#me on the conditioning soapbox again

[whatisshelties]

Some jumping + conditioning resources for @wyrddogs

The Truth About Jumping by Carolyn McIntyre

This one doesn't get specific, but the last paragraph does explain the concepts behind conditioning for jumping and why it's important. She does mention that you need to target the front limbs, rear limbs, and core. That message I got there was conditioning all over will help, lol. From what I grasp, strengthening the front end helps with the forces from landing, while strengthening the rear will help add power to the take off. The core holds everything together.

Canine Conditioning Coach Video Library

You can sort the videos by using the tags. There are videos behind a paywall, but you can sort to find the free videos only. I think a lot of the beginner/foundation exercises are free. You can also sort by the body region the exercise targets as well. I feel like I need to make an obligatory mention of the FB group Canine Conditioning and Body Awareness. CCC owner is also an admin on this group and sometimes will review videos. You could also search the group for discussion about jumping related exercises. What I think is really cool about her site is that if another program has an exercise your dog is struggling with, you can see if there's a foundation level video available on CCC that might help you build up to that other exercise.

Movement Puzzles

Not specifically jump related, but I do think Mud had a lot of fun with this concept and I did notice his coordination improved while working on them. I need to get back into it. I think there are videos on her FB page that can give you ideas. The foundation 2 Bowl Game is free. I paid for the class (after she changed it to lifetime access, lol) and never worked through it it as written. I just sort of got the concept and ran with it.

Focus on Jumping by Bobbie Lyons on Clean Run

This appears to be a purely conditioning based self study course on Clean Run. Just the list of skills the class says it will address gives you an areas and movements you can work on. I think I actually had this class bookmarked at one point for Mud when it was only on Bobbie's website. I believe that was a working class with no audit option, so it cost more and I didn't see myself following along when I didn't know if Mud was sound. Now it's on my radar again.

I follow a good chunk of canine fitness or rehab pros on FB and other dog sport people sometimes share stuff. I saw this two part webinar series shared a couple weeks ago. Like I said in my comment, I was having a hard time thinking of things that weren't behind a paywall. There seem to be plenty of those. I'm going to guess that's partially the fitness trainers protecting themselves. They don't want people saying they found this exercise plan on the internet and then it injured their dog. Most of them will only work with sound dogs. I think some of the conditioning pros might have a video or post here and there that get a little more specific on their FB, but trying to track them down would be challenging.

Edit: I also feel like I should mentioned that you shouldn't feel like you need to buy all kinds of inflatable equipment. I honestly use board like items the most. I actually picked up a couple of these things (not this exact brand, but same item) after someone posted about them and they get used the most. They happen to be wide enough for Mud to sit on, but not really long enough, so I really should make boards, but we've been making due with what I've got. Any exercise is better than nothing.

[is-the-snake-video-cute]

You mentioned that snakes in Africa are under-prioritised, and that you did your internship there. Why are they under-prioritised compared to snakes from other places? Are they just under-prioritised in research, or in other aspects like care/treatment/etc as well?

Thank you for inviting me onto my soapbox!

Snakes from Africa are historically under-prioritized in herpetological research, but that certainly can skew towards how we care for African snakes as well. This is down to two major factors.

Historically, more funding has been allocated to research projects focused on describing new snakes in the Americas. Despite it being realistically more difficult to find and describe new species in, say, the Amazon, there's a common belief that "we've seen pretty much everything there is to find in Africa." We haven't!

The field of herpetology has historically ignored the testimonies of African people. It took decades for snakes in the Atractaspid family (the stiletto snakes) to be described as anything more than a single species because academia ignored the people who lived in their range telling us they were there and there are observable differences. Like, herpetologists even just a couple decades ago were going over, saying "hey what do you know about this," the locals would be like "oh yeah there are like fifteen of those here's what they look like" and then the researchers would be like "neat thanks" and just. Not take any of that into account. Just perpetually running all accounts from Africans through a billion layers of racism and mythologizing everything they say and it's ridiculous.

There are so many misconceptions even in academia about African snakes it is insane. I have had other herpetologists tell me to my face that ball pythons are only "in a narrow strip of Africa" and it's like.

I understand if you have no idea how big Africa is that seems "narrow" to you. But that's a wide range of habitats and conditions across a huge area and we need to account for that in the research of the diversity of python species and their adaptations. There's just an insane misconception that snakes from Africa all need "similar care" even though this is a huge continent with huge variations in environments.

"Oh, it's actually okay to keep African pythons in less humid conditions, Africa isn't humid"

Not all of Africa is has the same climate, for one, and not all of Africa is like just a desert. Ball pythons, for example, like it humid because in the wild they like to curl up inside termite mounds, where it's hot and humid.

You know, termite mounds, these things. Tell me again that it's okay to keep ball pythons in tiny boxes with no enrichment or climbing space.

This makes me so mad it's not even funny. I had a great time in South Africa but all my mentors (I was with the African Snakebite Institute, check 'em out, they're a great resource) were constantly having to fight for funding and dealing with misconceptions.

[middleagedenragedmama]

Repealing the Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare) - What Does It Mean for Me?

Trump has made it clear that one of his first acts as president will be repealing Obamacare or the Affordable Care Act (ACA).  He has also made it very clear that he does not have a plan to replace the ACA.  Most people understand that the ACA allows individuals and families to purchase Marketplace health insurance coverage.  Marketplace health insurance is the best option for many self-employed individuals, as the US mostly depends on employer provided health insurance plans that are cost prohibitive to small businesses.

With the announcement that Trump won the election, I was reminded that many of you did not live through or were not aware of what healthcare was like prior to the ACA (enacted in 2010).  I wanted to get on my soapbox a bit to explain what the ACA did to help individuals and what the repercussions of losing these protections could mean.

Pre-existing conditions – Prior to the ACA, health insurance companies could deny coverage or charge more for anyone with a pre-existing condition.  If you experienced a lapse in coverage for any reason (even a single day!), health insurance companies could deny coverage for any pre-existing health condition as well as any complication that arose from that condition.  Pre-existing conditions were not limited to severe health issues, it was any health condition that you were diagnosed with (ex: eczema, asthma, migraines, cancer, diabetes).

If you had high blood pressure and switched jobs, there is typically a 90-day probationary period before your new employer health plan kicks in.  During those 90 days, you would need to obtain COBRA insurance to ensure that your new employer plan would continue to cover your high blood pressure.  COBRA plans can easily cost between $600-$1800/month, so you could spend $1800-$5200 during those 3 months to prevent a lapse in coverage.  If you cannot afford to pay for COBRA, your insurance lapses and your new employer plan does not have to cover your high blood pressure.  If you end up with complications later down the road such as kidney failure or a heart attack and the insurance company decides that this is related to your high blood pressure, they don’t have to cover the cost of those complications either.

Lifetime Caps – prior to the ACA, each health insurance would list a lifetime cap on their policy.  This was generally somewhere between $1-2 million dollars.  This was the maximum amount of healthcare charges that they would insure you for, and once reached, you would become uninsurable for that healthcare plan. 

A $2 million dollar lifetime cap sounds big right?  The average person will not be eligible for medicare until they are 65, so that’s 65 years of healthcare costs that need to be under that cap.  We have 2 major health insurers (Anthem and United Healthcare) with some minor plans in play as well (Cigna, Aetna, Humana, and a few others).  Prior to the ACA, I have watched parents switch jobs from one job that provided Anthem insurance to another job that provided another type of insurance just to make sure they didn’t reach their lifetime cap.  These were individuals that didn’t want a new job, they had to find a new job and the next year, when their new employer changed their insurance plan to what the previous employer had, they had to find a new job again.  Each time, they had to pay for COBRA to ensure that their families didn’t have a lapse in coverage, otherwise their pre-existing conditions wouldn’t be covered.

Healthcare is expensive in this country.  If you have diabetes, cancer, a heart condition, or any chronic disease, you will have no problem reaching a $2 million lifetime cap in a few years. 

Once a lifetime cap is reached, that insurance will not provide you with any insurance coverage.  You are uninsurable by that company.  If you reach that cap at age 30, you have 35 years until you get Medicare, and that’s 35 years of scrounging around for other jobs that don’t have that type of insurance.

There were annual limits as well, and the same applied.  In this case, once you reached the annual limit, they just wouldn’t pay any more healthcare charges, and you were liable for 100% of the costs after that limit was reached.

Disability - If you are deemed disabled by the Social Security Administration, it takes an additional 2 years before you are eligible for Medicare.  In the interim, if you can no longer purchase a Marketplace plan, your only option is a state-funded Medicaid plan.  In order to qualify for Medicaid, there are income limits.  Remember you just got approved for disability and depending on your previous work experience, the average disability check is for $1542/monthly, but could range up to $3822/month.  Do you have a little bit of a savings?  To qualify for most state Medicaid plans when you are disabled, your income needs to be <$1255/month and you can have a maximum of $2000 in assets (savings, stocks/bonds).  The average disability payment makes you ineligible for Medicaid, and if the ACA is repealed, you will not have an option for health insurance unless your spouse carries you on their employer provided insurance.   

Preventative Services – the ACA requires plans to provide preventative healthcare services at little to no cost.  This includes well baby checks, vaccines, annual physicals, annual gynecological exams, annual lab work, mammograms, and colonoscopies.  Before the ACA, we paid for these services, and many people just didn’t seek preventative care because they could not afford the cost, even when insurance covered a portion of the charges.

Emergency Care – the ACA requires emergency room care to be considered in-network.  Prior to the ACA, if you were out of state and experienced an emergency that required an emergency room visit, you were charged out-of-network charges.  Many plans wouldn’t cover out-of-network providers, so you were liable for the entire cost of the ER visit.  A rough estimate for the average ER visit is around $2600 but could be significantly higher depending on the reason for the visit.

Protections from Cancellation – the ACA made it illegal for your insurance to cancel you for costing them to much money.  Before the ACA, similar to homeowners or car insurance, if you had too many claims, they just cancelled your coverage.

Birth Control and Contraceptives – prior to the ACA, birth control pills, IUDs, and other contraceptives were generally excluded from coverage and you had to pay for these out of your pocket.

The ACA did much more than just offer Marketplace plans for individuals to purchase.  It’s easy to take these protections for granted now that we are almost 15 years out from when they were enacted, but do not doubt that healthcare in the US is a business.  Every day, insurance plans deny coverage for treatments because it’s too expensive, and doctors are continually frustrated by the red tape required by insurance to get patients what they need.  Insurance plans will not hesitate to go back to the way healthcare was prior to the ACA, as it’s more profitable for them to do so.  They do not care that patients will suffer, that people will die, and people will be financially crippled in the process.   

[pumpacti0n]

Be for real.

Something that continues to vex me is this common presumption from centrist liberals that radicals are demanding strict moral purity or asking for far too much because genocide is an inherently unacceptable consequence for us and we refuse to be complacent about it.

It actually reads as far more "doomeristic" to respond to opposition on these grounds with "oh, here you go getting on your soapbox about genocide again 🙄" as if the scale of these atrocities were some minor issue brought up by a fringe group and not literally millions of people, as if this issue doesn't connect with multiple others. The implications are far-reaching and incredibly serious, yet are dismissed as flippantly as it would be if they were crying over spilled milk.

This is a familiar and predictable pattern with electoralists in general and apologists for imperial regimes, however. There's an obvious biased attitude that shows itself in the overemphasis on the so-called achievements of their favored parties and individual political authorities, while doing their dirty work by minimizing every harm they've committed.

They aren't even fully responsible for these achievements, by the way. Grassroots activists who have sacrificed and dedicated their lives to improving material conditions for the masses are erased while politicians and their constituents are given all the credit for it.

Apologists don't change anything and continue to enable the very fascist tendencies they fearmonger about precisely because they keep painting an incomplete picture of the situation and misrepresent the people calling for actual change instead of a mere changing of the guard. They get mired in futile "harm reduction" rhetoric while the harm only continues to escalate to the point of genocide, then blame the people who consider this escalation a deal-breaker, something that can't be meaningfully compromised with.

Just imagine, being under settler military occupation and bombardment, only be told you must compromise with the very people responsible for it, and that if you don't you'll be threatened with worse occupation and bombardment so you had better show up in support of the "less evil" genociders. This is gaslighting and abuse, plain and simple.

If we were to reduce the scale of this scenario to a violent, power-hungry husband and a wife suffering from domestic abuse, we can't honestly claim to be on the wife's side by telling her to flee to the house of someone who "only" beats her 2 days out of the week and not 5...we'd try to get her out of the situation by any means necessary. We certainly wouldn't be engaging in the dishonest and shameful tactic of bringing up how the husband donates .001% of his income to a local charity on occasion for tax write offs.

From this perspective, we might start to better recognize the apathy and anti-social conditioning it would require in order to tolerate or excuse such behavior, but when it comes to mass-death, it magically transforms into a simple math equation. "100 thousand dead is less than 200 thousand dead, so I guess 100 thousand dead is good" is a bleak and terrible consideration that forces us to view the lives of others as numbers and things whose existence are strictly theoretical and useful only to prove a point. It's repulsive to conflate any ideology that would force you to make such a calculation with the egalitarian worldview.

"Harm reduction" isn't about condemning thousands to death while smugly chastising those who view even one more victim as a cost too great. It reveals a deeply unsavory fact about the values of the people who use these kinds of arguments; that they think of their actions as "progress". Delaying the spread of the disease of fascism and directly opposing it on a conceptual and material basis are not the same thing. "progress" would look like decolonization and actual healing process taking place, where the long-standing grievances are finally addressed and the powers-that-be no longer exist to commit more harm in the first place.

This is not what electoralists want, however, because they lack the imagination, initiative and capacity to struggle and make this a reality. This is evident in the fact that their first impulse is to throw the people with these desires under the bus in favor of more elections and repeating the same debunked clichés about electoral politics ad-nauseam.

There's no honest desire from these administrations to bring about the end of this genocide, and there is no place for decolonization of the land on the ballot, because these things are integral parts of the empire's state mechanism itself. To do away with them would mean they have become obsolete. Acknowledging this isn't moralistic grandstanding, it's a conclusion drawn by analyzing the track record of this country, its various internal structures and its controllers.

Solidarity's foundation is trust, a sense of real interdependence. Neither is possible if someone whose immediate reaction to displeasure about genocidal policy is made out to be a trivial and hypocritical nuisance by their associates. Whose side are y'all on, anyway?

[dipplinduo]

Hey there! I'm actually a big fan of your work , and as a rookie writer myself, I wanted to know if you have some motivation advises (Comparison gives me so much writer blocks and I don't even post)

I love how I received and chose to answer this ask after having a lack of motivation streak that I only broke quite literally a few hours ago xD

I think it's interesting you're bringing up comparison - it honestly might be at the root of what you're specifically experiencing so I'm gonna focus my response on that. I could be off, but it sounds like seeing what other people are doing feels intimidating and puts a lot of pressure on you. So if it isn't "perfect" or "up to par" with what others seem to be doing, it's not good enough to post.

This is my personal take:

I saw a post (wish I could link it but can't remember where it was) that really resonated with me not too long ago. It talked about how we've been conditioned as a society in a way to see a lot of the arts as something to perfect; if you want to sing, you should focus on learning how to become a good singer. If you are a dancer, you should focus on learning forms to become a better dancer.

The post goes on to make the point that this is not why the arts were founded in the first place.

We as humans began to sing because we enjoyed singing. We danced because we liked to dance. We paint, write, and draw because - at each art's purest and most rudimentary form - it is the power and experience of personal expression. The benefit wasn't to be perfect, it was to enjoy the creative outlet in itself.

This is what has always connected me to writing. This is why I'm okay with posting the way I do, and why I don't mind light humor about my typos and all that. Because at the end of the day, you're writing because you enjoy it. You're writing to express and share with others. And you're doing it all for free. Your willingness to give the gift of your creativity out to the world is beautiful in itself.

This next part might sound a lot easier said than done, but again, this is all just my personal route that goes in conjunction with this philosophy:

See other writers/creators as your peers. Think of it like a potluck - everyone's bringing their own food, and everyone has different ideas. But it's cool because now you have mashed potatoes along with your favorite food, and someone else brought ice cream. No one dish is going to "win" - it's the culmination of everyone's efforts that fills plates up and make the event (fandom) enjoyable and connective.

Recognize the way in which your fic is uniquely yours. What's the touch you want to have? Things you enjoy that you want to feel yourself as you create, and perhaps share with others? Romance, humor, fun, peace, angst? Maybe certain situations for characters, or a moment you want to see with your favorite ship? The more you get in touch with what you want to portray, the more credit you'll be able to rightfully give your own work.

Engage with creators/commenters that are additive to your personal enjoyment and creativity. Going with the whole "this is all for fun, and is basically everyone's hobby over life and death" thing - the people you surround yourself with, or even the content you consume, can directly affect your experience in writing for a fandom. I personally get a lot out of talking about my ideas with others and through inviting and responding to feedback from people that engage with my work. If you like engaging with someone else's work, go ahead! See what stands out to you as inspiring, and let that be your takeaway to mull on (as you're essentially learning more about yourself and what you find entertaining or engaging).

I'm gonna get off my soapbox now (lol), but I also wanted to add one more thing:

There unfortunately is a competitive culture in a lot of recreational spaces, and especially with the arts and over the internet lol. There are people who like to overly criticize because it makes them feel better about themselves/their own work, there are people who may choose to dislike you or your work simply because they view you as competition, etc.

These kinds of choices some (not the majority of people!) may choose to make hold no actual reflection of your character or what you're writing. It is someone else's reflection being projected onto you. You may not be able to control what they do, but you can control how you respond. And my advice on that?

It's your free time. Don't give the haters a platform, just disengage & tune into the folks that uplift & encourage you instead. B)

[tshifty]

there is nothing that annoys me more than the "no vote! only revolution!" crowd that appears every 4 years. bc they don't actually do shit. they just tell people not to vote bc "voting bad and you're evil if you do" and say that the "only real solution" is revolution only to sit on their ass and do nothing. bc they don't actually want a revolution, they're performative as fuck and just want their cool guy internet points. doesn't matter to them that the way to get those points is by pushing a dangerous way of thinking. so yeah, it'll be a cold day in hell when I listen to the "don't vote, voting bad" crowd

i want to just say first that i think there are generally 2 crowds of people who don't vote and i do want to differentiate them

i think the first crowd is who you are describing--and more often than not it is filled with relatively privileged people who will be fine no matter the outcome, usually due to wealth, who would rather stand on a soapbox and talk about revolution than actually do the work. and it is this crowd that ive seen come at people who Do vote with extreme vitriol and act like voters are evil and stupid. i have very little patience with people like this. while i can recognize and even empathize with a lot of the anger that causes this mindset, i am also very disappointed by the childishness they display and just sheer refusal to show respect for other mindsets and ways of pushing for change. which again, they rarely actually tangibly do.

but i also do want to acknowledge a second group, often filled with people who wholly reject the electoral system BUT are doing deep community work on a daily basis and spending their time to improve people's immediate living conditions. and while i may not totally align with their views of our electoral system, i have a lot of respect for these people, many i know personally who work in mutual aid and direct service often of unsheltered communities and other marginalized communities. i do think there is a distinct difference. i think there are many abolitionist theories in this group that i would truly love to come to fruition, and i can respect and work alongside people who are simply filling another role for us to work to the same ultimate goal. it should be noted that this group doesn't attack people for voting bc they aren't rejecting electoralism in a childish way, and they are actually doing the work.

[fandomfluffandfuck]

about trump:

The man is a damn idiot. Not only did he put his OWN life in danger when he pulled that standing up stunt, but he put HUNDREDS of others in danger. The fucker’s so plainly a narcissist and it makes me sick to see people rally behind him like he’s the second coming of the Lord.

I’d bet a damn fortune that he’s probably fuckin’ excited about this. Goin’ on and on in his armored car about how good this will be for his election while TWO PEOPLE (and maybe three, one is in critical condition, I pray they recover) are dead.

Make America great again by putting this senile old bastard in a retirement home where he belongs.

Alright, I’m off my soapbox, y’all. I got shit to do. Have a nice day, Mr. S. I got something in the works about that trailer where our boy plays a thief? Somethin’ to do with Christmas. I don’t know, I wasn’t exactly payin’ attention to the plot.

Lord save us all.

-cowboy anon

related to this (and my tags from before there was any detail on anything)

Yeah, I've been refreshing news watching it all play out. My immediate two thoughts were (1) they missed? Damn and (2) those photos are, uh, too perfect. The fist pump in front of the flag, blood on his face, looking determined? I have a sinking feeling about that it looks like a damn propaganda poster.

But after having it sink in more... exactly. I feel you. I can't stop thinking about how good this is going to be for him, how this will boost his campaign. All, look at what they tried to do to him! They can't stop us! Look at what he survived! Poor Donald. Fucking awful.

I don't have words for the feelings it puts in the pit of my stomach. The people killed, injured, and traumatized? Those people won't get that moment back ever while he stretches this on, replaying it, using this like he used the Pulse nightclub shooting in Orlando to boost his campaign back in 2016.

I would like to be anywhere else but here.

Goddamn.

That's good, though, I hope you've had a nice day otherwise as well. We certainly need something else to focus on for a little today.

I believe you're referencing Red One, yes?

If so, that's exciting! That should be interesting, and I'm wishing you all the ✨️motivation✨️ to keep chugging along with whatever you're working on there!

[insipid-drivel]

What is one weird thing that you're proud of? And what is the story around it?

I once harassed the shit out of Starz Entertainment on facebook for publishing a highly misleading ad that preys on dark patterns and sending glorified cyberbullies to try to abuse me off of facebook.

I got 3 of their social media goons to ragequit. I won't post a screenshot of the first ad, primarily because I don't have one. Suffice it to say that it was very obviously a screengrab from the show "Outlander" and had a 10 minute "timer" (read: gif) that warned that, at the end of the "timer" a special deal for 6 months of a huge discount on their streaming site would expire.

I decided to test this by sitting and watching the timer to see it expire. As was totally unsurprising, it was definitely just a gif meant to get reaction-clicks, more traffic to their site and algorithm, and potentially prey on someone with a gambling addiction (like my grandmother) or other compulsion-causing condition to unwittingly throw their money at the ad to make it stop counting down. This is a real anxiety many gamblers and neurodivergent people have, and I have seen quite a few people with autism and/or ADHD and/or a slew of other conditions reveal that those kinds of malicious ads have indeed gotten them to part with some of their money just so they would make the timer go away.

Now, I decided to make this known to Starz by commenting under the ad itself where thousands of other people had also commented. To wit, I simply explained the sheer number of manipulative tactics they were using with this particular banner ad and how, upon reading their subscription TOS and the real terms for the discount (which wasn't fake), I also elaborated that the special discount lasted for several more MONTHS. Not just 10 minutes on facebook.

So I got mouthy. I didn't say anything directly defamatory or even intentionally insulting; I just wrote a small thesis paper on how their ad was the perfect example of Corporate Manipulative Tactics That Are Bad. The comment was 100% intended for anyone who really wasn't sure if the 10 minute timer ad was legit or not, and I would've rather had people know than remain ignorant before signing on with Starz since they're willing to lie 6 months down to 10 minutes.

I mean, I understand haggling, but come on.

Anyway, I post my response, and immediately I get a funny feeling. Mostly because within minutes, I receive a reply under what I wrote from a very generic (but real) person on facebook who forgot to lock their FB account and I could see in their "about me" section that they worked for Starz. This person called me stupid, that I was full of shit, that I was pathetic, that nobody cared what I had to say etc. etc. I only replied by using their replies and facebook's own algorithm and to continue my little TED talk about dark patterns using this person's attempts at cyberbullying as my soapbox. I stayed at the top of the comments section for a few days thanks to that.

Finally, someone shows up in my DMs. Calling me all manner of things, but pretty much the most boilerplate "I'm A Middle Aged Ad Exec And This Sounds Mean To Me So It Should Work On You" insults and harassment.

For the record, do not attempt to do this unless you have a lot of energy and a very open schedule, because I come from the era where 4chan was tricking kids into mixing bleach and ammonia to make "crystals", but really getting them hospitalized or buried for phosphene/mustard gas poisoning. "Goncharov" is a cute troll, but it's just that. Cute.

So Ad Troll #1 has to close down their FB account after I doxxed them when they told me to literally kill myself.

Less than 24 hours later, in comes some other person who totally isn't Starz affiliated ( /s ) to continue the same line of attempted verbal abuse. I mean, I find cold reading at a magic show boring, but they weren't even trying that. It was just schoolyard insults, again. I replied by mentioning she had the countenance about her that reminded me of a weather balloon full of Botox and tanning lotion had crash-landed on a topographical map of the Rocky Mountains. She stopped harassing me, closed her FB account, and disappeared after her nephew started pissing himself in the comments and saying "This is why nobody talks to you at Thanksgiving, Carol."

Third one? It gets fun. That's when I just started posting screengrabs of what these advertisers/social media whatevers were saying to me in FB chat, and I just began posting every screenshot directly as a reply to the very Starz ad they decided to behead me over. Tagging Starz's real company and corporate offices very. single. time. Probably well over 50 times, while continuing to give a long explanation about target manipulation and the tricks they use in Las Vegas casinos. I lived in Vegas for about 10 years or so and both my mom and dad worked within the contract and legal departments of MGM.

Suddenly, Troll #3 just disappears. Mid-insult. Curious that my wireless might've been acting up, I refreshed my facebook page just to make sure the game was still on.

The manipulative ad with the fake countdown timer had disappeared, and was replaced by this:

What a coincidence.

[nick-duval]

NICK: Wait, blonde Roxy is a thing that has existed? You've got yourself a deal, this I gotta see. You say that like you're joking, but I'm gonna make it a point of pride that you think I'm that funny, 😉

NICK: Don't you gaslight me, Señorita Santiago, I know you better than you think, 😘

NICK: Oh god, don't talk to me about the terms and conditions, there will be nightmares and possibly rants. Something something LEGALLY BINDING agreements that DO NOT REQUIRE A LAWYER to write them and are RARELY INDEPENDENTLY REVIEWED with ANY level of transparency--

NICK: --What were you saying about my soapbox moments again? 😜

ROXY: That's what I like to hear. ROXY: I'll show you my blonde if you show me yours. If it's a coffee spill, it most likely resulted from her laughing too much at your antics, cariño. I can't believe what I'm reading. It's as if you don't know me at all, Nico... ROXY: 😙 ROXY: I try to turn off location tracking or tell apps not to track me unless I'm using the app, but sometimes, I'm impatient and tap anything to get it off my screen. Which is not the way to handle things, I know. I am the same with reading terms and conditions. At this point in my life, I'm certain I've given away all my online privacy to tech companies and advertisers. ROXY: I happen to enjoy your soapbox moments. Passionate looks good on you.

[duckletranslations]

Fantasy Fairy Tale Ch 5

Season: Summer

A few days later, at the Snow White musical performance

Leo: Wahaha! This musical is so much fun! I have no idea how the next story will unfold!

I tried to make a memo of the inspiration coming to me here and there during the musical, but Mama and Ritsu sitting next to me grabbed me and I couldn’t move! They really went too far!

Ritsu: ‘Scuse me~ Tsukipi~, why are you talking as if Mikejimama and I are out to bully you? If we let you graffiti all over the theater, it’ll make a ruckus.

The staff here won’t be as lenient as Kei-chan, they won’t let you go after a few lectures~?

Leo: Huh? Anzu, I see you have a notebook and pen, can I borrow them?

Oh, thanks so much, I love you! Starting now, I’ll compose a song called “Princess Snow White and The Queen Are Good Friends” ☆

Madara: Hahaha! That would be hard to understand for people who haven’t watched this musical, right? But I reaaaaally love this reversal fairy tale!

Hajime: The amazing performances by the actors were so impressive, I can still vividly remember each scene on the stage ♪

The queen that Narukami-senpai played was no longer a vicious stepmother, but treated Snow White like her own daughter and helps make her look pretty. But one day, she asked the magic mirror—

“Mirror, mirror, on the wall, who is the fairest of them all?”

Madara: “You, my queen, are very beautiful, but the most beautiful person in the world is Princess Snow Whiiiiiiiite!”

Hajime: The queen heard it and was shocked. No, she was very happy! They threw a grand celebration ball for Snow White. However, Snow White was unexpectedly captured by an assassin disguised as the prince of a neighboring country.

Snow White ran away and was rescued by a kind huntsman. The worried queen disguised herself as an old woman selling apple pie, and as she searched for traces of Snow White, she heard the news….

Madara: Finally, mother and daughter were able to reunite at the dwarves’ house in the forest. It was really touching and happy…...♪

More than that, Arashi’s performance was so brilliant that I couldn’t see Arashi as a beginner at all. During the curtain call, I was clapping so hard with all my strength and now my hands huuurt ☆

Arashi: Ufufu, the sound of Mama’s clapping was super loud. I heard it even from the stage.

Sorry for making you wait long. I changed out of the costume of The Queen before coming. That outfit is just so elaborate and pretty.

I want to appear on more stages, wear more gorgeous costumes, and fully enjoy the longing gaze and applause of the audience while under the spotlight even more…..♪

Ritsu: Fufu, Nacchan, I know you’re really excited from just finishing the show, but can you leave telling me your impressions for the after-party?

Arashi: Ara, that’s right. On the stage, I was concentrating so hard that now I’m starving.

Then let’s go right to Cinnamon, my treat today ♪

Madara: So, to celebrate Arashi-san’s successful performance in this Snow White musical, everyone, cheeeers—!

Arashi: Cheers~ ♪ Ufufu, to have such a grand after-party is a little embarrassing.

But while I’m on the soapbox, I’d like to give you all my thanks again.

Thanks to your support and help, I was able to stand on the stage of my dreams as the ideal Queen of my imagination.

Ritsu: Haha, don’t be shy Anzu, accept Nacchan’s thanks.

Once Ha~kun and I learned about the situation, you know how you asked Aoba-onii-chan to contact the NewDi officials and request permission to the theater side to create a new script.

If you think about it, everyone already knows the story of Snow White; if you present it as it is, people might find it boring.

And, as a condition for reproducing the musical, Tsukipi~ said he would compose for them for free….The way I see it, the other party definitely benefited?

Leo: Huh? I don’t really get the complicated things, it’s just that writing songs for Naru is fun!

And the script adaptation was so much fun! As I read it, notes sprang out one by one! Like this! ♪ ~ ♪ ~ …..

Madara: Hahaha, I think this sound is coming from Leo-san’s stomach, thoughhhh?

Arashi: Ara, you’re quite chatty. The food we ordered is here, so eat all you want ♪

Ritsu: Gulp, gulp…..ah~ ♪ Making it so that the Shinonon Brand is available to order at Cinnamon is one good deed Ecchan’s done.

Hajime: Ehehe, if you like it, I’ll brew it for you any time~

Also, Narukami-senpai ordered so many tasty-looking desserts that I don’t know which to try first ♪

Leo: Wahahaha! Instead, let’s take a picture and send it to the Knights group chat, Suo~ and Sena will envy us!

Arashi: Ufufu, it’ll most likely only be Tsukasa-chan wanting in. Izumi-chan might just point out that I don’t know how to control my calorie intake.

For a long time, I was dieting so strictly that it even got Ritsu-chan worrying over me. Now that my modeling and acting careers are over, I can treat myself on today at least ♪

Madara: ……

Arashi: ….Mama, you’ve been quiet for a while now, does the food not taste right?

Madara: Ahaha, of course not. I’m embarrassed, but it’s because out of all the people you invited to the musical, I’m the only one who didn’t help you out.

Arashi: Ah seriously, how could you say something like that! I might actually get mad!

You helped Anzu-chan by delivering her important message, also you encouraged me and cheered me on as you promised…..

Because I had a strong person like you by my side, I could rest easy and chase my dream with courage.

Madara: Hahaha, so that’s how you see it. I’m Mama, so of course I watch over cute kids whenever…..☆

Leo: Eh, Anzu, did you like the desserts that just came out? You just asked the employee to pack various boxes, didn’t you?

…..Ah, you have to go back to NewDi for work, and you want to give these desserts to Oba-chan as a thank you gift?

Arashi: Ufufu, no need for apologies, Anzu-chan. I’m sincerely satisfied just from showing you my hard work on the stage and celebrating together.

It’s about time anyway, so should we end here for today?

Leo: Yeah! I ate ‘til I was full. How about I go to NewDi with Anzu to find Oba-chan! To thank him for taking care of Knights’ very own Naru!

Madara: Then Mama will be off now, wait for Mama you twoooooo ♪

Arashi: Ara, then I’ll also—

Ritsu: ……

Arashi: Oh? Ritsu-chan, why are you suddenly leaning your head against me? Are you just playing cute?

Ritsu: Zzz, zzz

Arashi: Ara. He’s fallen asleep?

Hajime: Haha, sure seems that way. If you’re alright with it, shall we stay a little longer? So Ritsu-onii-chan can rest well.

In order to match the script to Tsukinaga-san’s composition style, Ritsu-onii-chan actually helped Anzu-san and put a lot of effort into the script.

To make it happen, Ritsu-onii-chan even went to Hasumi-senpai for advice on scriptwriting, and he barely finished it within the time frame.

Oh jeez, Onii-chan didn’t want you to know about this, so can you pretend you didn’t hear anything?

Arashi: Ufufu, don’t worry, Hajime-chan. Just like that, looks like we have another secret between us.

I’ll have to make time later to directly thank and say hi to Aoba-senpai. Right now we should be with Ritsu.

If you ever have any troubles in the future, I’d like for you to rely on me. I’ll pull out all the stops to help solve them.

Ritsu: Zzz, zzz ♪

Hajime: Ufufu, it looks like Ritsu-onii-chan is having a good dream. He’s smiling so peacefully ♪

Arashi: Yeah. His sleeping face is really cute. He really looks like an innocent baby ♪

Good night, Ritsu-chan…..♪

[c0rpseductor]

as i guess An Online Leftist my complaint about other Online Leftists is they will often say something completely unhinged that clearly relies on an extremely idealistic viewpoint bc they don’t understand that there are material obstacles in the way of that thing. or that one person cannot know about and devote limitless time and energy to Literally Every Issue. like very often I will encounter some statement where i’m like “i agree with the sentiment but this is literally not possible in any set of real-world conditions”

like idk if anyone remembers but the whole thing about slavery and chocolate companies where it was sort of half-heartedly suggested that you boycott all the companies associated with those brands (which, for a lot of people, would probably rule out maybe half of their entire grocery store), and then someone ELSE was like “any so-called leftist who still eats chocolate is a hypocrite who loves slavery” because apparently nobody understands that the only way to “hit them in their wallets” is organized collective action, a few decentralized cries of “boycott everything” on tumblr are not praxis, and like...it’s just such a stretch to try to assign moral and political weight to what types of candy people eat when literally every fucking food has associated issues like this - not necessarily always out and out slavery but dangerous and deadly working conditions for exploitative wages. do you expect people to not eat?

like, it’s just absurdly detached from the material facts, you know? it’s a nice thought, but in reality whether or not i eat a chocolate bar doesn’t make or break anything. even if i convinced every single one of my followers to never purchase chocolate again, it’d be a drop in the bucket. do you get what i’m saying?

also sometimes the shit people soapbox about on here seems kind of like weirdly detached from the reality of being poor like. i can’t think of a good example but sometimes im really left asking myself like “with what money do you expect me to accomplish this, seeing as i have all of seven dollars to my name?”

[prolifeproliberty]

How to challenge a mask rule:

1. Ask yourself: “Can I afford to walk away? How badly do I need the good/service I’m seeking? Can I get it elsewhere?”

This is important because it determines whether you can walk away if they tell you that you can’t enter without a mask. My suggestion is to only try this with places that you can afford to get kicked out of.

2. If you answered “yes” to #1, don’t bring a mask (so you can honestly say you don’t have one). If you said “no,” then have a mask in a purse or pocket.

3. Read the sign on the door CAREFULLY. Look for the word “required.” If a mask is required, you probably will have to wear one or shop elsewhere. If it says “requested,” “recommended,” “suggested,” or “we ask you to wear a mask,” you might be in the clear. ALSO, look for fine print about health conditions.

4. Walk in confidently. Don’t glance around nervously waiting for someone to stop you. Just walk in like you normally would pre-COVID.

5. If someone stops you, they’ll probably say one of the following:

A) “Sir/ma’am, could you please put a mask on?”

B) “Sir/ma’am, masks are required. You’ll need to wear a mask to enter.”

C) “Sir/ma’am, do you need a mask/would you like a mask?”

If they answer A or C, simply say “no thank you” and keep moving. Be polite, smile, don’t yell or raise your voice. They asked a polite question, give a polite answer. Chances are they do not enforce their policy and will let you go shop. You can now add this business to a list of places that you can go without a mask.

If they answer B, you have a couple of choices.

- You can briefly explain your reasons for not wearing a mask. Consider rehearsing a very brief “elevator pitch” and pick one primary reason, such as effectiveness, risks like bacterial infection or O2/CO2 levels, or even psychological concerns. Tell them you would like to shop at the store, but you will go elsewhere if masks are required. Chances are, they will say no and you will have to either put on a mask or leave. Which is why I recommend only trying this if you answered “yes” at step 1. Being able to walk away sends a message that the business is losing customers because of their policy.

- IF you have a medical condition that is impacted by mask wearing, tell them that. I happen to have such a condition. My line is “I’m sorry, I have a chronic health condition that is aggravated by mask wearing.” If I think they’re likely to be firm on the policy, I may add “It is unsafe for me to wear a mask for periods longer than 20 minutes, especially if I’m walking around.”

I know it’s tempting to say you have a medical condition when you don’t, including “I have a medical condition called needing oxygen.” But I would ask that you leave that response for people who have conditions that make mask wearing more dangerous than it is for the average person. Instead, it’s important for people without those conditions to be advocating for the reasons nobody should have to wear a mask.

The result of people using the medical exemption when it doesn’t technically apply to them has been that it’s harder for people like me to be believed.

6. If they let you in without the mask, be a good customer! Be kind, give other customers space (especially if they’re double masked - assume they’re very scared of COVID and don’t harass them).

Consider little things like putting items back where you found them if you change your mind, respecting item limits for express lanes, and being aware of your surroundings so you’re not blocking other customers from getting items while you’re contemplating. If you’re at a casual/fast food restaurant, put your tray where it goes and clean your table. If you have a cart, put it in the cart return. Say please and thank you to the cashier (but you should do that anyway).

Be a model customer. Let the mask be the ONLY thing they can complain about! Now is not the time for your soapbox speech on how stupid masks are.

7. If they refuse you entry, put on the mask or walk away. Don’t argue with them or cause a scene (again, that’s why I recommend only using this if you answered “yes” on #1).

Don’t be the next viral video - or at least don’t let it be because of your behavior.

Yes, masks are ridiculous. But if we’re going to take back our culture, we have to do it with kindness and compassion to break the negative stereotypes the media labels us with.

We have to be ambassadors of normalcy.

[grison-in-space]

okay, so if I was constructing this model, you'd need for each locus for your polygenic trait...

some coefficient for the interactive effect between the allelic variants at that locus and the specific allelic variants present at other loci, because we know that this is a major factor in the expression of certain traits; for example, many of the effects we find in one line of mice do not replicate or even reverse themselves in other inbred lines (which is WHY we should be testing MULTIPLE LINES AT A TIME but every time I climb on my soapbox to yell about that everyone whines things at me like "but that would be so expensive" and "but I don't want to pay for that." tough shit. it's important, cupcake)

-> also? for the love of fuck, we've had the model demonstrating why most traits are driven by many loci with alleles of small effect since Fisher in 1928, I don't know why this is so fucking confusing to the GWAS people given that I have personally derived that model from first principles in my fucking undergrad population genetics lab, it is not that fucking difficult and it makes complete sense when you draw it out in unidimensional, simplified fitness space. (essentially, the larger the mutation, the more chance that it will overshoot the fitness optimum and therefore not be a net advantage over the status quo). and yet. behavior geneticists. routinely confused by this. absolutely fucking incredible.

some coefficient describing the reaction norm curve between genotype and environment to result in a phenotype range; these reaction norms again we know for from extensive evidence can be fairly complex and not all genotypes are impacted to the same extent or even direction by the same environmental conditions. again this is like, 80-year-old shit. you'd think people had never heard of phenotypic plasticity and reaction norms from the way medical researchers talk about the structure of neutral genetic variance.

now I just need to figure out how pts A and B there interact to yield sum total phenotype....

look computational psychiatry is a concept with a certain amount of cursed energy trailing behind it, but I'm really getting my ass chapped about a fundamental flaw in large scale data analysis that I've been complaining about for years. Here's what's bugging me:

When you're trying to understand a system as complex as behavioral tendencies, you cannot substitute large amounts of "low quality" data (data correlating more weakly with a trait of interest, say, or data that only measures one of several potential interacting factors that combine to create outcomes) for "high quality" data that inquiries more deeply about the system.

The reason for that is this: when we're trying to analyze data as scientists, we leave things we're not directly interrogating as randomized as possible on the assumption that either there is no main effect of those things on our data, or that balancing and randomizing those things will drown out whatever those effects are.

But the problem is this: sometimes there are not only strong effects in the data you haven't considered, but also they correlate: either with one of the main effects you do know about, or simply with one another.

This means that there is structure in your data. And you can't see it, which means that you can't account for it. Which means whatever your findings are, they won't generalize the moment you switch to a new population structured differently. Worse, you are incredibly vulnerable to sampling bias because the moment your sample fails to reflect the structure of the population you're up shit creek without a paddle. Twin studies are notoriously prone to this because white and middle to upper class twins are vastly more likely to be identified and recruited for them, because those are the people who respond to study queries and are easy to get hold of. GWAS data, also extremely prone to this issue. Anything you train machine learning datasets like ChatGPT on, where you're compiling unbelievably big datasets to try to "train out" the noise.

These approaches presuppose that sampling depth is enough to "drown out" any other conflicting main effects or interactions. What it actually typically does is obscure the impact of meaningful causative agents (hidden behind conflicting correlation factors you can't control for) and overstate the value of whatever significant main effects do manage to survive and fall out, even if they explain a pitiably small proportion of the variation in the population.

It's a natural response to the wondrous power afforded by modern advances in computing, but it's not a great way to understand a complex natural world.

[purkinje-effect]

wip wednesday...

a little bit of pr¡soner's c!nema, as a treat

if you see this, consider yourself tagged, lovelies ☢️

True to Angel's narrative, near Burlington Glassworks Mayor Knott concluded a heated discussion with several Children of Atom. She did not require See's instruction to seize the Lane's attention: instead, she upturned leather palms and gazed upon bronze faces which hung in attendance immemorial over the entire Concourse. Everyone stopped in place, and the crowded din faded out in whispers. No longer dampened by the sound of the population, the storm's rolling infrasound echoed all the more unearthly down the corridors of the mall.

The See's cordoning the GCD parted, guns crossed, and unlocked its front doors so that its inhabitants could hear the Mayor's speech. Sticks circumnavigated 'Choly, and tried to squeeze out the doors as far as the guards would permit. Behind them all, 'Choly questioned how the entire Concourse could have known to give her berth, let alone witness her now. But then, she commenced, and his jaw dropped at the too-perfect acoustics of the granitic interior. Knott's voice resounded with clarity and depth, as though she alone possessed a microphone to some vast bronze auditorium devoid of flutter echo.

"I know you lot are rushed to get comfortable before the nor'easter hits. The Hall has extended significant relief for the extra crowding I'm sure we can all already feel. The Children can provide far more expert provisions for what comes next. It is critical that you hear me. Many of you weren't here two decades ago, but you all know the stories. Similar conditions are upon us! Rest easy: there will be no risk to life or limb, provided we support one another. We are still protected from the rads, ice, and wind. We are our primary hazard. Please understand. The light effects are a symptom, not a cause."

With Knott behind him, Haidinger stood where instructed, wherein she held his gloved upturned hands in hers. As he began to speak, he shied from the notion his voice might carry in kind, only to be shaken that it carried so far.

"It oversimplifies our situation, to compare it to 2258. My studies analyze that event at every opportunity. It was the last time the Aurora affected the Concourse, but the building still provided some dampening of its effects. The Aurora of this storm will arrive completely unobstructed. As such, tomorrow's Division Day will be unprecedented for Ant Lane. The Aurora may place undue strain upon those who do not travel a Hinter orbital, who have not wintered a Granitic Mass. Be not afraid! Yea, though even Atom’s whisper can deafen, She cradles us within these holy walls. We walk hand in hand, neighbors, and learn together what the granite has to tell us. Community is our Foundation! The Children will begin our door to door Division Day visitation, doling all the grace and hospitality we have to give. Sutter Grove will provide spiritual counsel on request. And while doubtful, should the Aurora ail anyone, we have remedies for you, as you'll allow."

As Haidinger and Knott dropped their hands to their sides, the decibels of the people’s murmurs eased back in to match the actual sound level. ‘Choly recalled that one benefit of the Berry Mentats intuited his proximity to other living things: he appreciated in his Deenwood days that with Berries, unannounced approaches startled him far less often. Though he could hear people again besides the otherworldly soapbox, he still found himself trying to lipread. Before he could glean anything Haidinger and Fresnel discussed with Knott, See’s shouldered him and Sticks both back inside to re-lock the drugstore.

‘Choly navigated back to the front window, still reacclimating to his cane for even a few days without it. He couldn’t lipread the Hall figureheads’ discussion, but he could make out bits of what the community had to say. Rather than lambast the Children for the armillary shifts, the Laners now bickered with an overwhelmingly condescending Satellite population. Satellites jeered that, for having such well maintained immersion in armillary lighting, the Laners were so coddled by their elevated social status that these experiences came as foreign and alarming. See’s intervened far less frequently now than they had when Laners blamed the Children.

That’s the Fog, you nitwits, the Satellites mocked. Haven’t you been out in the Fog before?

[fondnesses]

nie huaisang, jin guangyao, self-concept, and culpability

This is an archive/repost of an analysis thread I posted on twitter. 4,600w behind the cut, open the readmore on your phone at your own risk.

[ED: I was not expecting this post to get traction in any way and was just typing up a bunch of loose thoughts from Twitter on someone’s request; I would amend several of these statements now, especially re: gender politics; it’s also moderately shipping-brained because these are things that came into my mind while working on fic; it’s much more CQL-informed than MDZS (because NHS has significantly more interiority in CQL); take all with a large grain of salt]

This is an attempt to synthesize and condense a bunch of rants I've gone on at different points in time about Nie Huaisang’s character arc and some of his notable relationships. First, a preamble to my actual points: I find litigating around which bad deeds of fictional characters are excusable vs. which aren't to be pretty tiring, because I don't think trying to quantify fictional characters' ethical responsibility is a particularly interesting way to engage with narrative. I say this because I think a lot about Ethics when I think about Nie Huaisang, but don't want to come across like I think The Point of this post is to reach a fixed verdict on which individual actions are justified vs. which aren't. 

One of the major Themes in CQL/MDZS—or at least one I think is particularly compelling—is the relationship between trauma and agency, in the sense of exploring what "fault" actually means when characters are faced with situations in which there are no "good choices", or where the "good" option is either not clearly visible or would involve significant personal loss/risk, especially when characters are entangled in cycles of violence/abuse which make the possibility of taking alternate routes appear even more foreclosed. This is what I find particularly tiring about character analysis that revolves around "well if [x] had simply NOT DONE [y]—" because outside of a handful of specific choices, there are few circumstances in the story where a sympathetic character makes a choice that was obviously wrong or where there was nothing to be lost by taking the other option, and I don’t get the impulse to flatten the stakes by making circumstances more straightforward than they actually are in the interest of soapboxing. 

This also works in the other direction, in that "did nothing wrong" readings are a snooze to me. I’m not interested in apologism in the sense of vindication, but am interested in it in the sense of dissecting why characters do the things they do, and laying out the internal logic that lets them rationalize it within their own minds. So the position I arrive at re: most of these characters is, "They did a lot of things wrong but it would've been borderline impossible for them to have done everything right and if they had there wouldn't have been a story so why bother getting mad at them for it. (Also because they aren’t real.)"

This is part of why Nie Huaisang + Jin Guangyao + Jiang Cheng are the characters I think about the most, because I'm interested in the way they justify their actions to themselves in relation to all of the above; to varying degrees, I think each of them thinks some form of "I had to do things this way and there was no alternate option for me" to be true re: various things they've done, & I'm interested in the conditions and personality traits that had to be in place for them to believe that. Related to this is the secondary theme that all actions have widely-reverberating consequences that even best laid plans can't predict, and that choices made in your personal/family/etc life have ripple effects that go beyond those relationships into the lives of others. Once again, this ties back to the significance of intergenerational trauma and cycles of abuse/violence/loss. 

In my opinion, Nie Huaisang's character arc is largely about these themes. To start with, I want to speculate for a minute about Huaisang + Meng Yao's relationship back in the day at the Unclean Realms.

A lot of people have talked about the visual similarity between Huaisang and Meng Yao in CQL's costuming; both on an at-first-glance level, plus things like the infamous headpiece as seen in Meng Yao’s Nie-furen days and Huaisang's Fatal Journey childhood flashbacks. 

They’re styled and framed together in such a way as to clue the viewer in to the fact there are connections between them that go beyond just "the only two twinks on Qinghe grindr". (Meng Yao isn't the only one who gets this treatment, though, because it happens with Huaisang and all of 3zun at various times. We’ll get to it.)

Thinking about Huaisang's relationship to Meng Yao obsesses me, because it doesn't seem to have any one relationship model it falls into above all others... it's this weird familial relationship/mentorship/friendship, despite in practice being a dynamic between a young lord/clan heir and his family’s retainer. I can't imagine Huaisang had many friends his age prior to the lectures, so there's that element to it, but practically it's also a master/servant dynamic where Meng Yao is obliged to defer to Huaisang and take his commands—except, in practice, Huaisang seems to defer to Meng Yao in serious situations, like the arrival at the Chang mansion. It’s undoubtedly Meng Yao who leads the party into the Unclean Realms, not Nie Huaisang.

The way that Meng Yao responds when Huaisang tells him to keep an eye on XY is really fascinating to me, because it has the energy of taking an order from someone you're babysitting, with the mixture of indulgence and irritation that you would expect. So Meng Yao has this ostensible (and literal) role as Huaisang's inferior within the hierarchy, but he's also Huaisang's caretaker (he says as much explicitly when Nie Mingjue banishes him), who's positioned as having a much higher level of maturity and life experience despite not actually being that much older than Huaisang, as far as I can tell.

(There's a universe in which their relationship at this point in time could come across as brotherly, but it isn't this one. The stepmom/governess energies are pretty overwhelming, probably because NMJ and MY read so… like… that in the drama, but this isn’t a Nieyao post, so I’ll leave it at that.)

I imagine Huaisang was at times jealous of Meng Yao for being valuable to Nie Mingjue for his skills and personality traits, while—love aside, and I think pre-sunshot Huaisang probably at times had that teenage mentality of “[Nie Mingjue] doesn’t even LIKE me!!” due to lack of maturity/perspective on love and Life—Huaisang was valuable to him just for being his heir, which has nothing to do with Huaisang as a person and is also something he actively doesn’t want for himself. 

(Huaisang’s insecurity around his brother reads very differently than the way Jiang Cheng says that his father doesn’t like his personality. Though we see him get scolded and avoid NMJ’s eyes at times when NHS knows he’s been shirking his obligations, the majority of the instances of the two of them together pre-Collection of Turmoil, they seem very comfortable in each other’s presence. I tend not to think Huaisang ever truly believed, deep down, that Nie Mingjue didn’t love him; overbearing/short-sighted pseudo-parenting strats=/=consistent patterns of emotional neglect and abuse.)

The skills and interests Huaisang sees as important are where he and Nie Mingjue run into conflict with each other, so to have someone enter their family dynamic (see that thread I linked earlier re: the hairpiece for some analysis on the significance of Meng Yao wearing the family braids) who appears to be more of a kindred spirit to Huaisang than anyone else around, who’s a couple years older than him at most, and who enters Nie Mingjue’s high regard (Huaisang is the one to tell WWX and JC how much Nie Mingjue respects/admires Meng Yao, after all) not because of how well he can swing a sabre around or direct troop movements, but for soft skills that Huaisang could theoretically acquire as well: this could be a blueprint for Huaisang to grow into his role as his brother’s heir, except it never happens, because by the time Huaisang really needs those skills Meng Yao has been banished. The ways Huaisang ends up adopting Jin Guangyao’s blueprint are exclusively in ways that wouldn’t have resulted in Nie Mingjue respecting him, lol. 

The difference between the two of them—one of the differences—is that Meng Yao learned how to think and act this way to survive much more challenging life experiences than Huaisang has ever had at this point. Meng Yao’s childhood innocence was never protected, while Huaisang has enjoyed a perpetual extended adolescence. 

This leads to contemplation of the other side of this relationship. I assume Meng Yao must have felt a lot of contempt over the way Huaisang, in his eyes, is essentially pissing away all the opportunities life gave him—which is a completely understandable way to feel, considering that Huaisang was born into conditions which Meng Yao has been desperately crawling his way towards his entire life, and has none of the desire to make himself someone who Matters in the way that's deep in Jin Guangyao's bones. Jin Guangyao’s drive for recognition is a response to his circumstances, obviously, but he's also just one of those people who wants to be a mover and a shaker, to be valued and appreciated for his skills, and that's not inherently bad; ambition isn't inherently bad. If Meng Yao was born into Huaisang's position in life I think things would have been very, very different. 

This isn't to say that Jin Guangyao is just a poor woobie who didn't have a choice to do bad thingsss (there's always a choice, just not always a good one; themes, innit), but just on the most basic level, a lot of Jin Guangyao's negative or harmful qualities are pretty obviously learned behaviours he picked up in response to things that have happened to him. This Guy Is Just A Guy Who Sucks is not interesting and misses the point on like, 15 levels. But at the end of the day Meng Yao and Huaisang are very different people with different priorities; “not like Nie Mingjue” doesn’t mean they actually have that much in common re: their goals or personalities, and Huaisang doesn’t want the things Meng Yao wants except in the broadest senses (personal security and comfort), which he already has and has no reason to believe are in jeopardy.

To go on a tangent for a minute, I've been rereading ASOIAF with PGOT bookclub & it has me thinking about the way that dynastic models of wealth/power are inherently traumatizing, which is something I don't see folks talk about very often, probably because of not wanting to seem like they're playing tiny violins for rich people, to which I can sympathize. However, I think it’s something worth dwelling on in this context. Familial relationships are warped when high-stakes inheritance, succession, etc. baggage is thrown into the mix; it's not that gentry have it "harder" than commoners (fucking obviously), but relating to your family primarily through a frame of property inheritance and dynastic maintenance and only secondly as actual family members is inherently harmful to the ability to have healthy relationships. Not to mention, it's harmful to one's sense of self to have one's choices and personal development be so scrutinized and hyper-determined, which is concentrated in a particular way when one is part of a succession hierarchy. Again, I don't mention this to be like "poor little rich boys are the REAL victims in society", it's just a thing that I don't think paying attention to the trauma of poverty and exclusion means we need to ignore completely. Being poor means not having agency; being born into an institution of extreme generational wealth/power means having a lot of agency on paper that's nonetheless very predetermined based on social+familial expectations. (Jotting this down for my nonexistent Sangcheng manifesto.)

On that note, the extent to which Meng Yao seems to have invested in building a solid relationship with Huaisang attests, one can speculate, to his awareness of how Nie Mingjue's likely early mortality could put Meng Yao in an intensely precarious position if he was still with the Nie sect at that time. The old clan leader’s up-jumped right hand from outside the clan, with poor cultivation, an unsavoury background, and an inflated sense of importance? Without the favour of the new clan leader (and, being Huaisang, Meng Yao could sensibly assume he would be in need of advisors), forget about it. By extension, Huaisang had to have factored into Jin Guangyao's much later decision to kill Nie Mingjue; Jin Guangyao knows Nie Mingjue has no heir but Huaisang (and has more context than most as to why that is, based on his understanding of the sabre spirits and the inherent precarity and strife of being a Nie sect leader), and clearly believed that Huaisang would be completely malleable as a clan leader (and had every reason to believe this.)

(Sidenote: this is the real tragedy of Nie Mingjue. Not just is he murdered, but he fails to accomplish many, many things: preventing the sword spirits from hurting people, preparing Huaisang to lead the sect, or being able to overcome the effects of his cultivation on his personality, until he’s become someone he would’ve once been appalled by. What good is being the general of a successful campaign if you can't even leave your clan in good order when you die, or protect your only living family from dealing with the same burden? Not to mention that your oldest friend clearly favours your ex, who unbeknownst to you is killing you, so you're alone at the end of the day, except for the little brother who never wanted the power he's going to be given in your absence. That sucks buddy! Watch out for that resentful energy!)

So we have Huaisang as clan leader; obviously this position isn't something he wanted, but I think a lot about how the interactions we see on screen/page paint a pretty inaccurate picture of his day to day life at this point in time with regards to where he stands in relation to other people. His cultivation is weak, he presents himself as ineffectual, & his primary living peers are 2/3 of the Venerated Triad, Hanguang-Jun, and Jiang Cheng—all pretty heavy hitters—, but he's actually had a massive amount of social power for the last decade, whether or not the audience gets to see him use it. Everything about this relationship is pure speculation, but this line of consideration veers into fridge horror territory when one contemplates the role Huaisang had in what happened with Mo Xuanyu. The power dynamic is clearly HEAVILY slanted in Huaisang's direction based on age and social status, on top of the other factors at work. It's. um. terrible! 

Relatedly, something I wonder about a lot is the degree to which Huaisang is high on his own supply—he’s obviously presenting a front for strategic reasons, but I wonder a lot about the degree to which he believes the narrative about his own incompetence and powerlessness even in the face of evidence to the contrary about both. The only area in which his power is actually constricted is with regards to the Jin Guangyao/Nie Mingjue situation; no one is stepping in and controlling him actively or telling him what he can and can't do as a sect leader otherwise. One of the big differences between Nie Huaisang and Jin Guangyao, in my opinion, is that I think Huaisang's self-esteem issues are very genuine while Jin Guangyao has a high opinion of himself that he's shored up as a self-defense mechanism against a world that's constantly telling him he ain't shit. 

I don't think Huaisang is An Actor like Jin Guangyao, who has entire fake personalities; the raw material of Huaisang’s persona is there. The Huaisang we see at Cloud Recesses is as much the “real” him as at Guanyin Temple. Why create an elaborate web of lies when he could just amplify and intentionally demonstrate certain existing qualities in order to give people a convenient idea of who he is? The part in Fatal Journey where Huaisang is lost in the Qinghe Nie crypts and he's hallucinating his ancestors' disapproval tells me a lot, in this respect.

Jin Guangyao is willing to grovel and prostrate himself as a last resort, but I think fundamentally Jin Guangyao's motivated by the desire to get to a place where he never has to stoop that low again. He'll do it as many times as he needs to preserve himself! But he hates it, and he longs for dignity and respect. Huaisang is able to performatively debase himself for a decade and a half because his ego is already pretty shit. The flipside of all this, though, is that I think it functions as a rationalization/excuse with regards to whatever unsavoury methods NHS might employ. Positioning himself as relatively weak and helpless within his own mind, to whatever degree he’s doing so, is a disavowal of choice/agency/responsibility, as I was talking about at the beginning of the thread. To paraphrase, if you’re a 38 year old who has snorted ketamine in a Carp Tower bathroom and are the ruler of a major cultivation sect, it seems that you are not, in fact, “baby."

I have no doubt that Jin Guangyao thinks of his weaponization of other people's perceptions of him as exactly that, and for the most part I think he sees what others think of him as fundamentally incorrect. With Huaisang, the degree of separation is a bit less clear to me.

(Aside: Jin Guangyao's approach is informed by literally not having had the opportunity to become a strong cultivator and exert power in a more traditional way. I doubt that a Meng Yao raised in the Nie sect would abstain from pursuing cultivation the way Huaisang does, even if he knew the cost, because his mentality is to use any and all resources available to him. The tradeoff would be worth it in his eyes, imo anyway. Thinking about a Meng Yao who practices full-blown sabre cultivation... hahaha wow. What a nightmare!)

It's crucial for me to be able to enjoy the conclusion of the story that Huaisang is the one who Gets Jin Guangyao in the end, and by methods that largely aren't related to cultivation. The thing that does Jin Guangyao in isn't his social climbing, his “unsavoury” background, or his weak cultivation—though these get mobilized against him after the fact—but his vindictiveness, his obsession over past slights, and the other character traits that led to his killing Nie Mingjue. I doubt Huaisang would ever have lifted a finger against Jin Guangyao were he not his brother’s killer. It’s a personal vendetta undertaken in response to another personal vendetta, & rather than being punished for his ambition* by a righteous man who's done all the "right" things, his undoing comes from underestimating someone who has socially "failed" as a cultivator and a leader.

[YMMV & debatable on a metatexual level, but purely speaking to in-universe causation logic.]

I'm pretty haunted by the way that the moment Jin Guangyao realizes what Huaisang's done is surely the most Jin Guangyao's ever respected him, while the question of what Nie Mingjue would have thought of it hangs over Huaisang for the rest of his life. Out of 3zun, the one who would’ve been the most sympathetic in the abstract to Huaisang doing Alla That to make Jin Guangyao pay is... Jin Guangyao.

The betrayal of realizing Jin Guangyao is the reason Nie Mingjue died is arguably as traumatic for Huaisang as Nie Mingjue's death itself, because the situation becomes, "Not only is my only living family member prematurely dead in horrific circumstances but the one responsible is someone I thought of as my protector." Rightly or wrongly, he believes there's no human being left in the world he can trust or who actually cares about him, and this is how you get to the point of... That. it's grief over Nie Mingjue but it's also grief over... feeling connected to the broader human race?

And, in fairness, Huaisang has reason to be paranoid. Nie Mingjue is dead for crossing Jin Guangyao; WWX is dead for going against the status quo; LWJ was punished severely for supporting WWX and has receded from society completely (and they were never really friends anyway); JC has become completely irascible; Lan Xichen is devoted to Jin Guangyao. He doesn’t have much of a reason to believe that trying to seek justice in a straightforward way by reaching out to others will work out in any way but getting himself killed. It’s also how you arrive at a place of not only seeing everyone around you as a potential tool, but of systematically degrading yourself and rejecting the possibility of anyone around you being able to support you or know you in a genuine way.

I mentioned earlier that Huaisang gets styled, at various times, after each member of 3zun; his robes here are a clear match with the pattern and style of Xichen’s robes in a much earlier episode. This is my segue into talking Xisang for a bit.

I want to know at what point he decided Lan Xichen was a lost cause. Immediately? Or did he try and feel it out cautiously before deciding Jin Guangyao had his claws in him too deep to be convinced otherwise by Huaisang himself? Did he ever give Lan Xichen an opportunity to prove him wrong?

I doubt Jin Guangyao would've died at Guanyin Temple if Huaisang hadn't intervened via Lan Xichen, and there’s a way in which Jin Guangyao’s final decision to spare Lan Xichen at the last moment, which in my opinion came both out of love and out of a desire to leave something behind—someone who would remember him as he wanted to be seen, despite everything—plays off of Huaisang using Lan Xichen in this way. They both choose to let Lan Xichen live in his grief and guilt for the rest of his life, for one reason or another.

I think the cruelty and apathy Huaisang has towards Lan Xichen’s emotional well-being as shown by using him as a weapon comes from deep sadness and jealousy for what he represents to Jin Guangyao: specifically that despite all he’s done, Jin Guangyao still has someone who loves him that much. Huaisang doesn’t and probably believes he never will, that he’ll be alone with this forever. 

The through-line of all of this is Huaisang’s social isolation, low self esteem, and (familial, inherited) fatalism. There’s also something to be said for his understanding of justice, & being motivated by justice, in a way I assume he connects to Nie Mingjue—I think the clothes Huaisang wears from Bicao and Sisi’s testimonies through Guanyin Temple point in this direction.

Huaisang has never applied himself more than he does to avenging Nie Mingjue, and I can’t help but think it comes from guilt, from wondering whether he could’ve done something sooner to protect Nie Mingjue had he been less carefree and naive. (It’s guilt both towards Nie Mingjue on a personal level as well as his generalized guilt towards his ancestors and the clan.) Of course, everything about Huaisang’s approach is antithetical to Nie Mingjue’s mentality, but rather than the subterfuge in and of itself, it’s Huaisang’s willingness to use others that Nie Mingjue would’ve recoiled from. This is what Nie Mingjue can’t forgive Jin Guangyao for—why are the lives of others more important than his own?. Huaisang and Jin Guangyao both sacrifice others in their pursuit of what they believe is a justified higher goal, with the implication that, rightly or wrongly, they believe they themselves need to live because they are individually too valuable to the cause; in their own minds, they aren’t expendable, while others are.

On the flipside, I think Huaisang’s attitude towards Lan Xichen re: culpability in the Jin Guangyao affair bears some resemblances to Nie Mingjue’s attitude towards Jin Guangyao’s responsibility for his killings at the Fire Palace; Huaisang measures Lan Xichen against a standard of what Huaisang believes he would’ve done in that situation and refuses to entertain the possibility that Lan Xichen could exist in a position between guilt and innocence. Huaisang is justified in holding Lan Xichen accountable, but that’s the problem; he doesn’t ACTUALLY hold Lan Xichen accountable, because that would require Huaisang confronting him & being upfront with Lan Xichen in the form of a conflict in which Lan Xichen could defend himself and possibly achieve closure. I think Huaisang looks at Lan Xichen and thinks, "This was all happening in front of you and you let it happen, which makes you complicit.” Is he right? Maybe, but Lan Xichen is emotionally and financially indebted to Jin Guangyao and was saved by him in the worst circumstances of his life! And more to the point, “if i were a member of the venerated triad i wouldve stopped it”/“rip to lan xichen but i’m different” is very funny considering Huaisang also did not realize anything was happening until it was too late, and was also on warm terms with Jin Guangyao just before Nie Mingjue’s death.

(Lan Xichen absolutely engaged in willful blindness for years, particularly in the face of Nie Mingjue’s clear concerns about Jin Guangyao that Lan Xichen did not want to believe, and consistently pushed at Nie Mingjue’s boundaries re: JGY, and i think ought to shoulder some blame. This thread makes good points about it. But, again, Huaisang himself was on good terms with Jin Guangyao prior to Nie Mingjue's death, so selectively assigning Lan Xichen guilt by proxy is, um, questionable.)

But I come back to the difference between Jin Guangyao’s last conversation with Lan Xichen, while he’s actively dying, where I think he’s being as honest as he’s capable of being—and, to be honest, I wonder whether Jin Guangyao really even knew how much he loved Lan Xichen until he was dying at his hands—as well as to the last conversations Huaisang has, with Lan Xichen and WWX, respectively. Even after it’s over, he won’t give a straight answer about his culpability or intentions, and won’t give Lan Xichen the most basic level of closure by telling him the truth. It’s very, “Here we are, the last two living people who loved them both, and if I have to live this way you do too." It’s crueler, to me, than making Lan Xichen stab Jin Guangyao in the first place, because it’s unnecessary. It's emotional cowardice, as well as profoundly sadistic. Which is all well and good, I guess, but I doubt he even really enjoyed any of this, stonewalling Lan Xichen included; for the love of god, at least Jin Guangyao experienced some sadistic pleasure at times. Please, someone, ANYONE, have fun with this wretched state of affairs.

Some part of Nie Mingjue still loved Jin Guangyao at the moment Jin Guangyao caused him to qi deviate, and some part of Huaisang still loved Jin Guangyao at the moment Nie Huaisang had him killed. Huaisang certainly isn’t going to get back the parts of himself he had to destroy to get there, and now he and Lan Xichen get to live with it.

To borrow from Louise Gluck: “Then I looked down and saw / the world I was entering, that would be my home. [...] And I said again, 'but the light will give me no peace.'”

[blankd]

Thoughts on The Mitchells vs the Machines

I watched it a while ago and kept forgetting to post my thoughts on it, but some posts here on tumblr recently reminded me.

I disagree with the majority takeaways I see but is that not the spice of life?

As a standalone movie its inoffensive and the writing of it will likely exit my brain in a few months.  However I can appreciate that the visual style was different from the typical fare and the mixture of 2d elements for visual embellishments were mostly enjoyable and well-suited for Katie as the POV character.

It's a bit "hyper" for my liking, but that's fine, it's likely intended for an audience that's accustomed to the flood that is the current norm of the internet.  It was probably made with GIFable moments in mind and that is the most frequent content that is shared about it, so it certainly succeeded in that regard.

My more critical take is that jokes are delivered at the expense of what could be more authentic themes.  Quips are made that draw attention to character flaws or undercut questions the movie should try to answer, but inevitably they are ignored to move onto the next joke or story beat.

The rest would fall more into spoiler territory, so read more for that.

--"They Were Both In the Wrong"

I personally disagree heavily with the thrust of how "both sides" were wrong when the degrees are disproportionate.

I've seen claims that Katie was "as in the wrong" as her father, but she's incredibly patient to the man who does her material harm.

I've yet to have seen someone say specifically what Katie did *wrong* to her father that is at all on par with the *years* he at best hasn't been able to interact with her or worse, actively refused to engage with her interests.

I would generously venture that her flaw was that she was more willing to communicate her feelings to strangers, but she easily talks to her mother and brother- her brother even helps her with her movies and she happily engages him with his own interests, which pivots the point back to how her father is physically/emotionally unavailable and led to the erosion and distance between the two of them.

Due to this, MvM comes across more as Kaite having to do so much more to guide her father rather than a more mutual learning experience for the both of them.

--"Technology that [Dis]Connects"

It's probably beyond the scope and intent of the film, but I was surprised there was no examination about why technology can be more alluring than interacting with physically present people.

For better or worse, the internet can be used as a means of supplementing the validation and acceptance of family.  It can also lead to no longer connecting to people around them because of the validation high of appealing to a constantly 'awake' sea of strangers- the spotlight is warmer than the cold reality that they are not the internet image they have cultivated.

For example, the rival 'perfect' family was never revealed to be a carefully constructed highlight reel that Mrs. Mitchell envies, they really were actually that perfect- because that provides an easier punchline than an examination or acknowledgement of how the internet can create unhealthy expectations.

I also can't expect MvM to acknowledge the reality that LGBTA+ people who are rejected by their family resort to seeking a new one through the internet because it would be much harder to redeem/rehabilitate a man defined by being tethered to "old values" if he was homophobic instead of "overprotective" and apprehensive at his daughter's departure from home and her dubious art career.

But hey we got that quick line at the end that Katie likes a girl, so that's a diversity win or something.

(To be clear I'm not expecting a whole parade or even an A or B-plot dedicated to it, but I think it should be acknowledged that this kind of "surprise inclusion" is very easily erased with a change of audio and would be completely unsurprised if this were the case for countries that are homophobic.  People can be happy about it, but it is dishonest to pretend that this is a bolder statement than it is.)

In that sense, I do and don't hold MvM to taking a "safer" route about how family always has your back, but this still feels like an important omission considering the focus on technology and its dynamic with the Mitchells.

I will also say that it was also bizarre, to me at least, that the obvious route that her father sees the value of home videos didn't become an active point between him and Katie.  Or that Mr. Mitchell's carpentry never really amounts to anything despite having a sentimental wooden moose.

Lastly, I think it's an unintentional, but it's interesting that Katie going to college to pursue her passion is viewed as a Terrible Thing by her father even though if he had his way, he'd be ostensibly living in the woods away from everyone else except his wife.

This isn't a problem, people are a collection of contradictions, but It's fascinating to see what the *narrative* treats as a difficult sacrifice while simultaneously pulling at heartstrings when PAL cites how children ignore their mothers.  There's an unexamined comedy that Mr. Mitchell's losing out on his 'passion' to live in the woods away from people is treated as tragic despite the movie's insistence on staying connected with your blood family.

--"The Inconsistent Personhood of AI"

PAL is rightfully angry at being discarded for something new; it's provided as a glimpse of what Katie will do when she finds 'her people' at college.

This in of itself is a good hook, because there is no one universal answer to when a flawed relationship should be mended with compromise or if it's better off being broken for the wellbeing of the ones involved.  Family and relationships are not programming, it's a choice and a gamble for whatever it brings but is nonetheless something that must be mutually worked upon.

Initially I thought that PAL was being set up as an exaggerated parallel to Mr. Mitchell.  PAL and Mr. Mitchell did their best to provide for their family.  PAL and Mr. Mitchell are in different stages of being 'discarded' by their family.  PAL and Mr. Mitchell both retaliate at their lack of power in the scenario by using the power granted by their roles to infringe on the autonomy of others for selfish reasons.

PAL even gives a 'chance' for her plan to be halted with, I had assumed this was being set up as the thesis of the movie, about humanity and the value of family, relationships, etc. being used to help someone who is already hurting.

But despite Katie looking at the camera and explaining herself, it is never actually directly resolved or challenged because a punchline was deemed more desirable for this narrative climax.

This begs the question of why PAL bothered with the pretense that she could be reasoned with, especially since this is not some question leveled at all of humanity, just two people.

I'm curious how the writers came to the conclusion that this was the best execution of the scene or if Katie's speech was considered immune to any challenge from PAL.  Would anyone have accepted this outcome if PAL were not an AI but instead a person?

It's not necessarily bad writing they went this route, but I doubt anyone would consider this good writing either.

By the end of the movie, PAL is no longer a 'person' who was betrayed and is lashing out, she is an object to be destroyed because the movie has to wrap up.  No compassion or chances are spared to this AI that did literally everything asked of her except take being discarded quietly.

Did PAL deserve a redemption arc? For this length of movie, probably not.  But it could have concluded with a commitment to doing no further harm.  Instead it is an accidental glimpse at how easily the pretense of compassion can be quickly discarded and mostly unexamined with the right framing.

A likely unintentional example is the conditional humanity given to Eric and Deborahbot who are adopted as "family" while the rest of the robots are mowed down without another thought.  Some are even beaten and broken while begging for mercy, because again, it is a funnier punchline.

Far be it for me to advocate that the murderbots needed 'a second chance uvu' but for a movie whose conceit rests on 'sticking by family' and 'giving chances', the writers certainly made a choice in deciding which AI get honorary humanity and spared violent death- perhaps PAL had a point about humanity's callousness after all.  Bad robots are discarded, good robots get to live.

Even the CEO who realizes he enabled this mess (easily the most unrealistic part of the movie, honestly) is given another chance and he manages to take away a completely wrong lesson.

Speaking of-

--"Maybe I Shouldn’t Have Used Tech Like This"

There's a particular image/gif set posted about MvM with the CEO apologizing for the machine uprising, attributing it to unchecked technology and monopolies.  I've always seen it accompanied by people congratulating the scene as if any of this is at all relevant to the movie.

Charitably, these are people who haven't watched the movie and don't know that PAL is a phone AI single-handedly doing this, but most take the stance that this scene is proof the movie is not saying technology is bad, only corporations are.

The speech isn't technically wrong but it is so utterly divorced from what happens in the movie that it's surreal to see people congratulate it as anything but a moment of soapboxing.

None of the datagrabbing was used at all as part of the takeover.  It's all magical kid-friendly terminators with no relevance to what anyone's browsing history is.  If the company was one that produced robot assistants instead of a being a super tech monopoly, there would be no narrative difference.

The closest to a predatory tactic that is used in MvM is the offer of free wifi which is used to lure most people into their cells which they happily comply with. Curiously this... commentary of people’s mindless addiction to technology is not acknowledged by the Tumblr Court with the same intensity as the CEO’s speech.

But more constructively, I do feel it’s a missed opportunity that Katie who's supposed to be an extremely online person apparently never said any bad things about her family or made any petty vent films for PAL to weaponize.  Instead an in-media audio at one of the outskirt locations was used to accomplish its Traitor Revealed moment.

IN CONCLUSION

MvM is a movie that involves topics that ought to be touched on and explored properly in media and chickens out on all of it due to possible concerns with age-appropriate handling or because it was more committed to its comedy than whatever it has to say about family, change and how technology affects people.

It also reminded me that I hope media will finally graduate from the trope that if you spec into any ‘outdoorsy’ hobby you are incurably afraid of technology.