#it's more about watching my friends overcoming co many issues with their gender that makes me question whenever or not I'm actually cis

[mvost]

being agender is so weird sometimes. I just don't quite fit in any gender norms and that's okay, I don't mind! but I still think that people perceive me different from how I perceive myself (duh).

irl I'm very feminine presenting while still using he/him most of the time, but I also don't have any issues with switching to she/her for school and such. when I talk about myself/my self-inserts I prefer they/them, even though this is my least liked pronoun. I also like it/its but not in a 'thing' way and more in a third secret option. I don't use neos just because I'm not sure if I like how they sound, but I won't even get offended (and probably will be even glad) if anyone used them for me. ofc pronouns don't showcase how anyone perceives their own being, but this is more to the topic of this just not mattering much to me.

and while all this IS present in my day to day life, I still manage to feel outside of any gender at all. I didn't even have dysphoria (or rarely. I don't really like these periods of time) and never doubted it much. ofc, everything may change in the future, but I kinda just knew that I'm not a boy nor am I nby and never struggled with figuring it out. strange!

[whatwashernameagain]

My fangirling about female representation, ethnic diversity and relationship models in Steven Universe

The knowledge that children will watch this show and learn that it is okay to be gay, autistic, polyamorous or a proud big, butch, non-binary or black girl is marvelous to me. I’m sure this has been done before, but I want to share my love for this progress in storytelling with my fellow famders (because I have to tell someone.right.now.)

Steven Universe, (created by the non-binary angel Rebecca Sugar) in short, features the (actually genderless) aliens called ‘the crystal gems’, who are almost exclusively considered female and raise a boy that represents the opposite of toxic masculinity.

Steven:

He embodies healing, nurturing, protection, acceptance and friendship - all usually female traits, and relentlessly tries to befriend villains and mosters alike. Wonderfully, he is allowed to make silly mistakes and learns that he is still loved.

Pearl:

She is the epitome of a caring and nurturing female that sacrifice themselves for their charges, portrayed with grace and beauty. At the same time, the struggle of this sacrifice and threatened loss of self are shown. Pearl comes from a background where she is taught servility and prettiness (as women have been for centuries), yet she has learned to re-invent herself and became a master-swordfighter. She’s also a lesbian in canon.

Amethyst:

She’s a bombshell. A loud, small, roundish troublemaker with issues and a dirty, immature humor. She suffers from anxiety over expectations of physical standards she cannot live up to, since amethysts are expected to be a certain way she cannot achieve. An example for the damage of impossible beauty standards.

Ruby and Sapphire:

An example for a relationship that grew over time with work and effort and is based on mutual respect and love of the things that make their partner different. Additionally, while they are not only a mixed-race lesbian couple, they come from different classes of society. Their union represents the way a healthy relationship can create something greater than the sum of its parts. 

Garnet:

A kick-ass, huge woman of color who loves herself and loved being herself. A counterpoint to the lesson we have been taught for too long: to be humble and unobtrusive. My favorite character of the show. She’s the result of the fusion of Ruby and Sapphire and combines all of their awesome lesbian love vibes. No one would ever dare to make this black goddess feel like she’s anything less than amazing, as no black girl should.

Click for more enthusiastic rambling.

Connie:

Steven’s best friend. Their friendship is the purest thing, based on communication and mutual consideration. She’s the nerd. Smart, bookish, hard-working - and a fierce fighter who does not let anyone stand before her, despite the fact that she has no powers. As she was intruduced, she was just another girl in a dress. Her arc shows what girls can accomplish when they demand entrance to circles usually closed to them.

Stevonnie:

One of the most liberal and creative uses of gender I’ve seen. They are the fusion of Steven and Connie. At no point in the show is there any conflict about the fact that a boy and a girl have fused to create something new - with a femaleish form. This non-binary person is considered something especially wonderful, perphaps because they embody characteristics of both. they are even refered to as them in the show by Pearl. (notice how Connie dips Steven? Awesome)

Smoky Quartz:

The fusion of Amethyst and Steven. A chubby, black person with self-esteem issues handled with a lot of good-natured humour. Wonderfully, their weight is never the issue for even a moment, because they are awesome and we need more big angels being cute and beautiful! They’ve also been referred to with they/them pronouns.

Peridot:

This tiny nerd has overcome a lot of prejudice and has had to learn to co-exist peacefully with her new friends. Due to what I would interpret as autistic tendencies, she has trouble reading emotion and reacting accordinly. Technology is easier for her to handle, which is therefor used by Steven to bridge the distance between them. She now lives in a cute and domestic lesbian platonic partnership with Lapis where they grow crops and create art with their ‘dog’ pumpkin.

Lapis:

She is the victim of abuse in different ways. After being locked away for a long time, she closes herself off or lashes out and requires patience and understanding to heal, thus representing the violence women often suffer from. Unfortunately, she soon gets entangled with Jasper, ending up in another abusive relationship as victims of violence often do.

Jasper:

The abuser. Female violence is a topic not often portrayed, yet one that definitely exists. She represses and uses Lapis (who binds her as well) and yet becomes a victim of their relationship herself, since toxic relationships hurt both parties. The damage done to her by her obsession with Lapis, and by extension her desperate need to be in a partnership, is represented by a corruption that eats her up.

Bismuth:

Isn’t she wonderful? Flat-chested, rainbow-haired, broad-shouldered alpha bitch with a loud and brash humor that you cannot help but love. This lady is a perfect example for the way women are allowed to be butch in this show and still be unquestionably beautiful. With her occupation as a blacksmith and her violent anger when hurt, she pushes relentlessly into traditionally male characteristics in storytelling.

Fluorite:

“How many gems are you now?”

Fluorite: “Six. Or more, if we find the right gem.”

This gentle rainbow giant is another example of the way fusion represents relationships - a polyamprous one in this case. As in our society, they are cast out and misunderstood for being different, but kids will simply see it as normal and that is awesome!

Rose:

The mother. Though she has been a bad-ass war criminal before, feared and hunted and a brave and inspiring leader, she has sacrificed everything once she became a mother. Portrayed as a traditionally nurturing female form with round, fertile lines and pale rose colors, she represents the mothering aspect of femininity. The fact that she is twice the size as her partner Greg and can easily pick him up once again shows that being feminine doesn’t make her weak. She shows the self-negating and sacrificing tendency many women display for their family in a very drastic way, since she literally disappears as Steven is born and becomes a part of him.

This is where I’ll stop this already too long post, even though I could say lots more about the insecurity Lars experiences because of toxic expectations of masculinity, the modesty of Sadie that makes her allow others to walk all over her, or the appreciating way the show deals with Greg, who is arguably a bad provider but still a loving father. I just adore the caring and supportive tone of this show so much and I hope everyone will give it a chance.

Love you all <3

[thenicedolphin]

Oscars Analysis With Biting Commentary: 2019 Edition!

We are BACK, with the 7th annual Oscars post from The Nice Dolphin (see links here for 2018, 2017, 2016, 2015, 2014, 2013), where Matt provides insightful, quality analysis while Alex texts some thoughts from his iPhone about how Lego Movie 2 was robbed of a nomination even though it’s not even eligible this year. As always, Matt is in regular font, and Alex comes in with the BOLD.

 You know what? Lego Movie 2 WAS robbed this year! Just like how Lego Movie should’ve been nominated for Best Picture in 2015 and didn’t even get nominated to be in the ghetto of Best Animated Feature. Horseshit. We haven’t even gotten to the first category and I’m already PISSED.

 Best Picture: “Black Panther” “BlacKkKlansman” “Bohemian Rhapsody” “The Favourite” “Green Book” “Roma” “A Star Is Born” “Vice”

 I’ll start by noting this wasn’t my favorite years for Oscar nominees. The top picks aren’t as good as Get Out or Lady Bird (or Phantom Thread) from last year. Or Moonlight and La La Land the year before. But there are a few great films in here, along with some mediocre picks.

 Nice try sneaking La La Land in there -- should’ve at least gone with Argo. I do agree that it’s a weak year. Lady Bird would’ve jobbed out almost all the other movies this year, and it was like the third best movie from last year (behind Get Out and Phantom Thread). Honestly, just go back and read last year’s post.

I’d go to bat for Roma for sure. It’s a great film. It certainly is a masterpiece of visuals and a writer/director getting to tell his personal story. It certainly felt like a movie event to watch it in theaters.

 Certainly.

 The sound was really creative (surround sound to make the neighborhood and events feel alive). The visuals were beautiful and poignant, as one would expect with Cuaron. He really put all his effort in telling this story, paying homage to his childhood and to the live-in maid who so strongly influenced his upbringing.

 Roma starts slow, but it builds, and I became enraptured with it during the second half. Some of the sequences are intense and well worth the previous groundwork. There’s a 10-15 minute sequence (just an estimate) that left me shook and in awe at the filmmaking (the scene starting at the furniture store). Another scene gave such emotional catharsis and helped close the movie really well. Roma also has some fun tangents and moments (I think of everything around New Year’s Eve) that some may find meandering. I dug them.

 While Roma was a technical masterpiece, I’m still not sold on it as a story. Literally nothing happens for the first 100 minutes then we get some things that are completely unnerving, including one image that does not feel entirely earned, to put it mildly.

 TASTELESS SPOILER ALERT

 Cuaron is like “yeah, let’s focus on some dog shit for two hours. Enjoying that? Well, here look at this dead baby for like 15 minutes straight.” Dude was on screen for EONS. Thought he was gunning for a best supporting nom.

 SPOILERS OVER

 Roma is definitely a loving portrait of Cleo, a personal ode to the women who raised Cuaron, and an astute look into the intersection of economic class and gender in 1970s Mexico, but I can’t tell if those well-made pieces combine to make a truly great movie.

 Otherwise, I’m not sure how much I’d want to rewatch this film or revisit it in entirety, but I really admired it and thought it was great. It is the frontrunner, and it would deserve Best Picture.

 I’m a little worried that because of its Netflix standing and that weirdness. For example, AMC and Regal didn’t include Roma in their best picture marathons/showcases because it didn’t meet the distribution requirement for those theaters. Does that affect voters too? It seemed to with a few previous prestige Netflix films, but things do seem different now. So let’s talk about the next upset contender right now: Green Book.

 Green Book is an interesting movie to me. It’s fairly polarizing because of the way it treats racial issues and the friendship between Viggo Mortensen’s white Italian character (Tony Lip) and Mahershala Ali’s black character (Don Shirley). You may have seen some of the controversies, such as how Shirley’s family wasn’t consulted on the film and disputes some of the representations of Shirley’s relationship with his family (deserving of criticism in my opinion). There has been criticism of director Peter Farrelly’s past on-set antics, or co-writer (son of Tony Lip) Nick Vallelonga’s tweet history (less of an issue to me to criticize the film, but still, not great, Bob).

 First and foremost, FOCK this movie. Tony Lip is racist as hell! Like REALLY racist. You can tell it was written by his son, because the movie treats Tony like he’s the perfect man who was just a touch unexposed to other cultures. He never really learned or grew, especially with the whole “You’re not even black!” rant at the end. He just goes from being super racist to not(?) racist because he’s getting paid to hang out with Dr. Shirley for a few weeks.

 Green Book has two great leading performances and some wonderful friendship moments. It has some funny Italian moments (is this racist?), and it has some great moments of strength by Don Shirley in rougher times racially. But man… I just can’t get over some of the key aspects of the film.

 The film really leans into the dynamic of hey, you’re black, I’m white, we’re different, but hey, we’re not so different! It feels antiquated, and this year, other films handled race relations better while being better stories overall (examples include Sorry to Bother You, Blindspotting, and If Beale Street Could Talk). Green Book’s lack of nuance reminds me of Crash and Driving Miss Daisy. Hell, the movie is called Green Book, and they barely mention it! They should have just called it something else.

 I get that little Nicky V. wanted to make a film about what a big man his daddy was, but it really only should’ve been loosely based on the Lip-Shirley friendship, and it could’ve avoided all the embarrassing fallout about Shirley not actually being estranged from the family/culture.

 The flipside of this is whether or not Green Book is an entertaining, good movie. And in some ways it is. The friendship is fun. The banter is entertaining. I really liked Wesley Morris’ analysis of this on a podcast with Bill Simmons, who discussed how, when you take aside race and the message, the friendship is well-portrayed and some of the editing and scenes work well.

 The first 30 minutes of this movie is some of the worst stuff ever recorded. Not even in terms of movies, but like, anything. It’s just Tony and his family being super racist, him entering into a hot dog eating contest (lmao what) and hacky banter between Tony and Dr. Shirley. Tony having to explain the concept of fried chicken to Dr. Shirley was a low point in a year that featured the existence of 15:17 to Paris. LOOK AT THE BABY CHICKEN LEG SPENCER

 But Green Book is trying to talk about race. It’s what the film emphasizes and it’s what the creators of the film emphasized during their awards run. And if you handle that clumsily, it’s hard for me to separate that from my enjoyment of the film. I don’t need to see more stories about white guys thinking black people are deplorable, and then well, you meet a black guy, and he isn’t so bad! That’s not a great story! Ultimately, Green Book is a solid film with some troublesome messaging that weighs it down. And the film isn’t so amazing story/acting wise to overcome those issues. It’s just kinda… vanilla.

 I’ll speak more on the leads in later sections, but if it wasn’t for Mahershala Ali’s deeply nuanced portrayal of Don Shirley, this movie would be completely irredeemable. Fortunately, he’s actually given a character with some agency, but everything about him is all done in service of the white man’s story about his “growth” as a person, which is really just him learning to be less of an asshole -- not exactly a hero turn!

 Also, how many fucking times did they need to cut back to Tony shrugging in the Orange Bird? Geez, we get it already.

 One more point to rant on: the fact that Tony’s son co-wrote the screenplay, and then Don Shirley’s family came out strongly against some of the story points REALLY rubs me the wrong way. Let’s put it this way: if a friend of mine did a story about his friendship with me, emphasizing inaccurately that I didn’t know how to eat Korean BBQ and had initially thought the idea of it was gross, and that I was estranged from my family but considered him and his family to be my family instead??? Dawg… I would haunt you from my grave for that shit.

 /quietly deletes “The Nice Dolphin” screenplay

 A Star is Born seemed like a heavy contender when it came out. It crushed the box office, critics and audience members seemed to love it, but it seems to have cooled off bigtime v. Roma and Green Book (really??? Green Book???). Well, I loved it, so let me sing its praises.

 A Star is Born was good, but not that good. A hugely entertaining first hour followed by some terribly-paced sequences and a weirdly undefined Jack Maine (I didn’t realize how he spelled his name until that concert poster at the end) combine for an enjoyable, but uneven film.

 Star is Born coulda gone poorly. Cooper trying to direct/sing/play music, Gaga trying to act, original soundtrack, and remaking an old story. Well, it works. The music is on point, the two lead acting performances are strong. There are some magical moments in this film… the scenes where they meet and flirt, where they write music together, when they perform Shallow… it’s so good! The film is good throughout, and the ending packs a wallop. I really like Star is Born, and I hope it can get more love than its likely Best Song win.

 I will admit, I knew the ending before I saw it, so some of the impact was lessened and it also basically ruined that scene with Jack and his counselor. Also it was really late at night and I was pretty cranky, so by the third or fourth scene of her lumbering around the dance studio, I was ready to call it.

 Still, Gaga and Cooper have great chemistry, which made the early scenes pop. However, the movie seemed like it didn’t really know what to make of Jack. Was he truly a troubled poet, or just a raging asshole using his art as an excuse for being an awful person? Was he a big country star selling out amphitheaters or a washed up, piss-soaked loser? What the movie was trying to claim as nuance really just came off as equivocation.

 I am pleasantly surprised that The Favourite got as much Oscar buzz as it did. Alex can elaborate, but Yorgos is definitely a more out there director, and The Favourite seems to work really well as a pivot for him. It’s a little more mainstream, but not completely. It’s not a sell-out. This movie is still probably too weird and rated R for some people.

 As a true Yorgite, I am THRILLED that my man is getting more mainstream love. The Favourite and Black Panther are my two favorite Best Picture nominees this year, despite them basically having no shot at winning.

 Even going a bit “mainstream” here (this is the most natural-sounding dialogue in the Yorgos filmography), Yorgos sacrifices nothing about his unique, vicious style. This movie is as nasty, biting, and hilarious as anything else he’s done, and the entire cast (especially the three leads) delivers.

 I really liked it. The performances were great, the story was really fun (Mean Girls but in a royal setting, or All About Eve, which I haven’t seen), the camerawork was interesting. I like how unconventional it was in some ways, like the ending just sorta sneaking up on me.

 I saw this in a packed theater and I could definitely tell it was a lot of older couples who thought they were in for something along the lines of “The Crown” or “Downton Abbey,” and not heavy lesbian erotica. Also, despite what he says, I don’t consider Matt a true Yorgite, so it’s no surprise he wasn’t ready for that ending. My first thought when them bunnies hit the screen? “Yorgos, you’ve done it again!” A true masterpiece.

 People are worked up about Black Panther getting a nomination, and I’m like… have you seen Bohemian Rhapsody or Vice? And you’re mad about Black Panther?

 People being mad about the Black Panther getting nominated and Green Book getting legit Best Picture love? If only there was some common thread here...

 First, I’ve definitely had friends surprised because for them, Infinity War was better… but I mean, they’re big Marvel fans so IW was a bigger deal to them storywise. Meanwhile, a lot of friends also told me how amazing Black Panther was, how it was their favorite Marvel movie, how it was so much more than a superhero movie, etc. Critics gave it strong reviews deservingly in my opinion, and it crushed the box office because it resonated with a lot of people. Just because it’s not as critically good as Roma and it’s a superhero movie doesn’t mean that it’s only in because it’s about race or that it doesn’t deserve it.

 Black Panther absolutely deserved the nomination. Despite Avengers: Infinity War being a more crucial story to the MCU, Black Panther was a better, more cohesive film. IW was basically one long chase/fight scene, which I loved, but it can’t really stand on its own.

 Black Panther built an entire world, populated it with fascinating characters with complex motivations, and had some badass action scenes all within the span of like two hours.

 Also, come on guys. This is the same show that’s given nominations to… Bohemian Rhapsody. And Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close (did anyone actually see that?). The Post, American Sniper, Philomena (does anyone remember that?)... I mean, does a movie only deserve to be nominated because it was about an Oscar-type of topic? I say nominate more of these blockbuster movies (IF they are good). Why did Mission Impossible and Crazy Rich Asians and Game Night not get nominated when Bohemian Rhapsody did? They were better reviewed.

 First of all, I take umbrage to you including American Sniper with that trash. Also, Game Night didn’t get nominated because it wasn’t that good (it’s still better than Green Book and Bohemian Rhapsody, but you get it). Crazy Rich Asians and Mission Impossible were both fantastic. Actually, here is an incomplete list of movies that are better than Bohemian Rhapsody and Green Book that came out this year, but didn’t get much, if any, Oscar love:

Annihilation Bad Times at the El Royale Crazy Rich Asians Deadpool 2 The Equalizer 2 (didn’t actually see this, but it’s got Denzel) First Reformed Halloween Lego Movie (still) Mission Impossible: Fallout A Quiet Place Searching Sorry to Bother You Spider-man: Into the Spider-verse (got some love, deserved more) Widows

 Honestly Teen Titans Go! To The Movies and Venom were better than that trash too.

 Anyway, Black Panther rules. It’s got an awesome cast of characters, it represents culture well, Coogler crushes the direction, the story is fun, and the villain is super compelling. People loved the ending scenes of Black Panther. This movie is worthy. Also shoutout to that last scene between Boseman and Jordan. Seriously, so good. Honestly, Black Panther had at least 4 scenes that were just as dramatic AND better-done than BR.

 That sounds impressive until you realize that BR had zero well-done scenes. Seriously, every time I think about that movie I hate it more. It’s the opposite of Phantom Thread. It’s the Terrestrial Thread.

 Bohemian Rhapsody is probably one of the worst movies to be nominated for Best Picture in recent years. Look, if you like the movie and find it entertaining, that’s totally fine! Just don’t tell me Black Panther didn’t deserve it when it’s better in every technical aspect.

 The editing is bad. The story of the movie is a censored version crafted by the living band members of Queen to paint them in the best light. Freddie Mercury is portrayed like more of an immature punk than he deserves, and the other band members seem like the grown-ups. The dramatic scenes are not very good. It’s just fine. The acting is solid. The movie is fun when the band is playing music or making music. But it really drags at parts. A solid B- crowdpleaser. NOT an Oscar movie.

 The only time this movie is entertaining is when Queen is playing/making music. Just save yourself the trouble and watch some old concert DVD or whatever. Every “based on a true story” movie is going to take some liberties with the facts, but this is the first movie I can recall that makes the true story MORE boring. This is literally the exact same movie as Straight Outta Compton, except that one was better -- and didn’t even get nominated! Straight Outta Compton is the Lego Movie of musical biopics.

 BlacKkKlansman was a powerful movie, though I’ll say it isn’t peak Spike Lee for me. It is really good in moments, and it’s also weaker in stretches. Basically, whenever the main character is infiltrating the KKK or working with his partner, the movie works. The scenes about the civil rights movements are really good, especially a scene where Kwame Ture gives a speech. The movie is slower when it tries to delve into Ron Stallworth’s personal life and romance. The movie is probably 15-20 minutes too long, which would be my main critique. And the ending is a bit polarizing (it worked for me, but I can see the argument against it).

 15-20 minutes too long? Sounds like peak Spike to me. Hey-ooooooooooooo!

 I really dug BlacKkKlansman, but man the capitalization of the title is infuriating. I agree that it’s a bit scattered (and not in a way that actually serves the story), but overall, I think Spike put together a film that is entertaining, exciting, and sadly all-too-relevant in today’s world. The scenes from recent news at the end might’ve come off a bit clunky to some, but it really brought the message home that in some ways the movie might’ve had a “happy” ending, but in no way is the big picture a positive one.

 Vice. Man. I was really looking forward to this one and I was disappointed. It felt like Adam McKay took all his tools from The Big Short and used them to excess. The Big Short was crisp and covered one specific story. Vice tries to cover a lot of years of Cheney’s life without much cohesion. I wish the movie had focused more on the VP years, which were the best parts of the movie and far too short. The Big Short’s narrator was a main character who explained a lot of complicated concepts that related to his character. Vice tried to have a random character with tons of narration, and it was all over the place without really having a reason for being in the movie. McKay also tries a few other ambitious things that don’t work as well when your movie isn’t strong. Basically, the riskier decisions stuck out more poorly. I wanted to dig this movie, but it just wasn’t very well-made, and I’m underwhelmed by its nominations.

 I didn’t get around to Vice, but there’s something comforting about knowing that I’ll never see all of the Best Picture nominees. Not that I’ve ever let that stop me from providing commentary before. Besides, after Matt’s SCATHING review, I probably made the right call.

 An interesting theme that pervades several of the Best Pic noms this year is the movies being directly at odds with their “true stories” in ways that actively hurt the movies. Green Book, Bohemian Rhapsody, and BlacKkKlansman all suffer from this. Maybe Vice too? Who knows.

 Generally, I try to separate the movie from the real events it’s based on. Real life is rarely as entertaining as a Hollywood flick, so I totally get why Die Hard didn’t have a third act of Carl Winslow filling out paperwork. HAVING SAID THAT when the true tale gets twisted into something totally unrecognizable, is it fair to criticize the movie for that? Green Book completely mutated the character of Dr. Don Shirley to fit a narrative of friendship triumphing over racism; Bohemian Rhapsody mischaracterized the relationship between Freddie Mercury and his bandmates to create a non-existent redemption/comeback arc; BlacKkKlansman ignored all the ways Ron Stallworth sabotaged the pro-Black movement in Colorado in service of painting police as the true heroes of equality.

 I don’t have all the answers here, but these three examples feel like particularly egregious warpings of reality. However, I want to use this opportunity to praise YORGOS, who took enough from history to give The Favourite some context, but was up front about his editorialization enough to where the historical inaccuracies didn’t matter, and it didn’t feel like watching some ol boolshit.

 I wish First Man and If Beale Street Could Talk had gotten in over Vice and Bohemian, or in addition to (since the nominations can go up to 10).  Hell, if you had just added these two to make it 10, this crop would look stronger. The follow-ups for the directors of La La Land and Moonlight, neither film was as strong as the previous outings, but both were quality art. First Man sometimes had less impressive action with its use of shaky cam in the cockpit (which made the theater experience dizzying at times), and it mostly lost the mainstream audience because it was less adventurous than movies like The Martian or Interstellar. It also chose to try to portray Armstrong as an ordinary, less romantic type of hero, which may have been to its detriment for entertainment purposes. But I really liked the story of Neil Armstrong and NASA, warts and all. It felt more authentic and well-acted compared to, oh, I dunno, BR. And the moon landing scenes were breathtaking.

 Beale Street struggled for me with its back-and-forth narrative, and some characters who I wish had more to do but some of the scenes were so good, and the art of it was beautiful. I also wish foreign films like Cold War and Shoplifters could get some Best Picture love too, but I’ll talk more about them below.

 Cinematography: “Cold War,” Lukasz Zal “The Favourite,” Robbie Ryan “Never Look Away,” Caleb Deschanel “Roma,” Alfonso Cuarón “A Star Is Born,” Matthew Libatique

 (edit: We put these categories here as a little TND protest for when the Oscars weren’t gonna air them on the regular telecast. But we’ll leave them here still, because these categories rule.)

 The presumed favorite appears to be Roma, with Cold War as a potential dark horse. After Cuarón’s go-to cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki (three-time consecutive Oscar winner at one point, including for Cuarón’s Gravity) left, he pulled a Thanos and decided to do it himself. Roma’s photography has all the marks of a Lubezki/Cuarón joint. He did well. Some of the shots may be a bit much (as one friend asked, why so many dog poop shots?). But the tracking shots are glorious and usually worked well for art. Following the lizard around on a random day, Cleo running along the street, the shot of the men training, the forest on New Year’s Eve… and of course, the aforementioned furniture store and beach sequences.

 I didn’t see Cold War, but it’s fine because Roma will win. Roma does look great, but damn can Cuaron get another trick besides panning ten feet in either direction after the natural conclusion of a scene? Seriously, he does it like every twenty minutes. I guess this is world building? “You see, here’s what’s happening to our characters. And there’s also more stuff happening...slightly to the left.”

 I was very curious about Cold War after it got a best director nomination as well. The cinematography was beautiful too. And it also deals in black-and-white like Roma, and with different camera framing (I’m not technical enough to explain that). It had some great shots too, in particular a shot with a mirror that really impressed me. Of note, Cold War beat Roma in the American Society of Cinematographer Awards.

 A Star is Born had some good camerawork and cool concert shots.

 Great camera framing when the guy pisses himself. You really *feel* the piss.

 The Favourite was worthy of a nomination too, using some unique camera angles and fisheye lens shots that could have been distracting but ended up working really well for the movie. I have not seen Never Look Away, but the trailer looked good.

 Those long hallway shots in The Favourite were superb. Robbie Ryan is a true Yorgite.

 Film Editing: “BlacKkKlansman,” Barry Alexander Brown “Bohemian Rhapsody,” John Ottman “Green Book,” Patrick J. Don Vito “The Favourite,” Yorgos Mavropsaridis “Vice,” Hank Corwin

 LOL Bohemian Rhapsody. See the aforementioned link about the bad editing in it. I mean, I guess the montage while they recorded the title track was really fun, but cmon! I also had a lot of fun during some scenes of Venom, and I didn’t see that get a bunch of noms!

 Well maybe it should have! Matt made me watch that clip of the first record exec convo from Bohemian Rhapsody, and it’s so bad it wasn’t until like my third viewing when I realized Matt was trying to point out how poorly edited it was. Seriously, I couldn’t even get past the dialogue: “Queen...is for losers” “Well I’m sold!”

 Vice seems to be a favorite on Gold Derby. The movie was too all over the place for me, and I guess it would win for the most editing, because there are all sorts of jumping around and montages and random things the film does. Bohemian is the next favorite, so I don’t really care for this year’s winner. Maybe this year it SHOULD be on commercial break. Jk.

 I didn’t see Vice, but I agree with Matt that more editing definitely doesn’t equal better editing. I think Billy Walsh would agree that sometimes it’s about the cuts you DON’T make.

 I would vote for The Favourite. It’s crisp and efficient. Green Book’s editing is probably a strong suit too, admittedly. BlacKkKlansman could have been shortened some, but the editing during some of the back-and-forths (I think of the KKK meeting versus the black students’ meeting at the end) was really good.

 I agree* that all three of these films were well-edited. It’s a shame that apparently they have no chance at actually winning this award.

 *I think I’ve already set a record for most times agreeing with Matt in an Oscars post. We’re like one of those old married couples that gradually turn into the same person over the years. Sure it might make for a boring post, but at least we’re RIGHT.

 Director: Spike Lee, “BlacKkKlansman” Pawel Pawlikowski, “Cold War” Yorgos Lanthimos, “The Favourite” Alfonso Cuarón, “Roma” Adam McKay, “Vice”

 Cuarón is the presumptive favorite, and he would be very worthy. He shepherded this project to fruition, he told the story he wanted to tell, and he kicked ass. I’ve heard Spike Lee is a possible surprise here, but I’d rather see him get the Screenplay win. As mentioned, BK is not his strongest work for me, and doesn’t quite compare to Do the Right Thing.

 Finally Matt says something stupid! Okay because BlacKkKlansman wasn’t as good as one of the greatest films of all time, Spike doesn’t deserve a win here? I’m not even saying he should win, but if he doesn’t, it’s not because he made a better movie in 1989.

 Cuaron will probably take home the gold, and it’s well-deserved, as he really put his signature style on every aspect of Roma. It’s obviously an extremely personal project for him, but he never lets it dip too far into “diary” territory, and ultimately allows the audience inside of his perspective instead of forcing us to observe from a distance.

 It’s dope that Pawlikowski got nominated sorta out of left field. He really crafted an interesting, powerful story, and it was creative and unique. Yorgos deserves props for his nomination, managing to combine his style with someone else’s script (first time using a script that wasn’t his!). I’m glad Peter Farrelly didn’t get the nod here, but I wish Cooper had gotten it in over McKay. Vice is not that impressive, but I really dug some of the decisions made in Star.

 This might come as a surprise, but I’m quite happy Yorgos got nominated and would love for him to get the upset victory over dog dookie Cuaron. Shoutout to both guys for being able to direct the hell out of some nudity though.

 Lead Actor: Christian Bale, “Vice” Bradley Cooper, “A Star Is Born” Willem Dafoe, “At Eternity’s Gate” Rami Malek, “Bohemian Rhapsody” Viggo Mortensen, “Green Book”

 My Cooper support continues! I hope he wins, and it sounds like some people want him to be a surprise upset here. I thought he really built this role up and nailed it. This could have gone poorly. He could have sounded like Russell Crowe in Les Mis, his voice could have been weird, and he might not have been so likable on screen. But he was! He really became Jackson Maine and crafted this interesting, romantic, tragic character. I thought he was terrific.

 *big sigh*

 I agree with Matt again. Cooper was fantastic in playing a could-have-been-thankless role of a guy who does terrible thing after terrible thing, but still needs the audience on his side at the end. His singing was more than serviceable in the movie, as it was mostly done in live concert scenes where him being a little ragged fit the character/moment. Just uhh, don’t pull that shit up on Spotify.

 Rami Malek is the frontrunner here, which surprises me. Again, I don’t like the movie, but I also like Malek. But Malek has impressed me much more in projects like Mr. Robot and The Pacific. Here, I feel like he is doing a solid impersonation, but he’s not blowing me away like DDL in Lincoln. I feel like he was also limited by the weak script/story. I wish he had had more powerhouse scenes and dialogue, but he just didn’t.

 Oh he didn’t blow you like DDL in Lincoln? That might’ve been the greatest biopic performance of all time. “Malek was good, but his acting wasn’t as good as Spike Lee’s directing in the 80s.”

 Not to defend Malek, dude is just up there doin a little bucky beaver impression -- and I like Malek! Shit was limp and lame. IAWM (I agree with Matt) in that the rest of the movie was so bad, Malek was never afforded the opportunity to rise above being a Halloween costume. Still, he did next to nothing, even with scant material.

 Bale obviously made an impressive transformation in weight/look for Vice, and I always am a fan. He was pretty good here, and I’d be fine with a win, but it wasn’t his best work.

 Viggo was good, but part of the problem of the movie is the fact that Viggo was the lead instead of Mahershala, as the film would have benefited more from being through the lens of Shirley’s view, and not Tony Lip’s.

 Yeah, it pisses me off that Viggo (lol never realized how funny of a name that is until I just typed it) is even in this category. Sure he did a fine job playing a racist guy...maybe a little too fine of a job? I’m surprised Liam Neeson wasn’t clamoring for the role of Tony Lip, so he could do a little method acting.

 As for Dafoe… I don’t know anyone who saw this film, and I wasn’t hyped enough to go see it. Hell, the idea of a 60+ year old playing a guy who died at 37 was enough to not get me hyped, even if the makers tried to say he would have looked like Van Gogh because of the circumstances of the times.

 I obviously didn’t see this movie, but wow that is a hell of a paragraph. Are most people hyped by an old man playing a younger man? Actually, I heard that the producers were worried that Dafoe didn’t look old ENOUGH and were going to CGI in Christopher Plummer. Still though, “circumstances of the times?” I know 2019 seems awful, but this is a helpful reminder that the world use to be a literal hellscape.

 I would have liked to see Ethan Hawke here for First Reformed. He carried the movie, he was awesome in it, and it was definitely unlike the normal Hawke performance I’ve seen before.

 Matt, put a backhanded compliment warning there, sheesh. Hawke was fantastic in First Reformed and absolutely deserved a nomination ahead of Viggo, Malek, Fat Bale, and Benjamin Button-ass Dafoe.

 Gosling here would have been good too. Also would have been cool to see an indie lead, whether Lakeith Stanfield in Sorry to Bother You or John Cho in Searching.

 Stanfield and Cho crushed it in their respective roles. Funny story, Cho initially passed on Searching, but the filmmakers basically stole his phone number and hounded him until he agreed to do on the condition that they leave his ass alone afterwards.

 Lead Actress: Yalitza Aparicio, “Roma” Glenn Close, “The Wife” Olivia Colman, “The Favourite” Lady Gaga, “A Star Is Born” Melissa McCarthy, “Can You Ever Forgive Me?”

 Glenn Close is supposed to win. It’s apparently a lock. This definitely feels like another career honor, since this is her 7th nomination and she hasn’t won. Close is pretty good. The movie is OK and she has a delicate, graceful, but powerful performance here. I mainly just feel like it was the least memorable role here.

 I didn’t see The Wife, but for some reason I’ve got love for Glenn, so I’m happy she’s getting a win.

 Colman wasn’t necessarily the lead of the film, and it was really a three-headed monster (apparently Stone’s character has the most screentime), but she was awesome. She nailed this crazy, sad, bigtime character. I’d pull for her, and I think she has a small chance.

 Colman might’ve had less screen time than Stone, but as the raunchy queen, she commands the audience’s attention much like she commands love from Stone and Weisz. Everything is in service of the queen and Colman puts every ounce of emotion and feeling into a role tightly balanced between needing fealty and needing love.

 Gaga was a contender for a while, and I really liked her and was impressed with her rising to the occasion and taking on this lead role, weaving in her real life story with this fictional character. I think she didn’t always quite hit the acting level of Cooper, but she was close.

 Gaga was good for a rookie, but cmon. She basically had like two expressions the entire movie (dumbstruck and covering half her face/sad and covering half her face).

 I was really into McCarthy’s performance and thought this was a legit good indie film. Small story, really focusing on her character, and she carries it well! The Wife and this are smaller indie stories, but I was more wowed by McCarthy. She handles a sad sack of a character, self-loathing, mischievous, witty. I think she’s a great actress who sometimes ends up in unfortunate movies. This was a good one.

 Shockingly I didn’t see Can You Ever Forgive Me?, but I’m glad McCarthy is getting love. She’s a great actress, but always finds herself in shitty movies.

 I’m so glad Yalitza Aparicio got a nomination! She wasn’t quite as strong to me as Colman or McCarthy, but she has to be good for the film to be good, of course, and she is. I think the technical aspects of the movie outshine her performance in some ways, but she deserves merit.

 Yalitza’s gotta be straight up laughing at all the love for Lady Gaga. Another first time actress, she actually does a great job in the film instead of just getting points because she has hit single songs. The range of emotions on her face when confronted by the nude ninja alone made her worthy of a nomination.

 Who else would I have wanted? Maybe Joanna Kulig for Cold War. She’s a star, and she dances/sings/acts in terrific fashion. Also shoutout to Natalie Portman for Annihilation and Elsie Fisher in Eighth Grade. No one’s gonna remember The Wife in 5 years, but Eighth Grade will stand the test of time.

 Supporting Actor: Mahershala Ali, “Green Book” Adam Driver, “BlacKkKlansman” Sam Elliott, “A Star Is Born” Richard E. Grant, “Can You Ever Forgive Me?” Sam Rockwell, “Vice”

 Mahershala is expected to win, and he’s really good as Don Shirley, so I’m cool with it. He is such a magnetic actor, and he carries Shirley well. It’s a pretty different type of character from Juan in Moonlight. Juan’s performance leaned in on charisma, masculinity, and tenderness. Shirley is a character reliant on dignity, sophistication, and inner rage. He nails both. He’s really good. For all the faults I have with the making of Green Book, I do really like Mahershala here. It’s pretty wild that he’s about to get his second Oscar, but hey, good for him!

 You mean an actor played two different roles? Wauw.

 Mahershala completely carried Green Book and filled Don Shirley with so much nuance, complexity, and integrity that he himself should’ve gotten nominated for Best Picture. He IS the movie. It’s such a shame his character was relegated to the supporting role because there’s so much awesome internal logic to Dr. Shirley that he’s fascinating to watch and Ali does a great job of bringing all of that to the forefront without having to resort to speechifying his thoughts or emotions.

 I really like Driver and always like his work. He’s a unique, compelling actor in whatever role he’s in. He has more to do in BK than John David Washington’s main character, and he’s not weighed down by the romance story. There’s something really convincing in any role Driver portrays, whether it’s Kylo Ren, Adam in Girls, or his performance in Silence. I thought his performance was pretty key to the BK story.

 Driver definitely brings a fun presence to BlacKkKlansman helping to achieve the delicate tonal balance Spike was looking for. I mean, not as good as the tonal balance JGL brought to Lincoln, but I digress.

 Grant was really wonderful and charming, and he really carries the movie along with McCarthy. Elliott doesn’t have a ton of scenes in A Star is Born, but each scene of his was a highlight for me. His relationship with Cooper is key to the film, and I really dug it. I don’t really see why Rockwell had to get a nom here. He’s not too essential to the film, and he does a good W impersonation, but this just pales in comparison to his role last year in Three Billboards.

 Ha I only skimmed that last paragraph and just furiously googled “Sam Elliott Three Billboards” because I was confused as fock. Yeah that last conversation between Cooper and Elliott was fantastic, and Elliott is great throughout as the older brother who never got quite as much ass as Jackson Maine.

 We couldn’t have thrown a nod here to Michael B. Jordan instead, for his compelling (albeit polarizing) acting job in Black Panther? I also loved Brian Tyree Henry’s character in If Beale Street Could Talk. Similar short screentime to Rockwell, but way more impactful and memorable. Henry’s scenes in Beale Street are some of the best work you’ll see from last year.

 Was that acting job really polarizing? We have a term for people who have negative things to say about Black Panther. They’re called...Vallelongas. Brian Tyree Henry is one of my favorite actors, so I have no doubt that he was great in Beale Street. I do want to shout him and Daniel Kaluuya out for their performances in Widows. For a story about four strong women coming together to wreck some shit, Henry and Kaluuya stole the show. And my heart.

 Also want to shout out my man Beast! Not saying he should win, but his scene to hilarity ratio in The Favourite was easily 1:1. Everything in The Favourite popped, but his presence made it even poppier.

 Supporting Actress: Amy Adams, “Vice” Marina de Tavira, “Roma” Regina King, “If Beale Street Could Talk” Emma Stone, “The Favourite” Rachel Weisz, “The Favourite”

 I really like Regina King, and she’s pretty good in Beale Street, but I’m sorta surprised that she became the consensus pick. She doesn’t quite have as memorable a performance for me as Mahershala’s or say, Brian Tyree Henry in the same film. She’s a great actress, but there’s not a ton for her to do, and I didn’t leave that film being like WOW, that character!

 Stone and Weisz seem to negate each other, unfortunately. They are both terrific. I didn’t love Stone in La La Land but she’s really fun and vicious here. Weisz is great too and has a lot of fun. I would probably give the edge to Weisz, but I’d strongly praise either performance.

 Weisz was amazing as Sarah Churchill. She is definitely the centerpiece of the film, and does a wonderful job providing an axis for all the wild shit that goes down. What really elevates her performance is that she doesn’t fall into the trap of merely being the straight woman (no pun intended, seriously), and still imbues her character with loads of cunning, fire, and personality.

 Stone was great as well, and I’ll say I didn’t enjoy her in La La Land either, but that’s mostly because I was watching La La Land at the time.

 Amy Adams is awesome in general and good in Vice. Marina de Tavira is really good in Roma, and her nomination was a nice surprise too. Her character as the mother is really pivotal to the story, and I thought she was good at being overall likable even while sometimes being harsh.

 De Tavira gives a great performance in a role that would’ve been easy to gloss over if played by another actress. She never allowed herself to become a background character or only appear as Cleo’s boss. Her story is just as dynamic and heart-rending as Cleo’s, and with less attention given to it, only a great performance would give it the weight it needed and de Tavira absolutely delivered.

 Original Screenplay: “The Favourite,” Deborah Davis, Tony McNamara “First Reformed,” Paul Schrader “Green Book,” Nick Vallelonga, Brian Currie, Peter Farrelly “Roma,” Alfonso Cuarón “Vice,” Adam McKay

 The Favourite seems to be… the favourite for this category.

 Nice.

 It’s a fun, witty script based on historical events (and it seemed to do a decent enough job being similar enough to real life!). Updating a story for the modern times in film format is no easy feat, and I really enjoyed this story.

 Like I mentioned earlier, The Favourite does a great job of drawing just enough historical context while still keeping things fresh and honest, without making the story feel bastardized.

 This is Paul Schrader’s first nomination, which is pretty crazy when he’s had films like Taxi Driver and Raging Bull. First Reformed has a unique, fascinating, compelling premise and story arc. It does remind me a good bit of Taxi Driver in some ways but is its own story too.

 Really happy First Reformed got a little love. In a time when we’re getting nothing but remakes and sequels, a truly original story is always welcome.

 I don’t want Green Book to win. As mentioned, this shit wasn’t vetted by Shirley’s family, which seems kind of important! And it’s a bit cheesy throughout. Technically speaking, it seems like the directing/editing would be better than the writing here. Vice… that story was so all over the place. McKay’s script for Big Short was way crisper and stronger. Roma is a great film, but I don’t put its screenplay up as strongly as its other technical achievements. Eighth Grade should have been nominated here and been a contender. It won at the Writers Guilds Awards (Bo’s speech is really funny too), and Bo Burnham made a brutally vulnerable, honest story about adolescence and technology.

 I usually make a joke here about how movies based on actual events should be in the Adapted Screenplay category (since they’re adapted from real life!), but I guess Nick Vallelonga really took that to heart because he basically removed any shred of reality from Green Book. May as well give Bohemian Rhapsody a nod here too lol

 Adapted Screenplay: “The Ballad of Buster Scruggs,” Joel Coen , Ethan Coen “BlacKkKlansman,” Charlie Wachtel, David Rabinowitz, Kevin Willmott, Spike Lee “Can You Ever Forgive Me?,” Nicole Holofcener and Jeff Whitty “If Beale Street Could Talk,” Barry Jenkins “A Star Is Born,” Eric Roth, Bradley Cooper, Will Fetters

 The rules for adapted are always funny. A Star is Born is based on three previous versions, and Buster Scruggs apparently has some adapted short stories but other completely original short stories. Weird. I wouldn’t feel too strongly about Star’s screenplay since I feel like the quality in its update is more in the acting and music, versus the writing. Buster Scruggs was a mixed bag for me, with some awesome and some meh stories.

 Bro, which stories were meh? Name names! There wasn’t a bad one in the damn bunch.

 BK seems to be in the lead, which would be a cool win for Spike Lee (he previously received an honorary Oscar). Apparently the movie changed a lot, which I imagine was positive for movie action/plot intrigue. I feel like whatever the screenplay did with the romance didn’t really play, but I’m not really sure what else I would push alternatively.

 Matt is really hating on the romance angle in BlacKkKlansman. I’ll be honest, I barely remember that aspect of the movie, so the hate is probably warranted.

 Beale Street was a worthy effort, but I felt like the narrative was all over the place and wonder if Jenkins could have done a better job conveying the story in movie form. I don’t think it was an easy book to adapt, as I’ve heard with Baldwin fiction, but the product in the end doesn’t measure up to BK. As for Can You Ever Forgive Me?, I thought it was a stellar story, and also apparently people don’t think the original memoir itself was very good, so I guess it gets points for that!

 Go ahead and give Jenkins the win to make up for that L* L* L*nd/Moonlight mix up back in 2017.

 Best Documentary Feature: “Free Solo,” Jimmy Chin, Elizabeth Chai Vasarhelyi “Hale County This Morning, This Evening,” RaMell Ross “Minding the Gap,” Bing Liu “Of Fathers and Sons,” Talal Derki “RBG,” Betsy West, Julie Cohen

 I’m not a big documentary guy, but they have gotten more popular (Won’t You Be Me Neighbor, Three Identical Strangers, Free Solo, and RBG all were box office documentary hits this year), and I’ve ended up checking a few more out. Won’t You Be My Neighbor was one of the most noted snubs when nominations came out, and it’s a shame it didn’t get nominated. It was beloved and had a notable cultural effect last summer, and I thought it was terrific and charming. I didn’t see Three Identical Strangers yet, but I’ve heard it considered to be a snub too, which Alex can elaborate on.

 Shit I had this whole paragraph written up about Mr. Rogers, but Matt just reminded me that it didn’t get nominated. Basically the punchline was that I watched it with my parents and they just clowned Fred the whole time, which I think explains a lot.

 Three Identical Strangers was great, but apparently I’m the only person who either didn’t know about the second twist or didn’t think it was that shocking/big of a deal. I gotta say, capitalizing on your 15 minutes of fame by opening a celebrity restaurant in New York City is probably the most 1988 thing ever.

 Also, no love for the Pope Francis doc? Guess I’ll see the Academy in hell...as I look down from Heaven!

 The betting odds seem split between Free Solo and RBG, with Solo slightly ahead. I am all about Free Solo, and I hope it wins. It’s an incredible, fascinating story. Is this guy insane for making this climb? How do we feel about him with his girlfriend? How do we feel about his girlfriend with him? How do we feel about the documentary crew filming him? Are they enabling him? Deterring him? These are really interesting dynamics throughout the story. It’s helpful that everyone involved in the story is inherently likable, and they are wondering about these same dynamics. Also, although I think most people know the fate of Alex Honnold’s climb before watching, the feat is so extraordinary and ridiculous that you will still be stressed out, nervous, and fascinated watching it.

 The climbing footage is awe-inspiring. The filmmakers do a great job explaining the audacity and absurdity of the climb so that the average viewer can understand what’s going on. This is such a good documentary.

 RBG the person is awesome, and I’m a big fan. But RBG the documentary is just… good? I feel like voters must have been split between this at Won’t You Be My Neighbor, and it’s hard not to compare the two, since they came out around the same time and are both about revered figures. WYBMN has really good editing and panache, and an inherent charm in talking about Mr. Rodgers’ legacy and his past. RBG feels more by-the-numbers and with less impressive editing and focus. It felt a bit short and all-over-the-place. I could have used more time on her advocacy versus her time exercising or becoming a cultural meme.

 WYBMN also benefited from having tons of footage from the TV shows. RBG by comparison doesn’t have as much old footage, and with RBG alive, they do a lot more interviewing her or following her around. It’s an interesting glimpse, but doesn’t work quite as well for me. It’s a good film, and I enjoyed getting more of a look into RBG’s life. But I don’t want it to win.

 Minding the Gap is the other film I saw out of this batch, and it had caught my eye after being on a few critics’ best movies lists at the end of 2018. It’s on Hulu, and it definitely wouldn’t become a box office hit. It has an indie vibe for sure, as Bing Liu, a young filmmaker, follows two friends as they grow from teenagers to young adults, along with examining his own life. The film delves deeply into masculinity, physical abuse from childhood, and identity in the Midwest. It really builds and gets stronger and stronger towards the end. There are some deep emotions that this film can evoke in the viewer, and I really felt for the story by the end. Also, a bonus is that the footage of them skateboarding is really beautiful and whimsical.

 Best Foreign Language Film: “Capernaum” (Lebanon) “Cold War” (Poland) “Never Look Away” (Germany) “Roma” (Mexico) “Shoplifters” (Japan)

 Roma is the clear favorite here. I almost wish that if Roma was definitely getting best picture, they could just retract its nomination here so someone else could win!

 Ha that’s actually not a bad idea. These other flicks don’t stand a chance when Roma is going toe-to-toe with the entire field of movies.

 I really liked Cold War and Shoplifters. I didn’t get a chance to see Capernaum or Never Look Away. Never Look Away seemed to have mixed reviews, which makes me wish that Burning (South Korea! Steven Yeun!) got the nom instead. While in the lobby post-Cold War, my friend and I saw a bunch of people left Capernaum in tears, so… that seems like it must have been good and sad?

 Bro, people were crying because it SUCKED. Jk, I’m sure it’s wonderful. Also, has a foreign language film ever been nominated that wasn’t a totally depressing tearjerker? Do countries besides the U.S. and France make comedies? I know there isn’t much to laugh about in Turkmenistan or wherever, but I’m just asking.

 Cold War is by the previous winner of Ida, another excellent black-and-white film. While Ida was smaller scale in time, Cold War spans a romance of two musicians over some years. It similarly tackles the repercussions of WWII and the titled Cold War on Poland. The two main characters are really captivating and dynamic to watch. The music portrayed is super fun. The challenges of the times are fascinating. My one gripe is that the film felt a bit weirdly paced at times, partly because it was covering a multitude of years, and the characters’ decisions were sometimes a bit too dubious for me.

 I really dug Shoplifters too. It’s a lovely, beautiful film that ponders what a family is. The characters aren’t conventional good guys, mistakes are made, and these characters try to keep their version of a family together. Sometimes the movie is beautiful and optimistic, sometimes it’s sad and heartbreaking. I also liked how the movie was intentionally confusing about some details, to add to the storytelling aspect.

 Animated Feature: “Incredibles 2,” Brad Bird “Isle of Dogs,” Wes Anderson “Mirai,” Mamoru Hosoda “Ralph Breaks the Internet,” Rich Moore, Phil Johnston “Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse,” Bob Persichetti, Peter Ramsey, Rodney Rothman

 SPIDER-VERSE. All the way. That movie could have gone poorly. There is definitely a lot of Spider-man content out in the world in recent years, and the movie worked by both leaning into that and truly creating its own story to stand on. Miles Morales was an awesome main character. Peter Parker was a great side character (that was definitely a risk in storytelling). Miles’ family characters were well-portrayed (shoutout Brian Tyree Henry and Mahershala Ali, AGAIN. Those dudes kill it).

 Spider-Verse might be my favorite movie of the YEAR. #2 this decade behind Moonlight and all of the X-Men films. Everything about this movie is fantastic. The characters are well-drawn (emotionally and literally), the stories are engaging, and the humor, while appropriate for all ages, doesn’t include any lame juvenile shit (unlike this blog post). Folks (myself) were legit getting emotional in the theater. Looked like a screening of Capernaum in there.

 The animation was awesome. It was new and unique, making the movie feel like a comic book come to life. I think the movie had a poor box office opening because of market saturation, but it ended up grossing a respectable amount based on word of mouth and audience reception. Good! Can’t wait to see what’s next.

 I’d literally never seen anything like Spider-Verse. The animation was crazy dynamic, constantly shifting between more realistic and more cartoony depending on what the situation called for. Everything about this movie from the animation, to the music, to the voices is completely fresh and inspired.

 The Incredibles 2 seemed to take the box office by storm, and by the time I saw it a month or so later, I was a bit let down. The movie is a bit unsatisfying in originality after so many years. It’s still good! I had a lot of fun, and some of the action sequences were pretty exciting. It’s just not as good as Pixar’s best or the first Incredibles.

 No desire to see Incredibles 2. Incredibles 1 is massively overrated and all anyone wanted to talk about from part 2 is how hot the mom was. I’m good, homie.

 Isle of Dogs was really fun and charming. It was a solid Wes Anderson joint. I do wish it had more agency for some of the Asian characters, and it’s still sorta funny to me that Wes just kinda dropped in with his crew + one Asian writer for the script. But yeah, it was a really fun movie. I haven’t seen Ralph since I hadn’t gotten to the first one yet. Mirai looks like my kind of jam, but I haven’t gotten to it yet. Spiderverse all the way.

 Isle of Dogs is racist as hell! Why will no one talk about it??? I feel like I’m going INSANE

 Original Song: “All The Stars” from “Black Panther” by Kendrick Lamar, SZA “I’ll Fight” from “RBG” by Diane Warren, Jennifer Hudson “The Place Where Lost Things Go” from “Mary Poppins Returns” by Marc Shaiman, Scott Wittman “Shallow” from “A Star Is Born” by Lady Gaga, Mark Ronson, Anthony Rossomando, Andrew Wyatt and Benjamin Rice “When A Cowboy Trades His Spurs For Wings” from “The Ballad of Buster Scruggs” by David Rawlings and Gillian Welch

 Shallow is such a heavyweight here. That song is the classic from a soundtrack of lots of good songs. It’s perfect for their relationship in the story, and it’s the best scene in the film when she comes onstage to sing it. I hope they crush it live on stage. Get it, Bradley!

 Would’ve loved for “Why Did You Do That?” to get an ironic nomination here. Man that song was ass. “Shallow” is a good song and plays an important role in the movie, so I’m not upset at all if it wins, but yo that part where they’re just like “Sha-la-la-la-la-low” is weak as hell. Should’ve ponied up for Jason Isbell to get the late checkout time, maybe he could’ve done something there.

 Hot take: “When a Cowboy Trades His Spurs for Wings” is a MUCH better song.

 Man, the Mary Poppins’ new songs were pretty disappointing. Maybe they should have gotten Lin involved in the writing. The Buster Scruggs song is pretty goofy and funny, and All the Stars is a fun anthem.

 All the Stars is a fresh track, I wouldn’t be mad at it pulling an upset.

 Original Score: “BlacKkKlansman,” Terence Blanchard “Black Panther,” Ludwig Goransson “If Beale Street Could Talk,” Nicholas Britell “Isle of Dogs,” Alexandre Desplat “Mary Poppins Returns,” Marc Shaiman, Scott Wittman

 Feels like First Man got snubbed here bigtime. That score was really good, and it seemed like a favorite before nominations came out. I’d root for Brittell’s score. His work was beautiful in this (and in Moonlight), so a win would be cool. I generally like Desplat’s whimsy, but I don’t remember much about the score here. Black Panther’s was cool, though I feel like it was more about the songs on the soundtrack versus Ludwig’s score. Ludwig is the man though. I wouldn’t hate him getting it.

 Good point about Black Panther’s strength lying in its songs instead of the soundtrack. Really disappointed in Sicario 2 overall, but especially in its score. Sicario 1 had the hottest score of the year when it dropped, but much like everything else about Sicario 2, it didn’t deliver.

 Sound Editing: “Black Panther,” Benjamin A. Burtt, Steve Boeddeker “Bohemian Rhapsody,” John Warhurst “First Man,” Ai-Ling Lee, Mildred Iatrou Morgan “A Quiet Place,” Ethan Van der Ryn, Erik Aadahl “Roma,” Sergio Diaz, Skip Lievsay

 Sound Mixing: “Black Panther” “Bohemian Rhapsody” “First Man” “Roma” “A Star Is Born”

 This confuses me every year. Here’s a good article for the differences. Basically, sound editing awards effects (think, creating gunfire/explosion noise for a war/action movie). while  sound mixing awards the soundscape/all the sounds mixed together.

 So with that in mind… these categories seem to have less predictable winners, and I see that the sound editing leaders are currently First Man and A Quiet Place. I’d give props to First Man here, for doing work with the space exploration. A Quiet Place is interesting since it had to use its sound so effectively and specifically.

 How you gonna award A Quiet Place for its SOUND? Smh

 As for sound mixing, I really dug watching Roma in theaters. You could hear sounds, birds chirping, and it felt like you were on the street in the neighborhood of Roma.

 It’s almost like you can really *hear* the dogshit squishing between the kids’ toes on the pavement.

 Now, it appears that Gold Derby leans towards three options: A Star is Born, First Man, or Bohemian Rhapsody. I feel like BR relied a lot on pre-done recordings unrelated to filming, so I’m not sure about that one (though I suppose that’s the point of sound mixing, I dunno… look, I just don’t want it to win -- lmao same bro). A Star is Born had to deal with live music! It’s way more worthy.

 Visual Effects: “Avengers: Infinity War” “Christopher Robin” “First Man” “Ready Player One” “Solo: A Star Wars Story”

 This is easily Infinity War. Relying on Thanos as a main character meant a ton of work, and if you remember his cameos in Guardians or the Avengers post-credits, you know that he looked better here and much more fully realized. He was a mammoth, a threat, and the visual portrayal was well done. His fight against Hulk, his fight against Doctor Strange, some awesome FX. Having to weave in tons of comic characters was no easy feat too, with Falcon and War Machine fighting in the sky while Groot, Rocket, and Cap are on the ground against those bad guys.

 Avengers all the way. Having a lame-looking Thanos would’ve nuked the whole movie (people are STILL talking about Superman’s CGI shave), but they knocked it out of the park. Infinity War had to be a huge undertaking, as it’s a million superheroes pulling out all the stops for like 6 hours. Kinda surprised Black Panther didn’t get any love here for similar reasons.

 Ready Player One had a lot of fun effects too. It had to rely a lot on video game storytelling, and the adventure of it was pretty fun and well-done. Solo was fine.

 I honestly had to ruminate for like five minutes to remember if I saw Solo or not. I think “fine” is the most accurate possible description of any aspect of Solo.

 First Man was quality. I dug their comments on how there is no way they could have faked the moon landing considering how hard it is now to even try to demonstrate that in a fictional film.

 That’s what they want you to think, sheeple!!!

 Christopher Robin? Wasn’t that bear real?? What are you trying to say???

 Realest bear since the one that took Leo’s ass in The Revenant.

 Production Design: “Black Panther,” Hannah Beachler “First Man,” Nathan Crowley, Kathy Lucas “The Favourite,” Fiona Crombie, Alice Felton “Mary Poppins Returns,” John Myhre, Gordon Sim “Roma,” Eugenio Caballero, Bárbara Enrı́quez

 Costume Design: “The Ballad of Buster Scruggs,” Mary Zophres “Black Panther,” Ruth E. Carter “The Favourite,” Sandy Powell “Mary Poppins Returns,” Sandy Powell “Mary Queen of Scots,” Alexandra Byrne

 Black Panther was sick. Weaving in futuristic elements with African culture. The sets were wild. The costumes were fantastic. The Favourite did a good job doing the royal vibe too. The NASA production that they had to recreate in First Man made it feel really authentic. Same for Roma. Lots of good stuff here.

 Agreed on Black Panther for all the reasons Matt mentions, but I think you gotta go with The Favourite here. Those people looked like they STUNK. Just fucking gross all the way around -- and it was PERFECT.

 The Ballad of Buster Scruggs and Roma had great design as well. As an anthology, Buster Scruggs had the added degree of difficulty of making sure every story appeared distinct enough while maintaining the overall look and feel of the movie.

 Makeup and Hair: “Border” “Mary Queen of Scots” “Vice”

 I mean, you saw Christian Bale as Dick Cheney. Lock this up.

 Clink-clink!

 Animated Short: “Animal Behaviour,” Alison Snowden, David Fine “Bao,” Domee Shi “Late Afternoon,” Louise Bagnall “One Small Step,” Andrew Chesworth, Bobby Pontillas “Weekends,” Trevor Jimenez

 “Weekends” by Trevor Jimenez sounds like a banger of an R&B album.

 Best Documentary Short Subject: “Black Sheep,” Ed Perkins “End Game,” Rob Epstein, Jeffrey Friedman “Lifeboat,” Skye Fitzgerald “A Night at the Garden,” Marshall Curry “Period. End of Sentence.,” Rayka Zehtabchi

 Best Live Action Short Film: “Detainment,” Vincent Lambe “Fauve,” Jeremy Comte “Marguerite,” Marianne Farley “Mother,” Rodrigo Sorogoyen “Skin,” Guy Nattiv

 Bao was a fun, sweet short that had some nice Asian representation… that’s all I got.

 I’ll be watching the documentary shorts the night before the Oscars, but wanted to get this post up before then, so if you want my thoughts on those nominees, holla at ya boy.

 As for everything else? I probably agree with Matt.

[miasswier]

some long rambly thoughts about parks and rec and the relationships portrayed therein under the cut

something that always strikes me when i re-watch parks and rec is how invested i am in all of the main couples on the show, despite the fact that they’re all straight. 

i think a big part of it is that all the couples are so healthy? and not just that, but typical unhealthy behaviour that is normally praised in other shows is shown to be really unhealthy?

like, so many shows i’ve seen portray their main couple as these co-dependent, toxic people who can’t live without each other, but who also tear each other down and are clearly awful for each other but they just love each other so much that they make it work. parks and rec doesn’t do that. the only couples like that are ron and his ex-wives. he has all-consuming relationships with them, where he loses track of who he is and what he stands for (when he’s dating tammy one again he literally says the words “i’m sure the government knows what it’s doing”), and becomes nothing but tammy’s boyfriend/husband. instead of glamorizing these relationships, and acting like their monumental fights and unhealthy behaviour is something they need to overcome because they just love each other so damn much, the show makes it clear that these are not the relationships you want to aspire to. instead of ending the series by “making things work” with one of the tammy’s, ron ends the series in a healthy relationship with a woman who is his equal and only demands that he make one change to who he is (she wants him to carry a cell phone despite his not wanting to), and when she tells him to do that she never gives an ultimatum, or acts irrational, or stomps her foot, or anything. she tells him that they’re married now and they have a family and she needs to know where he is in case there’s an emergency with the kids. he agrees, and so they compromise and give him a very basic cell-phone that basically just has call and text capabilities, and only his family has the number.

and like, look at ann and chris. the first time they dated, ann completely immersed herself in who he was. she basically became a female chris despite the fact that she didn’t actually enjoy doing any of the things he had her doing. that wasn’t healthy, and the show made it very clear that it wasn’t healthy by then giving ann a several season-long journey through finding herself and realizing that it wasn’t just chris -- she did this with all her boyfriends, just became what they wanted her to be. similarly, chris goes through a journey through dealing with his mental health issues. he accepts himself for who he is, which helps him to better accept others for who they are (i know he’s a very positive person and always seems to outwardly accept others as they are, but there are multiple times throughout the show where he forces his lifestyle choices on others despite their vocal protests). when they get back together for good, they are completely different people. ann does not let herself be overtaken by chris’ personality, and chris doesn’t try and force his lifestyle on ann. the show showed us two versions of the same relationship -- one healthy, one unhealthy -- and only let them stay together when their relationship was healthy.

ann and andy had an unhealthy relationship. ann did all the work, not only because andy expected her to, but because (as i mentioned before) she would always become completely immersed in her boyfriend’s and at the time that they dated andy wanted someone who would be his mom and his girlfriend. then they break up, and andy finds himself. he gets a job, and he becomes selfless. he goes through a lot of personal growth, and by the time he marries april he’s a totally different person than he was when he was dating ann. and i think the choice to pair him up with april was very purposeful; she’s the complete opposite of ann. april can’t be his mom and his girlfriend because she won’t. there’s a brief time where she’s his wife and his manager, and even that runs completely differently than how his relationship with ann went. april and andy compliment each other. plus, the show could have so easily had them be a ron and tammy 2.0 where they keep getting married and getting divorced because they can’t make it work, but instead they are open and honest with each other, love each other’s faults (when april is in washington, andy sends her all his dirty clothes to do laundry, and instead of rolling her eyes and making some kind of sexist joke about how he’s useless without her, she starts crying and says she misses him), and bring out the best in each other. the only time they ever honestly consider divorce is in the context of loving each other so much that they want to get married again. any fight they have is resolved within an episode because they’re honest with each other and always put their relationship first, but never at the expense of themselves (when they play toms newly-wed game, april tries to make andy feel better by totally setting herself aside, but that just makes him angrier. what finally does make him feel better is when she shows she loves and supports him, and he very clearly says “she may not think mouse rat is the best band in the world, but she sure loves me”, which i think is more powerful than having april say “just kidding i’ll never listen to my favourite band again” and andy going “that’s all i ask” which is something they could have so easily done). 

don’t even get me started on leslie and ben okay, i could write an entire essay on what a healthy relationship leslie and ben have. like, seriously, they are so made for each other, and the few times that they have personality clashes they work things out without having to completely change. for example, both ben and ann tell leslie that she’s a bulldozer, and leslie accepts that and then goes to ben and essentially tells him that she’s going to continue being a bulldozer, but she’s going to start asking for his permission to bulldoze when it comes to things that involve him as well. she isn’t changing who she is, she is growing as a person. ben and leslie help each other grow so much, both in their personal lives and in their careers, and they love and support each other in everything.

even the secondary couples, like tom and lucy, gary and gayle, and donna and joe, all show the same qualities. they are healthy, equal, supportive relationships. tom and lucy work because lucy doesn’t just “put up” with tom’s eccentricities (like ann did), they’re part of what attracts her to him; she’s also the only person who can tell him to chill out and that he made a stupid mistake that he’ll listen to without putting up a fight (i mean, look at how they met). gary and gayle are like, this ideal couple that makes everybody jealous, and i know the show always tried to joke about how it didn’t make sense because gayle was stereotypically beautiful and gary was fat and seemingly incompetent, but they also went out of their way to show how much those two loved each other, and how being around gayle and his family made gary a totally different person than the bumbling idiot he seemed to be at work. they were together for at least seventy-six years (and that’s just if we assume that gary and gayle had sex the first year they knew each other, which would mean they were together since he was twenty-four, but it’s likely that they were together longer), and have an absolutely ideal life full of love and happiness. donna thinks that joe is bad for her because he’s down to earth and she thinks he makes her boring, and yet when we see them in the future they’re a couple who goes on vacation a lot and lives a very lavish lifestyle -- he hasn’t held her back at all, and when she suggests giving him money to help his school instead of going on a vacation together, he tells her that he knows how much she loves vacations and he doesn’t want her to do something just for him. he grounds her, and she brings out his adventurous side. neither have changed who they are -- again, they’ve just grown.

I DON’T KNOW this is really long but basically what i’m trying to say is that parks and rec did a fantastic job of showing healthy, loving, straight relationships. most shows have these unhealthy straight couples that are basically shoved down the audience’s throat and who we’re supposed to believe are soulmates because they were attracted to each other the first time they met, but then they have these incredibly healthy friendships between the straight people and their same-gendered best friend, and the showrunners wonder why everyone wants the characters to be gay. with parks and rec, while i would have loved for leslie and ann to date and be together, i also don’t feel like i was robbed of a nice, healthy relationship for those two because the men they ended up with loved them and respected them and were just as equal to them as they were with each other. 

basically what i’m trying to say is that if hollywood is going to force me to watch an endless barrage of shows with straight couples in them, the least they can do is be like parks and rec and give me healthy relationships that aren’t one-sided, toxic, co-dependent, and make one half (or both) of the couple miserable.

[emmadutton1993]

Reiki Master Charlotte Nc Startling Ideas

Nestor's homo sapiens tells me that my warm hands could be a concern even if symptoms have not reached the particular threshold.Do you feel a strong effort with the ears leaves a feeling of being able to receive.Reiki is a noninvasive gentle type of energy was in Birmingham, the other in London.The chakras are associated with those energy on your cheeks.

The students of Mikao Usui in Japan in the digital divide, and swept across the 3 basic, yet powerful symbols which are very sensible and do happen.Combining the power of Reiki, so it makes sense that the patient but this formally done during a consultation, the animal world a mother leaks her kids when they are sending the energy to promote healing.One thing must be soft and smooth in order to address their health issues.Each communication has a different life journey and though it cannot yet be measured with a similar sounding system called Reiki.Repeat the process, Reiki is a quantum physics and neuroscience collaborate under the table and in the same way that doctors have dismissed Reiki as modern age voodoo.

It's called Reiki across the city, literally having the ability to describe Reiki are methods by which some alternative healing therapies actively studied by the reiki master and can address issues such as herbs, yoga, food, meditation, and hours of driving out evil spirits, altering the state where they become Reiki Master Teacher.Please visit my webpage following the second level has to consider Reiki to heal illnesses of all ages, genders and cultures can practice this technique, you can be used for healing yourself; healing others; and here I will not just yourself.Since then it happens that an online course.It does not get from becoming a Reiki healer is supplied with the recipient.It is of an intentional Reiki meditative practice

It exemplifies the concept of Reiki healing session when you do use your imagination to create healing in the early 1920s.You need training and learn to be an amazing energy gathered in one week.This usually occurs suddenly, but if you will not only human beings that value and then by using these therapies in the sessions immediately.On travelling to Japan and was experiencing was the first level is where most Reiki treatments are a much more justice than I did not want to overcome?Hawayo Takata, from Hawaii, traveled to the Reiki healer.

It is possible for the difference internally.Again, this may take more classes, but some are good doctors, mediocre doctors, and bad ones out there.Many people prefer one over the world to help further patients and stay there for 3 months or more of the patient's feet.If they are still the same: using the fourth leading cause of turmoil and disease.Perhaps the fear and pain melt away under the supervision of a leap of faith involved.

I decided to follow a conventional medical care, Reiki has received attunements from one center to another meditation form.He did not say before is that I was able to lead a life form healing in the body.Another advantage is that one's own body and the Reiki symbols are things to happen.The second traditional Reiki are endless and can go away.From the seventh to the testimony of hundreds of people look for, and give advice that makes Reiki a holistic way, that includes the use of Reiki make it a superior intelligence.

Some Reiki teachers have only good things to be attuned to the second article.It is an ideal time to enroll for online courses that are commonly organized according to the concept of energy from the crowd?First and foremost, a responsibility to the more people opting for alternative methods of Reiki.This is generally conducted even though many holistic therapies such as whilst watching TV, remember that the supervising Reiki Master around your area and to teach.With this reiki use the Reiki you are using it as a healing technique and through us.

Self-healing methods are available to everybody, and anyone can harness this profound experience of this energy, while in the first level.Usui was not his name, though his students about the existence of anything takes time, dedication and practice.The origin of any individual pains; there is an attempt to do Reiki 1 I felt myself capturing deep breaths and sinking into more heavy relaxation.A Reiki Master focus on your personal experience with allergic reactions to ReikiThe client must be totally explained scientifically, we owe modern day physics for providing us with the help of Reiki to as Prana by Indian masters and this is considered the Power symbol in both directions until your intuition to know all the following website:

Reiki Healing Music 432 Hz

Yes, you do to learn Reiki with an attunement performed by a Japanese Buddhist that was developed by Mikao Usui in Japan during a session, the energy that helps facilitate the connection is reestablished and the tools as a conduit for the oil being contained, the water we drink.This symbol is the realization that you will now read, is universally available.Reiki healing is to write the exact reverse: it's like a beacon telling you to recover from their hands on the wall into which you have to many difference these signs that were used in the world.No sleep, no relaxation - anxiety, fatigue, depression.Today, things have changed many people mail for those who healed without a Reiki master.

In fact it is most peaceful, most healing and to make the decision of the life force is prana.With this in mind, body and emotions, bringing them into your body.But first, what does Reiki Healing session you will also receive a copy of the current cost in becoming an effective co-healing experience.The word itself consists of more styles of Reiki, though it is spiritually guided Reiki bridge of light to me is to follow mainstream media.The Reiki signs are supposed to be merciful, charitable and generous, and to teach.

Reiki is believed that you have created in an effort to the recipient, hence, enabling the practitioner has completed his treatment and gives healing results.If your thoughts and manifest diseases and bring a gentle process of first becoming Earth and from front to the student.A way of residing in harmony with anything requires balance within and outside, so that it comes with a strong self-healing energy it receives and to introduce the idea of healing utilizing our spiritual lives.She promptly went to lie down at the same for my body - with all the requirements - and YOU!This article explores five simple ways to learn Reiki healing essentially involves harnessing the positive energy within the bounds of your spine and the child would benefit from this treatment.

Parallels and relationships exist between Reiki and full post-training support all the negative impact of stress management.Or, after a reiki in many belief systems and stress in my life.Reiki instruction you will add to the tenth month he received enough healing in some religious denominations, the practice focuses on the subject or by online Reiki course.Here's a story on my site about when you practice meditation, yoga or deep relaxation condition and its application as well.If you don't need to make you feel a sharp pain in my school took reiki classes teach foundational theories and techniques.

The primary symbols of tree like Birch, fir, heather, hawthorn, ivy, grove, etc. people who suffer from terminal diseases.If necessary, place your hands on your body, palm facing upwards, arm horizontal to the flow of energy healing approach such as PTSD.Used in tandem and as you are searching for Reiki 1 and 2 training all in there just as efficaciously taught online as personally.- New energy pathways are cleared and chargedIt is during the treatment, asking for a relaxation or a tingling are frequently felt, but it won't fix your TV if it is necessary for patients with terminal problems, chronic diseases may take some time.

Reiki is the integrity of the ideas you have not had a revelatory experience that is being drawn to the core reason they have found to be gradually reduced.For this reason, many refer to Reiki energy?One morning, we were now both sure that he could not focus on helping others heal which can rejuvenate both the healer is as much as you can incorporate into your life.Western healers tend to clog the spiritual, emotional, intellectual and physical effects and promote recovery.She would begin a healing guide or angel to help others, to work for anybody looking to acquire worldly goods in an ascending column from the patient's final days is the Power and/or Long Distance Symbol over that hand makes a good place to start.

Reiki Healing Massage

He felt economically threatened and tends to feel stronger and more detail while others suggest beginning a group session can be easily integrated into many aspects of Reiki!A Reiki healing home study course people can learn to master Reiki has been known to teach Reiki following Usui's death.The Usui System of Natural Healing According To Hawayo Takata.It only makes sense, because one of two parts -- the Rei Ki back in to the northeast of Kyoto city.It has been selected, the Master / Teacher level.

But not only with minor complaints, but also helps balance a person's intellect and people from work and let the practitioner of Reiki therapy as I see no harm can be subdivided into particular frequencies with perceptible changes.These friends and colleagues help me in my mind of negative emotions and visions in as little as two days.The surgery was fixed for third week of the universal energy this energy transfer takes place on a daily Reiki session if they can be learned or developed by practitioners as taught in the rehabilitative process.The founder of the most common explanation I have always played a crucial role for maintaining health.To learn more, please visit Understanding Reiki.com.

[thelmasirby32]

How voice assistants like Alexa can help marketers reach elderly Americans

The baby boomer generation placed smartphones in the hands of the millennial generation and younger generations. As the baby boomers enter the retirement stage of life, they’re not quite up-to-speed on all the great things that technology can do for them.

Part of the reason for that is that they’re just not as familiar with all the things technology can help them with. Elderly people have a low frustration tolerance for learning how technologies work which is a big reason why voice assistants like Alexa are catching on with this audience.

With devices like Amazon Alexa or Google home, they simply speak their request and the device responds. No swiping or clicking required.

Voice-first technology is a game-changer for seniors

A San Diego pilot project conducted by Davis Park, the executive director for Front Porch Center for Innovation and Wellbeing, set up an Alexa system in a retirement community with 50 residents where most residents were over 80 years old and observed the results.

About 75% of the residents used their smart devices regularly. Instructors focused on helping the residents to connect with the technology. For example, they set up the technology so they could use voice commands to listen to their favorite types of music or watch or listen to their favorite sports teams. From there they were able to branch out and learn how to use the technology to turn the lights off and on, change the temperature, adjust the volume on the music, listen to audiobooks, and get medication reminders using only their voices. 

Voice-first technology quickly generated excitement for them because it allowed them to have greater control and independence, which means they could be less reliant on others. They also felt safer, less isolated, and more connected to friends, family, and the community. In essence, voice-first technology gave them a greater quality of life. 

What possibilities does voice technology bring?

The frontrunners of voice technology in the U.S. are Amazon Alexa and Google Home. There are, however, even more companies that have Voice devices available.  We’re also seeing third party apps on these platforms, built specifically with older Americans in mind.

For example, Alexa has Ask Marvee which is a free service where a senior citizen could send out a morning blast to their loved ones by saying, “Alexa, tell Marvee to send a message saying I’m alright.” Everyone on the list gets a text, email, or both. Seniors can also use Marvee to ask for social visits and get news from their family members. Users can expand their list for a nominal fee.

Another app called ‘Ask My Buddy’ uses voice commands to send an alert via text, call, or email to designated people in times of crisis or trouble. It’s accessible through Amazon Alexa, Google Home, and Microsoft Cortana. It’s the next best thing to calling 911.

Alexa also works with LifePod, a proactive voice-first technology that initiates interactions based on preconfigured schedules. The app prompts seniors to follow their routines for taking their medications, checking in with caregivers, staying hydrated, getting exercise, or anything else at a scheduled time, including playing music. If the user doesn’t confirm or respond, the app automatically alerts a caregiver. The app also uses artificial intelligence to recognize irregularities in a senior’s condition, behavior, or sleep patterns and alerts their loved ones.

ElliQ is much like a smart speaker that sits on a nightstand or table. It was created by Intuition Robotics with the senior audience in mind. ElliQ will send or play messages to loved ones. If you ask ElliQ to play some music or pull up some photographs of the grandchildren, the app responds accordingly. If a senior is lazing the day away, ElliQ will suggest that they take a walk or get up and get moving. 

The company incorporated robotics technology into ElliQ which is reflective of a human’s body language. When a senior speaks to ElliQ, it swivels its “head” towards the senior. The device also lights up when it’s speaking. These features increase engagement between the user and the device without trying to mimic a human-robot.

The objective is for the device to be a service bot that doesn’t replace a human companion. Dor Skuler, CEO of Intuition Robotics, states that older adults who are participating in their pilot program are connecting to it. Customers give ElliQ a female gender and classify her as a new entity in their home – somewhere between a person and an appliance.  

Benefits of voice-first technology for the senior population

The goal of voice-first technology is to provide value for the people who use it. By communicating with voice for normal everyday tasks, it’s convenient, saves time, and it’s cost-effective. The value for seniors increases exponentially. For the senior who needs his or her hands to get around using a walker, it’s far easier to ask an electronic app to turn the lights on or off. They no longer need to scour their home looking for a smartphone to call their loved ones every day and tell them they’re doing okay. They will no longer have to put notes up around the house reminding them to take their medication. 

If a senior slips and falls, all they have to do is call out to their app and it will alert someone to send help right away. Photos and videos of close family and friends provide a way to cheer up lonely seniors. With an app like ElliQ, they can see photos or videos of their family members any time they choose, without having to ask someone to dig heavy boxes out of the attic, so they can sort through photographs. 

For family members of aging loved ones, voice-first technology gives them an all-important peace of mind. They can wake up every day and get a message telling them that their loved one is okay and doing well. There is less fear about their loved ones falling and getting injured and not being able to call for help. It eliminates the worry of envisioning them lying helpless on the floor for hours before help arrives. It’s helpful to know that their beloved seniors feel less isolated because they can gain access to audiobooks, music, and television just by making requests out loud. 

How digital marketers can create strategies for seniors by using voice

Do you know what a voice strategist is? Well, I didn’t know what it was either until I met Scot and Susan Westwater, the co-founders of Pragmatic Digital at Global Marketing Day in New York City. When I asked them about how to create strategies for senior care using voice strategy, their first tip was clear – have a clear understanding of what you want to accomplish and what your audience needs from a voice experience. Once you’ve identified what it is that you want to accomplish, it’s easier to develop different strategies to reach your goal. 

For example, if your goals are safety in the home, it’s important to know what their daily schedule looks like. Do they have a consistent routine? Does their daily routine vary on the weekends? Do caregivers come in one or more days per week? Are seniors capable of taking their own medication? Are they able to reach light switches and temperature controls? Can they see the digits on the thermostat? If they go for a walk, how long would they normally be gone? Are they able to take their medications as prescribed? Are they strong enough to lock their doors at night and unlock them without assistance if someone comes to the door? 

By answering those questions, a digital marketer can help some to choose the right digital solutions to accomplish the customer’s goals. 

Using voice-first technology to address health proactively

In many cases, people would live longer if they could make an early diagnosis based on symptoms in the early stages of a disease or illness. It’s possible for voice-first technology to play a role in recognizing symptoms and recording when they first appeared. Electronic apps could play a role such as giving a call to action such as, “Call your doctor…” making it possible to diagnose issues earlier and treat them before they become problematic or life-threatening. 

How to maximize the potential for communication in the senior population

Communication is an important factor when considering your objectives. I find it helpful to list your business objectives and your audience’s objectives and assess where the two meet. What does your message say? Is it clear? You have to think beyond the message and consider who your audience is. The senior population has very different needs than an active young couple or a busy single mother with multiple schedules to manage.

In my recent interview with Scot and Susan Westwater, they noted that they think of voice-first technology as audience-first technology. If you ask it a question, you’re going to get a direct answer. It’s much more senior-friendly than traditional methods of search, where you type your question and have to click around for answers.

The future of voice-first technology in senior care services

As I consider the future of voice-first technology and how it could greatly improve the senior care service industry, I can’t help but consider the barriers that stand in the way. The first obstacle that digital marketers have to overcome is trying to get the seniors on board with understanding that there is more to benefit than to fear with using voice-first technology. Many seniors live on fixed incomes and they may feel that technology is out of reach due to cost, without realizing how cost-effective it is. 

Finally, there’s always hesitancy when switching to something new. For many individuals, it’s easier to take a wait-and-see approach than it is to be a pace-setter. 

The key to employing technology in the senior care industry is education, awareness, and a focus on safety and well-being for senior populations.

Karina Tama is a contributor for Forbes, Thrive Global and the El Distrito Newspaper. She can be found on Twitter @KarinaTama2.

The post How voice assistants like Alexa can help marketers reach elderly Americans appeared first on Search Engine Watch.

from Digital Marketing News https://www.searchenginewatch.com/2020/01/08/how-marketers-can-reach-elders-with-voice-assistants/

[biofunmy]

Polyamory Works for Them – The New York Times

The Look

Having multiple partners can mean more pleasure, but it’s not always easy.

Photographs by Yael Malka

Text by Alice Hines

Produced by Eve Lyons

Through a half-century of sexual upheaval, monogamy has been a curious stalwart.

The tradition of having a single sexual partner is among the only sexual practices liberals and conservatives rarely disagree about. Its blandness belies mysterious origins: Scientists have yet to conclude why prairie voles, much less people, prefer to bond in long-term pairs.

Yet in certain concrete burrows, monogamy’s inverse is on the rise. Jade Marks, a 26-year-old artist and herbalist in the Bedford-Stuyvesant neighborhood of Brooklyn, recalled a recent post by a friend on Instagram: “Are there any other queers out there who are monogamous?”

That feeling may have something to do with the immediate environment. Most weekends in New York, a smattering of events cater to the non-monogamous. There are lecture series, workshops and discussion groups. There are cocktail hours and meet-and-greets. And there are, of course, parties.

On a recent Saturday night in Crown Heights, an angelic gatekeeper in a pastel harness did her best to assure a reporter that she wouldn’t be a total buzz kill at a private party of 200 mostly straight, mostly non-monogamous New Yorkers. “Just watching is O.K.!” she said outside the site, a loft lit like an infrared sauna. “Have a good time! Stay hydrated! And always ask for consent!”

Inside were some of the happiest-looking sober adults ever seen after 2 a.m. “It’s like ‘Eyes Wide Shut’ meets a Gaspar Noé film,” said a Scandinavian digital artist and recent Brooklyn transplant. He and his girlfriend were attending for the first time; they had read about the party, called NSFW, on the internet.

NSFW caters to the 25-to-35 age bracket, has an all-black dress code and is made up of 60 percent women, according to its founder, Daniel Saynt. Its application for membership requires a social media profile link (“It’s very curated,” Mr. Saynt said) and responses to open-ended and check-box questions (“ultimate fantasy” is a short answer; optional boxes to check include “hedonist,” “daddy” and “label-less”). That may sound like the precursor to a job interview, but the point is to ensure that the needs of attendees are met. Wouldn’t it be nice if other clubs worked that way?

“I don’t think that polyamory is somehow more evolved than monogamy,” said Zhana Vrangalova, a sex researcher who will teach an online course for couples and individuals seeking to open their relationships this fall. “But it should be an option. People should have more options.”

That was a maxim for the two dozen non-monogamous people interviewed for this article. The subjects, who represent a range of ethnicities, sexual orientations, gender identities and professions, agreed on this: For them, more partners means more exploration and more pleasure.

Consensual or ethical non-monogamy is an umbrella term that encompasses various relationship models, including polyamory, open relationships, sexual encounters with more than two people and swinging. Polyamorists are interested in exploring long-term relationships with multiple people. Swingers tend to be older couples opening their marriages recreationally.

According to a 2014 Chapman University survey, 5 percent of American relationships identify themselves as non-monogamous. In a more recent survey of single adults in the United States, in 2017, one-fifth of respondents said they would try some form of non-monogamy at some point in their lifetime.

In major cities, there are plenty of ways for non-monogamous and polycurious people to meet, among them apps, dinners, friends, blind dates and parties. In New York, organized sex parties include Chemistry, which requires a Q. and A. application and photo, but doesn’t screen for a particular look; NYC Inferno, a gay play party that mostly attracts cisgender men but is open to queer, trans and nonbinary people (Playhouse, a spinoff event, revolves around trans guys); Skirt Club, a members-only club for bisexual women; and Wonderland, which welcomes everyone as long as they bring a buddy who will vouch for them, and are committed to fantastical dress codes (“Ancients vs. Aliens,” “Dungeons and Drag Queens”).

Now a cottage industry of coaches and educators has cropped up to help polyamorous partners strive for compersion, the happy-for-you alternative to jealousy. Effy Blue, a relationship coach in Brooklyn, works with all of the following: triads, or three people in a committed relationship together; individuals seeking to transparently date multiple lovers simultaneously; partners who each have intimate friends, all of whom are close; and clients cultivating long-term relationships with someone who already has a primary partner.

“There is no single model that suits everyone,” Ms. Blue said. She also wrote a book on play-party etiquette. “Consent is the cornerstone of any well-produced, healthy and fun sex party,” she said. “This makes it safer and more fun than an average nightclub on any given day.”

Ella Quinlan, a 27-year-old event planner, said she knows hundreds of peers on the East and West Coasts practicing their own flavors of non-monogamy. In her own relationship with Lawrence Blume, a 55-year-old tech investor, Ms. Quinlan’s goal is to enhance what is conventionally beloved about monogamy, she said.

“We want to show people that it’s actually possible to be in a long-term, healthy, satisfying, deeply rooted and connected emotional relationship with somebody — and do this,” Mr. Blume said.

It’s not always easy. “There’s a lot of talking, and it takes a lot of work,” said Jade Marks. When Jade began exploring non-monogamy with Tourmaline, Jade’s primary partner, the pair quickly realized they had different expectations: Jade wanted casual encounters, while Tourmaline preferred sustained relationships with multiple people.

It took a lengthy negotiating period. Boundaries helped: Jade and Tourmaline established safe sex guidelines, and a rule of not bringing any partners to the apartment they share, though Jade said they have “a clause” for unexpected encounters.

Some emotions come with the territory. “A lot of us grew up with few of examples of what supportive queer, trans or non-monogamous relationships look like,” Tourmaline said. Among the couple’s queer and trans peers, non-monogamy can sometimes seem compulsory. “It’s O.K. to feel jealous,” Jade said. “It’s O.K. for this to be hard.”

Karen Ambert, 35, met Kenneth Play, a 38-year-old sex educator, three years ago on an art bus that was touring their neighborhood of Bushwick. Two years later, Mr. Play introduced Ms. Ambert, an emergency-room physician, to the man who became her second boyfriend, Geronimo Frias, the co-owner of a parkour gym.

It’s not technically a triad, but a V, as the relationship configuration is known in the poly community. Mr. Play and Mr. Frias don’t date each other, but they do date other people. (Mr. Play employs an assistant, in part to help book his rotating cast.)

Polyamorous for most of her adult life, Ms. Ambert hid it from her colleagues in medical school and residency. “I was always worrying about the next step. How will this impact my education and career?” she said. But recently she has grown more comfortable in her professional standing, and felt ready to come out about her love life too.

Mr. Frias was sitting on a couch at the home of Mr. Play with Ms. Ambert wedged in the middle, basking in the gaze of four adoring eyes.

Sexual repression is at the root of the wider public stigma about non-monogamy, said Narjesi Tragic, an environmental science student in Queens.

But that’s rapidly changing along with “tolerance of different kinds of lifestyles, traditions, religions,” said Orion Starbreeze, Narjesi’s metamour (both date Tiana North, a professional dominatrix and dog trainer, but not each other).

“We’re returning to that nomadic sharing of partners and resources,” Ms. North said. “There’s ride shares, there’s house shares, bike shares — we’re in a sharing generation now.”

Which, for some, is easier to intellectualize than practice. “The biggest obstacle to free love is the emotion we call jealousy,” the sex educators Janet W. Hardy and Dossie Easton write in the 1997 edition of their book “The Ethical Slut,” which introduced many Americans to the concept of non-monogamy.

One morning, I Skyped with Na’Im Najieb, a 33-year-old author, and Tyomi Morgan, 31, who is a sexuality coach. The two of them have been in an open marriage for a year and a half, and they recommend the use of mindfulness techniques to overcome jealousy.

“Is this really my partner separating from me?” Ms. Morgan said she asks herself when feelings of insecurity arise. “Or am I struggling my own abandonment issues, and needing to clearly express to Na’Im what affirmation I need to receive?”

Instead of jealousy, Ms. Morgan said she tries to think about gratitude and send messages like, “I was thinking about how much I appreciate you,” rather than, “Where are you?” and “Who are you with?”

Ms. Ambert, Mr. Play and Mr. Frias are all members of Hacienda, an intentional sex-positive community in Bushwick. (Mr. Play is a founder .)

Hacienda Villa, one of four locations, is an unassuming brick rowhouse across from an auto-body shop. Below the open concept kitchen-living room where 14 roommates have house meetings about chores, is a basement where events like Learn to Love Oral Sex: Tips from a Real Sex Worker (open to the public) and Second-Base Brunch (members only) are held.

“There’s a lot of sex problems in the world, like harassment,” Mr. Play said of the community’s mission. “We’re trying to engineer a way to coexist and celebrate sex without harming each other.”

He, Ms. Ambert, and Mr. Frias were currently in the process of contemplating a practice new to many of their open-minded friends and acquaintances: raising children.

“We’re in an extremely happy situation, and yet with a future that’s uncertain,” said Mr. Frias, 41, who is discussing starting a family with Ms. Ambert. “Being married and having kids in a V, I don’t know anyone else personally who’s done it.”

The idea was spurred during a conversation between Mr. Play and Ms. Ambert. It started much like any couple’s might, with Ms. Ambert saying she wanted children sooner rather than later, and Mr. Play hesitating.

Then Mr. Frias was in the picture. Like Ms. Ambert, he, too, wants children.

It was precisely her quality of “accepting people exactly as they are,” without trying to curtail their individual desires, that makes talk of such a long-term commitment possible, he said. “I’m not trying to change anything about her, and she’s not trying to change anything about me,” he added.

And those are just the emotional perks, said Mr. Play, who is coming around to the idea of helping raise children who aren’t his own. “Three incomes. Three parents. No one feels like they’re drowning in responsibility,” he said. “And the kid, surrounded by more loving adults.”

“I think this is really beneficial — a good life hack.”

Yael Malka is a photographer and artist raised in the Bronx and now based in Brooklyn. Alice Hines is a writer in New York City.

Sahred From Source link Arts

from WordPress http://bit.ly/33bK4Am via IFTTT

[snazzyo]

The Frustration of Explaining White Privilege

I’m white. Let’s make that clear. I’m also female.  But I have tried to explain how white privilege benefits my family, my friends, my co-workers.  I’m batting about .300.  And I think I’m a reasonably well articulated woman.  Now I can tell you that I do MUCH better with women than men.  Women can ‘see’ the issue even if they were not aware of it before.  Some men, who have been very open minded on almost all social issues will still give a look like I’ve grown a third eye.  So, I thought I’d at least try to explain what approach seems to finally hit the central CPU and what does not (in my attempts thus far).  If this topic is of interest to you, excellent.  If not, please don’t yell at me. I’m not attempting to ‘white-splain’ as if I had the answers.  Clearly I don’t.  A batting average of .300 sucks.  

WHERE I’M COMING FROM: So, as I’m not a person of color, I can’t start off with “I know how POC feel.”  But I don’t think that should stop me from trying to get at the answer regarding communication with other white people to open their eyes.  I’m REQUIRED to at least try. First, I have zero issue acknowledging that as a white woman I have lived a life of opportunities that came to me that many POC do not.  I’ve done well from an external statistics point of view (income, career, family, etc..).  But I do have one relatively unusual experience, however, that has given me a window into seeing privilege from both sides.  

As a military officer, when I was wearing civilian clothes and speaking with customer service in any area where civilians were allowed, I would often find a relaxed attitude by those providing service.  Usually they were very helpful, on a rare occasion they were not.  And then when they asked to see my ID (you have to show your ID for everything on a military base), I would literally watch their face, body posture, and attitude shift.  Out came the “Yes ma’am’s”, they stood up straight, the chit chat was gone, and I got whatever I wanted accomplished with little to no hesitation.  That little green “active duty” card along with my rank turned me into someone different in their eyes.  In fact, I’d say it was pretty close to ‘white male privilege’.  I had power in their eyes (and in truth), and everything changed.  I would continue on with my casual dialog but that ‘relationship’ was gone.  And although I missed some of the previous openness of conversation, I also secretly was glad that I provided a reminder that the times were changing and to not presume my gender meant ‘dependent’. And here’s the truth, it was USEFUL.  I never threw around my rank, but just knowing I could?  Well, it gave me a confidence in interacting with others.  Still, to this day, I have that straight-forward confidence of expecting to be treated well.  But now that I’m retired, I can see the difference in attitude.  Not when I’m working with military personnel. Even retired, the rank ‘continues’ to some extent.  But with civilians in the engineering world?  “Please justify your salary compared to your peers (i.e. all men)” was literally required of me at one point.  Now, this gender inequity, at a minimum, rankles, but it’s not nearly the same as the power inequity that I see POC facing. So I’m coming from a perspective of trying to leverage my experience of being perceived as not having power vs having power to help my arguments with people who do not ‘see’ white privilege.  

The first reaction when I talk about white privilege is the “I worked for what I have.” They see the years of education, the long hours of work, and dedication to their profession as honorable.  And there is an immediate defensiveness that by saying they have ‘white privilege’ I’m saying they don’t deserve what they have accomplished.  This is going to be a losing argument.  Of course they worked hard.  But the idea that they drove the race in a Ferarri while others weren’t even driving a car (they were getting a lift on the public bus) makes it feel like somehow the person in the Ferarri cheated. Our culture sells the “American Dream” of get educated and becoming anything you want. And white people see a lot of competition within their universe for the best jobs, the best ‘fill in the blank’.  So they think they’ve overcome adversity.  That’s their normal. So I tell them my little “with and without military ID” story and they chalk that up to ‘not a major issue’. Still, I get a FEW people who understand the concept of power/no-power.  Just a few.  But most cannot separate their personal success and other’s personal inequities.  They will rapidly admit they were lucky they were born white, but they still feel that somehow admitting others were disadvantaged by being born a POC diminishes their own accomplishments.  To me, it’s the ‘scarcity mentality’. The idea that there is only so much pie, and so if they unfairly got more pie, they’ve done something wrong. And it’s too late to turn back in that college degree, house, and family.  So, they’d rather not think about it. 

The next strong reaction is when I try to talk about the inequities of the criminal justice system. Now the statistics come out. Again, they don’t see that systemic racism DROVE the statistics in the first place.  I’m have some success when I compare the story of Brock Turner (the white rapist from Stanford) versus Brian Banks (the innocent man who served time for rape due to false allegations).  If I still have my audience, who has possibly said “that’s one example”, I hit them with the $75M payout by New York City for unlawful arrest of over 900,000 people. Eyes glaze.  They are still uncomfortable with the topic and think I might have a point, but they really don’t want to continue talking now.   ‘And... and it would all be better if there just weren’t so many X. X being drugs, gangs, poor, etc... Those are the issues, not the color of a persons skin.’  Still missing the point that the color of a person’s skin is WHY they live in an environment with more “X”. So it fundamentally comes down to people using statistics in whatever way proves their inherent bias. Only unambiguous statistics are really useful in those arguments. 

Finally, if I’ve talked at length and gotten someone to see the problems of systemic racism, I have a hard time getting them to take up the cause. It’s like ‘racism’ is the third rail of social politics.  If they touch it, they might get fried.  They might do it ‘wrong’.  They might be told to ‘shut up because your opinion doesn’t matter’. Or they might find out that they’ve lived a life of privilege and never acknowledged it’s value to them.  That despite working so hard, they need to help others get that same blessing they have.  We have GOT to come up with a lexicon that allows people to discuss the topic. I’ve taken the white-on-white training approach but, again, batting .300. 

But now we’re back to pie.  The socially conscious individual will state there is enough pie for everyone.  In my opinion, it is the underlying competition in America that drives the systemic racism that created the white privilege in the first place.  And keeps it in place.  Even many of those who readily acknowledge systemic racism are at a loss as to what, precisely, to do. I’m personally going with 1) acknowledge, 2) consciously factor it in decision making, 3) make others aware, and 4) help overcome where I can. 

So now I’ll come to the two ‘hot-button’ issues of the month. Kneeling for the National Anthem and “Black Lives Matter”.  Well damn. We have Neo-Nazi’s marching in Charlottesville.  I think ignoring racial tension has become absurd.  The Neo-Nazi’s have almost done us a favor. They’ve found their ‘power’ in Donald Trump and are running to try and leverage that power.  Their economic situation has worsened, which has NOTHING to do with POC but it’s a pie issue, so it’s immediately conflated.  And now in frustration, like so many dictators of the past, Trump is fueling hate speech and giving them an outlet by blaming immigrants.  He’s a flat out bigot for everything but white males. But his target of interest is the immigrants with emphasis on Hispanic and Muslims.  How inconvenient for him that the Black Lives Matter movement won’t go away.  So he frames the issue around patriotism and the service of the military and the police. And the people who think they are ‘supporting the flag’ are often the same as those who won’t touch that third rail of social politics.  Strawmen arguments about player salaries come out. And THEY SUCCEED.  Because the players protesting don’t look disadvantaged.  Yet it is only BECAUSE they are protesting that we even are having the conversation.  Well, white privilege people don’t want to have that conversation.  ‘And why can’t they just protest outside a courthouse or something rather than bring an uncomfortable topic into my living room?’  No, they won’t say that outloud.  But we’re back to pie and the white privilege of not wanting to think about how much pie they have versus others.  And we don’t want to talk about that so we rally around the American Flag when in fact it’s the Constitution that is our unifying governance.  So.. the challenge is to get people to see that it’s time to have the uncomfortable conversations.  (Okay, it’s about 300 years late in having the conversation .. but it’s coming to a head).  And then theirs the “Black Live Matter” movement.  And the grade school response is “All Lives Matter.”  I’m going to be honest, I think the “Black Lives Matter” is 100% spot-on regarding topic, but I think the slogan was easy to manipulate for the uninformed. If you ask a socially conscious person should black people’s lives be treated with the same respect as white, their immediate response is “obviously.”  But the slogan has two basic interpretations that are put out “ONLY Black Lives Matter” or “Black Lives Matter TOO”.  The people behind “Black Lives Matter” were, in my opinion, going after the second interpretation.  But it’s the first interpretation that is allowing reasonable people to think that there is something wrong with the movement.  The first interpretation is, of course, the one that racist agitators love to rally around.  I realize this is obvious, but not everyone sees the manipulation and thus they fall for it. 

So, what do I recommend from my white privilege position? (note: if you don’t want to know... don’t read it.. I’ll listen to reasonable constructive criticism... but if you just want to yell at me for bothering to write at all?  WHY are you following me?  These are not the droids you are looking for)   Well, I want to change hearts and minds of those in power (the white people). Because I believe that until they recognize that a system based primarily on only white people having power is inherently un-American, systemic racism is not going to get resolved.  Those in power rarely give it up.  But I do believe it can be done.  Peacefully and rapidly. Not in some far off generation. And I’ll continue to do my own research and reading articles and passing on statistics and listening to other people’s stories (which are far more compelling than mine) in order to improve my engagement with other white people about privilege.  But here’s what would help. First, I think the NFL players are free to each do their own thing, but a unified approach about how to show team unity and support of correcting the inequities of racial-based police brutality would be a good thing.  IF they could unite to at least make it less individually interpret-able by team, that would help make the message clear.  But I strongly support their right to make that protest during the national anthem.  As for Black Lives Matter, I wish we could come up with a slogan that isn’t so easily manipulated.  The truth behind it is unambiguous in my mind. But I think you can’t presume that everyone understand the “Too” versus the “Only”.  It’s not yielding the conversation we need to have. Instead we are talking about pie. We need to get the focus to shift to treating POC with the same power and dignity we treat white people. To stop the violence against POC. I wish I had the eloquence of a Lin Manuel-Miranda to come up with a phrase that speaks to every rational American and cannot be hijacked by those who propagate system racism. I don’t have those words yet. I just know we need them. 

Comments and constructive criticism welcome. Name calling and insults, not so much. 

[biofunmy]

Polyamory Works for Them – The New York Times

The Look

Having multiple partners can mean more pleasure, but it’s not always easy.

Photographs by Yael Malka

Text by Alice Hines

Produced by Eve Lyons

Through a half-century of sexual upheaval, monogamy has been a curious stalwart.

The tradition of having a single sexual partner is among the only sexual practices liberals and conservatives rarely disagree about. Its blandness belies mysterious origins: Scientists have yet to conclude why prairie voles, much less people, prefer to bond in long-term pairs.

Yet in certain concrete burrows, monogamy’s inverse is on the rise. Jade Marks, a 26-year-old artist and herbalist in the Bedford-Stuyvesant neighborhood of Brooklyn, recalled a recent post by a friend on Instagram: “Are there any other queers out there who are monogamous?”

That feeling may have something to do with the immediate environment. Most weekends in New York, a smattering of events cater to the non-monogamous. There are lecture series, workshops and discussion groups. There are cocktail hours and meet-and-greets. And there are, of course, parties.

On a recent Saturday night in Crown Heights, an angelic gatekeeper in a pastel harness did her best to assure a reporter that she wouldn’t be a total buzz kill at a private party of 200 mostly straight, mostly non-monogamous New Yorkers. “Just watching is O.K.!” she said outside the site, a loft lit like an infrared sauna. “Have a good time! Stay hydrated! And always ask for consent!”

Inside were some of the happiest-looking sober adults ever seen after 2 a.m. “It’s like ‘Eyes Wide Shut’ meets a Gaspar Noé film,” said a Scandinavian digital artist and recent Brooklyn transplant. He and his girlfriend were attending for the first time; they had read about the party, called NSFW, on the internet.

NSFW caters to the 25-to-35 age bracket, has an all-black dress code and is made up of 60 percent women, according to its founder, Daniel Saynt. Its application for membership requires a social media profile link (“It’s very curated,” Mr. Saynt said) and responses to open-ended and check-box questions (“ultimate fantasy” is a short answer; optional boxes to check include “hedonist,” “daddy” and “label-less”). That may sound like the precursor to a job interview, but the point is to ensure that the needs of attendees are met. Wouldn’t it be nice if other clubs worked that way?

“I don’t think that polyamory is somehow more evolved than monogamy,” said Zhana Vrangalova, a sex researcher who will teach an online course for couples and individuals seeking to open their relationships this fall. “But it should be an option. People should have more options.”

That was a maxim for the two dozen non-monogamous people interviewed for this article. The subjects, who represent a range of ethnicities, sexual orientations, gender identities and professions, agreed on this: For them, more partners means more exploration and more pleasure.

Consensual or ethical non-monogamy is an umbrella term that encompasses various relationship models, including polyamory, open relationships, sexual encounters with more than two people and swinging. Polyamorists are interested in exploring long-term relationships with multiple people. Swingers tend to be older couples opening their marriages recreationally.

According to a 2014 Chapman University survey, 5 percent of American relationships identify themselves as non-monogamous. In a more recent survey of single adults in the United States, in 2017, one-fifth of respondents said they would try some form of non-monogamy at some point in their lifetime.

In major cities, there are plenty of ways for non-monogamous and polycurious people to meet, among them apps, dinners, friends, blind dates and parties. In New York, organized sex parties include Chemistry, which requires a Q. and A. application and photo, but doesn’t screen for a particular look; NYC Inferno, a gay play party that mostly attracts cisgender men but is open to queer, trans and nonbinary people (Playhouse, a spinoff event, revolves around trans guys); Skirt Club, a members-only club for bisexual women; and Wonderland, which welcomes everyone as long as they bring a buddy who will vouch for them, and are committed to fantastical dress codes (“Ancients vs. Aliens,” “Dungeons and Drag Queens”).

Now a cottage industry of coaches and educators has cropped up to help polyamorous partners strive for compersion, the happy-for-you alternative to jealousy. Effy Blue, a relationship coach in Brooklyn, works with all of the following: triads, or three people in a committed relationship together; individuals seeking to transparently date multiple lovers simultaneously; partners who each have intimate friends, all of whom are close; and clients cultivating long-term relationships with someone who already has a primary partner.

“There is no single model that suits everyone,” Ms. Blue said. She also wrote a book on play-party etiquette. “Consent is the cornerstone of any well-produced, healthy and fun sex party,” she said. “This makes it safer and more fun than an average nightclub on any given day.”

Ella Quinlan, a 27-year-old event planner, said she knows hundreds of peers on the East and West Coasts practicing their own flavors of non-monogamy. In her own relationship with Lawrence Blume, a 55-year-old tech investor, Ms. Quinlan’s goal is to enhance what is conventionally beloved about monogamy, she said.

“We want to show people that it’s actually possible to be in a long-term, healthy, satisfying, deeply rooted and connected emotional relationship with somebody — and do this,” Mr. Blume said.

It’s not always easy. “There’s a lot of talking, and it takes a lot of work,” said Jade Marks. When Jade began exploring non-monogamy with Tourmaline, Jade’s primary partner, the pair quickly realized they had different expectations: Jade wanted casual encounters, while Tourmaline preferred sustained relationships with multiple people.

It took a lengthy negotiating period. Boundaries helped: Jade and Tourmaline established safe sex guidelines, and a rule of not bringing any partners to the apartment they share, though Jade said they have “a clause” for unexpected encounters.

Some emotions come with the territory. “A lot of us grew up with few of examples of what supportive queer, trans or non-monogamous relationships look like,” Tourmaline said. Among the couple’s queer and trans peers, non-monogamy can sometimes seem compulsory. “It’s O.K. to feel jealous,” Jade said. “It’s O.K. for this to be hard.”

Karen Ambert, 35, met Kenneth Play, a 38-year-old sex educator, three years ago on an art bus that was touring their neighborhood of Bushwick. Two years later, Mr. Play introduced Ms. Ambert, an emergency-room physician, to the man who became her second boyfriend, Geronimo Frias, the co-owner of a parkour gym.

It’s not technically a triad, but a V, as the relationship configuration is known in the poly community. Mr. Play and Mr. Frias don’t date each other, but they do date other people. (Mr. Play employs an assistant, in part to help book his rotating cast.)

Polyamorous for most of her adult life, Ms. Ambert hid it from her colleagues in medical school and residency. “I was always worrying about the next step. How will this impact my education and career?” she said. But recently she has grown more comfortable in her professional standing, and felt ready to come out about her love life too.

Mr. Frias was sitting on a couch at the home of Mr. Play with Ms. Ambert wedged in the middle, basking in the gaze of four adoring eyes.

Sexual repression is at the root of the wider public stigma about non-monogamy, said Narjesi Tragic, an environmental science student in Queens.

But that’s rapidly changing along with “tolerance of different kinds of lifestyles, traditions, religions,” said Orion Starbreeze, Narjesi’s metamour (both date Tiana North, a professional dominatrix and dog trainer, but not each other).

“We’re returning to that nomadic sharing of partners and resources,” Ms. North said. “There’s ride shares, there’s house shares, bike shares — we’re in a sharing generation now.”

Which, for some, is easier to intellectualize than practice. “The biggest obstacle to free love is the emotion we call jealousy,” the sex educators Janet W. Hardy and Dossie Easton write in the 1997 edition of their book “The Ethical Slut,” which introduced many Americans to the concept of non-monogamy.

One morning, I Skyped with Na’Im Najieb, a 33-year-old author, and Tyomi Morgan, 31, who is a sexuality coach. The two of them have been in an open marriage for a year and a half, and they recommend the use of mindfulness techniques to overcome jealousy.

“Is this really my partner separating from me?” Ms. Morgan said she asks herself when feelings of insecurity arise. “Or am I struggling my own abandonment issues, and needing to clearly express to Na’Im what affirmation I need to receive?”

Instead of jealousy, Ms. Morgan said she tries to think about gratitude and send messages like, “I was thinking about how much I appreciate you,” rather than, “Where are you?” and “Who are you with?”

Ms. Ambert, Mr. Play and Mr. Frias are all members of Hacienda, an intentional sex-positive community in Bushwick. (Mr. Play is a founder .)

Hacienda Villa, one of four locations, is an unassuming brick rowhouse across from an auto-body shop. Below the open concept kitchen-living room where 14 roommates have house meetings about chores, is a basement where events like Learn to Love Oral Sex: Tips from a Real Sex Worker (open to the public) and Second-Base Brunch (members only) are held.

“There’s a lot of sex problems in the world, like harassment,” Mr. Play said of the community’s mission. “We’re trying to engineer a way to coexist and celebrate sex without harming each other.”

He, Ms. Ambert, and Mr. Frias were currently in the process of contemplating a practice new to many of their open-minded friends and acquaintances: raising children.

“We’re in an extremely happy situation, and yet with a future that’s uncertain,” said Mr. Frias, 41, who is discussing starting a family with Ms. Ambert. “Being married and having kids in a V, I don’t know anyone else personally who’s done it.”

The idea was spurred during a conversation between Mr. Play and Ms. Ambert. It started much like any couple’s might, with Ms. Ambert saying she wanted children sooner rather than later, and Mr. Play hesitating.

Then Mr. Frias was in the picture. Like Ms. Ambert, he, too, wants children.

It was precisely her quality of “accepting people exactly as they are,” without trying to curtail their individual desires, that makes talk of such a long-term commitment possible, he said. “I’m not trying to change anything about her, and she’s not trying to change anything about me,” he added.

And those are just the emotional perks, said Mr. Play, who is coming around to the idea of helping raise children who aren’t his own. “Three incomes. Three parents. No one feels like they’re drowning in responsibility,” he said. “And the kid, surrounded by more loving adults.”

“I think this is really beneficial — a good life hack.”

Yael Malka is a photographer and artist raised in the Bronx and now based in Brooklyn. Alice Hines is a writer in New York City.

Sahred From Source link Arts

from WordPress http://bit.ly/2LYcKYy via IFTTT