#i cannot succinctly summarize this series | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

radiantlyrey · 6 months ago

Text

Doctor Who Review: S1/S14E04 - 73 Yards

(Could not succinctly summarize this episode without spoilers. Review behind the cut; SPOILERS ABOUND, as usual.)

It’s hard to know what to say about this episode. It raises many questions, but offers few answers. It’s creepy and unsettling at first, until it relaxes, as its main character accepts the horror that has fallen upon her. It’s an episode of Doctor Who that the Doctor barely appears in, the first “Doctor-lite” episode in about 16 years (Series 4’s “Turn Left”). It is a story of Ruby Sunday. Not the story; not remotely. Just a story, one that may prove to be merely a haunting vignette by this season’s end. And yet it may also have more bearing on the story than we currently know. It’s a story about not knowing, about not getting answers, and it may very well be Russell T Davies’ finest episode of Doctor Who.

We know from the 2023 specials that the world of Doctor Who is now taking on a more fantastical bent. There are gods playing with the world now, and goblins creeping on the edge of things, and not everything can be explained by science. “73 Yards” is perhaps the biggest example of this so far, just from the sheer number of things it refuses to explain. We don’t know why the Doctor disappears. We don’t know why the Woman follows Ruby, nor what she says that makes people run away in fear. We don’t know why the Woman is always 73 yards away. Even the reveal that the Woman is Ruby at the end of her life raises more questions than it answers. We get no satisfaction here, no rapid-fire explanation at the climax that slots everything into sense. It is what it is. You might as well ask why Cinderella has a fairy godmother, or why the old witch thought a baby was a fair exchange for a handful of rampion. It’s a fairy story, and the only rules it has to follow are its own.

It follows its rules fairly well, too. The Woman is never any closer or farther away (until the end, anyway). Every person who speaks with her runs away in terror, and refuses to deal with Ruby in any way. While the story makes little sense in a science-fictional way, it nevertheless works when you accept that it is a fantasy. It’s internally consistent, and that’s all you really need from a fantasy story. The Woman only approaches when they must come together, for Ruby’s belief in their connection is correct; they cannot exist without each other, because they are each other. They collide at the end to finish the loop of time (or perhaps Möbius strip of time?) and lead themselves out of it before it all begins again. And so the story of Ruby Sunday continues, with this mystery left behind as a half-remembered dream.

One of the main reasons the fairy story of “73 Yards” works is because of Millie Gibson’s outstanding performance. If “Boom” was an episode-long showcase of Ncuti Gatwa’s acting abilities, then this is a showcase for Millie Gibson as an actress, made all the more stunning when you learn that this was the first episode she shot. She fully inhabits Ruby’s fear in the first part of the story, and her grief when she’s abandoned by the most important person in her life (Carla, her mother). As the episode moves forward in time, Ruby’s attitude towards her predicament changes from horror to an uneasy camaraderie, and Gibson sells that, too. You can read so much of Ruby’s desperation and hope in her face and her body language, and all of that is due to Gibson’s talent and presence. It’s hard to believe she was only 18 when she filmed this, because it’s one of the finest performances in New Who. If this is what she’s got to offer, I genuinely can’t wait to see what she does next in this role and in her career.

Gibson’s performance is a big part of what makes this episode work for me, but Russell T Davies’ script is no slouch, either. He imbues the story here with a touch of horror in the beginning, and enough intrigue to keep you glued to the screen. At the same time, he fills the episode with the fairytale logic that makes it work, even reminding us gently at the end what kind of story this is (“I could make it snow, once upon a time”). It’s the finest script he’s written for Doctor Who, right up there with “Midnight” from Series 4. But where “Midnight” is all tightly wound tension only released at the end, “73 Yards” is a mystery tinged with tragedy. Of the two, I prefer “73 Yards”, and I’m intrigued to see what place (if any) it holds in the overall story for this season.

As with every episode, there are critiques one could make about this episode. I will not be making any. This episode haunts me, as the Woman haunted Ruby. In my eyes, it is perfect, almost too perfect to look at, if that makes sense. (It took me five days to rewatch it for this review, if only because its little tragedies hit too close to home to be cathartic.) I find the mysteries we’re presented with here to be a feature, not a bug. I do not demand answers, though it’s possible we will get them. I will be content if “73 Yards” remains a sorrowful side-plot in the story of Ruby Sunday. It was a story well-worth telling, and it will sit in my heart forever.

#doctor who #series 14 #73 yards #dw spoilers #ruby sunday #millie gibson #russell t davies #skye reviews things

9 notes · View notes

romijuli · 2 years ago

Text

okay i’m free of football let’s go, in order of posting date, also some series in here because why not

this ends up being more Which Ones Did I Have The Most Fun With in some cases but isn’t that what writing’s about in the end

The Kids Are (not) Alright: (unfinished series, a bucket of eventual ships but current ones are tzmskz and kaoru/kumon, angst-y) my funky little jrpg au!!! not the first Big Ol’ AU Idea i’ve had for this fandom but the first one i started posting, for sure. i’m still working on the “main” fic for it, as well as some surrounding worldbuilding (help me) but i’m delighted by the stuff i’ve written for it so far, hehehe.

kiss me once, kiss me twice, kiss me three times: (one-shot, tsuzumisukazu, fluff with like a HINT of angst) “the kiss fic” as i so lovingly call it, hehehehe. this one was just plain FUN and one of my favorite ones to reread

Untitled Birthday Fic Series: (unfinished series by virtue of the premise, eventual tsuzumisukazu I’M SORRY I HAVE A PROBLEM, mostly a lot of musing about romantic feelings) a collection of, you guessed it, birthday fics, each delving into the brain of one member of my favorite little triangle. each of these focuses on one component ship i guess. LISTEN i just really like how these came out and i can’t wait to ACTUALLY FINISH IT,

ribbons, ruffles and bows: (one-shot, taiyuki, fluff!!) written for a pride month exchange!!! i just really liked writing taichi here. also i love using non-canon pronouns for characters i need to do that more often

on the concept of being “special”: (one-shot, jutsuzu, emotional hurt/comfort i guess?) one of my rpw pieces and apparently the one with the most kudos??? which is surprising because i never hear anyone talk about this ship???? hello?????? i’m not sure what it is about this one that sticks out to me, maybe it’s just something about writing the itty bitty rarepairs. they’re cute.

hello, stranger: (one-shot, tsuzumisu, what the fuck even IS this one’s genre) another rpw piece, the one i put the most work into and the one that drove me FUCKING INSANE WRITING IT. GOD. i affectionately describe this one as “indescribable au” because i CANNOT summarize what’s going on here succinctly enough. misumi can travel between timelines in his dreams??? but it’s super specific??????? anyway i DO love how this turned out and the comparative word count to the rest of my rarepair week collection is hilarious

third wheel: (two-chapter fic, tsuzumisukazu yes i know, Tsuzuru Is Going Through It) my tsuzuru writing is in PEAK form in this one my god. i don’t know if i’ll ever write him this well again.

What if (once I’m free of football) I made a list of my fave fics I wrote in 2022….

#what the fuck do i tag this post #yes its a reblog because i am ~allergic to being perceived~

4 notes · View notes

cranberry-bar · 5 years ago

Text

Doukyuusei BLANC CH 9 [SPOILERS]: really long post about Sajou’s internalized homophobia

SPOILER ALERT: don’t read if you don’t want spoilers for the entire Doukyuusei series, including chapter 9 of Blanc

A/N: this is just MY interpretation of the chapter.... spoilers below the cut :)

Ok so in Blanc chapter 9 there’s this scene where Sajou pulls Kusakabe away from the funeral pews, and it’s identical to the panel in Doukyuusei chapter 2, when Kusakabe dragged Sajou away from Harasen’s office. It’s a great parallel, mostly because the juxtaposition of these two scenes pretty succinctly summarizes Sajou’s character growth, but also, it serves as a concise metaphor for the entire series’ overarching conflict: Sajou’s internalized homophobia.

Kusakabe is not homophobic. In fact, as Sajou points out in Sotsugyousei, Kusakabe is painfully optimistic and open-minded. We see this throughout the series… Kusakabe doesn’t care who knows he’s gay. He wants to kiss Sajou in public and hold his hand on the crowded bus — requests which Sajou nearly always refuses. Kusakabe proudly announces to the sales person at the jewelry store that he’s buying a wedding ring for a man. In Blanc, he wants his music video to reflect that his song was written about Sajou, not about a woman.

On the flip-side, Sajou is deeply insecure — especially about being gay. He pushes Kusakabe away almost compulsively; in public, he rejects Kusakabe’s affection for fear of being seen. In private, he repeatedly closes himself off emotionally from Kusakabe. We see it again and again. He refuses to cry or admit to his feelings. While Kusakabe freely gives and receives love, for Sajou affection is a constant battle. Sajou never lets himself believe the affection Kusakabe gives him is genuine or will last.

This is the real conflict in Doukyuusei — the theme that spans every installment in the series, the reason we needed Blanc in the first place: Doukyuusei is still, at it’s very core, a “getting together” story, even after all this time, because even though Kusakabe and Sajou technically get together in the very first chapter, Sajou continues to wall himself off from his emotions, and by extension, from Kusakabe himself. They’re not truly, equally in it together until this very moment, in chapter 9 of Blanc.

And so, we come to these two parallel scenes: the one in Blanc, and the one in Doukyuusei.

In Doukyuusei chapter 2, Harasen exploits Sajou’s fears of Kusakabe leaving him. When Kusakabe pulls Sajou away from Harasen, he isn’t just saving Sajou from a physically uncomfortable situation, he’s yanking Sajou away from his own insecurities.

Early on in the chapter, Sajou closed himself off and pushed Kusakabe away, but Kusakabe eventually sees through it. That’s what makes Kusakabe a great character. After he realizes what’s going on, he goes back for Sajou to essentially rescue him from his own overthinking.

If Harasen represents Sajou’s fears, then Kusakabe is his salvation. Kusakabe reassures Sajou of his feelings for him, and for a while, they’ve put a band-aid on the bigger issue.

It’s interesting, then, that the over-arching symbolism for that chapter is Emperor Tenchi’s poem about the leaky roof in the harvest hut. The roof hasn’t collapsed yet, they’re not in imminent danger of flooding. This is a slow and gradual leak, which over time will become a bigger and bigger problem until it consumes them. It’s foreshadowing what will happen later on in the series. Kusakabe grows more and more eager to progress their relationship, but Sajou is still stuck. He can’t move forward until he moves on. It’s a little ironic that Kusakabe knows only the first part of the poem — “Course the rush-mat roof / Sheltering the harvest hut / Of the autumn rice field…” — but he can’t seem to remember the second part. Metaphorically speaking, he’s not yet aware of how monumentally this leak is going to effect their relationship. Sajou, though, he knows the end of the poem — the more famous line, or in other words, the one everyone else sees coming — and he completes the poem which Kusakabe cannot remember: “And my sleeves are growing wet / With the moisture dripping through.”

By the time we get to Blanc, the leak has sprung.

Sajou’s reluctance is holding their relationship back. They break up, but by chapter 3 Kusakabe is ready to call Sajou and beg for a second chance, and it could have gone down that way, nothing learned nothing forgotten. Instead, Sajou’s mom falls ill and it’s the catalyst for Sajou and Kusakabe confronting their problems. We know what happens: Kusakabe comes through for Sajou like always, he proves his dedication, he’s there by Sajou and Kumi-san’s side, and then we get chapter 8. Kumi-san has passed away and Sajou, grieving, wants Kusakabe’s comfort, except this time, the literal physical embodiment of the looming homophobia Sajou has always feared is standing in their way.

In chapter 8, for the first time in the entire series, Kusakabe and Sajou experience a trial as a couple which is directly caused by external forces of prejudice and homophobia, and ironically, in a roundabout way it still comes from within Sajou himself, but this time it comes from within Sajou’s family. It’s his insecurities come to fruition, in the form of his father. And now we see where Sajou’s fears of acceptance and his internalized homophobia stem from. It’s ironic, then, that only a few chapters prior, Sajou had told Miyamura-san: “I don’t have confidence in myself. It’s fine if I’m alone… if something happened it would be my responsibility, but with him it’s different. I’m scared. He pulls people into his life. If people look at him weird, if he loses something or gets hurt, it would be my fault. So I can’t do this anymore.”

All this time, Sajou has agonized over the fear that Kusakabe will suffer because of their relationship. He fears Kusakabe will face judgement and discrimination, and one day he’ll have had enough, and he’ll leave Sajou. Except, Kusakabe has already left him, and it wasn’t because of any external force of homophobia. It was because of Sajou, himself, that couldn’t own up to who he is, that he couldn’t truly accept himself or his relationship. He couldn’t truly accept being gay. Really, the entire series has led up to this moment: Sajou must choose between overcoming shame and confronting his fears or succumbing to them.

And Sajou stands up for Kusakabe.

It’s the first time in the series this happens. Time and time again previously it’s been the same. Sajou runs, Kusakabe runs after him. Kusakabe reassures, emotional peace is restored, and Sajou’s dangerously precarious self-worth lives to see another day. Kusakabe spends his whole life running, chasing, pining, and waiting for Sajou. After the fight with Sajou’s dad, Kusakabe tells Sajou “I was waiting for you.” Not just now, but forever, since the very beginning, Kusakabe has been waiting for Sajou to truly be ready, to accept not just Kusakabe, but himself, and what this really means is “I will keep waiting.”

It’s especially poignant when you look at Sajou’s parents as two halves of Sajou in opposition — his mother representing the part of him that embraces himself whole-heartedly, that loves Kusakabe, and his father representing the part of him that feels obligated to conform to society’s standard of normal, to push people away and build walls, to shield himself from emotional pain. It is meaningful, then, that Sajou tells his father “I wish you had died, instead.” Because, really, this is Sajou choosing which part of himself he wants to survive. And he chooses the better part, the part of him which gives love freely and accepts himself and his sexuality full-stop.

And so… and so and so we come to the panel in Blanc chapter 9. Kusakabe has shaved his head (oof don’t remind me), he’s taken out his earrings, and shown up to the funeral in a respectable suit and tie, all in the name of appeasing Sajou’s father, and Sajou hates it (can’t blame him, the hair looks so bad) but really, in a way, seeing Kusakabe like this is what Sajou’s always feared: that Kusakabe would some day have to change himself, or make himself smaller, in order to be with him. Though other characters may refer to Kusakabe as idiotic or foolish, Sajou has never thought poorly of Kusakabe. He has only ever thought poorly of himself. What Sajou loves about Kusakabe is his fierce determination to go after what he wants and to express himself freely and openly. But now, for the first time, Kusakabe is stifling himself for Sajou’s dad, and really by extension, for Sajou. Of course Sajou hates it.

Sajou’s dad orders him to sit, but Sajou ignores him, he pulls Kusakabe away from the stands and they run, and they talk, and finally Sajou admits what we’ve known since the beginning: he was afraid, because he couldn’t let himself believe that Kusakabe truly wanted to marry him. He apologizes, they cry, and when Sajou’s dad barges in and interrupts by asking what the hell they’re doing, Kusakabe’s absolutely unbothered and responds with “We’re talking about getting married.” And I love what comes after: “His dad didn’t say anything after that.”

In the Doukyuusei version of how this scene plays out, Sajou nearly succumbs to the extortion and pressure of his adult male role model. Harasen tries to convince Sajou that he and Kusakabe shouldn’t be together, and it works. His fears get the better of him and it’s only Kusakabe coming to his rescue that saves him. This time we see the reverse. An adult male role model is trying to break up his relationship, but this time Sajou isn’t a kid anymore, and when Sajou’s dad tries to break down Kusakabe’s resolve, and it starts to work, Sajou does for Kusakabe what Kusakabe did for him all those years ago: he saves him.

When you juxtapose the meaning behind these two parallel scenes — one where Sajou had to be rescued, and the other where Sajou not only saves himself, but Kusakabe as well — we see that the story has come full circle. Blanc needed to happen, because Sajou needed to move past his shame, to allow himself to be vulnerable and loved, in order to fully commit to Kusakabe.

Finally, finally! Yes, unfortunately we do have to witness them bone with Kusakabe’s hideously shaved head, but the chapter ends with them agreeing to get married, so there’s the silver lining.

#op #doukyuusei #sotsugyousei #sajou rihito #doukyuusei blanc #blanc #nakamura asumiko #kusakabe hikaru #not sure why i wasted all my time on this #but this chapter was such an emotional upheaval

407 notes · View notes

lyrebirdswrites · 4 years ago

Note

hello finn!! 💖💞💗 i was wondering, in a non-spoilery way, who your fave jjk characters are and why?

hi mariam!! 💖💞💗

This is such a predictable basic answer but I really love the main characters. No surprise picks here lol. first year trio my beloved...

I’ll start with Yuuji because he’s the protagonist. The best boy. First in my heart. The reasons I love him can be neatly summarized in this lil amv which is basically a compilation of all his best and cutest expressions. Look me in the eyes after watching that and tell me he’s not the most lovable thing about this whole series. You can’t do it. He’s literally so lovable what the hell

Jokes aside, the thing that draws me to Yuuji is just how unshakably kind he is. It’s in the name, Yuuji means unwavering humanity. Like Panda said during the goodwill arc, he inspires everyone around him by being this one bright point in what is established in canon as a pretty miserable way of life. He has this sensitivity and selflessness and emotional intelligence about him that is pretty rare among male protagonists imo, and he’s always trying so hard to do the right thing and do right by others even when it comes to combat and death. When he gets hurt and endures suffering (eg when he failed to save Junpei), he still does his best to keep his heart open and stay true to his principles, I find that really admirable. Also the fact that his execution is set out as a real possibility at the start of the story makes everything about him more dear to me... characters who are living on borrowed time mess me up. Not to use a meme from 2014 but Yuuji is honestly a cinnamon roll too good to pure for the jujutsu world and I love him.

Megumi!! I know I said Yuuji was best boy, but Megumi is also best boy first in my heart. They’re both best boys. Best boys together. Best boyfriends, if you will

It’s hard to put my finger on exactly why I adore him to such a degree, especially in a non spoilery way. He seems kind of gruff and standoffish but he gets embarrassed super easily... he considers himself to be sensible and serious but he shares one braincell with the rest of the trio... he looks like a standard emo shonen rival but he turns out to be so supportive and such a genuine good friend. He’s got depth, he’s got layers. Like an onion. I do think he shines brightest when he’s acting as a foil to Yuuji. It’s so fascinating to me how they seek the same goals but they learn different lessons and take different roads to get there, and how even with their differing outlooks they still hold a deep respect for each other’s approaches. All the time I think about that one interview calling him the heroine of the story, I’m just gonna link it because I won’t be able to summarize it succinctly. Megumi steals the show for me every scene he’s in, particularly during the Origin of Obedience arc, and my affection for him knows no bounds.

And of course I must express my undying and eternal love for Nobara. I know this is breaking the rules again but Nobara is ALSO first in my heart... the undisputed best girl of the series. “I love myself when I’m all dressed up and pretty and I love myself when I’m strong, I’m Kugisaki Nobara” hello??? “You’re a bad match for me” HELLO??? She’s so iconic, and as much as I like softer feminine female characters with inner strength, I lose my mind whenever Nobara gets the chance to be snappy and aggressive and totally unhinged. I love it when shonens let their female characters be actual people.

But also underneath all that Nobara is still really caring and so ride or die for her friends, and it honestly melts my heart. Her little speech to Yuuji about how she only has so many seats free in her heart but that some people like him just bring their own chair and sit down... there’s a post saying this is maybe the sweetest way op has ever heard someone say ‘I care about you’ and I agree. It’s such a wonderful little moment that says so much about her character and her friendship with the boys. I love it when shonens let their main trio be actual friends. Anyway words cannot describe the depth of my love for best girl Nobara, Queen Of Shonen Jump (she shares the crown with Power from chainsaw man tee hee).

Gojou and Getou are definitely on my list of top faves too, but literally every single thing that really sells me on both their characters is a massive manga spoiler so I won’t elaborate there. Just know that I love them.

#girl help i'm too invested in these characters #how did i get here #lyrebirds answers #kikuism

7 notes · View notes

prongsmydeer · 5 years ago

Text

Ayesha Liveblogs Tiger King

“I think it would be fair to say that Carole is the Mother Teresa of cats” now there’s a sentence I never thought I’d hear

“I’d never been a person who had friends” statements like this always perplex me because surely there had to be ONE other person in however long you quantify childhood that you identified with. Like not one whole ass person? You’re not the only person who loves cats Carole

The juxtaposition between Carole Baskin’s “Animal Print for Animal Rights” and Joe Exotic’s “Tiger King underwear is our bestseller” is poetic cinema

Okay this isn’t a reflection of my opinions on this man but I Saw a Tiger is a good country ballad there I said it

“When I first met Joe, I was like a month out of high school” well that’s not good

[Joe Exotic voice] Some people have tigers to cope

Doc Antle has only been on screen for 30 seconds and already he has made himself memorable by directing the film crew

Is Bhagavan Antle Indian in some way or did he just have a really intense Eat Pray Love journey with his guru

Also is he really a doctor orrrrrrrrr

“I am out there in the forefront so known of being this guy that is in love with big cats and has them love him back” please don’t tell me this guy does anything weird to his animals

“People only care about saving what affects them”

“You can’t put a price on holding a baby tiger” but you did and apparently it’s $625

The fact that multiple tigers have had albinism is probably a sign of major inbreeding practices at these zoos

You know, even if I ate meat*, there is no way I would be able to handle any kind of early prep stage of it bc seeing these cow carcasses is A Lot

*If u r reading this I don’t care if u eat meat leave me alone

“Animals just wasn’t enough, okay? So then I started adding magic” well that took an unexpected turn

I don’t know if it’s for real fair to criticize every person who has brought a big cat out in a public venue/talk show because I know at least like Dave Sal/moni is always going “THESE ANIMALS MAKE TERRIBLE PETS”

As a sidenote from what I understand this Saff person keeps being deadnamed/misgendered throughout this documentary and I do not appreciate it

“I grew up a professional cowboy in a family of professional cowboys” every sentence on this show is a journey

WHO is letting their ONE-YEAR-OLD lay on top of a tiger cub I know you’re at a zoo but BRUH

“It’s going to be a small Waco” to say this ON THE NEWS

This 2 minute stretch of episode is all the PSA anyone ever needs to never own a gun

Well I think we can all agree that PETA is a fucking mess

God this is like battle of the people who are terrible at doing anything good for animals

“What do you carry that gun for?” “People” AHHHHHHHHHHH?!?!!!!?!?

“I sleep with an AK-47 under my mattress, loaded, ready to roll” WILL SOMEONE HELP THE U.S. OF A

I was warned about this show and yet I was still not prepared for the level of UNHINGED it would be

How in the FUCK does a place like this not have an on-site medic

“Why don’t you come back on another day” he said, after telling the public an employee had his arm taken off

“I am never gonna financially recover from this” SURE JOE THIS IS ABOUT YOU

To go back to work a WEEK after getting your arm amputated... BRUH

“Any law that you think’s unfair or unjustice, it is your obligation, it is your responsibility to stand up against that bullshit law” well Thomas Jefferson was a slaveowner so clearly the injustice thing was relative for him

Traditionally don’t drug addictions fuel people choosing extreme paths with their life rather than the other way around?

JKHGKJHGKJH this whole exchange:

Interviewer: What kind of doctor is he?

Maria: Mystical science.

Interviewer: Mystical science?

Maria, nodding: Yeah.

“How many wives does Doc Antle have?” I didn’t expect this but somehow it tracks

I’m gonna bet none of these people with subcontinental names have a single bit of South Asian heritage like okay “Moksha” and “Rajnee” did Bhagavan name you

On a more serious note: It’s really fucked up that these men keep meeting literal teenagers, making them their employees, and then also get into relationships with them. I cannot emphasize this strongly enough THIS IS NOT GOOD OR HEALTHY

It’s pretty weird that Doc Antle keeps emphasizing so frequently that one of his partners is Italian

“I’m gonna go be a yoga animal trainer” ah, white people bullshit

“Goodbye. Don’t fall in love with your boss.” Good advice, Dad

I was not expecting all this subcontinental imagery to get under my skin this badly but what’s your problem dude can’t u be normal for like a second

“You’re this garbage person, but if you listen to me, I’ll make you great” again this tracks but gross

Again, on a more serious note: if a partner ever talks to you this way please call a domestic abuse hotline

Not that India is at all in a good place right now but I personally ban Doc Antle from ever entering India. Banned. Forever. I will not be accepting constructive criticism at this time

“I didn’t really know any better” is a really good way of summarizing what all of these younger partners have been through

Wow Carole is really explaining this abuse issue succinctly

Antle’s indignation at being implied to be a cult leader despite the fact he is most definitely a cult leader

Joe’s story in his documentary is constantly “is this going to be a humanizing moment PSYCH it’s still terrible”

HOW IS THIS LEGAL PAY YOUR WORKERS A LIVING WAGE

Why is this husband-killing thing JUST A FOOTNOTE AT THE END OF THIS EPISODE OH MY GOD

We have deviated so far from the tiger thing oh my god

Why is the only man in this documentary who is faithful to his spouse the man that smuggled drugs inside of snakes

Every time I learn a new thing about a person in this documentary I have to reorient myself

This whole episode has been about this murder and I’m concerned that its title, “The Secret,” hasn’t even been revealed yet

GOD I take back what I said about I Saw Tiger, the concept of this song/music video for Here Kitty Kitty is so disturbing that this man deserves no credit whatsoever as a musician

CAROLE WHY ARE YOU GIGGLING ABOUT THE MEAT GRINDER IT’S NOT FUNNY

Well I don’t have much to say about this episode other than yikes

I guess if you’re really out to spite someone stealing their brand and posting exactly the opposite of everything they stand for is an effective if weird and petty way to do it

Do you think the whole throne footage moment was a “Frankenstein realizing what he has wrought” kind of thing for Kirkham

This is really like watching a sports game of two teams you can’t stand except the sport is murder and other miscellaneous crime

If we’re all being real with ourselves the documentary filmmakers themselves MUST have had some issues going on to be able to walk into this situation and not do anything about it

This series really seems to present a compelling case for why every major figure in this documentary has potentially committed at least one terrible crime

Ah there’s the judgment from the woman in Florida I guess it’s two crimes with one stone

God these poor animals they do not deserve anything happening to them

While obviously people are enticed by the prospect of someone they’re into having an animal JUST GET AN ALREADY DOMESTICATED ANIMAL LIKE DOMESTICATED CATS AND DOGS EXIST OH MY GOD DO NOT USE EXOTIC PETS AS DATE BAIT

It has been so long since we heard about Travis ngl I already forgot about him

Why is every single person in this show SO OFF THE WALLS I mean I know why but also WHY

This documentary is also a treatise in the flaws of the U.S. prison system and how it sets up people up to fail or re-offend upon release

Take a shot every time a middle-aged man in this show mentions that he casually bought himself a big cat as a teen

“Joe was the entertainment director.... by title” I don’t think this was meant to be a burn but what a burn

I am almost certain I WATCHED that Last Week Tonight episode during that election and if u told me that 4-5 years later I would be rewatching that clip in a documentary about this man’s journey to being convicted for murder then I cannot say I wouldn’t be surprised but I would probably believe it

Also I have to wonder what John Oliver thinks about being part of this

[“Beyonce?” voice] Shaun Majumder?

Sidenote: Until this exact moment I thought of Shaun Majumder as Ben Mulroney even though Brian Mulroney is white as hell I guess I have faceblindness but only for Canadian talkshow personalities

I have been aware of this before now but the fact you can buy a GUN at a Walmart what in the FUCK is U.S.A. doing

Man does this campaign manager really want to take ownership of anything Joe Exotic has ever done

Ngl I was wondering why someone who had at one point clearly had a lot of money seemed to have such poor dental care access but meth certainly does explain it

I mean people can be attracted to both men and women (hello) but since Joe was fuelling their drug addictions since they were teenagers attraction is at best a null factor and at worst an added layer of terrible to this whole mess

It’s hard to even respond to this in a meaningful way because this is so fucked up. Don’t own guns.

“That was a big fucking mistake,” he said, right after someone explained that he was driving large groups of people in an enclosed space in a busy city with wild animals that could maim or kill them

Padlock penls piercing really does not seem like a first date bombshell

“We went to dinner and he never went home” well if that doesn’t set you with a sense of foreboding

TWO MONTHS AFTER WHAT IN THE HELL OH MY GOD also I hope Dillon is okay

“It wasn’t about the animals anymore” you THINK

“It was sort of funny when they started but it’s gotten really dark” how meta

Of all the reasons Joe could’ve abandoned his zoo, I really didn’t think embezzlement would be what pushed him

“He won’t tell anyone where he’s at, not even me,” said Dial, with no acknowledgement of the fact that Joe is also theoretically still married and would maybe tell his husband???

Oh Dillon spotted??? Yikes get out dude

Take a shot every time a white person who really doesn’t understand where the word “karma” comes from starts talking about karma as if it is the Law of Revenge

The fact this man brings a film crew out with him while he’s on the run evading a federal investigation..... incomprehensible

“Joe just wanted to put it in somebody’s name and continue to be the tiger queen, I mean king,” really REALLY of all the reasons to object to Joe you’re going to choose homophobia wow

Is this about an attempt to have someone murdered or does something happen to Baskin it is very unclear

This documentary has an interesting format of switching focus from crime to crime to crime

“I’ve never been as proud of being married to anyone as I am being married to you” It’s weird to compliment your husband by comparing him to all your other husbands

How is the lesson for Jeff Lowe in this “let’s build another zoo” surely at that point it’s better to just cut your losses

[Garretson voice]: You should pay me for being a bro, dude

“I’m a libertarian, so technically, fuck the Feds,” I’ve never heard an intonation that better suits a conservative millennial

I mean I don’t think it was advisable but honestly why are people surprised Joe took the stand isn’t delusions of grandeur kind of his thing

Sometimes it’s just that they’ve added in other moments to break up the awful immoral crimes with just run of the mill douchebaggery like the nanny/gym thing huh

I guess the silver lining in this is that potentially these big cat zoos will shut down but like where do these animals who have been raised in captivity go??? I don’t trust anyone in this documentary to not exploit them in some way ugh

“Not a single animal benefited from this war,” correct, Saff

“I was wrapped up in having a zoo,” not really an excuse but ok

#tw: literally everything #ayesha says things #ayesha liveblogs tiger king #long post #u ever quarantine so hard u watch an entire docuseries in a night #no but seriously it would be hard to warn for everything but proceed with caution #liveblogging

16 notes · View notes

bothsandneithers · 4 years ago

Text

Day 3327

I need to hurry up and write this, because I am forgetting how miserable I was. This is not part of an effort to ensure that I don't repeat this process over again (perhaps as some may be tempted to do after childbirth). Instead, this exercise is consistent with my tendency to ask my friends to describe the most uncomfortable and unfortunate parts of their vacations. Who wants to hear a story that could more succinctly be conveyed within the narrow pages of a travel brochure? To adapt this question to the present situation: Who wants to hear a series of events that could be more adequately summarized by a few pages in a student handbook?

I’m sure that someone could have a field day by drawing parallels between giving birth to a child and writing a dissertation. While this is not my story to tell, I have described my experience by drawing upon the image of a mother who harnesses supernatural strength to lift a car off of her child. The listener is then immediately confused, and I then have to clarify that, in this metaphor, I am both the mother and the child, and that the dangerous, debilitating, threat of the car, is my dissertation.

It may be more effective if I am more direct: I want everyone to know that I (as the small child) was quite miserable, and I (as the mother) accomplished something that I thought was more than I could handle.

I imagine that if a car did end up on a small child, then the entire situation would invoke so much stress on the mother that she may not ever be able to recount exactly what happened during those subsequent moments. In a different way, of course, and for reasons I am still trying to understand, I too remember very little from the summer and early fall leading up to my defense.

In the place of memories, I find myself relying on artifacts to represent months and events that I cannot recall. One such set of artifacts are the six or so issues of The Atlantic magazine that have been set aside into a small pile; each one received a small verbal promise that I would open the pages after my defense. Now, as I review the covers, I imagine that they may never be read. Below are some of the stress-inducing cover stories of these abandoned issues:

How to destroy a government: The president is winning his war on American institutions.

How QAnon is warping reality and discrediting science.

The election that could break American.

How did it come to this? Why the virus won.

In the early days of lockdown, when the virus was beginning to take hold of its victory, I read this explanation for why most of us are not thriving right now: In order to flourish, one must be able to play several different human roles over the course of the day -- something that is arguably impossible when we rarely leave our dwellings.1

After reading this explanation, I starting clinging to the argument that the overwhelming reason why completing my dissertation had become so difficult was because of an absence of variability in my human roles. Even though none of my other typically played human roles were terribly interesting (commuter, friend, peer, coffee shop customer, gym patron), each one offered me respite from the singular human role that I was stuck with: The neurotic graduate student.

The neurotic graduate student human role was difficult to be around, because she was always worried about so many things: that her arguments weren't good enough, that there were errors in her code, that she should be able to understand certain concepts that were still evading her, that more time-intensive analyses were still required, and that overturning new stones would reveal that previous analyses or assumptions were wrong or incomplete. More simply, the neurotic graduate student human role was always worried that she was not good enough.

This persona can be debilitating, and I found that the act of writing a dissertation included a lot of time not actually writing, but rather, a substantial amount of time was devoted to sitting in paralyzing anxiety, not able to do anything.

Even though many of the weeks leading up to my due date were a blur, I do recall choosing this time to watch One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest. Perhaps I did this because misery loves company. I decided to view this odd movie choice in a particular odd format, whereby I watched the movie in 15 minute intervals, across several nights, as if savoring a segmented Toblerone.

I watched the first few segments in stoic sympathy with the characters, but I eventually found myself amused when Jack Nicholson realizes that almost all the residents are “voluntary”:

You can go home any time you want? You're bullshittin' me. He's bullshittin' me right? Cheswick, you're voluntary? Scanlon? Billy, for chrissakes you must be committed, right? I mean, you're just a young kid, what're you doin' here? … I mean, you guys do nothing but complain about how you can't stand it in this place here and then you haven't got the guts just to walk out?

I remember smiling for a few moments at this scene; it was a gentle reminder that I invited this stress into my life, and that I could, indeed, bring it all to an end if I really wanted to. The smile was fleeting, and felt similar to when you are crying, and your friend says something that is true and funny to try and make you feel better, and you laugh and it feels really good but it also reminds you of how bad you feel, and how far away you are from feeling like yourself.

Yet again, someone else might have a field day drawing parallels between today’s academic environment and a fictional mental institution from the 1970s. I can't do this, in part because, aside from that one scene, I don’t actually remember what happens in the movie.

I did, however, voluntarily lock myself in a hotel room to write, because the suffocating familiarity of my home was preventing me from generating any new sentences. A sticker had been placed between the room's door and its frame, denoting that the room had been thoroughly cleaned. Surely this was only intended to be a symbolic seal to provide some peace of mind that it was safe and acceptable to be outside of one's house.

Once inside the room (that seemed no cleaner than in the absence of a pandemic), I did not immediately initalize my plan to write incessantly. Instead, I desultorily found myself on a support group on reddit that was dedicated to "PhD stress." Feeling compelled to write anything that was not my dissertation, I made a post targeted at those who were also writing their dissertations during a pandemic:

What you are doing right now is really, really hard.

Under "normal" conditions, you would be facing a sheer amount of uncertainty with your work (e.g., not knowing how analyses will turn out, not knowing what your advisor will think of your progress, etc). Under these new conditions, you are dealing with the uncertainty of the state of the world (pandemic), the government (upcoming election -- if in the US), as well as your dissertation! These are absurd conditions, whereby any one of these things would undoubtedly have negative impacts on your well being.

For many, you went from having an entire support group of peers, to sitting in your bedroom, day in and day out, trying to come up with novel ideas and effective ways to communicate these ideas.

As such, I urge you to take care of yourself. I urge you to give yourself permission to ignore unwanted criticism that, while in other circumstances you may work hard to address. Now, in this current context, just don't. Give yourself permission to stop perpetuating the idea that your work and your psyche should not be impacted by the fact that nothing is the same right now.

Defend your ideas, yes. And do good work (-- nah, do good enough work). But know that you are defending your work under surreal circumstances. Account for this when you wake up tomorrow, move four feet from your bed to your desk, and try to do the same thing over again.

Overnight, this became the most popular post in the subreddit’s history. Admittedly, there aren’t a lot of members in this particular community (it should also be noted that this post was recently surpassed in popularity by a post entitled, “PhD has destroyed my mental health”). Still, several users responded with something along the lines of, “Thank you. I needed to hear this.”

I needed to hear those words too -- that is one reason why I wrote them. But I was also desperate to play another human role; one who ambiguously could have already made it to the other side of the dissertation defense, and was able to offer encouragement to those close to the finish line.

Soon after my hotel stay, where I eventually did find motivation to write, I was set to defend my dissertation. This was met with the opportunity to transform into another human role: someone who was nearing the end of her graduate student career, and had no choice but believe that her work was good enough.

The dissertation defense took place via video conferencing. I sat at my desk in my make-shift office in my bedroom.

Five kind and smart professors asked me kind questions that made me feel smart.

And that was it.

After the defense, the stress began to fade away. I recalled the wise words that my therapist once said, “It’s remarkable how, after the defense, people just won’t need anything from you anymore.” I made edits to my dissertation and submitted my final version. I dismantled my “home office” and replaced it with a reading chair and a plant. A new issue of The Atlantic arrived in the mail, and now with time, cognitive space, and optimism that this issue would not be as depressing as the others, I started to read.

I opened to an article about a historian who predicts that the United States is about to experience a terrible decade. He blames this on the overproduction of elites. ("There are still only 100 Senate seats, but more people than ever have enough money or degrees to think they should be running the country.") These elites find alternative ways to disrupt the status quo to influence people; the elite overproduction "creates counter-elites, and counter-elites look for allies among the commoners.”2

Although the article was compelling, it did not feel like appropriate material, as one does not work tirelessly through graduate school to then be compared to Steve Bannon.

I continued to the next article which was about young adults (or old children) who post things to a social media platform I’ve never used (TikTok). Not only do they create short videos that are viewed by millions of viewers, but there is an entire industry of these individuals, and they curate their content together in the mansions that they cohabitate (I am yet to grasp the monetization of this endeavor).3

I settled into my chair. Finding myself enjoying my new human role as a casual observer to an unknown world, I thought: What an absolutely absurd life pursuit.

xx,

Amy, PhD

https://nplusonemag.com/issue-37/the-intellectual-situation/epilogue-for-a-way-of-life/ ↩︎

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2020/12/can-history-predict-future/616993/ ↩︎

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2020/12/charli-damelio-tiktok-teens/616929/ ↩︎

#phd

1 note · View note

aelaer · 5 years ago

Note

Hey aelaer, I have a question and since you seem to have been writing fanfic forever, I think you're a good person to ask this. I have a crossover idea with Doctor Strange and another universe, but to my dismay someone has already written something similar (not the same universe). I did have my story plotted out already, but there's some key concepts that can't be avoided I don't know if I should give up. I don't want to be accused of plagiarism even if the story is completely different.

Hi, thanks for thinking of me for your question! I have a tendency to ramble (and I ended up writing an essay for this) so let me answer you immediately: yes, you should still write it.

Now the rest of the answer delves into the why, in entirely too much detail as I am wont to do.

According to plagiarism.org, Merriam Webster defines the following items as plagiarism:

to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one’s own

to use (another’s production) without crediting the source

to commit literary theft

to present as new and original an idea or product derived from an existing source

For instance, if I were to state that the above was my own words, I would be plagiarizing both Merriam Webster and plagiarism.org (which is just irony at its finest).

Figuring out how to avoid plagiarizing words is easy: don’t copy-paste words that aren’t yours and declare them as yours. Slight rewording of the content doesn’t keep it from being plagiarism, either. The issue of ideas, however, is a good deal more difficult to quantify, especially in the creative space.

The Office of Research Integrity starts off by giving us a base point of idea plagiarism with the sciences in the following statement:

“In the sciences, as in most other scholarly endeavors, ethical writing demands that any ideas, data, and conclusions borrowed from others and used as the foundation of one’s own contributions to the literature, be properly acknowledged. The specific manner in which we make such acknowledgement may vary depending on the context and even on the discipline, but it often takes the form of either a footnote or a reference citation.”

This makes sense. In many educational systems kids are taught to properly site sources for information, which extends to ideas within the scientific community. If you are building your thesis on cancer research upon the discoveries of other researchers, they need to be referenced and cited properly (and it builds credibility for your own studies).

But how does this apply to creative writing, or indeed any creative medium? Obviously you don’t see footnotes for every source of inspiration in popular fiction across creative media, and it’s not like magical schools are banned from fiction because JK Rowling wrote a series about such a place. How do the rules of plagiarism of ideas that have a clear guideline in formal writing adapt to the creative arts?

To answer this question I am first going to turn to the modern legal system. Every country has its own set of laws regarding the protection of original works and ideas, but for the sake of ease the following is based on US laws and definitions. If you’re interested in your own country’s specific laws (and how they differ from what is stated here) I recommend a quick Google search.

Copyright is a concept that puts some (but not all) acts of plagiarism into a legal liability. It came into form as the printing press (and printed works) became more popular, but has grown significantly over the past 150 years as new technology and new ways to distribute media have come into play. As Wikipedia succinctly summarizes, “In law, copyright is the exclusive right, given to the creator of a work, to reproduce the work, usually for a limited time. Copyright protects the original expression of an idea in the form of a creative work, but not the idea itself. A copyright is subject to limitations based on public interest considerations, such as the fairuse doctrine in the United States.” This is how parody and criticism are protected, for instance.

It’s important to note that copyright protects the specifics, but not the actual idea. For instance, Marvel (and thus, Disney) have the copyright to the story of Stephen Strange, the arrogant surgeon that had a terrible car crash and went to Kamar-Taj and learned the ways of the Mystic Arts. However, if someone were to write about Trevor Baker, the arrogant baseball player that lost his arm in a car accident and went to a secret society in Japan to learn magic to become a sorcerer, there is no copyright protection. The idea is the same (and perhaps plagiarized), but there is enough difference to make it its own work.

You may note that, under that copyright definition and the current state of US law, all fanfiction are copyright infringements. Alongside that, all fanfiction can be considered a plagiarism of ideas in the eyes of some original creators. However, you’ll find that most authors, studios, and creative organizations are tolerant and sometimes encouraging of fanfiction and other fan-derived works so long as it’s not done for profit and clearly stated to be a fan-derived work (one time commissionsseem to be a grey area that most seem okay with, but something like art prints of copyrighted or trademarked characters is not something I’ve found definite rules for, and I imagine that it is also on a case by case basis; publishing written fanfiction works widely for profit is a big no for most creators). For more on this subject and how fan-derived works have fared legally, take a look at this wiki article, which mostly looks at cases within the United States but is still an interesting read. For more details about specific cases you can go to the sources linked.

You’ll note that, since copyright law does not protect ideas, that it doesn’t really fall into the scenario prompted in the original ask. The reason I bring up copyright is that it is important to recognize the differences between copyright and plagiarism.

I think Sara F Hawkins (an actual attorney, unlike me) states it best in her article about it. She has a whole list of the differences between copyright and plagiarism, but I think for the sake of this topic, this point is especially relevant to us: “Plagiarism is a violation of moral, ethical, or organization norms not laws.”

So let’s look at this case from those three viewpoints (for the sake of ease, I am using this definition to show the difference between ethics and morals. I don’t know if it’s right, but it’s useful).

Moral: The plagiarism of ideas and where it stands on a moral ground really varies from person to person. For instance, one may accuse me of plagiarizing @amethyst-noir‘s ideas with the embellished or different spins on the prompts and asks received in her inbox. However, my moral stance would be that this falls into inspiration rather than plagiarism because there is enough of my own work within these prompts. This is a stronger argument as I also have her full support (as well as the support of a couple of the anons), but even if I didn’t, I think that if you put enough of your own spin onto the base of an idea, you craft it enough to make it your own. Many, many stories follow the same general plot lines and tropes; that does not mean they are all plagiarizing each other. Furthermore, the original ask makes it sound like you, anon, did not know this story existed after crafting the outline, making the argument null. How can you plagiarize something you did not know existed? You can’t, not from a moral standpoint.

Ethical: Unfortunately this one is a bit harder and the one you seem most concerned about. There is no one culture amongst the fan fiction community, and even every fandom has its own set of different communities with their own sets of norms, leaving this not entirely possible to predict. Instead I would rather critically examine the key plot points that are the same as this writer and figure out if they are relatively common tropes or entirely too specific to each other. For instance, if there’s a kidnapping, that’s in half the fiction out there. It’s way too broad a trope to be considered an idea one can really plagiarize. However, if both your story and theirs feature a kidnapping of the same character in the same spot with the same method after a very similar series of events, then there may be more people that see the similarities between them.If you want to take precaution against overzealous fans of the other work, upon publication of your own story, you can outright mention that you found a work similar to yours well after beginning your story and that any similarities are unintentional, with a link and a positive plug to the story in particular. You could even reach out to the author themselves before publishing, but I don’t think this is necessary, especially since you are crossing over a wholly different world (which already distinguishes itself as a different piece of work in regards to the base idea in most cases).

Organization: The authority on transformative works is usually considered to be AO3. AO3 would not pull a work for very similar ideas; if that were the case, the hurt/comfort, chatroom, and E-rating categories would be much, much smaller than they are now. So no worries on that end.

I cannot predict the behavior of your reviewers, anon, and without specifics I cannot say how similar your work is to this work already published, but I hope that everything I outlined above gives you an idea of where to go from here.

I am going to end this essay of an answer with something I found in my research on this subject. I came across this fantastic article by a Jonathan Bailey about the plagiarism of ideas and how they apply in US patent law (unlike copyright law, you can patent ideas), and what it would mean for the creative space if they were applied similarly. I recommend reading the whole article, but this passage especially stood out to me:

The best thing that we can do is realize that, in the eyes of the law, the value of a creative work is in its execution, not the idea behind it. As such, we have to take it upon ourselves not only to be original, but to carry out our visions the best possible way.

I think that should be a mantra everyone working with both original and derivative works should take to heart. Supposedly every story has already been told, so we may as well just tell the stories with our own spin, in our own words, and our own specific ideas that make them distinctly ours. That is how we make them unique and memorable.

#fanfiction #fanfic #fan fiction #writing #plagiarism #copyright #ao3 #ask #answered #Anonymous #long post

21 notes · View notes

shirlleycoyle · 4 years ago

Text

The High Price of ‘Making the Numbers’ at the USPS

This article was sent on Tuesday to subscribers of The Mail, Motherboard’s pop-up newsletter about the USPS, election security, and democracy. It is the second in a multi-part series about working conditions at the USPS. Subscribe to get the next edition before it is published here, as well as exclusive articles and the paid zine.

This is Part II of a multi-part series looking at working conditions at the post office. If you missed Part I, click here.

For a brief period, it looked like the post office would finally be changing. On Valentine's Day in 1992, eight union leaders and USPS management signed the Joint Statement on Violence and Behavior in the Workplace (JSOV). Spurred by the Royal Oak shooting we covered last week, the one-page document was much more than the "thoughts and prayers" style platitudes we have since become accustomed to after a mass shooting. Instead, the JSOV declared that "grief and sympathy are not enough. Neither are ritualistic expressions of grave concern or the initiation of investigations, studies, or research projects."

The statement went on: "This is a time for a candid appraisal of our flaws and not a time for scapegoating, fingerpointing, or procrastination." It affirmed that "every employee at every level of the Postal Service should be treated at all times with dignity, respect, and fairness…'Making the numbers' is not an excuse for the abuse of anyone."

But among the missing signatories was the American Postal Workers Union, one of the biggest and most influential unions representing postal workers.

Years later, APWU Eastern Region Coordinator Mike Gallagher wrote a position paper to stewards about the continuous problem of workplace violence at the post office. He explained that his union chose not to sign because "quite frankly, we knew that the USPS would apply the principles of the Joint Statement against bargaining unit employees and not against managers." The APWU's position was this statement wouldn't change much, because the causes of workplace violence at the post office were fundamental to how it operated. Even a blanket zero-tolerance policy wouldn't change that.

Over the last few months, I have been interviewing postal workers about what it is like to work for the post office. They express a range of sentiments, from pride to gratitude to frustration and exhaustion. As I have said before, the post office is an impossibly vast and diverse organization that defies simplicity.

The most common sentiment I hear is postal workers are proud to work for the post office because it is inherently meaningful work. But they also wish it was a more humane place to work, that problems actually got fixed instead of ignored or passed along. Most of all, they wish the USPS was a place where being a good boss or being a good worker actually mattered. There is a maxim at the post office that doing your work well only gets you more work. It was a maxim 30 years ago, and it's still a maxim today.

I found the most revealing part of this reporting process came when I asked a few of the postal workers I interviewed what they thought of a 1994 Government Accountability Office study, its results succinctly summarized by the title: "U.S. Postal Service: Labor-Management Problems Persist on the Workroom Floor."

The seven postal workers from around the country who volunteered to read the study unanimously agreed the basic characterization of the postal service from 1994 is still accurate. It is an authoritarian, top-down organization in which policy is set by higher-ups who have often never done the work of sorting and delivering mail. The people actually doing the work—or even the people managing the people doing the work—have little to no say in how the work is done. There is a widespread perception that supervisors are not selected based on their management skills. As a result of the basic metrics and incentives upper management creates for both supervisors and workers, an "us vs. them" mentality between labor and management dominates daily routines.

To the question of "have things gotten better since the 'going postal' era?" I received a resounding "no."

"I cannot even begin to tell you how incredulous I was reading this," a 27-year-old mail handler at a processing and distribution facility in Oklahoma wrote in an email. "To know that my same daily complaints and laments were a problem back nearly as far as when I was born—and that they haven’t been resolved in the slightest!!—is so disheartening to me."

Another processing and distribution facility worker from the Pacific Northwest echoed similar sentiments. "That was 10 years before I started, and I have to say overall, No. It has not changed much."

Today's edition of The Mail is going to be about why so little has changed even after the rash of shootings that resulted in dozens of dead and wounded and permanently tarnished the post office's reputation. But it's important to acknowledge this is not just about the post office. Violence—both verbal and physical—in the American workplace was not a new phenomenon when Patrick Sherrill killed 14 coworkers in Edmond, Oklahoma in 1986. The U.S. workplace too often treats workers as little more than extensions of the machines they operate, measuring success and failure by "hitting the numbers," callous to what that sort of treatment does to human minds and bodies. We often think of the post office as a quintessential American institution. Unfortunately, when it comes to how it treats its workers, it is.

In 1994, two different letter carriers filed grievances against supervisors who were allegedly harassing them. The cases were consolidated into one national-level arbitration hearing in 1996. The national-level arbitration was not about the specific harassment allegations, but whether the JSOV, by then four years old, was an enforceable agreement. In other words, could a carrier file a grievance against an abusive manager for violating the JSOV and have that supervisor disciplined, transferred, or even fired? Or was the JSOV just another empty promise from management?

The JSOV itself appears to be quite clear on this question. "Let there be no mistake," the statement concluded, "that we mean what we say and we will enforce our commitment to a workplace where dignity, respect, and fairness are basic human rights, and where those who do not respect those rights are not tolerated."

But by 1996, USPS management didn't see it that way. They argued the JSOV was merely a "pledge" and did not override its right to manage the workforce as they see fit. They said the JSOV was nothing more than an effort to "send a message to stop the violence."

Just as the APWU predicted, management was using the JSOV to punish rank-and-file employees for offenses like cursing at managers while simultaneously arguing the JSOV was nothing more than a toothless document when wielded against abusive supervisors.

The arbitrator sided with labor. "The Joint Statement marked a departure from the past and pointed the way to organizational change," the arbitrator found. "This was a document that evidenced an intent to take action rather than a mere statement of opinions and predictions."

It's difficult to objectively evaluate the JSOV's effectiveness in curbing workplace violence at the post office. But the broad consensus among postal workers and union stewards I've spoken to is the JSOV is better than nothing but hasn't done much in practice.

On the one hand, there is some evidence that working conditions at the USPS have gotten better. In 2000, there were 10,553 Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) complaints filed against the USPS by employees out of a workforce of 786,516, or a rate of 1.34 percent. By 2018, the latest year for which these statistics were available, there were just 4,081 complaints out of 633,641 workers, or a rate of .64 percent, less than half what it was in 2000. But factors besides working conditions at the USPS—such as the perceived worthiness of filing complaints with the EEOC—can also impact those rates.

Likewise, grievances that went to arbitration show some tentative signs of progress. Since 1996, when the JSOV became contractually enforceable, there have been 1,195 grievances involving the National Association of Letter Carriers with a JSOV-related complaint, or about 50 per year on average, according to a copy of the grievance database reviewed by Motherboard. Of those, 611 of the complaints were denied by an arbitrator, leaving 584 cases ruled at least in part a violation of the JSOV.

But, again, this data is not capturing the whole picture. These numbers are not the total JSOV-related grievances, just those that reached arbitration for this one union. And although the years with more grievances came prior to 2000—the most was 145 rulings in JSOV cases in 1997—this is probably because workers had this new avenue to file grievances they didn't previously have, so it captures events dating back several years and conflicts that have been stewing for a while. Rulings per year gradually declined until 2008 with a low 14, before rising again to about 35 per year in recent years.

Source: NALC arbitration database obtained by Motherboard

Moreover, some of the rulings detail that postal management continues to look the other way on problem supervisors, a key issue highlighted by the Congressional investigation into the Royal Oak shooting.

For example, in 2008, an arbitrator found a supervisor in Oakland, CA had "a history of cease and desist orders…at stations throughout the Bay-View Postal District." Management was aware of these previous violations of the JSOV and the history of worker complaints against this one supervisor, but management "failed to take appropriate action." The arbitrator said the supervisor's actions of calling his employees "muthafuckers" and "bitches" was "exactly the type of work place behavior that the JSOV was intended to prevent." The arbitrator ruled the supervisor could no longer be anyone's boss, but only in the Pacific Area region.

Sometimes, the arbitrators themselves do little more than shuffle off problem supervisors to other locations. In 2009, a supervisor in Gaithersburg, MD repeatedly threatened and harassed workers, which the arbitrator found to be "abusive behavior which holds open the potential for violence." Nevertheless, the arbitrator's ruling was to reassign the supervisor to another nearby post office and receive sensitivity training.

Also in 2009, a union steward and postal supervisor in Stockton, CA got into a physical altercation when, after an increasingly escalating shouting match, the steward accused the manager of sleeping with the postmaster in order to get her job. The manager then slapped the steward, who restrained the supervisor and left. Despite the police being called and a statement taken, the supervisor received only a written warning while the steward was suspended for 21 days without pay. The arbitrator discovered this was not the first time local management had looked the other way on complaints of this particular supervisor violating the JSOV.

And these are just a few of the examples that have been documented. More often, postal workers and union officials say, violence and harassment in the workplace goes unreported as an accepted part of the job. In 2018, NALC Branch 343's newsletter succinctly summarized just how little has changed since the "Going Postal" era:

It has been my experience that seasoned carriers often times will ignore or shrug off this type of behavior because they have been exposed to it for such a long time. This speaks volumes. Many of these carriers have seen worse and nothing happened.

Why is the post office such an enduring hotbed of workplace conflict? This is a question I've asked postal workers around the country over the past few months. And the most surprising element of reporting this story, at least to me, is there is absolutely no mystery about it. Everyone knows exactly why the post office is rife with workplace conflict. It's even right there in the JSOV: "making the numbers."

Until recently, Josh Sponsler was a letter carrier in Ohio. He decided to quit the post office despite being a "career" employee with solid pay, good benefits, and a decent pension waiting for him at the end of the road. But he quit because the mounting stress and tension in the workplace took a toll on his mental health. When I asked what it was about the workplace that made it so stressful, Sponsler brought up "the 96."

The 96, officially known as Form 3996, is the form carriers have to fill out if they expect they will have to work overtime to deliver the mail that day. In the morning, when carriers show up for work, they will look over the various types of mail they have to deliver: the pre-sorted mail, the magazines and other "flats," and the packages. If they think work that day will take longer than eight hours and therefore trigger overtime, they reach for the 96.

But supervisors also have their own opinion about how many hours each route should take. The machines that pre-sort the mail automatically generate statistics about how much mail is going to each route. Those stats are then sent to supervisors each morning. Then, supervisors literally measure each route's unsorted mail with a yardstick. After plugging that number into the same software, the computer generates a final estimate for how long the mail should take to deliver.

Often, Sponsler says, the carrier's estimate will be very different from the computer's. For one, neither the computer programs nor measuring mail by the yard captures the most important factors about how long it takes to deliver mail. For example, what's the weather like? Are there mailers going to every business along the route? Every residential address? Is there road construction along the route?

And the computer's estimate is based on the regular inspection every route gets, where a postal supervisor will literally time with a stopwatch every move the carrier makes to determine how long that route "should" take. This estimate then becomes the baseline for that carrier's route estimates until the next inspection is done. But, for various reasons, that inspection may not be representative of the route year-round.

These two estimates for how long the day's mail will take to deliver is, as Sponsler put it, "the first thing that would cause tension" every day.

The tension is heightened because these estimates, multiplied by the thousands upon thousands of mail routes around the country are, in many ways, the main metric for how the modern post office functions. Supervisors are not given budgets in terms of dollars but in terms of work-hours. The more hours carriers say they'll need to finish their routes, the harder it gets for supervisors to meet their work-hour budgets, which will get them in trouble with their bosses.

The same goes for supervisors overseeing workers who don't deliver mail, such as mail handlers and other workers in processing facilities. In fact, for them it can be even worse, because they never leave the facility and are therefore constantly watched by their bosses. Throughout the JSOV grievances reviewed by Motherboard, workers report supervisors timing their bathroom breaks with stopwatches, looming over them so the workers can "feel their presence" while they work, or filing official warnings if they're too slow on a machine by a matter of seconds.

When carriers, union stewards, and post office managers talk about "making the numbers," they're talking about these numbers, the work-hour budgets. And they're also talking about the increasingly unreasonable requirements postal management puts on supervisors and postal workers alike, bringing mail to more and more delivery points every year with fewer and fewer workers, relying more and more on overtime that management consistently wants to slash. Talking to postal workers, an analogy that often comes up is that working for the post office feels like working in a pressure cooker. Everyone is being squeezed.

Reaching for the 96 has become an increasingly common occurrence. In August, the USPS Inspector General reported on the agency's soaring overtime costs which it largely attributed to "staffing challenges." Because the post office has consistently cut the number of people it employs even as it delivers to more locations, it relies on overtime to deliver all the mail every day. But, in many ways, keeping employees from filing their 96's is the most important thing a supervisor does from USPS management's perspective, because it saves the post office money.

Source: USPS OIG

There are, of course, good ways and bad ways for managers to handle this dynamic. Most postal workers I've spoken to said they've had at least one good boss who was reasonable and treated workers with respect. But, they are the exception, not the rule, because doing so requires actively ignoring or competing with the incentives put forward by their bosses.

For the not so great bosses, they have every incentive to bully workers that take longer to do the job, have routes with the greatest discrepancy between the computerized stats and the carrier's own work pace, or, as is all too often the case, just pick on someone they don't like for whatever reason. And they often do it under the guise of achieving operational efficiency, of hitting the numbers.

Day after day, week after week, month after month, this conflict by design can easily devolve into being about anything other than delivering mail. Mail carriers get frustrated and feel like they're being gaslit into doing a job that cannot be done. They get frustrated being told to do a job in a way they think will be slower while also being told to work faster. Their bosses think they're a liar for saying the work can't be done in eight hours. Supervisors tag carriers who they perceive as constantly asking for unjustified overtime as problem workers who need discipline.

This dynamic was represented in an extreme but not anomalous way in the Gaithersburg case. The supervisor testified to the arbitrator on the record that he "thinks that Carriers that apply for overtime are 'thieves.'" This view, he added, was the reason he felt empowered to harass carriers who said they would need overtime to finish their rounds. It was also backed up by his postmaster, who expressed similar sentiments.

"You just know there's a very good chance that, by filling this sheet out, you're getting into an argument about time," Sponsler said. And sometimes those arguments get out of hand.

If things haven't gotten any better at the post office, it's fair to wonder: why don't we hear about "going postal" anymore?

I put this question to Northeastern University Professor James Alan Fox, who has studied mass shootings and workplace violence since the early 1980s. He said shooting trends are more like a "general contagion," in that once they get publicized, a small group of people identify with the shooters and replicate their actions. For example, once the Edmond shooting was covered by the media in 1986, other postal workers started to think that might be a way for them to address their grievances, too. In a situation where these shooters likely saw no way out of their problems, they now had one.

But these trends pass just like any other. "There are fads in crime as there are in other aspects of life," Fox said. "Back in the 80s, the way that postal workers expressed their anger and grievance was with a gun…but that is not part of the culture now."

There is, however, a cohort of postal workers who report regularly higher job satisfaction than everyone else. They're called rural mail carriers. They do the same job as the so-called "city" carriers, even many times out of the same offices with the same supervisors, but for complex historical reasons, they fall under different salary structures. Whereas city carriers are hourly employees that get overtime for working more than eight hours in a day, rural carriers are given an annual salary to deliver the mail however long it takes. As a 1994 Government Accountability Office report put it:

"Rural carriers do not have to negotiate daily with supervisors regarding the time it will take to complete mail sorting or delivery, and their performance is not closely supervised. Rural carriers generally control their own workdays as long as all the mail is delivered on time each day."

I asked Sponsler if he thought putting everyone under the rural carrier structure would solve the workplace issue. He said he had never thought about it before, but he doubted it could ever happen because the entire organization, workers and management alike, have become too addicted to overtime. Many of the workers like the extra money and management won't hire enough people to avoid it.

Instead, he proposed different solutions, ones I had heard many times before. Abandon the autocratic management structure. Get rid of the computer metrics, or at least drastically curtail how they're used. Empower supervisors to run their post office the best way they see fit, not just follow orders from on high that apply to all the post offices in the area. They're big ideas, but not impossible ones.

Sponsler ended our interview by saying he didn't really want to quit the post office, but he had to. He liked most of the people he worked with. The carriers really do care about delivering the mail in that cheesy way you always hoped was true but never wanted to ask. It really is true, he said.

"Even with my experience, it can be a very good place to work," he assured me. But it's a far cry from making sure that experience applies to more than just a select few lucky ones with a good supervisor. "The service needs to work on a lot of stuff to get there."

The High Price of ‘Making the Numbers’ at the USPS syndicated from https://triviaqaweb.wordpress.com/feed/

0 notes

gravitascivics · 4 years ago

Text

BELIEVING WHAT ONE WANTS, PART I

[Note: From time to time, this blog issues a set of postings that summarize what the blog has been emphasizing in its previous postings. Of late, the blog has been looking at various obstacles civics educators face in teaching their subject. It’s time to post a series of such summary accounts. The advantage of such summaries is to introduce new readers to the blog and to provide a different context by which to review the blog’s various claims and arguments. This and upcoming summary postings will be preceded by this message.]

This blogger, before addressing the general challenges civics teachers face regarding political values and how they play out in the classroom, wishes to remind the reader what this blog’s goal is in the current set of postings. That goal is to provide an explanation of how a natural rights political culture affects federalist aims a teacher might hold.

So, this posting in a summary way, reviews some of the basic moral claims that a natural rights political culture promotes. To begin, part and parcel of a dominant political view is to identify what it holds to be moral when it comes to political calculations. This is especially important when the issues at hand are not so easily discerned as to what people should do on a moral basis. Those types of concerns pop up all the time and not just politicians or elected officials need to address them, but the average citizen needs to do so as well.

And when it comes to the typical situations that Americans face, two political values tend to be paramount in such calculations. That is the values of liberty and equality. It seems that these two concerns come to the fore most often among the array of issues that policy makers consider. And usually a good deal of contention characterizes those deliberations.

For example, policies over welfare or health care illustrate the point. People who support government involvement tend to cite equality as their relevant concern; while those who oppose government action look to liberty to bolster their claims. And one can divide these fights, to some degree, between those who hold natural rights positions – as in everyone is responsible for his/her own fate – and those who hold onto more communal responses that seem to count on federalist values – as in “we’re all in this together.”

Natural rights’ rationales advocate against communal responses especially, if by communal, one means government action – along with its coercive abilities. After all, government can put people in jail. They support their contentions with the belief that counts on people being responsible for their own fates and any reliance on government, among other negative consequences, undermines people meeting their responsibilities.

Another important example in which natural rights advocates repeatedly express their concerns is over government regulations of businesses. They generally argue that such government interference only hurts economic growth and, therefore, hurts everyone. This is claimed despite evidence to the contrary assuming regulations are within reasonable boundaries.[1]

On an emotional-moral level, what advocates seem to stress is the near sanctity of the individual. It is he/she whose sense of worth motivates him/her to accomplish good or even great things. One is reminded of the novel or movie, The Fountainhead,[2] originally written by Ayn Rand. In that story, the main character, Howard Roark, is brought to trial for dynamiting a building project that he designed as its architect. This designing was done surreptitiously, and the project went astray from his design. At trial, in his only statement of defense, he states he was deprived of his agreed upon basis for doing the project – that his design not be changed.

In his speech he gives probably the most cogent rationale for the natural rights view. Here is a taste of that testimony:

The basic need of the second-hander is to secure his ties with men in order to be fed. He places relations first. He declares that man exists in order to serve others. He preaches altruism.

Altruism is the doctrine which demands that man live for others and place others above self.

No man can live for another. He cannot share his spirit just as he cannot share his body. But the second-hander has used altruism as a weapon of exploitation and versed the base of mankind’s moral principles. Men have taught every precept that destroys the creator. Men have been taught dependence as a virtue.

The man who attempts to live for others is a dependent. He is a parasite in motive and makes parasites of those he serves. The relationship produces nothing but mutual corruption. It is impossible in concept. The nearest approach to it in reality – the man who lives to serve others – is the slave. If physical slavery is repulsive, how much more repulsive is the concept of servility of the spirit? The conquered slave has a vestige of honor. He has the merit of having resisted and of considering his condition evil. But the man who enslaves himself voluntarily in the name of love is the basest of creatures. He degrades the dignity of man and he degrades the conception of love. But this is essence of altruism.[3]

But as for this view as an overall bias, the point to draw is that it holds a particular sense of liberty or, as it is called, natural liberty. Succinctly, that form of liberty holds that people has the right to determine one’s values and beliefs and to be able to behave accordingly (short of interfering with others to do likewise). A “true believer” of this construct holds natural liberty as his/her ultimate or trump value. Or stated another way, for him/her, he/she could claim: “Give me liberty or give me death.”

[1]See Abhijit V. Banerjee and Esther Duflo, Good Economics for Hard Times (New York, NY: Public Affairs, 2019).

[2] Ayn Rand, The Fountainhead (Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill, 1943) AND King Vidor (director), The Fountainhead (the film), Warner Brothers, 1949.

[3] “Howard Roark’s Courtroom Speech,” Work the System, n.d., accessed September 29, 2020, https://www.workthesystem.com/getting-it/howard-roarks-courtroom-speech/ .

#natural rights view #The Fountainhead #Ayn Rand #polarization #civics educaiton #social studies

0 notes

ignis-scientia-estrogen-brigade · 7 years ago

Note

Dear ISEB. Thank you so much for all you do and the delightful Ignis art. Tell me, why do you love him so much? What made you realize he's the one? I want to know What drives your passion for this man. - curious anon

My dearest anon, thank you sincerely for the kind words regarding the quality of my work. I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again—nothing brings me more joy knowing that my Specs offerings strike a chord with the FFXV community, and I hope to continue providing enjoyable content in the future. ♡

To answer the second half of your message, in the words of everyone’s favorite strategist, “Brilliance cannot be summarized, I’m afraid.” That said, my current favorite pastime is staring at Iggy’s exposed nipple proclaiming my love for Best Boy™, so I’ll do my best to articulate what it is about Ignis Scientia that has captivated me almost from the start.

If one were to do some digging, they would find this series of tweets I published around the time I started playing FFXV:

According to the date of the first tweet, I began my initial playthrough on February 4th, 2017. The following tweet is dated for February 5th, 2017; based on the thoroughly unscientific evidence I have provided here, I conclude it took me roughly 24 hours to determine that the strategist was my “boyfrand” and that—unbeknownst to me at the time—I would turn into the flaming pile of Ignis trash you have all come to know.

It’s hard to say what it was about him that caught my attention; perhaps it was his accent that set him apart from the rest of the bros, or maybe I simply have a thing for tall, skinny men wearing glasses and nice clothes. Whatever the case, I began to gravitate toward him without even realizing it, picking up on the subtle nuances of his mannerisms (like the gentlemanly way he crosses his legs rather than manspreading coughgladiocough) and laughing aloud at his savage quips.

What I can tell you, my beloved anon, is that my eternal esteem for the royal advisor became etched in stone following the events of Chapter 10. Unlike Gladio or Prompto, Ignis (in my personal opinion) is the only other character save Noct who has a complete story arc from beginning to end; his fall from grace in Altissia resulted in him hitting rock-bottom, only to overcome his adversity like a phoenix rising from the ashes and prove himself even more worthy a Crownsguard than he was before. His loyalty to his king is unparalleled, his sacrifice for love of crown an altruism above all measure, and his final words to Noctis—Godspeed and take care, Majesty—would’ve made my heart burst and my ovaries explode regardless of his physical attributes.

I actually think I summarized my love for Ignis quite succinctly in my Author Bio, which I’ll post here for your convenience. I hope it sheds a bit more light into the exaltation I feel for everyone’s favorite strategist:

The beginning of Chapter 10 absolutely gutted me—perhaps even moreso than the ending—and it was only then that I realized that Ignis was the real hero of the story. Because it was not Gladio or Prompto who was by Noctis’ side when he awoke following the Hydraean catastrophe, but Ignis; it was not Gladio or Prompto who delivered the devastating news to Noct that his betrothed had perished, but Ignis—the man who brushed off his resulting blindness as nothing more than a small sacrifice. It was Ignis who made sure his friends were properly fed day in and day out, Ignis who drove the Regalia from Galdin Quay to the Vesperpool and back again for me twenty times or more, Ignis who held the brotherhood together when tensions were high and their bonds were frayed nearly beyond repair. Ignis knew just when to hold Gladiolus back and just when to give Noctis the push he needed to fulfill his destiny, and he did it all without dragging anyone down with him when he couldn’t even see what the hell was in front of him.

#final fantasy xv #ignis scientia

70 notes · View notes

blazardragon · 7 years ago

Note

What is your favorite thing about the Asano family?

Hi anon! I like the two for very different reasons. Imanaged not to write a whole a book about why I love them, but trust me,there’s more reasons than what wrote. I’m putting this under a read more since there’s stuff about myself included (mostly on the Gakuho portion) and Idon’t know how many people actually want to learn more about me.

I like them both for a lot of reasons, but I’m going tomaintain my focus on why I love these two more than every other character (exceptKorosensei. I love him a lot, too). I mean, I like that they’re hardworking andcompetitive, but there’s a lot of characters who are like that. I appreciateGakushuu’s straightforwardness to the point of squareness because those aretraits I share myself, but there are plenty of other square characters, too. Ithink Gakuho’s playfulness is cute, but there are many other characters wholove to joke around and tease. Plenty of characters are ‘likeable’. Whathappened is that there were points in the series where the two dropkicked me inthe heart so hard that they’ve left permanent marks :’D

First of all, I’ll dote over Gakushuu a bit since explainingwhy I like him is easier to summarize. To be frank, I didn’t like him at first.I didn’t hate him, but he seemed like a mini-boss who Class E simply needed toeither completely crush or convert to their side before getting to the bigboss, so my impression of him was that he would be a mediocre character devoidof individuality. However, he wasn’t completely crushed by 3-E, nor did hecompletely convert to their side. After all their battles, he remained theleader of his own group, defending his own values while still respecting thestrength of 3-E. Ultimately, I think that sends a more powerful message thanhim simply becoming one of them. Not everyone needs to be on the same team toget along and respect each other.

I must also mention how responsible he is. His methods areshady at times, but he’s genuinely trying to be a good leader, and I think thathelps separate him from other prideful rival characters I’ve seen. He’s notjust thinking about himself and his values, but how it affects the peoplearound him. He was even willing to swallow his ego and ask 3-E for help whenhis classmates were at risk. I cannottell you how much my respect for him grew after seeing scenes like these andcoming to realize just how resolute he is:

There are very few characters as proud as he is that havethe internal fortitude to honestly ask for help, so he’s a character I don’tmind fawning over.

The reasons I like Gakuho are even harder to articulatesuccinctly because it’s kind of messy. At the most basic level, he’s my copingmechanism. I like that he was a kind person who went crazy in a way I can identify with. In my attempts to usemy successes to shield myself and the people I love from injustice and cruelty,I ended up developing an obsession with perfection that ultimately developedinto deep-seated anxiety. The level of unyielding focus such a mentality gaveme was helpful at first. By most measures, I was enormously successful. I was aPresidential Scholar Candidate, a National Merit Scholar, and I even got a fullscholarship at a good college. The only problem was that I was often nervousand miserable. Scoring well on tests doesn’t mean much when you find yourselfunable to connect with other people because your anxiety is giving youdepression-like symptoms. This might sound nuts, but I really liked these partsof the manga:

Because goddamn, I have never seen such an accuratedepiction of my own anxieties. That’s the monster I’ve been struggling with. Itattacks me for the silliest of shortcomings and commands me to erase thembefore someone uses my shortcomings to screw me over. I’ve never seen a character describe losingin such visceral terms, and the fact that there was a character describing theway I felt was honestly cathartic.

However, the catharsis didn’t stop there. It was clear to methat he would rather blow his face up than ever back down on what he hasconvinced himself to believe (I had actually said this long before chapter 126.To think he’d actually try blowing himself up!). I thought he’d continue on hispath until it killed him. Instead, he listened to Korosensei. He relaxed and forgavehimself for his shortcomings, making him finally able to see the good in Korosensei,3-E, and his fantastic son. The torture of himself and others stopped. Ultimately,what makes his character so special to me is that even when my anxieties blindme, he’s a character I can still see myself in. He’s even worse than me, and ifhe can relax and open his eyes to the good around him,then I sure can, too. I’m starting to actually connect with people a little nowthat I have more control over my mentality, so that’s pretty exciting.

Consequently, I’m deeply in love with the idea of himachieving happiness, so I’m stuck in fandom hell drawing my deplorable favewith his amazing son. I’ll take fandom hell over the previous hell I was in anyday of the week, though.

17 notes · View notes