#not solely based on personal favors & personal biases

[randomness-is-my-order]

you know what is genuinely heartening for me about wei wuxian’s character? we can very easily discern that throughout the course of the series, countless people are ready to kill wei wuxian but on the flip side?? wei wuxian is also someone who is capable of inspiring enough loyalty and love that people are willing to die for him. this is a random reference but i remember having a discussion about a kdrama (strongest deliveryman for anyone who’s curious) and this one person said that it is easy to tell how good of a person the main character is because he has all these people surrounding him, ready to listen, ready to lay down their lives for him. and that is exactly the case with wei wuxian–it is a testament to his character that people like wen qing, wen ning, jiang yanli made the sacrifices that they did, just so he could live on. it is a testament to his character that lan wangji, an absolute paragon of virtue, would 100% die for wei wuxian. and yes, wei wuxian would stick his neck out for each of them as well but it’s the fact he doesn’t have to–that this loyalty is not transactional but something he has inspired within these people simply by being himself and doing the right thing and proving that he is deserving of their loyalty.

it’s the fact that other “leaders” of their world did not only fail at earning loyalty but they were such horrible people that instead, they inspired betrayal within their subjects. it’s so fascinating how wei wuxian’s effect on people compares against the cultivation sect heirs and leaders because, despite all the odds stacked against him, he did a better job at actually leading the cultivation world (the war victory, the advocation for the wen remnants, the inventions that advanced the cultivation society) than any of these political figures at their peaks (and this includes jin guangyao with his watchtowers and lan wangji’s arriving where the chaos is stuff, though these are validly debatable).

okay but point is: it is very easy to make people hate you and want to kill you, atleast in the mdzs world, but it is far more difficult to inspire the kind of loyalty that would make people want to die for you and wei wuxian, somehow, managed to do just that and not just once. also, that the people loyal to him, are some of the most morally upstanding characters–as perceived either by the cultivation world and/or the fandom. isn’t that so telling?

[edenfenixblogs]

hi, i wanted to give you an update on that post of mine you reblogged. heritageposts has informed me that they were using the red triangle in this context: https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20231123-one-small-red-triangle-palestine-we-are-finally-looking/

i was wrong about what they meant with the 🔻 emoji and i am officially rescinding my previous statement

I am all for fact checking and I would love to believe that Heritage Posts did not mean this particular horrible thing they did.

However, Middle East Monitor (MEMO) is not a reliable source for information in this conflict. If HP is actually using MEMO for news, they should focus on more reliable ones going forward.

There are plenty of other left-leaning sources with more reliability, credibility, sourcing, and transparency.

They have failed several fact checks for misleading and occasionally false information. The publication is explicitly and repeatedly pro-Hamas, and they often omit vital information to skew their stories.

While they are not rated as an outright propaganda publication or as a source of conspiracy theories, they do often cite sources which do and are.

Finally, they are funded by donations. Of course these donations largely come from people who support the kind of reporting that people who donate to them support. They are a nonprofit organization, which is not inherently a bad thing. But this means their interests are not based in journalistic ideals but in political ideology. This is not a reason to completely discount a source, but it is something to keep in mind.

In general, with a topic this intense and with such profound consequences for so many people, I’m only engaging with sources who receive a “reporting” rating of “high” or better and a “credibility” rating of “high credibility.”

I would POSSIBLY consider a “reporting” rating of “Mostly factual” if it had a “high credibility” rating and several extenuating circumstances and reduced media bias to compensate for its lower score in another area.

Leftist sources worth referencing instead:

Forward Progressives

Haaretz

International Policy Digest

Current Affairs

And many others

Personally, though, (for this particular conflict especially) I tend to prefer sources that fall into the central three categories: left-center biased, least biased, and right-center biased.

No news source is perfect or without bias. But this conflict is so fraught that I frankly don’t trust anyone reporting with extreme ideological intentions. And I also don’t want to only read sources that make me comfortable. I am personally very leftist in all of my personal politics and voting. However, I also know that the far left has been more hostile to me based solely on my Jewish ethnicity than anyone else in these past months. Furthermore, I think politicians should be more left, but journalism should always prioritize facts and a full scope of a situation over any one viewpoint. I am the daughter of a journalist. I am deeply in favor of journalistic freedom. And I absolutely do NOT believe in “both sidesism.” Sometimes, there really aren’t two sides to a situation that are both equally worth listening to. There is no alternative viewpoint to “Black Lives Matter” for example that is not deeply racist.

There are not “two sides worth teaching” when it comes to The Holocaust.

But the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is not so simple. Israel should stop its bombing of Palestine. Palestinians should have full and equal rights. Jewish people in Israel and around the world should not have to live in constant fear or attack, harassment, or murder. There are a lot of extremely valid perspectives from Palestinians, Muslims, Israelis, Arabs, and Jews. And right now, the far left and the far right are weaponizing their ideologies to reduce all of the aforementioned groups to their worst actors. That is not something that will help anyone with regard to this conflict.

Left Leaning Sources

ABC News

Associated Press

Atlantic Media

Boston Globe

The Forward (This is a Jewish source. They had one failed fact check in the last five years, but issued an official correction.)

Human Rights Watch

Institute for Middle East Understanding (This is a Palestinian source and it has a completely clean fact check record)

Least Biased Sources

Jewish Telegraphic Agency (Obviously a Jewish source)

Reuters (this has a Very High reporting rating)

American Press Institute (not only have they not failed a fact check in five years; they have never failed a fact check ever)

The Conversation

Pew Research

Foreign Policy

Foreign Affairs

Sky News UK

Right Leaning

Note: As I stated numerous times, including in this post, I am a leftist. However, something important for American readers of this post to know is that, when it comes specifically to matters involving military analysis of foreign conflicts, a slight right lean in perspective is common and sometimes preferable to leftist idealism. I say this as someone who votes and holds opinions that are about as far left as one can get. However, I also say this as someone with a background in university studies of international politics. Because analysis of military conflicts is often done by those with experience in and understanding of the military, most of the most credible and detailed analyses of foreign military affairs do tend to be more right leaning than sources of equal worth focused on domestic political matters. Furthermore, a leftist tendency toward pacifism (which I share) tends to mean less leftist involvement in military-involved political matters at all. Of course, none of this means there are no quality leftist sources on the current conflict (which I obviously demonstrated by linking to such sources above). I am simply explaining the value of such sources to those who may justifiably be skeptical of anything right-leaning after the hellish past two decades of domestic policies and US-caused violence in other countries.

Note 2: There are plenty of right-leaning sources that received “high” credibility ratings and “high” reporting ratings. I found no sources that had both “very high” credibility and “high” reporting ratings in the “right-center” category.

Boston Herald

Chicago Tribune

Counter Extremism Project

Foreign Policy Research Institute

The Jewish Press (clearly a Jewish source, this publication is geared toward the Modern Orthodox Jewish community. They have no failed fact checks)

ITV News

Jewish Unpacked (this source has no failed fact checks. this source is right-leaning by necessity because of its historical examination of antisemitism in leftist spaces making those spaces inherently unsafe for Jews—not specifically in this most recent flare up in the I/p conflict, but for years).

Right Bias

Note: I don’t personally follow or read any of these sources. But I did list leftist sources with high credibility and reporting ratings, so I will do the same here in the interest of fairness. It should be noted that all other source bias ratings had results several pages long. Right Bias sources with high credibility and reporting ratings were confined to one page only. There are no Right Bias Sources with Very High reporting ratings and high credibility.

Economic Policy Journal (no failed fact checks now or ever)

Influence Watch (tends to view liberal and progressive politics as “extremist,” but has no failed fact checks.)

I am not inclined to trust HP simply because their most recent antisemitic behavior fell short of hoping for Jewish genocide. I have a higher bar for accounts than that.

[gabrielsbubblegumbitch]

asking for Velvette Dx and/or head canons if it's not too much hassle! Plz and ty!

tw // suicide

I would like to preface all my posts on headcanons related to psychology and mental illness with a disclaimer: diagnosing mental conditions, especially personality disorders, can be extremely challenging. It's a complicated process that relies heavily on a psychologist's interpretation of facts, making it susceptible to biases. Personality disorders cannot be diagnosed based on surface-level observations and are not just labels that we can assign to people like in the case of MBTI. Additionally, I am not a clinician with any expertise in diagnosing people. Therefore, the following post should not be taken as a reliable professional opinion. It's simply my interpretation of the internal mechanisms that may be responsible for the behavior of certain characters in my fan fiction. Furthermore, I want to make it clear that I have no intention of stigmatizing people with personality disorders by associating them with villains. A personality disorder does not determine someone's character or make them a bad person. Some characters may be evil because of the choices they make, not as a result of their mental conditions.

So, as I mentioned, I headcanon Velvette as having an Antisocial Personality Disorder. It is characterized by lack of sympathy or empathy for the rights of others, while simultaneously acting charming and interpersonally manipulative.

❤️ Throughout her childhood, Velvette lived exclusively with her father in the impoverished and sketchy part of the city. Her father worked a lot to earn them living but at the same time he drank a lot and while drunk tend to be aggressive. Also he surrounded himself with bad people. In my mind Velvette can deal with Vox and Val's shit so well because since she was little she was surrounded by unpredictable and violent men. At this point she couldn't be less scared of them.

❤️ She endured relentless bullying during her school years due to her inability to afford stylish clothes and gadgets. This was particularly hurtful for her, given her deep passion for fashion. Velvette devoted all her free time to design stunning looks, harboring a fervent desire to be able to wear them.

❤️ Around 12, she figured that following rules was pointless, being in a disadvantaged position due to her family's poverty. The sole way to boost her social status, in her view, was to break those rules. This extended beyond minor offenses like stealing groceries; she engaged in more serious crimes, such as taking money, clothes, and jewelry from stores and individuals. She never felt any remorse for these actions; to her, they were merely a means to achieve her goals, regardless of the harm inflicted on others.

❤️ She never finished her education because sticking to school rules wasn't her forte. She had the smarts and charm to sidestep juvenile detention. Despite concerns from a few individuals, we all know how well the system deals with "troubled teens." Besides, her father wasn't bothered by psychologists' opinions as long as she was bringing in some cash.

❤️ As a young woman she used her charm to manipulate men and take advantage over them. While she contemplated sex work as an easy money-making avenue, she found men too repulsive to engage in it. Instead, her preferred method involved blackmail – she seduced married men, particularly the submissive ones drawn to her aggression and coldness. Through this, she gathered intelligence and skillfully weaponized it against them.

❤️ At some point, she blew up as this super popular influencer. It kicked off with her sharing cool, low-cost looks on the internet. People loved her sassy attitude and creative stuff. But as she got more famous, it stopped being about creativity and turned into a power trip. She built a cult-like following around herself and started abusing her power. Being openly mean worked in her favor online – people ate it up, especially when she got into online fights. No matter how wild it got, no one could successfully cancell her. Actually, I think Vox really admires her talent for stirring up drama. He pushed her several times to get on some reality show, thinking it'd make the ratings explode. But the darkest stuff Velvette pulled wasn't out there for everyone to see. It all went down in her DMs. She justified it as "finally getting justice from rich white brats," using her influence to get teens to pull off crimes and risky stuff. She even manipulated at least two depressed kids into taking their own lives. When shit hit the fan, and she knew prison was coming, she took it as one last chance to torment people. During a "live stream apology," she commmited suicide in front of thousands of people.

❤️ In the show, it's evident that she's downright rude. Not just to Carmilla and the other overlords, but also towards Vox and her own employees. The lack of sensitivity and respect for others, coupled with a strong sense of superiority and being extremely opinionated, are typical traits associated with Antisocial Personality Disorder (APD). My girl literally got song called Respectless.

❤️ She disregards any kind of authorities and when someone tries to impose their will onto her, she's going berserk.

❤️ She genuinely couldn't care less about what people think of her; she despises people that much. In fact, being hated now excites her because she knows she's untouchable and influential and it makes everyone even more angry.

❤️ She's extremely reckless, even if she knows it could hurt her – another trait associated with APD. While we observe Vox and Valentino able to behave when necessary, Velvette storms into overlords' meetings guns blazing and starts with insulting everyone, even though she aims to convince them to align with Vs.

❤️ She struggles to form genuine connections with other people. Still, she's got a soft spot for Vox and Val, sort of considering them her friends. At the same time, she sees them as just a couple of guys she can easily play to her advantage.

Vox hc | Valentino hc

[sophieinwonderland]

Back to the "Sophie is dangerous" doc: Return to the Survivor's Network

In episode 1, we established that I'm a block evader for interacting with people who *checks notes* don't have me blocked...

In episode 2, we learned how, according to the doc's author, all Tibetan Buddhists are apparently monks?

What nonsense are they going to spit out next?

Let's find out as we return the doc!!!

First, I do want to preface this by talking about the Survivor's Network Discord Server and how I handled it.

Because I truly do regret it.

At the time, a former member of the server (Squid) posted about how members of the server were regularly mocking me, and were even using a Discord bot to roleplay as me to do so.

A current member at the time (KipAndKandi) made a post that seemingly confirmed for me that this was ongoing, which suggested to me that, based on the timeline, this had been going on for months by that point.

And as these accusations were flying, the Survivor's Network's members largely remained silent about it, which felt like an admission of guilt. If they were being misrepresented, then surely the SN members would come out to correct the record, I reasoned.

Eventually, members finally did come out to say that the roleplaying only happened a couple times. And the active member who seemingly confirmed it suggested they misspoke or were misunderstood. (I believe they said they had meant they saw the immaturity and the attacks on me, but not the roleplaying.)

All in all, I handled the situation in a very destructive way, and I wish I had tried reaching out to people in the server instead before going into war mode.

Having said that, I do have to address some just... utterly ridiculous takes on this controversy in the document.

WHY would this "interesting"?

This is, perhaps, the single most brain-dead critique the author of this document could have given.

In case you didn't realize, Squid hated me too! Practically all the sources I used could be described as "anti-Sophie." Both the current members at the time and the ones who left it. There were no "pro-Sophie" sources in that.

Believe it or not though, I don't base someone's credibility solely on how much they like me personally.

Honestly, it's bizarre that you think I would.

Is this how you think? "Well, this person dislikes me so their opinion isn't valid."

Frankly, I considered KipAndKandi's testimony way more valuable BECAUSE they didn't like me.

Here's the start of that post for context, where they stated they saw what Squid was talking about.

The fact that they were both supporting the SN and didn't like me at the time meant if anything, they would be biased in favor of the SN, and would have no reason to lie and make stuff up that would damage the SN's reputation, unlike a disgruntled former member like Squid who had a grudge against them.

More than that, the fact that they were new suggested it was an ongoing problem because Squid had been out of the server for months

Squid was disgruntled and had motive to lie or at least represent the SN in a negative light. Similarly, if I had followers or people who did like me in that server, they would be biased in my favor and also be less reliable sources.

I can't stress enough how utterly absurd it is that you think I should have dismissed their testimony simply because they didn't like me.

DissociativeDiscourse's Misgendering Post.

Now here we get to the other issue with the Survivor's Network which had to do with its admin, who posted the following, responding to an ask I answered.

Their screenshot of my post in response to a misgendering ask that echoed transphobic talking points:

Their reply:

And YES, it's fucking misgendering.

Why would this even be up for debate???

The fact that it's in response to a post I made and is using male pronouns is misgendering. Regardless of whether the misgendering is based on transphobia or pluralphobia. It's still misgendering.

In fact, it's very, very intentionally and maliciously misgendering with the "dude. bro. brother." line.

It crosses the threshold from "I'm going to ignore your gender and don't care if it hurts you" to "I'm intentionally going to repeatedly misgender you because I want to hurt you."

I legitimately debated whether this was technically transphobic or not, but the fact that it IS misgendering seems pretty cut and dry to me.

To be clear, I didn't believe in a grand conspiracy.

My thoughts on the SN is that you have a close group of friends in an echo chamber of sorts regularly attacking someone, cherry-picking their posts, and constructing a totem of what that person is. They each feed each other's anger and hate, building up this strawman.

And then this boils over into attacks outside the server.

I didn't think dissociativediscourse was leading everything directly, but I did have reason to believe that the other members of SN saw it and chose to not speak out about it because it was someone in their clique.

I don't necessarily believe that anymore. It certainly could have slipped under the radar, and just because a person is the admin doesn't mean they're all following that person's tumblr or watching their posts. But it's what I felt at the time.

Also, while not a conspiracy per se, there is a degree of coordination in their posts.

I thought the reports from Squid, seemingly backed up by KipAndKandi, were sufficient.

I thought, if there was another side of the story, it would come out once the accusations went public.

In hindsight, I could have approached other members of the SN privately, and should have. But... the idea of DMing a group of people who pretty much universally can't stand me was scary. And I wasn't sure if I could even trust them. If they lied to me in DM, I would have no way to verify if anything they said was true. If they had to defend themselves publicly, someone in their server, or who had been in the server in the past, could call them out on any lies. But in a DM, there would be no possible way to know unless I tried infiltrating their server myself.

Again, I handled this the wrong way and I regret the damage this caused to members in the server. But I want to explain my rationale at the time.

More on Vetting...

There's one more thing I need to say, on the subject of vetting, the author says that there's no way to verify that the screenshots of DissociativeDiscourse were real.

This is because within 1-3 days of making my first post about it, DissociativeDiscourse went back and deleted the post.

So it's true that it's no longer there.

Because it was deleted.

There is no possible way to verify that it was real.

There's nothing that can prove it ever existed.

The only ones who know it existed are me, DissociativeDiscourse...

And OH YEAH! The entirety of the SN who read DissociativeDiscourse's apology to the server, which was then put into Circ's document addressing the accusations.

When the post resurfaced this year, the admin had this to say in the Survivor’s Network: i am going to be fully transparent. i am the one who made that post, on November 28th of 2022.

You can see the full "apology" post and my response to it from the time here:

Putting "apology" in quotes because it was a private apology to the server that feels more like it's apologizing for the optics and doesn't seem to grasp how the post was bad.

In fairness, they did try to explain why they didn't try to apologize to me directly, including this line...

She has a tendency to twist words in posts, or assume bad faith when there is none, and it was felt the apology would not be accepted in good faith.

And... I can see how they would get this impression. I think they're wrong. I think I would have accepted a sincere apology and would have dropped it. But I understand why they would feel this way.

There is probably a lesson to be learned here about the importance of communication. Because I think both myself and the members of the Survivor's Network were scared of trying to address the other in a healthy way for similar reasons.

And even here, I've felt guilty for how things went down for a while but didn't know how to address it or apologize. So from that angle, I can understand it. I think the reasons they chose to not apologize to me weren't too different from the reasons I avoided really apologizing for how my actions hurt the people in SN.

Because doing so can be hard and scary. Especially in these types of situation. I get why they chose the route they did.

Back to the matter at hand though...

Vetting...

To the author of the document... if you weren't part of that drama, I can forgive you for not knowing about this very public document with the confession that literally everyone knew about at the time.

After all, you're not omniscient. You can't know everything.

Even if, again, everybody else did.

It does seem like you should have asked DissociativeDiscourse about the document though before implying I may have made it up. Especially when, as you point out, one of my failures in that drama was not properly vetting claims.

But maybe you couldn't reach DissociativeDiscourse.

I mean, they haven't posted in months, right?

So... in your wisdom, you decided without contacting them to dredge up past drama including a post they made that they were so ashamed of that they deleted it within days of being called out.

But wait... You claimed you contacted and got permission from everyone in the document, right? So... did you manage to reach DissociativeDiscourse to ask if you could include them, and then just chose not to ask if they made the post because it wouldn't support your narrative if they admitted it to you.

I'm almost certain DissociativeDiscourse wouldn't have denied it after making a post after admitting to it and apologizing for it to so many people. And if they did deny it, I'm even more certain that you would have happily put that into your document to try to prove I made the whole thing up.

So what is it? Were you lying about getting permission from everyone? Or did you contact DissociativeDiscourse to ask permission but then just chose to imply it could have been made up without even bothering to ask them directly if it was real, when you easily could have checked with them?

Or, I don't know, maybe something worse: you asked, they did admit to making the post, but you decided to go the "can't verify" route anyway because it suited your purposes better?

Which is it?

Because none of it looks very good for you.

Anyway, that's it for this episode of the document drama. Stay tuned for episode 4 where we get to talk about even more bad takes on gender in the document that thinks misgendering plurals isn't actually misgendering. Yay!

[beardedmrbean]

BRUNSWICK, Ga. (AP) — The only Black person who served on the jury that convicted three white men of murdering Ahmaud Arbery was called to the witness stand Thursday as defense attorneys sought to make a case that their clients deserve a new trial.

The juror, identified in court only as No. 380, was questioned about whether he lied during jury selection about harboring no biases against the men, who in 2020 chased a running Arbery in pickup trucks through their neighborhood before one of them fatally shot the 25-year-old Black man in the street.

Attorneys also questioned the juror about a day he bought a hotdog at a rally promoting justice for Arbery near the Glynn County courthouse where the murder trial was held. The man insisted he took his food and left, and it was unclear whether that happened before or during the trial.

Regardless, he denied misleading the judge and attorneys about his ability to serve impartially during jury selection in October 2021.

“I felt sorry for the family. After court started, I felt sorry for both sides,” the juror said on the witness stand Thursday. He added: “I wanted to help for the truth to come out, right from wrong.”

Attorneys for Greg McMichael, his son Travis McMichael, and their former neighbor William “Roddie” Bryan made their arguments for a new trial before Superior Court Judge Timothy Walmsley. He was the judge who presided at their 2021 murder trial and sentenced each to life in prison.

Walmsley didn't rule Thursday. Defense lawyers and prosecutors will have a month or more to file legal briefs summing up their arguments before the judge issues a decision.

Arbery's father, Marcus Arbery Sr., told reporters outside the courthouse he thought the arguments by defense lawyers for a new trial were “very weak.”

“They were throwing everything to the wall, and nothing will stick," he said.

The McMichaels armed themselves with guns and jumped in a pickup truck to chase Arbery, a 25-year-old Black man, after they saw him run past their house on Feb. 23, 2020, in a subdivision outside the port city of Brunswick. Bryan joined the pursuit in his own truck and recorded cellphone video of Travis McMichael firing shotgun blasts at close range into Arbery, who fell fatally wounded in the street.

Travis McMichael’s attorney, Pete Donaldson, told the judge that juror No. 380 had “concealed his bias in favor of the Arbery family” when he was questioned during jury selection. He based the assertion on an interview the man gave to a private investigator in June 2022.

Juror No. 380 became the only Black juror in the murder trial after defense attorneys struck eight other Black panelists as a final jury was being chosen. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that it’s unconstitutional for attorneys to reject potential jurors based solely on race or ethnicity. The defense attorneys insisted they had other reasons.

“I felt like the weight of the whole Black race was on my shoulders,” Donaldson quoted the juror as having told the investigator.

The juror was not asked about that comment during his testimony.

Prosecutor Linda Dunikoski noted the juror had told a defense attorney during jury selection three years ago about coming upon a rally supporting Arbery’s family after visiting a hardware store. The juror said he believed that was the same rally at which he’d bought a hotdog.

“Did you lie to us with any of your answers” during jury selection, Dunikoski asked No. 380.

The man answered: “No.”

No arrests were made in Arbery’s killing for more than two months, until Bryan’s cellphone video leaked online and the Georgia Bureau of Investigation took over the case from police. Arbery’s death became part of a broader reckoning on racial injustice in the criminal legal system along with the police killings of George Floyd in Minneapolis and Breonna Taylor in Louisville, Kentucky.

Defense attorneys argued during the Georgia trial that the armed pursuit was justified because the McMichaels and Bryan suspected Arbery was a thief and sought to detain him for police. Travis McMichael testified that he opened fire in self-defense when Arbery attacked with his fists. Police found no evidence Arbery had stolen anything or committed other crimes in the neighborhood.

Greg McMichael’s lawyer, Jerry Chappell, said he was supporting Donaldson’s effort to question the juror's impartiality.

Bryan’s lawyer, Rodney Zell, argued that his client’s trial attorney was ineffective, particularly for allowing Bryan to be interviewed twice by the Georgia Bureau of Investigation before his arrest. Bryan’s voluntary statements about how he and the McMichaels maneuvered their pickup trucks to cut off Arbery’s escape were used against all three defendants during the trial.

Seeking a new trial marks a first step by the three defendants in challenging their murder convictions. Walmsley sentenced both McMichaels to life in prison without parole, while giving Bryan a chance of parole.

The men were also convicted of federal hate crimes in U.S. District Court after a separate trial in February 2022. The jury concluded the trio targeted Arbery because he was Black. Prosecutors presented two dozen social media posts and text messages, as well as witness testimony, that showed all three men used racist slurs or otherwise disparaged Black people.

The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals heard arguments in March from attorneys asking the court to overturn the hate crimes verdict. A decision on the federal appeals is still pending.

[ivypalooza]

Navigating Beauty Standards: The Complex Intersection of Korean and South Asian Ideals

Beauty standards are deeply ingrained in societies worldwide, reflecting cultural, historical, and even colonial influences. In Asia, the contrast between Korean and South Asian beauty ideals highlights the complexities surrounding colorism and body image. As South Asians increasingly embrace K-beauty and skincare routines, a disheartening rejection of South Asian aesthetics persists within Korean beauty culture. This dichotomy exemplifies broader issues of how beauty is defined and valued across Asian societies, particularly in the comparison of Korean and Indian standards. Moreover, the influence of social media exacerbates these disparities, perpetuating an unattainable standard of beauty for Asian women. As an individual of Indian-Korean heritage, I have personally grappled with these conflicting ideals, struggling to find acceptance within either culture's beauty norms.

The Divergence of Beauty Ideals

Korean beauty standards often revolve around a particular archetype: fair skin, large eyes, a V-shaped face, and a slender figure. These standards, while reflective of a specific cultural aesthetic, contribute to a culture of colorism that marginalizes individuals with darker complexions. In contrast, South Asian beauty ideals encompass a diverse range of skin tones, body types, and facial features. However, within South Asia, light skin is still often favored, reflecting historical biases rooted in colonial legacies.

The Emergence of K-Beauty in South Asia

In recent years, the global popularity of Korean beauty products and skincare routines has surged, captivating South Asian consumers. The meticulous skincare regimens and innovative products offered by K-beauty have garnered immense popularity, encouraging South Asians to adopt new practices in pursuit of healthier, glowing skin. This convergence of beauty cultures highlights a shared appreciation for self-care and the desire for radiant, flawless skin.

The Rejection of South Asian Aesthetics in Korea

Despite the mutual exchange of beauty practices, South Asian aesthetics are still met with resistance within Korean society. This is due to deeply entrenched colorism, which perpetuates the belief that lighter skin equates to higher social status and attractiveness. South Asian individuals, regardless of their Asian identity, often find themselves ostracized and deemed less desirable solely based on their skin color. This rejection serves as a stark reminder of the insidious influence of colorism in shaping perceptions of beauty.

The Influence of Social Media

Social media platforms amplify and exacerbate these disparities in beauty standards. Filtered images and curated profiles contribute to an unrealistic portrayal of beauty, placing immense pressure on individuals to conform to an unattainable ideal. The prevalence of certain beauty standards on platforms like Instagram and TikTok further perpetuates the notion that there is a singular definition of beauty, further marginalizing those who do not fit this mold. Social media categorizes Asian women and makes other Asians feel they don’t belong to that beauty standard and if they try to achieve that, it would look wrong on them because they don’t fit the categorized look of what they’re supposed to be doing to feel pretty, and then it feels like an outsider trying to fit in. It’s a very difficult feeling to have, so a lot of people willingly choose to do the looks that are only made for “them”. It enforces the racial idealization of the “other”, to exclude rather than include. You’re not part of this, so don’t do it. If you do it, we will pretend to support you but in reality we will make fun of you for even trying. Because of this, it feels like you don’t even want to try to look pretty at all. It hurts more when it is women, particularly Asian women themselves poking fun at you for being Asian and trying something that is meant to exclude you.

Personal Reflections on Identity and Beauty

As an individual of Indian-Korean heritage, I have grappled with a sense of not belonging within both cultures. I have never fit neatly into the established beauty norms of either society. My body does not align with the expectations of either Indian or Korean standards, and my skin color, while uniquely beautiful, does not conform to the prevailing ideals. I have lightish brown skin but not light enough in the way North Indians would like it, which is a very light pale brown, and I am not even close to pale for Korean standards. This has led to a profound sense of discomfort and self-consciousness, as I constantly feel the need to meet an unattainable standard of beauty which I can not conform to at all. It has made it difficult for me to be comfortable with my physical appearance and as a result I’ve grown to hate how I look. It’s a little better now, but I’m still struggling with it. I hate how I’m not the perfect Asian skinny that Asian women are. It used to be so bad that I feared because of my looks that Korean people wouldn’t accept me, and because of that I was always hesitant to make Korean friends as I was worried they would make fun of me for the way I look as beauty is such an important part of Korean culture. I’m glad that I have found people that are very loving and accepting, but it is still a big fear of a cultural norm which excludes me from my East Asian heritage. I will say though, it has gotten a lot better in Korea for Native Koreans to accept more diverse skin tones, but a backwards society and racial stigma of foreigners in Korea is still prevalent.

Conclusion

The complex interplay of Korean and South Asian beauty standards exemplifies the larger issue of how beauty is defined and valued in Asian societies. The convergence of K-beauty and South Asian skincare practices offers hope for a more inclusive and diverse understanding of beauty. However, the persistence of colorism and rejection of South Asian aesthetics in Korean culture serve as stark reminders of the work that remains to be done in dismantling harmful beauty ideals. It is crucial to recognize the inherent worth and beauty of individuals, regardless of their adherence to societal norms. Embracing diversity and celebrating the richness of different identities is the first step toward redefining beauty on a global scale.

Source/Inspiration for some of the topics I mentioned:

[generativeinai]

Reducing Bias in Recruitment with Generative AI in HR Solutions

In today’s rapidly evolving business landscape, one of the most critical challenges organizations face is attracting and retaining diverse talent. However, despite the growing emphasis on inclusivity and diversity, hiring processes remain riddled with biases—whether unconscious or structural—that undermine these efforts. From resumes to interviews, the risk of bias can be found at every step of the recruitment process.

Fortunately, generative AI is emerging as a powerful tool to combat these biases, providing Human Resources (HR) teams with innovative solutions to create a more equitable, fair, and efficient recruitment process.

The Problem of Bias in Recruitment

Bias in recruitment comes in many forms, from gender and age bias to racial and socioeconomic bias. These biases can seep into every stage of hiring, starting from how job descriptions are written, to the way candidates’ resumes are assessed, and even during the interview process. For instance, the language used in job descriptions can unintentionally favor a certain gender or demographic group, or recruiters might unknowingly prioritize candidates who share similar characteristics to current employees, leading to a lack of diversity.

Beyond just fairness concerns, bias in recruitment can also harm a company’s bottom line. Research shows that diverse teams are more innovative, productive, and effective. However, organizations that fail to address bias may miss out on top talent and create a homogenous workforce that lacks the varied perspectives necessary for success in today’s complex, global economy.

How Generative AI Can Help Reduce Bias

Generative AI, a subset of artificial intelligence, is designed to create new content or solutions from existing data. Unlike traditional AI, which is often focused on predictive tasks, generative AI can produce original outcomes—like crafting job descriptions or generating interview questions—that can directly address biases in recruitment. Here’s how generative AI is reshaping the HR landscape and helping to reduce bias in hiring:

1. Crafting Neutral Job Descriptions

The language used in job descriptions plays a significant role in attracting a diverse pool of candidates. Many job descriptions contain subtle, biased language that can discourage certain groups from applying. For example, words like "aggressive" or "dominant" may subconsciously attract male candidates, while terms like "supportive" or "nurturing" may appeal more to female candidates.

Generative AI can analyze job descriptions and suggest more inclusive language, ensuring that the wording appeals to a broader, more diverse audience. By recommending gender-neutral phrasing and avoiding biased terms, AI can help employers craft job descriptions that attract candidates based on their skills and qualifications, rather than their gender or background.

2. Analyzing Resumes Without Bias

AI-powered tools can scan resumes more objectively, reducing the impact of unconscious biases that may influence human recruiters. Generative AI can focus solely on the candidate's skills, experience, and qualifications, removing demographic information such as gender, age, or ethnicity that may lead to unintentional bias.

In addition, generative AI can identify patterns in resumes that align with job requirements more effectively than a human recruiter might. By focusing on the skills and qualifications that matter most for the role, AI ensures that the assessment process remains consistent and equitable, preventing subjective preferences from influencing decision-making.

3. Structured and Unbiased Interview Questions

The interview stage is another area where biases often emerge. Recruiters may unintentionally ask questions that are more aligned with their own cultural backgrounds or personal preferences, leading to skewed assessments of candidates. Generative AI can create structured, standardized interview questions that focus on the specific skills and competencies required for the role. These AI-generated questions can be customized for different roles and tailored to assess candidates' capabilities in an unbiased way.

Additionally, AI can help reduce interviewer biases by providing real-time suggestions on how to phrase questions more neutrally. This ensures that the interview process remains fair and that candidates are evaluated on their skills and potential rather than personal traits that are irrelevant to the job.

4. Ensuring Diversity in Candidate Pools

Generative AI can help HR departments identify and address gaps in their talent pools. By analyzing historical hiring data, AI can identify patterns where certain demographic groups are underrepresented or overlooked. For example, AI can suggest changes to recruitment strategies that target diverse communities or underrepresented groups in specific industries.

Moreover, AI-powered platforms can actively recommend diverse candidates by sourcing talent from a variety of channels, including those that may be underutilized. These recommendations not only support diversity goals but also ensure that the hiring process includes a broader range of perspectives and experiences, which benefits the organization as a whole.

5. Unbiased Decision-Making Algorithms

One of the most exciting aspects of generative AI is its ability to assist in decision-making. Generative AI can analyze a wide range of variables—such as past hiring data, performance metrics, and candidate feedback—to help HR teams make better, data-driven hiring decisions. Importantly, these AI models can be designed to disregard irrelevant factors (like gender, age, or ethnicity), focusing solely on the skills and potential of candidates.

Furthermore, AI systems can be trained to recognize and eliminate any biases that may be present in historical hiring data, ensuring that decisions are made based on objective factors rather than historical patterns that may reinforce inequality.

The Ethical Considerations and Challenges

While generative AI holds great potential for reducing bias, it is important to recognize the ethical implications of relying on AI in recruitment. The algorithms that power generative AI systems are only as good as the data they are trained on. If the training data contains biases—such as a history of hiring only from specific demographics—there’s a risk that AI models will replicate those biases.

To mitigate this, it’s essential that companies ensure transparency and accountability in the design and deployment of AI systems. HR teams should work with data scientists and AI experts to regularly audit AI algorithms for fairness and accuracy, making adjustments as needed to ensure that the technology works to eliminate bias rather than reinforce it.

Moreover, while AI can help identify and address biases, human oversight remains crucial. AI should be seen as a tool that supports decision-making, not replaces it. HR professionals must use their judgment and expertise to interpret AI outputs and ensure that the recruitment process remains aligned with organizational values.

Conclusion

Generative AI is revolutionizing the way organizations approach recruitment, offering powerful tools to reduce bias, improve decision-making, and build more diverse and inclusive workforces. By leveraging AI’s capabilities to analyze job descriptions, evaluate resumes, craft interview questions, and make unbiased hiring decisions, HR teams can ensure that they are selecting the best talent based on skills and qualifications, rather than unconscious or structural biases. However, as with any technology, it’s crucial to approach the use of generative AI with caution, ensuring transparency, ethical standards, and human oversight throughout the recruitment process.

Ultimately, as organizations continue to embrace AI-powered HR solutions, the result will be a more equitable, efficient, and diverse recruitment process—one that opens the door to a wealth of untapped potential.

[fxprobotuae]

MT4 Automated Trading Robots: Elevate Your Forex Game with FXProbot

In the rapidly evolving world of forex trading, the ability to adapt and leverage technology is essential for success. As traders seek efficient and effective ways to maximize their profits, automated trading solutions have emerged as a game-changer. FXProbot’s MT4 automated trading robots offer traders an unparalleled opportunity to elevate their forex game, combining advanced technology with user-friendly interfaces to streamline the trading process.

The Power of MT4 in Forex Trading

MetaTrader 4 (MT4) has long been the platform of choice for forex traders due to its robust features and flexibility. Known for its advanced charting capabilities, extensive technical analysis tools, and support for automated trading, MT4 allows traders to customize their trading experience to fit their individual strategies and preferences.

FXProbot enhances the MT4 experience by providing sophisticated automated trading robots that integrate seamlessly with the platform. These robots are designed to operate 24/7, monitoring the market and executing trades on behalf of the trader. This continuous operation ensures that traders can seize opportunities in real-time, without the need to constantly monitor charts and market fluctuations.

How FXProbot’s Automated Trading Robots Work

FXProbot’s automated trading robots utilize advanced algorithms to analyze market data and identify profitable trading opportunities. By operating on the MT4 platform, these robots can access real-time market information and execute trades based on predefined criteria set by the trader. This level of automation removes the manual workload, allowing traders to focus on their strategies rather than the mechanics of trading.

Traders can customize their robots to align with their individual risk profiles and trading goals. Whether one prefers high-frequency trading or a more conservative approach, FXProbot’s robots can be programmed to follow specific strategies. This customization ensures that traders can execute their plans efficiently and effectively.

Advantages of Using FXProbot’s MT4 Trading Robots

One of the most significant advantages of using FXProbot’s automated trading robots is the elimination of emotional trading. Emotional biases can cloud judgment, leading to impulsive decisions that undermine trading success. FXProbot’s robots execute trades based solely on data and predefined strategies, providing a disciplined and objective approach to trading.

Additionally, these robots operate continuously, allowing traders to take advantage of market opportunities at any time, even when they are not actively trading. The speed at which the robots can analyze data and execute trades is critical in the forex market, where prices can change in an instant. With FXProbot, traders can ensure that they are always positioned to capitalize on favorable market movements.

Customization and Flexibility

FXProbot recognizes that every trader has unique preferences and strategies. The platform allows for extensive customization of trading robots, enabling traders to set parameters that suit their individual styles. Traders can choose their preferred currency pairs, adjust risk levels, and define trade sizes, ensuring that the robots operate in a manner consistent with their trading philosophies.

This flexibility empowers traders to adapt their strategies as market conditions change. Whether a trader is focused on short-term gains or long-term stability, FXProbot’s automated robots provide the tools necessary to align trading practices with personal goals.

Conclusion

FXProbot’s MT4 automated trading robots are revolutionizing the way traders approach forex trading. By leveraging the power of automation, traders can elevate their trading game, gaining access to continuous market monitoring, precise execution, and a disciplined approach free from emotional bias.

The seamless integration with MT4 enhances the overall trading experience, providing traders with the resources they need to succeed in a competitive market. Whether you’re a novice looking to improve your trading skills or an experienced trader seeking to optimize your strategies, FXProbot offers the automation you need to thrive. With FXProbot, the future of forex trading is at your fingertips—elevate your game today.

Contact Us

FXProbot

Email Address: support@fxprobot.com

Website: https://fxprobot.com/

External Link

Opencollective.com Giphy.com Wakelet.com Blurb.com Magcloud.com

[expertwitnessdr4]

Top Medical Witness Expert: Get Professional Opinions

In the realm of legal proceedings, the role of a medical witness expert is crucial for providing clarity and precision. Whether you’re navigating a personal injury case, medical malpractice suit, or any other legal matter involving health and medicine, the insights of a top medical witness expert can make a significant difference. Here’s why engaging a reputable medical witness expert is essential and how it can impact your case.

What is a Medical Witness Expert?

A medical witness expert, also known as a medical expert witness, is a highly trained and experienced medical professional who provides specialized knowledge and opinions in legal cases. They are often called upon to clarify complex medical issues, offer objective evaluations, and testify in court to help judges and juries understand the medical aspects of a case.

Why Engage a Top Medical Witness Expert?

Unmatched Expertise: Top medical witness experts have extensive experience in their fields, which allows them to provide accurate, credible, and detailed opinions. Their expertise ensures that their evaluations are not only thorough but also grounded in current medical knowledge and practices.

Objective Analysis: One of the core functions of a medical witness expert is to offer an unbiased and objective analysis of the medical evidence. They review medical records, conduct evaluations if necessary, and provide their opinions based solely on facts rather than personal beliefs or biases.

Clear and Effective Communication: In legal settings, it’s crucial that medical information is communicated clearly and understandably. Top experts have the ability to break down complex medical terminology and concepts into layman's terms, making it easier for judges, juries, and attorneys to grasp the key issues.

Credibility and Authority: A well-regarded medical witness expert brings credibility to your case. Their professional standing and reputation can enhance the persuasive power of your arguments and lend authority to the testimony presented.

Comprehensive Reporting: Top experts provide detailed reports that outline their findings, opinions, and the basis for their conclusions. These reports are instrumental in building a strong case, offering a clear record of the medical analysis conducted.

How to Choose the Right Medical Witness Expert

Selecting the right medical witness expert involves several considerations:

Specialization: Ensure the expert’s specialization aligns with the medical issues in your case. For example, if the case involves orthopedic injuries, a specialist in orthopedic medicine would be most suitable.

Experience: Look for experts with substantial experience in their field and in providing expert testimony. Their track record in similar cases can offer insights into their effectiveness and reliability.

Reputation: Check the expert’s reputation within the medical community and legal field. Positive reviews, testimonials, and endorsements from attorneys or other professionals can be indicators of their competence and professionalism.

Availability: Confirm that the expert is available to provide testimony and can commit to the timeline of your case. Their availability for depositions, court appearances, and consultations is crucial for a smooth legal process.

 

In legal cases involving medical issues, the input of a top medical witness expert can be a game-changer. Their expertise, objectivity, and ability to communicate complex medical information effectively are invaluable assets. By carefully selecting a reputable and experienced medical witness expert, you can ensure that your case is supported by authoritative and credible medical opinions, ultimately enhancing your chances of a favorable outcome.

For more info :-

Dr. Ted Krensavage Anesthesia Consultant

Dr. Ted Krensavage

[avidtrader]

Did Elon Musk Save Tesla Stock From Imploding??

Did Elon Musk Save Tesla Stock From Imploding?? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_UD-84mnQE Today we go deep into Tesla stock chart on the daily view and give you all of the key upside and downside levels. AKA your support, resistance, gap fill targets. Most of the public was bearish going into tech earnings this week. Having a non biased opinion is key. No room for perma-bulls in this market, we must be realistic. ✅ Subscribe To My Channel For More Videos: https://www.youtube.com/@AvidTrader/?sub_confirmation=1 ✅ Stay Connected With Me: 👉 (X)Twitter: https://twitter.com/RealAvidTrader 👉 Stocktwits: https://ift.tt/28OI7p5 👉 Instagram: https://ift.tt/mFC1R6l ============================== ✅ Other Videos You Might Be Interested In Watching: 👉 The ULTIMATE Guide to Finding Hidden Gem Stocks | AvidTrader https://youtu.be/pZAKJLk9o0I 👉 How My Subscribers Doubled Their Money Today!!! https://youtu.be/s5M_OGv8AtM 👉 7 Great Value Stocks to Buy BEFORE They Explode! https://youtu.be/0I451lsCjAc 👉 💥Super Cheap Penny Stock Can Run 3-5X FAST💥 https://youtu.be/4B3EK7lb38k ============================= ✅ About AvidTrader: Value Investor. Discussing Day & Swing Trades Also Long Term Investments! Stock Breakdowns. Grow Your Trading Account Effectively. Technical Analysis and Pattern Recognition. How to Make Money, But More Importantly Learning & Having Fun in The Process! Avid Trader is not a Series 7 licensed investment professional, but a digital marketing manager/content creator to publicly traded and privately held companies. Avid Trader receives compensation from its clients in the form of cash and restricted securities for consulting services. 🔔 Subscribe to my channel for more videos: https://www.youtube.com/@AvidTrader/?sub_confirmation=1 ===================== #elonmusk #teslastock #tesla #stockanalysis #technicalanalysis #largecapstocks #billionaire #ceo #electricvehicle #evbattery #hedgefund #bullish Disclaimer: We do not accept any liability for any loss or damage which is incurred from you acting or not acting as a result of reading any of our publications. You acknowledge that you use the information we provide at your own risk. I am not a certified financial advisor and you must do your own research and due diligence before ever buying or selling a stock. never trade solely based on someone else's word or expectations of a stock! Copyright Disclaimer: Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use © AvidTrader via AvidTrader https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCK_XU3FW-ffEK8BG5EisnNA April 24, 2024 at 06:35AM

[john3vanmba]

New Year, Old Divide

Had you ever experienced any discrimination in your school, workplace or community? If not, you’re very lucky because believe it or not, even in our current time, plenty of people still experience the feeling of being left out for reasons they are at no fault to begin with.

In one of our previous lectures under Lasallian Business Leadership, Ethics and CSR, we have tackled a subject about workplace diversity and discrimination. While discrimination is a neutral word in our old dictionaries, it is now usually used in a negative sense such that it refers to the differentiation not based on the individual merit of a person but rather on prejudice or some other negative attributes. Discrimination, unfortunately, continues to be prevalent in our society where it is till and an issue even in the supposedly progressive era of 2024. Despite significant efforts of caring people towards inclusivity and equality, the bias still exists in the many segments of our society, including in our workplaces. Many stories of discriminatory hiring practices, whether obvious or not so obvious, continue to tarnish the reputation of companies across different industries. You can just scratch the surface of common exchanges and you would still see numerous anecdotes of experiences highlighting the frequency of racial discrimination in the hiring process. Stories from qualified candidates being overlooked or outright rejected on the basis of their race and with hiring decisions influenced by stereotypes and prejudices than by the applicants’ credentials. Such discriminatory practices manifest in various forms, ranging from the refusal to consider candidates from certain racial backgrounds to the worse phenomenon of tokenism, wherein individuals are hired solely to fulfill diversity quotas rather than on the basis of their qualifications.

Much to our regret, discrimination is not only visible to a few isolated incidents but is rather symptomatic of deeper systemic biases, which are already integrated within our society. Hidden biases, shaped by centuries of ingrained stereotypes and social conditioning, continue to inform the decision-making processes of hiring managers and recruitment teams, often leading to the fostering of such bad practices even in the most talented and skillful work environments. One shocking manifestation of racial discrimination in hiring is racial profiling, whereby individuals are pigeonholed into certain roles or industries based solely on their racial or ethnic background. This form of discrimination operates on the misguided belief that individuals of a particular race possess inherent attributes or characteristics more suited to certain roles, thereby creating harmful stereotypes and limiting opportunities for career advancement. Also, the practice of preferential treatment still exists, wherein individuals are favored for employment solely on the basis of their race, often as a means of fulfilling diversity quotas or projecting a certain image of inclusivity. While these are well-intentioned, such practices ultimately serve to undermine fairness where it creates another cycle of inequality and resentment.

The consequences of discriminatory hiring exist not only within the individuals directly affected; they extend further even across generations. By growing these disparities in employment opportunities and cycles of poverty and marginalization, discriminatory hiring practices continue to magnify existing inequalities and causing more trouble and disparities in different groups of people.

The fight against discriminatory hiring and discrimination in general is a collective goal; it requires the concerted effort of policymakers, employers, business leaders, government and civil society alike. Only through a commitment to equality, fairness, and justice, can we hope to realize a future where opportunities are truly accessible to all, regardless of race, ethnicity, or background. I hope we can achieve that in the near future; I will pray for that time to finally come.

[karin-ko]

GO by Isao Yukisada

The movie "GO," directed by Isao Yukisada and released in 2001, depicts the protagonist Sugihara, who is of North Korean descent in Japan, and those around him. It is easy to imagine that Japan's impression of North Korea, South Korea, and China wasn't as favorable twenty years ago as it is now. While our generation and even younger ones may have a better understanding of each other, that bias has not entirely disappeared. Even today, there are still many people, particularly among the older generations like Sakurai's father in the film, who do not hold favorable impressions solely based on someone's nationality. This sentiment is not one-sided among just the Japanese; people from those countries may also feel similarly. Whether it's Sugihara's father changing his nationality to South Korean to make life easier for his son in Japan, his estranged brother as a result, or Sakurai's reaction upon learning about Sugihara's background, the film vividly portrays the impressions and realities between Japan/Japanese people and its neighboring countries and people at the time.

As Sugihara says, people tend to label others despite nationality, race or anything not being the sole defining factor of a person. This tendency stems from a fear of the unknown and is influenced by historical backgrounds, among other factors. It often happens, both consciously and unconsciously, for people to conflate the residents of a country with its government and history due to the influence of education and media. As a Japanese living in America, I often find myself judged, positively or negatively, solely based on being Japanese or Asian. I sometimes feel the innocuous biases, discrimination, and people's indifference which I did not notice when I was part of the majority. Hence, lines of Sugihara or other characters like eliminating the national borders or the relationship between Sugihara and Sakurai, who deliberately avoid mentioning names, and the quote about the unchanged beauty of a flower despite its name changing, all resonate deeply. It is a great film that inspires me to take pride in myself regardless of name or title and to want to become stronger to the point where I can think that and interact with others with that mindset.

Also, the camera work, music, pauses, and narration give an overall impression reminiscent of anime or manga, which was very cool. Particularly, the way the opening credits were displayed and the use of colors, along with Sugihara and his father's duel scene, were incredibly stylish and gave a nice adrenaline rush. The frequent cuts during running scenes or when Sugihara speaks at length emphasized both energy and the drag of the narrative, akin to anime, which was excellent. The sudden quietness highlighting his concentration during the study, followed by the return of ambient sounds with a ringing phone, was also impactful.

The saddest part was the death of Sugihara's friend from his Korean school days, Jeong-il. Despite expecting his death from his lines hinting at wanting to talk next time or having something to say, it was heartbreaking because he was a nice guy. However, his last scene when his steadfast sense of justice, kindness, and strength, are shown by protecting a female Korean student and the scene when Sugihara made a decision not to resort to violence to avenge, deeply touched my heart.

Moreover, I love that the film beautifully captures the atmosphere of Japan from the early to mid-Heisei era. Not only the landscapes, characters' clothing, hairstyles, and makeup, but also the way they exchange contact information with paper or converse using a landline, sneaking into school at night, or walking only on the white lines—all of these elements made me nostalgic for my childhood. Being born in the Heisei era, I have a deep affection for it, but seeing these films and those who spent their youth during that time made me even more envious. The atmosphere and stories of Heisei are truly the best. And above all, Yosuke Kubozuka, who plays Sugihara, is just too cool. Kingggggggg. Kou Shibasaki, who plays Sakurai, is adorable too, and there are many other talented actors still active today, making the film exciting. While there are many humorous elements, the film delivers a solid message, making it one of my favorite movies.

This movie hit me right in the feels, and I would watch it again and again because venturing out of my comfort zone to see the wider world and grasp what truly matters, friendship and love transcend nationality or titles, acknowledge and take pride in oneself as is, and love important people for who they are, these are the beliefs that I have held for the past few years and I just rethought and reaffirmed.

[executiveadvisory]

Common Decision-Making Pitfalls for Leaders: Avoiding Critical Mistakes with Professionals at Executive-Advisory Inc.

Effective decision-making is a cornerstone of successful leadership, but leaders often face various challenges that can lead to pitfalls. Recognizing and avoiding common decision-making mistakes is crucial for maintaining organizational effectiveness. In this guide, we'll explore some prevalent decision-making pitfalls for leaders and strategies to avoid them.

1. Overreliance on Gut Instincts:

Professionals at Executive-Advisory Inc highlight that relying solely on gut instincts without considering available data or analysis can lead to decisions that are subjective and biased. When leaders heavily depend on intuition, they risk overlooking critical information and may make decisions based on personal biases or emotions rather than objective factors. This can result in suboptimal outcomes and erode trust among team members who may feel decisions lack a solid foundation.

To mitigate this pitfall, leaders should balance intuition with data-driven insights. Encourage a culture of evidence-based decision-making where gut feelings are complemented by relevant information and analysis. Establish clear guidelines for when gut instincts are appropriate and when a more analytical approach is necessary. By fostering a data-informed culture, leaders can ensure that decisions are grounded in a comprehensive understanding of the situation.

Example: A leader facing a crucial hiring decision might feel a strong instinct about a candidate, but to avoid overreliance on gut feelings, they could incorporate structured interviews, performance data, and peer assessments into the decision-making process.

2. Analysis Paralysis:

Overthinking and excessive analysis can result in delayed decisions, missed opportunities, and a lack of adaptability in rapidly changing environments.  Professionals at Executive-Advisory Inc elucidate that leaders may become paralyzed by the quest for more information, leading to decision inertia and potential frustration among team members who are waiting for guidance.

To overcome analysis paralysis, leaders should establish clear decision-making timelines and priorities. Set expectations for the amount of information required to make a decision and create frameworks to help prioritize critical factors. Encourage a culture of proactive decision-making and continuous improvement, where decisions are seen as iterative processes that can be adjusted as new information emerges.

Example: In a rapidly changing market, a leader faced with a product launch decision might set a timeline for gathering market research and competitor analysis, allowing for a timely decision without sacrificing the need for relevant information.

3. Confirmation Bias:

Professionals at Executive-Advisory Inc clarify that confirmation bias occurs when leaders favor information that supports their existing beliefs or preferences, leading to a narrow perspective. This can result in a failure to consider alternative viewpoints and a reluctance to challenge assumptions, ultimately undermining the quality of decision-making.

To mitigate confirmation bias, leaders should actively seek out diverse opinions and perspectives. Encourage open discussions where dissenting views are welcomed and create a culture that values constructive disagreement. Implement decision-making processes that incorporate checks and balances, such as assigning a devil's advocate role, to ensure thorough exploration of alternatives before finalizing decisions.

Example: When considering a strategic shift, a leader might deliberately seek input from team members with different functional backgrounds to challenge preconceived notions and avoid confirmation bias.

4. Groupthink:

Professionals at Executive-Advisory Inc state that groupthink occurs when team members conform to a consensus without critically evaluating alternative viewpoints, suppressing individual creativity and independent thinking. This conformity-driven decision-making can lead to suboptimal choices, as dissenting voices are either ignored or suppressed.

To prevent groupthink, leaders should foster a culture that values diversity of thought and encourages team members to express their opinions freely. Implement techniques like devil's advocacy, where individuals are assigned the role of challenging prevailing opinions, to ensure thorough exploration of alternatives. Create an environment where dissent is seen as a constructive contribution rather than a disruption.

Example: In a brainstorming session, a leader might assign a team member to play the devil's advocate role, encouraging the team to consider potential flaws or drawbacks in their proposed ideas.

5. Anchoring Bias:

Anchoring bias occurs when decisions are influenced by initial information or reference points, even if they are irrelevant or inaccurate. Leaders may anchor their decisions to the first piece of information they receive, limiting their ability to adapt to changing circumstances.

Leaders should actively encourage awareness of anchoring bias and its potential impact on decision-making. Seek input from multiple sources to establish a broader perspective and challenge initial assumptions. Regularly reassess and adjust decisions based on evolving information to prevent the undue influence of initial anchor points.

Example: When negotiating a contract, a leader might consciously seek out multiple quotes or proposals to avoid being anchored to the first offer received, ensuring a more comprehensive evaluation of alternatives. Executive Advisory Inc.

6. Sunk Cost Fallacy:

Professionals at Executive-Advisory Inc specify that the sunk cost fallacy involves persisting with a decision because of the resources already invested, even when the decision is proving to be ineffective. Leaders may be reluctant to abandon a failing project due to the emotional and financial investment made.

To overcome the sunk cost fallacy, leaders should cultivate a culture that values adaptability and recognizes when it's appropriate to cut losses. Encourage teams to reassess decisions based on current circumstances rather than past investments. Regularly evaluate the ongoing relevance and success of projects to prevent the commitment of additional resources to failing endeavors.    

Example: In a product development scenario, a leader might decide to discontinue a feature that has consumed significant resources but is not contributing to the overall success of the product.

Strategic Objectives:

Leaders can enhance their decision-making effectiveness by recognizing these common pitfalls and implementing proactive strategies to mitigate their impact. Balancing intuition with data, establishing decision-making frameworks, fostering a culture of open communication, and actively challenging biases are essential components of effective decision-making. By addressing these pitfalls head-on, leaders contribute to a more resilient and adaptive organizational culture, ensuring that decisions align with strategic objectives and contribute to long-term success.

[sports-bet101]

College Football Betting: Leverage Consensus Picks for Success

College football betting is a dynamic and engaging pursuit, drawing in fans and bettors alike with its unpredictable nature and passionate displays of athleticism. In this competitive arena, leveraging consensus picks, including winning sports betting picks, has emerged as a vital strategy for success. Consensus picks, which represent the collective opinion or prediction on game outcomes from various sources, can be a powerful tool in a bettor's arsenal. This article delves into how to effectively use these picks for better betting outcomes.

Understanding Consensus Picks

The Basics of Consensus Picks

Consensus picks in college football betting are essentially the aggregation of betting preferences from a large group of people, including expert opinions, public betting trends, and statistical models. By analyzing majority leanings on particular games, bettors gain insights into market trends and potential outcomes.

The Role of Expert and Public Opinion

Consensus picks blend expert analysis and public sentiment. Experts base their opinions on comprehensive knowledge of the game, while public opinion can be influenced by factors like team popularity and media narratives.

Analyzing the Value of Consensus Picks

Identifying Market Biases

A key advantage of consensus picks is revealing market biases. For instance, a popular team might always attract more public bets, skewing betting lines in their favor, regardless of actual winning chances.

Contrarian Betting Opportunities

Sometimes, going against the consensus can be profitable. This approach involves spotting overvalued favorites and finding value in underbet teams or overlooked matchups.

Integrating Consensus Picks into Your Betting Strategy

Balancing Consensus with Personal Analysis

While consensus picks provide market insights, they shouldn't be the sole basis of betting decisions. It's crucial to combine these with personal game analysis, studying factors like team dynamics and player injuries.

Staying Informed and Adaptable

The college football betting landscape constantly evolves. Keeping up with the latest news, trends, and consensus shifts is essential for informed decision-making. Adapting your strategy based on current information is key to success.

Practical Tips for Utilizing Consensus Picks

Start with Reputable Sources

For reliable consensus data, turn to reputable sources. Top sports betting analytics sites offer valuable resources for consensus picks and expert college football betting analysis.

Use Consensus Picks as a Guide

Consensus picks should guide understanding market trends and sentiment, not dictate game outcomes. Always conduct your research.

Monitor Line Movements

Line movements in response to consensus picks can indicate significant betting trends, often worth considering in your strategy.

The Risks and Rewards of Following Consensus Picks

Understanding the Risks

Blindly following consensus can lead to pitfalls, especially where public opinion is heavily skewed. It's vital to recognize that consensus picks are not a guaranteed success path.

The Potential Rewards

When used wisely, consensus picks can unlock profitable opportunities. They help identify market inefficiencies, particularly in less high-profile games with less strong public opinion.

Conclusion: Making Consensus Picks Work for You

Leveraging consensus picks in college football betting involves a nuanced balance of market insight, personal analysis, and understanding the broader betting landscape. Utilizing these picks as part of a comprehensive betting strategy can significantly enhance your chances of success and instill greater confidence. It’s about integrating these insights with your knowledge, staying adaptable to changing dynamics, and always being prepared to adjust your approach based on the latest data and trends. This strategic incorporation of consensus picks can transform your betting experience, making it more informed, dynamic, and potentially more rewarding in the exhilarating world of college football betting.

Stay Ahead of the Game

For the latest in college football betting insights, subscribe to our newsletter. Whether you're an experienced bettor or a novice, understanding and utilizing consensus picks can significantly improve your betting experience. Dive into the trends, analyze, and make informed decisions as you explore the exciting world of college football betting.

[zealousnightsublime]

Why Attractive Women Are 16% More Likely to Secure Start-up Funding

Starting a business is a challenging endeavor for anyone, but for women, the journey can be even more arduous due to various gender biases and stereotypes that persist in the business world. However, recent studies have shed light on an intriguing finding - attractive women are 16% more likely to secure start-up funding compared to their less attractive counterparts. This article explores the reasons behind this phenomenon and provides valuable insights for aspiring women entrepreneurs.

The Gender Gap in Start-up Funding

Before delving into the influence of physical attractiveness, it's essential to understand the context of the gender gap in start-up funding. Historically, women have faced significant obstacles when seeking financial support for their ventures. Despite progress, female entrepreneurs often encounter biased investors, limited access to capital, and an overall lack of representation in the start-up ecosystem.

The Influence of Physical Attractiveness

Research suggests that physical attractiveness can play a role in securing start-up funding. Studies conducted at renowned universities have shown that attractive women have a 16% higher likelihood of receiving funding compared to their less physically attractive counterparts. This advantage is not solely attributed to shallow perceptions but can be attributed to various psychological and societal factors.

Perception of Competence and Trust

Physical attractiveness can positively influence the perception of competence and trustworthiness. When potential investors evaluate entrepreneurs, they often make quick judgments based on visual cues. Attractive women tend to be perceived as more confident, capable, and persuasive, leading to an increased sense of trust in their abilities. This perception can sway investor decisions, as trust is a crucial factor when allocating funds.

The Power of Confidence

Confidence plays a vital role in securing start-up funding, and attractive women often exude a greater sense of confidence. Their physical attractiveness can boost self-assurance, resulting in more assertive presentations and pitches. Investors are naturally drawn to individuals who exhibit unwavering belief in their business ideas, making attractive women more persuasive and compelling during fundraising efforts.

Unconscious Bias and Stereotypes

Although progress has been made, unconscious biases and gender stereotypes still persist in the start-up ecosystem. Investors may unknowingly favor attractive women due to ingrained societal perceptions that equate attractiveness with intelligence, competence, and success. While this bias may seem unfair, understanding its existence can empower women to navigate it effectively.

The Role of Networking

Networking is a crucial aspect of securing start-up funding, and attractive women may have a slight advantage in this area. Their physical attractiveness often garners attention and facilitates connections, opening doors to influential individuals within the industry. While networking alone is not a guarantee of success, it can provide access to valuable opportunities and resources.

Overcoming Biases and Challenges

Despite the advantages, attractive women entrepreneurs still face biases and challenges. It's important to acknowledge that physical attractiveness should not be the sole determining factor in securing funding. To level the playing field, it is essential to adopt strategies that go beyond appearances and focus on merit and substance.

Strategies for Attractive Women Entrepreneurs

1.Building a Strong Personal Brand: Establishing a compelling personal brand can help attractive women entrepreneurs differentiate themselves from competitors. Highlighting expertise, achievements, and unique value propositions can bolster credibility and attract investor interest. 2.Leveraging Social Proof: Utilizing social proof, such as customer testimonials, case studies, and endorsements, can reinforce the viability and market potential of a business idea. Attractive women entrepreneurs can leverage their network and connections to gather social proof, enhancing their chances of securing funding. 3. Developing a Robust Business Plan: A well-crafted business plan that outlines market analysis, financial projections, and growth strategies is crucial. Attractive women entrepreneurs should focus on demonstrating their business acumen and the potential for profitability to instill confidence in potential investors. 4. Seeking Mentorship and Support: Engaging with mentors, industry experts, and support networks can provide guidance, knowledge, and valuable insights. Mentorship can help navigate challenges, provide strategic advice, and establish connections with influential individuals in the start-up ecosystem.

Conclusion

Attractive women entrepreneurs possess a unique advantage when seeking start-up funding. Physical attractiveness can positively influence perception, trust, and confidence, ultimately increasing the likelihood of securing financial support. However, it is essential to recognize that attractiveness alone should not be the sole determinant of success. By leveraging strategies, building a strong personal brand, and focusing on merit and substance, attractive women can navigate biases and excel in their entrepreneurial endeavors. Read the full article

[unleashingpotentials]

Unleashing Potential: Empowering Recruiters to Handle Favoritism at Work

Favoritism in the workplace is an insidious issue that can erode employee morale, hinder career growth, and create a toxic work environment. When certain employees are favored over others, it can lead to feelings of unfairness, demotivation, and reduced productivity among the affected workforce. As a result, recruiters and HR professionals play a critical role in addressing and mitigating favoritism. In this blog, we will explore the impact of favoritism, the reasons behind its occurrence, and the strategies that empower recruiters to tackle this issue effectively.

Understanding the Impact of Favoritism

Favoritism occurs when certain employees receive preferential treatment, opportunities, or privileges based on personal relationships rather than merit. The consequences of favoritism in the workplace can be far-reaching:

Reduced Employee Engagement: Employees who feel overlooked due to favoritism are less likely to be engaged in their work, leading to decreased productivity and innovation.

Erosion of Trust: Favoritism erodes trust between employees and management, creating a culture of suspicion and hostility.

High Turnover: Employees who experience favoritism may seek better opportunities elsewhere, resulting in increased turnover and the loss of valuable talent.

Negative Impact on Team Dynamics: Favoritism can create divisions within teams, hindering effective collaboration and teamwork.

Reasons Behind Favoritism

Favoritism can stem from various factors, such as:

Personal Bias: Managers may unknowingly exhibit favoritism due to unconscious biases related to age, gender, ethnicity, or personality.

Relationship Dynamics: Employees who have personal relationships with supervisors or higher-ups may be more likely to receive preferential treatment.

Performance Perception: Managers may favor employees they perceive to be high performers, even if objective performance metrics do not support this perception.

Similarity Bias: Managers may show favoritism towards employees who share similar backgrounds, interests, or experiences.

Empowering Recruiters to Tackle Favoritism

Implement Transparent Hiring Practices: Recruiters should ensure that the hiring process is fair and unbiased, focusing solely on candidates' qualifications and suitability for the role.

Establish Clear Performance Metrics: To minimize favoritism based on subjective perceptions, establish transparent performance metrics that objectively measure employee contributions.

Conduct Regular Performance Reviews: Performance reviews should be conducted consistently and objectively, offering constructive feedback to all employees.

Encourage Open Communication: Create an environment where employees feel comfortable expressing their concerns about favoritism without fear of retribution.

Offer Training on Unconscious Bias: Provide training sessions for managers and employees to raise awareness about unconscious bias and its potential impact on decision-making.

Implement a Whistleblower Policy: Have a clear policy in place for reporting instances of favoritism or any other unethical behavior, protecting employees who come forward.

Monitor Workplace Dynamics: Regularly assess workplace dynamics and employee satisfaction to identify signs of favoritism and address issues promptly.

Conclusion

Favoritism in the workplace is detrimental to employee morale, productivity, and overall company culture. As recruiters and HR professionals, it is crucial to empower ourselves with the knowledge and tools to tackle this issue effectively. By implementing transparent hiring practices, setting clear performance metrics, conducting regular and fair performance reviews, and promoting open communication, we can create a work environment where all employees feel valued and empowered to reach their full potential. Addressing favoritism requires a concerted effort from everyone in the organization, but the results are well worth it: a thriving, inclusive workplace where employees can unleash their full potential and contribute to the success of the company.

SITES WE SUPPORT

Unleashing Potential – Weebly

SOCIAL LINKS

Facebook Twitter LinkedIn