#abandoned trolley

[zombilenium]

"Abandoned America" by Matthew Christopher

[s2z]

Preston East, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 2024-06-24 08:10:21 by stuart murdoch Via Flickr: What a mess One of several projects, that explore photography as evidence amongst other ideas. Tumblr | Instagram | Photography links | my Ko-fi shop | F*#kYeahTrolleyed | s2z digital garden | pixelfed.social | vero | Dpreview albums | my work archived on trove at the N.L.A.

[redrcs]

After successfully mating, the males die in large numbers.

From the series, The Secret Sex life of Shopping Trolleys.

[bluvlet]

some random scenes from a trolley problem fic i will never finish writing

[offyatrolley]

[scholarofgloom]

[pizzaisland03]

cr. to @pizzaisland03

[holdallthatremains]

trainin like rocky 🪨

[thebreakfastgenie]

When I did all that Scientific American Frontiers posting I didn't mention the episode where he interviews some neuroscientists who are using the MASH finale as a moral dilemma for their research.

[murraywalker]

Going to Costco is a good idea in theory. In reality, it's a fucking nightmare.

[dirtycornersofdorset]

[s2z]

My other blog fuck yeah trolleyed is going really well, here's a recent find.

[jtownraindancer]

had a momentary obsession that i shall ramble about in the tags

[eelhound]

"The idea of reforming Omelas is a pleasant idea, to be sure, but it is one that Le Guin herself specifically tells us is not an option. No reform of Omelas is possible — at least, not without destroying Omelas itself:

If the child were brought up into the sunlight out of that vile place, if it were cleaned and fed and comforted, that would be a good thing, indeed; but if it were done, in that day and hour all the prosperity and beauty and delight of Omelas would wither and be destroyed. Those are the terms.

'Those are the terms', indeed. Le Guin’s original story is careful to cast the underlying evil of Omelas as un-addressable — not, as some have suggested, to 'cheat' or create a false dilemma, but as an intentionally insurmountable challenge to the reader. The premise of Omelas feels unfair because it is meant to be unfair. Instead of racing to find a clever solution ('Free the child! Replace it with a robot! Have everyone suffer a little bit instead of one person all at once!'), the reader is forced to consider how they might cope with moral injustice that is so foundational to their very way of life that it cannot be undone. Confronted with the choice to give up your entire way of life or allow someone else to suffer, what do you do? Do you stay and enjoy the fruits of their pain? Or do you reject this devil’s compromise at your own expense, even knowing that it may not even help? And through implication, we are then forced to consider whether we are — at this very moment! — already in exactly this situation. At what cost does our happiness come? And, even more significantly, at whose expense? And what, in fact, can be done? Can anything?

This is the essential and agonizing question that Le Guin poses, and we avoid it at our peril. It’s easy, but thoroughly besides the point, to say — as the narrator of 'The Ones Who Don’t Walk Away' does �� that you would simply keep the nice things about Omelas, and work to address the bad. You might as well say that you would solve the trolley problem by putting rockets on the trolley and having it jump over the people tied to the tracks. Le Guin’s challenge is one that can only be resolved by introspection, because the challenge is one levied against the discomforting awareness of our own complicity; to 'reject the premise' is to reject this (all too real) discomfort in favor of empty wish fulfillment. A happy fairytale about the nobility of our imagined efforts against a hypothetical evil profits no one but ourselves (and I would argue that in the long run it robs us as well).

But in addition to being morally evasive, treating Omelas as a puzzle to be solved (or as a piece of straightforward didactic moralism) also flattens the depth of the original story. We are not really meant to understand Le Guin’s 'walking away' as a literal abandonment of a problem, nor as a self-satisfied 'Sounds bad, but I’m outta here', the way Vivier’s response piece or others of its ilk do; rather, it is framed as a rejection of complacency. This is why those who leave are shown not as triumphant heroes, but as harried and desperate fools; hopeless, troubled souls setting forth on a journey that may well be doomed from the start — because isn’t that the fate of most people who set out to fight the injustices they see, and that they cannot help but see once they have been made aware of it? The story is a metaphor, not a math problem, and 'walking away' might just as easily encompass any form of sincere and fully committed struggle against injustice: a lonely, often thankless journey, yet one which is no less essential for its difficulty."

- Kurt Schiller, from "Omelas, Je T'aime." Blood Knife, 8 July 2022.

[offyatrolley]

[edzephyr]

I was walking to the gym one day and saw a bear with some trash on the street. He was on a small sun-faded plastic child's chair.

On the way back, the bear was gone, but I noticed a trail of white fluff down the street. As I walked, I realised it was the bear's innards, and I found the bear's skin torn up in an abandoned trolley.

The rest is as follows:

A wash (it took about half an hour to collect all his stuffing)

2. Reassembly and pet brush to de-matt

3. Eyes polished. (they were all scratched up)

4. Eyebrows

5. Nose (science blue)

6. Boots

7. Pants

8. Tunic (with a hand-embroidered emblem and some spare braid)

9. Spock

10. Spirk

🙃

BONUS: I also found this guy recently. Another project!

Now who on earth could that remind me of

 ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Anyway happy valentines day!