally upright person making violent actions (i.e kidnapping) and the hero protagonist experiencing the fallout.

your words felt very much like what i was trying to say in acknowledging that it's dangerous, but more concise; perhaps i simply was overzealous in crafting the scenario? i am sorry for giving the wrong impression.

it might be helpful to state that it was actually my only ask to this blog aside from this one; it has no connection to other inquiries regarding heroes taking violent action. i might have had the impression that a previous anon was writing a detective story of sorts, where the protagonist was dealing with opponents who wouldn't hesitate to use violence, and thougnt to state what i felt could be done to keep the protagonist's head relatively intact despite head injuries. my apologies for the broad assumption!

Yeah, without wanting to light you up this time, the problem with the scenario is a little deeper than I might have addressed in the previous comment. And, in fairness to you, that was a long ask, and Tumblr doesn't accommodate my preferences for how to fully respond to comments like that. (Which is to say, break it into pieces, and deal with each part independently.)

The problem you're running into is an idea that heroes and villains view violence from fundamentally different perspectives. In isolation, this isn't automatically a bad thing, but it does leave you vulnerable to engaging in some classic Saturday morning cartoon grade philosophy. “The bad guys only use violence because they're bad, but the good guys only use violence because they're good.”

Again, if this fully terminated in a discussion about how proportional use of force can be an appropriate, or sometimes even a necessary, response, that would be one thing. Unfortunately, a lot of writers stop at that point, and internalize a double standard for violence based on an artificial delineation that doesn't even exist in their characters' world.

There are a lot of reasons that the author can pull hard for their protagonists, and those will spill over onto the audience. The protagonist is (probably) the character the author identifies most with. As the primary PoV character, the protagonist is in the best position to advocate for their own thought process. Due to sheer exposure, and whatever adversity the protagonist has experienced up to that point, they audience is also likely to be more sympathetic to the protagonist's position.

This does mean, when your protagonist starts going over the line, your audience is going to be less critical of their actions. At least, up to a point. You can take this all too far, and lose your audience, which is part of where our cautions about violence come from. But that's an adjacent issue.

However, within your world, it's important to assess when, and how, characters use force based on who they are. And, in fairness to you, that was something you were partially conscious of. The critical hiccup was that the roles of protagonist and antagonist are agnostic to who these characters are in your world. People will use whatever tools are appropriate for completing their objectives, regardless whether you think they're the hero or villain. That includes, potentially, use of force.

The distinction I made poorly is that your kidnappers don't use force because they're the villains, but they use it because it's a critical tool for doing their job. I'm struggling to come up with a scenario where you'd have a human trafficker as the protagonist of your story, but it's not going to fundamentally alter their approach to violence, nor their methods. (Not saying the scenario is impossible, but it would run the risk of being extremely distasteful.)

Perhaps, a more palatable example would be an assassin. They're still popular as edgelord protagonists, and can just as easily be antagonists. However, they also do a fantastic job of illustrating that the hero or villain status doesn't (especially) alter the evaluation of whether they're a protagonist or antagonist. Leaving a large body count, in either case, simply means that that something got out of control, and in either case, this is someone who's been killing people.

Something that might seem like a non-sequitor at first, coming out of the Patreon Discord server last week, was a reminder that, when you're using the D&D alignment chart, you can absolutely end up with evil protagonists. Not even in the sense of villainous protagonists, like with The Godfather films and novel, but characters who are genuinely the hero of the story, and evil. My preferred example of this remains Jack Bauer (Keifer Sutherland) from 24.

The inverse is much rarer. Some Javier-style investigators probably fit the bill of good-aligned villains. Though, these are usually paired against criminal protagonists, or at least protagonists who've been framed or falsely accused.

The reason this tangent is relevant is twofold. First, it's important to remember that your protagonist can be evil. They can, absolutely, be a bad person. As mentioned earlier, because they're your PoV, they'll get some deference from the audience simply from being their primary point of access to the world. Second, concepts like good and evil may be far more determinative over their use of violence, but the idea of protagonists and antagonists exist independently of that. Who your characters are will have a much bigger impact on the degree of violence they'll be comfortable with inflicting.

Beyond this, there is a real problem for a lot of writers, who think about violence with that Saturday morning cartoon logic. It's absolutely fine to have extremely violent protagonists, however, the question you need to start with is whether that violence fits with who they are, outside of their role in the story you're telling.

Related to this, and it drives a lot of the, “I want a protagonist who doesn't kill people,” is the idea that your protagonist needs to be a good person. They don't. And having a protagonist who inflicts grievous harm on people, but stops short of actually killing them doesn't absolve them of the harm they're causing. You can argue that someone who tortures someone, “for good reasons,” and finishes with a mock execution is less evil than someone who does the same but simply executes their victim when they're done, but both of these are pretty evil acts across the board, and you'd be pretty hard pressed to argue that the former is fully innocent, when lasting harm has been inflicted upon their victim.

So, ultimately, as a general rule, knockouts don't work. It's a kind of moral hand-wringing that authors engage in because they're afraid of their characters being perceived as bad people, or because they want a consequence free way to close out a fight scene. Just like in the real world, knockouts don't really do what the author wants, because they're, at best, a deferment on future violence. The impulse to preserve your character's moral high ground is certainly understandable, but in most cases, this method will be detrimental to your work as a whole. It reduces the tension from future violence, as your reader now knows that there's an easy out with no lasting consequences. There are ways to have consequence free fights (such as characters managing to create an opening and escape), but the hard knockouts don't work as well as you might hope. I'd hesitate to call knockouts, “bad writing,” but they certainly open the door to some of our worst impulses as writers. Impulses we really need to resist, as they don't lead to better stories, just more contrived scenarios.

-Starke

This blog is supported through Patreon. Patrons get access to new posts three days early, and direct access to us through Discord. If you’re already a Patron, thank you. If you’d like to support us, please consider becoming a Patron.

#writing advice #writing reference #writing tips #how to fight write #starke answers

111 notes · View notes

lullabyalikpoptarot · 4 months ago

Text

Heeseung and Jake's Dynamic Reading

Okay, going to get to this duo. I was stuck between them, SunSun and Wonki, but I was planning to do them this week, so will still go with them, and get to the others the following weeks. I like this bond too, so I want to see what I can get energetically.

Overall energy: Well, there energy is very jumpy, it was hard to pull cards for these two. So, we start with the House one, not the greatest card to start with for a bond, but it seems these two are focused on their individual pursuits, but I can also see this as these two are able to show their best selves or themselves when they are around one another, so that is good.

Now, we get to the Gemini card, this pops up again, so they are a chatty bunch, they enjoy light and fun conversations with one another, and they make each other laugh. I can just see these two laughing together and having fun. I don't really see deep or profound conversations, more lighthearted and fun ones.

Heeseung's energy: He starts with the Monk and Advocate card. Heeseung is a pretty simple person, he doesn't require too much, maybe this is why they get along well. He kind of keeps to himself and works on his own personal development. He may be a calm presence around Jake. I see him being inspiring to Jake, trying to push him to better himself and do things for himself. I feel Jake has a bit of low self-esteem, so I can see Heeseung trying to build his confidence, this is cute.

Heeseung seems to have a lot of bright energy and excitment with Jake around. I say he can give him a boost and energy. I can also see him wanting to radiate that towards Jake. Heeseung is a strong individual with a lot of confidence. I feel that strength flows into Jake at times as well. This 7 of Cups is interesting, not sure what this card means here. There is some confusion and uncertainty here. Is he confused about Jake? I am stumped with this card. I clarified it and got the 7 of Swords, so I may be right there. I think he may not know a lot about Jake. I just think he may question who he is really at times, because they don't really go deep into who they are I am getting.

Heeseung is all about personal growth and development, now I can see him being critical of Jake and his decisions at times. I mean friends do that. I see him wanting to help him grow and be a better person, so he may try to help him with that. Not sure how well Jake takes that, since I see he doesn't really accept help from others.

Jake's energy: He starts with the Star and Goddess card. I see him as someone who loves life and tries to make the best of it. I see him wanting to be a strong presence in Heeseung's life. I feel he likes to show his good side. I see a lot of creative energy with Jake too, so his creativity shows when he is around Heeseung. He may ignite it. Like if he is around Heeseung, he is inspired to create.

Now, with this 5 of Pentacles here, like I mentioned, he doesn't like seeking support from others really. He keeps to himself and keeps his burdens to himself, so he isn't comfortable letting him in on those things. I do see him working well with Heeseung when it comes to work, they make a great team. I can even see them working on a creative project and doing well together, they blend together very well.

There is a strong independent energy to him, so he does a good job of standing his own ground, but he has a nice calm presence in this dynamic. I see a lot of feminine energy with him around Heeseung. He has a calmness and softness to him. I see him being open-minded when it comes to Heeseung and a supportive friend that is willing to listen to him but also enjoys sharing his opinion on things. I can see him being pretty open and honest with him about certain things, it would be more about work and how to go about things in life. I can also see him observing him a lot and trying to learn from him as well.

Overall, their bond is sweet. I don't know if they really know each other on a deeper level, but on the surface get along well and help each other out and genuinely want to help one another prosper in life. This was a nice reading, not draining at all, I love the calmness of their bond.

#kpop tarot #enhypen tarot #heejake tarot #heeseung tarot #jake tarot

11 notes · View notes

religion-is-a-mental-illness · 2 years ago

Text

Watch this video first, then scroll down.

youtube

I want to do a quick exercise. Close your eyes.

I want you to picture your best friend. Think about what specifically you love about them. What trait makes them them?

Now open your eyes.

I don't know what each of you came up with, but I'm pretty sure I know what you didn't come up with. I’m pretty sure none of you thought, "What makes Jim Jim is the fact that he's six-foot-two and a redhead." I'm guessing you chose their inner qualities, their sense of humor, their generosity, their intelligence, qualities they would have no matter what they looked like.

There's one more quality I'm pretty sure you didn't choose. Their race.

Of all the things you could list about somebody, their race is just about the least interesting you can name, right down there with height and hair color.

Sure, race can be good source material for jokes at a comedy club, but in the real world, a person's race doesn't tell you whether they're kind or selfish, whether their beliefs are right or wrong, whether they'll become your best friend or your worst enemy.

But over the past ten years, our societies have become more and more fixated on racial identity.

We've all been invited to reflect on our inner whiteness or inner Blackness, as if these racial essences define who we are.

Meanwhile, American society has experienced the greatest crisis in race relations in a generation. Gallup has been asking Americans how they feel about race relations, and this chart is the result.

So as you can see, between 2001 and 2013, most Americans felt good about race relations. Then both lines take a nosedive.

It's no exaggeration to call this one of the greatest crises of our time. And clearly we need new ways of thinking about race if we're going to reverse this trend.

So today I'm going to offer an old idea, but it's an idea that's been widely misunderstood.

You've probably heard it before. It's called color blindness. What do I mean by color blindness? After all, we all see race. We can't help it. And what's more, race can influence how we're treated and how we treat other people.

So in that sense, nobody is truly colorblind. But to interpret the word colorblind so literally is to misunderstand it.

Colorblind is a word like warmhearted. It uses a physical metaphor to capture an abstract idea. To call someone warmhearted isn’t to talk about the temperature of their heart but about the kindness of their soul.

And similarly, to advocate for color blindness is not to pretend you don't notice race. It's to support a principle that we should try our best to treat people without regard to race, both in our personal lives and in our public policy.

And you might be thinking, what's so controversial about that? Well, the fact is the philosophy of color blindness is under attack.

Critics say that it's naive or that we're not yet ready for it as a society or even that it's white supremacy in disguise.

And many people agree with these feelings.

[ Continued... ]

By: Coleman Hughes

Published: Sep 26, 2023

Like any young writer, I am well aware that an invitation to speak at TED can be a career-changing opportunity. So you can imagine how thrilled I was when I was invited to appear at this year’s annual conference. What I could not have imagined from an organization whose tagline is “ideas worth spreading” is that it would attempt to suppress my own.

As an independent podcaster and author, I count myself among the lucky few who can make a living doing what they truly love to do. Nothing about my experience with TED could change that. The reason this story matters is not because I was treated poorly, but because it helps explain how organizations can be captured by an ideological minority that bends even the people at the very top to its will. In that, the story of TED is the story of so many crucial and once-trustworthy institutions in American life.

Let’s go back to the start.

This past April, I gave a talk at the yearly TED conference in Vancouver, Canada. In my talk, I defended color blindness: the idea that we should treat people without regard to race, both in our personal lives and in our public policy. (This is also the topic of my forthcoming book.)

Even though a majority of Americans believe that color-blind policies are the right approach to governing a racially diverse society, we live in a strange moment in which many of our elite believe that color blindness is, in fact, a Trojan horse for white supremacy. Taking that viewpoint seriously—while ultimately refuting it—was the express purpose of my talk.

As you might imagine, TED is an unbelievably well-oiled machine. In the weeks and months leading up to the conference, I wrote my talk, revised it in conjunction with TED’s curation team, and cleared it with their fact-checkers. I have never prepared more thoroughly for a talk. On April 19, I stepped onstage in front of an audience of nearly 2,000 people and delivered it.

TED draws a progressive crowd, so I expected that my talk might upset a handful of people. And indeed, out of the corner of my eye, I saw a handful of scowling faces. But the reaction was overwhelmingly positive. The audience applauded; some people even stood up. Throughout the meals and in hallways, people approached me to say they loved it, and those who disagreed with it offered smart and thoughtful criticisms.

But the day after my talk, I heard from Chris Anderson, the head of TED. He told me that a group called “Black@TED”—which TED’s website describes as an “Employee Resource Group that exists to provide a safe space for TED staff who identify as Black”—was “upset” by my talk. Over email, Chris asked if I’d be willing to speak with them privately.

I agreed to speak with them on principle, that principle being that you should always speak with your critics because they may expose crucial blind spots in your worldview. No sooner did I agree to speak with them than Chris told me that Black@TED actually was not willing to speak to me. I never learned why. I hoped that this strange about-face was the end of the drama. But it was only the beginning.

On the final day of the conference, TED held its yearly “town hall”—at which the audience can give feedback on the conference. The event opened with two people denouncing my talk back-to-back. The first woman called my talk “racist” as well as “dangerous and irresponsible”—comments that were met with cheers from the crowd. The second commentator, Otho Kerr, a program director at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, claimed that I was “willing to have us slide back into the days of separate but equal.” (The talk is online, so you can judge for yourself whether those accusations bear any resemblance to reality.)

In response to their comments, Anderson took the mic and thanked them for their remarks. He also reminded the audience that “TED can’t shy away from controversy on issues that matter so much”—a statement I very much agreed with and appreciated. Because he said as much, I left the conference fairly confident that TED would release and promote my talk just like any other, in spite of the staff and audience members who were upset by it.

Two weeks later, Anderson emailed to tell me that there was “blowback” on my talk and that “[s]ome internally are arguing we shouldn’t post it.” In the email, he told me that the “most challenging” blowback had come from a “well-known” social scientist (who I later learned was Adam Grant). He quoted from Grant’s message directly:

Really glad to see TED offering viewpoint diversity—we need more conservative voices—but as a social scientist, was dismayed to see Coleman Hughes deliver an inaccurate message. His case for color blindness is directly contradicted by an extensive body of rigorous research; for the state of the science, see Leslie, Bono, Kim & Beaver (2020, Journal of Applied Psychology). In a meta-analysis of 296 studies, they found that whereas color-conscious models reduce prejudice and discrimination, color-blind approaches often fail to help and sometimes backfire.

I read the paper that Grant referenced, titled “On Melting Pots and Salad Bowls: A Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Identity-Blind and Identity-Conscious Diversity Ideologies,” expecting to find arguments against color blindness. I was shocked to find that the paper largely supported my talk. In the results section, the authors write that “colorblindness is negatively related to stereotyping” and “is also negatively related to prejudice.” They also found that “meritocracy is negatively related to discrimination.”

I wrote back to Anderson:

Far from a refutation of my talk, this meta-analysis is closer to an endorsement of it. The only anti–color blindness finding in the paper is that color blindness & meritocracy are associated with opposing DEI policies. Well, I do oppose race-based DEI policies in most (but not all) cases. Unapologetically. But that is a philosophical disagreement, not an example of me delivering incorrect social science. I feel it would be unjustified not to release my talk simply because many people disagree with my philosophical perspective. By that standard, most TED talks would never get released.

To which he responded: “Thanks, Coleman. Great note. More soon.”

Before this email exchange, I hadn’t seriously considered the possibility that TED might not post my talk at all. What’s more, the fact that the “most challenging” blowback to my talk was a social science paper showing that color blindness reduces stereotyping and prejudice puzzled me.

About a week later, I received an email from Whitney Pennington Rodgers, the current affairs curator at TED and the point person for the curation of my talk. Whitney said that in lieu of releasing my TED talk normally, TED was inviting me “to participate in a moderated conversation that we would publish as an extension of your talk.” I’m always happy to converse and debate, so I agreed—too hastily, in retrospect. I had assumed that the phrase “an extension of your talk” was meant metaphorically—i.e., that this “moderated conversation” would be a separate video. Only later in the email exchange did I realize that it was meant literally. In other words, TED wanted my talk and this “moderated conversation” to be released as a single, combined video.

I had two problems with this. First, it would hold the release of my TED talk hostage to the existence of this other “moderated conversation” (which at the time was not guaranteed to happen at all). Secondly, I worried that tacking a debate to the end of my TED talk would effectively put an asterisk next to it. It would imply that my argument ought not be heard without also hearing the opposing perspective—that it shouldn’t be absorbed without a politically palate-cleansing chaser. Given that my talk had passed the initial fact-checking, the curation team, and had been cleared by Anderson and Rodgers themselves, I saw no reason why it wouldn’t be released and promoted as any other talk would be. I told Rodgers as much over a Zoom call.

Because she and I were unable to come to an agreement, I had a follow-up call with Anderson. On that call, he conceded that his employees’ anger stemmed from political bias, but nevertheless asked me to agree to an atypical release strategy: TED would release the debate and the talk as separate videos, but at the same time. He sold this idea to me as a way to amplify my talk—as if this atypical release strategy were conceived for my benefit. That made little sense to me. The reality, I told him, was that these nonstandard release strategies were intended not to amplify my message but to dilute it. After all, the whole genesis of this debacle was the fact that certain TED staffers wanted to nix my talk altogether—and Anderson feared an internal firestorm if my talk were released normally. Clearly, the release proposals being pressed upon me were conceived in order to placate angry staffers, not in order to amplify my message.

By the end of the calls, we had reached a compromise: TED would release and promote my talk as they would any other, and I would participate in a debate that would be released as a separate video no fewer than two weeks after my talk.

I held up my end of the bargain. TED did not.

My talk was posted on the TED website on July 28. The debate was posted two weeks later. By the time the debate came out, I had moved on—I assumed that TED had held up its end of the bargain and was no longer paying close attention.

Then, on August 15, Tim Urban––a popular blogger who delivered one of the most viewed TED talks of all time—pointed out that my talk had only a fraction of the views of every other TED talk released around the same time. Urban tweeted:

There have been a million talks about race at TED. For this talk and only for this talk was the speaker required to publicly debate his points after the talk as a condition for having it posted online. As it is, the lack of standard promotion by TED has Coleman’s talk at about 10% of the views of all the other talks surrounding his on their site.

Two days later, I checked to see if Tim was onto something. As of August 17, the two talks released just before mine had 569K and 787K views, respectively, on TED’s website. The two talks released immediately after mine—videos that had less time to circulate than mine—had 460K, 468K views, and 489K views, respectively. My talk, by comparison, had 73K views—only 16 percent of the views of the lowest-performing video in its immediate vicinity.

My debate with Jamelle Bouie—a New York Times columnist with almost half a million followers on X, formerly Twitter—has performed even worse on TED’s website. As of Tuesday, September 19—after having over a month to circulate—it had a whopping 5K views. That makes it the third worst-performing video released by TED in all of 2023.

Either my TED content is performing extremely poorly because it is far less interesting than most of TED’s content, or TED deliberately is not promoting it. A string of evidence points to the latter explanation: unique among the TED talks released around the same time as mine, my talk has still not been reposted to the TED Talks Daily podcast. In fact, it was not even posted to YouTube until I sent an email inquiry.

According to its website, TED’s mission is to “discover and spread ideas that spark imagination, embrace possibility, and catalyze impact.” They claim to be “devoted to curiosity, reason, wonder, and the pursuit of knowledge—without an agenda.” My experience suggests otherwise, with TED falling far short of those ambitions and instead displaying all the hallmarks of an institution captured by the new progressive orthodoxy. TED’s leadership must decide whether it wants to do something about it—or let the organization become yet another echo chamber.

Let's call this what it was: an attempt, at a grassroots level, of agitating for blasphemy laws within TED. That's really what it was, accusations of blasphemy and heresy.

The correct answer, and there is one, is to discipline - and if necessary, dismiss - employees who violate the values and ethics of the organization. No matter how shrill and couch-fainting they are. Netflix did it. Get rid of them and they'll squawk a bit, and some of their fellow fundamentalists will rally around them, but they'll be out of your organization. Release a statement about your company's principles and values, and then let it blow over. Because it will.

You don't concede to religious fanatics. You stand up to them. Consistently. Especially when they work for you. (FFS, how were the highest levels of management afraid of the plebs?)

#Coleman Hughes #colorblindness #colorblind #antiracism as religion #antiracism #TED Talks #censorship #color blindness #color blind #liberal ethics #liberal values #cancel culture #ideological capture #blasphemy #blasphemy laws #religion is a mental illness

8 notes · View notes

graylinesspam · 2 years ago

Text

I've been trading existential dread with my queerplatonic wife for a while now. Because she's dealing with the crazy world of dating as a pretty queer girl in Texas. And I'm somewhere in a pit about my AroAce identity and the fact that I can't live independently from my parents now. (yes I know that's a capatilist ploy but I'm a hyper independent oldest daughter that was supposed to have my life together by know before surprise disability wrecked all of my dreams. So give me a while to mourn please.)

And one of the things she's helped me put into words is about how fucking lonely and useless and pathetic I feel. Because, most people, especially women, my age start to deal with their physical and mental restrictions with the support of a partner. I mean early twenties is peak, "we're both fucked up and afraid but at least we have each other," years.

And being an AroAce person, I don't have that option as readily available. I don't have people who are willing to support me, and spend time with me, and help me figure myself out. Because I'm not trading sex and romantic connection.

I'm in desperate need of human connection. Of a place to live outside my childhood home. Of emotional support. Of someone to listen to me rant at 10 p.m. And hold my hand when I'm scared and encourage me to better myself. To push myself to grow under these near impossible conditions. And I don't have that.

I can't rely on my family. Not because their bad people but because they're similarly isolated and emotionally neglected people that are hanging on by a thread and have been for most of my life. But at least my parents have each other.

I'm starting to get scared that I'll never find that connection. Because I need so much, and I can't offer the basic currency that people my age trade in.

Most of the time I like to think of that as a good thing. I don't need to worry about who I do or don't fall for because it'll never happen. I don't have to worry about 'losing the spark' or falling out of love with someone. Because I won't ever love them in such a flimsy way. I can focus on my try compatibility with my future partners. Our emotional and physical needs. Our preferences. Our boundaries, and similar interests.

But that's optimistic future me who has a job and a car, whose been through therapy, and figured themselvs out, and isn't a burden in a relationship. That's not now me. Now me is not someone I would ever consider dating and asking anyone else to date me feels so unfair. Like I'm taking advantage of them. Like I don't have enough to offer in return. (again hyper independence.)

And part of me wants so badly to just going to give in and take the first offer. To just say the right things and put out and pretend like I can connect with someone in a way I so clearly cannot.

I know in the future I will have so much to offer if I can just make it there. But that feels impossible to do on my own. And quite frankly I just don't have anyone.

But it isn't fair to myself or to anyone else for me to knowingly lie to them to receive the support I need. And I couldn't mentally handle it even if I tried.

It's just so hard to build relationships with other people when you don't have that foundation of attraction that everyone seems to think is so intricate to human connection.

I want a relationship built on respect and meeting each others needs. And communication and support. I want to be adult and mature about this. But the truth of the matter is that I am young and alone and lost. And I need help. I don't have hardly anything to offer and need so much.

And I don't know how I'm ever going to get to the point that I can offer anyone anything if I don't get my needs met.

So I'm spinning my wheels in fucking predatory right now.

And I'm trying to be so proud of my identity this June. But sometimes it's hard.

As much time as I spend advocating to baby aces that it will get better and you absolutely don't need to ignore it or pretend. That people will understand. That you will find that connection you need. Sometimes it's so fucking hard to remember that for myself. I'm not over the struggle yet. And frankly, I'm scared all the time.

It's just the way that identity has intersected with all the other parts of my life in the most inconvenient way possible. I'm fucking poor, too autistic to drive, chronically fatigued with serious joint issues, and fucking alone. Everything sucks right now.

#June #pride month #lgbt community #aroace #asexual #aromantic #Triple A in the queer way #Agender #Its fucking hard sometimes #And i'm trying to remind myself that the struggle is worth it #The struggle is how you grow #But it doesnt feel like i'm growing #It feels like i'm falling apart #And i'm fuckng crying in the middle of pride month #Please dont read this and get scared away from being ace #It doesnt suck all the time #I'm just going through it right now

8 notes · View notes

tragedyposting · 2 years ago

Note

question you said in one post that you shut down replys in that feminist or most of them dont hate moms ect. my question to you is when have you seen feminist telling a women that seeks to stay at home and have kids and raise them and count on there man for being the sole provider as something wonderful ?

First of all if you mean this post, the replies are off because it’s not my post. If you can’t reply to any of my other posts let me know and I’ll look into the problem.

I am going to answer this with the assumption that you really want to hear my perspective so we can understand each other better, but if that’s not what you want I’m not going to engage much further than this. I don’t mean to assume the worst, but you’re coming at me with a very hostile tone.

I would say the reason there’s not a lot of feminist dialogue encouraging women to become mothers is probably because feminism tends to focus more on making space for women in parts of society that they’ve traditionally been excluded or discouraged from. Motherhood has thousands of years of cultural history and societal expectation advocating for it in a way that lots of other options women might want in life do not. My feminist mother never stopped me from playing mommy with my baby dolls, (in fact, she bought them!) nor did any of my teachers (who kept them in stock in the preschool for boys and girls to play with as they pleased), but plenty of customers at my job will still only buy a science themed toy for a male child. Most of my friends’ parents are already asking them when we plan to give them grandchildren, not if.

As for “counting on [their] man for being the sole provider,” the reason feminists don’t advocate for this is because it’s not a very secure position to put yourself in. No matter how loving and reliable and faithful your husband is, things could still happen. Suppose you marry young and have kids straight out of high school. You’ve never had a job before, and then one day, when your oldest kid is around 10, your husband has a heart attack. What do you do? You don’t have any work experience, and (this is something I see a lot of people advocate for in the tradwife community, I’m not saying this is the case for most stay-at-home moms, or even your opinion) your husband always made all the decisions financially and didn’t bother to clue you in on important documents and information about your finances: what are you going to do then? I grew up with a stay-at-home mom, and I’m glad I did because she was a hard worker and we are very close and she was lucky enough that she worked for many years with a sought-after set of job skills and wouldn’t have been out on the streets if my dad had left her or become disabled or god forbid killed when we were kids, but it’s a position you take with a lot of risks.

I wouldn’t advocate that anyone, man or woman, be financially dependent on anyone without an extremely airtight backup plan and support system. And this is, to an extent, an issue you will see feminists working on: providing resources for women in that kind of situation by advocating for accessible childcare for all who need it, domestic violence resources to help women in abusive relationships become financially independent, and so on, are all goals that should make it safer for women to choose the life they want without opening themselves up to danger.

#feminism

3 notes · View notes

brw · 1 year ago

Text

Very glad I get to explain this. Basically after Scotland and England had a basic union because of the merging of the crowns, but before there was a general Great Britain, Scotland (and by that I mean Edinburgh and Glasgow, the Highlanders who were being taxed out of their own land probably had a different view) were very interested in how wealthy England was getting through its new empire and the imperialist East India Company. A few people got the idea to basically fund their OWN empire, so they could get rich too They knew there was land that could make them rich in Panema, so, not worrying about the people living there like most people, they started getting the people to try and fund the expedition to claim the land and get the imperialist machine rolling. This part of the story went well–around 20% of the entire wealth of Scotland went into this thing. I mean, families put their whole life savings into this, because they were that desperate to have their own imperialist machine built by the labour of enslaved people. Anyway, they go off to establish their new colony, which is also being claimed by Spain because of course it is. Upon arriving, these colonists soon found themselves dying quite rapidly. This was for a few reasons–the climate of Panema is probably as opposite to Scotland as you can get and a lot of people suffered illness from fever and heat. The food supplies hadn't been stored properly, so supplies went low fast. They didn't know how to hunt the animals in the area, and their bodies weren't acclimatised to the diseases there. Apparently, the native people around there tried to give them some fruit to make up for the lack of food they had, but the ships' captains, who mostly remained onboard, appropriated them and didn't share. The death toll was around 10 settler-colonists a day.

This was obviously a disaster. So everyone left, except for the few people they left behind to die because they were too weak to be moved. More unfortunately, the second expedition that they had planned to follow after the first with more supplies hadn't heard of the absolute catastrophe that had gone on and left anyway. When they got there, the captain of that little group and the captain of the first clashed pretty badly because there was basically no colony there and the second didn't think they were going to have to build one. They tried to arrest each other, it was a mess, and then the Spanish Empire came because as far as they were concerned this was their land and not the people who were living on it's land. The Scottish went home because they did not have a force left after all the people that died, and just like that a group of 2,500 would be imperialists were down to just a few hundred after the disease and lack of food killed most of them.

Scotland's economy was in pretty bad shape after this, and it ended up a key motivation in the Acts of Union. The Scottish aristocracy and wealthy elites decided for the people (they were never asked if they wanted to be forever in a union with England) that it would be in their best interests financially and socially to be in a permanent political union with England, and that's where we end up today. Some rich people wanted an empire, it failed, and then they decided to join another empire. Interestingly, another motivation for Scotland's union with England has to do with the Irish colonisation project–it was a lot more politically convenient for the powers of England and Scotland to be unified against the Irish working people, rather than having two distinct nations have colonial power over Ireland.

Anyway, while I am a staunch anti-unionist and a massive advocate for Scotland's independence, there is a distinct feeling of having dodged a MAJOR bullet in this story. If you're interested in learning more about this, I highly recommend Union with David Olusoga, which explores this in great detail of how the concept of Britishness came to be, and the role the colonisation of Ireland specifically but also of this massive failed Imperialist project of the Scottish aristocracy played into the union as we know it today

3K notes · View notes

juniorsearcyandbuddy · 4 months ago

Text

Chapter 1: The Introduction

Hello, Tumblr! I am Junior Searcy, the creator of this blog, bringing you today my first post with “my buddy.” Although this blog is required for one of my Psychology classes, my goal for this blog is to be able to have fun with this while also sharing the insightful perspective of adult development and aging, specifically with my buddy Ms. Michelle. The specific topics I went over from our textbook “Adult Development and Aging” were individuality, the meaning of age, and identity. Through a showcase of questions I’ve developed, I want to share with you all the life lessons, words of advice, and the personal experience of my buddy and how we—as the younger generation—can learn from it.

To introduce her, Ms. Michelle is a family friend of mine who often immerses herself in crafting. She was born on June 26, 1957, into a big family in Kansas City, Missouri, but was raised in New Orleans, Louisiana. Now that you know a bit of Ms. Michelle and my goals for this blog, let’s get on with my curious questions and her introspective answers!

The Interview

For my first question, I discusses the social pressures of “acting one’s age” and asked my buddy how she sees herself acting older or younger than her age right now or throughout her life. Ms. Michelle relays to me that she has always acted younger than her age and has been told she has acted “childish.” Yet, with this, she always priorities having fun and being comfortable! This is something I can personally relate to, as well! Both my buddy and I simply want others to enjoy themselves!

If I quit having fun, I’m going home!

Onto the second question, I discusses the differences of self-esteem between teenagers versus older adults; teenagers generally having lower self-esteem and old adults generally having higher. When it comes to aging, I wondered if confidence grew as one grows older and asked about my buddy’s experience with self-esteem. My buddy honestly answers that she has had very poor self-esteem, but as she leans on God and does some soul searching, she believes that it has helped a lot with that. She also agrees that confidence is something that builds as most people grow older because of the ability to be independent, such as living on your own, taking care of yourself, or paying bills. However, Ms. Michelle also acknowledges the second-guessing that comes with raising children and how, even they’re adults as well, no one is immune from wondering if they did something wrong. Of course, no parent is perfect and many should also learn that each child is different and should be given different rules. For this, my buddy gives an anecdote about how her first child was a good kid, but her second child “didn’t seem to understand or respect property.”

Enjoy the year that you have… you’ll get a year with every age!

As for my last question, similarly to the last topic, I wanted to know about my buddy’s experience with forming her identity and what advice she might have for the younger generation that are still figuring themselves out. As someone who comes from a family of overachievers, Ms. Michelle’s siblings had a hard time understanding her way of life. Despite having struggled with identity in the past, my buddy strongly believes in the unconditional love of God and that her life is in the hands of the Lord, finding monetary things unnecessary to living a fulfilling life. As for advice, Ms. Michelle advocates for enjoying the age you are right now. “You know, 15 year olds wish they were 16 and the 16 year olds wish they were 18. And 18 year olds want to be 21. And when you’re 30, you want to be 20 again.” Additionally, being true to yourself and never trying to fit into groups that you know you don’t belong in is something that my buddy wants everyone to understand, as well. Something my buddy has pondered about while watching certain television shows is if bullies are aware of the fact they are the villain in the scene. This conversation also leads Ms. Michelle to tell a story about how she tried to be friends with this girl who was often bullied in her class growing up, yet the girl was extremely defensive. Because of her defensive behavior, my buddy, still feeling empathy for the girl, did not want to bother her anymore and were never able to be friends. Some more advice, Ms. Michelle offers is being a person before becoming a couple, and becoming a couple before becoming a family. As someone who was married and pregnant while still in high school, this piece of advice is something she feels is very important for everyone!

A Discussion

To conclude my first post, I wanted to also discuss the ways me and my buddy are different generationally. As someone who is still young and has yet to experience my first long term relationship, I never might grow up to raise children and understand what it’s like to doubt myself, just as she did. Ms. Michelle’s responses mostly surrounded her life as a mother and, while that is extremely admirable and should never be looked down upon, I feel that is something that really highlights the difference between her and myself. Because of how much I prioritize my education and career goals over relationships, I honestly see a future for myself where I’ll have cats as my children. Even though some people in the present might still be pressured to have kids, Baby Boomers must have had that idea shoved down their throats as soon as they were teenagers. All-in-all, I enjoyed having this interview with my buddy and I’m excited to learn more about her life and to receive more advice.

End.

1 note · View note

news365timesindia · 7 months ago

Text

[ad_1] The Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) concluded the 13th edition of their highly anticipated SHRM HR Excellence Awards at the SHRM India Annual Conference 2024 held at the Taj Palace, New Delhi. Celebrating excellence in people management and human capital strategies, the awards honoured the visionaries who have implemented innovative practices that elevate not just their organizations, but the entire HR profession.Ms Achal Khanna, CEO of SHRM India, APAC and MENA with Jury for the AwardsIn this landmark year, the SHRM HR Excellence Awards introduced three distinct tracks-Enterprises, Startups/MSMEs, and Public Sector Enterprises (PSEs)-to recognize the unique challenges and achievements across various sectors. The winners were selected from a competitive pool of entries, with organizations demonstrating transformative approaches to workforce management, employee engagement, and fostering inclusive and agile workplaces.Congratulating the winners, Ms. Achal Khanna, CEO of SHRM India, APAC & MENA, said, "This year's SHRM HR Excellence Awards have set a new benchmark in recognizing the outstanding contributions of HR professionals. Each winner exemplifies what it means to put people first and drive meaningful change within their organizations. I am incredibly proud of how far HR has come, and these awards reflect the innovation and dedication that will continue to shape the future of work."Among the winners in the Enterprise category were Genpact who won Excellence in Talent Acquisition, Larsen & Toubro Ltd. won Excellence in Developing Emerging Leaders, Tech Mahindra Limited won Excellence in Managing Employees Performance and HCL Technologies Limited won Excellence in HR Technology amongst others. Under Startup and MSME category, the winners included Phenom who was recognised for Excellence in Talent Acquisition and Ramco for Excellence in Learning & Development along-with the other winners. The PSE category celebrated SAIL for Excellence in Inclusion, Equity & Diversity, ONGC for Excellence in Community Impact and NTPC for Excellence in Benefits & Wellness amongst others.With 51 winners announced across the three tracks, the 2024 SHRM HR Excellence Awards highlighted the broad spectrum of outstanding people management practices. The winners were evaluated on new, dynamic criteria designed to reflect the ever-evolving HR landscape, with a focus on future-oriented solutions that drive impactful business outcomes. This was carried out by an independent jury panel composed of Senior HR leaders, independent consultants and academicians.The SHRM India Annual Conference 2024 served as the perfect backdrop for this prestigious event, bringing together HR leaders, innovators, and practitioners from across industries to celebrate the transformative power of exceptional HR practices.For more details on the winners and their award-winning initiatives, please visit: www.shrmconference.org/awards.About SHRM India SHRM is a member-driven catalyst for creating better workplaces where people and businesses thrive together. As the trusted authority on all things work, SHRM is the foremost expert, researcher, advocate, and thought leader on issues and innovations impacting today's evolving workplaces. With nearly 340,000 members in 180 countries, SHRM touches the lives of more than 362 million workers and their families globally. [ad_2] Source link

0 notes

news365times · 7 months ago

Text

0 notes

mamellotshepang · 7 months ago

Text

The future is Bright! Blog 5

I am a third-year occupational therapy student, and besides learning how to help people right now, I am getting prepared for the demands that the field will throw my way as it changes with time. The world and the work of an occupational therapist alike is fast evolving. Prospects and challenges that are likely to arise will be quite exciting, especially for those of us in the health science department.

I have been privileged enough to have had an amazing experience with the physical and psychosocial blocks. Both blocks have taught me a lot about myself and how exactly I fit in the world of Occupational therapy. It's not easy memorizing all the theories I have learned in the last 3 years as I prepare for future endeavors, but as I prepare for the exciting unknown future, I will ensure that I am equipping myself with more than enough knowledge. As stated by the World Federation of Occupational Therapists, "Occupational therapy is based on the belief that activity participation is central to health and well-being". That means I must center my work on helping a client gain confidence, pleasure, and independence in those things they want to be able to do. In conducting work with clients who have intellectual disabilities and mental health issues, this is most definitely therapy that should be fostered and adapted to the lives and goals of everyone.

In addition to being clinicians, we OTs of the future will also be leaders in our field and passionate advocates of our clients. I have yet to develop the skill of advocating for clients, and this will be a part of my preparation for the journey ahead.

How exactly am I preparing for the future?

I'm learning so much from my current placement working with clients who have intellectual disabilities and mental health difficulties. Through practical experience, I am able to enhance my clinical abilities and expand my knowledge on how to adapt interventions to meet the unique needs of each client. This builds my competence in working with clients.

OT is a field that’s constantly evolving, and staying up to date with the latest research is essential. Because of the research module, I regularly read journals like The South African Journal of Occupational Therapy and engage in OT-centered books to ensure that learning and building myself doesn’t end in the lecture rooms. This will also help me in the future as I am learning about new perspectives in the health science field as well.

I have seen how important it is to build rapport with members of the MDT team. Securing relationships with other students from different disciples has helped me a lot and I intend to carry on building foundations of friendship with fellow future colleagues.

I will ensure that I equip myself with knowledge of other cultures because I know I will be treating clients from different religions and cultures. Preparing for this diversity means developing cultural awareness and sensitivity, which will allow me to tailor interventions to meet the unique values, beliefs, and practices of each client.

The future of OT will demand creativity, leadership, and an unwavering commitment to client-centred care. I’m ready to take on these challenges, knowing that the work we do as OTs can profoundly change lives—helping people build independence, find meaning in their daily activities, and achieve a better quality of life. The future of OT is bright, and I’m excited to be a part of it.

0 notes

sizo14 · 1 year ago

Text

An OT Curriculum Available In South Africa That Is On An International Level.

Images from google images.

Amongst all other health professions, occupational therapy is the only client-centered profession that focuses on promoting health and well-being through participation in meaningful activities. The primary goal is to enable participation by working with individuals, and communities to enhance their ability to engage in occupations they want to do, need to do, or are expected to do (World Federation of Occupational Therapists, 2024). For occupational therapists to be able to do so, occupational science or understanding is used to modify the occupation itself or the environment to support the client's needs or occupational engagement (Therapists, 2022). Higher educational training is needed to be a qualified OT, with one of the research-leading university, the University of KwaZulu Natal, offering the course. This then leads us to the big question: Are Occupational Therapists produced by this institution prepared for Community or Primary Health Care?

Primary Health Care (PHC) is the initial health care individuals need or seek. PHC is a whole-society approach that ensures that individuals receive quality, cost-effective, and effective health care that will enhance social well-being, mental well-being, and physical well-being (World Health Organisation,2022). Just like any other academic institution, the University of KwaZulu-Natal also has a set standard-based sequence of planned goals that is essential and facilitates learning amongst students, this is also known as a Curriculum (Great Schools Partnership, 2015). According to the Rhodes Department of Education, the curriculum specifies skills, content students need to learn and practice or achieve and be able to independently apply. This includes study materials, schedules, and instruments. In today’s piece, we will be analyzing the OT curriculum at this prestigious University of KwaZulu Natal.

The UKZN OT practical aspect of the curriculum prepares students by demanding students to think out of the box and think on their toes, taking into consideration all the factors that affect access to health care such as socio-economic status. Going to their communities or homes aids in preventing social disparities in health care caused by one's socio-economic status. Knowing that you might never see the client again because of lack of access due to money or transport demands the therapist in charge (Student) to maximize time with the client and ensure that treatment is effective. With different placements in every block since the second year, your mind is broadened by the exposure to different clients' environments limiting us to just only recommend what the theory says that may collide with the client's real life situation.

With this exposure, you cannot suggest modifications that are based on what you think is the environment of the client but need to be in a real environment and make realistic programs and modifications. For example, just because the client says you they have stairs doesn’t mean you can suggest they build ramps, in communities like Mariannridge they might not do that, due to how their environment is like(living close together, the gradient of the stairs, and how the only houses they have are build and also socio-economic status). This makes one think of other individuals we have seen in clinics and suggested impossible things. But because we never understood and still learning, little grace and learning from these is important.

With every encounter with people accessing the service, you are always reminded that we need to have sympathy and treat each individual with care regardless of their socioeconomic status background, or reason for access. We are taught to be advocates and work with stakeholders. This wasn’t an easy part because we were cautioned that we need to be able to articulate our words very well, which I am not so good in but improving. In this block, in Mariannridge we have recently advocated to the ward Councilor to donate wheelchairs to those who are in need, as this assistive device does enable occupational engagement. We have collaborated and we are working hand in hand with other stakeholders with the minimum resources we have for treatment sessions, collaboration with individuals such as CCGs and learner support does make service delivery much better. We were prepared by the OT curriculum that you might not get all the fancy equipment in the place you are placed at, therefore you need to use available resources including human resources which brings hope that there will be a carryover of the sessions or treatment.

Not only as students we are practically prepared, with theory which is the basic and initial phase of the course we are prepared from the word go. How each module is set up for each year makes sense when you must integrate it in the Final, 4th year. Each module feeds on your holistic intervention from understanding Anatomy and physiology and integrating it with your Kinesiology when doing modifications. These modules selected are seen making forming a golden thread in 4th year and aiding in improving treatment delivery in primary health care. The presentations that take place aid in summarising and reporting about clients in writing or verbally.

There is a Zulu saying that says “akukho soka elingenasici” which translates to “there are always pros and cons in a situation. With the OT curriculum as students, we are Exposed late to practicing in the community even though it has changed for other levels. They are exposed to the community since the first year. We were unfortunate due to conditions such as COVID 19. With all this preparing us, it is worth it in the end even though it is physically, and mentally taxing. The workload makes it even harder especially during 4th year.,

Even so with the Dearth in Universities that thoroughly prepare students for Primary health care service delivery, in the Discipline of Occupational Therapy, The University of KwaZulu Natal curriculum is recommended. Their curriculum does not only equip them with assessment but intervention skills too, with the help of experienced supervisors and lecturers.

References

Great Schools Partnership. (2015, August 12). Curriculum Definition. The Glossary of Education Reform. https://www.edglossary.org/curriculum/

Therapists, W. F. of O. (2022, September 20). Statement on Occupational Therapy (Archived). WFOT. https://wfot.org/resources/statement-on-occupational-therapy

World Federation of Occupational Therapists. (2024). About Occupational Therapy. WFOT. https://wfot.org/about/about-occupational-therapy

World Health Organization. (2022). Primary Health Care. World Health Organization. https://www.who.int/health-topics/primary-health-care#tab=tab_1

World Health Organization. (2023). Declaration of Alma-Ata. World Health Organization. https://www.who.int/teams/social-determinants-of-health/declaration-of-alma-ata

0 notes

precambrianhottopic · 1 year ago

Note

For chickens specifically: most of your poultry is coming from Cornish Crosses. Cornish Crosses are a hybrid of certain breeds, although the specifics are kind of an industry secret. The parent breeds are developed/bred independently of each other, and a certain portion of those chickens are cross-bred into Cornish Crosses. Cornish Crosses fundamentally cannot survive until maturity.

The thing about them is that they are specifically bred to grow exceedingly quickly. So quickly in fact, that they NEED to be culled by 10 weeks at the latest, or their sheer bulk leaves them unable to move around properly. For reference, chickens tend to start laying around the 16-17 week mark.

None of this is an argument against eating poultry as a whole. I am not vegetarian/vegan, and I am not trying to convince you to be vegetarian/vegan. I am pointing out that the capitalistic drive to get the most meat (and therefore profit) out of each bird in the shortest time has thrown out animal welfare in the process. By all means, advocate for heritage meat breeds! They're fantastic. But the industry definitely needs better regulations

this is really interesting!! the logistics of factory farming have always fascinated me in a horrifying kind of way- like, sure, we can make animals this efficient, but we definitely shouldnt!! chickens especially have their welfare almost completely forgotten, the example of the cornish cross you brought up is especially appalling, especially when there are MUCH healthier breeds available. i fuckin love eating meat i think livestock have been such an important part of our lives for so long and theyre not going away anytime soon but with factory farming in the state that it's in we absolutely need to rethink the way we consume meat. heritage chickens are awesome!!! small farms that actually care about the way they treat their animals are awesome!!! i really hope we see heavier regulation on the industry in the near future and a shift towards smaller-scale farming with a far greater focus on animal welfare. thank you for this ask :))

#plush.txt

0 notes

zannatykhatun · 1 year ago

Text

Cognitive fog

Cognition and values will affect our judgment of the meaning and value of products and things.

Cognition and values will guide what type of products you choose, or how you like to sell products.

For example, if you saw what I mentioned in the last article, some of the needs extended through the two dimensions, some people may think, who would make the room like this? I might as well set up a tea table in the room and drink tea and read when I have time. Wouldn't it be nice?

I have money to buy tens of thousands HE Tuber of figurines. Wouldn’t it be nice if I went drinking with my friends...

Whatever you think is correct.

Because everyone’s cognition and values are different. What you advocate is drinking and having fun, so you can’t understand that people who love the second dimension can’t work in this industry.

In fact, when you have a deep understanding of animation and two-dimensional animation, you will find that there are a large number of people, many opportunities, and a huge demand for all kinds of things...

In fact, there is no right or wrong. Everyone's choice is different. This is guided by everyone's cognition and values.

However, since we are entrepreneurs, if you want to discover more business opportunities, you should learn to switch roles and learn to integrate other different cognitions and values to look at the same thing.

If you can't understand and integrate, you don't recognize other people's behaviors, you can't understand other people's values, and you only live in your own cognitive world, your cognition and values will affect your discovery of business opportunities and the products you choose. , industry and development direction...

Understand this principle, you should be able to understand why you can't make some products that you know are very profitable, and why others always find a lot of niche needs, but you can't find them...

All of this is due to your own cognition and values, which causes your brain to block a lot of things and information that you don't like and don't approve of.

Okay, let me share this article with you here.

Of course, there are more than these factors that affect your ability to produce high-priced products, but due to space limitations, I cannot share too much here. I will explain the relevant content in depth through other internal materials in the future.

Being able to clear away these three layers of fog will at least help you see more business opportunities.

Here is a reminder: these three fogs do not exist independently, but influence each other.

Now, you can close your eyes and recall the previous three points. Now imagine a scanner scanning your body. You will have unexpected results!

3. Summary

Throughout our lives, your personality, habits, and cognition will affect all aspects, not just your selection.

The three points mentioned here are like three forces, like the three kingdoms, they are involved and influence each other. You also need to consider the issue of balance when making changes.

These three points are constructed by many factors such as our growing environment, things we have experienced, our family of origin, etc., so everyone will have a unique world view, values, and outlook on life. As a result, what everyone sees is actually different, and everyone's three views are unique. So as long as you get rid of these three layers of fog, you will also see unique business opportunities that belong to you!

Each of my articles aims to provide you with inspiration and broaden your thinking. Even if it helps you a little, it will make Teacher Fox sincerely happy.

columnist

Foxes love to talk nonsense, public account: Foxes love to talk nonsense, everyone is a product manager columnist. I like to integrate] with each other. I am good at positioning segmented tracks and exploring user needs and pain points!

This article was originally published on Everyone is a Product Manager. Reprinting without permission is prohibited.

The title picture comes from Unsplash, based on the CC0 agreement

The opinions in this article represent only the author's own. The Renren Product Manager platform only provides information storage space services.

Because when you have this habit, it means that you don’t understand people who buy at high unit prices, what are they thinking in their brains, what are their consumption habits, and what do they value when shopping...

Therefore, the products you usually choose and the projects you look for are all at low unit prices and sell cheap things. In your heart, you will be more inclined to serve people who correspond to your consumption habits.

These behaviors of yours have become a habit. When you see others selling expensive things, you will think these people are fools.

#HETuber #Music #Gaming #Entertainment #Sports #Science And Technology

0 notes

steadycoffeeflow · 8 months ago

Text

So NaNo staff issued a note to the community that you can read in full over on their website.

As already noted by others, there's no acknowledgement that their earlier statements were couched in false social injustice and co-opted language they shouldn't have. Just the apology for "lack of context" when they came out in wholesale support of AI.

I want to make it entirely clear: It is not "selective intolerance" to be against training models that plagiarize writers' work and threaten the welfare of writers, be they hobbyists or professionals.

NaNoWriMo issuing a statement that's not apologetic in the slightest, to a community well-versed in subtext and tone, is just another indication this org is dead in the water. Their opening line claims that telling people to stop stealing authors' works without permission is "vitriolic", I mean, come the fuck on.

Yet, they're claiming to be neutral.

If you want to give them the benefit of the doubt, AI is a very broad term, so it's possible they didn't mean generative AI.

But to that, I say, this statement was as good a time as any to at least define what the hell they initially meant. And they didn't do that. Instead, they did what I called out earlier: both-sidsing, limp wristed prattle days after the fact (it took Ellipsus all of half a day to issue their statement, alongside much of their board of writers, who are also volunteers by the way).

"We absolutely believe that AI must be discussed and that its ethical use must be advocated-for. What we don’t believe is that NaNoWriMo belongs at the forefront of that conversation. That debate should continue to thrive within the greater writing community as technologies continue to evolve."

Guys, you made yourselves the forefront of the conversation. And that thriving community engagement that had been fostered for over twenty years was summarily nuked when NaNo failed to protect children from harm, let's not forget that. This ideological concept where NaNo comes out, fists flying with accusations of classism and ableism because people take legitimate issue against plagiarism, then rolls right over decrying how vitriolic people are being in response to their antagonisms?

Just an idea, don't support thieves, don't speak over the disabled community, and maybe, just maybe, don't fuck around. Cause with the number of sponsors that have dropped and national media coverage this story has gotten (but lol, totally not at the forefront guys, too much heat for such a silly small thing, y'all are totally blowing this out of proportion let's, oh, take the heat off when we were the ones who turned the stove on in the first fucking place (I am American in an election cycle year I am losing my fucking mind)) I believe NaNo is entering the "find out" stage.

Back to the earlier point of what exactly I'm taking issue with...

Many "AI" features that have been umbrella'd under this term already were available in some form or another for several decades, existing as programs or features of software. Just because some tech bro rolls out an update and slaps AI in front of their API doesn't mean the tool is actually "AI".

But if you want to discuss the merits of Microsoft's Clippy being an AI program, let's fuckin' go.

Full disclosure: I deleted my NaNo account. My MLs were booted in April with no warning nor discussion, and my local community is doing it's own thing independent of NaNo.

We can support and cheer each other on just fine without the groomers and plagiarists.

Also, again, what the fuck does "advocated-for" mean who over there is hyphenating random shit? This is coming from a kenning enthusiast, please what the hell is happening over there??

I'm coming out of my cage and things are not fine, I'm screaming at NaNo "WHY ARE YOU DOING THIS?!"

If you haven't already been made aware how borked NaNoWriMo is, in the past 24 hours they've released an endorsement of AI after partnering with an AI software program.

The problem is, much of what they're saying is outright bullshit, and I don't even need to get into the nature of belittling the very writers they claim they're sticking up for by talking over them. It's an exploitation of a community, using them as a PR meat shield.

Because it should be awfully apparent NaNo's goal isn't to foster a healthy writing community. If that were the true goal, their missteps for the past year following the child harm allegations wouldn't be happening. Rather, instead, it's more likely the reason every company has relentlessly pursued and pushed AI: $$$

I don't think I'm entirely off base to say money is the reason AI is mucking up much of our creative spaces. At the peak of this fervor, you could load up some listicle titled '5 Ways AI Boosts Your Side Hustle' or some YouTuber claiming to make thousands a month with their AI writing, as if it were that easy to make a living writing and silly authors have just been leaving money on the table.

The mad gold rush that followed impacted literary magazines and publishing spaces, such as Clarkesworld Magazine freezing submissions as they were inundated with poorly written nonsense. The people behind NaNoWriMo, however, apparently believe Clarkesworld Magazine is just being classist and ableist in their anti-AI stance. Yes. Certainly because of those reasons.

And not because their submissions jumped an untenable amount, almost 500% from their usual submission intake, and cost the lit mag staff untold amounts of mental harm (as well as a very real number amount of staffing hours and financial costs to combat this problem).

But to that, NaNo Org argues that AI is cost-effective, actually!

Which, we're back to the opening argument that NaNo is full of shit (in case you didn't realize that citation link was sarcasm and not evidence in support of NaNo's stance). It may be free to the end user to access AI, notwithstanding the many many models one can buy including NaNo's own sponsor, but the financial damages being incurred by the use of this tech is anything but. The fact NaNo glosses through this in three little bullet points is insulting.

But what really has gotten me to write off about this on a mostly dead Tumblr blog, is that I've worked in the publishing industry all of my adult life and I've been a part of the creative writing community about as long as NaNo claims to. Hell, part of my contract freelance work has been to go through slush piles and evaluate, by hand, if the submission utilized AI or not. Full transparency, that work has helped me get through medical bills this year.

Yet that's my point. Someone had to rearrange their budgets to hire many people like me to combat rampant AI-generated submissions, from college admission offices to literary magazines to other publishers. What could have gone toward the print run of a special issue or increasing the marketing budget of a debut author now has to go making sure illegal, plagiarized work isn't being unwittingly published and endorsed. It's not classist to take a stand against a technology that's disruptive enough to put people out of business, but NaNo takes aim and fires off some bullshit claim they're pro-indie authors.

You might be thinking, "But Steady, if the business can't adapt to the market, they shouldn't exist!"

And to that I say, not every single little thing needs to have a financial commodity price tag slapped onto it. Not everything needs to make money. Things have a right to exist without a price tag stickered on them. The onus of this situation is because NaNo partnered with an AI sponsor. They're outright seeking to make money out of this. Because they're well aware of the PR fiasco, they're high-grounding the situation by claiming they're sticking up for the little guys, while outright taking money from a harmful billion dollar industry.

Meanwhile, the little guy will find no publisher will touch their work, that their writing has no copyright protections attached to them, and they'll be blacklisted by those they stole the work from. NaNo claims this is unfair; sorry folks, that's just how it works. Stealing from your fellow writers tends to get those same writers to rally against you.

I don't need to be told that the publishing industry has issues, that fanfiction writers are made fun of and lambasted. But most of those issues stem from and feed right back into the very problem NaNo is claiming to stand against: The financial commodity of writing.

NaNo has everything to gain by you believing them and using their sponsorship coupon so you can generate works as a writer that have no copyright protections and likely violated the copyrights of fellow writers works in doing so (I can play the bolded words game too, you pricks (see their update in response to the massive backlash this stance has generated online)).

The final point I have to say, is that in NaNo's defense they claim their online workshops are just full to the brim! See the demand! Look, look with your special eyes how popular AI is!! You fools, this is the future at hand!!!

Except, I, an avid anti-AI writer and publishing professional, attend webinars about AI all the damned time. Mostly to understand what new angle or developments we'll have to defend against. Every single one of these publishing industry or writing webinars are, in the end, a sales pitch to get you to pay them rather than a fellow freelancer.

Notwithstanding, it's a marketing and sales 101 faux pas to mistake interest in a thing, eyes on screens and butts in seats, for tacit endorsement in said thing. Besides the obvious point that people most impacted by this tech would be interested in learning more about it, there's the very real possibility that the same crowd who drives clicks to Forbes and YouTube videos is partially the same crowd that flocks to these NaNo webinars seeking to make a quick, effortless buck.

So, in the end, NaNo isn't speaking to writers. They're speaking to people looking to exploit a blind spot in an industry in order to make $$$ in our Capitalist Hellscape. And in NaNo's rush to join that race, they're trampling over the community they've grown and fostered for over 20 years.

The insinuation of this entire statement is that NaNo is standing tall for the "little guy" that the writing community has just let wilt and suffer for years, neglected and unheard. And it's totally not that NaNo nuked their own forums, a free, accessible resource for such writers to utilize, and without warning fired all of their volunteer staff all because they dropped the ball in moderation and safety checks (I'm not touching on whether the groomer is still working for NaNo since that situation is tainted by rumors, sensationalism, and directly conflicting stories).

And topping this all off with a pithy little cherry on this shit sundae: "For all of those reasons, we absolutely do not condemn AI, and we recognize and respect writers who believe that AI tools are right for them. We recognize that some members of our community stand staunchly against AI for themselves, and that's perfectly fine. As individuals, we have the freedom to make our own decisions."

So not only does NaNo condone plagiarism and theft, they're quick to both-sides the issue, only to immediately say "we're all free to make our own decisions!" Not said is the heavy implication, "oh but if you stand against AI you're a classist, ableist dickhead!" Which, if it wasn't obvious, is so far removed from the truth it's insulting.

In short, fuck NaNoWriMo.

Also what the fuck does "further-proof" mean.

#nanopocalypse #I'm dead serious on hearing Clippy arguments #I want motions on my desk before end of the week #the tech bros just reinvented public transit again I mean Clippy #it's Clippy all the way down #NaNoWriMo AI #on writing #fuck NaNoWriMo

14 notes · View notes