#so take what i say with a grain of salt

[crimsonender]

I'm glad you mention people with metabolic disorders like, as a fat guy with a metabolic disorder it's really frustrating seeing how people dismiss that as a factor in weight gain and maintenance, including doctors :/ like the number of professionals I have been to in my life- let alone regular old ignorant assholes I encounter- who think telling me to eat healthy and exercise more is going to unlock the secret skinny person that they've miraculously discovered hidden inside a lazy fatty... like you of all people should know my thyroid numbers buddy

I also think that like, something got twisted here. If you're fat you shouldn't give up on your body. You should still eat healthy. Even if eating a perfectly healthy and functional diet doesn't lose you a single pound, you should still do it and it's really important to drive that home to people that are overweight because they are at a higher risk of depression and developing eating disorders, many of which can include binge and binge/restrict type disorders. Because fat people also have a harder time moving around, its just easier for fat people not to. But again, you should build up muscle strength and be able to move around comfortably regardless of how much you weigh.

Being fat doesn't mean, necessarily, that your body is swimming in glucose and carbs and salt, but fat people that don't see themselves ever getting "better" might allow for that to happen because of how much they hate the way they look. Thats why "healthy at any size" is an important movement. Its not about saying "yep. Any size is healthy no matter what!" its that you should try to to be healthy no matter what the scale says. Thats *always* a good thing and *always* better for you.

As a personal anecdote there was a time of my life that I had stopped exercising and didn't give a SHIT what I was putting in my body. I had developed a very bad walking gait that was actively injuring my joints. My core muscles were so weak I couldn't sit up in a chair for longer than twenty minutes without the base of my spine throbbing in level 10 stabbing pain that was so bad it made me dizzy. My gut health was awful and every trip to the toilet was miserable and exhausting.

Then, I started eating right. Then I started exercising. I opted to sit at my desk instead of lounging in bed or on my couch, in an upright chair to start building my core up again. I went on walks. I got a physio consultation and found out that I literally had to relearn how to walk, and even now have to make sure I'm not rocking side to side on my ankles and grinding the joint into the socket with each step, every time I go walking. I have not stepped on a scale in four years. I'm honestly not sure if I am comfortable doing that. I don't know how much weight I lost, but I know it's not nothing because pants that were tight on me three years ago now fall off my ass if I don't cinch them with a belt. (That i had to cut new notches into, because when i bought it I could barely buckle it up around my middle, but now the smallest notch was still too loose.)

I'm not really thinking about my size, I'm not thinking about the number. I'm thinking about how good it feels to feel nourished. How much I can appreciate the sweetness of young vegetables because I rarely eat things like snack cakes anymore. I can go on a six hour hike and my legs feel fine. (even if Im a little slow.) I am more in tune with my body and I don't eat until my stomach hurts, feel guilty, and then punish myself for the rest of the week by not eating anything... only to inhale everything in the cupboard at 2am because of how much I've starved myself. Going to the toilet isn't painful and miserable anymore. I am still fat. I probably always will be, thats the phenotype I've been given. But I just am happier, more comfortable, and more capable since I started giving a shit about my body regardless of what size and shape it is.

All that to say that distorting this and the ideas that go into this sort of positive, healthy mindset into "if you just eat better and work out you'll be skinny" no the fuck you won't. the healthy skinny svelte version of me you're making up in your head doesn't exist, even at my peak, even at my most healthy, I'm gonna be chunky and stout and I'm fine with that. And if you're my Doctor, you better get fine with it too.

[theunknowncowboy]

The real crime of Neon White's writing is how blatantly homoerotic White and Yellow are and that I as the player cannot choose to kiss Yellow.

And spoilers

That Neon Yellow gets killed like not even 1/3 of the way into the game. Like fuckin fr? In his dying words he is being gay as shit and you still kill him that early? Fuck off.

[please-help-this-little-lesbian]

The little tidbit about the original human settlers of the Underland “getting along” with the local indigenous people is kind of weird considering part of tuc is a critique of colonialism. Like, Bartholomew of Sandwich and co were colonizers. They are constantly at war with a native species of the Underland (the rats). And obviously you can be nice to the people you're colonizing, but you're still, you know, a colonizer. Idk I just thought it was a weird detail given the themes of the books.

[marxism-leninism-utenaism]

personally i think baldur's gate 3 is pretty mediocre as an eroge, and also as an rpg. it mainly excels as an excuse to have spent that money on that graphics card

[sparkycinnamon]

have you ever wondered why henry and june are (most likely) 10 but they're in middle school. like that isnt possible unless they got moved up a grade

(disclaimer: in my hometown (where i lived for pretty much most of my life so far), there was no middle school and I don't really know if there are middle schools in my current town, so my knowledge on middle schools is limited and mostly comes from google searches.)

From what I know, middle schools in the U.S typically have 11-13 year olds attending, so yeah, it seems kind of weird.

Like, yeah, it's possible that they were moved up a grade for whatever reason, but Henry's grades are implied to be less than stellar in certain moments, so I honestly doubt it.

[wwooyology]

Will sunghoon ever meet his child in How Could You? Or even know that yn was pregnant at all? I've read this weeks ago and remember it again today 😭 it hurts so bad and its so good 💔

hi, noonie!! so if I do decide to continue this, there is a good chance that sunghoon won't find out until it is too late, but I haven't decided on it fully

[oh-katsuki]

im gonna SAY SOMETHING somewhat controversial!!! but it’s my opinion!!! 

when it comes to 2D animated characters in 3D spaces, ufotable runs CIRCLES around mappa. granted mappa is a smaller studio, but that being said.. the way ufotable works it’s 3D rendering of backgrounds and then places 2D characters in it is (imo) leagues better than mappa. that being said... mappa excels way more in ambient lighting than ufotable does. 

neither is bad at what they do at ALL, but my opinion is that ufotable blows mappa out of the water with this new demon slayer season. it works it’s characters into the spaces so well, the colors are fantastic, they’ve got gorgeous textures on their 3D animated subjects and backgrounds so as to not lose the stylistic choices present in the 2D animation. that’s not to say mappa is bad by ANY means. mappa’s animation of both jujutsu kaisen and chainsaw man is NOTABLY good, just in a different way that tends to stick within the 2D animation realm. they’ve got a fantastic handle on their line weight (esp in chainsaw man) that makes the animation feel more “real”, whereas ufotable leans heavily into it’s stylized line work. 

there was really no need for me to compare these two studios since they make different things, but im a big fan of both of them and i am fascinated by thinking about stylistic choices made by studios as part of a pattern. they’re both great in their own right. 

anyway.... ufotable outdid themselves with this new demon slayer season. it’s fucking stunning. i can’t get over how nicely their backgrounds and 3D animated objects work with their 2d animated characters. 

[relivethisdream]

How did u make ur header? It looks cool :3c

I followed along this tutorial on Pinterest! But what I did specifically was make the header layer and the layer around the box the same color as my blog theme, mostly so it looks more seamless. Here it is if you’re curious

[joshneedsspace]

Particulary I hate terfs who are like "oh but they didnt go through the trauma of being a woman so theyre not!" like disrespectfully fuck off with that shit lmao. Trauma gatekeepers over here choosing to define being a women with how much you have to suffer, as if there arent outside and systemic reasons behind why women are put through more to begin with

[graythursday]

‘gotham gazette’ newspaper promo for ‘the penguin’ hints at harvey dent addition to the universe— “is our legal system dented beyond repair?” + riddler crumbs :>

[faunandfloraas]

The Nobleman or 양반 (yangban): The smiling face represents the bluff and composure that an aristocrat is often known to have. The chin is a separate piece from the top of the mask, and the actors can lean forward and back to make the mask smile or frown as needed.

This monk who abandons his doctrines, or 취발이 (chwibari): Chwibari was originally a monk, but he had no intention of joining the monastic order, so he came down to the world and wanders. Represented with a forehead full of wrinkles and spots.

The widow or, 부네 (Punae/bune): represented to be a widow, or a kisaeng ( a woman who sang, danced, or played an instrument to provide entertainment for company at a drinking party), or a mistress of the Yangban. She has a very small mouth, round cheeks and forehead- giving a general look of happiness good-humor.

[telesodalite]

Never getting over Fulcrum being a project manager...

Idk why, but something about that is so funny to me. Not just because the title of "project manager" is inherently kinda funny for a Decepticon, but also because-

1. It's vague sounding and hard to explain irl because it technically exists in multiple fields, like healthcare or manufacturing, which surely translates into canon in some way.

2. In canon, it's simultaneously a really mundane, innocuous sounding job, yet it's also a super morally awful position to reside over depending on the context. (*cough* forced colonization and cyberforming *cough*)

And 3. It solidifies the fact that behind all the surface level militaristic work we get with both the Decepticons and Autobots, there's also Cons and Bots with "normal" jobs in both factions.

Like, sure yeah we get scientists and doctors, engineers and programmers, but usually in big important or warfront positions. (For plot reasons, understandably.) But it's also really funny and interesting to think of those that worked background positions, or minor jobs.

Like an Autobot working in their equivalent of an HR department, or a Decepticon who runs one of their outpost's or starship's kitchens.

Just all the pre-war jobs that didn't just disappear with the war, but instead evolved to exist within the factions.

It's particularly funny with the Decepticons though, because it could be a super mundane job or situation, but because it's them, it has to have an air of ~e v i l~ to it, either legitimately and/or merely for the vibes, like Tarn's "performance reviews".

[elainsgirl]

I dont think people understand what slow burn is. That's why they say "I dont understand Elriel. They are easy, boring, predictable. Elain is boring, she going to bring nothing to her book."

Like im sorry they arent like the baddie fmc who has a dagger around her 24/7 and the emotionless mmc who falls in love with her after like 5 chapters when they are supposed to be "EnEmies tO lOvErs". BOOKTOK HAS ROTTEN YALL BRAINS.

So true.

Its leads me to believe they’re only consuming specific type of books - which is fine. Read whatever you like, how much you’d like BUT it does narrow down your thinking. Take antis saying elriel is “boring” because they don’t have banter. Banter isn’t a requirement for every single couple nor does it suit every single dynamic…you shouldn’t need every single couple to have “banter” to find them interesting or see their potential.

I think some people have lost the ability or struggle with understanding built up foreshadowing. Books nowdays are either standalones or series that follow one couple - but you know they’re endgame from the start. Because thats what elriel is - built up foreshadowing that started from acowar, some may even argue with acomaf. They’re not a couple that entered a relationship straight away - they’re built up to that stage in a nice slowburn where we see their development and them entering each stage one by one.

Its why Gwyn will be the great Saviour of the entire acotar universe - she will be the centre of every single plot, everything important like the troves will go through her first - just like the badass, sword wielding fmc stereotype who leads the story. Its why Elain is now suddenly a sassy, fire mouth that goes off on Lucien bcs ughh she just can’t stand how much she wants him and feels sooooooo frustrated w him constantly teasing her. None of thats canon. None of that even suits the characters but they’re popular micotropes within booktok therefore have to be traits that Gwyn/Elain possess otherwise they’d be plain and boring.

[thelaurenshippen]

finally taking the time to read through the SAG agreement summary and oof, I hope they have an AI town hall soon because...well, there are things to discuss!

so, in case folks are curious, here are my immediate takeaways from the deal as a SAG actor, a SAG producer, and person who is not any kind of expert but spends a lot of time being skeptical of contracts I sign. this is a summation/commentary, not a holistic breakdown of every point, nor even an in-depth discussion of the points I do talk about. and it is, of course, in no way legal advice or voting advice.

this post is already maybe the longest post I've ever written on tumblr (lol) and I feel like I've barely scratched the surface. to be clear, nothing I'm saying here represents how I'm going to vote, how I think other actors should vote, or my be-all-end-all stance on a particular issue. this is me reading through, flagging what concerns me, and asking myself questions. and I'm here to take your questions too! though of course my expertise is limited.

(what?? something I wrote got annoying long?? in my tumblr? it's more likely, etc. huge write-up after the cut)

the good

self-tape stuff: this is one of the more niche/the thing that the general public will find least interesting, but they've put in a lot of provisions to make sure self-tape auditions have limits (# of pages, no stunts, no nudity, doesn't have to be professionally shot, etc.) which is amazing because these types of auditions have gotten out of control since the pandemic. this feels like a great gain

data transparency: in no world did I think the streamers were ever going to agree to any data sharing with either the wga or sag so even though the data is limited, this still feels huge to me.

folks who sing and dance will be paid for both of those things now, which is great

they've added MLK day and Juneteenth as holidays (about time)

a performer cannot be required to translate their own lines

principal performers are required to be given hair and makeup consultation or reimbursed for obtaining their own services - this seems like a small thing, but it's being put in here pretty much entirely because HMU services have generally been appalling when it comes to textured hair/a variety of skin tones. there's also stuff in here about working to hire more diverse HMU artists

it looks like it's going to be easier/provide a path for folks getting IMDb credits even if they're not credited on screen

miscellany: there's a bunch of gains in wage increases, P&H increases, relocation fees, franchise language etc. that all seem good to me, though my limited knowledge on those subjects prevents me from going in depth on them.

this is not important, but it tickled me, there's a term to replace all instances of "telegraph" in the contract with "email & text" which like...why has it taken us thirty years to do that lol.

the "...hm..."

intimacy coordinators: oof. when I watched the press conference SAG gave, I was fucking thrilled when they said that the new agreement required folks to hire intimacy coordinators for nudity and simulated sex scenes. that was almost reason enough for me to vote for it tbh - not requiring it is the exact reason I voted no on our last contract. however, reading the contract summary now, the exact language is: "Producer must use best efforts to engage an Intimacy Coordinator for scenes involving nudity or simulated sex and will consider in good faith any request by a performer to engage an Intimacy Coordinator for other scenes. Producer shall not retaliate against a performer for requesting an Intimacy Coordinator." this....sucks. "best efforts" and "good faith" are not the same as "required". IMO, an intimacy coordinator is the same thing as having a stunt coordinator or, like, any number of health and safety requirements. OSHA doesn't say you must "in good faith" put your "best effort" to providing fire exits. it's great that performers can request coordinators for any kind of scene, and this is still the strongest language we've ever had in a contract but....c'mon guys.

residuals: look, I can't speak to these new terms in any concrete way. there are increases, there are bonuses for streaming success, there's a whole thing about a fund regarding those successes that I need explained to me more in depth, but overall, it looks like we made some in-roads here. as someone who employs actors under digital distribution contracts that has no residuals (podcasts), I know how genuinely cumbersome the unholy trifecta of "views-success-profit" can be (as in views do not equal success, success does not equal profit, etc.). I also have no sympathy when the majority of companies dealing with that cumbersome trifecta are massive media conglomerates. anyway, long story short, idk if this is good enough, I'm hoping to attend the next info meeting sag has.

the bad

the new hair/makeup provisions are explicitly for principal actors. while I hope it leads to better, more inclusive HMU services all around I haaaate that this implies supporting or background actors (who oftentimes also have to sit in HMU) don't deserve the consideration. (then again, background actors are usually required to do their own HMU/bring their own costumes, but for productions where that's not the case, the same HMU provisions should apply IMO)

as with every contract, there's language that could be stronger, clarity that needs to exist, and important things missing - but this isn't the final contract and I'm not a lawyer, so I'm gonna leave that stuff to the experts.

but, "lauren", you say, "what about all the AI stuff? where does that go?" well, reader, I was planning on including that in the above but it's the hot-button issue right now and I think it's wickedly complicated, so I wanted to break it down separately, after I had a chance to point out all the good-bad-in-between stuff that's not getting talked about.

a note: in my career, I've learned there's two big things to keep in mind when reading a contract you might sign:

what is the worst case interpretation of this language (thank you to my lawyer, prince among men, for teaching me how to do this in practice (that said, anything I say here is not legal advice, he'd also want me to say that lol))

what are you willing to lose/compromise on/what are the limits of your pragmatism? contracts are not about a company giving you everything you want out of the goodness of their heart - it is always a compromise. pragmatism has to be a part of the equation.

so, with that said, I'm going to play a little devil's advocate here, and a) try to find the good/the pragmatic and b) catastrophize the worst case scenario. but first, it might be handy to look at this SAG infographic for some basic definitions. let's go.

the AI good

a ton of stuff here requires consent. that is not a small thing, and the consent continues even after your death (whether it was a yes or no; though this can be complicated by your estate/your union)

the language does establish that the consent must be a separate signing from the employment contract, even if its in the contract, which is great (but more on that below - timing matters)

actors often do get paid for use of their digital replicas, though it's different based on the use/type of replica.

the actor must be provided with a "reasonably specific description of the intended use". this language is vaguer than I would like, because it allows producers to decide what "reasonably specific" and "intended" means - there's always going to be some vagueness when it comes to this specific thing, but a good start would be for producers to require not blanket consent, but conditional consent for each significant use of digital replicas.

if the replicas are being used in other mediums, that must also be consented to, thank god.

replicas cannot be used in place of background actor counts on a given day - if I'm understanding this correctly, this means a production can't just have a bunch of fake background actors by themselves, they have to engage real people up to a certain number first (which in this new contract is 25 for TV and 85 for movies). we're already filling in background with digital people or copy-pasting of the same crowd over and over and have been doing so since at least the late 90s, so it's good we're continuing to put up boundaries around that.

the AI "...hm..."

it's unclear (to me) when an actor can be asked to consent. IMO, everything is meaningless if the consent is happening as part of regular contract negotiations. these things have to happen when - and only when - the actor has already been engaged in a role and feels empowered to say no

the use of independently created replicas (replicas pulled from existing footage, not created by the actor) being allowed without consent under first amendment reasoning - this is obviously concerning a lot of people bc first amendment arguments are so broad. that said, there's a pragmatism part of me that understands this is already happening/has been happening for a while and used in ways I think are perfectly fine - I was just watching the new episode of For All Mankind (one of the best TV shows right now!) and it's an alternate history, which meant that in the opening scenes of this season they had some bonkers good deep fakes of Al Gore saying stuff he never said. I think that's okay to do in a fiction show that imagines a different US history! "but Lauren", you might be saying, "Al Gore isn't a member of SAG!" are you sure? are you positive? because I'm pretty certain he is - he was in several episodes of 30 Rock, way more people are in SAG than you think (every NPR reporter for instance), and the two worst presidents we've had in the last 50 years (yes, those ones), are both definitely members of SAG (even if one is dead). now, the other side of this is that public figures like politicians are under a different social contract than actors, and if they wanted to sue, they could, unlike the average SAG actor who might have their image abused. this is why this is in the "hm" column - deep fakes and parody/satire/commentary use of replicas is already here and there's always going to be a 1st amendment argument to make, so we need to figure out how best to limit those and protect the most vulnerable.

alteration: with this language, a project can digitally alter without consent if the script and performance stays "substantially" the same. again, this language is too mealy-mouthed. I don't know that I have a huge problem with a line of dialogue getting replaced with a digital version of that actors voice if, for instance, a word was mispronounced, or wind garbled the sound or whatever - yes, it would eliminate the need for ADR, but if we put some limit on it like..."if there are more than 5 lines in a given episode/movie that require digital alteration in the service of clarity, the actor must be engaged for an ADR session or paid for the digital replacement" then I could see this being workable. I'm also personally okay with things like costumes being digitally altered but, again, we need limitations on that. digital altering cannot replace the art of costuming but, for instance, if a costume needs to be altered to include a hate symbol or something, I think that's fine (example: I have friends who worked at the VFX house for an alternate history TV show that involved a lot of Nazi costuming and set design - a huge part of that VFX house's job was to put swastikas in places, rather than props making nazi flags. I'm okay with that!) but again, these fringe cases do not a compelling arugment make, and this contract language can be interpreted too broadly for my comfort! like everything else in this "hm" category, I need to see the final contract language to decide.

the AI bad

there's a bunch of circumstances in which actors don't get paid for creating their replica/use of it and those circumstances are too broad for my taste.

synthetic performers - this is just awful. no. no, we should not be allowing AI to generate entire actors. just............no. there's some language about the producers having to talk to the union if the synthetic performer is "used in place of a performer who would have been engaged under this Agreement in a human role" but this doesn't apply to non-human characters so....wouldn't that be all roles?? leaving the producers room to be like "this role has to be synthetic, we never would've cast a human!" is bullshit. also, even if we're having AI create a magical talking unicorn whole cloth (which, like, also no, we have artists for this), that unicorn still needs to be voiced by a human person. this whole section is a disaster.

the exceptions to consent for digital alteration are bad-bad. I talked about the potential ADR replacement above and that has a whole host of issues with it that I didn't even get into, but I can see the argument. the rest are very troubling:

there is an exception under "any circumstance when dubbing or use of a double is permitted under the Codified Basic Agreement or Television Agreement" - okay, so does this mean we can replace dubbing artists and stunt performers entirely? this section is about digital alteration, but who's to say alteration couldn't turn an actor broadly miming a fight into an entirely digital, expertly performed fight that usually a stunt double would have done? with AI translation technology, does this mean we're replacing VO artists for dubs entirely? bad!

similarly, "Adjusting lip and/or other facial or body movement and/or the voice of the performer to a foreign language, or for purposes of changes to dialogue or photography necessary for license or sale to a particular market" - Justine Bateman has a great twitter thread on the terrible puppetry potential of this but I want to draw attention to the particular market bit - we all know that selling to china is such a huge part of studios' strategies that they'll remove entire scenes or lines around queer stuff. to me, this clause makes all of that so much easier. I know the argument here is going to be "we can replace swear words and license it for kids!" which.......sure? fine? but, uh, we already have ways to deal with that? and the potential for abuse here is terrifying to me. with all the digital alteration stuff too, there's just so much icky implication for the beauty/body standard to get so much worse.

if a background actor’s digital replica is used in the role of a principal performer, they'll be paid as if they actually performed the days for that role, which, sure, but uhhhh why are we saying it's okay for a digital replica of a background actor to suddenly be a leading role!?!?! I can't think of anything more demoralizing than going to set to act in background (a job I've done! an important job! a fun job a lot of the time! but creatively limited) and then getting a much bigger role (the dream!) and.....not being able to, you know, act that role or be in scenes with other principal actors or do the thing that you've dedicated your life to doing. nightmare stuff.

woof. there's so much more to say but I'm going to leave it there. these are the concerns I'm going to go into SAG's meetings with, and the concerns I'll be considering as I decide how to vote. I know there are things I didn't address and very possibly things I misinterpreted or misrepresented - if you're an actor, I highly recommend a) reading that Justine Bateman thread and b) attending SAG's meetings to ask questions and express your concerns. and I'd love to hear what y'all think! my ask box is open.

[5-pp-man]

as it started becoming clear who he was in a relationship with i was like "oh great. another student teacher thing" but this is like. the first time in an anime that I've seen them explicitly call out the teacher for being a pedo and putting it in a negative light. damn.

[leviathans-watching]

how do you feel about om! ending?

lololol frankly i think it should have ended a long time ago...

its obvious that i haven't really interacted with obey me in a long time and honestly it's because i didn't care for where the story went. not only do i not like nightbringer and thought it was a poor choice from the beginning, i also think the main story didn't need as many seasons as it got, especially because the characters got assassinated and flanderized, story lines were messy, dropped, or irrelevant, and overall, it was just never as interesting as the original story arc.

it's easy to point out flaws in each season, including season one, but at least it had heart and intention. season two has merit to me simply because i think the human realm part was interesting, but overall, i think it peaked in the original 20 lessons and just kind of tapered off from there. there are some exceptions where things got interesting again, like the addition of thirteen, mephisto, and raphael, but overall, i much preferred the limited story we were originally given.

i think also the limited gameplay mechanics really harmed the game in the long run (hence why they kept adding things and even made completely new ones in nightbringer), but as an og player (seriously, og, i began playing it the month it was released) it got boring. another part of being an og is that it was frustrating watching the devs get greedy especially as quality plateaued (or even went down) and players concerns (like the racism and whitewashing) weren't addressed well

additionally, as the story went on, i lost interest in the characters because they weren't developed in any meaningful way. i've stated before that the characters i write for are almost separate entities from the canon ones and that's because i based them off of the original season one versions and they've changed soooo much since then, especially considering nightbringer (but also i didn't play nightbringer so i could totally be talking out of my ass but i feel like the premise itself inherently changes the characters since it's a different version of the ones we know and love from the og game)

it may seem like i'm being a little harsh, and honestly i am since i do have a genuine love for the game even if a lot of my passion has faded, but i'm very very bitter about where the game went and greatly mourn what we could have gotten if things were different. i still am fond of the original arc and characters but so much time has passed since then and so much has changed with the game and the fandom that i don't think i'll ever love it like i used to. anyway rant over, mammon is the loml, and it's touching to see so many current fans mourn the game because i love that people still love it and see so much magic in it <3

(obligatory if you like the later seasons/nightbringer/where the story went/etc all the power to you it just wasn't my cup of tea in the end)