#the comment section still is bigoted though now in a different way

[anhed-nia]

PS I almost saw IN A VIOLENT NATURE for the first time at an open air screening on Governor's Island, a popular NYC destination for outdoor entertainment and close-to-home glamping. I thought that was a great idea, but ultimately I skipped it because I wanted to see the film for the first time without the light pollution and ambient noise. They made this cool graphic for it, though...which immediately triggered comments section controversy about AI.

The social media person replied that the image was not AI-generated; though the "scene" does not take place in the movie, it is a photograph of a person wearing the screen costume, just doing something fun on Governor's Island to advertise their cool event. No matter what your general feelings are about AI in commercial art, we can probably all agree that it sucks that we have to have these onerous arguments about everything now.

For me, and I think for anyone who enjoys visual art, the medium matters--not because of some imaginary hierarchy of importance, but because different media have different effects, traditions, and implications. And because, with respect to AI, the statement "This really happened!" and the question "Wouldn't it be cool IF this really happened?" inspire very different responses. My personal, casual feeling is that AI art is OK as long as it is easily identifiable as such; like I've seen some really fun AI images whose particular kind of outrageousness makes appropriate use of that specific medium. I'm a "right tool, right job" person, I think some things should be paintings and some things should be photos, some things should be stage plays and some things should be movies. You should carefully choose your medium and exploit the unique qualities of that medium based on exactly what you're trying to accomplish. For this reason I think that AI images that are just trying to fake the effects of i.e. painting or photography kind of suck. And related to that I object to living in a world where we all just have to throw up our hands and say "Oh well, there's no way to know anymore whether something is physically-real or whether it's just a hypothetical representation of something that maybe-could-be real, I guess the only thing we can do is not give a shit about where anything comes from or how it got here and what that all means." For me, "There's no way to ever know anything for sure so who fucking cares" is not an acceptable default setting. (And I realize this is becoming the central issue of our day due to all kinds internet-enabled misinformation and I'm treading on the hem of a way bigger topic here, but never mind all that now...)

But still, I find myself just as annoyed with fakery as I am with people who instantly declare something to be fake. Frankly I think those guys are just scared of being fooled and so they're trying to preserve their own sense of superiority by declaring everything to be fake before they have any evidence one way or the other. This is a very different thing in its consequences, I know, but some of these guys sound just like the bigots who go around trying to clock random strangers as trans; they always have these ridiculous lists of "evidence" that turn out to be just as applicable to afab and amab people as they are to people who have transitioned. It's all roughly the same flavor of defensiveness from people who are scared of being tricked into believing or feeling something that will turn out to be a fraud. And I can sympathize with that to some degree, I don't wanna be tricked into believing in, for instance, awesome-looking photo shoots that never happened; like if you said it wouldn't matter to you if the photos Thierry Mugler shot on top of the Chrysler Building turned out to be digital fakes, then I would happily call you a liar. But what I really hate more than anything right now is this immediate effect where as soon as anything cool-looking appears online, we all have to have these contentious arguments where insecure jerks pound their chests about how un-foolable they are...and sometimes it turns out that the "AI art" is real and so their claims to amazing powers of perception are a big embarrassment. I guess my conclusion is that if everyone agreed to make AI imagery clearly identifiable in some way, then we could all stop having our good time spoiled by this paranoid bickering that has become the prerequisite for enjoying anything. But that's probably an impossible dream.

[magicmountainenjoyer]

This says a lot of what’s been going through my mind here, but I’ll also be adding some of my own stuff here if that’s alright, specifically extrapolating on the “content creators are human. We should treat them as such” section.

I definitely don’t think Skizz is specifically a transphobe, but I also don’t think he’s thought about it much. I don’t think he’s had to think about things much.

He’s a cishet white man in America who managed to work his way up to the middle class. He spent decades in the corporate world and, from what I’ve gathered from him talking about his job, a big part of his role at the company he worked for was a social one. Being a manager means you have to mediate conflicts and enforce avoidance of “divisive” topics, regardless of whether or not those topics should be divisive in the first place. Between this and the fact that he's a very late gen Xer, a generation that firmly pushed the idea that silence and neutrality were necessary to keep the peace and that peace should be kept at all cost, I'm really not surprised he worded his response the way he did, both on the stream and in his comment.

He's in a group that hasn't directly faced what intolerance can do. He hasn't been forced to consider what might be growing in silence under his nose. He's still under the impression that a motto of "live and let live" is enough while not understanding that one of the sides in the matter wants the other to cease to exist just because they're different. He mistakenly believes that keeping quiet and telling others to do the same is the way to keep everyone happy.

I don't think this makes him a bad person. I think it makes him someone who hasn't had to consider his community in this way before. I think it makes him someone who has had a level of innate privilege his entire life just because he exists in a way that society has deemed correct. He doesn't understand that there's genuine danger for queer people in the world, especially right now, and that being silent on that threat is being complicit with it. Because he's never had to really consider it.

I don't think Skizz is a bad person in the slightest. I do believe him when he wrote in his comment that he believes in trans rights. I don't think he's necessarily transphobic or bigoted in his approach. But I do think that he needs to reconsider his approach and decide something for himself.

He needs to know what his priority is. Will he prioritize his queer audience, or will he prioritize not rocking the boat. Will he decide to cater to the loud minority that gets uncomfortable when you firmly declare that human beings deserve rights and respect, or will he decide to make an attempt to create and foster an environment that supports the existence of those different from themselves.

Whatever choices he makes will take time, and we as an audience have to understand that. He needs to make a choice, and those aren't quick, especially when content creation is his full time career now.

I'm in no way trying to defend his stance or response or anything, but I don't think unintentionally saying or doing something bad makes you a bad person or irredeemable in that sense. What matters most is how you react to it and whether or not you're willing to learn and grow. That's where Skizz is right now.

As a trans member of the audience, I was watching the stream live when that donation message came through, and while I dislike the way the anonymous donor phrased it, hearing Skizz's response hurt. Call me parasocial, you'd be right, but Impulse and Skizz filled a void for me because I did not have a great childhood and I had an even worse father figure, so hearing him call the existence of people like me political and divisive hurt. It hurt so much. And even though it hurts I also can't stop myself from thinking about it, from checking his tag on tumblr, from reading comments on posts, reading the comments on the VOD in question.

I tried watching the phasmobros stream earlier because I still love his content, because I still love Impulse's content, but it still hurt. The REPO stream didn't feel much better, either.

I really hope Skizz learns not to conflate silence with peace.

Actually, I'm still going.

TL;DR

Two days is nothing in real life time.

Content creators are human. We should treat them as such.

Equating morality to the content people consume is not a "one-size-fits-all" strategy.

This is in no way equivalent to what happened with Iskall.

Do I agree with Skizz having mods that support MAGA? No, not at all. I think he deserves the benefit of the doubt, at the very least.

Two days is nothing in real life time.

I think people are jumping the gun with the current information we have. I think Skizz hasn't had the chance to really do anything yet. Hell, I don't think ANY of the Hermits have had the chance to do anything yet, let alone think. I feel like we've been spoiled with in-real time updates. I don't think it's fair to expect Skizz, or anyone for that matter, to reply or act right this second or else.

Content creators are human. We should treat them as such.

TL;DR: This man has just bumped headfirst into the Paradox of Tolerance. Give him a second.

Generally the definition of tolerance has been maintaining a neutral opinion. This was especially the case with Gen X/Millennials. We have different opinions and we work together anyway. I probably don't have to inform you that's much harder to do in the present, if I'm putting it lightly.

I don't think Skizz is transphobic. I don't think he looked at his mods and decided to hire two of them because they're MAGA. Don't get me wrong; I am not defending having mods that are MAGA. I think that five years ago, he needed people to moderate his chat and he thought those mods did fine. This circles back to the definition of tolerance.

Right now, Skizz is facing the paradox of tolerance. It's up to him what he does with it. And honestly, this might be the first time he's having to think about this. He's a white cis man, which means he occupies a position of incredible privilege (that is not a moral judgment).

And you know what? Trans rights are divisive and the fact they're divisive sucks. I'm saying this as a trans person. You post something about trans rights and you have people fighting on your post in 0.2 seconds with increasing levels of hostility. I don't blame anyone for not knowing how to deal with that on livestream, or wanting to maintain neutrality, as much as it disappoints me.

In the wider scheme of things, Skizz is new to being a full-time content creator. He's probably never dealt with a situation like this before.

I feel like people were quick to assume malice or hostility. So I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt and I hope other people are, too. I also don't think this is the cardinal sin that some people are treating it as.

Equating morality to the content people consume is not a "one-size-fits-all" strategy.

I'm already seeing posts encouraging people to boycott his content and heavily implying that someone is a bad person if they don't. You've probably heard of the situation with J.K. Rowling. The reason people are calling for a complete boycott is because any support or money actively enables her transphobic actions and platform.

Separating content from content creator is complicated. I acknowledge that. But applying the morality = content consumption runs the danger of turning into "I am a good person because I only consume pure content™ and this person is bad because they consume the bad content." I don't think that's the way we should be judging people.

This is in no way equivalent to what happened with Iskall.

If this situation is a 10, then what happened with Iskall is a 120. Iskall's situation had tangible victims and was happening over an extended period of time.

Do I agree with Skizz having mods that support MAGA? No, not at all. I think he deserves the benefit of the doubt, at the very least.

[askaceattorney]

These are letters regarding the situation that recently transpired. After this, we will no longer be answering any letters regarding politics. All of us agree that this blog needs to strictly stay out of politics. In truth, politics should never have been the center of this blog. After this, any letter regarding politics or the situation will be deleted.

This is a blog that focuses on answering letters to Ace Attorney canon characters. It does not discriminate anyone or any mod based on race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, politics, etc. and such actions are not tolerated. If you believe one of our mods is discriminating for whatever reason, show solid evidence and we will handle this privately. A support for a former or current president of a country is not proof of discrimination and neither are political memes posted on a personal account.

(More Politics Ahead)

Dear rogertheegg,

Co-Mod: Nope. Everyone’s welcome here, regardless of political leanings.  I’m afraid I’m as clueless as you are about what exactly happened with the two former Mods (they didn’t even say anything to me about it), but it’s all water under the bridge as far as I’m concerned.

Mod Edgeworth: Absolutely not! I have never tolerated political discrimination. You are allowed to believe whatever politics you want.

Dear kunaiman,

Co-Mod: High five.

Mod Edgeworth: Thank you very much for your support.

Dear Mistakes,

Mod Edgeworth: I’m not going to go into anything else regarding my politics, but I will state my reason for outing myself: I’m doing this for Co-Mod.  I do consider him a friend of sorts and I do not wish for him to have to suffer this blowback alone. So, if you want to state your grievances, go ahead.

Know this though, I am still the same mod you have met and have never hidden my character from any of you. My politics do not define my character and neither does Co-Mod’s politics define his character. The same goes for anyone else. I’m just someone that leans Conservative and voted for Trump. If that makes me a bad person, even if I do stand against any discrimination, then I will gladly accept it.

Co-Mod: So, here’s the truth about me, Donald Trump, the MAGA Committee, etc. (and this is from the horse’s mouth, so anyone who says otherwise is lying) -- I’ve never been a huge fan of the guy, but I supported the good things he did and wanted to do during his presidency -- creating jobs, draining the political swamp, promoting patriotism, and so on -- and for that, I feel no shame.  I also wished he could’ve kept his big mouth shut about a lot of things, but overall, I saw him as someone who stood up for people who’d been largely ignored before he came along -- namely, middle class Americans. If you see him and his presidency differently, I won’t hold anything against you for it, so I respectfully ask that you do the same for me.

Dear Anonymous,

Mod Edgeworth: Don’t worry, I know who you are. You maybe under anonymous, but when we receive your letter, it isn’t anonymous lol. What we do is place your letter in photoshop and get rid of all your identity. Thank you for your support and I agree.

This blog will continue, even if it’s under a very few of us. I will allow everyone to display their grievances in the comment section. They have just as much right as Co-Mod and I do.

If there’s anyone I wish for you to support, it’s Co-Mod. He’s the one being the most effected by all of this. I don’t believe politics should have been involved or that we should have to justify why we believe in our politics. Neither have to do with our love for Ace Attorney.

Dear I’m still surprised,

Mod Edgeworth: I’m guessing this is for Co-Mod, because it doesn’t seem like you’ve read my own defense. I literally stated that both Co-Mod and I support LGBT and that the letters deleted because of shipping had nothing to do with any political beliefs. Beyond what I stated in my defense (despite what Co-Mod states below), I won’t say anything more. Non of us have to justify why we support a former president. I have my reasons just like anyone else. It doesn’t make me a terrible person and I will forever stand for everyone’s rights to believe whatever politics they believe.

Co-Mod: It’s a shame I have to say this on an Ace Attorney blog of all places, but where is your proof that I or anyone on my side of the aisle takes any enjoyment in seeing anyone dead or oppressed, whether in a minority or otherwise?  I can only assume you’ve been listening to some skewed sources, or that there’s something huge I’m missing, because I’ve yet to see any right-wing groups reach that level of hatred.  (And if you know of any, please fill me in.  I mean that honestly.)

As for why I left same-sex attraction out of this blog, it’s simply because I see it as a divisive topic rather than a simply controversial one, (i.e. the death penalty, game piracy, etc.).  I’ve also proven several times that I’m not very good at addressing it without people getting rubbed the wrong way, so I decided to play it safe and not discuss it at all.  I’m happy to talk about it anywhere else, but a blog about Ace Attorney didn’t seem like the right place for it to me.  On top of that, there are plenty of blogs about peoples’ same-sex ships all over Tumblr, so why complain about this one?  If there’s a rule stating that Ace Attorney-themed Tumblr blogs are required to include those ships, I sure haven’t heard it.

I’ll admit this much -- like Phoenix, it’s something I can’t claim to understand, so maybe I still have some learning to do about it, but if I’m going to be accused of bigotry, I’d like to see some solid evidence of it.  Assumptions don’t count in my book.

Dear Dailystir,

Mod Edgeworth: Thank you. I’m not going to address anymore than I already have. I will not and refuse to mention anything else on my politics. Just like how you said, I am more at the center in the political world. I lean more Conservative, but I am Independent. I consider both Republicans and Democrats to be two different wings from the same bird.

I’m also glad you do not consider being a Trump supporter to be in the same basket as being a racist, bigot or any of that. These days, I can declare myself as a supporter of Andrew Jackson (I’m not btw) and not be against Natives, even though he was the reason for the mass genocide of thousands of Native Americans. I can openly support Martain Luther King, yet not be considered homophobic, even though he was against LGBT. I can consider myself a Bill Clinton supporter and not support raping women, even though that’s what he did in office. Yet, the moment I declare myself a Trump supporter, I’m automatically Anti LGBT, a bigot, a sexist, a racist and a phobe of some sort, because Trump supposedly is? What a world we live in! I can’t remember the last time supporting a political figure or celebrity made you a terrible person.

As for Mod Vera and Mod Maya, I still wish they could’ve said something to me or Co-Mod, if they truly felt uncomfortable. I’m still willing to talk to either of them and hear them out. I don’t blame them for doing what they did. I don’t know them or what life they live in. I have talked to someone, who had faced bigotry  and hate from Trump supporters in their area to the point of fear. I’ve even seen a Trump supporter bully an Anti Trump Supporter and I ended up reporting the bully, then calling them out for their behavior. I can say from experience that when you face real discrimination, it puts you in a state of fear to never express yourself or your identity. My family faced that and so did I. It’s the reason I’ve never revealed my race, gender or sexual orientation and can understand where Mod Maya and Mod Vera are coming from.

I think the real takeaway is to not judge anyone based on their politics, but also to not hate anyone who does. You will find bigotry on any side of the political spectrum from any group. To say there is none on any side is spouting ignorance.

Dear Anonymous,

Mod Edgeworth: It is sad, though even if I do understand where Mod Vera and Mod Maya are coming from, I still can’t justify them not talking to either of us first. They never spoke to either of us and assumed the worst out of both of us. They never asked us anything or mentioned their concerns. I’m certain, even now, they’re still assuming things.

Had they mentioned their grievances, I would have been willing to talk with them and work things out, but we were never given that chance. It kinda hurts, because they said they understood when I told them I was staying out of politics and was willing to admit that I supported Trump and am an Independent Conservative. Then, they pull the rug from under us and claim we are against ethnic minorities and LGBT. That’s why I wish they could’ve said something.

I’m still willing to talk to either of them, but I doubt they’ll want to hear from me. No amount of context is going to change that. If it did, they would’ve talked to me about it before leaving.

-The Mods

P. S. Co-Mod: As ugly as this can of worms is, it’s been a fun practice in defending my beliefs and decisions.  Never underestimate that skill, everyone.

Mod Edgeworth: I still can’t believe this was brought out at all. I’m so sick of politics!

[cherrytea556]

Since when did I ever claim to not watch his content? Actually the first claim I made was that I used to watch his content. Multiple times. And I did tell you about reaching out to TBYS from the start. How can you still drag out this lie?

Allegations I brought up are: his anti feminism which you could easily find if you scroll through his channel. If you want my experience with TBYS, it would have to be on Tumblr messages. I don't intend on releases it publicly cuz it's kinda a waste of my time but if your curious of this fun little fact about me then I won't hesitate in bringing it in.

With making tbys fans look bad, I mean....their kinda doing that to themselves. When I say TBYS fans, I don't mean you, i mean those who I have seen in the comments section of his videos. Those people particularly spout misogynistic bullshit about women and flood in the comments if anyone criticises him (like a commenter comparing a video criticism TBYS to burning Jesus in the cross. Yes, this comment is real) It's nothing new to TBYS though cuz the red pill community is always filled with these types of people. If you don't believe me, look at the comments during his anti feminist years complaining about 'the modern woman' and I'm sure you'll find it.

That quote of 'tbys fans' was for his fans in general, I never denied it. I just clarified that it wasn't towards you specifically because of the context of our argument.

All this about TBYS not being transphobic and your still not addressing the screenshot right there that basically says that he views trans people as child predators. If tbys only thinks that theres trans people who grooms kids, why tf is he equating child predators and trans people to begin with? It's really not hard to comprehend. Have you ever heard of the lgb alliance? That's an group of gay people who don't want to associate themselves with the T. Your agruement of tbys not being transphobic because he doesnt hate gay people is nothing when theirs real gay people who don't even like trans people and don't want them to be in the community.

Colleen and adam are a groomer and victim. Illy and TBYS are right wing youtuber vs animator. Illy at worst is an immature person who can't handle certain situations properly (flagging someone which can do damage) thats not comparable to an actual predator who caused truama to their victim.

The difference between left wing and right wing though is that left wing aren't bigots. Since his content is largely chunked with anti feminism, did you listen to those videos without actually thinking about them? Cuz those don't present much evidence to his claims either. It's just assumptions. Most wildest assumption was his claims of a woman in the steve harvey show that she abuses her dog just because she said that her and her dog never fought with each other. Or how a woman is abusive (in another steve harvey show) because she asked her partner who he was talking to. The evidence and resources i can remember he tries bringing in that era was him trying to speculate of a youtuber, rachel oates, of being sexually assaulted. In a video where it was a response to her critiques of the red pill. I don't think I need to tell you how inappropriate that is. Did he acknowledge any of those?

You want proof, then message me about it on tumblr. I'm not gonna continue wasting time doing this tumblr drama thing just because you find it necessary. I can clearly tell your younger than me based on the way your handling this, hell this might have been something I would've done had I been a fan of tbys and had tumblr earlier. Don't try to talk to me about reaching out to tbys when you didn't see my conversation with him cuz have you read them, maybe you'll see. Actually, why didn't you just message me on tumblr instead of this reblog? You have the option now to so why not? If you wanna continue this, message me instead where I can bring in my resources.

Sure, a youtuber with a big platform equating trans people with child predators isn't gonna cause any harm, please give me a break. You clearly underestimate how social media influences people and that's gonna be something for you to figure out yourself as you get older. There's a lot of things for you to figure out yourself as you get older, I know i have.

Anyways, just message me on tumblr or otherwise, I'm done.

Are people really defending this run-of-the-mill anti-woke YouTuber just because Illymation wanted him reported for his reaction video to ‘Perks of Being the Fat Kid’??

[letteredlettered]

Do you have any tips for coping with people making problematic comments on things you have written? I'm currently writing a fic that explores communication problems & societal gender narratives. In this context, the main (cis/het) couple have a nasty fight & there is clear fault on both sides. I've had several people attack the female character in the comment section, saying that she is a complete bitch/piece of shit & her husband should leave her - I'm finding it quite upsetting.

First of all, I’m so sorry this is happening to you. It’s painful to receive comments that aren’t thoughtful about your work or you and that are hateful toward a character that you love and in some way is a part of you.

I do think sometimes people don’t mean to be hateful with comments like this. They’re trying to show that they’re invested. Also, sometimes people read fanfic to reinforce feelings they already have about canon, and they’re not really interested in fics that deviate. Sometimes people don’t even seem to notice that it deviates, which took me a long time to understand. Apparently, so many people are used to reading fics in which Draco Malfoy is a pure flower and Harry Potter is a jerk that they assume that’s the fic I’m writing, when as I’ve mentioned elsewhere, I was pretty sure we were all starting on the premise that Draco Malfoy was a bigoted bully who was a party to genocide and Harry Potter is a brave and generous savior.

Knowing that people aren’t really understanding my story or considering what it’s actually trying to say--that they’re just kind of repeating the shipper or fanon or headcanon feelings they want all fics to have--isn’t actually comforting. After all, they’re not thinking about my story. But at the same time, it is somewhat comforting to me to realize that my story probably doesn’t suggest that Draco Malfoy is a pure flower, that they’re bringing that from somewhere else, and that even though they’ve decided to ignore nuance in my story, that doesn’t change what my story is.

So, honestly, my response to these kind of comments is usually to just ignore them. But there are other options:

1) Delete. There is absolutely nothing wrong with deleting a comment.

2) Reply. I got a comment not too long ago that to me was the complete opposite of what I was trying to write about. I have to say it horrified me. My reply went something like, “I’m so glad you’re enjoying this story, and thanks for your comment. I must say I’m very sorry this is the impression you received, as I was trying to convey the exact opposite. As someone who deeply cares about [X], its makes me sad that you believe this story [bashes X]. However, I also deeply believe that readers should feel free to have their own interpretations, and in that sense, what you get from the story is just as valid as what I intended. Thank you again for reading.” The commenter clarified that they didn’t exactly hate X and had meant something a little different, which was a little comforting (as I gotta say, the initial comment was SHOCKING to me), though I’m honestly still disturbed about it.

My reply was very polite (I hope), but it’s also okay to just tell someone how you feel--that you’re frustrated/hurt/upset by their comment. It really depends on whether saying that will make you feel better, and whether you’re willing to deal with that person getting angry or there being a confrontation in your comments. Confrontations are okay. Expressing yourself is good. But if it makes you anxious or upset, it’s also okay to avoid it in this instance. The stakes for honesty are low here--the only thing to be gained by it is making yourself feel better, so if just unloading frustration or rage would make you feel better, eh--go ahead. If it won’t, don’t. (If it’s someone you know and must deal with repeatedly, the stakes for honesty are much higher.)

3) Ignore, but formulate a reply. Sometimes the point of expressing all your feelings isn’t for the sake of honesty--it isn’t so the other person now knows The Truth. Sometimes expressing yourself is important so you can understand how you feel, face it, let yourself feel it, and move through those emotions. Sometimes I find it comforting to just let all my feelings out in a reply without posting the reply. When I express my anger and frustration in a reply, I often feel better by the time I finish the reply. I feel no need to release that anger and frustration onto someone else, because I’ve already released it within myself. Then I just erase my reply and basically forget about the comment.

4) Ignore, but talk to trusted friends. Sometimes a comment is so frustrating or upsetting that I feel kind of at a loss. By sharing the comment with people I know and trust, I can a) once again, express my feelings and allow myself to deal with them, b) receive the comfort and reassurance of my friends, who are going to say nice things about me and my story regardless, c) avoid confrontation and upset with a stranger whose opinion I don’t particularly care about either way.

What I would advise against when it comes to this is mentioning the comment to people you don’t know/trust, which includes semi-public spaces like tumblr/twitter/discord/instagram/etc. This, to me, is the absolute wrong thing to do and can be very ugly and unkind. Sure, you get to express yourself and receive the support of your friends, but there’s always the possibility that people will go troll that commenter or make life difficult for them.

The exception, I would say, is if the offensive comment is offensive in a way that deserves public attention. I personally believe that it can be fine to call public attention to things like racist and misogynist slurs or comments inciting violence towards real people etc. In those cases, I believe that social condemnation can actually be useful, though personally I still believe some care should be taken in how one approaches such a situation.

Anyway, this was a long response, but I’m sorry again you’re dealing with this, and good luck on your story! It sounds like a good fic. <3

[afroggyfrog]

SuperStraight

A brand new sexuality that is trending on twitter and being super popular.

Definition:

A superstraight person is someone attracted to members of the opposite gender who are not transexual.

This was created as a response to people who sometimes say things like this:

(source:BBC)

Let’s give a name to the people who insist that not being attracted to trans people makes you transphobic, since I’m not about to describe them every time i wanna bring them up, I’ll call them trans-incels because just like incels they resent people for not wanting to have sex with them.

It’s worth it to remember that trans-incels aren’t representative of all trans people. or even of a majority of them, if i were to bet, they are about as popular as actual incels.

In all the comment sections I checked the anti trans-incel side was a clear majority, and having searched for “superstraight” on youtube to see what people have to say, the first video on the list, from a trans man, is definetely anti trans-incel .

> If you don’t want to date a trans person that’s fine, and if somebody is trying to force you they’re just an asshole

-probably most trans people

From the perspective of a trans-incel (and how we’re all assuming too much)

Imagine a person.

Imagine the probability that they are racist.

Imagine that same person saying “i wouldn’t date a black person”

Has the probability increased at all? be honest, it hasn’t gone up to 100% (which would be the race-incel response) but it must have gone up by at least a little.

But why did it go up by a little? Because now the chance they’ll say something like “because blacks disgust me” has also gone up.

Now imagine being into internet drama (ew) and as a trans person, you’re especially interested in people being transphobic and you probably see transphobia every day because people like talking about it as much as anti-sjw(tm) people like to talk about the trans-incels.

If discussions about trans people only gets to you when it causes drama you’ll probably never see “i wouldn’t date trans men/women...” without having it be followed by “...because they’re not real men/women”.

And even though the whole point of being superstraight is to explain why people wouldn’t date trans men/women without calling them ‘not real men/women’ lets see what the original guy who started the whole superstraight meme has to say at second 15.

https://youtu.be/z8vQhkPnEE4

It’s like instead of throwing bait, they’re just throwing food.

The more you see “...because they’re not real men/women” the more likely you are to expect it, and as someone who subscribes to people posting drama 24/7 you’ll see that hundreds of times until you end up answering ...

the probability that the person who says ‘i wouldn’t date trans men/women’ to be transphobic is 100%

...and even if they don’t follow up with something transphobic it’s always easier to imagine they’re just hiding it rather than to change your whole worldview on the spot.

And if you think “why do they even predict transphobia before its spoken”, well, this might sound crazy to you, but everyone is assuming things all the time, our whole perception of reality is nothing but a hallucination that our brain comes up with using not only stimulus from the world but also assumptions.

There’s a blind spot on each 1 of your eyes, your brain simply fills it in without you knowing, it also adds color to the edge of your vision and makes the whole thing less blurry.

When someone says “i won’t date trans people” some people will simply fill in the blanks, they’ll assume every bit of info about who you are what you believe in what your personality is from just a sentence, because the brain is literally designed for it.

IQ tests are just patterns where a spot is blanked out and you’re supposed to fill it in, your intelligence is measured by your ability to fill in the blanks, and low intelligence people will just make mistakes more often, but everyone smart or dumb will constantly make assumptions about everything, and dumb people will be proven wrong about their assumptions more often.

And this happens all the time even when you’re not talking about politics or having a fight.

Someone talking about the earth being curved? well, every time I saw someone do that they called it a sphere so let me just fill in the blanks.

Someone saying they wouldn’t date trans women? well, every time I see screenshots of people saying that in my drama facebook group i see them being transphobic, so let me just fill in the blanks

That’s just how incels operate.

Building legitimacy

Have you ever noticed that every sexual preference eventually gets assigned a flag, on that note, why does every country have a flag?

If you ask a regular person to guess why their country has a flag you’ll get something related to aesthetics, our flags represent our country.

For example Romania and Hungary:

In school we are taught that each colour on our flag has a different meaning, I searched on google and everyone disagrees on what they mean but as an example.

Liberty (sky-blue), Justice (field yellow), Fraternity (blood red) 

Outside of school I was taught by my grandma that the Hungarian flag, much like the Romanian flag, also has a meaning.

The green represents a wide field of green grass, the white represents a white dog playing on the field of grass, rolling around on his back, and the red represents his red dog cock.

Both of these meanings are pretty much just something that a Romanian randomly came up with so i don’t think most people know why countries have flags.

Flags originate from war, that way the armies know not to attack their own allies when they see they carry the same flag, having an army grants you true legitimacy because you can just beat people up into believing you’re legitimate, so countries with no armies probably still had flags because it would be really hard to pretend you have an army otherwise.

Nowadays every country has a flag even if war is illegal, simply because every country has been using one for so long that it became convention. If you don’t follow convention you will be seen as illegitimate. It’s an unwritten rule, but a rule nonetheless, that you need a flag, and much like not following written rules makes you illegitimate (and illegal) so does not following unwritten rules.

And sexualities having their own flags and names probably feels like an even stronger convention than countries having flags for some people.

It’s very often brought up that you have to feel “valid” (which more or less means “legitimate”) 

I still don’t know why, but it’s apparent that people need to be reassured that their sexuality is “valid” and then there’s also this:

Why does a sexual preference have to be distinct from a sexuality? I don’t know, but I’m pretty sure the only difference between the two is legitimacy, to confirm to the conventions of flags and labels.

Q: So why do superstraights get a label and a flag and copy everything that LGBT people do, like tweets talking about how valid their followers are or using the word bigot etc

A: Because to get true legitimacy you need to copy the conventions.

The cargo cult

(wikipedia) Some primitive tribes of people would look at colonists from the civilised world and notice that after they’d built some plane lanes, the planes would come bringing cargo full of valuable stuff.

The tribesmen have made the observation that planes land if you build lanes for them to land on, they made the hypothesis that building the lanes causes the planes to come, and like scientists, they set out to test it.

They made lanes, they made fake planes, they tried to copy everything that the colonists did hoping it would be enough.

Superstraight is a lot like a cargo cult of sexualities, they have a flag, they have a label, they call everyone bigots all the time.

This is the first pic I sent before cropping it.

Because, like a cargo cultist who does not see the plane factories from the colonists homelands, the superstraight person does not see the LGBT community from outside his filter bubble, the filter bubble where only the most obnoxious people like the trans-incels can get through.

So when the superstraight person who thinks every LGBT person is just an obnoxious incel tries to “fit in” with the LGBT, they will act like an obnoxious incel, and when everyone is angry at him, he thinks to himself “they've all proven themselves hypocrites! i baited them so hard! i won!!!”

Even tho there’s a bunch of LGBT people from the comment sections I read who don’t even know the trans-incels even exist, because their filters simply don’t show them the same things you superstraight people are shown.

It gets worse

There’s some people who are so cocky and think they’re so much smarter than the LGBT community that they can just sneak in the nazi SS symbol into their flag and not just fuck up the bait completely.

hehe Schutzstaffel fla- wait! you cant call me a nazi! this is just another sexuality you hypocriteeeee

But this is also just a minority of the people who get superstraight trending, its so popular that I’m pretty sure most of the people getting it to trend are actual normies who wouldn’t even recognise the SS symbol and who have never been to 4chan.

Speaking of 4chan

Of course people don’t think superstraight is legitimate when you have 4chan taking credit for it.

They pick up on all the superficial customs like the flag the label the speech patterns and think “this is their, logic, im using it against them, and they’re all mad because of this alone and not just because a we’re comparing ourselves to the Schutzstaffel”

In a turing test a computer attempts to pass as a human.

In the ideological turing test a human tries to pass as someone of a different ideology.

Are people afraid of passing the ideological turing test? do they think if they can think like the enemy, then they’ll become the enemy? there was no need for people on 4chan to talk so openly about superstraight being a ruse, there was no need to make nazi memes with it, there is no need to post “we used their logic against them”, to constantly tell “yes this is all a lie”.

And yet people have to constantly break character and expose superstraight for being a fake sexuality, why? what’s even the point of it then?

What it could have been

Imagine a world in which instead of making a cargo cult sexuality and just delegitimizing it yourself with all the actual nazi symbolism, you were able to cancel trans-incels.

Imagine if they were able to say things like “the trans-incels are trying to create a new rape culture in which superstraight people are coerced into having sex with transexual people” with a straight face

Imagine if they even tried to coin the term “trans-incels”, since incels are hated by progressives for misogyny and are often associated with 4chan.

Imagine if they could get people banned for hate-speech against the superstraight

Imagine if they had the balls to denounce the people amongst them trying to delegitimise superstraight with their nazi SS and obvious parodying of the  points that aren’t taken seriously by anyone who doesn’t call themselves anti-sjw.

Maybe then there’d be some divide between “pro-superstraight” and “anti-superstraight” instead of everyone who’s not anti-trans agreeing that superstraights aren’t legit.

Maybe they’d be able to get some people canceled, there’s been at least one actual celebrity (India Willoughby) who is a trans-incel, they  could have canceled her! but nobody is even trying.

And oh how much “applying their own logic against them” would have been true if as a response to “but not all trans people are calling you transphobic for having a sexual preference!” you dusted off the “not all men are like that” memes that was popular with feminists.

If they would go on the offensive, cancelling people, spreading trans-incel screenshots to everyone who says they’ve never seen one, mocking people who stand up against them the way feminists used to and say “nOt aLl TrANs pEopLe aRE liKE THat” to anyone who says “not all trans people are like that”, to tell them that “silence is violence” and to make them cancel eachother.

Imagine how much more effective that would have been.

In the end this isn’t gonna make a difference, it will be forgotten, maybe in a couple months, or a year, or a week, some people are  angry today because a counterculture hashtag is trending, but they’ll forget about it too, maybe a couple dozen people will permanently have superstraight on their twitter bios, but really, nothing interesting is gonna come out of it, and if someone tries to make something like whitesexual/blacksexual/asiansexual etc a thing the well will have already been poisoned by superstraight.

[avery-knight-writes]

Country Music Analyses: “I’m Still a Guy” by Brad Paisley

Welcome to the first installment of Country Music Analyses! We’re starting the series off with the song that inspired it. This song was a favorite of mine when I was younger, and along with my upbringing, it worked to define my perception of masculinity and the values that should be placed on and assigned to gender roles.

I have recently noticed how much of it is utter bullshit.

Let’s jump right in, shall we?

 (Note: I don’t reproduce and comment on the entire song for the purposes of these analyses. Not every line is noteworthy, but if you want to be certain I’m not misrepresenting the context of a lyric, feel free to Google the song. In fact, I would invite everyone to do that.)

CONTENT WARNINGS FOR: Sexual harassment/assault mention

 When you see a deer, you see Bambi

And I see antlers up on the wall

When you see a lake, you think picnics

And I see a largemouth up under that log

So, right off the bat, we have some gender role nonsense. And no, apologists, it isn’t just personal differences between the two of them, it’s gender roles because the whole goddamn song is about his pride in being a model of the male gender role. His female partner isn’t even a character in this song, just a generic illustration of traditional femininity.

Do I really have to explain why this is messed up? There’s very much a “women are soft romantics, men like outdoorsy stalking-and-killing wildlife stuff” theme here. And obviously there’s no evidence to support this generalization. A lot of women like outdoorsy things, a lot of men are romantics, a lot of people like one or both or neither.

When you see a priceless French painting

I see a drunk naked girl

“The naked female body is merely an object for my consumption.”

You think that riding a wild bull sounds crazy

And I'd like to give it a whirl

Well love makes a man do some things he ain't proud of

And in a weak moment I might

Walk your sissy dog, hold your purse at the mall

But remember I'm still a guy

Some guys are rightfully terrified of the idea of riding a wild bull, own little dogs, and carry purses. They are still men. Funny how individual preferences have no bearing on your gender, isn’t it?

(Also, rodeo bull riding involves abusing an animal to make it violently angry for the entertainment of the masses and the profit of a few. You should not want to participate in animal cruelty.)

And I'll pour out my heart

Hold your hand in the car

Write a love song that makes you cry

Then turn right around

Knock some jerk to the ground

'cause he copped a feel as you walked by

Honestly? No complaints with the chorus. The first three lines are about being sweet and romantic, and then the last three? I can’t really argue with punching sexual harassers/assaulters in the face.

But when you say a backrub means only a backrub

Then you swat my hand when I try

Well now what can I say at, the end of the day

Honey, I'm still a guy

Ah yes, a completely natural and healthy trait of all real men everywhere is a constant, overwhelming libido that causes them to violate the established physical boundaries of the person they love!

Look, different couples have different dynamics. For some people, an interaction like this could be pretty playful and innocent. But some people are very particular about only being touched when and how they have explicitly permitted you to do, and furthermore, this segment reinforces the horrible tolerance our society has developed for sexual violence within romantic/sexual relationships. Heck, I know a frighteningly great number of people who are distressed by the fact that men pinching the ass of a woman they don’t even know on the street has “become” sexual harassment, as though that hasn’t always been a violation of someone’s physical boundaries and only recently have we developed some of the necessary legal and social shifts to allow a violated woman to seek justice.

Christ on a bike, y’all.

Okay, we hit another chorus, and then we come to the part of this song that gave me the idea for this series.

It makes me so mad, guys. Buckle in.

These days there's dudes getting facials

Manicured, waxed, and botoxed

With deep spray on tans and creamy, lotion-y hands

You can't grip a tackle box

I happen to like both fishing and moisturizing regularly. But I don’t normally roll up to the lake, find myself a shady spot, and start lotioning up. Obviously.

Yeah with all of these men lining up to get neutered

It's hip now to be feminized

But I don't highlight my hair

That’s a personal choice. You have chosen incorrectly. (Just kidding, I’ve never died my hair once. I do want purple hair, though.)

I've still got a pair

Testicles do not make the man, Bradley.

Yeah honey, I'm still a guy

 My eyebrows ain't plucked

There's a gun in my truck

Oh thank God I'm still a guy

Okay, my snarky asides aside, this whole section (which is the entire rest of the song) is such toxic garbage. I mean, we have transphobia (“men lining up to get neutered” and “I’ve still got a pair,” implying that a person must have testes to be a man) along with the standard derision that tough guys have for “pretty boys,” i.e. men who have some or many feminine traits, or simply aren’t as hypermasculine as the paragons of male desirability that are country boys. The whole thing is just infuriatingly ignorant and needlessly condescending.

Guess what, Brad? It actually isn’t “hip now to be feminized.” What it IS now is somewhat more acceptable for people to express themselves honestly and fully. Not safe enough, because there are still plenty of assholes who, like you, belittle them for being their authentic selves.

And let me ask you something. What in the flying fuck would it cost you to just let people be themselves? Men who wear skirts and makeup aren’t hurting you or anyone else. They’re just existing. They are happy when they are free to dress and present and exist as they please, and the only distress they experience from doing so is the duress inflicted upon them by bigoted assholes who say and publish shit like this!

Paisley’s stated intent for this piece was to “capture” the “struggle” between men and women his song. But all he really captured was an overly simplistic caricature of masculinity and femininity as passed down to us through centuries of patriarchy. That’s a struggle, all right, but it isn’t the one he cares about. Perhaps the best critique of his failure to understand the reality of gender and identity comes from the Genius lyric page for this song: “One thing comes across clearly in Brad’s light-hearted play on these stereotypes: gender is always a performance.”

Ugh. I’m going to wrap up here, before I rant myself into next Tuesday. I want to point out here that while this song of Paisley’s obviously pisses me off- partly, I’ll remind you, because I bought into the dumpster fire that is its concept of gender roles for so long- I actually like a lot of the man’s discography. I might do one of his better songs in the future. Or I might tear apart the creepy, stalker-ish upbeat nightmare that is his “It Never Would’ve Worked Out Anyway.” Or I might do both, but I don’t want this series to turn into a Paisley-fest.

I haven’t decided which song to tackle next week, but it should be a more positive one. Thanks to everyone who made it this far. I hope you liked it enough to stick around for the next one. If you didn’t, that’s fine. Hope you enjoy the rest of your day either way.

[magpiefngrl]

Hi! I was just about to literally fall at your feet for the wonder that is your erised fic BTW DID I TELL YOU I LOVE FAKE DATING TROPE SO MUCH I COULD BREAK THROUGH WALLS JUST TO GET IT anyway i am SO pleased read SPAZZING when i heard about au requests! so here! DARE DATING! both harry and draco date just to prove who is a better date but the catch is the whole date goes PERFECTLY every gesture every glance is fine but underlying thought is OH U THINK U CAN BEAT ME ON THIS R U LL FU I LL WIN

Thank you for this capslock comment, it made my day! Your prompt is awesome, I was laughing when I was reading it, which always means that I’d enjoy writing it. And I did! It was so much fun to write :)

This is 8th year, dare dating trope (rated Teen, 2k). Apologies for any errors, I’m a non-native Eng speaker :)

*

Harry didn’t know how hewas pulled into this madness, but before he knew what was happening, Zabini haddared him to go on a date with Malfoy, Hermione had accepted on his behalf andRon and the rest of his House had taken up the challenge with unprecedentedenthusiasm.

‘You’re representing Gryffindor now, mate,’ Ron said, while the girls oftheir year rifled through Harry’s trunk, trying to find the right outfit.‘Gotta prove you’re better than him at dating.’

Harry tried not to wince as he watched the girls handling his underwear.‘I don’t see why I need to bother with my clothes and — ouch, Parvati, I toldyou a comb doesn’t help, it always looks like this.’

‘Maybe a spell?’ she offered, but he stopped her with a hand. Sheshrugged. ‘Let’s hope he likes it that way.’

‘There’s nothing to like!’ Harry protested. ‘This is a dare.I don’t expect him to like anything about it!’

‘Really?’ Hermione was perched on the end of Ron’s bed, flicking throughthe dating advice section of a Cosmopolitan. ‘Because if he hatesit, it means Gryffindor is bad at dating.’

‘D’you want Gryffindor to look bad, Harry? Do you?’ Seamus said.

Every eye in the room (and there were many) turned to stare at Harry.

‘No, of course not,’ he mumbled. ‘Maybe try your spell?’ he askedParvati, who grinned and took out her wand.

In the end, two and a half hours after this new kind of torture, Harrywas waiting at the school entrance, his hair marginally tamer but a lot softer.He was wearing jeans and a plum-coloured jumper that Fleur and Bill had giftedhim. He hadn’t worn it before. Toonice for school, he’d alwaysthought. Lavender had insisted, though and she’d even untucked his shirt tailsand let them peek underneath the jumper. ‘This slightly messy look is sexy.Will make your date want to touch you.’

Harry had spluttered, ‘I don’t want Malfoy to touch me!’ The thoughtthere’d be touching made his insides squirm in a peculiar way.

Several stern looks had shot at him again. ‘Do you think Malfoy hasn’tthought of everything? He’ll make you want to touch him and then Gryffindorwill fail,’ Ron had said, and that was that. Harry had nodded in a resigned anddetermined way. Gryffindor had to win.

When Malfoy arrived, he looked — Harry didn’t want to think of it thatway, but it was the first word that came to him: he looked glorious.He’d worn a crisp white shirt and a dark grey suit, and he looked so puttogether and neat that Harry had to suppress a sudden urge to ruffle his hairup or wrinkle his shirt.

How deviant. Surely this was a Slytherin tactic, like theones Lavender knew. Harry clenched his fists and led the way out of the castleto Hogsmeade.

The walk there was wreathed in a painful silence. Harry wondered whetherthe Slytherins had had a hand in creating Malfoy’s look. Whether he’d also beenadvised what to do and whether he saw it as a House challenge, like Harry did.But Malfoy stared ahead, almost unconcerned that Harry was by his side, whichannoyed Harry no end.

So he reached out and held Malfoy’s hand.

‘What—?’ Malfoy said, shocked, but smoothed his expression when he sawHarry’s satisfied smile.

‘Is there a problem?’ Harry asked.

‘Of course not,’ Malfoy sneered.

They’d walked for a few more silent minutes when it was Harry’s turn togasp. Malfoy had started caressing his palm with his thumb. Malfoy’s smug smileat Harry’s reaction pissed Harry off.

He’d show him. He started stroking Malfoy’s palm, too, and was rewardedwith a blush spreading on Malfoy’s face. Ha!

‘Where—’ Malfoy had to clear hisvoice and start again. ‘Where do you want to go?’

They’d reached Hogsmeade. Harry’d been thinking about the pub: cozy,lots of booze, perfect place to keep this as non-romantic as possible, but he’dchanged his mind. ‘Madam Puddifoot’s alright?’

Malfoy narrowed his eyes. ‘Sure.’

The tea shop was as frilly as Harry remembered but much less pink nowthat it wasn’t Valentine’s Day. Thankgod for small mercies, Harrythought as he squeezed at a round table at the back next to Malfoy. The limitedspace meant Malfoy sat so close that Harry caught a whiff of his perfume. Whichsmelled nice. Enticing.

Harry winced internally at his thoughts. How could he find Malfoy’ssmell attractive in any way? He might not be a bigoted bully anymore, but hewas still a Class A git.

After they’d ordered coffees (Irish; a shot of alcohol being absolutelyessential to deal with this situation), Malfoy held his hand again. Harry’sstomach performed a flip at his touch, which was quite disconcerting. Harrysilently berated his internal organs for their traitorous behaviour and turnedto Malfoy, trying to come up with some conversation. What do you say to the manwho was your enemy for many years? Hermione had advised Harry to be himself; what bollocks. Harry had to demonstrate dating prowess, but judging by his lastfew dates (Susan Bones, Ernie McMillan, not to mention Cho some years ago) hewas crap at it.

Malfoy, apparently, found words, proving Slytherins had trained him muchbetter than Harry’s housemates had. ‘Your hair looks different. Did you dosomething with it?’

Harry wanted to snap back a biting reply, but instead he said, ‘Parvatiknew a spell that makes it softer.’

‘Oh,’ Malfoy blushed. It was hot in that tea shop. ‘Softer.’ His voice cameraspy and low and brought shivers to Harry’s spine. Merlin, Slytherins hadthought of everything!

‘There’s not a lot I can do with my hair,’ Harry said to fill thesilence. ‘It won’t listen to anyone or anything.’

‘Just like its owner,’ Malfoy smiled.

Harry was taken aback by the lack of mockery in his tone. It almostsounded as if Malfoy was flirting. ‘I guess,’ he smiled back, reluctantly. ‘It gotme into a lot of trouble when I was young. My aunt and uncle hated the sight ofit. Once, my aunt sheared it off so much that you could see my skull. But thefollowing morning it’d all grown back. Back then I’d no clue what had happened.I mean, it’s hard to tame, but I like it.’ Harry shut his mouth. Why on earthwas he babbling about hair? He gave himself a mental kick in the bum.

‘Accidental magic.’ Luckily, Malfoy didn’t seem bored. He thanked thelady that brought their coffees and stirred his cup, his left hand stillwrapped around Harry’s right. Harry would have to spend the rest of the dateone-handed and using his left, because he’d be blasted if hepulled his hand away first. Though, he had to acknowledge that it wasn’t thatmuch of a hardship. Malfoy’s hand felt rather nice, warm and just large enough(Susan’s hands were too small, Ernie’s too large). He decided he could likeMalfoy’s appendages even if he still disliked the person.

Malfoy put down his cup. ‘Once, I made my father’s hair turn blue for aweek. Don’t laugh.’ Malfoy smiled, seemingly pleased with Harry chuckling. ‘Nospell could change it back until he bought me what I’d been asking for: a toybroomstick. He was proud, though; he didn’t even Glamour it when he left thehouse, but praised me for doing such magic at the age of five.’

Malfoy trailed off and stared at his half-full cup. A shadow passed hisface and Harry startled himself by wanting to chase it away. He put it down tohis need to impress his date, that was all. It was all part of the dare.

‘What Quidditch team do you support?’ The change of subject was ratherabrupt, but Harry felt a little flutter when Malfoy gave him a grateful smile.

‘Bristol Buzzards. You? Don’t tell me, I know: Chudley Cannons. Theunderdog, right?’

Once the conversation got going, Harry realised he could almost forgethe was talking with Malfoy and holding his hand. Malfoy shifted, pressinghis thigh against Harry’s, and heat spread through Harry’s body. He wassurprised to realise he’d been enjoying himself and had therefore lost track ofhis goal to beat Malfoy in the dating game. He couldn’t help but be impressed;Malfoy was good at dating. Harry had to step up his game, and the opportunitycame when Madam Puddifoot brought over a huge chocolate soufflé ‘on the house’,while sneaking a glance at Harry’s forehead. Before Malfoy had something to sayabout that (as if Harry could help who offered him free desserts!), Harrypicked up the spoon, cut through the soufflé and offered to feed Malfoy. ‘Wanta taste?’

Read More on AO3: The Dare 

**

Mermaid AU

Pirate AU

Durmstrang!Harry and Beauxbatons!Draco AU 

Royalty/Arranged Marriage AU 

Musicians AU

Medieval AU

Fae AU

Adventure AU

Firefly/Space AU

Magical Flower Shop AU (canon universe)

kofi

**

AU Series on AO3

[calliecat93]

ST: TNG S5 Watchthrough Episodes 14-17

(Trigger Warning: The episode Ethics contains the theme of suicide. While I will try to not go too in-depth, as it is part of the episode I will be discussing it. If this topic makes you uncomfortable or is triggering to you even in the slightest, please skip the section of the watchthrough. Thank you)

Conundrum: So we have us an amnesia episode. Who’s the poor individual who gets hit with it? Everyone! Yes, some weird scan thingy causes everyone to lose their memories. They still know how to perform their jobs and all that, but otherwise, they remember zilch. I’m kind of mixed on how they did it. Overall, they are intelligent and calm about the situation, which on the one hand feels unrealistic. You’d expect far more panic and tension if you suddenly found yourself on a ship among people you don’t know. On the other hand at this point even without their memories, they’re probably used to weirdness like this (the S4 episode Clues had a similar thing happen) and it’s kind of refreshing to see people handle a situation without becoming paranoid assholes. Also… they make some kind of awkward Troi/Riker/Ro love triangle. Troi has some familiarity with Riker due to their past, which makes sense… but why add Ro to the mix? The only time they really interacted outside this episode was Ro’s intro, where Riker was a hypocritical asshole who made her take her earring off. They really don’t seem to agree and I guess the writers went ‘well they argue… so it must be love’! Which… no, going with this with Ro makes zero sense and it really makes it feel like Riker is playing both women, which both feel OOC for him, and even taking amnesia into account makes him look worst. Why does S5 want me to hate Riker? Otherwise, it was fine. Just kind of eh. Again we kinda sorta did this plot already (differently but still) and it doesn’t become hard to figure out who the one behind this is when you realize that they’re the only one getting prominent screentime who isn’t a pre-established character. Still, it’s just alright, but yeah that love triangle nonsense, while by no means the worst I’ve ever seen, really was unnecessary. 2.5/5.

Power Play: In this one, Troi, Data, and O’Brein get posessed on an Away Mission (Riker almost did as well, but it flew away before it could posess him). They take Ten-Forward hostage which includes Worf and Keiko, and later Picard. This had to be fun for Marina Sirtis, Brent Spiner, and Colm Meaney since they ge to act all evil… though Spiner’s already done it with Lore, but still XD So it was fine. It was tense and had some disturbing moments like Posessed!O’Brein forcing himself on Keiko. Dear God I hope the Enteprise has a counselor (aside from Troi since she was partially involved in this) cause neither of them deserved that. It was also scary to see Data acting like… well, Lore pretty much. Seeing Riker, Crusher, Geordi, and Ro trying to figure out how to save them without anyone getting killed was also interesting, it’s the first time we’ve seen a hostage situation like this in a ST show (Space Seed in TOS kinda counts, but that was an entirely different scenario and was more ‘hostile takeover’ than ‘hostage situation’). That’s honestly all I’ve got/ IDK, S5 has just been painfully average thus far where none of the episodes have been particularly bad, but only like… three so far (Ensign Ro, Disaster, Unification) have kept me interested. Maybe that’ll change here soon bu it’s just like ‘…it’s fine but I feel nothing otherwise’. 3/5.

Ethics: I again point to the trigger warning above. The episode contains the theme of suicide (though it is NOT carried out) so if this topic at all is uncomfortable/triggery, please skip this section. So what happened? An accident has left Worf paralyzed. Crusher has called in a neurologist while Worf, believing that he can no longer be a warrior in his condition, wants to be killed. Needless to say, we’re dealing with some heavy stuff in this one. We kind of have a similar thing going on as in Half a Life where Worf wants to die as according to his Klingon beliefs, his life is over since he is paralyzed. He asks Riker to help commit it as he’s his friend and naturally Riker is appalled at this. Picard breaks it down for Riker and that while we don’t understand it we should respect it… but again we’re talking about assisted suicide. I get what Picard is saying but just… no. The episode makes it clear that we’re supposed to be conflicted, however, and in the end, Worf decides against it due to both an experimental procedure and because Riker uncovered that Alexander would be the one who’d have to assist in the suicide if Worf did it. Needless to say, Worf ain’t letting that happen. It does make Worf’s feelings clear, however. His anger, his fear, it’s very hard to watch Worf in such a state. The neurologist, Dr. Russell, offers him a procedure that may work… but it’s a procedure that is still in the experimental stage and turned down by Starfleet Medical. Needless to say, Crusher’s not exactly happy with the idea of using a medically untested procedure on one of her patients… but to be fair, Worf has refused all other treatment and the use of implants and with suicide the only other option, I can see why Russell would be willing to offer. But at the same time, it does come across her just using this as an excuse to use said treatment which also has plenty of risks on said patients life/further well-being, and Crusher telling her off repeatedly is very satisfying especially at the end when Worf almost died due to her, and she seemed more concerned with noting it than what her actions caused and said that Crusher was jealous. Yeah, Russell sucks. It does bring up a lot of medically ethical questions, however: is it right to use an experimental procedure on a patient when all other options have been turned away or are available? Especially when said patient is suicidal or when it comes to said patient's beliefs? I side with Crusher at the end of the day especially since Worf is very lucky to have survived/recovered his mobility afterward, but the questions are still ones to point out. Then there’s poor Alexander whose on the verge of losing his father and Worf not wanting him to see him like he is and… God yeah. Just as I complain about the lack of impactful episodes, this one comes in. It’s a very tough episode with everything going on with Worf, the theme of medical ethics, and it’s heavy on the emotions. IDK how well I can say that the episode portrays it, but it certainly hit hard and brings up a lot of questions for the viewers. It certainly reaffirms how much I love Crusher XD 4/5.

The Outcast: /sighs/ Okay… how to go about talking about this one? In this episode, we meet a species of aliens that don’t use gender identity, and if they show signs of identifying as male or female, they undergo ‘treatment’. One of these individuals is Soren, who identifies as female and falls in love with Riker. So… there are many things that this can be associated with, but this was made as a gay rights episode. Now… let us remember when this was made. S5 was airing during the early ’90s. This was not a good time for gay individuals. We were very much anti-LGBT+ in those times and the AIDS epidemic where they were scapegoated as a public menace still being rampant didn’t help. In many ways, doing this episode was a bold move and I can respect them for at least is trying to tackle the topic seriously. If there’s any franchise that you’d expect to tackle these kinds of issues it would be this one. But the question is does it hold up 30 years later? Well… unfortunately, no. First, if they really wanted to get the gay rights message across… why was Soren played by a female actress? Maybe it was the only way they would have been allowed to do this, but because of it, it keeps a heterosexual angle that causes the message to be lost. We also don’t have any regular/reccuring characters as queer which would be pretty important to have in this episode. Considering that TOS took the risk with making PoC equal to white people at a time it wasn’t at all welcomed, TNG not doing so with LGBT+ individuals is rather unfortunate to put it nicely. Not to mention it sticking to standard male/female stereotypes as the norm when breaking them down to Soren, as well as Worf’s sexist/bigoted comments. That’s no even going into other identities such as transgender and non-binary. I’d really like to know what they think of this one considering the themes. As I am a bi/demisexual cis woman and this was meant to be a gay rights episode I will look at it as such and from that POV, the episode does not at all look great in a modern light.

Maybe I’m just far too nice and should be harsher on this, and I’m not gonna lie I’m horrible at addressing these things so I apologize if any of this came out wrong. But between this and The Host, it’s clear that the show was ill-equipped to handle LGBT+ topics. But at the same time, back then even considering addressing the topics in any way would have been risky. I do believe that there was a good faith effort and maybe in some ways, it helped when we improved later. It’s always hard to say if people should tackle topics they don’t understand or not. Naturally, it’s rage-inducing when they get it wrong, but it can also open the door to getting people to learn and to improve. Maybe this was needed in the ’90s and they did it the best way that they could, and maybe the fact that we can look at it and go ‘we know better’ is a sign that we’re better than when we were 30 years ago… or again, I am far too nice/too much of a doormat and I give the benefit of the doubt way too much. People who are more knowledgeable/know how to address this far better than I have here have likely done so and I’d encourage others to read more into those perspectives. Regardless, the episode overall is okay I guess. I certainly felt horrible for Soren at the end as she’s taken to undergo ‘treatment’ and Riker trying to help her get out of it. Her speech, wanting to just be treated as a person and not be treated as horrible due to who she is during the trial did really hit me and is why I think that the show did mean well. If she wanted to identify as female and be with Riker, she should be free to and then how she was forced to conform to her society’s views at the end when Riker tried to save her, it’s just... hard to watch. I wish that the ending was more optimistic/hopeful but I can’t say that the message wasn’t loud and clear. It very much reflected society at that time, and in many ways it’s still relevant today concerning how society treats those deemed outside the norm. But it also has issues due to the execution as I already mentioned, and I can only hope that Modern Trek (Discovery, Picard, soon SNW) and whatever they do in the future are/will be better at handling these kinds of themes because there’s no excuse to get it wrong in today’s time. 2.5/5.

I hope that I addressed things properly concerning the last episode. But it’s now done. We have nine more to go for the season. Let's see how it turns out.

[normanandcaliban]

Demons and Department Stores

Music: “You and Me” by Shallou

“Whoa, dude check this out!” Norman’s voice called to Cal from several aisles down in the department store.

They’d been rummaging through the $5 movie section for the past fifteen minutes trying to find something christmas-y for the annual family Christmas movie marathon. Every year, the Castor household came together the first weekend of December to watch all the classic holiday movies like “The Santa Clause” or “Deck the Halls” or “A Christmas Story.” This year, Norman wanted to find something new to add to the movie collection. It was also Black Friday, which meant their $5 movie was actually closer to a $1 movie. Bonus points for team thrift shop.

Cal’s human-form ears perked up at the sound of his boyfriend’s voice. They tingled and felt slightly uncomfortable due to their unusual small, round shape. He scratched them in irritation. The natural curves of his elongated, pointy, red lobes suited him much better, but he promised Norman he’d remain shifted whenever they were in public since “ordinary humans can’t handle the concept that demons actually exist.” Yet, Cal thought to himself.

Maintaining a human appearance was a pain in the neck and took intense psychological focus to keep up. Any distraction, no matter how slight, could cause his skin tone to shift back to its bright, demonic red or his tail to sprout through his pants, which, by the way, was definitely as painful as it sounded. Most demons his age still struggled to keep basic transformations down, but he wasn’t worried. He was almost five hundred years old and he’d had several centuries of practice maintaining concentration when shifting his physical form. Besides, he was out having a good time with Norman. That’s all that mattered to him right now.

Without taking his eyes off the back cover of a bizarre “Rudolph the Reindeer: Zombie Apocalypse” movie, he called back over his shoulder, “Yeah? What’d you find?” He chuckled as he put the movie back in the bin. He never knew Rudolph could be such a badass, saving the world from mutant elves, armies of undead creatures, and powerful, unholy entities.

He turned to head towards the spot where he last heard Norman’s voice and collided with a middle-aged woman looking at CD’s.

“Oh shit, I’m so s–!” Cal’s eyes widened as he saw the woman’s sharp, blue claws quickly shift back into human form. She frantically checked her surroundings to make sure no one else saw the transformation. Her eyes returned to meet Cal’s with an edgy, apprehensive stare. She readied herself to pounce, as if she was waiting for him to scream or run. If Cal had been human, she likely would’ve silenced him to make sure her secret disappeared along with his body.

Cal cocked an eyebrow at her aggressive stance and shifted his eyes to their true demonic form, giving her a flash of his true identity.

The woman immediately backed down and relaxed, letting out a sigh of relief. “Goodness you sure gave me a fright, deary! If you had been human, I was going to have to call the Collectors to have this mess straightened out.”

The Collectors were a sort of black market “laundry team” that helped demons stay below human radar by cleaning up…accidents. They mostly worked in stain and body removal, but they also worked behind the scenes to position evidence and erase identities.

“It’s not the Collectors you’d have to worry about, ma’am. Work harder at maintaining your appearances or the Department of Earth Affairs will step in to reclaim you.” Cal tried to keep the underlying tones of condescension in voice hidden.

The woman straightened up and quickly hustled away as a confused Norman approached.

“What was that all about?” He asked, holding about twenty shiny, red and green movie cases in his arms and three in his mouth.

Cal scratched his head, “Seems like I’m not the only demon out Christmas shopping in this town.” He noticed the overflow of movies his boyfriend was attempting to carry and took some to lighten the load.

“Seriously?” Norman looked over Cal’s shoulder at the woman in question. She appeared as normal and as human as Cal did now, which meant she must be a shifter too. She grabbed a box from a shelf containing a small, lighted trees and placed it in her shopping cart. Seeing demons actively participate in Christian traditions was both intriguing and confusing. “How is it demons can stand Christmas? Aren’t you supposed to hate all things holy, religious, and God-related?”

Cal’s eyebrows shot up and he burst out laughing. “Well, yeah, as long as you don’t dump a bucket of holy water on me or start an exorcism. But Christmas? Heck no! Giving and receiving gifts is awesome, dude. Think of all the loot you collect!”

Norman thought about the Christmas traditions and realized that some of them didn’t have much religious symbolism. The tree. The gift giving. Santa Claus. The pieces started fitting together in his head, “Oh, so it’s the greed that attracts you to it?”

Cal shrugged, “I guess.”

Norman blushed, realizing he’d been ignorant.  “I’m sorry if I’m sounding like a bigot…”

Cal waved it off, “No, no. you’re fine. Your assumption was partially correct. The greed is definitely a huge draw for my kin, but just because we thrive on the vices of humanity doesn’t mean we hate Christmas. We love spending time with the people we care about just as much as humans do. We are creatures of passion after all.”

“I guess that rings true with all of us.” He grabbed Cal’s free hand with his and gave it a squeeze. Cal smiled back at him as they walked to the checkout aisle.

“How did you know that woman was a shifter? Do you have a 6th sense?” Norman asked, changing the subject back to the other demon.

“Oh I bumped into her and she partially shifted back. That happens sometimes if a shifter loses their focus.” He said as they payed for and bagged their movies and walked toward the exit. The cashier had been listening in on their conversation and looked at the two of them like they were a couple of weirdos. He figured they’d been talking about some “Dungeons & Dragons” thing and rolled his eyes at the weird shit young people get into these days.

“Wait, so how does that work? You just focus really hard and stay in your human form?” Norman pinched Cal’s cheek trying to test his concentration to see if his beige skin color would change back to its natural crimson.

Swatting away Norman’s hand, Cal laughed and shook his head, “Yes and no. Focus is definitely key, but so is age. A demon’s power solidifies and matures with age. That’s why young demons are considered more dangerous due to the volatile nature of their abilities. When I was younger, I could barely even hold my tail in, much less my wings.”

“So how old are you then?” Norman realized this was the first time he’d asked about Cal’s age. He felt kinda ashamed for not asking sooner.

“Well, time works differently in my home dimension. There, I’m about twenty-two, but here I’m almost five hundred years old.”

The information took a moment to sink into Norman’s head. His eyes widened when it did, “Whoa, wait WHAT?! You’re FIVE HUNDRED YEARS OLD?!”

Cal raised a sarcastic eyebrow, “Oh come on, don’t tell me you’re honestly surprised that demons have long lifespans.”

Even though Cal was right, Norman had no response. He was still quite astonished at the fact that his boyfriend was currently old enough to be his living 16th-century ancestor. A shudder passed through his body.

Cal wrapped one arm around Norman’s shoulder, pulling him close. A wicked smile curved across his face.

“Kiss me, I’m ancient.”

“Ew, no! Get away from me grandpa.”

“Oh ho! So that’s the type of kinky shit you’re into, huh?” He briefly tickled Norman’s ribcage.

That comment, plus the tickles, earned Cal a soft punch on the arm. “Shut up, you know what I’m into.” Norman pulled Cal in for a kiss.

When they parted, Cal could hardly restrain his curiosity, “And what would that be?” He was pretty sure he knew the answer, but he wanted to hear Norman say it out loud. Norman rested his forehead against Cal’s and stared into the demon’s fiendish eyes.

“You.”

.

.

.

.

[warmheartwitch-blog]

Why I’m Radical Part 1 of 3

I originally shared this in the comments section of an article on The Feminist Current.

As a preface, I want to say thank you to all the brave feminists who speak boldly and think critically about gender identity. You have helped me to finally end my irrational feelings of guilt about being a lesbian woman with a “non-inclusive” identity. You helped me get over the heartbreak of losing one of my oldest friends, who now sees me as a villain who's not worth her time.

I am a young woman in my early twenties. I have only recently come out the other end of a queer conformity meat grinder that started early in high school and continued halfway through college. My friend went through this same meat grinder, but was ground at a different rate. She used to identify as a lesbian until she went to an East Coast college and met a trans man who she has since married (her first relationship). I made the mistake of mentioning to her and her trans boyfriend that I think it's coercive to insist that lesbians should want to sleep with trans women. I thought they'd agree with me, I thought that the extremism hadn't touched them.

I was wrong. The boyfriend's anger went from 0 to 11 in a heartbeat and he acted as though I was stabbing him and everyone he loved and spitting on their corpses. My friend agreed with him at every turn, though she let him do most of the talking. I had to spend the next two hours or so defending my stance and explaining to them all the multitude of ways that no, no, no, I don't actually despise/and or/want to cause violence to trans people but my own personal sexual experiences (which don't hold much weight, apparently) make me really question the idea of gender-not-sex based sexual attraction. But he would not go off the defensive.

The thing is, at this point I was still mostly swallowing the queer identity rhetoric. I believed that trans women have always been women, that identity is all-important, I just wanted the “inclusive sexuality” jargon to stop. But because of this one transgression, they pegged me as a bigot.

Sadly, they wore me down at the end. I started crying. I apologized to the ends of the Earth, I explained my uncomfortable sexual experiences, trying to justify my “bigoted” perspective. In the end I broke down and promised that I would be open to dating trans women again. And the whole time my friend and her boyfriend took on this wounded, noble victim persona.

It was absolutely awful.

[cm-sheridan-writes]

Chat Window

However it happens, it starts with putting yourself out there and hitting the Enter key. Leading up, there are several little moments on the forum, and out of the sea of usernames, a few start to stick in your memory. Eventually, you begin to keep track of their posts.

It takes months, but you realize that you’re forming a picture of a few of the users. One usually shows up in the middle of the night, active for a few hours before disappearing again. You wonder if they have insomnia, or if they live out of the country. Curious one night, you search for other posts they’ve made, digging for clues, cultural references, anything that could give you an answer. It occurs to you that someone could be researching you at that very moment, and your fingers pause above the keys. Is this creepy? Are you crossing a line? You’re ten pages deep in their old posts, though, so any wisdom from this realization is too little, too late.

You start edging into the conversation around them. It’s a fine line that you’re completely anxious of: you want them to notice you, but you don’t want to be a bother. You play with the idea of a direct message, but without any sort of context or post to reference, it feels way too vulnerable. Better not. Besides, what if they turn out to be a completely obnoxious person, or a bigot, or they reveal that they love Ayn Rand, like, on a deep and cellular level? Can you deal with that? (Memories of reading The Fountainhead for a lit class in high school may scar you a little more than you want to admit. Your instructor clearly had some sort of expectation about that book when he assigned it, but whatever it was, you cannot imagine.)

(You post something about this lit class, and Ayn Rand, and spend a few hours commiserating with most of the replies. One Rand supporter sneaks in and questions if you really absorbed the piece, and you find yourself disabling comments because the ensuing brawl is cluttering up your inbox.)

A few weeks pass, and suddenly there’s a note in your inbox, and that familiar username is behind it:

One new message from snaplolcat01:

    saw ur post on ayn rand.. the comments were a trip and i read every single one. really glad no one made ME read anything by her

There’s a little flutter of validation in your chest, and you eagerly type back a response:

    Haha, yeah, the comments got way out of hand, I should have known what I was doing when I posted that. Yah, your lucky. There are a couple scenes I just CANNOT unread. If you want my advice, stay FAR AWAY from those books.     *you’re (ugh, first impressions, and that happens)

A few minutes pass without a response, and you shrug it off and click away from your inbox. As you scroll and tap and read and respond, you have a little, vague smile on your face. Being noticed is always nice. Communication is slow but constant over the next few days, whenever you find yourself near your computer and with some free time. They never seem to be on at the same time you are, but usually, you find a new response from them. You tiptoe around each other, keeping the talk to whatever latest drama is happening in some section of the forums, but you carefully reveal small pieces of yourself, and the conversation branches to news and politics, movies, and one day, when your schedules seem suddenly to overlap, favorite childhood cereals.

It’s been months, you realize, since that first introduction, and your talks would fill several dozens of pages at this point. For the most part, they still respond while you’re asleep, and one day, you say, “You’re always up so late, you must be on a different timezone than me.”

You’re up late that night, working on an essay, when one of your open tabs chimes at you. You glance up and click through, and in your inbox find:

    haha, well idk what ur schedule is but im only able to get on after school and work     i usually read stuff here til i fall asleep

The essay can wait.

    Oh, gotcha     What are you studying

The picture in your head starts to flesh out just a bit more. You find out that you two have a mutual interest in biology, though you’re in a pre-med track and intending to go into law school, while they’re doubling with computer science and interested in how this all ties in with genetics. They’re balancing a few restaurant jobs as well as a position grading for one of the professors in their department. You can sympathize with the lack of available time; you’re supposed to be writing an essay right now, after all.

    oh dude i dont wanna distract u!!!

    No, you’re fine!     I need a break anyway, my brain feels like cement

The process of sharing is natural, sometimes abundant and sometimes halts, but never feels forced. The person behind the pixels seems as flesh and blood as anyone you know “in real life”, though you’re forced to confront your growing disillusionment with that phrase. You’d scoffed at a friend in high school who had had an internet girlfriend, asking how the relationship could be real if you’d never seen them in person. The internet had been a barrier back then, and while intellectually it made sense that there was a human being on the other end of the Ethernet cord, it was like watching shadow theater play out behind a scrim. It had never made sense that someone could fall in love with what you only saw as black and white pixels on a screen.

More and more, however, you’re forced to accept that you know more about this person than you do about many of the people you see on a day to day basis.

****

    This might be a bit weird but go with me on this

    yeah?

    SO I’ve never ever seen you in real life, but it’s so weird that I know more about you than the girl in my cell bio class that I’ve been crushing on and I see her for actual hours a day     And I don’t know a damn thing about her     We braethe the same air     *breathe

    it’s wild dude     i know whatu mea n     (sorry long day, typing sucks haha)     one of my tas was talking bout th is at a party (she was hella stoned, fukin wild XD)     going on about global societies an d how we as like a people could connect so mjuch faster to somenoe acoss the globe     easier than th people we see evry day     somthing about a keyboard makes it easier     ^^^her exact words

    Whoa

    i know rt?     maybs if bio girl gave u her fb u two wopuld talk     fuck dude i gott slep     i kno my typing sucks but this is embararasing     *embasrasing     FUCK

    HAhahahaha, no worries     I should get going too (though I wanna hear more about this TA)     (I never run into any of my profs or anything at parties)

    haha highly recomend, its an EXPIERENCE     cya dude

This idea of global society sticks with you, and their TA’s comment about keyboards. A keyboard offers a backspace key, and a way to edit yourself. You’ve said plenty of dumb shit on the internet before without necessarily stopping to think through the consequences, but then it occurs to you that at the start of this whole friendship, you’d sometimes gone through ten variations of the same two-sentence message before finally deciding to send it. It was a series of self-edits and careful selection of which parts of yourself you’d wanted seen. Just like real life.

There was comfort in the distance, though. Without a person in front of you, and with the limitless communication offered by a message sitting in your inbox, you couldn’t see reactions -- or judgment. This correspondence held more personal information about yourself than some of your in-person friends knew.

****

    So I got Maya’s facebook page     We’ve been talking, and we’re going to get drinks this weekend, maybe see a movie if there’s anything good out

    YAY!     thats awesome1!!

    Thanks! :)     If we hadn’t talked about global societies and stuff a few nights ago I dunno if I would’ve gotten up the courage to talk to her. Your advice for talking via computer made it soooo much easier.

    so ur saying im resopnsible for this new relationship?     *responsible     ur welcome ;)

Drinks go fantastically, and you and Maya decide to forgo the movie and head back to her place. When you finally make it back to your computer, there are a few frantic, nosy messages.

    HOWZ THE DATE     cmon dude im dying to kno

    i can only assume ur havn massive amounts of sex rn     and im v happy for u     but i need to know

    r u alive????

You can’t keep the smile from your face, and you start to type out a response. Maya hadn’t thought it strange at all that you had an internet friend who had pushed you to finally ask her out. She’d even teased you, “Make sure to brag about me to your buddy.” The memory of that, her lips grazing your skin and her breath tickling your ear, raises goosebumps, and you shiver just a little bit. Some things just can’t be replicated over the internet, you decide, but friendship doesn’t seem to lack.

[news-mashable-yahoopartner-blog]

How Trump turned the 'fun' internet into a coping mechanism

It’s Viral Market Crash week on Mashable. Join us as we take stock of the viral economy and investigate how the internet morphed from a fun free-for-all to a bleak hellscape we just can’t quit.

I don't need to tell you that being online is less fun than it used to be. 

The internet has, of course, always sported a vicious underbelly, particularly for members of marginalized communities. Now, though, the whole thing has been boiled down into two halves: the dreadful, perpetually memed news cycle and our increasingly futile attempts at escaping it.

The primary complaint about Twitter, or at least the stereotypical one, used to be that "no one cares what you're eating for breakfast" — that the network was too crowded with personal minutiae to be of use. Well, at least that boring stuff was non-toxic. Now, our president's preferred way to communicate with the public is on that same platform, which had been plagued with Nazis, trolls, and bigots even before his rise to power.

SEE ALSO: How one company reshaped — and kind of ruined — the viral video landscape

After the 2016 election, a lot of people became hyper-engaged with politics. In many cases, this took the form of engagement with political memes (#TheResistance) across social media platforms. From the "this is fine" dog to making fun of Trump's typos to that godforsaken photo of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama laughing in the same room, internet culture became the primary medium through which people expressed (or performed) their political opinions.

🤣🤣 triggered trump has really bad lawyers. pic.twitter.com/w39n8s8v4G

— WakeUp2Injustice (@WakeUp2News) May 2, 2018

The effect was twofold: political discourse short-circuited into a 280-character version of itself, while viral internet culture — once somewhat enjoyable — became inextricably tied up with our post-election trauma. 

Even before the election, Pepe the frog, once a silly cartoon, had became a hate symbol. But once Trump took office, the news cycle and the meme cycle became completely indistinguishable — each made worse by the other. 

In the news, single tweets function as major political events. The president retweeted a violent pro-Trump Reddit meme about CNN. The New York Times reported on it.

The fun internet as we knew it was dead.

That's not to say there's nothing enjoyable online anymore. Anyone who's ever seen the Old Friends Senior Dog Sanctuary Facebook page will tell you that. But the "fun" stuff online — the stuff still, somehow, divorced from politics — occupies a different space than it used to. Today, it's become more of a therapeutic tool, a means of escaping the bad part of the internet. 

It exists in opposition to something else, something from which we need a break.

A post shared by Slime by Desi ❥ (@slimeclouds) on Jun 8, 2018 at 8:10am PDT

Consider the internet's wide array of "satisfying" videos. The viral slime economy, for example, is booming on Instagram, with several accounts boasting millions of followers and teen slime entrepreneurs turning thousands in profits per month. On Etsy, there are thousands of slime kits for sale. Then there are the soap-making videos, the hot knife ASMR, the kinetic sand. The list goes on.

To be clear, people enjoying satisfying visuals is not a phenomenon unique to our post-election world, or even to the internet. But it has taken on a new tone. The way we've begun to frame soothing content is less "simple, fun sensory experience" and more "way to cope." The art of self-soothing has become its own viral ecosystem.

The idea is captured most succinctly, perhaps, by the subreddit r/Eyebleach, a forum where users post and discuss "wholesome" images and videos. Generally speaking, r/Eyebleach is a pretty pleasant place to be. On one recent photo of a smiling dog named Jake, the top comment is: "I've got this feeling Jake might be a good boy." Below it, there's only one reply. "Might," it says. "Excuse you?!?!" This is about as contentious as things get.

The subreddit is not explicitly framed as a way to escape toxic political discourse. Its "about us," section, though, reads "After a long day of seeing what internet anonymity can do to people, you're bound to need some eyebleach." In 2018, we know exactly what internet anonymity can do to people — we've watched it ruin the internet.

But even if the sub had no tagline, the name "Eyebleach" would say it all. Our eyes need cleaning because the world is bad. The pleasant, once allowed to be independently good, exists online as a direct response to the horrible.

Media outlets play a huge part in creating this ethos. They constantly publish stories about how to curate a calmer feed, how to find soothing videos to watch, how to ignore politics and just look at dogs for a while. (Mashable, in fact, has a whole column called "Hard Refresh.")

A post shared by sugar booger (@sugar_boogerz) on Feb 16, 2018 at 11:48am PST

As you might guess, the idea of using the internet to escape from the internet is not foolproof. (Self-care bots abound on Twitter, but the tweets reminding us to drink water are still directly next to bad-faith meta memes about Russian election meddling.) The better approach is to take a full break: to read a book, to begin an exercise regimen, to drive down a country road or put your face in a pillow and scream for a while. No matter what you're doing online, you're still likely logging off in a worse mental state than when you logged on.

This is not to say that there's anything inherently wrong with fun content that's also therapeutic. I enjoy a 3 p.m. slime video as much as the next person. The issue lies with framing anything pleasurable as strictly reactive. The world is bad, so here's a corgi. Right now, someone is being harassed on Twitter, which is the reason you should enjoy yourself instead. These ideas no longer feel like genuine efforts to make anyone actually feel better. They're overdone, part of the regrettable "dumpster fire" ethos. They oversimplify the experience of engaging with the world's suffering. And, more and more, they're beginning to feel like whispered efforts at keeping us logged on.

Because the truth is that we know everything is bad. We don't need to speak it into context every time we feel joy. We feel joy anyway. It's a rebellion in and of itself. 

So, sure, the fun internet is dead. But long live fun.

[tarascreativewritingblog-blog]

Hilarious or Hurtful: The Politics of Comedy

                                      https://imgflip.com/i/pgi5i

Why did a blind man fall into a well? Because he couldn’t see it.

Most people would agree this joke is terrible. But is it offensive? This was a joke that was told amongst my friends a couple of days ago, and we disagreed on whether or not it was hurtful. That disagreement made me realize how subjective comedy can be. And I found myself going down the rabbit hole of YouTube comment sections, Ted Talk videos, and opinions of professional comedians to try and answer the question: When is a joke offensive?

While doing research, I found that there are two camps when it comes to comedy. One group believes that comedians shouldn’t offend anyone. Another that comedy is about exploring touchy subjects and nothing is off limits. Personally, I consider myself to be in the middle of this comedy spectrum.

One Buzzfeed contributor really drew from the PC view of comedy. His opinion was that a comedian doesn’t need to be rude, if they are truly funny. I wasn’t too surprised to see this though, because half of Buzzfeed's content is about being offended by things. I respect Buzzfeed for tackling serious issues, but I don’t think this website is known for having nuanced discussions.

On the other hand, a Ted Talker went on stage and said that comedians should push boundaries, because people can choose whether or not something is offensive. His opinion seems to be a little bit of a stretch for me. If a comedian comes on stage and says that you suck, and they mean it seriously, it would be hard not to be offended. You really can’t choose to have or not have feelings.

Like most things in life, there is a middle ground. A lot of what comedians do is try to push the limits, use the things that are considered taboo to surprise people. Think of the medieval jesters who would go up to the king and say vulgar things. Anyone else who did this would’ve had their heads cut off, but jesters got away with it, because it was so far beyond what was considered acceptable, and that’s why it was funny.

I remember hearing British comedian Ricky Gervais speaking about the subject of offensive comedy.  He said that the intention is all that matters when it comes to humour. So if someone makes a joke that isn’t meant to hurt anyone than they can’t be in bad taste. I agree that intention does matter when assessing a joke, but people can still be hurt accidentally.

It does seem though that people on the internet need to roast someone if they make an offensive joke. One good example came from a Jon Ronson Ted Talk about a girl named Justine Sacco. Justine made a hurtful joke online, which is inexcusable. But because of this people bashed her in the name of social justice. Justine had to hide from shame; she got fired from her job and her life was changed from that incident. Even though the joke she said was mean, ruining her life because of it was unjustified, especially because Sacco claims that her joke was actually supposed to be satirical.

Here’s the thing, don’t fight fire with fire. If someone tells an offspirited joke, tell them how the joke is upsetting, but don’t cross the line by becoming a bully. The fact is, no one’s mind will be changed if you call someone a racist dick. “Oh someone online called me a racist bigot. I guess I should change my whole world view even though I might have actually been raised to think that way”, said no one ever!

Also, people make mistakes. Sometimes comedians make a joke that lands wrong, or pushed the limit. But that’s their jobs as comedians, to experiment. If a comedian makes one off colour joke, let them apologise, give them some room to move on from the incident. Honestly, if we don’t do that there won’t be a lot of comedians left. Of course, if a comedian continuously and unapologetically makes insensitive jokes, than it’s time to stop supporting them.

Another thing that people can find offensive in comedy is making light of things. I saw a list on tumblr saying “Things you can never joke about”. Now, if your opinion on this topic can be reduced down to an internet meme, then maybe you’re under thinking something. Yes, of course, there is a line, and at a certain point something is too close to home or hurtful. But on the other hand, how many people deal with upsetting situations is by making light of them. I think that’s because by using humour you can see the ridiculous in a situation (eg. politics in the US, bullying, or even war) and then see it in a different light. Dark humour can help people. For example a joke about bullying can show people how ridiculous teasing people is, and can empower victims of bullying.

Some people don’t like dark humor though and some people do. That’s perfectly okay. Everyone has their own cup of tea. I think that’s something we need to respect.

While people try to make rules about comedy (ie. you can’t joke about this and that or every thing is fine to joke about), I think that comedians work in a grey area. A common saying is that comedy is tragedy plus timing. When it comes to whether or not a joke is hurtful we really need to assess it on a joke by joke basis, because every joke has a different context or meaning.

Finally: People please listen to each other. I think a lot of people online think that their opinion is the right opinion, and everyone else who doesn’t agree with them is a horrible monster. We probably all think that we’re super smart, at least on some level. But try something: Next time someone thinks a joke is offensive, listen to their feelings and where they are coming from. And if someone argues a joke isn’t offensive, listen to them as well; there might be another side to the joke that people should take into account.

Why did the chicken cross the road? To hear the comedian on the other side.

Why did a blind man fall into a well? Because he couldn’t see it.

Most people would agree this joke is terrible. But is it offensive? This was a joke that was told amongst my friends a couple of days ago, and we disagreed on whether or not it was hurtful. That disagreement made me realize how subjective comedy can be. And I found myself going down the rabbit hole of YouTube comment sections, Ted Talk videos, and opinions of professional comedians to try and answer the question: When is a joke offensive?

While doing research, I found that there are two camps when it comes to comedy. One group believes that comedians shouldn’t offend anyone. Another that comedy is about exploring touchy subjects and nothing is off limits. Personally, I consider myself to be in the middle of this comedy spectrum.

One Buzzfeed contributor really drew from the PC view of comedy. His opinion was that a comedian doesn’t need to be rude, if they are truly funny. I wasn’t too surprised to see this though, because half of Buzzfeed's content is about being offended by things. I respect Buzzfeed for tackling serious issues, but I don’t think this website is known for having nuanced discussions.

On the other hand, a Ted Talker went on stage and said that comedians should push boundaries, because people can choose whether or not something is offensive. His opinion seems to be a little bit of a stretch for me. If a comedian comes on stage and says that you suck, and they mean it seriously, it would be hard not to be offended. You really can’t choose to have or not have feelings.

Like most things in life, there is a middle ground. A lot of what comedians do is try to push the limits, use the things that are considered taboo to surprise people. Think of the medieval jesters who would go up to the king and say vulgar things. Anyone else who did this would’ve had their heads cut off, but jesters got away with it, because it was so far beyond what was considered acceptable, and that’s why it was funny.

I remember hearing British comedian Ricky Gervais speaking about the subject of offensive comedy.  He said that the intention is all that matters when it comes to humour. So if someone makes a joke that isn’t meant to hurt anyone than they can’t be in bad taste. I agree that intention does matter when assessing a joke, but people can still be hurt accidentally.

It does seem though that people on the internet need to roast someone if they make an offensive joke. One good example came from a Jon Ronson Ted Talk about a girl named Justine Sacco. Justine made a hurtful joke online, which is inexcusable. But because of this people bashed her in the name of social justice. Justine had to hide from shame; she got fired from her job and her life was changed from that incident. Even though the joke she said was mean, ruining her life because of it was unjustified, especially because Sacco claims that her joke was actually supposed to be satirical.

Here’s the thing, don’t fight fire with fire. If someone tells an offspirited joke, tell them how the joke is upsetting, but don’t cross the line by becoming a bully. The fact is, no one’s mind will be changed if you call someone a racist dick. “Oh someone online called me a racist bigot. I guess I should change my whole world view even though I might have actually been raised to think that way”, said no one ever!

Also, people make mistakes. Sometimes comedians make a joke that lands wrong, or pushed the limit. But that’s their jobs as comedians, to experiment. If a comedian makes one off colour joke, let them apologise, give them some room to move on from the incident. Honestly, if we don’t do that there won’t be a lot of comedians left. Of course, if a comedian continuously and unapologetically makes insensitive jokes, than it’s time to stop supporting them.

Another thing that people can find offensive in comedy is making light of things. I saw a list on Tumblr saying “Things you can never joke about”. Now, if your opinion on this topic can be reduced down to an internet meme, then maybe you’re under thinking something. Yes, of course, there is a line, and at a certain point something is too close to home or hurtful. But on the other hand, how many people deal with upsetting situations is by making light of them. I think that’s because by using humour you can see the ridiculous in a situation (eg. politics in the US, bullying, or even war) and then see it in a different light. Dark humour can help people. For example a joke about bullying can show people how ridiculous teasing people is, and can empower victims of bullying.

Some people don’t like dark humour though and some people do. That’s perfectly okay. Everyone has their own cup of tea. I think that’s something we need to respect.

While people try to make rules about comedy (ie. you can’t joke about this and that or every thing is fine to joke about), I think that comedians work in a grey area. A common saying is that comedy is tragedy plus timing. When it comes to whether or not a joke is hurtful we really need to assess it on a joke by joke basis, because every joke has a different context or meaning.

Finally: People please listen to each other. I think a lot of people online think that their opinion is the right opinion, and everyone else who doesn’t agree with them is a horrible monster. We probably all think that we’re super smart, at least on some level. But try something: Next time someone thinks a joke is offensive, listen to their feelings and where they are coming from. And if someone argues a joke isn’t offensive, listen to them as well; there might be another side to the joke that people should take into account.

Why did the chicken cross the road? To hear the comedian on the other side.

[grimecrow]

An Open Letter To Cenk Uygar. My Faith In Christ Is No Less Absurd Than Your Faith In America.

Mr Uygar;

I watch a tremendous amount of TYT, I share it with others, I spread the good word; I am for the most part a big supporter though I can't afford to subscribe. After watching so much Young Turks over the years, I guess the recent comments about religion made me sigh one too many times.

I have read the bible; I read the bible when I didn't have a religion and many years later I still became a Christian. Now you will think I am an idiot but I ask that you finish hearing me out. You always say you wanna give people the chance to state their side so please finish reading.

Belief in sky gods, healing crystals, ghosts or UFOs is no or less absurd than the patriotism you or anyone else has for their country. How does my faith compare to your patriotism? Read on.

The United States of America, isn't an ideal, or a dream, or a hope or anything. It is a set of arbitrary lines drawn on the map and agreed upon by the general population. Nothing more.

You show clips on your show where people talk about this person or that person or this other group aren't 'real' Americans, then you quote a very old document and talk about how the original speaker is un-American. You are correct, the original speaker is wrong, the people they are talking about ARE Americans; you are also incorrect though as the original speaker is ALSO an American.

Do you meet the arbitrary requirements set by the ruling body to qualify legally as an American? Yes? Then you are an American. If ideals and actions mattered so much as a quantifier to be American regardless of what those ideals or actions are then some random guy in Spain who has those exact same of principals and beliefs as an American should would by default be an American. They aren't though are they? They are Spanish.

How does this tie into my faith in Jesus Christ?

When you are talking about holy texts you keep talking about how the bible indicates contradictory things therefore a person who doesn't accept 100% of what is there is a joke of a person. You have to accept 100% of what is written as what is supposed to make you a Christian or Muslim or whatever and if you don't then you aren't really a person of that faith.

So...do you accept 100% of America's history and actions as an absolute of what it means to be an American? Even the dark and contradictory stuff? No of course not, you will say people meddled with things, people of the time didn't have full understanding, and that is just history so people can strive to be better than we were in the past.

OK...well you also don't agree with the President, the congress, the senate, a majority of governors, the Republican party, Republican voters, corporate Democrats, Libertarians, and many other factions of America. They don't represent “your America”, you disagree with them and want to stamp out what they are and what they make America. If they pass laws, gain a majority or whatever you still reject them, don't support what they define America as and the actions, documents, or whatever that become a part of American identity are not respected or integrated into “your America”.

I don't actually put much weight in the bible, I believe the bible is written out by man and there are different editions therefore man has tampered with it, changed it, and lied in it to further their needs at the time. It's why I also don't put a lot of weight in the church, as it is an organization created by man, run by man, with its main intent to be rule and subjugate. I still believe in the teachings of Jesus though; the Sermon on the Mount and many other sections are “my Christianity”.

Do I believe that Jesus walked on water as the bible says? I don't understand what the original words or intent were so I have no idea what the writer of the time is actually saying so I have no idea. It could just be a metaphor for something and we don't know.

I'd also like to take a moment to point out how you and I are the same again with our respected absurdist beliefs by bringing up Wolf-Pac. You created Wolf-Pac (Google it if you are reading this and don't know what it is!) to get money out of politics because you believe the current system isn't true democracy and corrupts “your America” though it is a mainstay aspect and truth of what America is and has been for a long time.

I am the exact same way when it comes to churches that put the scribbles of the Bible before the actual teachings of Christ. If you can ONLY teach, guide or preach based on the literal wording of the bible then you are a false prophet, corrupt and trying to preach not to spread the message of the Lord but to gain money, power or some other mortal angle. This isn't just true of Christians I feel the same way about all religious leaders that do nothing but quote the bible as their way of preaching regardless of the religion. Bible preaches know little to nothing of what Christianity actually is as an ideal, that's why you get so many hate preachers, and crazy bigoted church organizations.

Why is it that you having faith in America despite the manipulation by people for their own gains, the codification of propaganda to help that manipulation, history and current actions by factions within your country is OK but...

me having faith in the teachings of Jesus Christ despite the manipulation by people for their own gains, the codification of propaganda to help that manipulation, history and current actions by factions within the religion absurd and I'm an idiot?