#im so interested in the culture itself.. what it says about them & how they perceive themselves..

[ranticore]

i ended up not drawing the fursonias beyond sketches but here's the #canon scoop on the characters' archetypes and what furry subculture they'd be into

Bowman: his fursona would be a cool dog (mutt) who wears boardshorts and Sun's Out Guns Out tank tops with the stupid big arm holes. The art style would be Baracore and the character's name would just be Dog. He would be at every room party at every convention doing kegstands and he's not too good at drawing but gives it a shot anyway. Every character he draws has dreamworks face. Inexplicably popular until the multiple cheating scandals make the rounds on twitter. 6700 followers

Islin: one of those guys who only cares about hyper realistic art of dragons with every scale rendered up and the super elaborate ref sheets. Art style is early 2010s Realistic Anthro Dragon, character name is something like Ryvraxys. Never draws characters wearing clothes or doing modern day things. He never made it out of deviantart. Used to rp a lot but kept getting banned for god moding. His art & designs suggest an incredibly active After Dark twitter account but there exists no evidence at all on the internet that one exists

Félix: it's a twinky red fox obviously. The design is painfully generic but the lore is insanely detailed, more than you'd expect from a character who's mostly drawn in suggestive poses. Character name is his name and the art style is Lion King core. Consistently gets into the most insane gay drama at cons but somehow he never seems to be the one at fault despite always being at the devil's sacrament too. Bad at drawing but the writing is good. 436 followers after he got cancelled for saying a slur at an unmasked illegal covid party (he shared the video himself)

Jean: fursonya is a violet starling with back wings who's always dressed in a steampunk getup, with top hat. The name would be something like Faraday. Art style is realistic coloured pencils, rarely digital. He always calls them "anthros" and refuses to associate with "furries". Has a €10k realistic resin-based partial suit with hydraulic wings, is openly catty about people in "cheap" suits. 12988 followers, mostly from ppl who like the suit.

Léa: fursoney is a sexy snow leopard with a ludicrously complex spot pattern, art style is Guy Who Says Fwolf Core. The character would be called like Esmeralda or something. She writes callout posts which are always a little too gleeful in tone. 1256 followers, she's got a high turnover rate because people follow her for good art but then she fills their dashes with vague posts like "some people really need to learn that doing kegstands isn't a substitute for growing a personality 😘💅"

Senca: her fursona is a hare which is always drawn feral and with a highly symbolic art style, lots of staring eyes and illustrated thorns and moon phases. She makes merch (read: dropshipping plastic waste) and sells at artist alley frequently. Not particularly interested in suits or anything. She's blacklisted from one really popular con and nobody knows why. 630 followers.

Olivier: yeencore bark bark bark bite monster wolf type character which is like a wolf but with spikes on the tail and horns.

[butchviking]

I get what that person is saying but I don't think men experience "misogyny". I think it's related to misogyny and it's related to homophobia but can't properly be called either.

Patriarchal cultures are like a cult or religion of male supremacy, utterly obsessed with propagating themselves. That is why they control women brutally as they literally control the propagation of human life. But culturally, they are also obsessed with creating men that can make more men like themselves. There's different molds for different cultures of course and with different acceptable "types" of men even within the same culture (ie being gentle is unmanly, BUT you can be gentle if you make up for it by being violent through rhetoric and community function - think of Priests or otherwise "gentle" seeming very religious men, and how for them it's interpreted as being "dignified" in a way it wouldn't fly for other men). So while there's some room for variation, there's still a strict sort math involved for how unmanly you're allowed to be, and a strong artificial upbringing to mold boy as much as possible.

So going back. That process of molding is what she's getting at. It's not that men experience "misogyny" or that straight people experience "homophobia". Rather patriarchy needs to mold boys into men capable and willing to carry out misogyny, homophobia, and other cruelty to perpetuate itself, and they most certainly are willing to abuse boys just enough to make sure they get those results - if not by directly changing that boy, then by teaching other boys by example what sort of behavior deserves cruelty. And there's an in-built cultural anxiety at people outside of these roles, and even a panic response to them in children. This is why say, even conservative women react violently and urgently to something like their little boy wanting a butterfly face paint instead of something manly. It's a panic response!

Anyway this is just my two cents as a moid, sorry for the essay v_v ... but I think misogyny and homophpbia proper really have to be preserved to define the experiences of people who strictly do experience that on a life-long and systemic basis. But idk certainly thought provoking...

i think it relies upon one being mistaken for the other. a straight man can experience homophobia, i do know that - some guys beating on him for looking like a fag aren't going to stop when he insists "you've got it all wrong! im not actually gay!!" and i do also know that males can experience misogyny, if they're perceived as female - and that does happen to "cis" men too. a lot of ppl have called this "misdirected homophobia" & "misdirected misogyny" in the past but when i was talking abt this last i was arguing that the "misdirected" is kind of neither here nor there. it's happening, misdirected or not. they won't ever experience the full weight of those marginalisations - even the campest straight guy in the world can still marry his wife, and the most female-passing transwoman you'll ever meet will never need an abortion - but they can absolutely still experience facets.

the thing i thought was most interesting in that post was the thought of the straight teen still figuring out their sexuality & internalising the homophobia they recieve bc they think they MIGHT be gay... in a way thats still a case of one being mistaken for the other, but in an internal rather than external way. they're experiencing homophobia externally bc someone else has mistaken them for gay, and experiencing it internally bc they have mistaken themselves for gay. but some day they figure out that they're not actually gay after all - what does that experience leave behind in them? (listen to frank iero barriers to find out)

what ur talking about i would just call gender socialisation. gender is a system constructed for the purpose of misogyny, it's the framework of patriarchy, but i wouldn't argue that men experiencing negative aspects of gender socialisation & enforcement are experiencing misogyny. those are distinctly different.

[weirdmageddon]

btw please i need yall to stop taking shitty mbti tests and learn about cognitive functions. fuck sake its so hard for me to bring up the mbti because i dont wanna be dismissed about it being “stupid as fuck/its wrong” because 99.9% chance you say anything about there being a problem with it YES I ALREADY KNOW. we’re basically not even talking about the same thing. i know all the stereotypes. i know the limitations of the system in the way you probably understand it. i’m well past that. they piss me off too!

that’s why i went into the trenches, learned through trial error and experience, and came out so that i can teach others what it’s supposed to be in the right way, and i don’t want to be dismissed for that when my understanding isnt even fundamentally the same as yours. trust me i hate 16personalities and readers digest articles on the types as much as anyone else. i hate type stereotypes. i hate how watered down the system has gotten in pop culture. i completely understand why you’d be hesistant, i would be too. but trust me it’s not the same as the 4-letter E/I N/S T/F J/P dichotomy bullshit. hell i hate how watered down and stereotypical the cognitive functions themselves have become, defined based on emergent properties and not the processes themselves.

i have loads of resources that are actually good because i know what im talking about and ive been around the block saw what works what doesnt and ive curated resources, including my own knowledge, for both newcomers and existing people with an interest in typology alike. please feel free to share it! mi casa es su casa

1) a master document that has a lot of info ive been working on sporadically. covers misinformation and ways to curb it. still largely a wip and is mainly a dump of my thoughts, it’s more meta about the type system itself. but still useful for anyone to have a look at. explains what goes wrong in why public perception and understanding of it is so wanky. more broad in scope than the second document below

2) this document i made, basically a cleaner and more straight-to-the-point version of the first document that’s helpful in understanding the building blocks of jungian typology; i picked out the best sources i’ve come across that best explain the function axes and concepts at their most fundamental. i introduce them in an order that builds on itself so that it’s not as nebulous to grasp. it’s essential to understand what these things are broken down, and most people don’t which is unfortunate, and also the reason so many people treat it as a joke because yeah the way they understand it IS a joke. more narrow / in-depth with cognitive functions and actually typing.

3) my new sideblog @functionaxes where i’ll slowly be making some more posts. its a work i progress still but im in college

4) my pdb account has cool shit that gets into more specific topics you wanna check that out

i prommy it’s not goo goo fake astrology shit if you actually dive deeper below the surface. and this is coming from someone skeptical as fuck and knows why people are skeptical as fuck. what it does is gives descriptions to fundamental axes of cognition that we all experience and is supposed to be used for self-understanding and growth, makes you aware of your weaknesses and strengths and why those are your weaknesses and strengths (and the “why” is something i need). it’s not a tool to box you in, but a tool to explain what already exists. it’s a lot more flexible than you think.

it’s not the end-all-be-all of personality, the range is HUGE, for example i have the same type (INFJ) as both adolf hitler and jesus christ of nazareth. the system is not defining who you are or what your motivations are, it’s giving semantic definition to the processes of perceiving and judging the world completely separate from your motivations and attitude. you also have to consider enneagram type to serve as a complement (i also have resources for this on my pdb profile) and more to even get closer to completing a detailed profile of yourself.

anyway sorry for getting heated i’m just sick of being dismissed when i really wanna talk about it but i need people to really understand it and be on the same page with me first. i cant keep containing this special interest to myself anymore on this platform lol. ok to reblog in fact i greatly encourage it (this post may update so be sure to check the original post for any changes)

[ivi-prism]

Ivi, can you explain to me this kinda discourse between reddit and tumblr about the roleplay in hermitcraft?

Since middle of season 8 i stopped to interact with both fandoms, so am not well aware of what happening, what can a i see is what most people here on tumblr love the rp while reddit hate it.

My doubt is, if people in reddit was as annoying as some people here on tumblr with that topic.

I had a really toxic annon bothering me cause i didnt like the roleplay this season and saying i shoul leave to reddit cause i "betrayed" hermitblr. The nerve! Dear, am on tumblr before you know how to use a computer!

I wasnt really bothered with the rp thing, even if i dont like it i really get bored with it that i stopped watch their videos, but i still supports them cause hermits deserved and i know people enjoy it. But then a lot people started to harassed the hermits that doesnt participate in the roleplay that i decided to avoid the fandom at all with little exceptions.

Uf sorry for the rant, but it was stuck in me since forever and am trapped in this bored bus ride and cant see the hermit stream :c

Te enviaria una foto de doggos en compensación, pero tumblr no me deja enviar fotos

Hi Svetla!! So sorry for no immediate reply! I was watching the stream to get all the info!

But now Im here so I’ll explain the sort of beef?? I mean is not a beef is the perceived difference of fandom between both plataforms.

With the end of season 8 being so positively received on tumblr while it had mixed and more out right negative reactions on reddit it started becoming apparent that opinions where more varied than any of the sector’s thought but still they remained somewhat separated from eachother because of plataforms.

I discussed this before with Quara, but personally I believe that each site by how it works and by how present the Hermits are in each platform satisfies different needs for different fans.

Tumblr’s chaotic, collaborative culture and layout allows for more fandom-y practices like creating headcanons, creating fanon lore, creating alternate universes, etc. So it both encourages fans to interact with more fandom content as well as attract fans that would like to engage with the og content (hermit videos) and the fandom content (all the mentiones above and more)

Meanwhile Reddit with its system of upvotes and downvotes and focus on soley discussing the subject matter + the fact Hermits are directly involved with it. It attracts another demographic like the fans that are more interested purely on the content, or the tech side of it.

This two are probably influenced by demographocs as well but that is not the point.

The point is there are different expectations in each site because put simply. There are different ways to enjoy things and none is better than the other, they are simply different.

Having that in mind, the different expectations create different reactions which is what we observed happened with season 8.

My theory is that the storyline of big moon and the big lore implications excited Tumblr because that is what the fans in tumblr are expecting. After all we do much more headcanoing and derivative fan content here. We expect change, we enjoy change since being in fandom (as understood in tumblr) means you are exposed to quick variations and collaborations and changes so if you find yourself in hermitblr you are probably expecting and enjoying more the lore related changes.

Meanwhile the reddit audience that may enjoy more the reliable format of the hermits, the more hanging out vibes of it which each member doing their projects found the change to be neutral or negative (broadly speaking, no plataform specific fandom is a monolith I’m just trying to explain the general attitudes I saw and the reasons I think it might be different). Maybe it was not even the change in on itself that made reddit found season 8 jarring but simply that it was less of what they had come to expect from hermits.

And important to reiterate. Both takes are valid! Content can be enjoyed in different ways

As the hiatus settled in. It became clear Hermits where receiving most of their feedback from youtube, reddit and twitch. But it became noticeable in tumblr that the feedback that had come from reddit since many users (me included) would see the feedback on the reddit and even if not rude (hell, it was probably not even the majority that was being actively hostile) it could be harsh. And some bordered on the attitude of “oh! The HERMITS (all) DIDNT like season 8 so OBJECTIVELY I am more right than people that liked it because I didn’t like it! In fact I hated it!” (This comment has been exaggerated, is just to highly some of the thoughts in the subreddit)

Tumblr of course did not enjoy this sort of attitude as many people here did enjoy it, and claiming all Hermits hated it and that it was a mistake it was a very general statement in a more complex situation. Tumblr (at large. Not saying absolutely everyone) did appreciate the storyline, and the experimentation and the effort. -Thus why the current push for hermitblr fans to be more vocal in channels hermits see (like twitch) of their enjoyment of what the Hermits did. Not necessarily to go “no dudes we absolutely adored that with our entire souls you should only do this sort of lore now” but on an effort to let the Hermits know their experimentation was seen and appreciated.

Now to answer your question (sorry for the long ass context but it is needed to fully adress what had happened)

The anon probably saw you didn’t enjoy how season 8 turned out and probably being defensive because hey! They probably did enjoy it (and also a show of tribal mentality in humans of sticking with your group and othering the others) they went “hey you! Person that has negative opinions like the ones I have seen are shared by the reddit. Why don’t go there and leave us alone?”

Thats why the anon was asking you to leave.

Now was Reddit as toxic about it as Tumblr? Well… yes. In the sense that each plataform perceived general opinion (which is valid) emboldened people to belive “oh so we are all in agreement and we all feel like this”

Tumblr may have been toxic about the lore imposing it as the “great thing that needs to happen always and the thing missing from hermitcraft” (although I wouldn’t know myself in what way since I admit was in a bubble of fellow fans enjoying it as much as I did. So if my assumption on how toxicity in tumblr looked like are wrong, forgive me I simply don’t know).

But Reddit had also been toxic with sentiments of “Hermitcraft is superior as a vanilla series and anyone that doesn’t like it like that should shove it” “Hermitcraft is ruined for me and I don’t think I will be anticipating the next season if they do the same” (valid sentiment. Just worded harshly on a plataform the Hermits use and could have seen that comment) “Hermitcraft is NOT supposed to be an rp series. I condemn that” (as strong dislikes as someone may have about what happened Hermits should be allowed to experiment)

So…. There hasn’t been direct beef but both sides definitely choose how they felt about the event and feel about it strongly, which in turn makes individuals act in a toxic manner on both sides.

Is a situation of a very “us v them” mentality even for what isn’t really beef?? Like Tumblr simply stared and reddit and went “huh so this happened” and Reddit hasn’t really acknowledged tumblr as far as I know? So… is not beef, just differences that have enabled some people to be toxic

[thepoisonroom]

hey im thinkin about getting into standup, but im overwhelmed thinking about where to start, do you have any tips?

oh my god i do!!!! i wrote this whole thing and i'm coming back to this intro to say that it turns out i had a LOT to say so apologies for the length! and take this all with a HUGE grain of salt! i'm one person working in a very specific niche (LGBT comedy) in a weird granola-y city so my experiences are not universal. anyway:

i started as a complete beginner to like writing my own material and doing spoken performance (i was a band kid which is SO different) so if you have any experience in those areas you've already got a huge leg up anyway:

first and most obvious is take notes! i have a tiny joke notebook that i take everywhere and before that i kept notes on my phone. write down ideas you have during your day or before you fall asleep. it's an easy and organic way to acquire material without the pressure of sitting down and Being Funny On Command. having that repository of ideas in your back pocket will make it easier to sit down and prepare your set, and i find it always gives me inspiration for more material.

if you're really nervous, i'd recommend going to the open mic that you're looking at ahead of time so you can get a sense of what the crowd and vibe are like there. i do a really small lgbt open mic which is a really friendly low-pressure audience. if your town has something like that, or an open mic that advertises itself as a place for first timers, i'd recommend that. the crowd makes a HUGE difference and if you don't jive with the culture of the mic it's worth it to be picky! i really don't want you to go to some gross bro-fest and have a bad experience getting heckled by drunk randos. you deserve an audience that'll help you relax and enjoy your time onstage.

find out the standards and practices for your mic! mics have very different systems for deciding who gets to perform, but most of them involve arriving ahead of time to put your name on a list. find out when the list goes up and how it works. small mics will usually let everyone who signs up perform. big mics will sometimes choose people randomly. sometimes they'll give priority to first timers or out of towners or people the host knows. it's important to know this so you have some idea of how to get onstage, and how likely it is that you'll get a spot.

at most mics the organizer will have some way to let you know how much time you have. try to find out how they do this and how much time you'll have. all the ones i've done will show you a light when you have one minute left and then another when your time is up. try not to stress about this too much. it's usually no big deal if you're just trying out a little bit of material and wrap up early. it's also not a big deal if you're in the middle of something when you get the first light. just expect it and give yourself that remaining minute to wrap things up; you don't have to panic and cut yourself off.

it's very common for newbies to deliver their material too fast! you're nervous! we get it! but you can take pauses to think, or to let the crowd finish laughing, and that's totally great and fine! don't pressure yourself to get in every single joke you wrote down! if you pace yourself everything will land more cleanly and it'll help the audience follow your line of thought. pauses feel so scary and long when you're starting out, but i promise they're not bad and seem much shorter to the people watching than they do to you.

it's very normal to bring your joke notes onstage during an open mic, so don't sweat about memorizing all of your material. it's a place where people go to practice! on a similar note, don't worry if you forget things completely or skip something and have to add it in out of order. this is when those pauses come in handy! you can absolutely give yourself a second and then transition into a new topic. no one will mind (or notice tbh) if it's a little disjointed. again, you're practicing!

everyone has different systems for how they like to prepare and get feedback. one of my friends rehearses her sets in front of two different audiences and gets their feedback. i used to rehearse my sets in front of my ex for feedback but now i usually just make a voice recording of myself practicing that i can listen to or watch beforehand. if you can find an audience and feel comfortable letting them see a work in progress, practicing in front of someone you trust is a great way to workshop your material and get used to having an audience. even if you're practicing with a live audience, it can also be really helpful to record the whole thing so you can watch it back and have a clearer record of which parts landed and which ones need work. it can be hard to remember what you said and did, especially if you're nervous, so having that record of how it went is super helpful when you're making edits.

also this might be something that everyone in the world knows except for me a year ago, but it's very normal to try the same material repeatedly, even at the same mic. i didn't realize this and used to write an original 5-8 minutes every week but no one expects you to do that. you're there to practice and perfect material, not impress everyone with the volume of writing you do.

oh i also didn't know this but it's very acceptable to riff off of jokes that the host or comics who went before you have done in the mic. if you're into improvising this is a really easy way to cash in on the audience goodwill other people have generated. but if you're someone who prefers to memorize that's very cool too. it's not required, it's just a cheat i lean on if i'm not sure how i want to start.

this has been implicit in other stuff i've said but it's worth it to say it directly: do NOT worry if what comes out onstage is different from what you planned. it's hard to predict how you'll react to having an audience, and it's also super normal to cut or add in material depending on the vibe you're getting from the crowd.

don't worry about structuring your jokes or physical/verbal performance a certain way just because other people do it. lean into whatever makes you feel funniest and most confident! our idiosyncrasies are what make us funny! i make a lot of dumb hand gestures onstage and i laugh at my own jokes and do the same stupid voice whenever i'm speaking as someone else within a joke. that's my approach and it works for me! it's not how, like, john mulaney does it, but it's not my job to be john mulaney, it's my job to relax and express myself.

oh also like this should be obvious but remember that you're also there to be an audience member and learn from watching other people! try to be courteous and listen to everyone else! if you like people's performances and feel comfortable doing so it's nice to tell them that afterwards! standup is a solo performance but you can learn a lot from other people, and those relationships can be super helpful if you want advice or want to eventually get booked to perform for money.

sorry, i see now that some of these are really concrete and some are really esoteric. the practical tips are good as is, but i think what i'm mostly trying to say with the more esoteric stuff is this: the reason i love doing comedy with other women and LGBT people is that i think we all have such different and interesting senses of what it could look like to be funny. some people love puns and some people love impressions or storytelling or absurdism or whatever. pop culture can give us such a monolithic idea of what funny looks like but in reality it's a huge creative challenge to find new ways to be funny! try to focus on what inspires you and gives you ideas! it's about expressing yourself, so you are the ultimate arbiter of what that expression can look like.

oh also a disclaimer: especially for marginalized people, there can be a ton of pressure to use your personal experiences as joke fodder. if you're in an audience that doesn't share those identities, it can be really tempting to work overtime to make them comfortable with your perceived difference. be really mindful of your own boundaries so you don't end up feeling bled dry by something that's supposed to be fun and affirming! i do a lot of jokes about being a lesbian and being biracial, but for me it's important not to rely on homophobic or racist stereotypes to get laughs, because that's something that personally makes me uncomfortable. i talk about my mental illness a lot in standup, but there are parts i keep private even though they're funny, because they'd feel too vulnerable to share. make sure to ask yourself how you'll feel sharing your experiences with an audience.

also, a quick note for you or anyone else who's interested in standup even a little bit. PLEASE do not hesitate to hit me up, whether on anon or off anon or in the DMs, if you ever want advice or want to workshop joke ideas or need a test audience or ANYTHING. i've been unusually lucky in my experiences, and even i've been put off by other comedians' material and behavior, and the culture of the standup scene in my city. i've been really lucky that i met other LGBT comedians early on who wanted to support and mentor me, and it's really important to me to pay that forward to anyone who wants to try it out.

i'm really sorry that that was so long-winded, but i hope some of it helps! if you do end up trying standup, please message me and let me know how it goes! i'm rooting for you!!

[hungwy]

@ the 2 long fr ask v sorry anon u better read this cuz i typed a lot for u...

full ask:

full disclosure im not really sure where im going with this but i read your wall of text and i’m really curious about your worldbuilding frm a (supposedly, rip) writer perspective !!

you said that you were interested in gods that were more abstract and less anthropomorphic, so perhaps you could expand on that? it sounds like a fascinating concept because often people relate gods to humans somehow (either as all-powerful deities that somehow are capable of human-like reasoning and motivations, deities that can be Understood to a degree by regular human beings, or as concepts that people are already familiar with aka Personified Concept Of Justice or w.e), so it could be interesting to see an exploration of how human beings would relate to supernatural forces they’re not equipped to understand, whose motives and abilities are entirely outside of the scope of current human ideas about the world—humans seem to have a natural tendency to generalize and categorize things down into something they can grasp and work with, so culture evolving around trying to figure out a way to model the world in light of that could naturally breed the divergence between human ideas & Truth About Deities you mentioned.

if you think about it, a lot of things even in our “plain” universe that seemingly obeys scientific laws we’re systematically working on discovering can be pretty awe-inspiring in nature, right?? so many things are so far beyond general understanding that to the uninitiated, they can be pretty close to magic, even if there are ways to dig deeper into them and understand them more (or whatever we consider to be “understanding”). so it’s possible that in your universe the fundamenal forces governing things could be just. different? on a really core level, which naturally sends humans scrambling to make some kind of sense of things. i mean, we already kind of do, with religious explanations stepping in, so perhaps that would be more dramatic in a world where the unknowable is even more fucked and unperceivable to your human societies.

naturally, that might give more power to religion than science, if people have practical experiences that their “science” cannot explain well (maybe because it’s beyond human logic in the first place) & that religion seems to provide some kind of answer for. it might also keep the mysticism; religious belief might require some degree of dedication, which might be a risk in itself if you’re an average person playing with forces no one can properly explain yet. organized science might be struggling to catch up and maintain credibility; but at the core, it could also be that there’s nothing particularly unscientific about the source of what is perceived as magic/“gods”—just that the barrier to perceiving them in a logical and systematical manner with no spiritual aspect to it could be a lot higher, which then tempts people to go with the most accessible explanations. (again, made more tempting if your magic is powerful enough to represent some kind of real danger—framed as “displeasing the gods” or w.e, maybe—or to provide some highly desired abilities, even if their source is misunderstood by human beings thru misframing the entire concept.)

long messy rant aside, very very curious to know more about your ideas !!! do you intend magic to be some kind of old-as-time concept that human beings are slowly developing a relationship with/a deeper understanding of over the ages, where they develop their (possibly flawed) understanding of gods as well?? or is their understanding catalyzed by some specific event, presumably an interaction by said gods with society? do these “gods” have any perception of human society? pls share more if you are inclined to !! :>

(sorry if the rant was overstepping ahh i really got carried away didn’t i)

id like to preface this with i havent slept. PLEASE ask me clarifying questions

i think from a cultural perspective it would make sense for humans to anthropomorphize higher powers in order to relate to it better. even further i think (though i haven't really fleshed out the actual capabilities and motives of gods) gods would have the ability to appear to us as human or human-like. in this essay i typed completely without planning i will construct how.

i first have to consider the form or forms of divinity and how that relates to my -- ideally -- material universe. should i incorporate gods and magic as material phenomena that are observably composed of matter and energy -- or reactions of some sort of transcendent immaterial reality beyond normal human sense and reason? im sort of leaning towards that more spiritual reality. choosing that means id have to explain how incomprehensible, unknowable forces work and interact with comprehensible, study-able forces, which frankly is a lot more complex than just tossing in someone like Zeus.

so the question basically being asked is how does this divine force come to create our world? id basically have to create a whole metaphysical system. maybe i could give credence to panpsychism and say everything has sentience and subjective experience, and some vague actuation by this transcendental force began our universe. this Transcendence that shifts with eternal (but cyclical) change produces some sort of transcendental force which "peaks" as consciousness/sentience/experience (that panpsychism). (the "troughs" of this force are what we'd call other dimensions or planes, and this is where i plan for gods to reside) anyway, this consciousness is our fundamental “thing”, our atom, our quark, our light, whatever; consciousness itself IS the physical world. the shifting of this force means that our universe, too, is in constant (but cyclical) change, and has a regularity that comes with extending from one entity that allows the universe to be systematic and wholly not chaotic. im tempted here to say the Transcendence naturally promotes a balance of consciousness (= material reality) by interfering with those peaks of material reality. now im not claiming to understand the mechanisms of transcendent immaterial reality but certainly i should be able to claim that this universe is a closed system in which exchanges of transcendent force are allowed but exchanges of matter and energy (as we understand them) aren't.

we still have the problem of how we create an entity like a god, and magical forces. Remember that the transcendental force has both peaks and troughs of consciousness and therefore material reality.  Through this dualism of peak and trough (though not really a dualism… ive equated this force to a wave which means that there is GRADUAL change) I can now create two opposing realities: our universe and the antiuniverse. im basically just going to say that the realization of consciousness in the antiuniverse comes in the form of magic (=energy) and gods (=matter). just as with our universe, once you get down far enough the difference between magic/energy and gods/matter isn’t really apparent. it’s all really just a spectrum. Anyway. heres the big big big part: the troughs and peaks connect due to the nature of a wave being gradual. Our world affects theirs, theirs ours, etc. albeit not a whole lot for reasons I don’t care to think about. Matter and energy can travel into the antiuniverse and interact with magic and gods and vice-versa.

SO just gonna throw in here that like humans and rocks some gods will have more animacy than others (more magic) and will be able to purposefully and willfully travel into our universe. when they manifest they must cause some kind of eldritch psychological terror because they are a completely different realization of matter which frankly is probably impossible to comprehend. but more animate gods (more animate than humans) would be able to “correct” their forms into recognizable entities with magic, as id believe if humanity were to transcend their animacy they could rearrange their forms with energy. I think from here we can relatively easily extrapolate what gods are, provide them conscious motivations, create a hierarchy of gods and lesser supernatural entities, explain divine interference, etc etc etc. if you have any questions i can make up more answers!

NOW I can get to your points! youre indeed right that this could be “an exploration of how human beings would relate to supernatural forces they’re not equipped to understand, whose motives and abilities are entirely outside of the scope of current human ideas about the world”. in fact thats exactly underlies what religion will be about. humans wont be aware of another world at all except for a few souls who learned this secret knowledge. humans wont understand theres a massive rift between the strange occurrences that belong to our world and the even stranger occurrences invading it from the antiuniverse. everything is just sort of conflated to gods, ghosts, spirits, monsters. their experience with the physics of magic means that only gods in control of magic can really bestow any magical control to humanity (though id argue everything with consciousness has innate magical potential to some extent).  but here gods could actually be what is the equivalent to displeasement, the unsatisfaction of their intents, the disruption of their motives, etc, and have destructive reactions towards it, just as they can be pleased, satisfied, and complete (though these would just be approximations using human emotion).

[dust-tone]

Dust-Tone Interview: Sweatson Klank (fka TAKE)

art by dusq.

Sweatson Klank (formerly known as Take) is nothing short of a musical pioneer. Having been at the center of the ever-growing beats community for almost two decades now, Tom Wilson has helped engineer the creative environment that is known and loved today. You can find his discography scattered amongst nearly a dozen revered labels (including Project: Mooncircle, All City, Friends of Friends, Poo-Bah, Alpha Pup and more). He has also produced an extensive collection of official DJ mixes for beloved radio stations and collectives (BBC, dublab, BTS, Low End Theory, Brainfeeder and many more). Most important to note however is his paramount Sketchbook night which laid the foundation for the famed Low End Theory and the fertile Los Angeles beat community as a whole in the early-mid 2000′s.

While Sweatson Klank is both busy with musical projects and running the label Tone and Manor, we were fortunate enough to sit down and get his perspective on the current musical climate.

Dust-Tone: When did you first start making music and what got you interested in it? Early influences?

Sweatson Klank: I started making music when i was 13. I had a deep connection to music really early on. I got a guitar and took lessons for a year. From there on I jammed with my friends and eventually started a couple little bands in High School. I also got a bass and started playing bass a little here and there. These bands were just little garage bands where we would play parties and wherever we got invited to play, but it was good fun and I learned a lot from those experiences. When i got to college i quickly started looking for other musicians to form a band with but had trouble finding people I related to musically. Around that time I went to a huge house party off campus and really got my first taste of what a dj was truly capable of. This guy, who later became a good friend was rocking a crown of about 300 people with just turntables, records and a mixer. Mind you, this was well before cdjs or Serato. At the time is was still really special to witness a dj playing records and doing so with a technical prowess I hadn't ever seen before. I had an epiphany, that night. I watched this dj just control a crowd and they were loving it. I had been having trouble forming a new band because I had a really strong opinion of what i wanted it to sound like and others didn't seem to see eye to eye with me. I was always telling people how to play and what to play with their instruments. As you can imagine, no one really liked that hahaha. Little did i know i was a producer in the making. I had all these ideas but I wasn't capable of playing them or truly expressing them yet. So back to this party, I was shocked to see this dj setting the vibe and expressing himself through playing records. I sat there all night bugging him to let me try it. Of course, he kept saying no, get lost. Finally as it got later and he got drunker, he told me " If you want to make a fool of yourself go ahead" and handed me the headphones. I had never touched a turntable or mixer in my life, but i had been watching him do it all night. So i got up there and started flipping through his records, which i knew absolutely nothing about, they were all house records. The only record i knew was a Micheal Jackson record - " Don't Stop Till You Get Enough" so i grabbed it and somehow magically blended a perfect mix on my first try and the crowd went nuts!! Most likely because it was MJ and that song gets any party hype hahah.. So i grabbed another record i didn't know and tried again and completely train wrecked and the dj grabbed the head phones back from me and went back on. That one moment of glory though was enough to set it all off for me. The next week i was at his house begging him to teach me and practice on his turntables. Its just snowballed from there. i was hooked, started buying records, eventually got turntables, a club night, started dj'ing all over. I learned to dj playing house music but i was much more into Hip Hop and Funk and Soul. After about a year, i realized i wanted to actually make tracks and not just be a dj. So i got a drum machine, and then a sampler, and a four track and there you have it, i was on my way to doing what i still love to do today.

DT: What are you currently listening to? Does this affect the evolution of your current sound? Do you find yourself holding onto influences and themes of the past over new music tendencies or is how you make music flowing more with the changing of the times?

SK: That question is pretty difficult because I listen to so much music all the time. I really don't listen to any one style of music constantly. I love to discover old music that I didn't know. Record collecting is still one of my favorite hobbies so Im constantly finding stuff from the past that is incredibly inspiring and influential in the music i make today. I think i am much more inspired by the sounds of the past than i am the sounds of most fo todays music. As an artist, your tastes are constantly evolving, and to me thats a beautiful thing. It shows your own growth, and life is all about growing. When I am not in the studio working, i generally prefer to listen to old records. Jazz, Brazilian, African, weird electronic library records, New Age music and i love 80's Soul/R&B boogie stuff!

DT: You've been a pretty important staple in the "beat scene" for over a decade now. Low End Theory (which has now sadly come to a finale), Dublab, AllCity, Warp, Ghostly, Poobah, Project Mooncircle, even BBC and so many more love you. You are the modern hero to the independent beat maker. Do you feel like growing up on the west coast had any impact on early exposure to this musical way of thought? Able to meet the right people, get pushed in the right directions, etc?

SK: Thanks man, so nice of you. I think just having a forward thinking attitude about music and life really helped me most. Low End was a great place that helped me get noticed and meet tons of incredible people who shared similar perspectives on music. Before Low End though, we had a night called Sketchbook which was essentially an early version of all of that. Our goal was just to push the weirder left field side of hip hop and downtempo electronic music before it was actually cool. It was an uphill battle at first but but we just did it out of love for the music and a passion to play stuff no one else was playing.

DT: How has the "beats" community changed since you first entered it? Some would argue what was once a niche LA sound has spread worldwide and transformed through the different cultures. Does this influence your music?

SK: When we started doing this, it was just our own form of expression, we had no idea it would eventually grow into the "Beat Scene"  and now in turn,  people call it Lo Fi hip hop.. i just laugh. Its all good. I think there are tons of great producers out there making really interesting beats!! So Im happy to maybe have been a part of the birth of whatever the movement wants to call itself now. I think I am more in awe and influenced by the OG's than the new comers. To me everyone has one great record in them.. But to put out great music for years and years, thats a different story. That is what inspires and influences me the most. When i leave this earth, I want to leave behind a vast catalog of musical creations, regardless of if any of it was commercially successful or popular. Just like most of the records I admire most from 30-40 years ago. They were never hugely popular, but they were incredible!

DT: What is your creative process like? Do you start with the tool or from the imagination? Or both? Do you find yourself ever using traditional methods for making music or do you normally stick to the DAW? (which DAW/gear do you use?)

SK: My process really varies. Sometimes I start with a sample, other-times i just lay out a chord progression on the piano or a synth and build from there. I try to find new ways to tap into creativity so that im not bored. There is really no one single approach to making music. I use Ableton as my main DAW but I also use a ton of external instruments like synths, guitars, bass, drum machines, percussion instruments, vinyl samples.

DT: Fine Lines, your latest release from FoF Music is incredible. Did you have a specific aural goal with this album or did you just create and let the sound emerge naturally? Are you currently working on anything for the future or currently focusing more on support for your latest release? Anything exciting planned for 2019?

SK: With the 'Fine Lines' album I really wanted to create a cohesive album that embodied a specific vibe. How that vibe is perceived is up to the listener of course, but i sought out to make something that was indicative of my life during the making of these songs. In its most basic explanation its a story of growth, love, battling darkness both inner and outer and the never ending search for true happiness hahha. Yes I have a bunch of stuff slated for 2019. First off i just launched my label Tone and Manor. We just released our first compilation " All Over the Place" Vol. 1 and have Vol. 2 coming out in November.   The Tone and Manor label is a passion project of mine. I teach music production at Point Blank Music Academy and I mentor a lot of young producers and beginners and the label is a way for me to help some of them get their music out there into the often confusing music sphere. I also have a new album coming out in 2019.. Im really excited about that. For this one I am really going back to my roots. Analog synths, samples, instruments and in general a more organic vibe to the music. Its getting closed to finish and im really hyped to share it when its ready. The first single will likely come out early 2019.

DT: Do you find that switching your name brought any confusion? Do Sweatson Klank and TAKE focus on separate sounds or do they have a similar theme you aim for?

SK: Switching my name from Take to Sweatson Klank was purely for the reason that Take became increasingly impossible to find online, being that its a verb used in every other sentence. It was a bit hard at first to re-brand but im glad i did it. The sound has always been me. Its the evolution of me as an artist. If i was still TAKE the songs I've released as Sweatson Klank would be the same. It was really just a name change, not a style change. The intention hasn't changed.

DT: Please recommend something you're currently listening to, favorite place to get food in LA (are you an LA native), and a film or book if you have had time to indulge.

SK: Currently as i write this i am listening to a track from 1985 called 'Plastic Love' by a Japanese Female Soul artist named Mariya Takeuchi. The list of things i listen to could fill up 3 pages hahaha. Lets just say i listen to everything!!! I stay up on the latest hip hop, house, techno but I find more pleasure in digging through old records and discovery things from different times and countries!! Yes, I would say I am an LA native, I moved here from Paris, France when I was 5. Favorite place to eat really depends on the mood! Sushi Gen in Little Tokyo is definitely a regular in my rotation. Current read; The book of Joy by Douglas AbramsI just want thanks for taking the time to shine a light on me and my work, I hope your readers enjoy.

Sweatson Klank’s music is available direct from the artist through bandcamp: https://sweatsonklank.bandcamp.com

And his label’s discography as well: https://toneandmanor.bandcamp.com

Huge thanks to Tom Wilson for taking the time to talk with us and give a window to his world.

[tumblunni]

Its weird how much the perceptions of queer people can change throughout history

And like i'm not just talking about how widespread predjudice is and how shitty the education is, so that a trans person like me could grow up not only not knowing they were trans until age 20 but not even knowing that trans people EXISTED. And then of course there's how the perception of the word "queer" has made a rollercoaster journey from "unrelated quaint word for slightly odd" to "homophobic slur" to "reclaimed slur" to "so reclaimed that it's used as a common umbrella term by LGBTQ rights organizations and educational systems" to "ok suddenly its a slur again and we dont know if we'll be able to reclaim it this time". And then allllso there's the fuckin annoying subject of how bigots insist upon perceiving trans women as "really just gay men" or "straight men with a fetosh for dressing up", and then trans women as also being the only trans people who exist,because trans men (and lesbians) are apparantly "just women playing at it" or "lol sexy" and somehow can't really be real. Somehow even less real than the thing they already say isnt real. Seriously, wrapping my head around how bigots think is EXHAUSTING!

Aaaaanyway all of those recent issues REALLY SUCK but then they got me thinking about how bigotry was really different just ten years ago, and how fascinating (and depressing) i found it to hear about unrecogniseably different bigotry in ancient history. So uhh yeah lets ramble about that??

Random example that I only remember because I had a Big Norse Mythology Phase in high school. Back in those times it wasn't considered gay to be attracted to men. Like.. Seriously! They still had homophobic bigotry and horrifying lynchings,banishment, social ostracization and other hate crimes. It's just that their definition of who was 'one of the bad ones' and who was 'acceptable' was wildly different from what we have today. It was like.. Not about who you were attracted to but the specifics of the act itself? They uhh..literally had top and bottom predjudice. You weren't "gay" if you had sex with men, only if you were on the bottom when it happened. Because it was "natural" for a man to be the pitcher, but "womanly and deviant" to be on the receiving end and *gasp* actually enjoy it! You could somehow retain your straightness card by topping a dude and he was the only weird one for enjoying this sex you were having. Because yknow the top is just totally imagining he's fucking a woman, so its Not Gay. Somehow.

Like there's a whole poem about two guys slinging insults at each other for five pages, and one stanza is like "i totally had sex with you and that makes you gay!" Taken to ridiculous extremes where he claims the other man is SO gay that he was somehow able to get magically pregnant and have his children. Also they were monsters because why not. But (i shit you not) he adds that they werent even PARTICULARLY SCARY monsters and that proves that you are a terrible man. For giving me a bad lay. Which somehow means you are gay and I'm not.

And like I mean.. I can understand how a culture with so many all-male sailing crews would kinda have to deal with a lot of gay relationships happening, but its just so fuckin WEIRD that they managed to do it while retaining a predjudice against them! I mean the ancient greeks had a similar situation and they very notably went full acceptance to the point even the most LGBTQ-erasing scholars can't manage to paper it over. Not that they were perfect either, of course, there was a lot of societally accepted pedophilia. But then again britain's had a history of that too, plus even worse stuff... Okay im getting offtopic, thats another subject for another day.

So yeah. Weird alternate conceptualization of sexuality. And part of me wants to laugh at those bigots being so wrong, while part of me feels relieved thinking that at least half of all gay men managed to avoid predjudice compared to how common it is in our society. But then i think about how much the "i'm on top so i'm straight" thing is played off in really creepy ways in those mythological tales. Like seriously its horrible imagining some guy raping another guy as a sign of dominance and pulling the "he enjoyed it so arrest him" card. Or lovers selling out their other half to deflect suspicion from themself, like "yeah you caught us having sex but he was the gay one." It's such a weird form of bigotry to wrap my head around, i don't even know if these worst case scenarios would have happened but i'm scared to research more into the subject in case i find triggering stuff like that.

Tho i mean this is just a factoid i found in a mythology book to explain a weird diss poem, like not even an actual history book with sources ans examples. So for all I know maybe it isnt even true? *shrug* i just thought it was interesting to think about and i hope maybe i can bump into someone else who's better informed on the topic.

Oh and also LOL just to add that I totally fell in love with norse mythology cos of Loki,became a huge Loki stan, wrote stupid fix-it fics for LITERAL MYTHOLOGY where Loki was proven right and got all his dead kids back, and throughout this entire time dumb teenage me never once thought "hmm maybe i'm fascinated by the one gay and genderfluid character because i might be queer". What a dope! (Seriously internalized transphobia fucks you up...)

[pplowden]

Exaggeration and puppets

I decided to begin researching controlling exaggeration through how humans do it in performance, rather than verbally. This is because when humans perform with their bodies, it is always controlled and often exaggerated. For example in mime, exaggeration is the bases of the performance, the silence demanding more attention on the movement of the body and each movement emphasised to represent simple emotions.

I watched the animations of Jan Svankmajor, ‘Meat Love’ being one which really stood out. I found it so powerful because it had everything - birth, love and death. The fact that it is performed by two vulgar pieces of meat and its length is what exaggerates it; how can it be that two nonhuman things can explain human existence in a mere 1 minute?

In my zoom tutorial with Luke it was suggested I looked at Paul Klee hand puppets. I was not taken by their aesthetic but was drawn to the idea of puppets to explore exaggeration. Citing Chitty Chitty Bang Bangs ‘music box dance’ scene, this temptation became stronger. I realised everything in it was centred around exaggeration, the crowds outfits, a kid of a king, the music, and most of all the inhuman movement of a toy on a person. It made me wonder; If a puppet is representative of a person, it makes the audience question why are we seeing a puppet, not an actor? I believe the answer is because a puppet is a tool for exaggeration. A puppet is a dumbed down version of a person and must be controlled. It cannot move smoothly or freely and holds no real voice. The audience is challenged into understanding why each puppet has been assigned the dialogue and movement it has. It can only represent a few, clear things, rather than a whole complex, real person. Like mime, it shows that to exaggerate you must simplify.

Running with the idea of simplifying to exaggerate, I decided to make a plain puppet the size of my living room. I have enjoyed working large before and think it is a simple way of exaggerating something as it demands attention and makes the audience wonder why it is so big. By making it plain I was able to focus on exaggerating only one thing; the size.

I was happy with the outcome, I find it unsettling and like how it almost looks normal. It reminded me of the Alice and wonderland scene where she fills the whits rabbits house. Looking to Jordan Wolfsons puppet at the Tate and 2014 piece ‘Female Figure’ I felt that although I find his work difficult to watch, I like that he creates one puppet to focus on one thing. It shows why exaggeration works so well in puppets, because they can only show so much, you have to pick one thing/ characteristic and amplify it.

Brian Griffiths puppets showed me something similar, the explanation for his exhibition being ‘the puppet in its purest form and motion resembles something of the artifact, tool, machine or musical instrument. They are contradictory things to be looked at and spoken through, that are animated and brought to life via imagination and will’.

Puppets are merely a tool for what we, humans, want to talk about further, the things we want to exaggerate.

Lost with what interesting to do with this, I have decided to take on some advice I got in my tutorial that sometimes it is best to get lost in the process and not worry about the outcome. After watching the film ‘Being John Malkovich’ and discussing ideas with my brother and sister who I am in quarantine with, we have decided to get up early and create a one day project film, arriving dressed  up as a puppet and seeing what happens, exploring how that accidental becomes the deliberate. Working with some floating ideas we already have, we are hoping a narrative will form itself. I hope this will be a successful way to work during this time of lack of events, conversations and coincidences which would usually create a clearer process.

I am really happy with the outcome - we managed to create a short film in just one day ! We picked a doll that looked like me and used this as a starting point. Dressing up in the same top and doing my hair and make up, we began by finding places we could film which would look as if me and the doll where in the same place, wanting to play with the idea of realness and the artificial in puppets. This helped us a form a simple narrative about control and truth versus fiction. While I, supposedly human, cook a breakfast, the doll moves freely around the (doll)house. My movements become more and more manic until the breakfast becomes a live being who is controlling me ; I am in fact the puppet stuck in the dolls house and the plate of food is the thing left talking.

We used flour and makeup to create a slightly alarming and explicitly fake look, and playful music by Nina Rota. To exaggerate this all even further, we used ‘fake french’ for the script to further play on the ideas of a simplified, broken puppet, and as an exaggeration of French mime, whose character is often clumsy and clown like. The final line is ‘parceque, le grande catastrophe, of course c’est love’, spoken by the bacon and eggs face. This is a final half explanation of the mad puppet woman, but more so an exaggeration of the film, there has been no mention of love before this point, the script is almost nonsensical and this is humorous to end with something so grand and in some ways, untrue, and yet of course- it would be love.

I was super happy with the reaction, that they realised it was about purposeful failure as a I played on this a lot, for example I edited in moments where I didn’t known I was being filmed and exaggerated them further, exploring the accidental coming the deliberate.

I found that at first people were unsure of what to say. I guess this touches on what Claire said in our tutorial about the audience not knowing what to think about why I’ve made my work yet I feel that this reaction was perfect.  They were taken aback and then once they started discussing it they had picked up on the things I had tried to exaggerate. If I can do this, then why must they understand why I have made each thing? It is boring if the audience can understand every choice and decision - I much prefer to create work I want to create without worrying how it will be perceived. As long as there is some form of reaction and connection I think this is good, if they understand  my mind then great and if not then perhaps even better? Its not bad to be a mystery ; as long as people are interested enough to start discussing. This is something my classmates agreed with, they said mood and feeling is what is important.

 he video and audience reaction to the doll seeming more real than me reminded me of this scene in Stardust of the voodoo doll. I would like to further explore themes on control in puppets through simplified, over-exaggerated movement.

Rachel MacClean’s video work

I really like her work for how modern and absurd it looks. Her characters are often uncomfortable to watch and it seems like its own fantasy world. However her message is clear and political. She seems to be the absurd and and unknown as a way to exaggerate hat we are doing to society, as if we are out of touch with a ‘real world’. Im not sure I agree with his, although her work inspires me, I prefer work which celebrates the unknown as well as the known. I think humans are still ‘in touch’ with the world.

What I liked most was the visual extremity. Her films are vibrant and immersive. Some of her characters reminded me of ‘whoville’ from the grinch which I am very fond of. It is a peculiar look in which a person is still recognisable but it feels uncomfortable to refer to them as people.

Her work also reminds me strongly of the new film ‘Paradise Hills’ directed by Alice Waddington. In both the sets, costumes and editing carry an aesthetic of rich, current culture as a vibrant, almost sickly and tacky look. Also reminiscent of the capitalists in hunger games.

Rosie Gibbens is another artists whose performances in my opinion take on a similar aesthetic as well.

Her piece which really took me however was this one, where on one screen she is moving in the form of an animal, with bras attached to her to distort her usual body shape and on the right screen is a zoomed out birds eye view of her. I like this contrastof perspectives and although I do not care for what the point of the script, I like how it is written as an examination. The audience feels as if they are studying a creature, a puppet. 

Through researching artists I have learnt that visuals are very important when exploring this idea of the artificial and exaggeration. Whether this be costume, camera angles or literal visual examples of fake products.

In my tutorial notes Ellie wrote ‘Keep pushing your story-telling through film and explore how using even more different styles can contribute to the absurd worlds you’re building. It would be interesting to see different characters and storylines as different chapters to this work.’

Reading ‘the absurd worlds you’re building’ pleases me to know this is how the audience is viewing my work. I now wanter to continue to explore the fictional using exaggeration and the artificial as a way to do this.

[puppyboy]

why are you anti psychiatry? Is it like the movement, or you don't beliebe in psychiatry as an area? 🐣 I learn a lot from u lmao I be googling what you say to understand lmao and it makes me more curious about things I didn't know I was interested in

first off id like to clarify that im not that v well read or personally experienced in this topic, probably bc im ~arguably neuro-typical lmao? and i say arguably bc while i understand that there are a wide range of imbalances and conditions that indispensably necessitate both medical and therapeutical treatments, the term itself is so ambiguous that u could b perceived as “that” from a certain pov and then from another be diagnosed w like….a bunch of stuff. and im not trying to be a bitch but just look at ppl on this site for a v clear example of that! i dont judge people for self diagnosing when they cant afford professional~ help or even if they just like, feel like it and it helps them, BUT i also think (and this is the anti-psychiatry bit) ppl forget that the categories and ideas of psychiatry arent epistemologically supreme or whatever (bc medicine in general isnt but particularly in the case of psychiatry imo) and instead are like v heavily socially charged bc a huge amount of the things they deal with are aspects that stem from or exist within or are imbricated with human sociability and everything that that implies in terms of epochs and cultures, not just within consciousness (which is another reason why this whole thing is so ambiguous i mean this has always been the most mysterious~ field of human study for science). what i mean is that this whole thing is much more complex than how it’s usually framed EVEN when it’s problematized, and while i agree that mental health should b viewed as equally important as bodily health and we all know it isn’t, i don’t think standard psychiatry has been v responsible in terms of taking into account the primary roles of cultural and social environments in the development of our social selves (which is in response to what we construct our personal~ selves), and precisely by not taking them into account its that it has perpetrated inequities that exist within those environments through the categories and solutions it offers (i.e hysteria, schizophrenia)

i came to this thru foucault lmao of course, he proposed basically what i just tried to explain, so if it doesnt make sense here u could maybe read him up, or if ur feeling extra kinky try zizek (lmaoo not anti-psychiatry per se but imo he’s v succinct when it comes to the whole self-other-consciousness-culture deal)

[but-the-desserts-were-okay]

Okay okay this is Absolutely about The Shape of Water because im still thinking about it several years later and no, im not okay, thank you for asking. It’s a solid movie for so many reasons, not least of all the representation of marginalized people, but to put a non-human entity alongside all those great characters and call them the love interest is so... -chef’s kiss-. When Elisa signs the line (that lives in my head rent free now and forever) “He does not see how I am incomplete, he sees me as I am!”, it’s a declaration of trust in the Other, a statement of her ability to find common ground and value in someone very different from herself. And the line itself, stating that the Amphibian Man finds value in HER, a disabled woman, is dear to my heart because how many times have I felt unloveable because of the boxes I tick on a list of marginalized demographics? How many times have I felt like a burden, an outsider, “too much” - too queer, too fat, too mentally ill? In this instance I am both the monster and the monster’s lover, participating in a love many would see as monstrous, and simultaneously flawed yet so very Valued. To put such nonconventional love interests together is to tell the audience that they, yes, They have a place in the world, the place they’ve seen in movies, tv, and books and longed after but never believed they could fit into because they’re Too Much. It’s saying “this place you want so badly is For You, with all the weight historical love stories carry”.

And when I try to think of another example outside of love stories, I think of another Doug Jones role, ironically, because he is a white, cishet, able-bodied man and therefore not really the kind of person that benefits most from these characters (this is not in any way meant to disparage him, he’s very good at what he does, seems like a delightful person, and has my full respect, it’s just ironic). In Star Trek Discovery, he plays an alien named Saru, who (spoilers for season 3) has just become captain of the ship. Saru is highly capable and a good leader, but undeniably Not the conventional leading man we might associate with such a prestigious position. He looks different, acts different, thinks different from the humans on the crew. He is, for a season and a half, what I like to call “professionally anxious”. It is something intrinsic in him, a trait for which there is no workaround. And that makes him a valuable member of the crew, because his very way of perceiving the world is so Different from what the human crew members have. Even now, though he is not as nervous as he used to be, he carries with him the weight of his past ways of thinking and the cultural traits of his people, and that is precisely what makes him not just an effective leader within the universe, but a meaningful character for those of us watching the series. To see him perform so well, and to see the trust the crew places in him, is immensely meaningful as someone who is mentally ill and neurodivergent. Because in our world, when you are different in those ways it is seen as an instability. To see the crew fully place their trust in the Other is, frankly, one of the most inspiring things about this season for me, because I am the Other as well. When the way you interact with the world is fundamentally different from the majority, it’s so easy to feel like there is no way for you to succeed and be fulfilled, whatever that may mean for you. By placing Saru in this role, Star Trek is telling us that, again, there is hope for us outcasts to find our place.

Tldr; when Guillermo del Toro told us “monsters are the patron saints of our imperfections”, he was fucking right.

Man i know its been said before but every time a monster/alien/cryptid is put in a position typically held by a conventionally attractive, all-American white bread actor, it serves to make those of us who feel outcast from society a little more comfortable in our skin, and that matters. In this essay i will

[unhingedthinking]

Strap yourselves in guys, I’m about to analyse the shit out of this argument™

Just for those of you who took one look at the title and went nope. here’s some tl;dr. 

The author

The author is a rector for an Anglican church and holds a PhD in theology. Now this article was written a couple of years ago, but has resurfaced in the wake of our shitlord extraordinaire™ government deciding that the best life decision (rather than you know, do their actual job) was to hold a non-binding plebiscite to see if the Australian public thinks LGBTIQA+ people should be allowed to be married with that actual terminology.

How he positions support for same sex marriage

Now the argument that is being made here is that the current debate at the time (and let’s be frank, still is) is that the major argument for the yes vote is that “well all of our countries that we’re pals with (and some we’re not so chummy with) have passed it, so it’s about time that we passed it too.” Basically the en vogue argument. It’s apparently fashionable to give equal rights to people so we should totally hop on board for that reason alone. The dude actually defends the government not passing it by comparing a survey saying “hey, same sex couples should have the right to marry and the majority says so” to a survey that says “hey most people want capital punishment.” I mean, both are technically a death sentence if you squint really hard, just the fact that one’s a little more permanent and the other is ideally far more amenable to a happy and sustainable life. He basically makes the argument that the only reason you haven’t heard the argument for against same sex marriage is that those who are pro are lobbying and shouting too loud for sensible no arguments to be let through.

And here’s his argument

His main argument (and I’ll give credit, it’s a well reasoned argument), is that we shouldn’t support marriage equality because it simply isn’t “marriage equality.” It’s something that’s entirely different. 

In order to offer the status of marriage to couples of the same sex, the very meaning of marriage has to be changed. In which case, what same-sex couples will have will not be the same as what differently sexed couples now have.

It will be called marriage, but it won't be marriage as we know it. It won't be "marriage equality": it will be an entirely new thing.

Getting in a side dig at Bill Shorten (because that’s apparently still something cool for conservatives to do as well). This is how he defines marriage:

As we now understand it, marriage is not merely the expression of a love people have for each other. It is, or is intended as, a life-long union between two people who exemplify the biological duality of the human race, with the openness to welcoming children into the world. Even when children do not arrive, the differentiated twoness of marriage indicates its inherent structure.

Now, I didn't pluck this definition from the sky, nor is it simply a piece of religious teaching. It is the meaning of marriage that emerges from all human cultures as they reflect on and experience what it is to be male and female. It is only in the last 15 years that anyone has seriously thought differently.

According to this guy, a child is the “tangible expression of our two sexedness”.

Now if you’ve been following along with my general blogging regarding gender, sexuality, queer, or post-queer theory (yeah, i’m deliberately separating them because the academic in me needs to), you’ll have already seen that I’ve already talked about the whole limitation of seeing biology as “two sexedness”. But that’s not really what I want to choose to focus on for the purpose of his argument, as that’s not the crux of his stance.

The stance in which his argument falls within the notion that marriage is simply a signification of two people (in his argument of opposing sexes, utilising essentialist constructions), life-long commitment to the rearing and nurturing of children. He then uses this notion that because of this, the argument for same sex marriage has no standing as by revising the meaning of marriage to be one that does not include the “two sexedness” and having the goal of a “tangible expression of our two sexedness” in that marriage, same-sex couples are only ‘married’ in the name of it, rather than the act. It’s simply a choice of word rather than an official commitment.

And my favourite part, here’s why that particular argument is outdated (and, quite frankly in my opinion, wrong)

This discourse is particularly interesting if you place it within a Focauldian lens falls within the power relations surrounding the exercise of bio-power, or in layman terms exercising power over the practices of reproduction and life. The author only deems a marriage legitimate if the couple are having the intention to copulate and rear children in the understanding of heteronormative idealism. It is playing into the morality clause that children are only able to be sufficiently raised with both a mother and father figure who fulfill sufficient masculine and feminine roles in the development of the child. 

Now let’s break that apart. If we forget the whole religiousness and “two-sexedness” sections of the argument for a moment (I’ll fold them back in in a minute I promise), let’s look at the other factors:

The structure of the family unit is quite a bit diverse from what it was deemed 15 years ago as by the author’s statement of the argument for redefining marriage. The nuclear family is no longer the sole viable option for people in contemporary society. Single parent families, same-sex families, foster carers, legal guardianship between family friends, polyamourous familial structures, groups of people raising children together, the list is pretty much inexhaustible.

Considering the fact that technology has significanlty improved to the point where we can have IVF, stem cell research, donors and surrogates as viable options for same sex couples to have biological children, they still have the ‘intent to begin a family’

Research actually demonstrates that there’s not really a discernable difference between children raised in a heterosexual coupled relationship to that of a homosexual, but then again, that depends on how you interpret the data of the study.

If we go back to contemporary understandings of gender theory, all individuals interpellate and enact various constructions of masculinity and femininity in their everyday lives, and therefore having both cisgendered male and female essentialised constructions of masculinity and femininity are not necessarily required within the rearing of children, as these constructions are also interpellated through socialisation within institutions such as schools and the wider societal interactions.

Adoption and foster care is literally a thing (albeit some structural and functional barriers within the institutions that manage such services still prevent nonheteronormative couples from accessing such services successfully - but that’s another matter entirely).

To put it in a simpler way, understanding the intent to start a family as solely biological between a woman and a man having sex is quite frankly antiquated in its construction and does not reflect the contemporary understandings of familial structures. In fact, it’s a limitation on children as it doesn’t allow them to experience or perceive the diversity of relationships outside of their own familial unit, which can generally lead to them being more accepting of difference and being a less shitty person in general.

Let’s move back to the religious side of the debate, which is that marriage is defined similarly in “all cultures” - despite there being evidence of those of a third sex (agender or intersexed) in many civilisations and cultures that defies the “two sexedness” argument. By religious standards, sure if you want to define marriage as being between a man and a woman, by all means that’s your own perogative. I’m an atheist so it does not bother me either way. However, as the author actually defines in his argument, this is legislation we are talking about. Legislation refers to the state, which is separated from the church (and therefore religion). It is state marriage that we are referring to. If a church does not want to marry two people because they are same sex, that’s their issue. We’re talking about defining marriage between two people (regardless of sex) as a legal right for all. Yes civil union is similar in its construction to state marriage, and yes they are recognised as such in many situations. But here’s the thing. We’re not fighting for something that is similar. 

The word marriage itself has power. 

It has a status within society that a civil union is just not on par with. “My husband/ my wife” are revered in our monogamously centric society as a life goal that everyone should strive to attain. It opens a door to a social standing that you’re perceived to be in a stable, committed relationship that is accepted by society. You are in a position, like the author states, to have children and raise them to be decent and well intentioned active citizens. The fact that it is a man and a woman or a man and a man or a woman and a woman (if we’re being essentialist here and ignoring the existence of intersexed and nonbinary individuals like much of this debate seems to do) shouldn’t really matter in this day and age if we’re basing our definition of marriage on the notion of the intent to raise children. If they want to do it, then who gives what’s going on between their legs or in between their sheets. Quite frankly, they’re not going to make their children gay, like how every heterosexual couple only raises heterosexual children *cough*.

Finally, let’s consider the fact that the author is opposed to the notion that a lifelong commitment without the intent of raising children is an empty promise. I’m sorry, but why isn’t the act of willingly committing yourself to one person for the rest of your life not enough? Why do we have to bring children into the matter? Is it really so bad that some people decide that either they don’t want to have children or do not perceive themselves to be capable to raise children to have that commitment to one other person recognised by the state within the eyes of the law? I don’t think so. 

Let’s wrap this ramble up

Basically whilst his argument is logical and has an academic merit to it, he is basing his evidence in outdated models of the familial unit, and blurring the lines between the state and the church in order to define his points, particularly by bolstering his viewpoint from a westernised religious standpoint on the definition of marriage. Asking for marriage equality, whilst on the surface, only appears to be wanting to have equal rights to something that is not possible under the current definition of marriage is senseless. Language is constantly evolving and changing, and redefining the word to suit contemporary understandings of how relationships and the commitments within those relationships are perceived and valued is not only a good thing, but something that should be at the core of the foundation of being a decent human being to those who live a life that is diverse from your own.

So I’ll agree that this guy is not being a bigot in his approach to the debate (as it is rather civil I have to say), it’s just that his information and perception of contemporary discourses of social reality are being ignored in favour of his own ideology of what marriage should be.

[artstarstv]

Headbanging Sculptures: An Interview with Mimosa Pale

Wandering Shocks at Art Fair Finland, 2017 photo Neo Aarnikotka

Mimosa Pale is unlike any other artist you know. The Finnish performance artist brings sculpture to life through colorful materials, dance and artworks inspired by the carnival, jazz and old fashioned side shows. You might have heard of her hat shop Himo, where she sold handcrafted hats she made in the Berlin’s district of Neukölln (long before it became hipster paradise). That’s not all. Pale has also created technicolor, headbanging sculptures in Helsinki, leafblowed a public monument she covered in fringes and once even created a Marie Antoinette-style headpiece made of shot glasses. 

As she gears up for a book she is making with Justyna Koeke about Tinder dating in the forest, she’s also looking forward for the Stamp Festival in Hamburg, as well as an exhibition at Hilsbach Kunst & Kultur and a performance in The Hot Box. In the meantime, Pale spoke to us about carnival culture, hat-making and recycling for land art sculptures.

Wandering Shocks 2017, photo Lisabi Fridell

There is a great crossover between art and fashion in your work, where does it all come from?

Mimosa Pale: Well, actually I was never so interested in fashion, but more in masquerade! the idea to make my hatshop himo was out of the wish to have an art studio, where people, just anybody could pop in and have a reason to be there. I think people often have a fear to encounter art, as its  traditionally placed on a pedestal or golden frame. So Himo was my studio and a performance space and it was disquised as a hatshop. it had an himo-rosa velvet sofa and a little stage. but the most amazing thing for me was that people believed in my hatshop from the first moment. They came with their hat problems and surprisingly I was able to help them with  "turn it upside down and it looks great" mentality. This led to my real interest in millinery and I started taking courses in hatmaking. but in short: I wanted to combine performance art and sculpture in my hatstore, so I felt most succesful when a person came in and bought a hat, and would go out of the shop with a sculpture on their head creating  street life performance.

Mimosa Pale, Blow, Streetlevel Festival, Helsinki, 2015, photo Antti Ahonen

Why is a DIY approach important to your practice?

I think it has to do with my desire for borderless art. Art is for everybody, and everybody who wants can make it. The more people are encouraged to make art, the more interesting the world becomes. More people practicing self-realization in the form of art reduces stress and anxiety, makes you happier. so maybe it can be described as a social approach to art.

How does the history of costume influence your work?

I’m interested in carnevalism, and in the effects it has on people practicing it. Now that I’m in an artist in residency in Horb am Neckar and there is a vast culture in carneval, which is called "Schwäbisch-Allemanische Fasnet" . I have entered a fools guild just to study this whole thing.  We are carrying the "Häs" with a wooden mask, each weekend between january and march we go parading in an other town scaring the audience or throwing candy to them... and we meaning about 3000 fools from different villages. Its quite a blast! 

Mimosa Pale, Blow, Streetlevel Festival, Helsinki, 2015, photo Antti Ahonen

You really know how to create an atmosphere full of imagination, is your starting point playfulness?

To me, the performances have to make sense somehow. I guess I have a certain kind of logic there but maybe it comes across as something else! for example I just made a performance in Munich where I tried to transform myself into a living diamond. It kind of makes sense, doesnt it?! Who would’nt want to be a diamond? At the same time the visual aspect of an idea is very important; its part of the way an idea is transmitted.

You made feminist art before it was trending, what can you tell us about why the Mobile Female Monument counteracts the history of male, phallic sculpture?

The fact is that there are many sculptures in the history of art that are made by men, are huge, and are phallic. Mobile Female Monument encounters them being soft and mobile and as a place to go inside.  

I call myself a feminist and I’m often being labeled as a feminist artist but I still want to say that this work is more intuitive than its political (that there is more to it). It celebrates the vulva, carnivalizes it, lets everybody touch itself, invites people to create their own little spontaneous performance around it.  At that time I was interested in Commedia dell arte forms of present day, side shows and performance art’s borders. Naturally pissed off by the omnipresence of sex in the advertisements of this ostensibly sexually liberated society, I was curious to see what happens when the taboo is performed exaggerated in the bright daylight. I had to find something where people would stop without me having to stop them;  At the same time the work was personal: what is my sexuality, where is it going, it seems to be evolving. These are, I believe, universal thoughts. Yet there is not so much talk about it; and that’s where it I guess became interesting: showing something that everybody is thinking of.  

Mimosa Pale, Foliage 2018, photo Oona Heleena

Why did you want to do Foliage with your artist group, Wild Angelicas? 

I wanted to create more wearable sculptures, and I always have this feeling of discrepancy between sculpture and performance art. In this I made one piece for a tree and one for humans. I like the contradiction in the idea, being in a foliage one usually wants to hide, the reflecting fabric makes one extremely visible though. It was made in the time of #metoo debate, and I had the Story of Daphne in the back of my head. Feeling ill about the abuse on women and yet being relieved that something is changing.

What are the Wandering Shocks and why are they so fun? How do they interact with each other and the public?

The Wandering Shocks (shock is apparently another word for haystacks) are  performance sculptures (made of baking paper). They can visit a festival, or a gallery or just walk on the street; it always works! People love them! If there is music they dance, if not they still dance or do the headbanging. Sometimes they also just stand and people next to them forget there is a human inside. They interact with the public in a silent, friendly way. Its a fun way to bring art somewhere where its not been expected. They are sometimes mistaken for an advert (for example IKEA had something similar recently)...this reflects how people think nowadays.

Mimosa Pale: Foliage 2018

What was the goal of your piece Blow? It seemed to have some rock/metal undertones?

Do you mean the one where I decorated the public monument with fringes and was blowing it with the leaf blower? Im interested in how we perceive public art, monuments, its interesting how these become part of our daily life.  Also I think these monuments, and also our perception need airing from time to time. Decorating a monument changes the daily stage setting for a short time but I believe it can have inspiring effects on people for a long time.

Maternal Bio Power Plant (2014)

Where do you get your materials? How do you feel about recycling?

Good question! I wish I was the fair trade organic artist, but I’m not! When I’m sad about this I tell myself: I’m just a very very small artist... My best work material-wise was the Maternal Bio Power Plant (2014), a land art sculpture which was made of 170 tons of bulls manure. It was a huge breast, that also was functioning as a bio gas collector, built for an art exhibition taking place on a field. After the exhibition the farmer would just spread the 170 tons of manure as fertilizer on the field. At that time, I was breastfeeding and the breast was the most important organ of the daily life! It was quite funny really how I was working a month on the field covered with this shit (it was a rainy summer) and would now and then get a call from the house to run up to feed the baby. The stripping off the scum became almost like a ritual: in order to stay clean it had to be done carefully despite the urgency.

Performance in the exhibition "Stage" by Jukka Rusanen, Helsinki Contemporary, 2014, with Mimosa Pale and Joakim Berghäll, photo Mikaela Lostedt

What is your approach to performance art?

Performance art was one of the first art forms I started doing passionately and it has been an important part of my work. I think performance art is a very difficult form of art to work on continuously. I do now understand why most people are performance artists in their youth and stop doing it when getting middle aged. It is a direct, immediate, energetic, demanding art form. It requires extremely lot of energy if you want to regenerate your work every time. So doing an in-between thing seems to suit me personally. A bit of Sculpture, performance, music, head pieces... in a way I’m happy there is a form of art where I can combine all these things.

Who are your greatest influences in terms of art, fashion and culture? 

I’m a fan of Niki de Saint Phalle and the Nouveau Realistes, Meat Warlop, Meg Stuart.

Performance in the exhibition "Stage" by Jukka Rusanen, Helsinki Contemporary, 2014, with Mimosa Pale and Joakim Berghäll, photo Mikaela Lostedt

What do you try to communicate with your performance art?

I want to keep my work intuitive and I really try hard to stay truthful to myself and create a socially interesting atmosphere. I try to create a situation where people start communicating, not with me necessarily, but with the surrounding or within themselves.  Sure it varies from piece to piece, the location and venue effect greatly. but as a performance artist I’m aware that I’m taking peoples time, and as it is something so valuable in our world, I try to make the moments they spend watching me profitable! I was thought at art school that performance art is always going towards death. but in my opinion it can be far from it; away with the painful notion of performance art, the self suffering, vomiting artist sorting emotional crisis on stage. I wish my performance can be healing, entertaining, funny, interesting, empowering.

Where do performance art and sculpture intersect for you?

A sculpture is seldom enough for me as it is. !t needs some action! and that is very simply, where my sculptures intersects performance art. A humans size, My size, the body is in relation to the surrounding architecture, landscape, heaven, cosmos. This is what gives it already the frame: we are here on the planet in this size; what can we do? The truth is, my ideal sculpture is moving or changing or evolving.... I'm seldom content with an object that doesnt move! This applies to people and animals too !! So if I was good at engineering I propably would be making kinetic art. But as Im not into that, Me myself I’m the motor for my sculptures and thats what keeps me doing performance art.

What did you learn the most about making couture hats for your HIMO hat shop in Berlin?

I learned that selling hats is a difficult art of its own!  I learned how hard it is to make so many things in the same time; like producing head pieces, selling them, being present, making performances. The Himo time was a great time, I met many interesting people, having a shop makes you visible even in a big city like Berlin, and so I had the opportunity to work with people from fashion, theatre and music.  

What shows or exhibitions do you have upcoming? What are you currently working on?

I’m currently working on new sculptural work, its going to be art in public. I’m also working on a book with Justyna Koeke about Tinder dating in the forest. I’m also looking forward for the Stamp festival in Hamburg, an exhibition in Hilsbach Kunst & Kultur and a performance in The Hot Box.

Mimosa Pale, Study on Carpets, 2014

[maritzaerwin]

7 Tips to Deal With an Overly Flirtatious Colleague

The workplace can be the birthplace of some of our best friendships, and for others, even romance. This comes as no surprise, seeing as we spend one-third of our lives at work. Between afternoon coffees and after-work drinks, friendships, and even more, can blossom.

We often have unique bonds with the people we work with, as they understand the intricacies of our jobs and careers in a way that our family and friends can’t. So, it’s only natural that there is some crossover between our professional and personal lives in our social circles.

But whilst positive relationships can come from the workplace, there is equal opportunity for conflict and unwanted attention to arising too. When things go too far, your own safety is the most important thing, and your company should do everything they can to safeguard members of staff.

Whilst encouraging a relaxed, friendly atmosphere is a key part of promoting employee social health, there must also be clear rules on what kinds of behavior will and will not be tolerated in the workplace between employees and managers alike.

Identifying the Flirty Behavior

When it comes to dealing with romantic advances or overly flirty behavior, it can be a pretty awkward situation. As with all interactions with the people around us, there is a possibility that miscommunications can take place. Before making any decisions or taking action, it’s important to first step back and identify what the problem is. 

1. Is It Innocent?

There’s a chance that your overly flirtatious colleague is simply a little over-friendly, and doesn’t even realize that they’re crossing a line. Maybe they ask what you perceive as flirty questions in an effort to genuinely get to know you as a person, rather than in a romantic way. 

The reality is that some people are not so good at reading social cues, and if they have a playful nature anyway, it can lead to them being flirtatious when really they’re aiming for friendly. If this is the case, then all it takes is a simple conversation or some hint-dropping to steer them in the right direction.

2. Is It Inappropriate?

Overly flirtatious or suggestive behavior that makes you feel unsafe is a form of sexual harassment in the workplace. Pay attention to how it makes you feel when you are around the individual in question, and what they say or do to you.

Inappropriate behavior can come in many different forms, from lewd comments and telling inappropriate jokes, to offering promotions in exchange for sexual favors. These are just a few, but there are many other types of sexual harassment to look out for in the workplace too.

Whether it’s harmless or posing a danger to you or your job, any inappropriate behavior should be dealt with as soon as possible.

What Counts as Inappropriate Behavior?

Sexual harassment is, unfortunately, commonplace in the professional environment, with around one-fifth of Americans having experienced it in the workplace.

Whereas in the past, sexual harassment at work was largely ignored, and considered a part of the male-dominated workplace culture, nowadays with the rise of the #MeToo movement in recent years, things are much different.

Women and men alike who experience sexual harassment now have much more support and are encouraged to come forward and get the support they need. 

Sexual harassment can occur in a wide variety of forms and situations, a few of which we’ve listed below:

Inappropriate comments.

Making jokes of a sexual nature.

Touching without consent.

Offering pay rises or promotions in exchange for sexual favors.

Romantically pursuing you after you say no.

Sending indecent emails.

Stalking social media profiles. 

Sexual assault.

Sending unsolicited images or photos.

This is by no means an exhaustive list of the ways that sexual harassment can manifest itself in the workplace, and there are many other forms of it. 

One of the best ways that you can decipher what is inappropriate behavior and what isn’t is by paying attention to how you feel when you are around the person, as well as the type of things your colleague says or does to you. 

If you feel comfortable with their flirting, and possibly even reciprocate it, then you know there isn’t a problem. However, if you feel uncomfortable or unsafe around this person, then that is the biggest indicator that they are behaving inappropriately with you. 

How to Take Action Against an Overly Flirtatious Colleague

If the attention your colleague is showing you is making you feel uncomfortable. Then it’s crucial that you take action of some kind.

Whether it is dealing with the situation yourself or seeking support from your organization or manager, unwarranted romantic advances are unacceptable in the workplace.

But it is completely up to you how you deal with inappropriate behavior. Here are just some of the things that you can do to deal with an overly flirtatious colleague. 

1. Talk to a Trusted Colleague

One thing to do would be to talk to a colleague that you trust. They can offer you advice and even support in dealing with the situation. This can be a good way to also see if there is a pattern of behavior, as well as whether they notice the extra attention you receive from the colleague in question.

Having a confidante of sorts can prove to be a great source of emotional support for anyone dealing with sexual harassment, and can be valuable down the line if you choose to make a formal complaint with your employer.

2. It’s Okay to Tell a White Lie

The same way you would lie about having a boyfriend in a bar to ward off romantic advances from a stranger, if you aren’t comfortable with directly rejecting your overly flirtatious colleague, then this is an option too. 

There’s no harm in telling a small white lie to save any awkwardness that may linger after a rejection. Especially in the workplace, where social politics can drastically affect your productivity and morale levels, this is a way to let your colleague down gently and to let them know you aren’t interested.

The main aim of this approach is to make it clear that you aren’t available in a romantic setting, and already being interested in or involved with someone else is an easier, less awkward way to do this. 

3. Keep It Strictly Professional

The main priority for many in the workplace is to maintain a good level of professionalism. This is in regards to the work itself, the connections you make, and the way you conduct yourself whilst at work. So dealing with an overly flirtatious colleague can come in the form of going back to the basics of work conduct.

If you focus on keeping things strictly professional, then this can be a way to subtly let them know that you aren’t interested in reciprocating any flirty behavior. In practice, this could be that when they do make a comment, you redirect the conversation to professional or work matters.

Even a persistent admirer should get the message if you show a complete lack of reciprocity.

4. Set Boundaries

If you feel comfortable doing so, there could be a relatively simple fix to dealing with an overly flirtatious colleague – by talking to them. By addressing the issue head-on, you can clear up any misunderstandings and set some clear boundaries so they know not to cross the line with you again. 

This can be simply done with a question of “Are you trying to hit on me?”, or “What are you trying to achieve here?”. Directly addressing the flirty behavior forces your co-worker to explain themselves as well as be accountable for their actions.

In the event that your colleague doesn’t realize that they are being inappropriate, this could be helpful for both you and them. They are presented with an opportunity to take responsibility for, and change, their behavior, and you can take charge of the situation and keep your boundaries in place.

If the employee in question was intentionally trying to flirt with you, then setting boundaries with them is a necessary action to stop this behavior. Once they know that you aren’t interested in them romantically, they should distance themselves from you or change their behavior.

Unwanted flirting in the workplace can cause tension and even pose a risk to your job, so it is better to nip it in the bud sooner rather than later. 

5. Make a Formal Complaint

If hint-dropping or even confronting your colleague about their behavior doesn’t work, then the next step is to lodge a formal complaint. Reporting a flirtatious co-worker to your human resources department or management is the more effective route to take to keep yourself safe and protected from unwanted attention from a fellow employee.

Companies have to have safeguarding policies in place that protect employees who are the victims of sexual harassment, and clear disciplinary guidelines for the consequences of inappropriate behavior.

If you want to make a formal complaint, you should follow your organization’s reporting policies. As with any kind of complaint, you will need to recount your experiences and build a good case for your complaint. Therefore it is important to have evidence and corroboration for your claim.

6. Keep A Record

It can be difficult to remember every inappropriate comment or action your colleague exhibits, so keeping a record of evidence is crucial when reporting sexual harassment. Try writing down any comments or jokes they make, and if you are able to, recording your colleague is a surefire way to prove your claim. 

Depending on how your complaint procedure works, any evidence of harassment that is gathered can be crucial in ensuring you receive the help and support you need from higher management.

7. Have Someone to Corroborate Your Story

If you have shared your concerns with a fellow colleague, they can act as corroboration for your complaint. Whether you have shared your experiences with them, or have witnessed any misconduct themselves when it comes to proving that your claim is valid having a witness to the behavior is of paramount importance. 

Why Is It Important to Deal With Inappropriate Behavior?

While it might be tempting to ignore your overly flirtatious colleague to save face or maintain pleasant relations in the workplace, in the long run, this approach can do more harm than good. From the emotional and mental toll, it can take on you, contributing to a culture of enabling harassment in the workplace, taking action is the best option for everyone.

1. You deserve to feel safe and comfortable at work

If you want to do your best work and advance in your career, then the workplace must be a space where you feel comfortable and safe. So regardless of work politics, your own safety and productivity need to be the first priority.

A flirting co-worker’s incessant notes, non-consensual touching, and never-ending compliments can actually make the workplace a toxic place for you. It can have a significant impact on your mental health and stress levels too. 

2. There could be a pattern of behavior

Although we would hope that this isn’t the case, there could be a repeat sexual predator in your midst at work. And when inappropriate behavior goes unchecked, the person making others uncomfortable is only enabled by ignorance.

Reporting or addressing an issue with an overly flirtatious colleague could help to highlight a pattern of behavior, which would help to not only safeguard you but other people in your office who may have experienced the same thing. 

3. Your company has a duty of care

Sexual harassment or misconduct in the workplace is not your fault. It’s also not something you need to shoulder alone. Organizations have a duty of care for each and every member of staff and should be a supporting presence for anyone who has been a victim of sexual harassment.

So reaching out to a manager or lodging a formal complaint is a completely rational response to misconduct in the office. Regardless of yours or the perpetrator’s position in the company, your organization should do everything possible to ensure that everyone feels safe and comfortable at work, at all times. 

An overly flirtatious colleague could be innocent, but if it makes you feel uncomfortable then it is unacceptable in any environment, not just in the workplace.

The post 7 Tips to Deal With an Overly Flirtatious Colleague appeared first on CareerMetis.com.

7 Tips to Deal With an Overly Flirtatious Colleague published first on https://skillsireweb.tumblr.com/

[louiskaile]

Post Brexit Britain

My chosen subject area in which I would like to further explore would be radical ideologies, through political reasonings and how we are regressing our views of culture and togetherness to what was prevalent hundreds of years ago. In more recent years the right wing mentality has grown in popularity due to fear and austerity. I find this as a great shame as I am a strong believer in the saying ‘stronger in numbers’. Great Britain has seen this come to fruition in the last 5 years. With things like the Scottish referendum and of course Brexit. However we’ve seen a change in news reports as well as social media.

A good starting point would be the biggest news story at the moment and the best example of a shift in ideologies. Brexit. in the 70s we the public voted to be included in the European union as we decided it would not only benefit and enrich us but we would become a part of a community making Europe the biggest global super power ever.

Also another area in which I think would be a good starting point would be looking at influencers in right wing ideology and how they have appealed to a certain demographic and capitalised on that fact and how did they do that? Was it their position of power? Was it lies? or just simply relatable to their target audience. A great example of this would be Boris Johnsons Brexit bus, which claimed that we send £350 million a week to the EU, which was later claimed to be a fake accusation. So this meaning that even people in position of trust use lies to further great their cause. Also the bus appealed to certain demographic of people as well as a being very topical at the time, as the bus addressed the NHS. The NHS has been under a lot of scrutiny due to a rise in austerity causing increased waiting times, lack of doctors and even deaths. This has caused an increase in right wing ideology has people feel as a British national why should their own healthcare suffer for people who aren’t. Also the advertisement indicates that the £350 million a week that we spend would all go towards the NHS, which simply isn’t the case.

Another influencer I would like to look at is the owner of Weatherspoons a strong campaigner to vote leave he uses his power as well as his demographic to influence people into believing that his views are and should be the only way. Not only has he donated £200000 to the vote leave campaign but he’s also very public about his political standpoint, which is unusual for a business owner over fear of losing business. In Tim Martins pubs around the time before the vote they were seen stunting vote leave coaster, bunting amongst various other things. Also Tim Martin has said that since the UK voting to leave he will be removing various foreign drinks from his menu, such as prosecco and French Brandy.

I was encouraged to investigate right wing ideologies because at the moment we’re in a cycle of politics where people are moving to right wing views and I want to challenge that fact as I believe it will be damming not only for my future as a graphic designer but the UK as a whole.  

Im going to be exploring Sakoku (meaning closed country) as this relates very well to the current events in the uk. Sakoku lasted for 220 years spanning from 1633 to 1853. It limited nearly all foreign nationals from entering the country as well as all normal Japanese people from leaving. However Japan wasn’t completely isolated laws implemented by the shogunate meant that trade with China was vast through the port of Nagasaki with even a small Chinese community living there for work purposes. I can refer this back to my own investigation as The UK is essentially isolating itself from mainland Europe as it believes that it can better itself and its people without the need of ‘togetherness’. Japan learnt from its mistakes nearly 200 years ago and decided to open its borders. where as the uk is beginning to slowly fall back into the old way of thinking.

An artist in which I think will further my proposal will be Mark El-khatib a British graphic design who specialises in re branding like he’s just done for the new MK gallery. It's something which I intend to use in my own project (rebranding post brexit). Mark uses simplicity in his work to make it fool proof something that will be key in business surviving the post Brexit chaos. Also this clean way of working is somewhat cost effective, requiring less ink and less process.

I also want to explore the concept of Island mentality. This is where an island country perceives themselves as superior to the rest of world. They fear the unknown. The social harmony which is formed on an island leads to superior feelings of togetherness which isolates them. This would then bind the work in which I’m doing now with the Japanese Sakoku and the UK’s Brexit. Caruso St John Architects did an installation at the Venice Biennale showing the island mentality by obscuring a British pavilion by building scaffolding around it to show the isolation of the uk. They also built an island on top of it ridiculing the UK public for voting for Brexit. The isolation of the building is a representation of what the UK will be like after Brexit. But the island on top of the pavilion represents the superior being that the island mentality gives you.

I will also be looking at a series of Brexit podcasts to gain more insight into my subject matter. This would give me the valuable information straight from professionals, also podcasts are a great way to learn valuable information whilst also doing something else. for example I could listen to a podcast called remainiacs they pride themselves about being the ‘the no-bullshit Brexit podcast for people who won't just shut up and get over Brexit.’ From a remain stand point This appeals to me as it I also believe in that we should remain in Europe, also to their claim of being ‘no bullshit’ means that they will get straight to the point.  

My subject area relates to my own work because I am interested in what the rebranding will be in a post Brexit Britain. Careful consideration will be needed for the rebranding of Britain so that Britain is still seen as a desirable place to not only come but also to trade with. Talking from a business standpoint I believe rebranding is also crucial as companies will see a loss of business, especially companies that favour the leave side. Brexit has divided a nation and it is crucial for companies to not favour a side. I have looked at similar concepts within an infographic project in which I did, in that project I explored right wing views of football fans trying to reach their owner without a direct line to contact them. I will be using a similar approach in my work because there is this distance between the public and the final details between Brexit. However I want to be able to lessen this gap through the use of design. I might be trying to use bookbinding skill which I have learnt on the course as I believe with any good rebranding project needs a book to compile what has changed. I might also look at the idea of more traditional style of printing something the UK was famous and its something we may have to resort to in a post Brexit Brittain.

[selfsustainability-blog]

[24/10/2018, 18:47:33] donSELZ: so taking care of yourself enough that you are able to take cate of others [24/10/2018, 18:47:42] donSELZ: care* [24/10/2018, 18:49:12] Ella: Yeah kind of But I don’t think take care is the right wording but it’s along those lines I just don’t know the right words now ahah [24/10/2018, 18:49:51] donSELZ: yea, it's just cause what we are talking about is essentially self care [24/10/2018, 18:50:25] donSELZ: and the idea that we have to take care of our own situation before we are able to extend ourselves to others [24/10/2018, 18:50:46] Ella: Yeah [24/10/2018, 18:51:45] donSELZ: i remember Jihye was talking about how that might be seen as selfish/unkind and not wanting to compromise being the compassionate person that she wants to be/is [24/10/2018, 18:52:34] donSELZ: but we shouldnt be compassionate to other people at the expense of our selves [24/10/2018, 18:52:57] donSELZ: we have to be compassionate and kind to ourselves first [24/10/2018, 18:53:32] donSELZ: but also just as much as we should be kind and compassionate to others [24/10/2018, 18:54:35] Ella: Yes and I think when I say take care of others it’s more of a help others be self sustaining so helping them find the tools and stuff that work for them that help them be self sustaining [24/10/2018, 18:54:49] Ella: Mentally and physically [24/10/2018, 18:54:52] donSELZ: yeah, i fot thT [24/10/2018, 18:54:54] donSELZ: that* [24/10/2018, 18:54:57] donSELZ: got* [24/10/2018, 18:55:09] Ella: Okay cool I think that is better working than take care [24/10/2018, 18:55:19] donSELZ: okie doke [24/10/2018, 18:55:26] Ella: Wording [24/10/2018, 18:55:28] donSELZ: i use care because even though that is specific to you [24/10/2018, 18:55:56] donSELZ: care is more general so it includes and relates to what everyone in the group is talking about [24/10/2018, 18:56:09] Ella: Ahh yeah that makes sense [24/10/2018, 18:57:24] Ella: And I think the potential unkindness of being selfish is a real fear/anxiety of many people [24/10/2018, 18:58:44] Ella: I guess that there are ways to counteract it in life where you try and communicate with people around you as best you can so that they understand and don’t just think you are being mean. And it’s a shift in perception. If you have been brought up with the idea that selfishness is bad it’s a difficult thing to pivot your thinking around [24/10/2018, 19:00:12] donSELZ: yeah it's hard to change your mindset because you see how people react to you when you take away your hand inorder to help yourself up first [24/10/2018, 19:00:34] donSELZ: and seeing how people react makes you question yourself [24/10/2018, 19:00:48] Ella: Yeah it’s uncomfortable [24/10/2018, 19:01:00] donSELZ: even though your wanting to protect yourself first is right [24/10/2018, 19:02:24] donSELZ: but yeah it is uncomfortable which makes it harder to internalise the idea that caring for yourself first is a good thing and a really important thing [24/10/2018, 19:05:26] Joy: Its kinda the starting point of my study. It can told as  'unconscious anxiety I feel as associating with people' and ' having emotional security as being a selfless but selfish person' [24/10/2018, 19:06:19] Ella: I think there is also a really interesting aspect which is narcissism and certain aspects of care is celebrated. Such as financial success but your mental health isn’t. Just look at the amount of you tubers and other social media type people who are loved/revered and they are selfish people. (They are also disliked) [24/10/2018, 19:06:29] Joy: Omg your idea  helped me a lot to get through the part I was struggling with. i will upload my idea as soon as possible. Im adjusting it now. [24/10/2018, 19:06:39] donSELZ: wooo [24/10/2018, 19:06:58] Ella: Okay cool 😀 looking forward to reading it x [24/10/2018, 19:07:42] Joy: Yh it suggests another way of interpretation on the term but relevant to it I guess [24/10/2018, 19:07:56] Joy: 😍 [24/10/2018, 19:09:50] donSELZ: selfish means "lacking consideration for other people, concerned mainly with one's own profit or pleasure" [24/10/2018, 19:10:20] donSELZ: but what you guys are describing is not about lacking consideration for other people at all [24/10/2018, 19:10:41] Ella: Yeah so it’s more like perceived selfishness rather than actual selfishness [24/10/2018, 19:10:59] donSELZ: youre talking about caring for yourself but why does that automatically mean you dont care about other people [24/10/2018, 19:11:07] donSELZ: it's not a this or that thing [24/10/2018, 19:11:24] donSELZ: they can co exist [24/10/2018, 19:12:15] donSELZ: yeah it is perceived selfishness, but yeah that's why i prefer using the words self preservation [24/10/2018, 19:15:07] Ella: Okay yeah that makes sense

I guess because of the culture we have been brought up in it’s a binary and you are one or the other so to occupy two things that is slightly contradictory on the surface is hard for people to wrap their heads round [24/10/2018, 19:15:32] donSELZ: yesss i love this, we're relating to risk group [24/10/2018, 19:15:45] donSELZ: i wrote a bit about it in my essay - the binary [24/10/2018, 19:15:54] Ella: Ahh cool! [24/10/2018, 19:15:55] Joy: Thats the part I donno how to deal with. Bascially selfishness has a negative idea basing on social term. But i guess we all dont take it negatively including me. The point being is i wanna say being selfish in a certain level isnt a harm in community but there is a fine line between being selfish or being self-centred(not sure if it is a positive way of saying selfish person) person [24/10/2018, 19:15:59] donSELZ: i will copy and paste here [24/10/2018, 19:16:37] donSELZ: yeah i understand that, and i dont see it as negative in the way that you are using it at all [24/10/2018, 19:17:04] donSELZ: but because when you look up what the word selfish means [24/10/2018, 19:18:31] Joy: Yhh i just think that when we have a talk with people, it will be essential to explain about how we define selfishness in our theory X [24/10/2018, 19:19:16] donSELZ: i think i the word selfish is bound to be negative because what we are describing doesnt mean what the dictionary says selfish means [24/10/2018, 19:19:22] Ella: Yes I think that is a good idea and then coming up with a couple of key questions that we would find helpful to discuss [24/10/2018, 19:20:27] Joy: Yh ture. [24/10/2018, 19:20:30] donSELZ: what we are talking about is self preservation, which we can say is a type of selfishness that doesnt negate caring for others [24/10/2018, 19:20:42] donSELZ: from my works in the past i used this quote a lot "Caring for myself is not self-indulgence, it is self-preservation, and that is an act of political warfare" [24/10/2018, 19:20:53] donSELZ: by Audre Lorde [24/10/2018, 19:21:15] Ella: Andre lorde is a boss!!! [24/10/2018, 19:21:29] donSELZ: which helped me a looot with the ideas around caring for myself and not feeling like that makes me a self centred type of selfish person [24/10/2018, 19:21:41] Joy: Fab. I will look for Audre Lorde!! [24/10/2018, 19:21:48] donSELZ: awesome [24/10/2018, 19:26:56] donSELZ: “the binary femininity/masculinity also supports other binaries by making them appear natural or legitimate as well. Other binaries that follow from our examples might read as follows: home/work, private/public, and passive/active. In each of these binaries, the first of the pair is gendered feminine while the second is gendered masculine” – (pg. 2, French and Bliss 2006) [24/10/2018, 19:27:35] Ella: I feel like I have seen this quote somewhere before [24/10/2018, 19:27:44] donSELZ: lool well you read my essay [24/10/2018, 19:27:47] donSELZ: so it might be that [24/10/2018, 19:27:48] donSELZ: hahaha [24/10/2018, 19:27:50] Ella: Ahh yeah hahahah [24/10/2018, 19:27:54] Ella: 😂😂 [24/10/2018, 19:28:14] donSELZ: this is what i wrote about:

Often, self-care is seen as a private act that only stays internal. However true self-care naturally externalises itself often. Self-care is an intimate act with yourself that then affects the you outside of yourself. It swims back and forth between the ‘public’ and the ‘private’, but this is not always realised. It is bound by the traditions of the binary that we see our world in; derived from the gender binary of man or woman, and so we also see self-care in the binary of either public or private, but like gender the public and private also exist on a spectrum. [24/10/2018, 19:28:15] Ella: No I think it might of also been referenced in a book about metaphors that I have [24/10/2018, 19:28:27] donSELZ: hahahah yeah probably [24/10/2018, 19:28:43] donSELZ: ohhhh hahah was it the book you borrowed me this summer [24/10/2018, 19:28:51] Ella: Yeah ahah [24/10/2018, 19:31:32] Joy: Loool it seems like its my turn😂😂😂 i am still writing....sorry.. give me 5mins guys X [24/10/2018, 19:31:46] Ella: Haha it’s cool take ya time x [24/10/2018, 19:32:01] donSELZ: 😂😂😂❤ [24/10/2018, 19:47:37] Saamiyah: I think for me, the way I’m thinking of it is being selfish in some aspects of my life like only doing thing that may only benefit me. [24/10/2018, 19:48:35] Ella: Like what [24/10/2018, 19:54:37] Joy: Self-sustainability and Selfishness or Selflessness

My study mainly looks at being self-sustainable in regards to individual acts in society. Living in society requires us to adapt ourselves in an environment and live interactively with elements surrounding us, such as social life, cultures, regulations, and so on. When it comes to dwelling in a community, we easily find ourselves following the flow of society and hard to assert ourselves due to the care of how to be perceived and considerate attitude towards others. This tendency has existed since the first time human start to live collectively and reciprocally; it results in the concept of natural attitude to associating with environments. What is the natural attitude in the context? The term can be explained as the attitude (tendency) generally making a beneficial consequence to everyone. We have been learnt to be kind and selfless to people is essential, which causes resistance to selfishness and taking the word negatively. Besides, as there is a guideline of attitude to assimilate society, the unconscious anxiety of making a decision on an individual's action deeply place in their mind. [24/10/2018, 19:54:57] Joy: I havent finished it but i realised my 5mins was too long loooool [24/10/2018, 19:55:34] Joy: Please understand my grammartic errors 😂😂 [24/10/2018, 20:00:45] Ella: Ahah it’s all good.

So looking at the fear around becoming self sustainable and te perceived selfishness that entails whilst also adapting and navigating all the other human experiences of culture, relationships, law etc [24/10/2018, 20:02:03] Ella: @447473131379 can you elaborate on what you were saying? [24/10/2018, 20:07:06] Saamiyah: I think what I’m trying to say is that because I was bought up and live in a world where we have to constantly think of helping others, that when I want to do something they may only benefit me or saying “no”to people whether it be family or friends, it’s seen as a negative thing. So I want to explore the idea of doing things/saying “no” that may only benefit me (I don’t know what) [24/10/2018, 20:07:20] Saamiyah: Without feeling guilty [24/10/2018, 20:08:46] Joy: Exactly! [24/10/2018, 20:21:23] donSELZ: this relates so much to what im looking at! [24/10/2018, 20:23:08] donSELZ: that unconscious anxiety is what manifests the "looking glass self" [24/10/2018, 20:23:58] donSELZ: the looking glass self states that our self-views form as a result of our perceptions of other people’s opinions of us [24/10/2018, 20:25:19] donSELZ: and that unconscious anxiety of being seen as selfish starts to manifest in our minds as a "truth" even though it is not true at all [24/10/2018, 20:26:09] donSELZ: because of the hyper awareness because of the unconscious anxiety of how people might perceive it we can start to believe that about ourselves which becomes unhealthy [24/10/2018, 20:26:28] donSELZ: the guilt becomes unhealthy [24/10/2018, 20:36:00] Joy: It summarises what i want to say!👍 [24/10/2018, 20:38:42] donSELZ: :D