#i don't even have a problem with these movies being made just how the politicians keep on using them to further their own narratives

[sunshineindark]

.

[memientom0ri]

Analyzing the metaphorical connection between Squid Game/Round 6 and the movie Parasite.

Before we begin, it is important to know that these two films are different metaphors for social inequality in South Korea; a social factor that is caused by:

• Gender discrimination: women receive 36% less than men;

• Racial inequality: immigrants face difficulties.

• School bullying: 15% of students report it.

• Stress and mental health problems.

Now let's analyze the metaphors of the two works and how they resemble each other, despite the different ways in which criticism is portrayed in both.

SQUID GAME:

The metaphor in the form of social criticism shows us how human beings subject themselves to absurd situations when there is no other option, and how those above the lower class have control over that class and over society (politicians, millionaires, businessmen, among other important positions).

Here are the points I gathered to write my review:

• Games portray the need, fear about society and (de)valuation of life. Players both value and devalue their lives as they choose to continue playing, even when they see people die, because the combination of the need for money + greed (this greed that equals the lower class to the upper class, showing us that some of those who are above were also inferior), does not make them want to stop because the world out there will humiliate them, devalue them and kill them little by little, just as it happens in the game.

• No matter how superior you think you are to someone, whether it's due to intellectual, social or racial level, within the game everyone is humiliating themselves equally because they need the same thing: money (representing not only the literal money that the lower class needs, but also social validation, the minimum of respect, to be taken seriously).

• The real world is no different from the game: politics controls society as the boss and guards control the game; work (or lack thereof), represented by sadistic games, is necessary to obtain money and social validation.

• Bad people are just as sadistic as the controllers of society and the game. Since, in both seasons, bad people were responsible for sowing chaos among the players, killing each other before the games even started. People in society don't care if you need it as much as they do (even if they are in the same social class as you), they will walk all over you if they have the opportunity.

The sadism of the upper class.

The controllers watch the players kill each other and are killed during the games with class and tranquility, not lifting a finger to help. The villainy of the series represents how those above do nothing to change (even though they could),because they don't want to give up their money, because they don't care, because they've been consumed by greed for a long time.

• We are > always < being controlled by someone above us.

In both Season 1 and Season 2 we see 456 approaching and becoming attached to Player 001 (the first being the old man, and the second being Inho), both Bosses of the game infiltrated among the lower class. I observed this detail as a suggestion that there will ALWAYS be someone above controlling those below, even people in our daily lives. It is unconscious, but it is a form of submission; we obey those above us because it is moral to follow the rules. From teachers above students, parents above children, to bosses above employees and politicians above citizens.

I am passionate about the way film directors manage to fit these criticisms in such creative metaphors. It's like in The Matrix; which suggests that we all live in a control system, with the metaphor of Artificial Intelligence. It's so different from Squid Game, but at the same time the same.

In 2022, Lee Jung-Jae won the Emmy for Outstanding Lead Actor for Squid Game. The series received 14 nominations in total and won 6 (including Best Director).

Lee Jung-Jae made history by becoming the first Asian man to win this award.

PARASITE:

The metaphor here is less "fantastical" than in Round 6, leaning towards the more realistic side of the critique.

A poor family is hired to work in the house of a rich family, but it is not as simple as it seems. Tired of extreme poverty and a difficult life, The family devises a plan to gradually infiltrate the wealthy family one by one, until they are all working in the house.

They begin to take over the wealthy family's house as time goes by, but the film wanders through situations where social criticism masterfully made by Bong Jon-Hoo, it surprises and terrifies us in the face of such inequality.

The place where the poor family lives is well below the streets above, and they have to go down very long stairs to get there (it is interesting because it metaphorically shows how the lower class is so far below, that they live in a place where the sun barely touches).

At a certain point in the film, the poor family finds a man in a terrible situation, living hidden below the house of the rich family (once again, there is always someone below, even below the lower class. It can always get worse), and when they find this man, the mother of the poor family does not even listen to him, picks up the phone and says she is going to call the police; this scene suggests a lack of empathy that can be present even in the most needy. She did not even think that she herself could be in that man's place if she had not gotten a job in the house of the rich; she forgot that she is also inferior, but, as I said, there will always be someone worse off; and that is when people feel superior, even knowing that they are not.

Just like in Squid Game, in Parasite we see social inequality represented in two uncomfortable, different but equal ways.

Players vs. Bosses / Poor vs. Rich = Us (society, lower class) vs. Them (politics, industries, corporations, digital influences, upper class)

Below = Players / Poor family

Above = Bosses (001, guards) / Rich family

Metaphor: poverty, financial need/validation/respect = Games / Job in the rich house

Metaphor: politics, industries, companies, millionaires = Boss/001/guards / Rich family

The series and film have been widely awarded and recognized for their metaphorical perfection and cinematic work.

In 2020, Bong Jon-Hoo won the Oscar for Best Director, Best Film, Best International Feature Film and Best Original Screenplay for Parasite.

There is a lot of xenophobia behind the industries, so it is important to remember and highlight the victory of these great artists. Korean cinema is incredible, but it is undervalued.

[yournewlodger]

I think the self-built criminal empire "drag yourself up by the bootstraps" ification of Oswald Cobblepot is indicative of a larger problem with Batman that refuses to address that hey, maybe billionaire politicians who hoard all the wealth with a refusal to relate to or in any way help the less fortunate, are bad maybe. Like of course the Penguin is a self-made criminal immigrant mob boss, because these days you can only be a Batman villain if you are 1.) Mentally Ill or 2.) An Immigrant. And I'm not saying there's anything wrong with characters being immigrants. Before you say "how dare you piss on the poor" please understand I'm talking about intent when you see these characters always presented as villains.

And I'm all for reimagining characters for the modern lens, and I fully understand the inherent problematic nature of a character like The Penguin, and maybe I will be Bobo the Fool when The Penguin (the show) comes out, but I think reframing the Penguin as something out of The Godfather severely misses the point. Not only because never more have I wanted superhero media to critique billionaire criminal politicians running for public office (historically, the Penguin's whole bit), but because we don't need the Penguin to be something out of The Godfather. We have someone for that already. And clearly they know that. Because his name is Carmine Falcone.

I think that this notion that the only crime in Gotham City has to be drugs, prostitution, human trafficking, and domestic terrorism severely misunderstands the inherent whimsical nature of superheroes, and historically the Penguin. I mean we are circlejerking into infinity a self-hatred in superhero media. His name isn't even Oswald Cobblepot anymore. When's the last time the Penguin had an umbrella?

And here's the thing. I like Gotham (2014 - 2019). I do. But that universe at least understood that the Penguin is aesthetically ridiculous. Try as they may to present him as a threat, but he will always be a guy who calls himself Penguin.

I do think this problem started with Batman Returns. I'm not here explicitly to critique that version of the Penguin, but I do think it's where we began to lose the plot. Because once again the Penguin is presented as an underdog, a minority, an outcast. And again I ask you to think about intent when the Penguin is a villain and Batman is not. But that movie had Max Shreck to balance it out. What do we have now?

They are so, so allergic to presenting the rich as villains, because they'd be calling themselves out. Because calling the Penguin what he is, a cartoonish portrayal of a wealthy Gilded Age capitalist who preys on the less fortunate to further and further elevate his own wealth, doesn't align with their messaging, which is "billionaires are so awesome, and more importantly, infallible." The Penguin is meant to be an antithesis to Bruce Wayne, who is also generationally wealthy, but most importantly a philanthropist. Bruce Wayne is supposed to be someone who dedicates all he has to making Gotham City a better place, which also includes helping reform Gotham’s villains. But these days we see a man who more and more seems less like a hero, and more like a Penguin. Because if Bruce Wayne cared about Gotham City, really cared, beating every one of his villains to a pulp, just shy of his "no kill" quota, would be less of his focus. I mean how does a man with near unlimited resources allow institutions like Arkham Asylum to exist, let alone send his bad guys there?

And yeah, I know. The answer is the Batman mythos has turned it into The Good Place. His world is too complicated to do any real good. And yes, I know, it mirrors our world too. But why is it that the people who are pointing out that corruption, these We Live In A Society types, the villains? Why are they always the one presented as "insane" for pointing out what's right in front of them? And when's the last time Bruce Wayne did charity work, anyway? Tell me, who are we supposed to be rooting for in the end?

Anyway, the summary is this: The Penguin isn't a Capitalist anymore. The Penguin isn't even a Cobblepot anymore. Who is he? Because he isn't the Fine Feathered Fink I know. And we all know why. And personally, I'm sick of it.

[gameshowtrainwreck]

"Going Postal" by Terry Pratchett

I just don't understand the outrage being directed to those who have expressed some degree of satisfaction from the news of that United Health Care CEO getting shot. Why would his death be any more outrageous or any more unacceptable from the slow, often painful deaths endured by those at the stroke of his pen?

Frankly, the victim got off lighter than what some movies use for plotlines. It's not something I woulda done, probably not even how I'd do it (a couple of ideas, but they're assumptions that would require stuff anyone privy to the investigation might have already ruled out and i feel as if i contribute enough to the problem of online content as it is anyway), but the ruling class experiencing the same kind of terror they've been okay with allowing everybody else to endure is not something that really moves the needle for me. Frankly, I hope they never catch the shooter and the perp becomes a folk hero for the 21st century. Hell, murder ballads about the shooting are already popping up online. This shooting is reviving folk music. Nobody but family weeps for the low-born criminals dead in the gutter, why are the rest of us low-born expected to weep for an industry who has killed more than the drug cartels? Nah. They spent a lot of money on a lot of politicians to fuck us all over. As ye have sown, so shall ye reap. If a paycheck depends on abstracting people into a line item on a ledger and people end up dying because of it, then you really should consider another line of work.

"I have never laid a finger on anyone in my life, Mr Pump. I may be–– all the things you know I am, but I am not a killer! I have never so much as drawn a sword!" "No, You Have Not. But You Have Stolen, Embezzled, Defrauded And Swindled Without Discrimination, Mr Lipvig. You Have Ruined Businesses And Destroyed Jobs. When Banks Fail, It Is Seldom Bankers Who Starve. Your Actions Have Taken Money From Those Who Had Little Enough To Begin With. In A Myriad Small Ways You Have Hastened The Deaths Of Many. You Do Not Know Them. You Did Not See Them Bleed. But You Snatched Bread From Their Mouths And Tore Clothes From Their Backs. For Sport, Mr Lipvig. For Sport. For The Joy Of The Game.”

― Terry Pratchett, Going Postal

Sometimes there are people in this world who will make their best contributions to humanity on their departure. If you're afraid that might happen to you: (1) if you're letting shit get so bad in your interactions with others that somebody might take a swing at you that's probably something you should turn yourself in to the authorities over and try to plea bargain even though you can still get shanked in prison, and (2) lol why are you rich enough to work in health insurance and still fucking slumming it on tumblr? Get tae fuck with that scrub-league bullshit. Rich people are horrible fucking fanfic authors anyway, look at what's getting made in movies. (yes, golems speak by capitalizing every word of dialogue in the Discworld novels, it's something Sir Terry Pratchett did with his books and supernatural characters; Death is a character in them and speaks in small-caps without quotation marks. It's a little annoying personally, but Terry is such a good author you get used to it to the point where it feels wrong without it)

[valkyrieandstrangeridingaragorn]

A general problem the MCU has is that while they may be good at bringing up potentially interesting and complex takes on real-world issues or things that could shake up the status quo, they're not good at commitment, and usually have the issues get solved in anticlimactic fashion, whether that be by the end of the same project they were introduced in, or have them get solved offscreen.

Like, with The Falcon and the Winter Soldier, they raise a legitimate issue through bringing up the topic of how immigrants and refugees are treated. Setting aside Karli falling into the same trap as Killmonger of "villains who suddenly kill a bunch of innocent people at random because they were raising too many legitimate points, and we need the audience to not root for the", the issue is resolved through Sam effectively giving a "Do better" speech to the politicians while the deportation issue is solved offscreen.

Setting aside that they come off more like a HYDRA manifesto, the Sokovia Accords could've been the foundation for a discussion about acceptable forms of oversight for superheroes. But it really just amounted to a plot device to allow the airport battle to happen, they're pretty much forgotten once Zemo enters the picture, they're mentioned a few times in Ant-Man and the Wasp and WandaVision, and then Matt Murdock's scenes in She-Hulk: Attorney at Law reveal that the Accords were repealed offscreen.

Secret Invasion seemed to be on track to deconstruct Fury's habit of using superpowered people to help him, by having it reveal that he basically exploited alien refugees. But he doesn't actually solve that issue by the end (in fact, when it comes to defeating Gravik, he exploits G'iah having superpowers and wanting to avenge her parents to utilize her as an assassin).

I very much agree with you.

The MCU likes to bring up certain points of discussion but they seem to believe that either the audience is too stupid to understand complex storylines or they just want something easy to digest that won't upset anybody (mostly the execs).

It comes to show that while in the past the superhero movies were all about celebrating the heroes and their "otherness", nowadays we get organizations like the TVA justified by the narrative, the governments are protected and the blame is deflected towards the heroes like Bucky, or a series that could have made a fantastic story regarding Fury, Shield and their shady missions turns out to say... absolutely nothing at all.

What they did to the Flagsmashers and Karli was so utterly disgusting that I can't even begin to say how mad it made me. Hell, Secret Invasion was dealing with refugees as well (the alien-kind but, still). So why not try to connect the two somehow? We had Nick speak to Talos about racism, much in the way Sam gets to mention some of it especially when he's with Isaiah, but nothing ever comes out of it. They're short lines that can be quoted in tweets and memes but they're pointless when it comes to the story being told in the series.

And maybe that's the problem, it would seem that's all Marvel wants. It's like their "queer rep". They want something quick, short, and ambiguous that won't bother anyone too much. Probably because they're one of those who think "both sides" are equally right and wrong and so they don't want to alienate anybody.

And one of the reasons I hate this is that when it really comes to it... does the existence of heroes really change anything in the MCU universe? When it comes to external threats they're essential, but with internal affairs? They always stop the immediate threat but everything else that made it happen is left as it is (the worst offender is CW, the Accords and that damn Raft. "Oh let me break my teammates out of here but watch as I do nothing to help the other inmates or anybody else that will be sent here in the future". WTF is that?!!).

[scoobydooisadetective]

Hi. I just wanted to ask if it's possible for you guys to post the English translation of the Spanish posts? Tumblr doesn't have the translation option like X or Facebook

Hi! I'm guessing you're speaking about this post. Sure, no problem. I think it's relevant for everyone to know how long he has been in these kind of situations. I'll try to do my best w/ translation and offer some context.

Luz said in her post:

"I don't have a Twitter, I consider it an intolerant and racist world, this is the social network where Tenoch has the most bots against him, he receives a lot of hate and they generate that hate. But yesterday in a group they sent this picture, it's a publication about a radio host saying Tenoch apologized to him for being a person "without education and without ethics" according to his words.

(In the tweet: I share with you the picture when #TenochHuerta apologized to me for behaving as an uneducated being, without ethics and as the chairo without words he has always been. If I had known, I would've charged $1,800...

Note: Chairo doesn't have a translation, but it's basically derogatory way to to describe an individual who holds a far-left ideology, specifically any person who thoughtlessly defends, idolizes, and fawns over a populist politician and demagogue with an attitude similar to that of a religious fanatic.)

I thought it was weird and I found a publication made by the director Alonso Ruizapalacios in 2015 where he explains what happened that day

(full text here: https://www.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=pfbid02fkKp1ZGWvpcweaavk8e13ke4HQj2k616EPv75JrrExeEB49DUGPL7m31WJzGDqqil&id=1369494912&mibextid=Nif5oz)

"COMMERCIAL BREAK!

A few hours ago, me and Tenoch Huerta went to promote our movie GÜEROS at the radio show "Charros vs Gángsters", hosted by Jairo Calixto and some José Luis Guzmán "Miyagi" (I confess I didn't know about him until today).

Since we arrived at MVS Radio in Polanco, we saw patrols and riot policeman surrounding the radio station and preventing the production van from passing through. The driver suggested it was "because of that reporter that they are going to fire."

Despite this rarefied atmosphere, the inteview about the movie went like most interviews in radio and TV he (Tenoch) helped with in Mexico: wih cordiality, but with simple and unexciting (no preparation), but overall with the hysteria that characterizes a large amout of the communicators in our country - a kind of perpetual nervousness about not leaving even a moment of pause, to "fill the air" with whatever, with an incessant strident chatter that passes for irreverence and freshness. Despite that, we promoted our move without problem, between jokes about the Partido Verde and bestiality.

At the end of our interview, Tenoch took the floor and said: "Before we leave, I'd like to comment something in a personal capacity, I think it's necessary to have dialog to clarify the situation about the communicator Cármen Aristegui and her firing from this radio station." In that moment "Miyagi", who had not heard a single word about Güeros nor had he looked up from his iPad during our entire conversation, ordered: "Let's go on commercial break!" and it was obeyed immediately in the cabin. After a awkward painful silence, Tenoch and I realized we had finished. After a painfully awkward silence, Tenoch and I realized that we were done. We approached to say goodbye to our hosts, who barely shook our hands, without looking us in the eyes. But before leaving Miyagi told us: “We opened the microphones for something else, not so that you could continue with that…” To which Tenoch responded “We just want to know what is happening with Aristegui.” And nothing else was said.

We went out of the MVS with our heads spinning aournd, trying to understand what had just happened. And we still continue to not understand...

My interpretation: We're still trapped in this climate where communicators -even those who brag about being irreverent- fear (maybe justifiably) about their continuity in the enterprises that pay their salary. We're still living in a climate of very litte solidarity and a lot of intolerance.

Maybe "Miyagi" simply made a mistake and acted on impulse, a byproudct of the frustration from reading trolls against him since he didn't defend Cármen Aristegui. Or maybe the sushi upsetted his stomach... But what he did was censorship, it's indisputable. Turning your back on such a valid and relevant question and go on commercial break when things get awkward, in true Televisa style, was something surprising to witness live.

I don't have information to venture an absolute theory about all of this, nor to affirm that it is censorship that comes from above, or if it's rather self-censorship, a product of fear. But that there's something rotten in Denmark, I have no doubt.

While I appreciate the space that was opened to talk about our film, I deeply regret the continuation of this state of fear we live in.

I'm sorry that our communicators don't look at us in the eyes. I'm sorry there's no room for pauses. And I'm sorry there's no time to listen.

Context on who is this journalist and why this happened:

On 12 March 2015, two journalists from MVS, Daniel Lizárraga and Irving Huerta, were fired after they used the station's brand name without permission in a newly created website known as MexicoLeaks, which leaked reports on government corruption. Aristegui issued an ultimatum and threaten to quit if MVS did not reinstate her two staff members. Four days later, MVS fired Aristegui after considering that she had crossed the line for issuing an ultimatum to the MVS management.

My friend Tenoch says: My name is José Tenoch Huerta Mejía, mexican.

I love who I am, where I live and with who I live.

I don't like what's going on in my country, it's not the country I grew up in, nor the one I want to live in.

I don't understand a lot of things and as many more I'm scared about what we're living.

It hurts my soul to know that thousands are no longer hugging their families when their time had not yet come.

I wonder what's up, what can I do so everyone can be alright, the truth is I don't know but I decided to talk and ask.

I have nothing against any politician or people in power, I just want a different country.

I don't want one where we're all poor to be equals, but one where we're rich at heart, pockets and tummy to decide what to do with our time in this land.

Yersterday I asked something I needed to know, the mic was open and I asked.

Today, someone went to my house, intimidated me while hiding their face behind a brown scarf and a newspaper. They took photos of me, laughed mockingly at me and then disappeared into the hallways of the place where I live and have called home the last four years of my life.

What did I do wrong? Ask, say that I don't like any of this, thinking that we could have a better life, think?

A lot of people supports and helps me, but what about those that don't have the fortune to be visible?

I write this and I cry because I don't want to live like this, we don't deserve to live like this.

Mexico hurts my guts.

My little corner on land that gives me food and air to breath, that gives me a house and family.

I love my country, I love my people and even you, who doesn't understand we can live in a better way.

Thank you for your support, for being there and might our voices and hearts always sing.

We deserve something better.

Then, Luz adds:

What really happened was that exactly 8 years ago, in that booth, there was no freedom of speech, Tenoch tried to speak about a topic and was quickly cut off. Another account later shared that Tenoch had reported that he was being followed and photographed.

What I'm trying to say is that they have always hated him for telling them to their faces what he thinks about some topic and that makes them angry, they "can't stand it." Now that he is doing a little better, they are trying by all means to ruin his career. Tenoch himself has mentioned it in many interviews, and they have paid the media to destroy him.

I think we have to be careful, those media and haters are always aware of all the publications about him and if it is something controversial they can manipulate, they will do it, have no doubt about that, even if it is from years ago.

Do not react, do not comment or retweet, only report the publication if it has racist content. Never try to talk to them, it's not worth it. (Personal note: Please listen to this!! Especially twitter folks, since it might be counterproductive. By fighting them, you're offering them more interactions because that's how the algorithm works).

---

Hope this helped!

[skojukebox]

More cryptid/alien rankings. Even if only I read them, they must be done for posterity.

The Sandown Clown, a.k.a "All-Colors-Sam", seems like a sweet guy. His living situation probably isn't ideal, hanging out in a tin shack beside a river and calling to people with his weird little PA system, but he's also sad and pathetic in a way that makes you kinda wanna root for him? We've all had a friend like this dude. He's awkward and he's weird but he's trying his best. Can't hate him. You wanna help him if you can.

The problem is his fit, I guess. Total sweetheart, totally harmless and just wants to talk to you a little, but you're looking a little like a Garten of Banban character, brother. Still, there's potential; get him to come out of his (clown-shaped) shell a little and maybe walk him through a makeover and you might just have a diamond in the rough here. 6/10

The Jersey Devil... I dunno, we're getting a little bit too much on the pet side of things here. On one hand, he is at least... Partly human? At least, that's how the story goes. Actually, speaking of his story, is it just me or is it really messed up? His mom sarcastically goes "let this next child be the devil" because she's sick of having kids, and god is just like "okay"? And stuffs a camel-bat-giraffe inside of her that I assume instagibs her on the way out? Dick move, christian god. Real rough home life this little dude had.

Still, I dunno. Just look at him. I feel like if he did a 23andme it would come back like 5% human or something. This is the kind of cryptid you ride around on and go on adventures with. Maybe he talks to you in a very silly voice, too? But no smooching is gonna happen in the Pine Barrens, at least not with this fella. 1/10

Spring-heeled Jack's got a kind of swag. Look at this dude! Tight ass pants? Check. Crazy cape? Check. Guy's got a feather in his weird helmet. You know a dude with a feather in his cap is gonna at the very least talk like Slayer from Guilty Gear. If you want an antiquated sort of gentlemanly daddy supernatural boyfriend, he's probably your best shot.

Then you dig a little and you realize at least what half of this guy did was pester women. Jumping at them and going "wee-hee-heeeee!" is one thing, but Spring-heeled Jack loved to get a little bit too touchy-feely for my taste. What a waste! You've got the looks, you've got the ups, why don't you just hang out at basketball courts and impress women with dunks if you're that down bad, dude.

This is a big case of looks not being everything. Bro plays too much. 3/10

Indrid Cold is responsible for the scariest scene in the movie version of The Mothman Prophecies, but the more you actually look into him, the more you realize he was just a very absurd and tangential part of the gigantic UFO flap that was going on in 1966. A classic example of an initially intriguing story that goes off the deep end because the person telling it really only had one idea. They always end up going on the stupid space voyage and ruining the whole thing, huh?

But real or not, is that really a face you want to see on a daily basis? He perpetually looks like he just farted and he's very excitedly waiting to see if you'll notice or not. No thanks, I'm good. 3/10

Bigfoot is time-tested, not only in staying power of his sightings, but in romantic potential. He's just kind of a chick (and dude) magnet. And how can you blame us? Look at the gentle grace, the poise. That is a pose that I have made many times when someone tries to talk to me when I am stumbling down the sidewalk hungover on my way to get a greasy gas station sandwich, which if you ask me, is probably when I am at my most beautiful.

People have been writing tender (and very un-tender) love scenes starring Bigfoot since before I was born. In 2018, politician Denver Riggleman was elected to the United States House of Representatives after it was revealed that he had in the past written Bigfoot erotica. I like to believe that the reason for this is because the people of Virginia found it imminently relatable. Somewhere, deep in our DNA, is a desire for the missing link to lift us up and hold us tenderly. 8/10

[duhragonball]

Were you aware of/do you have an opinion on the Dragonball theme park that is starting construction soon? On the one hand it seems like that Harry Potter theme park (which was a dumb idea, nobody serious cares about HP anymore), but Dragonball also isn't shitty, and Akria Toriyama didn't spend the last years of his life making sure everyone knew he was a transphobe (which J.K. Rowling is doing her best to do). Do you have a take?

I was not aware of any of this, so I don't think I have much to contribute to the conversation.

The article I just found was published only a few hours ago, so I guess this is a HOTTT scoop? Also, it looks like the thing is being built in Saudi Arabia, so I guess that's why this got announced in the middle of the night where I live. It's 3am here and I'm up early because I went to bed at 7pm and woke up around 1am.

Okay, so the Saudi connection is something I can talk about, because this sounds a lot like the same agenda that led to the WWE's infamous deal with Saudi Arabia. For those of you who aren't into pro wrestling, in 2018 WWE started putting on events in Jeddah and Riyadh. This has been controversial for several reasons, but the main sticking point is that the Saudi assassination of dissident journalist James Khashoggi took place in October 2018, a few weeks before WWE's second-ever Saudi show, Crown Jewel. The U.S. condemned the assassination, and politicians pressured WWE to call off the show, but the Kingdom paid a lot of money for the deal, and Vince McMahon only cares about himself, so they just went ahead and did the show anyway. There's other issues, but that one especially stuck in my craw, and it's why I canceled my WWE Network subscription and haven't watched their product ever since.

Basically, the Saudi government has been trying to revamp their economy to reduce dependence on the petroleum industry. The WWE deal is part of the "Saudi Vision 2030" project, which aims to increase the economic, social, and cultural diversification of the country by the end of this decade. Tourism is a big part of that plan, which is why they're paying big money for sporting events, live shows, and so on. Their plans also include a lot of political and social reforms, but this feels like an afterthought, especially to a lot of critics. For example, they announced a "Red Sea Film Festival" in 2019, but in order to put on such an event, they first had to lift a 35-year moratorium on building new movie theaters. They started allowing women to enter the King Fahd International Stadium for the first time, but that's probably just because they really wanted a packed house for these shows and concerts they're putting on.

The whole thing smacks of propaganda designed to distract the public from KSA's lousy record on human rights. When WWE was promoting their first Jeddah show, they ran a lot of video packages about Saudi Vision 2030 and talked up how cool it was that the country was seeking to modernize. Meanwhile, a lot of their roster couldn't even go to these shows for various reasons. Sami Zayn's a Syrian by descent, Noam Dar is an Israeli, and Montel Vontavious Porter is a former Muslim, so he might get executed for apostasy if he entered the country. The women's roster was a whole other thing. I think they were just left at home for the first couple of shows, and then they gradually started allowing more women to participate. And all those slick Saudi Vision video packages looked pretty hollow when James Khashoggi got murdered.

My take has been that KSA is just throwing money at their problems and trying to distract their critics. Saudi Arabia is practically synonymous with oil, and that's what made the country rich. I watched a video on this a while back, and if I remember right, they discovered oil in the 1930s and wanted to avoid getting exploited by the British and French, so they partnered with the United States. That prosperous relationship allowed Saudi Arabia to become a regional power and basically have things their way. The human rights problems were allowed to persist because they knew the U.S. would always back them up to protect their oil interests.

But over the last fifty years or so, U.S. dependence on Saudi oil has declined. See, it's not that Saudi Arabia has more crude oil than other countries. What made it so important in the petroleum industry is that Saudi crude is much easier to refine than other sources. So Saudi refineries can produce more fuel in a short span of time, which gave them a lot of leverage in that sector. But there's been a big push in the U.S. to seek out and refine more crude oil domestically, and that's cut into Saudi Arabia's prestige. Now, when rival powers like Iran start bothering Saudi Arabia, the U.S. isn't as quick to offer support, and that's why KSA is trying to figure out how to adapt to the changing times.

To be blunt, I don't know how the hell a Dragon Ball theme park helps solve any of this. If the oil revenue is on the decline, then it makes sense for a country to invest in other industries while the coffers are fuil, but now Saudi Arabia has to backtrack a lot of their draconian laws and authoritative policies to improve their public image. And they need to do it quickly, but not so quickly as to upset the conservative elements in the country.

Like, all right, let's say they open this park, and they really want people to fly in from all over the world. I know a lot of women in the Dragon Ball fandom. What kind of restrictions would they have to deal with in the park? Is there a stringent dress code? They made a big deal out of the historic first-ever women's match at one of those Crown Jewel shows, but the wrestlers had to wear black unitards under their usual ring gear. So they eased up on some rules, but you watch the show and you can tell there's still some rules in place.

I've met a lot of LBGTQ+ people in this fandom. Can they go to the Saudi Dragon Ball theme park? Can a same-sex couple hold hands as they wait in line to ride the Ginyu Force Log Flume? And I'm sure there's a guy at the General Entertainment Authority office who would assure me that it's all good, nothing to worry about, everyone is welcome, please come to the theme park and spend lots of money. But once you get there? Remember, James Khashoggi was a citizen of Saudi Arabia, and he walked into that consulate assured that everything would be cool, and then it wasn't.

You mentioned the Harry Potter theme park, and yeah, that whole franchise is a PR hot mess, but at least I don't have to ask these kinds of questions about who can go to the park without getting detained. That's the public relations mess Saudi Arabia has to clean up. At least with Harry Potter, they just have to distract people from one hateful, cranky billionaire. For most casual fans, "J.K. Rowling" is a name they barely notice in the credits. But Saudi Arabia's issues are baked into the government, laws, and history of the whole country. Reform is possible, but it isn't as simple as the propaganda makes it sound. There's a lot of damage that needs to be repaired.

I'm sorry, I kind of turned this into a rambling essay about Saudi Arabia's pivot to tourism, but for me that's the main issue here. The park might get completed and it may even do big business, but I don't think there's a lot of transparency with these projects. From what I've heard, the WWE shows in Jeddah and Riyadh don't actually make a lot of money. Much of the live crowd attends for free just to make the shows look more popular than they are, and WWE only plays along because they're getting paid handsomely for the effort. It just comes across like the country is spending lots of money to imitate a tourist destination without actually becoming one. So the Dragon Ball park looks like it's also going to be a means to an end. Someone in charge liked the idea enough to push it through, but that doesn't translate into success.

Oh, wait, I just realized: What if the park opens, then fails, and it gets abandoned? I really don't have any interest in theme parks, but abandoned theme parks kick ass. Imagine Dogpatch U.S.A, except it's Dragon Ball themed. That would be amazing. I hope I live long enough to see photos of it when it gets all old and decrepit.

[steviesbicrisis]

"if we don't like it, we make it gay" that isn't the point, though. so many other people have said this more eloquently than i can, but you can't claim "death to the author" when the author is alive and actively lobbying for the genocide of trans people in the uk and influencing (and funding, iirc) republican politicians in the states to do the same thing. if you say "fuck terfs" but then continue to engage with the franchise and ignore the multitudes of jewish and lgbt+ people telling you the reasons why you shouldn't, the reasons why this franchise is literally killing us, your trans and jewish friends/followers are going to be cautious of you. *i'm* cautious of you, now. you're not only supporting a terf by giving her engagement, but jkr is a fascist. i can't assume your response to this, and this isn't sent out of malice, but i hope you can ask yourself if a book series and nostalgia are more important than the real people being affected by the political career of its creator.

I'm going to answer this as best as possible, but please be mindful that English isn't my first language, so I might not be as eloquent or exhaustive as I could've been in my native language.

Leaving this premise aside, I say this with no malice nor desire to sound bitter/defensive: please take a step back and stop assuming stuff about me.

I don't even know where half of the things you said come from, I genuinely thought you sent this ask to the wrong person until I read the "fuck terfs" part.

"continue to engage with the franchise" how am I doing this? I have 1 word associated with it, that's it. Do you see me promoting the books or the movies? do I reblog stuff about the franchise? Do I go around showing anything related to this? I've stopped giving money to that author the moment I found out what she stands for. I have one post related to the franchise before I knew how big of a deal it was to make fan-related content (I thought it was okay to still go on with stuff she doesn't get money from), which I decided to not continue writing it the moment I understood it might've been hurtful to someone.

You also assume I don't listen to fellow friends/followers. The thing is, you don't know me, this is Tumblr, I do not show everything about me in my blog. I have lgbtq sources I go to inform myself on how to approach topics that interest the community but not me personally because I wanna be supportive. You also have to understand that I get my information mainly from Italian resources and the approach on the topic might be different. This is not me speaking for the Italian trans community, obviously, but they seem to not really care if you engage with fanmade content, while I see in the "internet world" trans creators who don't accept fanmade as well and some do. I simply don't know where I stand but in the meantime, I'm not engaging even with fanmade stuff just to be safe.

All of this to say, I have no problem admitting that I don't know what I should do about fan-made related content because I tried to understand but with the mixed up opinions I simply don't know. Me not knowing translates to me engaging with any content until I understand better.

I'm trying really hard to not see malice in your words to be honest, since you've been assuming so much stuff about me. Everything else you touched upon it doesn't apply to me (like having nostalgia about the books, I never once said anything like that).

All of this being said, I am sorry to know that people are cautious about me. I hope you can understand that this blog is supposed to be a happy place to talk about Stranger Things and have a nice break from chaotic everyday life and I'm really saddened to know that it isn't as lighthearted as I thought.

To the people who were disappointed/had hard feelings after reading my bio, I am sorry. I mean it, I would never write something anywhere with the intention of hurting everyone.

To anyone who reads this, I hope you don't see me in a bad light after what this anon wrote and my response, I'm trying to handle this situation the best I can and be mindful of everyone's feelings. I am far from perfect but I am trying.

(I'm leaving the bio as it is if people wanna check it out after reading this but I'm going to change it after a little while.)

[phoenixlionme]

If you disagree with me, fine. But do not insult me in any shape or form. You want your opinions respected, then respect mine.

I wanted to give my personal two cents on both sides of the argument regarding the whole "woke" media. Personally, I feel both sides take it too far. And below I will give my reasons. But first I want to educate that the term "woke" was coined by the Black community to have other people in said community be aware of social injustices; it was supposed to be about vigilance. And somehow it got turned into an insult (mainly by the more conservative groups, even politicians), with many not being able to define it and thinking it's the end of all humanity. Look, humans have more important and urgent things to deal with than stupid culture wars and it be nice if said politicians got that but they don't. And that's the end of that, now I will begin my thoughts.

Anti: Just because something has diversity in it doesn't mean it's "woke". And (like I stated in the above paragraph) I don't think you can even honestly define it. Most people in these groups take things out of context in some moments to make your point. And I strongly believe that it's just performative outrage meant to get clicks so you can get money. You get bent out of shape if you see very brief political stuff (i.e., BLM) if that said stuff is opposite to your liking. You claim not to be bigoted but your content is mainly dragging down or outage porn over women, minorities, and the LGBT. You call the other side sensitive but look at your actions. Not to mention, you cherrypick any shows/movies that did fail with this "woke" content in order to provide "evidence". Getting some type of sick glee at watching it fail. You make some valid critiques over the problems with race bending and gender swapping but proceed to attack the creators and actors for essentially a fictional piece of work. Also, quit being an asshole to someone who genuinely states how seeing someone on screen who looks like them made them feel seen; it's not about them saying they relate to someone only because of surface level feature. It's about seeing someone who is like them in some way (race, sexuality, gender, etc.) who isn't made into a joke, criminal, sacrificial lamb, or diversity checklist. They are happy to see someone who looks like them in a role that they often don't see them in, and are written with respect and nuance. You don't get it, fine but don't be an asshole.

Pro: Diversity can't be the ONLY reason to watch a show and/or movie. There has to be good storytelling, characterization, plot, pacing, etc. to draw the audience in. Also, raceswaps and genderbends are (in my opinion) not great diversity examples. While I won't mind a few selections it's mainly for the former and still very limited. People of underrepresented groups should get original stories. And while it's okay to discuss social injustices in the work, you gotta do your research on it and not just hearsay from Twitter. You have to be careful and thorough thought into these moments and let it happen organically. And bragging to audiences about how inclusive you are makes you look performative especially when you start canceling actual good shows with great diversity. Also if you want to empower certain groups then given them actual stories from a variety of genres where they are fleshed out and given a personality. If they just show up mention their sexuality, race, and/or gender in some way with nothing else about them as a character it comes across as pandering.

Middle: Diversity and good stories EXIST. The Owl House, Arcane, Carmen Sandiego 2019, The Old Guard, Disney's original Mulan, Black Panther, ATLA/TLOK, Never Have I Ever,Everything Everywhere All At Once, Power Rangers, Steven Universe, The Dragon Prince, Star Trek, Harley Quinn TV series, Into the Spiderverse, Craig of the Creek, Dead End Paranormal Park, Brooklyn 99, Love Simon/Love Victor, Amphibia, Captain Planet, Dreamwork's She-Ra, Fullmetal Alchemsist, Paper Girls, Moana, DuckTales 2017, etc. They aren't mutually exclusive.

To summarize: Good storytelling can have diverse casts, people from underrepresented groups should get original stories instead of rehashed movies/series, fans are free to critique artwork and can offer valid criticisms but there are some "fans" who will behind the term "woke" to hide how they genuinely don't like a story simply because of their own bigotry (and might be profiting off of outrage porn). Everyone's entitled to their opinion but no entitled to be bullying, mean-spirited assholes.

[jalopyroger]

im sorry, this is not news, but two rich celebrities creating a film (Chris Paul, Billie Eilish, They're Trying to Kill Us, 2024) about cultural distortion today, what "keeps us sick", is fucking maniacal because they're part of the issue and their lack of self-awareness poses straight up as self-obsession. There's barely even, like, a pretty plastic sheet of rhetoric covering the truth anymore that can protect these people (name any given celebrity, politician, etc.) that benefit from the downfall of society from being perceived as they actually are, which are thick, out of touch, narcissistic cash cows for the capitalists that seek to literally destroy everyone and everything. I have not seen this film, I might click around in it to see more of what its about, but i really don't feel like i have to. i have better ways to spend 1:45min.

p.s. i feel like all the necessary voices in politics, social media, even art spaces have all been fucking snuffed out by the selfish royalistic self-righteous pompous pretentious shady slithery animals that believe they are civilized enough to interact with a society much less "own" it (ie. ppl in government, the soon-to-be oligarch, etc.), so that what we're left with is the garbage "entertainment" like that and pretty much everything else that is getting published in this era, putting messages into your brain that things are not what they seem, that you can and should trust and affiliate with certain individuals, for no other reasoning besides the fact that you should. they're good. you like them. your friends like them. they play and prey on people's animalistic tendencies, the biology of the brain, to inflict psyops on each individual in a society through music, ads, movies, tv shows, everything, because they can. and i have no idea what to do about this happening in the world, but i would like at least to gather a public understanding so we can genuinely, peacefully, collectively, decide what to do next.

this is bigger than this party or that party, this jurisdiction or that. we should all understand that by now none of that shit matters. we are all made of the common love that creates this one humanity, and the sheer volume of at least attempting to understand this, each and every person for themselves, creates a cohesive, omnipotent voice screaming the names of Justice, Redemption, and Reclaiming Our (Scorched) Earth from the highest mountaintops, a signal no selfish asshole can ignore, for he will know his reign has ended, as it is impossible to continue.

thank you.

<3<3

edit: scrolling down on these youtube comments i can see that the film is primarily about where food comes from and how to stay healthy by going plant-based i think, which although i mostly agree with, it leaves a metallic, greedy, capitalistic taste in my mouth because there are better ways to put out an "educational" film as a star with any resource imaginable at hand. "going plant-based" doesn't necessarily solve the problems that caused the malnutrition in this country; i see the point of the film is that, if everyone went plant-based we would not have such an oppressive food industry in this country for our wallets, waistlines, family's health, and the humane treatment of animals. but, i say good luck getting "everyone" to do anything. i know this defies my previous point in the above paragraph, but i purposefully didn't write whether or not i think it would be possible; i just retain hope that it is, because you simply cannot convict the future of anything until it appears. humanity recognizing itself is the only way i see Light returning to this era, so i hold onto hope for that day, but Billie and the basketball guy put out an unnecessary film, because animal products = bad has been a popular notion since the nineties. we're not really getting anywhere.

damn, i'm so tired of fluff. i really want reality to stake this place out. we have such a strange, misshapen attachment to the Powers That Be, and it screams Stockholm syndrome. i miss when life was simpler, but we will never, ever, be able to go back. there is only up from here.

you gotta believe that, or the sun will never shine (its your perception).

ok bye, fr this time

love u

[shivo-research-assistant]

Talking about Evil is Impossible these days

My fantasy world, the Rings of Meropis, truly is a vehicle to couch my ideas, thoughts, and notions about a few specific topics. These are issues that have plagued me for years. One of the most obvious, and most prominent, is the topic of evil. Now, as the world moves into its second arc, I am finally able to put into words and actions the "diegetic" problem of evil.

You see, I think there is a problem when discussing evil. Evil comes in many kinds with each kind needing its own tool. Beacons of good are like handymen really because to combat evil, they need to utilize an arsenal to fully exorcize evil. The evil of homelessness and the evil of a fascist dictatorship require vastly different tools to handle. Yet, there is one type of evil that is perhaps the most insidious because it is the evil, that vicious seed, that spreads in the hearts of good people and binds them in the spider's web. This is the evil that causes good to fail and curdle into the vile evil it once sought to destroy.

Cormac McCarthy, author of books like The Road, No Country for Old Men, and (maybe most importantly for this point) Blood Meridian, often discusses evil. Once he coined the term "prophets of destruction" for some of these characters. These are individuals who are the living embodiments of evil. They are twisted, irredeemable, vile beasts that seek only to level the world and its goodness. If you've read these books, you know the characters. They are the only ones that can truly give me nightmares anymore. Not because of the contents of the book but because of the reality of their being. When you've met a prophet of destruction, everything else seems so flimsy. There are wolves in the bodies of men with only the desire to destroy not because they are hungry or even because destruction makes them happy, but because they just ARE destruction.

I don't think many people truly comprehend the beings of these people. There is no reasoning with them. Because of this, there can be NO HALF MEASURES. A prophet of destruction will rip out your tongue as they're complimenting you on your wonderful diplomacy.

Yet, the problem comes when people, who haven't met one of these prophets, thinks they've found one. The easiest example is the person who shamelessly points to the evil politician of the day. No, Donald Trump, Pelosi, or any other politician is not a prophet of destruction. They aren't the type.

The problem with misidentifying these prophets is that, for people who understand that there are no half measures, they begin to take no half measures. Yet, they're using the wrong tool. When kindness and empathy leaves the heart, all other evil grows stronger. False prophets of destruction are the ones who create the asphalt to pave the road to hell. The purest of heart, who think they know the danger, are made pawns.

Diegetic sound is sound heard inside the "scene" of a movie or other piece of media. It is circumstantial and not universal to the audience. While regular sound is crisp and clear, separated from the media that it is stitched to, diegetic sound is muddy. It is not clear. It is a part of the world. The diegetic problem of evil is when we confuse one type of evil for another because we are a part of the world and not separated from it. We do not have the forty-thousand foot view to witness the problem and fully diagnose it. Our understanding of evil is only diegetic.

So how do we get around this problem?

Well first, we instill a strong sense of empathy and kindness. You need a group of people who can handle these "lesser" evils. The ones who can see a broken person and fix the problem that turned them vile, while not just snuffing out the person themself. This is a matter of knowing what tools are in the toolbox and practicing with them.

This was the intent of world arc one. Train the players, show them evil, and slowly have them reach a state where they can diagnose and treat the core problems. This has been a challenge and I do not believe they are fully there. Although, this is truthfully expected.

Now though, in world arc two, prophets of destruction begin to take center stage. What happens when there is no problem? What happens when evil stops being a person and starts being an "is?" Can people safely throw away their empathy, their compassion, and their restraint so they can take no half measures? That is yet to be seen.

I'm fascinated yet terrified to watch as people, who have grown so much, face what has felled so many good souls. Can they reach their breaking point? Can they return from the abyss?

Most examples of heroes in our media have shown that you CANNOT return. Batman doesn't kill the Joker. Yet, in some iterations, the Joker IS a prophet of destruction. There is nothing under the mask, no problem to fix, and no greater meaning. The Joker isn't a man. The Joker is. That is what makes them hellish.

In the real world, one could take no half measures against the Joker or Chigurh. You have to root them out else they will take everything from you, everything you love, and the world. Does that mean killing? No, not always. Sometimes it does but again, that requires nuance which prophets of destruction seek to kill.

The final pages of Blood Meridian involve a prophet of destruction seeking to destroy all nuance and impose a basic binary on the world. A simple yes or no choice. Yet, the world is not made of two colors and such a construction is a fallacy. To try to impose such a basic yes or no intentionally destroys all the tools one can use to destroy evil at its source. Without the other shades, evil will always exist in the dark. Because in a world made out of only black and white, there shall ALWAYS be shadow.

We cannot let that happen. Not for our own sakes but for the sakes of future generations.

Talking about evil has to include so much nuance which is a problem. However, I hope the Rings of Meropis can help expand at least my own ability to do so.

The prophets of destruction will be coming soon. I sit patiently and hope they receive no quarter from heroic hands that, in the same motion, can comfort a broken man without snapping their neck.

Let the games begin.

[turnedpalefromlackofsun]

Wanna hear my opinion on transformers one?

Warning i get overly political lmao (sorry for being disgusting)

Usually I'm a huge fan of optimus prime but this time I was not inspired by his ass. It was lackluster and I would not follow him for anything.

Which made it hard to sympathize with both sides (optimus and megatron)

Megatron was having some sort of mental breakdown but even then we was way more compelling. And it makes sense.

When has a revolution ever been peaceful? That's the reason my race is still mistreated and then gaslit about it. We know peace doesn't change anything but we still softly go "hey please remove the discrimination? No? Awe ok. We dont want to cause trouble. Please think about it? We have evidence to bring to court. Oh rejected? Ok. Have a nice day then"

A system that bad needs to be completely destroyed and then rebuilt. It's like a plastic toy. You can't just move a part and expect it to stay moved. You have to snap it off and then glue it the way you want.

I wouldn't do what megatron did. And i also wouldnt join him. but if a megatron popped up I'd silently cheer him on 🤣

Yes king, take down all those who made us the public enemy by calling us privileged while taking away our resources under the guise of righteousness. They are too good at their lies. Remove them big boss.

.....silently i think to myself in my 23 hour shift in the mines kek

Like damn orion. We did show evidence in court. Politicians are just so good they claimed we lied and we wanna be oppressed so bad, and the entire country believed it. Answer me optimus. How would we ever escape that?

Whats the guarantee sentinel couldnt do the same? His whole scheme is that he's extremely extremely charming. He can talk his way through things. He's a seasoned politician and also the devil. You think he cant cover up his ass and make it so YOURE the traitor even after the livestream

I see why it's a kids movie. It's cuz kids don't get just how dark the government can get.

Sentinel was right! He's in power so he decides what's the truth and what's not. It's a huge problem in science too. The study's results depend on which company sent the funding!! It's everywhere. The influence of money and power controls everything!!! "Science" was not left unmolested by the rich!! You think something as small as daily life can escape? You don't even know that they already have you.

Wake up Orion!! Wake up!!! Wake up!!! Wake up!!!

Open your eyes!!! You don't understand how deep the rot really runs. Sentinel literally admitted all of this to megatron when he was captured. Thats why only he knows how to exorcise your nation. The roots are infected. You have to pull out the entire tree. You can't just spare parts and hope the infection doesn't travel up FROM THE ROOTS

Babygirl... 💀 its ok I forgive orion because he's cute.

I took my bro to watch it with me (same race as me) and he's never seen transformers before and he was so mad.

Me too tbh.

And we're opposite sides of the political spectrum.

Like damn big dawg how tf did you think your people got free of the quintessons? By asking nicely? Orionnnnnnnnnnnnn *throws a rock*

That being said i swear I'm not being ungrateful to this country. It gives me so much more than anywhere else. Best country ever tbh.

And I can have all the privileges. I'm ambiguous enough that I just have to lie about my race a little bit and then I get everything. It's not bad. It's broken but also easy to scam. Thats what the smartest of our kind do.

Im just using it as an example.

so in conclusion i liked the movie. it made me feel. it is art that inspires emotion

[bobbyfiend]

People don't "deserve" things, but it's not because they don't deserve them

I guess I'm an existentialist, now. It's been a decade or two coming, but here I am. I find the basic premises of existentialism convincing, especially this really big one:

Nothing has meaning in and of itself. Thinking beings create meaning.

A beautiful waterfall isn't inherently beautiful, even though we say it that way; we find it beautiful (note: maybe not everyone does). People are not inherently good, bad, etc.; these are evaluations given to them by other people. Humans make meaning, we don't discover meaning that was already there. Because it wasn't.

This doesn't mean life is a bleak, meaningless experience[1], because we make meaning. That's what humans do. When we say "America is great" or "You are an amazing teacher" or "Room With a View is the best Merchant Ivory movie," we are expressing a meaning we make and experience. We can try to persuade others to adopt our meanings, and we can be persuaded by them to adopt theirs. This is how we get things like "justice" and "freedom" and "taxation without representation." The discussion of meanings is critical to creating a life worth living, and it never ends (welcome to the dialectic).

The hard part

When someone says, "Every human deserves [x]" (x = love, freedom, compassion, water, healthcare, safety, etc.), that is a logical problem for me, because of the stuff above.

Before anyone yells (not that anyone will read this, but just in case), please understand first that I fully agree with the end goal of those statements: we should be making sure people have access to those things. I'm not arguing with that view, I'm talking about how to understand it in a consistent way.

People don't have inherent meanings any more than rocks, nations, or political parties do. We give them the meanings. Beyonce is an amazing artist, Trump is a garbage fire disguised as a politician ... these are meanings we assign to others, or that emerge from meanings we assign to behaviors, identities, etc.

Saying a human deserves something packs a lot of meaning into that person. I don't think it makes sense to do that, so I [2] need a different way to think of this stuff--a way that respects the principle that meaning is created, not discovered.

I'm not 100% sure how to construe or talk about this, so internally I say things like "I believe, because of meanings I made or accept about humans and a bunch of other stuff, that I need to work toward humans having access to the things I consider human rights"[3]. I think making humans safe, happy, loved, healthy, etc. is a good thing, and that the human race will be better off the more we do this, so I'll try to convince others to do it. Underneath that idea are some more beliefs like "I believe making humans happy is a valuable thing to do," "I believe trying to convince others of this point of view is a valid activity," and "I believe I cannot be who I want to be unless I strive for this."

Again, I don't know quite how to say all this without saying humans "deserve" something. Here are some stabs at it, none of which really satisfy me.

"The more people working toward [x], the greater overall happiness will be, which means our world is better."

"People will be both individually and collectively happier if we work toward the happiness of others, such as by providing [x]."

"Your rationale for not striving to provide [x] to all humans regardless of identity or context is much less convincing than the rationale for providing it."

In the end, I don't think it's too important to convince others to drop the "all people deserve [x]" language, because I generally 100% agree with the push to provide [x]. We're working toward the same goals. The "deserve" frame also probably appeals to a lot more people than my kludgy attempts to express this without "deserving" in it.

Anyway, I haven't worked out quite how to conceptualize or talk about this, yet, despite being (currently) convinced that "deserving" is not it. My internal dialectic is ongoing.

---------------------------------------------------------------

[1] Maybe that's nihilism?

[2] I don't expect everyone to need this; maybe it's just me, and that's okay.

[3] Human rights aren't the same (at least from some perspectives) as humans "deserving" things; human rights can be seen as legal or moral statements about what a bunch of humans need to be doing, without saying that it's because other humans have inherent meanings that nobody made.

[thestrangestriddle]

Spoilers and thots on Grindeldore: The Movie

Beware, unfiltered spoiler content ahead, opinions, and whatnot all over the place

I should be prefacing this with the fact that the only proper horse I have in this race is the backstory of Albus and Gellert as individuals and as a collective.

As far as that went, my needs were pretty much met. Mads's and Jude's chemistry was very good, you got an actual palpable feeling between them that there is (!) a great love between them. Even without dialogue and just their expressions it's very obvious. They solved the Blood Pact in a way that made sense despite being a bit... eh at first, but sometimes the easiest way from A to B is a straight line.

I personally dont like any statements of "[insert actor] is [insert character]" bc it ends up hinging on the actor being the only one to be able to portray the character instead of it being "only" a portrayal. All things considered though, Mads was a phenomenal Grindelwald. His Gellert is a crowdpleaser who loves the audience as much as the audience loves him. He has the mischievous air of being permanently amused but also with a sense of humour that might be a little too sharp for someone. He also is a predator on the prowl, ready to lash out at any moment. Just like he went nuts with throwing lightnings at Newt and then destroying Paris on a whim, he's still quite impulsive when things don't go his way.

We get a man who is entertaining, charismatic, cunning, resourceful, and capable of being very cruel. It's beautiful to witness.

So no surprise at my highlights being any scenes with Albus and/or Gellert.

Other than that, the general problem of the movie is that it tries to be too many things at once: it tries being a political thriller, it wants to be a heist movie, it has a load of characters and at the end... it is quite messy and besides our two leaders, Jacob, and arguably Newt, they... just kinda float in the ether, barely with any meat on their bones.

I liked Theseus more than in the previous movie. Lally was cool but underutilised. Queenie's storyline was predictable but in a way that annoyed me. I could've done without Bunty, thank you very much. They tried to maintain some tension with Yusuf but of course but it fell incredibly flat and I have a hard time believing that Grindelwald ever fell for it. Grindelwald's Alliance is made up of non-characters and Vinda Rosier, and its newest addition of Anton Vogel as a corrupt politician... was too slippery a character to even make sense in his treacherous ways.

After three and a half years of radically rejecting the whole "Credence is a Dumbledore" nonsense, I found myself... accepting it. Maybe because I liked Credence more in this movie and after all these years. We still don't know how exactly he was able to communicate with Aberforth but I can tolerate that, it is what it is.

Speaking of Aberforth, I have a similar feeling to the retcon ‐ it is a retcon of him and Albus being estranged, not to mention the whole teenage father business (which... idk, I always imagined he was extremely dedicated to taking care of Ariana but Oh Well), but one where I can shrug and go "fine, I can take it or leave it".

This might be the first time the titular Fantastic Beast actually was a part of the plot in a way that didn't feel forced. I'm gonna be frank and say that the concept of "Wizard Steve Irvin and his critters" has not once tickled my interest (cue me only caring about Gay Wizards And Their Lovers To Enemies Story), so to weave it together in this way was the best possible way for me.

I still 100% believe that the movies should've focused on Dumbledore VS Grindelwald from the beginning on instead of what we got, but I'm very much in the minority. They wanted something with kid appeal and critters give that, even if these films very much don't feel like kids' movies.

TLDR; it gave me I needed wrt my niche but also there was a whole lot that couldve been done much better. If the movie was literally only about Albus and Gellert, i'd be happy as a clam.

[plsbyallmeans]

For the love of God, Please Look up - A Don't Look Up Movie Comment (4/5)

There's so much hype about this movie from the social media promotion to the stellar casting. Who wouldn't be intrigued to check this out when they have Leonardo DiCaprio, Cate Blanchett, Meryl Streep, Jennifer Lawrence, among others in their belt?

I usually have a problem with too many big-time celebrities in a movie because in my experience, big time celebrities in a movie have their own arcs, and having a number of A-listers in this movie made me wary if they will compress the story to give each artist their own story line.

In the film they didn't have to give each celebrity's character their own arc but enough to give us an idea about who they are and how their characters would end. But the main focus of this movie is on Leonardo Dicaprio and Jennifer Lawrence's characters. The other A-list celebrities play secondary.

There are two things that I love about this movie:

1.) Comedy reflecting the current events - It mirrors what's currently happening. The movie did that by exaggerating an event (in this case - a comet hitting the earth) and they showed how the media and politics would react to it. Initially, I find it comical how the two subjects reacted, thus I thought it falls under comedy. However, vis-a-vis that to reality, it makes me think how relevant it is today even though how comical it seems. Even the characters and the role they play are somewhat reflective of the kind of politicians and influential media personalities we have.

I couldn't help but wonder, would they react the same way when a comet is reported to hit the earth?

I also appreciate that they highlight how women are being treated vs men here. They showed it by how Jennifer's character got treated. She didn't get much credit and isn't celebrated when in fact her character discovered it first.

There's really a lot of element in this movie that reflects what's happening today, I don't want to mention them one by one but there's also a depiction of: corruption, cheating, social media, etc., they are brutal in showing this in the movie that you'll hardly miss them they just made it comical but it sends the message across - and as an audience I received it clearly. The movie didn't have space for ambiguities. It's very straight to the point.

2.) The ending - It's horrifying but I particularly love how the ending was shot and how meaningful it is. I found myself almost fighting back the tears. I imagined if that's happening: They are seconds away from dying - the table is shaking and they know that any moment they will be gone. Leonardo Dicaprio says, "thing is... we really...we really have everything, didn't we?"

That made me think, when we are in brink of annihilation what really matters? How could we show the people we love that we truly love them? How can we hold on to them?

I felt a sense of hopelessness and frustration that things could have been resolved if only they have a functioning government and a media that doesn't sugarcoat/manipulate the event.

In the end, I couldn't help but reflect after. This isn't just any comedy but it could possibly happen (it has a slogan on its poster that says: based on a truly possible event) and we could really die under the hands of idiots.

I think this and Children Of Men are the kind of movies that makes you think of what future we really have and how closer we are in a dystopian world regardless of how exaggerated and comical it seems.

Have Letterboxd? Let's follow each other!