#most of what happens is Substantial and it is Explained & Explored in the perspective of the characters

[taexual]

hey not to sound rude or anything it’s just a critic that i would like to share with you bc i feel like you write too much detail about other things that aren’t really how do i say it not important to the storyline. for example you wrote almost a whole chapter of jk and his friends doing absolutely nothing other than bicker for 30mins while drinking beer and what not so while it’s cool and very important for us readers to know about some details and information about the characters in the story it’s just too much and you did it again in chapter 7 too it’s like we never get to see him interact with oc more than 5 mins and the next moment he’s with his friends or idk she has to work on this and that like i get it she has to work but i don’t need to know the equipments. again im not trying to be rude or discredit you i love your story it’s very interesting i just want to let you know what you might do better next time if you would allow us to criticize you :)

hii, thank you so much for your insight!! i really appreciate it, although i am sorry those scenes felt excessive for you. they're meant to visualise the atmosphere, introduce you to the characters, build on their personalities, and strengthen the storyline, so it isn't just two-dimensional cardboard cut-outs interacting with each other in a vacuum. i'm hoping for full immersion into this universe with the way i write, but i understand if you're mainly interested in the two main characters interacting -- that's obviously totally fine! thank you for reading so far, anyway! 🥰❤️

[phoneybeatlemania-bit-the-dust]

do you have any theories about the india trip ?? personally, im not sure what to think about it, but i’d love to hear your thoughts !!

(Sorry its taken me so long to answer this - it just got lost in my drafts cause im an idiot lmao 🤦‍♀️)

Im not entirely certain on what I believe happened in India, if in fact anything did happen at all - but more on that later! I guess though that these are the main theories (though if you have any differing opinions/theories, feel free to discuss them!):

1. Paul rejected John’s advancements

2. John wanted to further their relationship, and Paul wanted to maintain the ‘friends with benefits’ situation they already had

3. Nothing significant happened between the two (yet something still changed in John)

I’ll try to discuss which theories I find the most convincing, compelling and substantiated - as well as offering my own opinions and hypothesis’s ^^ (discussion bellow the cut)

1. Paul rejected John’s advancements

The theory I would say im most drawn to - not the theory that im necessarily most convinced by though - is that John made a move on Paul, after a few years of pining for him, and was subsequently rejected. Its a theory that I tend to be compelled by, but I have to admit that its one I struggle to justify entirely. The problem with this theory, for me, is that this is a conclusion ive drawn based mostly off of what their relationship appeared to look like after India. It seems as though something must have happened between them to have ruptured their relationship as profoundly as it did - and because they were on relatively good terms before India*, combined with certain inferences we could draw from comments John made regarding his feelings towards Paul and their relationship, it feels as though it’s possible that he made an advance on Paul, which was rejected and thus caused the ultimate disintegration of the Lennon/McCartney relationship.

(*I mean, their relationship was always complicated and difficult - but it seems that it was okay-ish prior to India, and then just inexplicably plummeted after the trip)

But nobody (as far as im aware) has confirmed, or even really alluded to, this advancement or rejection ever having happened. And the lack of evidence substantiating the claim is a major draw back for me!

However, I do also feel as though nobody’s really come out about anything that happened in India - all ive heard is that they meditated, wrote songs, John and Cyn fought, and Ringo ate baked beans. But like, more must have happened on the trip, surely? Im not saying the absence of information regarding the trip is proof that there was a big “lovers quarrel” between John and Paul, and that everyone involved in that trip is now just sworn to secrecy or something - but like, id just like to see a biographer really investigate the holiday, and try to conclude what events might have occurred during the trip, because as of right now, with the information we have, it seems to have been, bizarrely, both a lacklustre and uneventful, yet still hugely impactful event. If the narrative of the “India trip” were to be shifted in the future in light of new information, the same way the narrative of “Let It Be/Get Back” is being changed, I wouldn’t be surprised!

2. John wanted more, but Paul didn’t

Another popular theory is that John and Paul were engaged in something of a physical affair, but in India John proposed (or perhaps demanded even) that they take their relationship further, and Paul just wasn’t compelled to do so.

Beliefs vary regarding this, based on how far you personally think their relationship went: some might say they only ever did a little drunken experimenting with one another, and that it was just a fun fling until John suggested they take it further. Others might argue that they were in fact in a committed relationship, and John wanted to go public with it - or at the very least, demanded exclusivity between him and Paul.

In entertaining this theory, im most compelled to believe that John and Paul were engaged in occasional “flings”, and perhaps by ‘68 were even acknowledging that there was some deeper and more sincere between them - but ultimately, I don’t think Paul would have ever been inclined to fully commit to John, because I think he always wanted children and a family. In addition to this, though its clear John and Paul were passionate about one another, it isn’t clear how compatible they were in the long term - and with Paul being the more grounded of the too, I suspect he would have recognised this incompatibility, which John (the idealist) might not have.

Though I admit that John could certainly be unrealistic and irrational, im not convinced that he suggested to Paul they go public with their relationship, because I think John still had a fairly strong sense of his place in popular culture, and would have still been able to recognise that if they were to “come out”, it would probably deeply and irreparably damage both their careers - as well as George and Ringo’s too - at least amongst the general public. They’d still have some ardent fans, but their following overall would have become far more niche, and the “beatlemania” would’ve worn off swiftly. Im not sure if either of them would’ve been willing to take that heat in ‘68, especially not Paul, who as I mentioned earlier, I think might have recognised the futility and incompatibility inherent in their relationship.

Then again though, John was always a little “cocky”* when it came to his sexuality - I think if an interviewer were to genuinely have enquired into his sexuality, straight up asking him “Are you bi? Gay?” I get the sense that he would have told us! Sure he’d probably have dressed the response up with a dozen quick quips and jokes, but ultimately, I think he would have given a sincere response. And so, perhaps he did feel he had the confidence, at least in India, to actually “come out”, but if Paul wasn’t willing to make this official with him, perhaps this confidence dissipated.

(*No pun intended you pervs🤦‍♂️)

Another thing to note about India is that they’d have been relatively secluded, as well as off the drugs/drinks for the most part - and this would have forced them to really reflect upon their relationship. Perhaps John saw that he wasn’t contented with Cynthia, and recognised his desire for more from Paul - and so in such a raw state of mind, I can see how he’d become so shattered if Paul were to have rejected him (that statement could relate both to the first and second theory, I feel). Perhaps John made an advance upon Paul whilst they were both sober for the first time, and that changed their relationship somehow? Just thinking out loud here!

But again, this theory overall has the same problem as the first in that, though it appears to make sense, it still lacks proof; it ultimately isn’t a substantiated claim.

3. Nothing happened between J&P, but something changed

This is probably the theory that everybody is least interested in hearing, but I still think its a pretty valid one, albeit the least dramatic (In my opinion though its still a really interesting perspective to explore though!).

Its possible that nothing of particular significance happened in India, but something still shifted in John, causing him to vilify and reject Paul. The issue with this though, is that it begs the question: why did John undergo such a significant change in India then?

Id argue that perhaps John was making very subtle and slight moves towards Paul, that Paul either ignored or didn't pick up on. Id assume that perhaps John had been hinting at this desire for awhile now, and maybe he got it into his head that in India, where him and Paul would have a lot of time to be alone and intimate, his feelings would finally be reciprocated. But then, Paul never picked up on these hints, and never made any advancements - and this broke something within John. It would fit neatly within the Yoko narrative, because it offers reasoning to the abrupt but intense attachment John formed towards her almost immediately after India - as well as explaining the sudden vilification of Paul. But I suppose that the first two theories also fit pretty neatly within the Yoko narrative, because they all relate to the same basic concept that John wanted more from Paul, and Paul didn’t - and so he tried to replace him with Yoko.

I suppose though, that the this theory overall could also be countered by making the argument that Paul also began to spiral after India, and so some occurrence presumably must have happened to Paul too. I wonder though if its possible that maybe Pauls spiralling was kind of a result of Johns? I get the sense though that Paul would need a change in his life to cause his mental health to seriously deteriorate, but I don’t feel like the same is necessarily true for John - I think John is sort of the type to spiral, irregardless of whether his life undergoes a significant change or not, because I think John was the force driving a lot of the drama and troubles throughout his lifetime. So if Johns mental well-being started seriously deteriorating, I can see this being a cause of panic and anxiety for Paul.

But something that further inclines me to believe that an actual event occurred between John and Paul is this extract from Geoff Emmericks memoir (x)(id recommend reading the entire extract, its interesting!):

‘I glanced in Paul’s direction. He was staring straight ahead, expressionless and weary. He didn’t have much to say about India that day, or any other. I sensed at that moment that something fundamental in them had changed.”’

It just really feels as though there was some confrontation between John and Paul that had to have happened to perpetuate the miscommunication later seen between them. Like if there hadn’t been some kind of confrontation, then I can’t really understand why Paul would be reluctant to speak about India, or harbour any regrets or dismay regarding the journey. Perhaps you could drill it down to the betrayal they appeared to have felt by Maharishi allegedly hitting on girls - but I feel like this was a “betrayal” mostly felt by John, I never really got the sense that Paul was deeply effected by it.

But yeah - those are the main theories I think.

Overall, I think that the third theory is probably the most substantiated claim, but I think it leaves a lot to desired. It just doesn’t feel like it totally fits together, as though theres more to the story - but I guess relationships and peoples psyches aren’t puzzles, and so not everything is always going to piece together perfectly; but I dunno.

Like I said though, the theory im most compelled by is the first. I acknowledge that it lacks evidence, but it just seems to make a lot of sense to me! But really, who knows what the hell happened in India?

If anyone else has an opinion on all this, or wants to expand upon or even suggest a new theory, feel free to! I always like hearing from you guys!

[strangertheory]

Right. So I know that there are Byler hints. I know that we were able to detect them, but there's still so many other people out there who don't see them or, even with us pointing them out to those people and writing novel like essays, keep denying that there might be a chance of Byler being a thing. How will the series change their minds in a natural way, without them feeling betrayed as in: "How is this suddenly happening out of nowhere?" or "But, but... what about Mike and El's relationship?"

"How is this suddenly happening out of nowhere?"

Hmm. But arguably that's what many fans who object to Mike and El's relationship have been saying about them.

Didn't Mike and El's relationship "happen out of nowhere?" A mysterious girl shows up when Will goes missing and suddenly by the end of the season which was primarily focused on the Party and El looking to rescue Will, Mike's kissing El and inviting her to the Snowball?

I suspect that what is going on between Mike, El, and Will is more complex and unique than most fans currently think. I think the story has as-yet undisclosed secrets. But until those aspects of the story are explored in the show, I see Mike and El's romantic relationship as very superficial if we assume that what we currently know about the characters is all that there is.

If fans who appreciate Mike and El's relationship are willing to accept the amount of time that Mike and El have spent together between seasons 1 and 3 as substantial enough to establish a close bond worthy of mutual romantic affection that they can support, then I'm not sure how they could dispute Mike and Will's long friendship having substantial moments of mutual affection and moments of caring for each other that should lend themselves to a very deep, trusting, and meaningful romance.

But if Mike and Will eventually demonstrate mutual romantic interest in each other, the task of explaining it will finally be lifted from fans' backs and placed in the hands of the creators themselves and I very much look forward to hearing the Duffer Brothers and writers and actors discuss all of the foreshadowing and details which pointed towards this eventual moment of realization for Mike and Will.

It gets emotionally and intellectually exhausting after the hundredth debate. This is part of why I removed most shipping posts from my pinned index post. I don't want to argue with fans who dislike Byler. I'd rather talk about other aspects of the story.

Whether it's well-intentioned and unprejudiced skepticism or not, debating the validity of a 🏳️‍🌈ship with fans who prefer a ship that is currently understood to be cishet is emotionally draining for me as someone who has had to defend the validity of my own feelings and identity to my homophobic family constantly. I don't honestly have the energy or desire to participate in this particular variety of "shipping war."

If someone empathizes and identifies with the romantic relationship between Mike and El: that's fine and I don't begrudge them that, in fact I have a very nuanced understanding and interpretation of Mike and El's relationship and possible eventual relationship dynamic myself (re: my various thoughts and theories about Stranger Things that I discuss in other blogposts) but I would prefer to not be asked to explain my opinion on their relationship at face-value anymore and I would prefer to not be placed in situations in which I have to defend why I think Mike and Will are a better match because I am tired of this particular ongoing debate in the fan community, and I don't enjoy watching the constant bickering and hurt feelings across this divide in the fan community when others participate in it, either. Regardless of what people ship, I don't want any fans to feel misunderstood or to feel as if their feelings don't matter and aren't respected. I encourage fans to ship what they want to ship and if a particular relationship between characters is meaningful to them on a personal level then it shouldn't matter what other fans think because the meaning they found in that character dynamic is real to them.

But the day I can simply link naysayers to an interview with the Duffer Brothers and not dig out my copious notes regarding why from a storytelling perspective Mike and Will appear to be set up as characters eventually intended to realize they have mutual romantic interest in each other will be a day I can finally relax and stop dealing with the tensions and animosities in the fandom with nothing but my own reasoning and observations to defend myself with.

There will always be those who are dissatisfied with the resolution of a plot thread in a story, and it's not necessarily the responsibility of the writers or other fans to win them over. Fans are welcome to think and feel whatever they want about a story and if fans believe that any plot twist was poorly foreshadowed or could have been handled better they are capable of writing and sharing their own opinions just as they always have.

I no longer feel especially responsible for the opinions of other fans and their ability to understand the show anymore. I'm sorry if you do: that must be incredibly frustrating.

If people don't like it? If people think it "came out of nowhere?" Well that sounds like their problem and not mine.

I don't plan on arguing over the validity of Byler anymore here on my blog, but I do look forward to celebrating if and when Mike and Will finally admit their feelings to each other and are able to be happy together.

[aotopmha]

Attack on Titan Series Thoughts

I've been mulling over Attack on Titan's ending and how I'd rate the whole story from all kinds of angles and I've reached the conclusion that above all else, the ending is really fucking annoying.

A great or a terrible ending would help me make my mind up much more easily.

If it's great, it's great. If it's terrible it's a good story with a terrible ending.

But instead, it is a mixed bag: there are things about it I like a lot and things about it I don't like.

It is a very common belief that the ending is paramount to a story's quality, but I've found that this is not really true for me. My favourite anime ever pretty much doesn't even have a proper ending. My needs for an ending basically encompass some sort of sense of closure and that's about it.

Especially longer-running series often either make the journey worth it just by being as long as they are (so a pretty generic ending is okay) or fall off in quality long before they are done. But AoT is neither of these for me.

AoT in this sense is complicated for me because I can't decide whether the ending impacted the quality of the story or not depending on which aspect of the ending I focus on.

Some details make it immensely satisfying to me and some details sour it a little bit.

I think right now the good and bad things balance out so in general nothing changes about how I view the story overall.

In basics, I really like the emotional core of Attack on Titan, but I've always found it flawed on the technical level.

I'd give the story a 10 just for how much it emotionally engaged me and made me care. This story is the reason why I started this blog and I became active talking about media in the first place.

For a time I was losing the sense of fun of being a fan: people just became really hostile when discussing stuff.

But this past week or so has been incredible in my inbox, reminding me of the highs of being a fan, with so many wonderful messages.

Other stories have made me more angry, made me cry more or laugh more, but AoT made me feel the biggest spectrum of feelings.

No other story has made me do this, at most I only became a member of various forums as a random member; I didn't create a blog with the aim to talk about one.

From a technical level, I would give it a 6-7 depending on the section of the story.

The foreshadowing for various twists is pretty loose from start to finish, there is a bunch of redundant scenes all over the story and the pacing can be really uneven. It is not nearly as *well-crafted* of a story in my eyes as I see people praise it to be.

The art is a pretty huge mess at points, too.

I think sometimes the fact that this is the author's very first actual long-running story very much shines through. I think only a beginner would dare to employ historical imagery as bluntly as Isayama did, too, for example.

But to me the emotional core is magical.

The average of these two aspects, emotional and technical, would be around 8-8.5.

But at the same time, when I finished that last chapter I felt like I couldn't rate it and this has rarely happened to me.

I've kind of slowly distanced myself from number ratings in general because consuming media is a very emotional and personal thing and exploring it via positives and negatives feels much more apt.

From that perspective, I think the story is incredibly emotionally intelligent and understands humanity really well.

Stemming from that in turn, I think themes are the strongest aspect of the story next to characters. While I think the story faltered in a some instances when it came to characters, I think the themes mostly stood tall all the way through.

I think it ended up giving answers to and looping back to ideas it started with: seeing the good in the cruel world, facing humanity's unending desire for conflict and need to survive, living without regrets, learning to see the world in more complex shades of gray rather than black and whites and learning to do the right thing when needed.

As a mystery box, it does answer pretty much all of the big mysteries of the story and I think I don't really take issue with any of the big answers except maybe one very specific one. The numerous twists throughout the story range from absolutely genius to fairly typical. Again, the foreshadowing gets a lot of praise when it comes to this story, but I think a lot of the story actually isn't planned. Isayama just uses some details in clever ways to make it seem like it was planned.

I think that is a skill in itself that never gets nearly enough credit, but in the end, I think that is the weakest part of the story along with the world itself.

I like the walls themselves and I really like some of the Titan designs, but other than that I never had much interest in the world of AoT on its own. It always has to be connected to characters or themes for me to care. The crystal cave, time sand dunes and certain Titan skeleton are the most interesting settings in the story for me in that sense.

I think it does also fall in the pit of some pretty frustrating dark fantasy tropes, most specifically with a certain blonde female character who had one of the best character arcs in the story that was kind of just thrown under the bus.

It can't quite escape the pitfalls of that genre and it just so happens to be my favourite genre of story, so I constantly see excessive shock value rape, forced pregnancy and gay erasure happen in stories that I think are great otherwise. It's frustrating.

I hoped AoT would be better than that because for so long it was, but it didn't end up being as such.

But at the same time, I think most of its female cast still ended up being pretty great and did some pretty fun archetype-defying stuff. It's a pretty strange dichotomy. It is actually much better than most dark fantasy, but not quite there yet.

This is actually true for the male cast, too, I think. It does some fun playing around with all of the character archetypes.

The story's action scenes are thrilling and some of the action setpieces are really memorable. The final arc really shines in that sense to me. As a horror spectacle it is especially excellent.

Despite sometimes coming across as narmy/unintentionally funny, it still somehow manages to make the Titans a credible threat and this is true throughout the entire story, for different, evolving reasons.

I think the Titans have become iconic for a reason and never lost the luster throughout any of the story.

Along with that, my final point is that it is one of the few stories that sets up a kill 'em all setting that actually kills major characters with substantial focus and commits to it. It also doesn't kill too many characters where no character ever gets to actually develop.

So, considering all of what I listed above, what would my general thoughts be?

I think it still is a story worth checking out.

Personally I obviously love the story as a whole.

But I think any fan of dark fantasy/sci-fi could get a bunch of entertainment out of it: above all I think it is an extremely digestable series.

It's sometimes a very dense read, but I never felt it was a "hard" read. It's a very dark story with a lot of horrible things happening, but I never felt it was difficult to get through even in its darkest of moments.

My favourite characters ended up being Gabi, Reiner, Eren, Pieck, Armin and Annie. Zeke and Hange get a shoutout, too.

My favourite chapters ended up being 71, 82, 100, 122, 131 and 137.

Who are you guys' favourite characters and what are your favourite chapters and why?

Send me an ask explaining why for fun! (Or ask me for my reasonings?)

[scripttorture]

Hello! I’m a long time follower of this blog and first of all, I wanna thank you for your amazing work! I’ve learned so much from your analysis and explanations! My question is: I have a character that is kidnapped along with two partners/friends that are beaten to death in front of her. She then endures torture such as being repeatedly drowned, tased and whipped, and she spends most of the time in a stress position (hands tied above her head from the ceiling). That lasts about 2/3 days (1/2)

When they threaten her with rape, she says the information she’d been withholding in an attempt to escape it. Is this realistic, or does it go against the fact that the most you torture, the less the victim is likely to cooperate? Also, they end up raping her still, and shortly after that she is rescued by her friends. What would be the extent of her psychology damage? I don’t want her to bounce right back into work like nothing’s happened - that would be disrespectful to actual victims (2/2)

-

I find gauging/explaining the extent of psychological ‘damage’ difficult because one of the things I try to avoid here is grading people’s pain. We have a tendency to default to almost ranking these things and I don’t think that’s helpful. It’s a perfectly legitimate question (and I don’t think you are trying to rank how much this character suffers) but it’s a… cultural quirk that makes answering a bit more difficult.

 The truth is that with all of these things there’s a range of individual responses rather then one universal ‘right’ answer. So if you’re struggling remember that the target you’re trying to hit isn’t a pin, it’s a boulder.

 As you practice writing different survivors you’ll get more confident handling symptoms and long term mental health problems.

 I’ll circle back to that, let’s tackle the question of whether people ‘talk’ first. I think a lot of people get confused by this because there are a lot of factors at work and it’s difficult to picture the knock on effects of all of them at once.

 Torture does not lead to accurate information. It fundamentally can’t. And it can’t because of mixture of factors including:

how our memory works

how our nervous system works

how torturers behave

the effect torture has on organisations more broadly

the erosion of public trust torture causes

 The question of whether an individual victim ‘talks’ or not concerns the first two points. Which (putting it briefly) are: pain and trauma cause memory problems meaning that torture actively destroys the evidence it claims to seek and that we are stubborn creatures who become a lot less inclined to actively cooperate with people who hurt us.

 However the issue is bigger then the victim here.

 When an organisation uses torture they lose the public trust, people stop volunteering information. And volunteered information is the main source of accurate information for any organisation.

 This means that the majority of people arrested by these organisations typically know nothing. They are then tortured and given a big incentive to lie.

 This creates a cycle of increasing misinformation. I talk about this effect in more detail here.

 On top of all this torturers… how to put this… They don’t give a fuck about genuine investigation.

 They claim that they do. But their actions tell a different story.

 Torturers don’t record what their victims say. They do not fact check what their victims say. There are multiple recorded incidents of torturers continuing to ‘interrogate’ prisoners who did not speak the same language and of torturers continuing to torture when victims were clearly physically incapable of responding.

 There have also been cases where victims have reported trying to give up information only to have torturers completely ignore it and carry on.

 And torturers are no better at telling the difference between lies and truth then anyone else. They often believe lies told by victims who know nothing. And they are equally likely to dismiss the truth.

 The main point to understand here is: there’s a difference between a character giving up information and a torturer/organisation that tortures obtaining accurate information.

 Personally? I think it is easier from a writing perspective to have the character lie, especially if this is your first time writing something like this.

 Writing torture is hard. It will be a lot easier to avoid falling into the common torture apologia trope that ‘torture works’ if the character lies. Especially if you don’t think the narrative has the time and space to explore the knock on effects of torture on the villainous organisation.

 So this isn’t so much an issue of realism as what you feel you can take on in this story.

 A small number of people do try to tell torturers the truth or give up information. But the scale of misinformation that torture produces is so vast that any small truths get lost among the lies.

 Conversely readers expect that if they see a character telling torturers something true, there are going to be narrative consequences. They expect this to mean the Bad Guys ‘know everything’ and will act on it.

 Realistically… torture can’t produce that sort of coordinated, thought through response. Because for everything this character says there are twelve others in separate cells contradicting that information. Because her torturers may not actually want to hear the truth, because they’ve probably sunk a lot of time, effort and personal prestige into a lie they heard a month ago being ‘true’ instead.

 But that’s not a leap most readers will make. It isn’t a context you can expect the average reader to understand. That isn’t me disparaging your readers it’s just… accurate information on torture is hard to find or access, so most people believe the apologia they see everyday. It’s another kind of trope and we’re all used to tropes playing out a particular way.

 Question whether your story has the space to explain this context and whether it can be done in a way that’s narratively satisfying.

 If the answer is ‘no’, or if you just feel like it’s a lot to tackle, then I think you’re a lot better off with the character lying to her torturers.

 Looking over the torture scenario itself I think you do have a survivable scenario here.

 I would say that it’s uncommon for victims to be put in stress positions for a few hours: generally the typical time frame is around 24-48 hours. Using a stress position in this scenario would still be painful but you don’t need to use it. You already have a lot going on with five separate tortures (six if this character is beaten as well.)

 I don’t see anything wrong with keeping it in here if you feel it adds something to the story. But if you want to drop one of these abuses the stress position seems like the odd one out.

 Circling back to the beginning and the psychological problems torture causes, I think a definition of ‘disability’* is helpful here. Disability is any impairment, mental or physical, that has a substantial, long term, negative effect on daily life.

 That’s what we’re talking about with torture survivors.

 Recovery is possible. Life for survivors can get better. Every common psychological condition torture causes can improve with time, treatment and life style adaptions.

 But we are talking about disability. Improvement and a happy life doesn’t mean that someone goes back to the way they were before.

 Let’s take a few examples from the list of common symptoms which you can find here.

 An ‘easy’ example to think through would be something like chronic pain. I think most of us can imagine how being in pain every day would have a negative impact on your ability to do things.

 It can make it harder to perform normal, daily tasks. People with pain in their knees might struggle climbing stairs and walking long distances for instance. People with pain in their arms or shoulders might struggle to get dressed, hang washing on a line and access things on shelves above chest height.

 Chronic pain can also make it harder to interact positively with people and socialise. We’re rarely at are best when we’re in pain.

 A harder example to think through might be the kinds of long term memory problems torture commonly causes. You can read more about them here.

 One possible type of memory problem is a sort of general forgetfulness that a lot of survivors experience. It is not dementia, it isn’t a progressive loss of memory. But some survivors find it a lot harder to remember information and that can have a huge impact on a person’s daily life.

 Typical examples are things like:

forgetting medical appointments, which can lead to people being denied treatment

being consistently late for work, which can lead to loss of employment

difficulty managing money

forgetting to pay bills, leading to essential services being cut

forgetting meetings with friends, leading to reduced social life and isolation

 That’s not a complete list but hopefully it gives you an idea of some of the ways this particular symptom impacts daily life.

 This thought process that I’ve outlined is what you’re aiming for when you’re trying to think through symptom severity. It imagining the knock on effects on daily life and ensuring they’re at a level where the character is disabled.

 That will look different depending on the combination of symptoms you pick.

 Survivors don’t typically experience every possible symptom. As I said there’s variety; survivors of the same traumatic event can come out with completely different sets of symptoms and we’re not always sure why.

 Given that I think the best thing a writer can do is pick 3-5 symptoms from the list for their character and show those symptoms consistently over the course of the story.

 Remember that symptoms can improve. A person’s mental health problems can get better; but this means ‘easier to deal with’ rather then ‘no longer there.’

 It’s also worth keeping in mind that the same mental health problem can look different in different people. It’s common for people with depression to experience insomnia but it’s also common for people with depression to feel tired constantly, sleep excessively and find it impossible to get out of bed.

 Decide on the symptoms you want to write then take a moment to think about how they should manifest in this particular character.

 I find it helpful to consider what it will add to the story. If a symptom works well with a theme in the story or creates interesting narrative opportunities then it’s usually a good pick. When thinking through the severity of the symptom consider whether this particular disability would create interesting challenges for the character as the story progresses.

 Recovery and learning to live with disability takes months or years. It’s not linear and there are some people who will require regular assistance.

 Essentially because symptoms are so varied between survivors and because they can manifest is different ways I can’t give you a perfect road map to writing trauma. There isn’t one ‘correct’ way to do it because there isn’t one way it manifests in life.

 But it isn’t necessarily as hard as it sounds. Writing this stuff well takes practice, trial and error. That shouldn’t stop you from trying.

 If you can I’d recommend finding a beta reader or writing group. Having other people reading over your stuff and giving feedback can really help. It’s a good way to make sure your scenes are coming across as you intend them to.

 I’d also recommend taking a look through ScriptTraumaSurvivor’s archived blog here.

 I hope that helps. :)

Available on Wordpress.

Disclaimer

*I’m quoting from UK anti discrimination law here mostly because I think it’s a clear, helpful way of picturing what we’re talking about.

[disneyat34]

Lady and the Tramp at 34

A review by Adam D. Jaspering

Lady and the Tramp begins with a quote by Josh Billings. “In the whole history of the world there is but one thing that money can not buy… to wit — the wag of a dog’s tail.”

The pithy observance frames the movie: dogs are good. It’s a simple premise. It’s a universal premise. It’s a beloved premise. It’s a marketable premise. People will want to pay money to see a movie about cartoon dogs that fall in love.

For such a simple story, Lady and the Tramp had a lengthy production history. Disney employee Joe Grant drew a springer spaniel named “Lady” in 1937. Walt Disney asked Grant to produce a storyboard for potential projects. Grant obliged, but after several false starts, nothing came to fruition. Lady was a character in search of a project.

Grant left Disney Animation Studios in 1949. His abandoned creation remained behind, unused, somewhat forgotten. In 1953, production began on a new movie featuring dogs. Disney Studios scraped together various, unrelated dog-related material in preparation for the film. Lady finally found her purpose. 

“Lady” was pulled from the archives; her species changed to a cocker spaniel. “Tramp” was inspired by a 1945 short story called “Happy Dan, The Cynical Dog,“ written by Ward Greene. Disney even drew inspiration from his own life. After once standing up his wife on a date, he gifted her a puppy in a hat box as an apology. Lady is introduced this way in the film’s opening scene.

It’s easy to consider Lady and the Tramp a simple story, and there’s no shame in that. Cinderella, Alice in Wonderland, and Peter Pan were all spectacles in design and delivery. Disney was well within their rights to slow things down. Lady and the Tramp is both conventional and approachable subject matter. It focuses on the world around us, making the ordinary seem every bit as fanciful and majestic as a far-off land.

Lady and the Tramp is set in the 1910s, forty years before the film’s release. While the period is arbitrary to the story, it’s essential to the film’s appeal. Setting the film in the near past gives it a unique feeling of nostalgic charm. It’s familiar, but also slightly foreign. Enough to pique interest, not so much it alienates. It makes adults think of their glory days, and children think of their grandparents’ house.

Choosing the proper era is a delicate tightrope. Too recent, and it seems old-fashioned but unseasoned. Too far back, it seems ancient and unapproachable. The science behind choosing the right era may be nuanced, but the solution was a foregone conclusion. Disney himself chose the 1910s specifically to recreate his own childhood. A fringe benefit of owning your own film studio.

Lady and the Tramp sets the entire movie from a dog’s perspective. Physically, and dynamically. The movie focuses on dogs and their diminutive vantage point. They spend more time with human ankles than with human faces. Dogs are the main characters, but the world is still decidedly human. 

Human buildings, human society, human owners, and human dominance. The dogs relate to each other as neighbors, but they still respect and acknowledge their roles as house pets. The dogs have their own understanding of the world around them, and are powerless to affect it.

The first fifteen minutes introduces us to Lady and her day-to-day life. She’s a dog, and as such she has no real responsibilities. She has no goals, no ambitions, no wants, no desires. She eats, she sleeps, she gets head pats from her masters. She has a pair of friends who stop by occasionally to say hello, but beyond that, she’s very dependent on her owners.

As time moves on, we the viewer learn Lady’s owners are expecting their first child. Lady, having no context for this, is left clueless as to what is happening. All Lady can comprehend is the construction of a nursery, and uncharacteristic exhaustion from the mother-to-be. To the animator’s credit, Lady making inquisitive faces for ten minutes straight never seems forced or repetitive.

It would seem the movie is trying to make a parallel to sibling rivalry, the animosity between children for the attention of their parents. The only difference being, instead of an older and younger child, there’s a dog and a baby. Assuming this was intentional and not subtext, it simply doesn’t work. 

Sibling rivalry begins after the birth of a newborn; the eldest child acts out for attention, rebelling against the redefined roles in the family dynamic. They resent they must share attention. This doesn’t happen when one of the participants is not a child, but a household pet. The most beloved of pets mandate less affection than a biological child. 

Even Lady, a dog with human attributes, can’t fault her masters for focusing more attention on the baby. Regardless that she is substantially humanized, a dog like Lady is still just a dog. There is an argument that Lady could hypothetically resent the shift attention. She is depicted wanting more facetime and interaction with her owners. She does clearly understand she has lost something.

She could resent the shift, but she doesn’t. Despite being a cartoon, Lady has no autonomy beyond being somebody’s pet. She’s not being neglected, and she’s not being mistreated, so she has no leg to stand on. The baby takes precedent over the dog. Any more than acceptance of the fact would paint Lady as selfish. This film is a romance, and Lady is supposed to be an upright, worthy heroine. She can’t have such a negative trait.

One shouldn’t fret over Lady’s circumstances anyways. The quasi-sibling rivalry concept is abandoned early. Lady doesn’t need to fight, strive, or earn attention from her owners. She doesn’t need to understand how she and the baby each fit into the family. She doesn’t have to revaluate her life of privilege now that elements have been upended. Because Lady’s masters up and leave and won’t return until the film’s conclusion.

What prompts a couple in 1911 to abandon their newborn child for several days is never explained. Is it medical? Is it business? Is it a vacation? Why do both need to leave and why can’t the baby come with them? It’s never addressed or explained. It’s questionable, uncharacteristic, and happens for no reason than to fulfill plot requirements. Lady can’t fall in love with Tramp until Lady flees her home, and Lady won’t flee her home unless Lady’s owners are gone. So Lady’s owners just... leave for some reason.

The nameless infant is left in the charge of Aunt Sarah, an apparent spinster relative to one of the parents. Throughout the Disney catalog, villains are hateful, greedy, angry, and callous. There is no other villain like Aunt Sarah, though. She’s not evil in intent, but so blindingly ignorant to what’s happening around her, the ignorance becomes a form of malice.

Aunt Sarah, embodying a key tenet of old maids, has an affinity for cats. Not only does this mean she has inherent disdain for Lady and all dogs, she brings her two pet cats into a decidedly un-catproofed house. The pair knock over vases, rip up the curtains, and torment a goldfish. Aunt Sarah, in her deliberate ignorance, blames these obvious feline crimes on Lady.

The two Siamese cats are as subtle in design as they are in deed. They are yet another racist caricature that make trawling through the classic Disney films of the 40s and 50s awkward. The animators were flat out deliberate in their disrespect. All they had to do was draw cats. The cats didn’t need to have human attributes at all, especially not Asian characteristics. The animators did not have to give the cats oversized, slanted eyes or buck teeth. They did anyways.

The main offender is their speech. While not a flattering representation of East Asia, it’s also not accurate even in a mocking way. Whatever accent these Siamese cats are speaking in, nobody on planet Earth has ever spoke that way, ever. It’s not Chinese, it’s not Japanese, it’s not Thai, it’s not anything. It’s just generically foreign. The ignorant stereotypical voice is so detached, it forgets what it’s trying to misrepresent. The cats are somehow too racist to actually be racist.

Lady goes through quite a lot in the first half of the film, but where is Tramp? As his name suggests, Tramp is a vagrant mutt (mostly schnauzer). He lives in a railyard and subsists on the handouts of kind restauranteurs. Like Lady, he also has no goals, no dreams and no ambitions. The two were destined to find each other.

Tramp’s life on the street is a stark contrast with Lady’s life of comfortable privilege. Based on this disparity, it’s easy to assume Lady and the Tramp is a film about class differences. When Lady first meets Tramp, Tramp halfheartedly alludes to the restrictions and illusions of security in the upper class, but he mostly shares this opinion to mock Lady’s discomfort. It’s not further explored.

Lady is not an upper class citizen. She doesn’t live in a society at all. She’s a pet. Her owners are affluent, but Lady’s world ends with the fence. She has no idea how the other half lives because the other half never made themselves known to her. It’s difficult to have a story of class consciousness when one character has only met five people in their entire life.

Again, another false start for the movie. Lady and the Tramp isn’t a movie about sibling rivalry, or classism, or the protection of a home from intruding racist cats. The movie sets up different plot threads, and all are a means to nothing. The film is about Lady and Tramp: two cartoon dogs falling in love. It’s what we were sold on. Why does the film try so hard to avoid delivery?

After being muzzled by Aunt Sarah, Lady flees, bumping into Tramp in her panic. Here, finally, Lady and the Tramp begins in earnest. Tramp suggests looking for ideas at the zoo. It’s an impractical solution, perhaps appropriate for a dog’s dexterity and resources. A dog can’t exactly walk into a hardware store and buy wire snips.

The zoo scene is filled with pleasant gags. Incidents with alligators, hyenas, and an extended scene with a beaver are delightful. What became a trip designed for practicality slowly blossoms into a date. The animosity and distaste that previously defined their relationship has disappeared. Finally, our promise of romance has been fulfilled.

The issue is, now the movie is half over. A normal romance story would have the two leads courting before the first act ends. Lady and the Tramp has been meandering, wasting time, establishing too much scenery that’s going underused. If there were payoffs to all these loose threads at the film’s climax, that would be one thing. But very little receives any sort of callback.

Lady and the Tramp is a movie of fluff and filler, and all of it is in service of one scene. The one scene that rescues Lady and the Tramp from obscurity and irrelevance. The scene that immortalizes its place in film history. The scene where Lady and Tramp share a plate of spaghetti. 

Lady and Tramp share a plate of spaghetti while being serenaded by an Italian love song. They’re enamored by the music and the candlelit setting. They take up the two ends of the same spaghetti strand, moving closer to each other in the middle. When they finally meet, they have their first kiss. Inadvertent, but welcome all the same. Anyone waiting patiently has had their romantic thirst sufficiently satisfied. 

The spaghetti scene has entered the cultural pantheon of romantic moments. It’s been alluded to, referenced, and parodied countless times. It’s more famous than the movie itself. It took a long time to get to, but Disney Studios didn’t blow the opportunity.

There is a distinct lack of purpose and urgency in the film. For long stretches of time, nothing of significance happens. The dogs walk around, the dogs see things, the dogs go places, the dogs talk. Sometimes its to the story’s benefit. Sometimes its to fill silence. Sometimes its to justify the detours. The movie is about two dogs falling in love. It’s paced so poorly, Lady goes on her first date with Tramp, then is ready to break up with him in less than twenty minutes.

This is the issue with Lady and the Tramp. As it turns out, the premise is not whether you would enjoy a movie about two cartoon dogs falling in love. Some viewers would readily accept, while others would require something more substantial. That’s not the premise. The premise is, if you were fully willing to watch a movie about two cartoon dogs falling in love, how much are you willing to endure before it happens?

The conflict, of what little there is, is the standard boilerplate romantic miscommunication. The type of problem that could easily be solved if one party could vocally explain the circumstances, were they were not obstructed by separation or one party’s stubborn refusal to listen. In the case of Lady and the Tramp, Lady is picked up by a dogcatcher and interred in a dog pound. She has her tags, so she’s only being detained for several hours. It’s just long enough to meet one of Tramp’s jilted exes, who regales Lady with a song about how much of a womanizer Tramp is. Or whatever the equivalent of “womanizer” is for dogs.

Regardless of the plot development, this jazzy song and dance number is occurring inside a dog pound. A pound that is very blatantly a stand-in for prison. The inhabitants are incredibly woeful and resigned. Some are actively trying to escape. Some have accepted their fate, singing melancholy dirges about their situation. One dog is literally executed off-camera. This is an incredibly downbeat, sullen, depressing environment. Doubly so that it occurs in what was until now a very uplifting and idyllic picture. 

Prior to Lady’s apprehension, Lady and Tramp had a brief but heavy discussion about their future. Sure, they love each other. The night was wonderful, and they’d love more. But Tramp enjoys his freedom. Lady enjoys being a pet. Tramp quickly changes the subject before either is forced to face the consequences. All of this is now compounded.

We arrive at the climax; Lady is scorned by Tramp’s playboy disposition. Tramp is trying to re-evaluate his life ad hoc before the girl he loves escapes him forever, but can’t. Lady tells him off from her doghouse. Concurrently, a rat sneaks into the nursery, terrorizing the baby. Just an ordinary rat. He’s not giant, he’s not rabid, he’s not frenzied. He has evil-looking red eyes, but he’s just a rat.

Despite the argument, Tramp helps Lady and saves the baby. Aunt Sarah, useless babysitter that she is, witnesses none of this. She comes in too late, finding the screaming infant and the stray dog. Aunt Sarah calls the dogcatcher, who immediately apprehends Tramp. Lady realizes how much Tramp was willing to sacrifice for her. Tramp really had changed, and Lady really did love him. With a series of well-placed barks, Lady is able to communicate to her human owners the exact situation.

We’ll ignore how Lady’s owners return from their contrived absence at the exact moment Tramp is being carted off. We’ll ignore how Lady’s owners understand precisely what is happening from a series of barks. We’ll ignore the humans’ staked interest in Tramp despite never seeing Tramp before, ever. We’ll also ignore how much more invested the parents are in the dogcatcher fiasco than their baby being attacked moments ago.

Tramp sacrificed everything to assist Lady. And in a turnabout, Lady sacrifices nothing. The dogcatcher’s truck is stopped by one of Lady’s friends, a geriatric coonhound named Trusty. Trusty almost dies in the process (suffering only a broken leg thanks to Disney magic). Lady’s owners adopt Tramp, taking on the extra burden of another pet. Tramp forfeits his rambling vagabond lifestyle. Lady has given up nothing at all. It’s not that she doesn’t deserve a happy ending, but couldn’t she at least muss up her coat?

Lady has four puppies in the film’s epilogue. Her owners previously had trouble dividing attention between a baby and one dog. Now they have a baby and six dogs. The dogcatcher is a very prolific figure in Lady and the Tramp. He’s clearly overworked due to the town’s overpopulation problem. One would think both Lady and Tramp would be fixed promptly.

Lady and the Tramp is a movie that is self-conscious about its simple premise. It tries to mask its inferiority complex by dressing it up in weightier ideas and concepts. Very few of these additions are explored to any sort of fruition. As such, the most core romance is denied proper focus. 

The romantic element is unfulfilling except for a few scenes, which entirely save the film. There’s nothing inherently wrong with Lady and the Tramp (excusing a few questionable cats), but there’s also little good to say in its favor. Unless you really, really like seeing cartoon dogs fall in love.

Fantasia Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs Cinderella Alice in Wonderland Pinocchio Bambi The Three Caballeros Lady and the Tramp Peter Pan Dumbo Melody Time Saludos Amigos The Adventures of Ichabod and Mr. Toad Fun and Fancy Free Make Mine Music

[sunset-spring]

Hey, I'm kind of scared to ask you this, but I wanted to know what you thought of the epilogue in Season 8. I'm terrified of what you'll say, but you seem to be a very logical and clear-headed thinker, so I am kind of curious. If the answer isn't good, then please respond privately. Thank you.

It’s ok, I’m not gonna lie I’m nervous about a lot of questions related to season 8 just because so many people have such hard line stances and opinions on it. I have a lot of the same fear talking about it for the same reasons I’m sure you were scared of even asking. Whether you like or dislike s8 or like it, it’s not a big deal to me - no judgement either way. Opinions are varied and everyone has their own reasons for either.

On to the actual epilogue, some context I wanna give is that I had seen spoilers for the season even though I couldn’t watch it til a few days later. I had a prior family thing and I was stressed and I went to tumblr on my phone to look at some art to keep me calm. So I saw a lot of reactions to the season as a whole, but I couldn’t tell what reactions were genuine problems or what were over dramatized hate when I didn’t have full context. 

So when I watched the season, the expectations I went in with were “there might be some things that I’m not going to enjoy, and some that are overblown.” And when I watched it… that was pretty much what I got. There were definitely some problems, but there was also a lot that I think was made out to be way worse than I personally found them to be.

The epilogue itself gets a lot of weight and importance put on it. And personally I wonder if it’s in part because it was leaked before the season aired. When I watched it, I felt very neutral to it. No super strong feelings either way, mostly just “oh, that makes sense for this character, but this doesn’t work very well and is not a great fit.”

Which I guess is a segue to talk about the individual bits in detail. This is going to be long and I’ll do my best to organize it for ease of reading, but I want to go into all my thoughts and logic as best I can and that might result in a bit of a lengthy read, so if it gets a bit ramble-y and confusing, I apologize:

Pidge and Hunk ended up in a place that I felt was very natural for both of them. 

Pidge using her passion for technology to help defend the universe alongside her family was something that felt like it was true to her personality and something that’s a very good world-building aspect for what would happen after the story took place. The concept was something I interested in all the way back in season 3, and is part of what inspired my cadet squad AU initially. So seeing that happen didn’t feel out of place to me. 

Hunk as well had always had his passion for cooking as a big part of his character. Seeing him become a chef and using that passion in a way to bring cultures together is a really good and is very in line with his character. We’ve seen him using that skill in other meetings, such as in season 3, and the way he uses cooking to bring people together is a big thing in the final season, as well as for his character overall. Space Mall is another good example, because while it’s mostly for fun and antics it also showed Hunk connecting and changing Sal for the better. 

Keith, Acxa, Ezor and Zethrid slowly turning the Blade into a humanitarian organization is something I’m a bit neutral on. On the one hand, seeing them come together to change a rebellion group that was no longer necessarily needed into an organization to help others has logic to it, and is a very good thing for them to do. But I’m not sure how I feel about it based on their characters and arcs:

We didn’t get a lot of time to get in depth with Acxa, Ezor and Zethrid, so the grounding for them is a bit iffy. I can sort of see it  since they were in a sort of similar position as Lotor’s generals as that Blade of Marmora is in terms of role: a rebel group that is based on taking down the old empire. And due to what we know of their backgrounds, they were people who were in an “us vs them” mentality based on how they were treated. The conflict of Ezor and Zethrid as warlords vs Acxa who chose to go on a separate path was supposed to show how the damage of that mindset could escalate into something harmful, even with people who had genuine reason to have it - I think that could even be applied to Lotor at least to some degree with how he broke down in season 6. 

I personally think Ezor is probably the best example of this based on her personality, specifically in season 7. We see the fear she has over being hurt and tracked down by others, and then we see her taking joy in the concept of hurting others who she has power over. Because of that fear, whenever she has security and power, she uses it in a very sadistic and spiteful way. That trait is a very natural thing that can occur in situations like her own, and is very understandable. But it’s also very damaging to herself and others.

So having them shift from a mindset of hurting others in order to protect themselves to helping others on a personal level isn’t a bad road to take; in fact it’s one that I think works really well. But because we didn’t get a lot of time to explore their characters more in depth and get to see that transition, I don’t think it works for just a single shot epilogue sequence. It would’ve worked better as it’s own plotline, but with how much already going on and a limited number of episodes to work with I have no idea where they’d fit it. 

Meanwhile for Keith, while he has a basis for being in the Blade already, I don’t really see a strong foundation outside of that. And I think for me, the reason it didn’t have that grounding was because we didn’t get as much with Keith outside of his familial arc with discovering his heritage and mother. That was his sole character focus outside of becoming a leader and Black Paladin, and his arc with becoming a leader was sadly sidelined in season 4 for the other. Which I can understand from a character perspective too - his heritage was an important thing he needed to connect to and understand. But as a result the other sadly didn’t have as much to go on. 

And I think that’s why this was his spot, because had he gotten more development in terms of leadership, I think he would’ve been in that Galactic Coalition leader spot with Krolia and Kolivan. Because with the scene of him with the two of them prior to the feast in the final episode, I feel like that’s where the story wanted him to be, but they also knew that they couldn’t get him there and make it seem earned. So him being the leader of the Blades as a new humanitarian organization feels like a compromise of that. He’s in a leadership position, but not on as big of a scale as the coalition. Which isn’t necessarily that bad, it’s working with what they had to try to get a good medium of what they wanted and what could be done. But it leaves it feeling a bit lacking in terms of personal motivation for Keith. It doesn’t scream “this is Keith making a choice and committing to a cause,” it feels much more like a structured narrative decision rather than an in universe motive for the character.

The final two are the ones I’m most nervous about talking about, because they get the most strong reactions from others. But I’m going to do my best to explain my thoughts.

I can see some of the logic in Lance’s end, but I ultimately think it didn’t convey the message they wanted with his arc very well and as a result ended up with some bad implications.

One of the things with Lance’s arc is that he starts off being a character who talks himself up a lot. He plays himself off as someone really awesome and cool, is very flirtatious, etc. As he continued to progress, we started seeing some of his insecurities. Season 2 introduced the fact that he was worried about not contributing to the team in a way that was substantial, and in season 6 while Pidge and Hunk did their tech and Lotor and Allura were working on the Sincline ship, he was left with little to nothing to do. 

Even with those insecurities, though, the way he responded to them was to actively take steps to improve himself. He doesn’t feel like he has a thing? He trains himself in a specific skill: Sharpshooting. Upset that Allura has chosen to be with another guy? He talks himself through it using the mice as a way to communicate what he’s feeling.

And I want to draw attention to what I feel are some of his biggest defining character development moments. In season 3, when he accepts Keith as the leader, when he talks to him on Thayserix, and when he talks up Allura in season 4 as the heart of Voltron. Moments where he builds others up. And Allura multiple times has talked about those moments with Lance. And her talking about him drove what I believe is his actual character arc, based on those insecurities and the way he plays himself up.

He is enough as who he is. He isn’t contributing any less by not having a niche like Pidge or Hunk, he isn’t supposed to be a grand hero who gets all the glory. He’s Lance, and he’s enough as he is. It’s that simple. 

But the way they choose to show that simplicity in the epilogue is… not the best. They set it up a little with the farm scene in season 4, but overall the choice to make his simple life be living as a farmer has a lot of bad implications based on stereotypes. Which is why so many people have such negative feelings towards it, which is totally understandable and completely valid. 

The idea of him settling in a more simple lifestyle isn’t something I’m apposed to, but I believe that choosing that instead of another type of occupation or lifestyle is a very poor choice, and as a result doesn’t convey his arc well or in a positive light. Which is unfortunate, because I really think that arc is good otherwise.

As for Shiro’s, there’s a lot going on with it and a lot of factors that play into it, which makes it difficult to talk about. 

The marriage is, I believe, a small step in terms of representation, as it’s the first time in western cartoons that a mlm wedding has appeared. But I also admit that because of it being such a small scene with no build up and no relationship to build it up, that it is very flawed. Others have talked about their distaste for it and I understand why, and I also understand those who enjoy it for being there at all. There are also aspects like his retirement that people aren’t fond of, and that’s understandable too, but that’s where I have my own feelings to talk about personally. 

The events of season 7 with Shiro and Adam upset a lot of people, and I myself wasn’t that fond of it. I didn’t feel as strongly as others, but the trope of “Bury Your Gays” is something that has been in media for a long time with a long history. So being upset by it is absolutely valid. The reason I personally didn’t feel as strongly as others was because Shiro, a main character who has fought and survived through the show, was still there, and still a gay man on screen whether he was in a relationship or not. 

The on screen break up I personally didn’t have a problem with either due to the fact that I have personally seen a lot of framing of relationships with abuse and unhealthy dynamics as “straight culture” and gay relationships as inherently free of those types of scenarios. I personally identify as asexual or questioning, but know I’m at least not straight from my own self reflection. And seeing this kind of mentality is very harmful and something I wish would stop because it pushes people within the community to stay in relationships that might potentially be dangerous based on pressure that such dynamics are impossible to occur within a wlw/mlm relationship. There’s also a factor of validity of orientations being erased due to relationship status, such as many people who identify as bisexual having their identity erased by others while  being in a m/f relationship, which is also harmful. While having a healthy and thriving mlm relationship on screen would have been great and a very good thing, I don’t believe the break up itself is a terrible choice because it shows that relationship status take away from someone’s identity.

Not only that, but Adam was not the only character within the show to die on screen, so it was not as if the fact that he was gay was a deliberate target on his back in context. Ulaz, Thace, and many other characters have had on screen deaths from seasons 2-7 before Adam. But as I said, the history behind the trope of “Bury Your Gays” does make Adam’s death sting in a much more personal way for a lot of people, which again is a very valid feeling that I don’t want to brush off. 

So with all that in mind, when the epilogue came and showed Shiro marrying Curtis, that leads to some flaws. Namely the fact that the relationship with Curtis is non-existent, and Curtis himself doesn’t really have much of a character to speak of. The marriage itself is good in the sense that it showed a gay marriage on screen, thus opening the door for other shows to do the same.

But in the context of showing a relationship, there was no relationship to be shown. And if Shiro and Curtis had developed a relationship over the course of the season, it would have been much better for both the story and characters, as well as for showing representation for the LGBT community. Without that, it feels like a last minute addition, which it admittedly was, instead of a genuine show of love and wanting to include a mlm couple. Which in the end, while good intended, it leaves it heavily flawed. Which no hate to anyone who enjoyed it for what it was either. I can genuinely see reasons on both sides why someone would dislike or enjoy it. Personally, the flaws outweighed some of the good for me and keeps me from enjoying it.

As for his retirement, this is where I get far more subjective and into how I personally relate to Shiro, which I know others may disagree with because this is very personal to me specifically I admit. 

When I first started watching Voltron, Shiro was my favorite character. He’s still up there among my faves even with Lotor swooping in after season 3. I loved Shiro’s personality; strong willed leader, open and still fun with the other paladins while still stern when he needed to be. The reason the fan name of Space Dad stuck was very obvious. He was put through hell, continued fighting and came out of it still kicking. And he still had that fun and supportive nature for others as he continued to keep going. 

A lot of people focus on him as mlm representation now, but he’s also representation for those with PTSD. And that’s where I started with him. 

The reason I like Shiro so much is because he reminds me - to an uncanny degree - of my older brother. 

He’s helped raise me my whole life, he taught me how to draw, and he still does so much to support me to this day. And in order to get help paying his student loans, he went into the military and was stationed in Iraq for a short time. He’s back now, and he’s totally fine! And I know many people have opinions on such wars and military, and I agree, trust me. 

And that’s why I don’t have a problem with Shiro’s retirement. After everything he’s been through, while him being a hero is great, I also feel like him stepping back, even if it’s in like a Miyazaki back-in-a-few-years way, is a good thing to show as healthy. Him retiring doesn’t mean he’s not allowed to be a hero, because in the context of the story in hindsight, he has always been gay and has always been a hero. And retiring doesn’t mean he never was, or has stopped being a hero. 

At least to me, but again, this is a very personal opinion and I absolutely understand why people would disagree. But these are just my feelings on the matter. 

That was a very, very, VERY long explanation of my feelings on the epilogue as a whole. I’m pretty sure this is the longest post I’ve ever written. 

But hopefully this has done a good job of explaining my feelings on the epilogue. I’m not really sure how I’d compress it all into a tl;dr, just because there was so much to talk about, so apologies for those who can’t sit and read it all at once. But overall, I was very neutral to it all things considered. 

But thank you @thenorthernphoenix for asking this! I’ve been sitting with these thoughts for a while in my head being nervous about putting them out there, but this helped me really collect them all and hopefully articulate it in a good way.

And again, if you liked the epilogue, more power to you, and if you didn’t more power to you. Everybody’s different with their own feelings on the matter.

[scifigeneration]

Evidence of aliens? What to make of research and reporting on 'Oumuamua, our visitor from space

by Steven Tingay

An artist’s impression of `Oumuamua, the first interstellar object discovered in the Solar System. ESA/Hubble, NASA, ESO, M. Kornmesser, CC BY

This article is part of our occasional long read series Zoom Out, where authors explore key ideas in science and technology in the broader context of society and humanity.

As an astrophysicist, probably the most common question I get asked is: “Are we alone in the universe and do aliens exist?”

There is no doubt: people love to think and talk about aliens. Hence, stories about the search for extraterrestrial intelligence get picked up and reported with gusto in the media.

But what really lies at the heart of this complicated and popular topic is evidence – the nature of any evidence of alien life, how we view and respect this evidence, and how this is communicated to the public.

Nowhere is this more important than in the coverage of scientific studies of a mystery object – ‘Oumuamua – that was recently discovered passing through our Solar System. For example, two publications in two respected peer-reviewed journals prompted very different reactions.

Hello 'Oumuamua

'Oumuamua, meaning scout or messenger in Hawaiian, is the name given to the first detected interstellar object to visit our Solar System. On discovery last year, 'Oumuamua was classified as a comet, but this was later withdrawn when no evidence for cometary activity was detected.

'Oumuamua was quickly found to have an orbit that does not belong to our Solar System. It has an origin elsewhere in our galaxy, and a trajectory that saw it traverse the inner Solar System over the course of a few months.

It passed close to the Sun and to Earth, and was found to have an unusual geometry, about 200 metres long and some 35 metres wide, rotating every seven hours.

Observations with ESO’s Very Large Telescope and others have shown that this unique object is dark, reddish in colour, and highly elongated. Credit: ESO.

The discovery of 'Oumuamua generated a lot of attention in the scientific community, and in the media. Given its unusual geometry and its origin outside the Solar System, questions were soon asked as to whether 'Oumuamua could be a spacecraft.

Observations were made with radio telescopes to search for any direct evidence of transmissions indicating intelligent life, including by a team led by me using an Australian telescope (the Murchison Widefield Array). We listened around FM radio frequencies, on the basis that any intelligent life on 'Oumuamua may recognise FM frequencies popular on Earth.

No direct evidence of intelligent life was ever found in these searches.

Data from the Murchison Widefield Array, showing no detection of radio signals from ‘Oumuamua in the frequency range 70-105MHz (containing the FM band). Steven Tingay and co-authors, Author provided

More hard data on 'Oumuamua

Extensive and impressive observations with a range of telescopes, including the Hubble Space Telescope, were made to accurately determine 'Oumuamua’s trajectory. Results of the study, by a team of astronomers led by the European Space Agency’s Marco Micheli, were published in Nature in June.

These very careful observations showed that 'Oumuamua accelerated as it left the Solar System, revealing the existence of “non-gravitational forces”. This means that the trajectory of the object could not be explained just by the gravity of the Sun and other major objects in our Solar System.

A range of possible explanations for the acceleration exist. One is that heated gas escaping from 'Oumuamua (outgassing) could produce a force that caused the observed acceleration. This is commonly seen in normal comets.

But 'Oumuamua still shows no evidence for cometary activity. Micheli’s team ran through six possible explanations and concluded that outgassing is the most likely option, even though there is no direct evidence that this is the case.

They showed that the acceleration of 'Oumuamua is unusual, but within the bounds of what has been seen previously for Solar System comets.

One of the explanations discounted by the study team is that 'Oumuamua was accelerated by radiation pressure from our Sun. Radiation from the Sun can push objects away from it.

But they concluded that this explanation is not preferred, because it means that the density of 'Oumuamua would have to be very low. An object needs have a large surface area and low mass (low density) to be accelerated by radiation pressure.

Could it be aliens?

Another study by postdoctoral researcher Shmuel Bialy and distinguished astronomer Avi Loeb, from Harvard University, took a different approach.

Details of the study have just been published in November’s The Astrophysical Journal Letters, but were available online earlier.

The authors chose to assume solar radiation pressure to be the cause of the acceleration, and then determined the properties of 'Oumuamua required to make this work. They require an object with thickness less than 1mm, an areal mass density of 1 to 2 grams per square centimetre, and a large area.

It is unlikely that nature would produce such an extreme geometry. The authors quickly mention this, before moving to a discussion that, under the assumption that solar radiation is the cause for the acceleration, 'Oumuamua is artificial - that means the product of an alien civilization.

The properties the authors derive under their assumptions are similar to those of solar sails being designed and built by humans as a possible way to travel interstellar distances.

Bialy and Loeb spend half of their article discussion section on the idea that 'Oumuamua could be a defunct or active solar sail belonging to an alien civilization.

Artist’s impression of the IKAROS mission using a solar sail. Wikimedia/Andrzej Mirecki, CC BY-SA

The nature and communication of evidence

Bialy and Loeb did not issue a press release about their study, but the media picked up the paper once it was accepted and available online, prior to this week’s journal publication.

(This is something that happened to me in 2012, leading to my published non-detection of aliens being run on the front page of the BBC news website.)

Bialy and Loeb’s publication attracted headlines such as this, for example: “Harvard astronomers claim Oumuamua is ALIEN PROBE - 'Nothing like we’ve ever seen!’”. Most other reporting was more balanced.

This is pretty normal. A lot of the media jump to aliens in the reporting of space and astronomy, even when the original reported studies have never mentioned aliens. Recent reporting of Fast Radio Bursts (FRBs) is an example.

What surprised me was the reaction of some of my colleagues to Bialy and Loeb’s paper. On social media, there have been some pretty personal attacks by scientists – on Loeb in particular – for being in the media for this work.

Both new studies lay out their assumptions, cite substantial evidence, and undertake rigorous calculations. Both were accepted by top-quality journals after independent peer review.

Both finish with bottom lines that the studies of ‘Oumuamua are inconclusive and we will need to examine more such objects that come through the Solar System in the future.

Both sets of authors also come up with different perspectives and motivate different questions. But Loeb has ended up in the media, talking about his paper, and is being panned by some colleagues for it.

Since the pre-journal paper was picked up he told me he has been swamped by media interest.

I use the discussions with the media as a platform for highlighting the standard scientific methodology: an anomaly is observed in data, the standard explanation fails to explain it, and so an alternative interpretation is proposed.

I encourage anyone with a better explanation to write a paper about it and publish it. Wrong interpretations can be ruled out when more data will be released on 'Oumuamua or other members of its population in the future.

As for the negative reactions he has received, he referred to an article he recently published where he paraphrased another scientist known for his once-controversial theories.

As Galileo reasoned after looking through his telescope, “in the sciences, the authority of a thousand is not worth as much as the humble reasoning of a single individual”.

Let’s talk about evidence

Given my work on observations of 'Oumuamua, a few journalists have contacted me for comment.

These have been great opportunities to discuss in depth with journalists the nature of evidence, the difference between something being consistent with observations and direct evidence for a conclusion, and the need for evidence to be commensurate with the impact of a claim.

If aliens are claimed, direct and robust evidence is required – not a conclusion based on a few observations that are difficult to explain, plus a bunch of assumptions.

But no scientist has claimed 'Oumuamua is alien in this discussion – they have just raised questions and explored answers.

There is no point in shying away from a proper discussion on the search for extraterrestrial intelligence, or in being personally critical of colleagues.

Scientists should take every opportunity to engage with the public and the media on the topic, given the public’s interest and the media’s willingness to report.

It is interesting, fun, and scientific, and a great opportunity to discuss the scientific method and science in an engaging manner. The media reporting of 'Oumuamua shows that (aside from a few headlines), the content of reports is generally pretty good and responsible.

Whatever 'Oumuamua is (almost certainly not made by aliens, in my view), it is a fascinating object and presents lots of interesting scientific questions that will trigger further studies and observations.

We will never see 'Oumuamua again, and we may never know exactly what it is. But seeing 'Oumuamua in the news is likely to inspire some kids to take up a career in science.

About The Author: 

Steven Tingay is a John Curtin Distinguished Professor of Radio Astronomy at Curtin University.

This article is republished from our content partners at The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. 

[scottmaxwell360-blog]

Creative Problem Solving Interviews

To get a sense of how design professionals use creative problem solving techniques to tackle industry challenges, I interviewed three experts and asked two questions:

How do you generate ideas? (How, when, and where are you inspired? What inspires you? What obstacles do you face in coming up with a new idea and how do you overcome those obstacles?)

What process(es) do you use to solve problems? (Describe the steps of your problem-solving process. Explain your journey from inspiration to implementation.)

Niall Fitzpatrick - Photographer

How do I generate ideas / What inspires: 

There are different specialities in photography.  Folks that go deep in a very specific specialty; and others that take a broader array of interests, are perhaps two extremes. I tend lean more toward the latter. I'm very interested in exploring daily settings (people in action, portraits etc., for example); and street and landscape photography. I let the project lead me to an extent. That said, being "prepared" is essential. I like to build a story with my photos. I’m always looking for a way to use the moment and timing to describe the project. This requires a few essential elements:

Base idea framework: having a conceptual framework for what I want to achieve - a loose framework with not too tight an expectation. This allows me to follow my eye and the surroundings to evolve the story I’m trying to describe.

Inspiration: The surroundings, people, landscape, and light - these are elements of my inspiration. But really the biggest element of inspiration comes from taking the time to "see." It's tempting to hurry through a photo shoot; or settle for a "good" shot. But I find that for inspiration to flow I need to take time to see. This can manifest in different ways: Looking at the setting from different angles or perspectives, snapping to warm up with 'no expectations'; sitting and watching; exploring and walking; ultimately getting in the 'zone' which is when I'm thinking less and doing more. Ideas beget ideas.

A willingness to follow the flow: Things often don’t go to plan. A subject shows up late; the sun doesn’t come out; the scene isn’t what you anticipated. I like to follow the moment – see what happens naturally. How can I use it? These elements often present subconsciously “in-the-moment” but the critical element is a willingness to be flexible.

What obstacles do I face?

Lack of focus is a critical blocker for me - feeling rushed in process or not being prepared. 

Bringing Energy: In addition, particularly when people are involved in the shoot, making sure I have energy to bring to the project, to motivate others and or direct the subject. A tired me is a less creative me. 

Being Prepared: Finally, it is critical to be prepared. Being prepared includes a fluidity with the camera. If I put my equipment away for a period of time and then pick up and shoot it invariably means I am not 'one' with that camera. This leads to basic mistakes: overlooking critical settings; shoot perhaps at wrong settings; slow and focused more on camera than subject. The more I use a camera the more fluid I am - hence why I try to shoot daily. 

I overcome obstacles by:

Being practiced and fluid with the camera

Well rested

Creating an environment of relaxation for both myself and the subjects of my photos (where people are involved)

Where possible researching the setting

Timing the setting (golden hour, planning for ideal light, etc)

Continual study of photography; in particular examining and understanding the art of others

What process(es) do you use to solve problems? 

In photography problems arrive in a variety of possible categories including:

Subject not presenting as expected or not willing to participate as expected

Lighting (how is the light at this time - soft, harsh, other)

Setting (physical surroundings) not as anticipated

The objective (why am I here not going as planned)

When I approach a shoot I try to keep these things in mind so I’m prepared. The best way to ensure you can overcome a problem during the creative process is to be prepared and focused. The journey from inspiration to implementation involves ensuring I am ready; have timed the shoot (conditions), can take advantage of light, and know how to engage my subject. It’s also important to have a mastery of the technical approach. Knowing how to use in-camera or post-processing techniques to achieve the desired outcome. In the end though –inspiration often comes from the moment. Implementation comes from practicing technique such that one thinks less about the camera and more about the objective.

Alecia Lewis - Graphic Designer

1) Idea generation, inspiration, and obstacles:

Idea generation and inspiration: I'm often inspired by people - the more you know and understand and develop real conversations and empathize with them and how they relate to things. That's true communication and that's what really inspires me to do great works that connects people with ideas. Of course, I also subscribe to several design blogs to see trends and see what's new and how others are solving similar problems. Often, I just think "Man, they're so clever, how do I improve on that?” Really, I'd say my most creative pieces were thought of after hanging out with a big group of friends. Then, on my way home or laying in bed, I'll think about a project I was working on, and instantly the ideas start to form. I substantiate my ideas with a real understanding of best practices and commonalities, or biases that already exist around us, almost capitalizing on them.

Obstacles I face are really deadlines and ignorance. People who contribute to my work as a designer, while they provide their expertise of the market, often aren't aware of design principles, design thinking, or best practices for that matter. They've often not even Googled design terms like "hierarchy". Just the other day, the executive who claims to be a strategist with all of the experience says, "Oh, well, I don't know your lingo." My lingo isn't some revolutionary terms or design speak. It's founded in basic, standard terminology that designers use. With all of their experience "working with designers", you would think they would have compassion or respect and would, at the very least, Google things like "design principles" and see that not everything can be the same size. In order for your CTA (call to action) to actually evoke an action in their audience, it needs to stand out, not be surrounded by everything else.

As a designer, I’ve exposed myself to the executive’s field and researched best practices and developed personas. I ask questions about the piece - where it lives, why it lives there, how the viewer gets to it, etc. Oftentimes people haven't thought about the process in a holistic way, but I, as a competent champion of effective communication, have knowledge of the sales cycle, market strategy and economics, and I always approach things in that way.

I overcome those obstacles in a variety of ways. Just as I'm designing a print or digital piece, I take the same path to addresses my frustrations - define, identify, research, understand, relate, concept, create, execute, test, evaluate, complete. Essentially I try to put myself in their shoes, understand the problem from their perspective, and address it by provided validated information that supports my views, and enlighten them to why I make the choices I make.

Sometimes people recognize the effort, applaud, and move on. Other times they could care less and just want it their way. I'm not always right, but I do always have a purpose so it keeps me motivated. I will say though, this is also the reason that I changed jobs - because I worked with people who didn't care to be better, do better, or communicate better, so I changed jobs to find more purpose - to use my creative talents to advocate for something I believe in, which is affecting positive change in the world.

So now when I feel defeated by idiots, I still have the reward of doing good work for a good cause. Oh, and the deadlines - well, everyone thinks creativity is like science. “It should only take 2 hours. Last time it took 2 hours, so this time it should.” Well creativity isn't a science, it's a journey. Every new piece is a new story, and it's extremely frustrating when the story has to be told too fast and you skip parts. Because if you skip too much it doesn't make sense.

2) Process to Solving a Problem:

Every designers process is different, but the good ones are similar and start with

Defining the problem: So many times people who request work have no idea what problem they are actually solving - which seems insane, but is absolutely true. Literally, they'll say "I want x" and I start asking questions and they actually want "7%dg".

Next, you identify your audience: understanding them, their likes/dislikes, why they do what they do, what they need/don't need... relating to them and almost becoming them.

Research and more research: Now that you really know the audience, you do a real competitive analysis - you look to see what competitors are doing right and wrong, and understand the real value proposition so that you can differentiate your solution from theirs.

Create: Because we can relate to the audience and understand the market, we get to create - you could use any word here like develop or ideate - either way, this is the sketching, the inception of the idea, the concepting phase - this, to me, is the most fun part.

Execution: which is the creation of the piece, the development of the idea - massaging the good ideas and eliminating the bad ones that may have had potential but don't solve the needs of the audience.

Testing: this is when you send the piece out and actually obtain feedback. Often the feedback is measured in sales initiatives and lead gen numbers, but really it should be like an email. You send two out and judge the outcomes compared to each other. Then you deliver to the world because now your work is validated. It helps the viewer, it dismisses alternatives, it is validated. Now it should be approved to be printed or coded and sent out to the masses.

Reflection: Then the key is to look back - and reflect. This is the retrospective, which rarely happens, but always should - this is the discovery of the process, it's efficiencies and inefficiencies.  You get to find out if the piece and audience are really who you think they are. Seeking a true understanding of what worked and why it worked, or what didn't, and being honest with yourself that we're not all brilliant every time, but we need to grow from the feedback and let it continue to nourish your next iteration,

Completing the Cycle: then the cycle is complete because you've solved the initial need or provided the initial solution, while also informing the next piece.

So often, defining the problem, the persona development of the audience, the research, ideation is skipped. The testing and retrospective -- all of these phases are skipped because someone says, "I need X" and incompetent people say, "Designer, you have 2 hours to give me X" while no one asks questions are challenges the reasoning. So "X" is not a true solution. It's an unsubstantiated demand that will likely produce some success, but not the success that a truly validated, well thought-out initiative could have provided.

So I'll say the general process is, "get assigned, ask a million questions, research, design, revise based on feedback from non-designers, attempt to educate them, revise more, then send out to the public to be forgotten about" lol ...but real designers like me have adapted. For instance, I don't know every audience member but I've formed a generalization that I can attribute to the brand, then I ensure that I understand the holistic nature of the piece, and then design.

Also, I'm not even sure these are all of the steps, but, that's basically everything. The funny thing too is it's on my list to put something like this together for my company - to truly show the executives how much more productive and proficient our company could be if we followed a real process, and to also explain to them why things take so long - because good design can't be bottlenecked by time. It has to be well-informed in order to inform the right audience and produce the best results. I'll also add: the creative team I'm on is referred to as "Creative Solutions" because we aren't a "service" department, we don't cater to people's needs of X - we are presented with a problem and create solutions that solve those business needs.

Ashley Stacey - Photographer

1) Idea generation, inspiration, and obstacles:

Ideas often come to me while I’m shooting, which can be both a blessing and a curse.  A blessing because it’s often the person and or landscape that inspire me – anything I can do to that helps bring out the very best in that person is my goal. So, if that means switching from what I had planned to a completely different set and/or position to make them more comfortable, then that’s what we do. I’ve been the subject in front of the lens and know how uncomfortable it can be sometimes – making a last-minute change that allows comfort (and ultimately confidence) to shine through is worth every obstacle that may come with that change.  Which brings me to the “curse” part of this question – these last-minute changes can introduce obstacles with lighting, composition, props, etc. To get around this, I try to move as quickly as possible rearranging sets or re-positioning the subject – my hope is for a seamless shoot where the subject doesn’t even notice we ran into the obstacle(s) in the first place.  

2) Process to Solving a Problem:

The process I use to solve a problem depends on the problem. For example, if it’s around creativity, I think about past shoots I’ve done -  what worked and what didn’t. I also try to put myself in the shoes of my clients and think about if I were them – what would make me happy? My clients hire me (hopefully) having looked at some of my work, which means they like my “creative eye”. If it’s something that I like, the hope is that ultimately, they will as well. On the flip side, if the problem revolves around business operations, I think about whether I can relate the problem to my corporate experience – if so, I incorporate what I’ve learned from past experiences in my next steps.

[stupidpianist]

8 november 2018

07:32: There goes alarm number one

07:44: There goes alarm number two

07:45: And number three

07:50: Not gonna snooze this one I SWEAR. Anyway, like, if you don’t at least snooze your first three alarms, what kind of a sociopath are you?? Have “big plans” today, if “big plans” means just having a productive day where I don’t make continual bad decisions. Don’t have a good reason for not liveblogging yesterday, it was just, I stayed up way, way, way too late on the night of the sixth, which resulted in me waking way, way, way too late on the day of the seventh, and in a complete state of brain fog, and entirely incapable of thinking in general. Spent the, uh, spent the afternoon hahahahh cause that’s when I woke up, Jesus, spent the afternoon doing administrative-related things, then had a work shift. Managed to touch a piano for, like, ten minutes before my shift started. Then did work. Then went home.

Felt pretty dysphoric for all of yesterday, as a result of just knowing that it was due to my own stupidity that I wasted an entire day. And not only wasted it, but that I wasn’t in an acceptable mental state for the entirety of the day as well. Was a bit of one of those “wake up calls,” or something, like, a personal “get your crap together, dude” moment, which made me decide, like, “okay, you’re sleeping before the sun rises tonight. you’re going to bed at midnight, no compromises. then you’re going to wake up early and DO THINGS, and not be in a completely debilitating stupor for the entire day.”

Seems like I’m off to an okay start, got seven hours of sleep, which is, like, for me, just above the bare minimum I get so that I don’t feel like I’m incapacitated at all. If I get less than six-and-a-half hours these days there’s a definitive, quantitative difference in my performance both mentally and physically, so, like, seven is, like, okay, nice job, guy. Been getting less than that for so long, and it’s one of the worst feelings, for me, at least, to go through a day in some fugue state, knowing that you’re not thinking clearly. Extremely frustrating, like knowing something is wrong, but not knowing what, exactly the cause/root is. Not worth it to stay up and enjoy the “festivities of the night” most of the time, unless it’s like, a get-together, or a celebration, because just the crappiness of feeling disgusting the next day outdoes so much of the fun/productivity that you could’ve just displaced with sleep and felt, overall, better. Don’t know why I keep getting less sleep than I need, it’s not for any productivity-related reason, it’s just self-indulgence. FEeling good that I’ve “reset” the sleep schedule today, going to see if I can continue it?? Know for certain that I need to wake by, at least, 11h on Saturday morning, so I can’t “go too hard” on Friday night, but Sunday I’m free, might be sleeping in on Sunday until noon, I fear… But probably not, I have nothing planned Saturday night, so I think a one, or two bedtime isn’t too late to be up by 10h or 11h again and feel, like, well-rested, even if I’ve had a bit to drink.

Outline of the day:

-go to health clinic (routine blood test just to make sure i’m not diseased or something)

-go to mclennan library to update liveblog

-go sign new work contract in music building

-practice (if time)

-go to actual appointment (since first visit to the drop-in clinic can only assign you a time, you can’t just jump into the appointment)

-go home for lunch/slight break, before heading to blood-work (since the actual appointment is just going to get me a blood-work time)

-go to music building to update liveblog

-practice

-go to piano organization meeting

-grab 710mL can of beer en route to home

-work out

-consume beer while reading/browsing internet intermittently

-shower

-bed

08:00: Teeth brushed (oh, did I mention I flossed last night?? That’s right I’m getting back on my floss game before I lose all my teeth and gums to decay!!!), face washed, hair wetted (it’s naturally looking good today, somehow, like, my bed hair looks pretty nice, so, minimal product needed), thermal shirt on, Champion hoodie I took from Corrina (on the night of Dungeon World, she had this bag of clothing she was going to donate, and offered any of it to us, and there “just so happened” to be this amazing coral or light-pink Champion hoodie that fits me PERFECTLY) on, brown slim pants on. Making a G Fuel shake, feeling a little out-of-it, probably because I’m really not used to waking this early, but I’m sure after a day or two it’ll be fine. Weather today should be good, for the first time in a while, we haven’t got much sun in a long time…

08:10: Taking this G Fuel “straight to the face,” really chugging it while updating music on iPod. Putting some more black metal on it, feel like I’m in the right mood today to listen to something bleak and aggressive but still feel good while doing so?? Not sure why I feel this, but, I mean, just going to “go along with it.” Could have left a bit earlier, but, like, I only have to sign the new work contract at 11h, which gives me way enough time, if I get there when the clinic opens at 08h30 there might be a substantial line already, but it’s not going to be, like, two-and-a-half hours long substantial. Feeling like I’m “leisurely treating myself” by allowing myself to leave by 08:30.

08:21: En route to clinic now. Witnessed police stopping bikers for some kind of infraction at an intersection, who look like students. Jesus, imagine just trying to make your 08h30 lecture on a frigid morning, biking and not driving, and you get stopped by a cop?? Who’s going to write you a ticket?? That’s going to cost an inordinate amount of money that you can’t afford because you’re a student?? And then it’ll make you late for your lecture?? That’s gonna throw your entire day off, like, what the heck, I understand they have a quota and they need to write a certain number of tickets, but why give it to a student… Who’s clearly on their way to class… I don’t know, this upset me, I don’t like this, I don’t like this at all. Keep turning backwards to witness the cop writing the ticket, trying to internalize their face.

08:36: Okay, got my ticket, number 90, the last number that was called was, like, 72? So I’m really not that far off. I know that people like to “trash talk” this clinic, and I know individual experience is no way to accurately report anything, but I guess I’ve always been lucky in that I haven’t yet had a bad experience with this clinic. I mean this in the physical sense, like, for physical ailments, I have no concept of how the mental health side of the clinic operates, though from what I hear it’s, uh… It’s not the greatest…

One of the comfy chairs is available, and not just the wooden benches, miraculously, going to read Foucault. Feeling alert, and, like, sort of preppy?? This is unlike me, I almost never feel like this. I think it’s just because of the early start, and my optimism with finally “setting things straight” in my life. Also feeling excited to go to arcade with A on Friday, feeling like I need to “earn” it, need to accomplish my lists of tasks for the day or else I can’t allow myself any relaxation time. Seems like this is a good thing to do, if done responsibly.

Always feel a strange sort of social structure exists at the clinic, not sure why I think so, though… There’s a weird sort-of tension between the students, and the secretaries behind their desks, like, a palpable but under-the-rug aggression between them, and then between the students there too seems to be a weird no-holds-barred sort-of attitude that I can’t place. Need to think more about this, maybe it has something to do with the stress that comes with being ill, and also the mutual struggle of attempting to see a limited amount of doctors?

09:45: Okay, my number was called, wow, that went by a lot quicker than I thought it would. Making my way through the Foucault, so far it hasn’t been terribly difficult to comprehend, though that’s one of the reasons why I chose this book and not other philosophy books I was looking to “get into.” Wanted to explore postmodern philosophy since I am not well versed in it AT ALL, but didn’t want to immediately start with a philosopher that writes primarily through references to other philosophical concepts, or presupposes a wide array of knowledge of other philosophers, because I just don’t really know much about philosophy at all. His rhetorical strategies are so efficient, was sending a message to [removed] about it being, like, “he’ll introduce an argumentative position you didn’t even know you had, and then he’ll explain why it’s invalid, before you even realized you could take that perspective.” Not sure if I’m describing this well, I hope I am…

09:47: Got my time for the appointment: 12h exactly. Going to head to McLennan now and update liveblog, which should take me right up until when I need to head to the music building to sign the contract. Mission: Accomplished.

10:43: Just finishing up this first liveblog update, feeling mental state continuing to ascend from a place of grogginess to a place of awareness. Really enjoying this feeling, like, really appreciating that it’s happening, and wanting it to continue. Realize, too, that even if I get adequate sleep and wake early, it doesn’t guarantee days like this, but also know that it caters to them a lot more than sleeping at 3, or worse.

Appointment time also means I’ll have adequate time to get a bit of practicing done, can at least get through my finger exercises and maybe some run-throughs, though maybe I should focus more on passage work at this point? I don’t know, I’ll “feel it out” once I’m in the practice rooms. Need to leave soon for the music building.

Also know I shouldn’t have more caffeine, but?? Like?? A coffee and a donut sounds so good right now? Do I do it, do I “become the slob?” Picturing myself as this giant amoeba sac right now, just sort of flopping along the ground, trying to get somewhere in the least efficient manner possible. I think, yeah, yeah, I think I’m gonna do it… but not yet… Going to do it before heading to the clinic again… Yeah, yeah, going to get that donut after I finish practicing. Then I’ll at least feel less guilty about spending money out on a coffee and donut. Remembering when I used to go to MIT on the weekends and my dad (who drove me there) and my little brother would sit in the student centre and get Dunkin Donuts. Dad would do work on his laptop and brother would study, or play handheld video games, and brother would always get the “glazed stick.” Was his favourite of all the pastries they had there. I don’t think I really have a favourite donut?? Depends heavily on my mood, but, like, okay, George’s Most Frequently Consumed Donut: jelly. Yummie. Gimme that jelly, need it, need that, need that jelly-- gimme.

Walking to music building now “with a pep in my step” hahaha

11:05: Finished signing the new contract. Took all of five seconds, though I don’t really know what I was expecting?? It’s, I mean, it’s just a contract, I have no idea why I thought it would take anything longer than that… Also have to make an amendment to the daily schedule, I completely forgot that the bloodwork lab is just walk-in as long as you have the right forms from your appointment, so I should be able to go directly from my appointment to the bloodwork lab, get my blood drawn, and then leave right after!! Less time wasted, can also mitigate it further via reading more Foucault while back in the clinic. Have a bit of time now to try and practice.

11:07: All piano rooms taken. Seems to be par for the course these days around this time, but it would have been nice to have an upright, even for a small chunk of time. There’s some uprights available on the third floor so I’ll just take one of those, even though almost all of them, like, literally, 99% of them are just horrendous. But, most people never even get the chance to touch a piano, so who am I to complain?

Going to run through my Alkan and Thalberg, and then going to focus work on Beethoven. Not too unprepared for prescreenings, and will definitely not be unprepared for auditions, for once, feeling confident about this. Just have a handful of passages in these two romantic-era works that I still stumble on that I’m not 100% feeling comfortable with, but, I mean, they’re not out of reach, or anything, I just really hate detail-oriented practicing.

Upright I got is one of the “absolutely atrocious” ones. Surprise, surprise. Terrible touch, terrible sound, feels more like I’m playing on soggy bread than a keyboard. Going to “make the most of it,” hopefully will get a grand in the next practice session.

11:50: Heading back to clinic for actual appointment and bloodwork. Shouldn’t take too long, I’m anticipating, so there’s still a huge chunk of the day left to practice piano. I’ll start studying for the second behavioural neuropsychology midterm on Saturday and Sunday, that should be enough time before Monday to make my way through all the lectures that are being tested on, not too worried about this. Thank god the bulk of midterm season is over and I don’t have to honestly worry about finals for a bit, feels good not to be freaking out every single night over not spending enough time studying.

12:50: Okay my appointment time was 12:15 and I’m still waiting…

13:15: Yeah, I guess they’re running way behind. I should have anticipated this, “should have known” not everything clinic-related would go so smoothly. I’m not angry, or anything, like, they have an enormous volume of students to handle and not enough funding to do it properly, it’s not their fault, just would’ve liked to get “in and out.” Making good progress on the Foucault, on a particularly difficult section now where he discusses the concept of soul in relation to penal systems. Having to reread a bunch of sections to understand what he’s talking about, I hate when this happens, always gets me annoyed/frustrated and makes me want to hurl things against walls, or something. Keeping me occupied, at least.

Also feeling first surge of exhaustion of the day; I figure this is just cause of the earlier wake time than I’ve been used to in a while, also that I got just over my threshold of sleep, this always happens, feels like this happens to most people a few times a day anyways, especially when they’re just sitting in a warm space on a relatively comfortable surface while reading. Fighting it off via taking massive breaths and shaking my head.

13:25: Hey, okay, the consultation is done! Went in, doctor was real nice and all. Got my forms for all the blood tests that they’re gonna run, “making my way” to the bloodwork lab. They’re closed for lunch until 13:45, but that means I might be one of the first people in before they get back, so I’ll definitely not have to wait long for someone to stab me with a needle.

14:25: DONE. WE DID IT. They’re only gonna call me if I need to come in for some reason because of some concerning results or whatever, so if they don’t, I should be A HEALTHY HUMAN from the perspective of BLOOD. Got message from [redacted], going to go and have lunch with them instead of lunch at home; nice that we have this weekly Thursday lunch recap thing, feels wholesome, and a nice way to “keep in touch.” Always enjoy talking to them. Will probably splurge and get a banh mi, keep telling myself I’m making the “big bucks” now post-promotion, but, like, should still probably “keep a wrap” on how much I spent eating out… Walking to music building now, feeling high levels of excitement.

15:49: Lunch/talk with [redacted] done. Seems like we never have a shortage of things to discuss, it’s always rapidfire conversation from the second we see each other until one of us or both have to leave. Glad to have people like that in my life, where conversation never seems to be exhaustible, in a natural, non-forced way. Still going to head home, though; not going to my cog sci lecture. Feeling like it’s “not worth it” because I’m behind on the readings and I know, from attending a bunch of previous lectures, that I’m not going to be able to follow much what’s going on. Don’t have to study for the final for this for a while longer, thank the lord, but I do have quite the backlog of readings for this class. Imagined myself saying “I do have quite the backlog” with a heavy British accent of some sort. Reminds me of Dunkirk, that Christopher Nolan film, was rewatching parts of it last night. Feel like it’s definitely one of my favourite films, one of the few films without much dialogue and with a huge focus on pure action that still makes you endeared to the characters and story, even if the story is all but nonexistent, in my opinion; I feel like the way it was structured, which confused some reviewers I like, was really good and made a lot of sense; feel like if the story was told entirely linearly, things wouldn’t have coalesced and climaxed in the way that it did; by splitting the story into three timelines shown on screen at the same time, but taking place in actuality at different moments, and depicted on-screen at differing speeds, only to finally come together, where the viewer can see all three parts merge, really makes the film; first time seeing it in theatres was with my parents, I was immediately like, “I have to see this again, I can’t watch this 70mm film on my laptop.” This was during one of my breaks, and I headed back to school soon after, and then I literally saw the movie another two times, and even bought a ticket for one of my friends to “coerce them” into seeing it before it was taken off screens.

Gonna walk home now and just recuperate for a moment, not going to risk lying down in bed, or anything, but it’ll be nice to be back in my apartment even for ten minutes or so.

16:32: Okay, spent twenty-ish minutes idly watching tech-related YouTube videos, now going to head back to school for some practice. This little forty-minute diversion cut a chunk out of practice time, but felt it was worth it, was feeling a little strained after the talk with [redacted], not because of the talk, but, right after the talk ended, I felt another surge of tiredness. Realizing now the first surge might be because of the caffeine crash after the G Fuel I had in the morning, combined with having just eaten, which has a whole host of reasons why it naturally makes people feel tired. Gonna “do the ol’” Beethoven, it’s the opus 110 sonata, my favourite sonata he ever wrote, but I think I already told you that?? Whatever, I’m telling you again, this is my blog, shut up.

18:22: In McLennan now, gonna use these forty minutes to update the liveblog. Piano meeting “looming,” imminent piano organization meeting. Great way to end the penultimate weekday. Tomorrow though I do have a really really long all-day work shift that’s not going to end until 22h, which I’m sort of miffed at, actually. Still, it’ll be a good impetus to get me out of bed again at seven-thirty-ish so I can practice before my 10h lecture, because right after the lecture my shift starts, and then right after the shift I’m meeting up with A. Glad I also got that banh mi in my stomach earlier, feeling minimally hungry. Today was a productive day.

Might be the last blog post of the day, if I have beer I usually don’t really feel the need to update the liveblog, because I’m just sitting in my apartment sipping beer and reading things. This might be it for today, I love you people so much, and I hope your days were good too!!!! See you soon!!!!!!

[buzzbuzzbumblingby]

Notes on Identity

“

Identity

Spectrum of identity

The inevitable conclusion of identity will come into light. Denial is not an option.

What would happen — what are the liabilities ?

Emotional costs for unification.

Perspective.

Especially the aftermath

Often What we know is replaced after times of upheaval. The truth must remain

Do not be consumed by your own sphere.

Irrelevance or major issue of control.

A major issue reoccurrence - Jockering for leadership positions and power.

A blip or new upcoming leader ?

What mark will be left and what norms remain?

Peacekeeping ir separating communities???

Demographics have changed -

Broadly what is the issues?

What are the substantial constitutions ?

Baggage - yes

However

If your neighbor is alienated (for something) -

Why would you want to switch places with something else?

There are no constitutional switches of baggage

It is to reclaim space and reform.

If that is not viable - what is optional?

How can that option be be radicalized?

Vary of- Swept away with emotional tide

There must be understanding of historical agreements.

And respect of such.

Reparations of recent lack of.

In order to shift the perspective now.

The past must be forced reflection, forgiveness, not forgotten but must aside, and forged anew!!!

Regardless of where you’re coming from in the spectrum, there must be something to call reflection to order. A final truth to speak. Do not dislodge more until there is a call to order.

For the first time in a century the driving question wasn’t actually driving.

Unfocus; Take an break and look around. Then refocus with more perspective.

Internally take stock.

Where do we think this is going ?

It would be fatal to ignore the external climate conflict.

No such thing as a casual glance.

Real micro issues.

What is the trajectory actually going despite foresight?

why is it so much different?

A mature reflection and confrontation must be had.

Where will the reserved power be held.

What is the identity?

It divided and it will probably remain such.

But how can the divide change to be more fruitful?

More equality.

We can not return to alienation owned by someone else (besides yourself).

There are no such things as homogenous group.

There will be division.

There must be particular lines followed in this spectrum of identity.

Without alienation and refusal of occasional lines of unification.

If you diminish any part of your identity - you forfeit everything. You deny yourself

“Bombs and bullets are never gonna make me do what they wanna be!”

Think of the consequences to the emph degree.

Say/ identity what you are and explain why.

Challenging the binary

The response to: should be the

Let’s celebrate the appetite.

Who wants to be challenged and change hithertoo

Who will come to give narrative ?

We need more.

Encouragement and space to take root.

Grounded intuitionally but needs time to take root externally.

The importance of getting people in a room and hear other people and connect.

“This is how things are but not how we want them to be.”

What does partnership look like?

Unless they’re at the tables the more isolated they will be.

Productive ways to understand what’s going on and perspectives.

Emotion beats productive every time.

If the prodical isn’t the problem; But how people are feeling.

There must be a response to that feeling.

Before people respond how to fix.

How does your contingency speak to that issue. Let’s keep at the table.

How to we keep them at the table?

How do we get them to the table (affirmation).

A forum to allow people to just talk. And feel heard. And challenges it respected.

Community building this is natural next stage of thiese questions and issues.

Having the freedom to explore.

The overexcereion of identity search.

I hope there is space for you.

Transparency- is it possible?

Most poor can’t cope with with such

But there is space for those expressions to be had.

Begine leadership that won’t always be there.

We can research the lines of protocol. But me putting myself in your shoes starts at your discomfort.

We currently have a binary solution but if we have answers to anything: it’s only when you put you’re shoes on the other for you to truly understand.

I would start on the premise of your discomfort.

The allure

Niavety

Resurgent

Renewed ressoniunxe

2003 Frankfort school

Conclusion/ risk of society is that secularization is an erodaual rise or bonds - loss of meaning and society. drifting towards transient rights.

Immigration and opposition of humanity challenges us.

The brace that held it together.

The chronography was set before.

Let’s be honest. Recognizition

What’s the solution. How can you help ?

There are not many cards on certain Sides.

Garented Mature understanding

A confidence handling

Gauging her because of her frailitlty.

Do we bring more into the conversation?

Do we move people?

Do we have a false sense of our own agency ??

Especially in decision making ???

Who comes after?

Collateral damage

Not to diminish the sense fo abandonment among the people

“

— HMMcGrath

22/12/21 - RETHINKING CONFLICT dinner STORMONT hotel, Belfast.

[brain-garden-blog]

The concept of schizophrenia is coming to an end – here’s why

The concept of schizophrenia is dying. Harried for decades by psychology, it now appears to have been fatally wounded by psychiatry, the very profession that once sustained it. Its passing will not be mourned.

Today, having a diagnosis of schizophrenia is associated with a life-expectancy reduction of nearly two decades. By some criteria, only one in seven people recover. Despite heralded advances in treatments, staggeringly, the proportion of people who recover hasn’t increased over time. Something is profoundly wrong.

Part of the problem turns out to be the concept of schizophrenia itself.

Arguments that schizophrenia is a distinct disease have been “fatally undermined”. Just as we now have the concept of autism spectrum disorder, psychosis (typically characterised by distressing hallucinations, delusions, and confused thoughts) is also argued to exist along a continuum and in degrees. Schizophrenia is the severe end of a spectrum or continuum of experiences.

Jim van Os, a professor of psychiatry at Maastricht University, has argued that we cannot shift to this new way of thinking without changing our language. As such, he proposes the term schizophrenia “should be abolished”. In its place, he suggests the concept of a psychosis spectrum disorder.

Another problem is that schizophrenia is portrayed as a “hopeless chronic brain disease”. As a result, some people given this diagnosis, and some parents, have been told cancer would have been preferable, as it would be easier to cure. Yet this view of schizophrenia is only possible by excluding people who do have positive outcomes. For example, some who recover are effectively told that “it mustn’t have been schizophrenia after all”.

Schizophrenia, when understood as a discrete, hopeless and deteriorating brain disease, argues van Os, “does not exist”.

Breaking down breakdowns

Schizophrenia may instead turn out to be many different things. The eminent psychiatrist Sir Robin Murray describes how::

I expect to see the end of the concept of schizophrenia soon … the syndrome is already beginning to breakdown, for example, into those cases caused by copy number [genetic] variations, drug abuse, social adversity, etc. Presumably this process will accelerate, and the term schizophrenia will be confined to history, like “dropsy”.

Research is now exploring the different ways people may end up with many of the experiences deemed characteristic of schizophrenia: hallucinations, delusions, disorganised thinking and behaviour, apathy and flat emotion.

Indeed, one past error has been to mistake a path for the path or, more commonly, to mistake a back road for a motorway. For example, based on their work on the parasite Toxoplasma gondii, which is transmitted to humans via cats, researchers E. Fuller Torrey and Robert Yolken have argued that “the most important etiological agent [cause of schizophrenia] may turn out to be a contagious cat”. It will not.

Evidence does suggest that exposure to Toxoplasma gondii when young can increase the odds of someone being diagnosed with schizophrenia. However, the size of this effect involves less than a twofold increase in the odds of someone being diagnosed with schizophrenia. This is, at best, comparable to other risk factors, and probably much lower.

For example, suffering childhood adversity, using cannabis, and having childhood viral infections of the central nervous system, all increase the odds of someone being diagnosed with a psychotic disorder (such as schizophrenia) by around two to threefold. More nuanced analyses reveal much higher numbers.

Compared with non-cannabis users, the daily use of high-potency, skunk-like cannabis is associated with a fivefold increase in the odds of someone developing psychosis. Compared with someone who has not suffered trauma, those who have suffered five different types of trauma (including sexual and physical abuse) see their odds of developing psychosis increase more than fiftyfold.

Other routes to “schizophrenia” are also being identified. Around 1% of cases appear to stem from the deletion of a small stretch of DNA on chromosome 22, referred to as 22q11.2 deletion syndrome. It is also possible that a low single digit percentage of people with a schizophrenia diagnosis may have their experiences grounded in inflammation of the brain caused by autoimmune disorders, such as anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis, although this remains controversial.

All the factors above could lead to similar experiences, which we in our infancy have put into a bucket called schizophrenia. One person’s experiences may result from a brain disorder with a strong genetic basis, potentially driven by an exaggeration of the normal process of pruning connections between brain cells that happens during adolescence. Another person’s experiences may be due to a complex post-traumatic reaction. Such internal and external factors could also work in combination.

Either way, it turns out that the two extreme camps in the schizophrenia wars – those who view it as a genetically-based neurodevelopmental disorder and those who view it as a response to psychosocial factors, such as adversity – both had parts of the puzzle. The idea that schizophrenia was a single thing, reached by a single route, contributed to this conflict.

Implications for treatment

Many medical conditions, such as diabetes and hypertension, can be reached by multiple routes that nevertheless impact the same biological pathways and respond to the same treatment. Schizophrenia could be like this. Indeed, it has been argued that the many different causes of schizophrenia discussed above may all have a common final effect: increased levels of dopamine.

If so, the debate about breaking schizophrenia down by factors that lead to it would be somewhat academic, as it would not guide treatment. However, there is emerging evidence that different routes to experiences currently deemed indicative of schizophrenia may need different treatments.

Preliminary evidence suggests that people with a history of childhood trauma who are diagnosed with schizophrenia are less likely to be helped by antipsychotic drugs. However, more research into this is needed and, of course, anyone taking antipsychotics should not stop taking them without medical advice. It has also been suggested that if some cases of schizophrenia are actually a form of autoimmune encephalitis, then the most effective treatment could be immunotherapy (such as corticosteroids) and plasma exchange (washing of the blood).

Yet the emerging picture here is unclear. Some new interventions, such as the family-therapy based Open Dialogue approach, show promise for a wide range of people with schizophrenia diagnoses. Both general interventions and specific ones, tailored to someone’s personal route to the experiences associated with schizophrenia, may be needed. This makes it critical to test for and ask people about all potentially relevant causes. This includes childhood abuse, which is still not being routinely asked about and identified.

The potential for different treatments to work for different people further explains the schizophrenia wars. The psychiatrist, patient or family who see dramatic beneficial effects of antipsychotic drugs naturally evangelically advocate for this approach. The psychiatrist, patient or family who see drugs not working, but alternative approaches appearing to help, laud these. Each group sees the other as denying an approach that they have experienced to work. Such passionate advocacy is to be applauded, up to the point where people are denied an approach that may work for them.

What comes next?

None of this is to say the concept of schizophrenia has no use. Many psychiatrists still see it as a useful clinical syndrome that helps define a group of people with clear health needs. Here it is viewed as defining a biology that is not yet understood but which shares a common and substantial genetic basis across many patients.

Some people who receive a diagnosis of schizophrenia will find it helpful. It can help them access treatment. It can enhance support from family and friends. It can give a name to the problems they have. It can indicate they are experiencing an illness and not a personal failing. Of course, many do not find this diagnosis helpful. We need to retain the benefits and discard the negatives of the term schizophrenia, as we move into a post-schizophrenia era.

What this will look like is unclear. Japan recently renamed schizophrenia as “integration disorder”. We have seen the idea of a new “psychosis spectrum disorder”. However, historically, the classification of diseases in psychiatry has been argued to be the outcome of a struggle in which “the most famous and articulate professor won”. The future must be based on evidence and a conversation which includes the perspectives of people who suffer – and cope well with – these experiences.

Whatever emerges from the ashes of schizophrenia, it must provide better ways to help those struggling with very real experiences.

Originally published by The Conversation

[orbemnews]

Once Tech’s Favorite Economist, Now a Thorn in Its Side Paul Romer was once Silicon Valley’s favorite economist. The theory that helped him win a Nobel prize — that ideas are the turbocharged fuel of the modern economy — resonated deeply in the global capital of wealth-generating ideas. In the 1990s, Wired magazine called him “an economist for the technological age.” The Wall Street Journal said the tech industry treated him “like a rock star.” Not anymore. Today, Mr. Romer, 65, remains a believer in science and technology as engines of progress. But he has also become a fierce critic of the tech industry’s largest companies, saying that they stifle the flow of new ideas. He has championed new state taxes on the digital ads sold by companies like Facebook and Google, an idea that Maryland adopted this year. And he is hard on economists, including himself, for long supplying the intellectual cover for hands-off policies and court rulings that have led to what he calls the “collapse of competition” in tech and other industries. “Economists taught, ‘It’s the market. There’s nothing we can do,’” Mr. Romer said. “That’s really just so wrong.” Mr. Romer’s current call for government activism, he said, reflects “a profound change in my thinking” in recent years. It also fits into a broader re-evaluation about the tech industry and government regulation among prominent economists. They see markets — search, social networks, online advertising, e-commerce — not behaving according to free-market theory. Monopoly or oligopoly seems to be the order of the day. The relentless rise of the digital giants, they say, requires new thinking and new rules. Some were members of the tech-friendly Obama administration. In congressional testimony and research reports, they are contributing ideas and credibility to policymakers who want to rein in the big tech companies. Their policy recommendations vary. They include stronger enforcement, giving people more control over their data and new legislation. Many economists support the bill introduced this year by Senator Amy Klobuchar, Democrat of Minnesota, that would tighten curbs on mergers. The bill would effectively “overrule a number of faulty, pro-defendant Supreme Court cases,” Carl Shapiro, an economist at the University of California, Berkeley, and a member of the Council of Economic Advisers in the Obama administration, wrote in a recent presentation to the American Bar Association. Some economists, notably Jason Furman, a Harvard professor, chair of the Council of Economic Advisers in the Obama administration and adviser to the British government on digital markets, recommend a new regulatory authority to enforce a code of conduct on big tech companies that would include fair access to their platforms for rivals, open technical standards and data mobility. Thomas Philippon, an economist at New York University’s Stern School of Business, has estimated that monopolies in industries across the economy cost American households $300 a month apiece. “We’ve all changed because what’s really happened is an expansion of the evidence,” said Fiona Scott Morton, an official in the Justice Department’s antitrust division in the Obama administration, who is an economist at the Yale University School of Management. Of all the economists now taking on big tech, though, Mr. Romer is perhaps the most unlikely. He earned his undergraduate and doctoral degrees from the University of Chicago, long the high church of free-market absolutism, whose ideology has guided antitrust court decisions for years. Mr. Romer spent 21 years in the Bay Area, mostly as a professor first at Berkeley and then Stanford. While in California, he founded and sold an educational software company. In his research, Mr. Romer uses software as a tool for data exploration and discovery, and he has become an adept Python programmer. “I enjoy the solitary exercise of building things with code,” he said. His son, Geoffrey, is a software engineer at Google. His wife, Caroline Weber, author of “Proust’s Duchess,” a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize in biography, and a professor at Barnard College, is a friend of her Harvard classmate Sheryl Sandberg, Facebook’s chief operating officer. Mr. Romer has never consulted for the big tech companies, but he has friends and former professional colleagues there. “People I like are frequently unhappy with me,” he said. Mr. Romer, who joined the faculty of New York University a decade ago, said that preparing for his Nobel lecture in 2018 prompted him to think about the “progress gap” in America. Progress, he explained, is not just a matter of economic growth, but should also be seen in measures of individual and social well-being. In the United States, Mr. Romer saw worrying trends: a decline in life expectancy; rising “deaths of despair” from suicides and drug overdoses; falling rates of labor participation for adults in their prime working years, from 25 to 54; a growing wealth gap and increasing inequality. Such problems, to be sure, have many causes, but Mr. Romer believes one contributing cause has been an economics profession that belittled the importance of government. His new growth theory recognized that the government played a vital part in scientific and technological progress, but mainly by funding basic research. Looking back, Mr. Romer admits that he was caught up in the “small government bubble” of the time. “I substantially underestimated the role of the government in sustaining progress,” he said. “For real progress, you need both science and government — a government that can say no to things that are bad,” Mr. Romer said. To Mr. Romer, economics is a vehicle for applying the independent rigor of scientific thinking to social challenges. Urban planning, for example. For years, Mr. Romer pushed the idea that new cities of the developing world should be a blend of government design for basics like roads and sanitation, and mostly let markets take care of the rest. During a short stint as chief economist of the World Bank, he had hoped to persuade the bank to back a new city, without success. In the big-tech debate, Mr. Romer notes the influence of progressives like Lina Khan, an antitrust scholar at Columbia Law School and a Democratic nominee to the Federal Trade Commission, who see market power itself as a danger and look at its impact on workers, suppliers and communities. That social welfare perspective is a wider lens that appeals to Mr. Romer and others. “I’m totally on board with Paul on this,” said Rebecca Henderson, an economist and professor at the Harvard Business School. “We have a much broader problem than one that falls within the confines of current antitrust law.” Mr. Romer’s specific contribution is a proposal for a progressive tax on digital ads that would apply mainly to the largest internet companies supported by advertising. Its premise is that social networks like Facebook and Google’s YouTube rely on keeping people on their sites as long as possible by targeting them with attention-grabbing ads and content — a business model that inherently amplifies disinformation, hate speech and polarizing political messages. So that digital ad revenue, Mr. Romer insists, is fair game for taxation. He would like to see the tax nudge the companies away from targeted ads toward a subscription model. But at the least, he said, it would give governments needed tax revenue. In February, Maryland became the first state to pass legislation that embodies Mr. Romer’s digital ad tax concept. Other states including Connecticut and Indiana are considering similar proposals. Industry groups have filed a court challenge to the Maryland law asserting it is an illegal overreach by the state. Mr. Romer says the tax is an economic tool with a political goal. “I really do think the much bigger issue we’re facing is the preservation of democracy,” he said. “This goes way beyond efficiency.” Source link Orbem News #economist #favorite #side #Techs #Thorn

[thesewomenrulemyworld]

best book on options trading Arkansas

Thematic Study

private options trading mentor Arkansas I still buy Nikola puts to this day and will likely continue buying puts until the stock gets delisted.

basic options trading course udimy Arkansas An index fund will never go down by 80% in a single day, but it will also never quintuple in a single day.

how to find a mentor and trading proram for options Arkansas Diving Into the DetailsOptions, like insurance policies, have a contract period.

how to do options trading Arkansas The only catch is that you cap your short-term gains.

best stocks for options trading 2018 Arkansas If a trader foresees only a small increase in the price of a security, then they can capitalize on that small increase by purchasing call options while also limiting any potential downside and reducing the cost of the premiums paid by writing options at a higher strike price that is unlikely to be reached.

best trading software options program Arkansas My $500 put turned into $3,083.

billy williams options trading course Arkansas You�ll pay more for it, but the extra time is worth it.

options trading platform Arkansas However, the upside to a bear put spread is limited by the cost of the written options increasing as the security continues to fall in value past the written put options� strike price.

options trading hours Arkansas I even knew a couple.

When you sell options, you collect a premium rather than you paying up to buy the option. You become the seller rather than the buyer and get paid accordingly. Selling covered calls and cash secured puts has allowed me to earn returns that crush what I used to make back in my dividend investing days. I talked more about selling covered calls versus dividend investing in this article:Dividend Stocks VS Covered Calls For IncomeWhich one comes out on top?To set up a covered call, you need 100 shares of a stock. You then set a strike price for that covered call. The closer the strike price is to the current price, the more you�ll earn in premiums. Setting out a further expiration date also increases your premiums. The only catch is that you cap your short-term gains. While you can�t lose money with this strategy unless the value of the underlying stock decreases (same scenario as someone who buys and holds without selling covered calls), you do cap your upside. If you set a strike price of $20 and the stock goes up to $25, you have to sell your shares at $20 each rather than at $25 each. If you bought at $15, you still get some considerable upside, but you can miss out on additional gains. There isn�t a chance of losing all of your money with a covered call strategy if you use the strategy on good stocks. That�s why I recommend starting here. Covered calls give you a deeper perspective of what can happen to the value of options. In a single day, a call or put can go down over 80%. Similarly, they can quintuple in a single day depending on what happens to the company. An index fund will never go down by 80% in a single day, but it will also never quintuple in a single day. And an option�s value can swing wildly within a few minutes depending on the price movement of the underlying stock. Nibble With Your Options BuysThe first time I bought options, I was extremely conservative. I bought a single Nikola put contract which did well. My logic for buying the put was that more evidence around Nikola�s fraudulent practices were emerging.

Critical Procedures:

options trading ideas Arkansas

trading weekly options for income Arkansas

options trading books Arkansas

classic options trading service reviews Arkansas

best options trading platform Arkansas The reality, though, is that over 90% of options contracts expire worthlessly.

The profit from the butterfly position would be maximized at $40.

gold options trading Arkansas That�s the skill part.

And an option�s value can swing wildly within a few minutes depending on the price movement of the underlying stock. Nibble With Your Options BuysThe first time I bought options, I was extremely conservative. I bought a single Nikola put contract which did well. My logic for buying the put was that more evidence around Nikola�s fraudulent practices were emerging. I followed this stock for weeks before finally deciding to get started. I still buy Nikola puts to this day and will likely continue buying puts until the stock gets delisted. Due to Nikola�s premiums being higher than the average stock, I buy puts set to expire in 5�8 days. For stocks with lower premiums, I�ll buy options with further out expiration dates. The further your expiration date, the more time you have for the stock to move in your direction. There are a variety of risky options trading strategies such as buying an option on its expiration date that can quickly deplete your money. If you want to give the stock additional time to move in your direction, buy a closer to the money option with a further out expiration date.

options trading stock picks Arkansas I can sleep at night even when the trade is underwater, as I�m confident the share price will eventually recover.

While at work one day, Suzy reached out, saying he was in Hong Kong with his family (where I was working at the time) and wanted to catch up for a beer. I had completely lost touch with him ever since he left the industry a few years prior to this meeting. I was both excited and curious to see what he was up to. After the usual formalities and a beer in, I asked him. He responded by saying, �I trade options for a living. �I was confused. My face resembled a deer in headlights doing a Derek Zoolander impression. He tried to explain the gist of it, but it was way over my head. All I could think of were the words �I trade options for a living� as I furrowed my eyebrows for the rest of the night. And then I went back to my button-pushing existence the next day. But this thing about options trading kept tugging at me in the back of my mind. I spent a few months reading up on it to understand some basic concepts. Once I felt I knew just enough to ask some not completely retarded questions, I emailed Suzy. For the next two years, I read through some pretty heavy and dry material while taking extensive notes. Colleagues at work would ask about the �Options Trading For Dummies� book I had on my desk. Although I started to understand some of the theories, I had trouble picturing them in action.

learning options trading Arkansas I talked more about selling covered calls versus dividend investing in this article:Dividend Stocks VS Covered Calls For IncomeWhich one comes out on top?

Straddles can offer relatively low cost access to substantial profits with little downside risk, which is merely that the price change is not significant enough to cover the cost of both premiums. StrangleA strangle options strategy is similar to a straddle, but it uses the simultaneous purchase of call options and put options at different strike prices. This spread in the strike prices means that the underlying security needs to move more substantially for one of the options to be in the money, but the premium cost for purchasing the options is lower in the case of a strangle because the options are purchased out of the money. An option trader will use the strangle options strategy when they believe that the upcoming price change will be significant, but they are unsure of the direction. This situation occurs in the same sort of events as are popular for the straddle strategy, but the trader is more confident that the change in price will be extreme. The strangle can expire worthless, unlike a straddle, but the lower initial outlay on premiums means that a strangle may actually cost loss in the event of a loss than a straddle will with only a small change in price.

options trading strategies for beginners Arkansas Like most things in life, it�s daunting at first, but then you get the hang of it.

Selling Covered Calls Is The Best Way To Get StartedFor a while, I resisted buying options because I saw it as gambling.

trading strategies and professional advice when buying puts and call options Arkansas The downside in a bull call spread is protected when both options expire worthless, but the premium gained from the written options helps to reduce the loss from the premium paid for the purchased options.

I used to have to make manual trade confirmations at work. Now I do it to record my profits!I feel like a kid counting pennies added to his piggy bank. Except this one pays to feed my family!That said, the more you learn, the more you realize how little you know. And that�s how I feel right now. Rather than patting myself on the back for profiting this past year, I feel hesitant to be proud. I realize how little I know and that I�m merely scratching the surface of the knowledge I need to feel fully confident in trading options for a living. And also how much more I need to hit the books. In terms of specific actions I need to take, they mainly involve expanding my arsenal of trading strategies. Before the market crash, I was exploring a couple that I would love to have in my rotation. One is the very cool sounding reverse iron condor, which is used to profit from significant moves around earnings announcements. When you think there�ll be a move either up or down, but are unsure of which way, this is the strategy to use.

what is the best options trading newsletter Arkansas If you�re a portfolio manager, managing someone�s retirement money, then you may think its a good idea to protect your portfolio against a significant drop.

Which is somewhat the approach I�m taking. My Path ForwardTrading options may sound sexy, but it�s pretty tedious. I�ve entered over a thousand executions into my spreadsheet this past year, which is something I LOVE doing. I used to have to make manual trade confirmations at work. Now I do it to record my profits!I feel like a kid counting pennies added to his piggy bank. Except this one pays to feed my family!That said, the more you learn, the more you realize how little you know. And that�s how I feel right now. Rather than patting myself on the back for profiting this past year, I feel hesitant to be proud. I realize how little I know and that I�m merely scratching the surface of the knowledge I need to feel fully confident in trading options for a living. And also how much more I need to hit the books. In terms of specific actions I need to take, they mainly involve expanding my arsenal of trading strategies.

Unique Plans:

gold options trading Arkansas

best course for learning options trading Arkansas

trading weekly options for income Arkansas

books options trading Arkansas

[rebornregionace-archive-blog]

[[Update]]

[[Hi, hey, hello! So, some of y’all may have noticed that I haven’t been the most active person on here. Oh, I reblog musings, answer some asks, but I haven’t been doing of what I consider substantial. There’s a lot of reasons for that, and I’m gonna post them under a Read More, but for those who want the quick version or those who are mobile:

TL:DR; Haven’t had a personal computer for awhile, just got one, and I’m rebooting Sawyer.

Now, the first one is kinda easy to explain. Haven’t had a lot of money for awhile, and through saving at this job I work, I’ve been able to get a new computer! Not the greatest, admittedly, but enough to get what I need done. Now, rebooting Sawyer...that’s probably going to require some explaining.

So, when I started Sawyer out, he was using my file as the basis for his team. At first, that didn’t pose a lot of problems, but as Sawyer’s tastes and personality formed, I found a lot of his Pokemon weren’t the most fitting of his tastes, and it made this awkward mismash. There’s a reason Sawyer’s gone through god knows how many Pokemon: I’ve been trying to find what his team is, while still being a powerful team that Sawyer can use, and it’s been a giant mess. Now some of you may wonder why not just reboot what Sawyer’s team was and retcon everything else? Well...there’s another problem.

For those who don’t know, Pokemon Reborn is not a complete game. The contest comes out in Episodes, and Sawyer’s save was made around Episode 15. We’re on 17 now. Now again, that doesn’t sound like much, but keep in mind, new episodes mean new mechanics, new Pokemon, etc. Hell, with Episode 17, we now not only have Alolan Pokemon, but there’s a relationship mechanic that needs to be explored now, in addition to the events and such that warrant another run through Reborn.

So here’s the gist: since this new playthrough is going to be based around Sawyer, I’ve got to make choices and actions based on *his* perspective, instead of mine, which is going to take time and effort. For a reminder, Sawyer arrived in Reborn at 16, and he’s now 20. And this journey isn’t over, he’s still got a lot to do and he’s already done so much. Which brings me to you all.

Sawyer left Reborn to act on his diplomatic duties (a concept I want to touch on with this reboot), and has had several relationships that have impacted his character in some way. I intend to reach out to those who have had an impact on him, and see what can be done about the relationship. There is going to be a change in where Sawyer went for his second championship, so some people he’ll have never met, and others he will know. I will reach out, again, to see what can happen. On that note, feel free to IM me here or on Discord (assuming it stops updating, JESUS I WANNA TALK TO MY PEEPS).

But in the meantime, Sawyer is going to take a hiatus. When he emerges once more, he’ll hopefully be better, more focused...and hopefully, enjoyed by you.]]

[perfectirishgifts]

Purpose At Work: How Interface Transforms Sustainability To Rewrite Our Future

New Post has been published on https://perfectirishgifts.com/purpose-at-work-how-interface-transforms-sustainability-to-rewrite-our-future/

Purpose At Work: How Interface Transforms Sustainability To Rewrite Our Future

Purpose At Work: How Interface Transforms Sustainability To Rewrite Our Future

Global struggles necessitate collaborative leadership. Whether its beating COVID-19, alleviating poverty or mitigating climate change, the challenges we face are too great for any one person or organization. That said, innovators that pave the path to success will be rewarded with earned media, goodwill and market share. 

A company leading by example to combat climate change is Interface. The carpet maker recently released the world’s first carbon negative carpet tile without carbon offsets. “A combination of low footprint manufacturing, more recycled content and bio materials make it possible,” Erin Meezan, Interface’s Chief Sustainability Officer tells We First.

While this manufacturing feat is a monumental accomplishment for the company, it presents opportunities and challenges. How can Interface scale impact? Is there a way to recuperate capital invested in R&D, while sharing insights with others in the industry? What’s the best way to tell the story in a way that catalyzes purchases?

Interface’s innovation and leadership presents learning opportunities for brands looking to Lead With We.

Risks and rewards of impact:

For Interface, sustainability isn’t related to a single product. The company applies a sustainability lens throughout its supply chain. While the environmental benefits are undeniable, what are the incentives from a business perspective? Is investing in this sort of large scale sustainability effort profitable?

“We think it’s going to drive revenue,” Interface’s Chief Sustainability Officer says. “We’re going to steal business away from competitors.  We’re also able to steal great salespeople because they’d rather sell flooring with a purpose than just sell flooring.”  

Interface’s purposeful accomplishments also authenticate its deep commitment to climate action, “which helps with investors,” she says. 

In addition to the organizational benefits, it fosters goodwill amongst Interface’s clients. To celebrate customers’ emissions reductions, the company developed the Carbon Neutral Floors Program. Interface issues a framed certificate, which clients like Facebook, Apple and Starbucks showcase in their facilities.  They also include results in sustainability reports, Erin says. 

By acting on impact, Interface is able attract and retain talent, investors and customers. The company founded by sustainability pioneer Ray Anderson is also innovating with its rubber business, incorporating the learnings from its work with carpets.

Leverage your IP and advance your industry:

While the results justify the investment for Interface’s leadership, there are substantial associated costs. With game changing technology like the carbon negative carpet tile, there is a balance between trying to earn money while catalyzing mass deployment of sustainable products.  

“We’re debating how to do that,” Meezan says. “We’ve got to get back the five years and millions of dollars invested. At the same time, we remain transparent by issuing environmental product declarations and explaining the broad pathway, without sharing the direct formula.”

Interface is also exploring a licensing model in which they would share their proprietary formula and processes. This would allow other businesses to scale sustainability efforts and provide a revenue stream for Interface.

Another initiative Interface is participating in is the Materials Carbon Action Network. The Network is a coalition of companies including Gensler, CertainTeed, Armstrong and others, committed to decarbonizing the building industry. “We create educational sessions and materials so that people working in the built environment space realize sustainability initiatives are not limited to one company,” Erin says. “This is a movement.”

Interface also engages with organizations like LEED and the Green Building Council to create market standards around green construction products. “We’re trying to create market pull and define a leadership position,” Meezan says.

Leverage policy to scale purpose and profits:

Joining cultural conversations and supporting policies that mandate emissions reductions is another way to move the building industry forward while gaining competitive advantage. 

Purpose At Work: How Interface Transforms Sustainability To Rewrite Our Future

“We don’t have time just to rely on awareness,” Meezan says. To move the needle faster, the sustainable floor producer supports policies like the Buy Clean California Act, which sets “maximum acceptable Global Warming Potential” limits for building materials. “Currently, it only applies to construction materials. We are working with a sponsor in California to amend it to include interiors products,” the Chief Sustainability Officer says. “Any policy that gets end-user businesses to consider carbon footprint in their purchasing specifications is super attractive to us because it drives demand.” 

Environmental policies also have large implications on the entire industry. “If the state of California starts saying, ‘I’m not going to buy a carpet tile that is not carbon neutral or better,’ that’ll quickly push our competitors to change,” Meezan says. 

Share your sustainability story:

One way Interface tells its sustainability story in a way that drives sales is via tools. They partnered with Skanska and Microsoft to create the Embodied Carbon in Construction Calculator (EC3) through the University of Washington’s Carbon Leadership Forum. “It crowd sources all of the carbon footprint information on the construction and interiors materials that go into buildings and shows architects and designers by ranking low to high footprint products.” The free resource makes it easy to find sustainable construction materials and that helps create market demand. 

“There’s a lot of latent desire for big end users like Google and Microsoft to buy low carbon products because it has an impact on their carbon goals,” Erin says. 

Over the last five years, more and more customers are asking for carbon neutral or carbon negative products. “There’s increased interest in closed loop, recycled materials and how that can decarbonize products,” Meezan says. “Paul Hawken’s book, Drawdown, had an impact. Carbon 180 helps connect investors and manufacturers with green products. There is also more media interest and coverage around the issues and innovations.”

Purpose At Work: How Interface Transforms Sustainability To Rewrite Our Future

By leading the industry with sustainability, Interface is able to gain earned media. A great example is the Beyond Zero film. Filmmaker Nathan Havey was interested in what happened after Ray Anderson died, the Climate Take Back and “what you have to do to change minds,” Meezan says. 

Interface did not fund the project. Instead, Havey Pro Cinema was attracted by Anderson’s vision and the work to back it up. The film has received awards from acclaimed forums like the Boston Film Festival, the Denver Film Festival and the Montreal Independent Film Festival. 

Ultimately, by walking the talk when it comes to purpose and providing resources for your customers to do the same, you can tell compelling stories and scale the reach of your communications initiatives. 

The challenge of changing industry behavior:

While Interface’s new products help businesses minimize their environmental footprint, there are still millions of buildings with outdated materials that need to be retooled. One of the ways Interface acts on sustainability is by reclaiming old products from customers to recycle and make new products. “The place we struggle the most is getting products back from customers,” Meezan says. 

An innovative way the company is working on getting more companies to give back old products is by offering a leasing program, which was actually conceived by Anderson 20 years ago. “We don’t want our customers to own the products. That way, at the end of the product life cycle, they come back to us,” Erin explains. 

3 lessons from Interface on how to amplify your purpose:

Each company has a unique sustainability journey. That said, we can learn from the successes and obstacles of eco-leaders like Interface. Here are three lessons Meezan learned from Ray Anderson on how to scale impact in your organization and beyond.

1. Inspire with vision: “Ray asked people to come along on the journey and inspired them to believe it was possible.”

2. Invite participation: “Ray gave employees permission to get involved in it. No matter what level of the company you are in, you’re allowed to start tinkering and figure this out. That was when innovation really exploded for us.”

3. Educate senior leadership: “Ray had so much humility to realize that he didn’t know how to do this sustainably retrofit his company. He created the eco-dream team to teach senior leaders about the scientific pathway for reversing emission. He also illustrated the role companies have in that and the associated business opportunities.”

From CMO Network in Perfectirishgifts