#this post is inspired by bus discourse!!!

[zaddyazula]

i hate single deckers

[anghraine]

I read an interesting post this morning about the rhetoric around "trauma porn" and "misery porn" and so on. It's here.

I'm not reblogging directly because my response is fairly tangential, so I'm handling it in ye olde journal fandom way by making a separate post. But the short version of the other post is that "porn" is doing a lot of heavy lifting in those formulations in ways that reflect on cultural discourse around pornography, tragedy, exploitation, and spectacle. Also, there's something iffy about the way things like trauma or tragedy are conceptualized as intrinsically flawed and excessive if they don't directly further the core of the story or have a clear "point."

That's all true, though I think the "x porn" formulation extends faaar beyond dismissal of tragedy or misery or dark fiction. In these formulations, "porn" becomes a convenient shorthand for "this exploits [something, usually real] for the benefit and enjoyment of others, frequently others who are not otherwise involved with [thing]."

For instance, as someone with a disability, I'm accustomed to hearing criticism of "inspiration porn"—in which actual or fictionalized disabled people are exploited and reduced to hopeful inspiration for other, usually non-disabled people (in short, so others can feel good). You could say "inspiration exploitation" but ... meh. So it's important to be clear that this terminology is far from just disapproving of grimdark or whatnot.

That doesn't mean that "[x] porn" isn't worth interrogating as a catchphrase in terms of how it relates to cultural perspectives on pornography etc etc. Just that it's used in a much broader context than this particular issue.

Secondly, some of that insistence on trauma/tragedy/unhappiness as intrinsically excessive unless there's some clear point sounds very much to me as a sort of New Criticism approach as overheard on the bus. Maybe this leans a bit towards conspiracy theory, lol, but I can explain.

The OP probably knows this, but New Criticism is a now largely outdated theory of literary criticism which is, among other things, deeply concerned with the unity of literary texts. Elements of a text which do not further the core themes and ultimate coherence of the text are often seen as weaknesses or excess from this POV. It owes a lot to previous traditions and takes on What Art Should Be, going back at least as far as Aristotle's Poetics:

The plot, being an imitation of an action, must imitate one action and that a whole, the structural union of the parts being such that, if any one of them is displaced or removed, the whole will be disjointed and disturbed. For a thing whose presence or absence makes no visible difference, is not an organic part of the whole.

So trauma or tragedy or misery that does not seem fundamental to the unity or wholeness of the piece and doesn't seem to make much difference to what the text is about or thematically preoccupied with can feel disjointed. It's not difficult for otherwise hardline anti-intentionalists (which also smacks of overheard New Criticism) to assume this arises out of a lack of discipline, control, or critical thinking about subject matter.

Of course, it frequently depends on the case. There's often a certain amount of "if I like it, X element is necessary to The Unity, and if I don't, it's a disjointed and problematic mess." But still, the emphasis on coherence and conservation of detail as intrinsic to artistic merit of literature is also a much bigger conversation than "misery porn" discourse. Aristotle himself, for instance, argued that tragedy is a higher art form than comedy. I think the discussion is at least partly as much about minimalism/a NC-influenced value for unity.

(FWIW New Criticism is very much out of style, but the impact on how literary criticism is taught in at least the United States, especially in K-12, is very profound.)

[burnitalldowndarling]

(4/4) and yet you get all these young, new writers writing as if instead of using our language the way it should be used, create things that read as if they’re literally translating English syntax to the letter, with results that, more often than not, are unreadable and pretty cringe-inducing. Sorry, this is all very rambly, but it is to say: what are your personal thoughts on that? Do you write differently when writing fanfic vs original fiction, and if so, what are some of the key differences you can think of? (Besides the obvious) Is there even such a thing as a “fanfic writing style”? And would you say it’s fair to say some fanfic is actively on par with published literature? Because to me it seemed obvious until I started seeing all the online discourse around that, on both extremes. I’m very curious to get your in-depth thoughts on that, besides just reflagging a post and agreeing with its contents.

Sorry I couldn't include your whole 4-part ask, Anon friend! I didn't want to make this too long. Speaking of which, here's a readmore.

Okay. First: there's discourse about fanfic vs original fic? Again? Yaaaaawn. And to answer: I do alter my style for fanfic, mostly to match canon better. Like, in my Dragon Age fics, I try to use the same dialogue style that the games use. Cullen sounds posh, for example, and overly formal even when he's trying to be casual; Carver sounds more casual and uses more rough slang. In Mass Effect I mostly do the same, plus I sometimes use choppier narration for a militaristic, "macho" feel, again emulating the games' style of making everybody sound Extremely American and badass. Devil May Cry was more of a challenge because those games don't have a consistent dialogue/narration style to emulate, just "who translated this and were they drunk?" Instead I had to focus on character and motivations -- i.e. "Dante is always hilariously nihilistic but he really just wants a family and some peace & quiet." With Trigun I've been struggling a lot because there are three completely different canons with three completely different characterizations and narrative styles -- two of which directly contradict each other -- and then there are the six or seven different translations! I haven't really settled on a style for that fandom, but trying to blend everything is part of the fun, for me. I like a challenge.

I'm not "dumbing down" or negatively affecting my own style by doing this, I don't think. Playing with other voices, by other rules, helps me refine my own authentic voice in much the same way that improv helps actors and comedians. I think that's the case for anyone who writes fanfic, but it's probably easiest to see with the pros. Take astolat, for example. Some of her Aubrey-Maturin fanfics are more restrained than her Temeraire novels, even though the latter were inspired by the former. The restraint is because there probably weren't many dragons running around during the Napoleonic wars, and because she's sticking close to Patrick O'Brien's style on purpose. But then, in the Temeraire books, she discards these constraints, which to me is her doing the writing equivalent of this:

Then she just fucking goes ham on her readers. Kicks them in the head with one of the best alternate histories I've ever seen, rewriting colonialism from scratch and giving it a better ending. She replaces a deep human friendship with the closeness between a man and his bus-sized Chinese dragon, and it works. These are feats of literary derring-do that a lot of writers cannot emulate, and wouldn't dare try. And yet I've heard more than one reader complain that she "wastes time" on fanfic. Which to me is like complaining that Rock Lee "wastes time" wearing weights.

tl,dr; Most people who insist that fanfic is inferior lack the expertise to judge the real skill involved in making it. Doesn't stop them from opening their stupid Dunning-Kruger mouths, tho, does it.

[illfoandillfie]

ok sorry but how many people do yall think rog has ever slept with cos i’m guessing four figures no lie

okay, i don’t normally respond to messages like this because, frankly, i dont really feel like its my place to speculate on roger’s sex life. Theres a difference between writing a fiction story with a character named after and inspired by him and discussing his actual personal life which i have no real knowledge about. What he gets up to in his free time is between him and the women he does it with. but i didn’t really feel able to ignore this one. please don’t take this as me telling you off or shutting you down or anything like that. If you want to speculate about roger’s body count thats up to you, go nuts with it. and i love when you guys message me and I don’t want to discourage you from feeling like you can talk to me or just send me your random thoughts or whatever about any subject. But I feel like I need to address why I disagree with this sentiment. Also so I can ask ya’ll to please stop asking me questions like this. 

So firstly, just to get this out of the way. 1000 is a lot. even 100 is a lot. I think if rog had slept with 1000+ people he’d have a least a few illegitimate kids and probably would have been checked into rehab for sex addiction (not to mention STIs and such because lbr people in the 70s specifically probs werent the most careful especially if drugs were involved). I mean even if we were going to say Rog got lucky with a different woman after every show we wouldn’t reach 1000. According to google, Queen played around 700 shows in their entire career. If we add shows played by The Cross thats only another 67 odd shows (according to wikipedia). 

now, i think there are 3 things that contribute to this idea of roger as especially promiscuous. 1. His attitude/demeanour/general way he sells himself. 2. the generally held conceptions about rock stars and rock star behaviour. and 3. what i’m going to call fandom dumbassery (but i mean that with a lot of love) 

So lets start with the man himself. Roger Taylor is loud and opinionated and not particularly humble. He knows he’s talented and attractive though for at least some time he was a little self-conscious about how feminine he looked. He’s always up for a laugh, likes to party and has admitted to enjoying his drink and his women. He’s had kids with two different women, who’s relationships “overlapped”, and is currently married to a third. At least that’s the perception we can gleam from his interviews, behind the scenes videos, and other public appearances. 

It’s easy to see how that image leads to accusations of being a womaniser and a cheater and basically a bit of a slut lmao. But here’s the thing. I think Roger, in part, markets himself that way. The thing is, if you look at his solo songs and the relationships he currently has with his kids and their mothers, and things other people have said about him/his relationships over the years, I think it’s fair to say he also has a bit of a romantic streak maybe? idk if thats the best way of describing it...he’s self confessed to not being a fan of marriage and the like but he’s not opposed to writing and singing love songs and seems to believe in ~love~ as a concept/power. He certainly cares deeply for those closest to him. Whether or not that translates to an agreement with monogamy I can’t say for certain. It’s hard to draw conclusions here because a lot of what we know of his personal life was fed to us through magazines and news paper gossip column articles and they were never looking for the truth, they were looking for scandal and sensationalism. 

For instance the whole thing with the overlapping relationships. I think most people who have read anything about roger and dom and debbie realise that it’s not as cut and dry as “he was cheating with debbie and left dom for her” even though that was the story being sold by the press at the time. The reality (or at least the version closer to reality since obviously no one outside of them and whoever they were closest with knows all the nitty gritty details) is that rog and dom had already split when they got married. it was a marriage of convenience to make sure her and the kids would be looked after financially etc even after he’d moved out. So while it looked to the public like he married one chick and 30 odd days later was spotted with another, there really wasn’t anything untoward happening.  I’m not saying he never had casual hookups or one night stands and i’m not saying he never cheated, but I do think some of it’s been exaggerated, whether by him to encourage the rock star perception or by newspaper/magazine articles.

Now, obviously, we have stories of rog, particularly in the late 60s and into the 70s, being with multiple women. There’s that bit in the Interview with a Queen “Groupie” (which is a fantastic read and i defs recommend checking it out if you havent already) where she talks about roger being a chick magnet and says that, at the time, it was pretty common to sleep about. But, she also says she didnt notice him doing it more or less than anyone else and seemed to mostly be with Jo (his girlfriend at the time). This is the same Jo that got a mention in the Queen in 3D book (”i think we all had the feeling that these two were together for life, but it was not to be”). Conversely, we have that quote (which i cannot find rn but i’ll link it when i do) about roger sometimes having one girl upstairs while another waited in the garage for them to be finished. I think it was about Rog in the mid-late 60s in Truro but whatever. Obviously he wasn’t anywhere near celibate and it’s likely was sleeping with people outside of his relationship(s). But one has to assume that as he got older those kinds of antics stopped happening, at least as frequently.

There is one potential story that I remember reading somewhere along the way about Roger cheating on Debbie while she was pregnant. But, take that with a grain of salt because I can’t find the article again and also I think it was from like The Sun or something equally as rubbish. The press was notoriously always printing mean shit about the boys and that might have been another thing they published to create scandal. Even so, if we assume it’s legit that is still only 1 story. Not to throw him under the bus but Brian is the one with multiple confirmed affairs, who literally wrote songs about it all. So why is Roger the one with sleazy reputation? 

This is where my second and third points come in. There is a pervasive idea about what it means to be a rock star. The whole trashing hotel rooms, sleeping with groupies, passing out drunk every night thing. And I’m sure that Queen was like that to an extent. I think it’s pretty common knowledge that all of them got up to shit on the road. Between innuendo laden interviews and songs, videos and accounts of their parties, stories CT has put online, and other stories like the one of Roger bringing out lines of coke as dessert when he was having dinner with motley crue. They definitely embraced the rock and roll lifestyle. And I think with Roger’s personality being what it is, it’s easy to link him to those traditional rock star tropes and say it was all true all the time. I also think Roger has done nothing to counter those beliefs. He’s been open about how he wanted to be a rock star since the minute he picked up a guitar, he’s labelled himself as a great lay in magazines, he’s joked about girls pulling their tits out over dinner in interviews (though he said he didnt take her home), he’s written songs like One Night Stand and Dirty Mind and Airheads which explicitly mention his preference for women and alcohol. I think it’s fair to say he’s kind of encouraged that view of himself. Whether it was just a side effect of being part of such a well known band and having such a boisterous demeanour/personality, or whether it was intentional as a version of promotion i don’t know. maybe a mix of them? I mean I’m sure it didn’t hurt sales and stuff. it’s the whole guys want to be him, girls want to be with him thing, right? Maybe that’s just me being cynical though lmao. 

Anyway, the fandom brain has taken all of that and compressed it into memes and jokes about rog being the band slut. Which i’m not complaining about, lord knows i’ve made the same jokes and reblogged the same posts and used those tropes in my fics. They’re funny and lend themselves to interesting fic concepts. Plus, i think roger is the sort of person who would probably laugh about most of it. But it’s an idea that keeps feeding into itself through fandom, perpetuating what is probably a misguided view of his personal life.

Again, I am sure he’s had his fair share of fun and I’m not trying to make out that he was always perfect or whatever, but I don’t think he’s been with as many women as the popular discourse would imply and I certainly don’t think he’s in the 4 digit numbers. 

[antinonymous]

The Punk Rock in Marxist-Leninism

As far back as I can remember, I’ve always hated punk rock; the reasons why having changed significantly. I heavily identified as Right-wing throughout my childhood through early adolescence, so punk rock was a piece of culture that I quickly realized was not for me, with its far-left anarchist aesthetic. If you’d shown and explained to me something like Holiday in Cambodia I wouldn’t have cared in the slightest. Anti-fascists often forget about how the far-right rarely considers the vast and vapid categorizations of different leftists and other anti-fascist types. Anarchists are just as anti-American as Stalinists; anarchists just don’t have a plan (besides the occasional riot) so they’re more docile and easier to ignore. They’re just extra annoying and snobby. The sonic elements of punk mixed in with the political atmosphere sealed it for me. I thought this entire genre of music sounded like some twerp in class who says shit about America just to ‘piss off the system’. Childish, really.

In high school, the first punk band I didn’t immediately hate was neo-Nazi band Skrewdriver. I was introduced to them on a bus for school, with only one black kid on the whole bus, having the song White Power being shown explicitly to them. I remember referencing it to him later in conversation and he said he hated that experience. To me though? Finally, I thought, some punk rock where I can very easily say ‘well I like the music, but I don’t like their politics’ and it isn’t SJW crap. If I were to say stuff like that about other punk rock bands that’d be blasphemy, so I avoided the leftists and found more Nazi punk, where the bad politics were more obvious.

As someone who’s always been into music, my childhood had a specific opinion that I now understand to be just a simple analysis- namely, that politically left-wing music doesn’t do anything to change the system whatsoever. On an open-mic day in my high school the buses had already arrived and then my band got to play Killing in The Name. The school, the ‘system’, allotted us more time because they wanted to hear a cool song. Nobody was inspired by that song that day to think critically about the condition of militarized police in America or how the Klan’s ideology controls the majority of America’s police. I know I didn’t. Frankly, I thought putting politics in music was a waste of time Right or Left. And I found more Rightist music later on, namely in black metal.

Black metal is a mirror image of punk, if that mirror were on two ends of a horseshoe. Both started out as what we today label ‘edgy’, yet generally non-political, and then got somewhat overtaken by the far right and far left. Black metal was firmly cemented in Nazi ideology by the mid-90s with Burzum and the history of the Norwegian second wave, as well as later bands like Germany’s Absurd to solidify National Socialist Black Metal as its own genre. Then there’re wackos like Peste Noire, who, with the help of figures like Anthony Fantano, are somewhat normalized and mainstream while also having deep French nationalist roots. But what makes black metal also similar to punk is the later insurgency movements from either political side into the other genre. Nazi punk distinguishes itself not by its members being skinheads, for skinheads began as a far-left movement, but rather with aesthetics like white and red shoelaces (wrapped straight) and, of course, swastikas. In the mid/late 2010s an anti-fascist black metal scene emerged in response to the atrocities of the Obama administration and Trump’s election victory. This was spearheaded by bands like Gaylord and Neckbeard Death Camp as well as others from Bandcamp and Soundcloud. It didn’t try to distinguish itself at all, in a crypto-anti-fascism directly proselytizing. Nazi punk and anti-fascist black metal are similar in that they, like all music as we’ll be seeing, also don’t achieve anything, but are specifically trying to change the strata of their own genre’s political associations. As my own father put it, there’s only two kinds of Oi – racist and non-racist.

Left-wing black metal was obvious folly that I participated in anyway. But even when I eventually started putting personal politics into my music from 2016 through 2019, I still avoided major bands like Rage and punk rock (besides Bad Religion, which I only liked because I saw a live cover). It was actually Peste Noire who showed me the wonder of sampling in music; yet another far-right appropriation of musical technique, sadly. It was only in late 2019 and 2020 that I listened to bands like Rage and Dead Kennedys, and seeing the amount of effort they put in their messaging left me cynically giggling. Paraphrasing other commentators, music has no effect on political change no matter how radical. Far-left Marxist, Bolshevik, anarchist and Social-Democratic musical compositions have existed since the nineteenth century and were plentiful in the entirety of the 20th century, albeit with significant change after the World Wars. But music is too individualistic to be politically effective as every individual person’s preferences are different. This is how Rage and anarchist punk rock sold so well in America and how I continued to enjoy Peste Noire long after I left the Right.

My music was also inspired by industrial metal band Rammstein, and I’ve since learned that, generally speaking, politically provocative art is an integral part of industrial music generally, which easily puts off someone not paying careful attention to the music. To paraphrase Žižek, artists like Rammstein and Laibach use fascistic language and imagery in a controlled way that lifts various signs from their associations of authoritarianism, leaving them inoffensive enough to gain mainstream credibility. Case in point, Slovenia’s Laibach has caused numerous controversies over their 41-year-career with their overtly militaristic theme, prolific German lyrics, and for having been branded as dissidents by the Yugoslav government, yet they are the only foreign band that has ever performed in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. They were invited to play in 2015 to celebrate the 70-year-anniversary of the fall of imperial Japanese rule on National Liberation Day. The government would clearly know better than to invite a legitimate fascist band; in their minds that would most certainly create an immediate attempt to try to cause some type of western imperialist unrest. One would wonder why they’d invite anyone at all. But nothing malevolent came about from it; the show went fine, and clips of it are on YouTube. I won’t try to make any comment on any individual in the DPRK or anywhere else, but it’s fascinating to think of what happens when Laibach is played through North Korean speakers, interpreted by those who have few else in common with the band other than they both have experience living under a régime inspired by Marx.

It must be a different experience from, say, the experience of Anarchy in the UK by Sex Pistols as sung on North Korean karaoke by VICE journalist Sam Smith. This leads me to my current gripes with punk rock, specifically in the year 2021.

Sex Pistols are the origin of punk rock’s association with anarchism due to the song mentioned above, but they are also the origin of punk rock’s association with Nazism due to Sid Vicious’ use of a swastika t-shirt. This is no paradox. Both are a result of Liberal nihilism, of having no true political leaning other than blind offensiveness and ideological motivation without one ever needing sincerity in belief. Either that or punk rock bands are explicitly Liberal/conservative, which is a discourse I remember from my childhood. Post-90s punk was too commercial, liberal, gay, et cetera, with bands such as Green Day having been seen as a perversion of the solidarity of the mostly cisgender heteronormative anarchist community of people who actually listen to punk rock. John Lydon is an open Trump-supporter. After the far-right January 6th attack on the Capitol, Dead Kennedys retweeted many Liberal commentators and politicians, including Republicans Mitt Romney and Arnold Schwarzenegger. I see not a problem with individual people and artists but a problem with punk rock as artistic expression; it has terminal hollow conformity. Overall, its association with petit bourgeois ideology leaves punk rock with little to give it credibility. Punk rock has always had an insincere, two-faced nature. ‘Punk’s not dead’ is the anti-fascist equivalent of ‘return to tradition’…or is it anti-fascist? Depends on who’s saying it, where’s being said, and who hears it.

Where to turn? Marxist-Leninists (and sometimes even anarchists) will argue that social bureaucracies such as Cuba, the People’s Republic of China, Vietnam and the DPRK provide an alternative to American global homogeny. Considering the American military spent over $700,000,000,000 on its military last year, and that many bases are specifically placed around those listed countries, their arguments aren’t entirely unconvincing. They also argue that because Marxist-Leninist politicians provided industrialization and progress for their nations without what Marxist-Leninists would personally term “imperialist war”, they should be praised, as well as the fact that many of the problems commonly associated with those countries are explicitly from American intervention to stop ‘the spread of Marxism’ and to keep them subordinated to western authority. However, as Bordiga writes in Characteristic Theses of the Party, the integral realization of socialism within the limits of one country is inconceivable and the socialist transformation cannot be carried out without insuccess and momentary set-backs. The defence of the proletarian regime against the ever-present dangers of degeneration is possible only if the proletarian State is always solidary with the international struggle of the working class of each country against its own bourgeoisie, its State and its army; this struggle permits of no respite even in wartime. This co-ordination can only be secured if the world communist Party controls the politics and programme of the States where the working class has vanquished.

Am I arguing for left unity, left solidarity, the whole “anarchists and Marxist-Leninists are going for the same communist goal” argument? No, I’m not talking about that. This has been said before but, historically speaking, there’s usually only one correct way to pilot a vehicle and thousands of wrong ways. But I’m talking about music. And I bring up Marxist-Leninism for what could be seen as a superficial reason; that the potency of Musikbolschewismus is greater than the potency of traditional anarchist punk rock. If we’re just talking about music to ‘piss people off’, which is what punk rock culturally amounts to, punk rock could be Marxist-Leninist in that that ideology has more of the nihilistic punk rock mentality than any band you could name. Because Marxist-Leninism can indeed be quite nihilistic, with Russian Bolshevik minority rule in foreign countries paralleling the worst aspects of American imperialism and its related apologia. As for industrialization, the USSR demobilized its military to a lesser extent than other European countries, organized more strictly than NATO. Their industrialization in question was related to impersonal and heavily regulated bureaucratic trade, the aforementioned occupation of eastern Europe and elsewhere, and warcraft: firearms, lightweight tanks, and thousands of nuclear weapons. In 2021, the history of Marxist-Leninist music is both far more potent and plentiful than anarchist punk rock; if a bit old-school, boringly classical, and used in the justification of unjust countries.

What I’m trying to say is this: what is the difference between an English band that wears swastika and MAGA t-shirts singing about how anarchy is good and another band that wears sickle and hammer shirts singing about how the USSR and the PRC are good? Both are nonsense but the latter is sincere with what they say… or are they? Considering punk rock’s edgy, yet ultimately cowardly and insincere anti-authority outlook, I can’t help but wonder what would be if Marxist-Leninism were to ever embrace the potentiality of its status and flaws and make annoying, loud guitar music. It wouldn’t be hard since, comparatively, the bad politics are more obvious. And once it gets started, it’d create a new cycle of the entirety of political thought in music; easily being able to be superior to Right-Libertarian punk rock and all the washed-up bands of the 70s-00s.

What’s the actual transgressive music we have today? Rap music has been mostly dominated by black Americans since the 80s, with a lot of rappers now being women. It is held to a different esteem than even the antisemitic ‘satanic panic’ of the 80s against heavy metal, since legal cases referring to rap lyrics are not unheard of and can even lead to conviction in modern times. It is much closer to the struggles of the global afro-diasporic community than with European writers from 80+ years ago. Punk rock never had, never could, and never will, have a scene of that calibre.

In conclusion, I hope I have provided a cynical pseudo-rehabilitation of punk rock through the example of Marxist-Leninism in a specific manner related to the overall creation of and interpretation of music, which is an important piece of international culture. I know Marxist-Leninist States to be corrupt and are not socialist, but to the eyes of an American, and to the ears of the average punk rock normie, Marxist-Leninism is just as anti-US government as the anarchists, only scarier, because they actually have a plan! So why can’t it be punk? The PRC’s State-sanctioned abductions are certainly not what Bordiga had in mind in regards to a proletarian government being against its own bourgeoisie. Internationality is the way forward. But it almost sounds like it’s against the system if one has that kind of understanding of ‘the system’. Who’s to say there isn’t an obscure 80s punk demo labelled Kidnapping Billionaires somewhere? Punk rock is nothing more than vapid noise to piss of conservatives. That’s it. It has no heart, spirit nor philosophy. The PRC even saying they would like socialism is too far for American conservative wormpeople, and legitimate reasons to criticize the PRC and other social bureaucracies get overshadowed by imperialist greed and racism. Music is not nearly the kind of tool of radicalism Zack de la Rocha thought it was, but with the internationality of Laibach we see it can do more than one can normally expect. It all depends on whether people can distinguish/separate the instrumentation from the proselytization.

[nightmaretyrantvantas]

So I’m finally getting around to writing out a bunch of info about my Sander Sides au so I hope youre all ready--(its like 1 am im so sorry for any spelling mistakes and missed tags)

So its 1 am on a work night and I cant sleep and I’ve had lots of ideas and canon things for this au bouncing around my head for days and now TONIGHTS THE NIGHT ITS HAPPENING IM DELIVERING YOU ALL THE DETAILS AND EVERYTHING I CAN THINK OF AND TYPE 

Also please feel free to ask about this! I know I got a few new followers from all my recent sander sides art and also thanks to @sugarglider9603 reblogging some art I made of their au I got the biggest flood of exposure and attention on my art ive ever had and I have so much to thank them for, for all recent exposure ive gotten the past couple days( theyre so sweet and lovely and easy to talk to sugar deserves all the love--) and its given me a huge surge of motivation and confidence to post this. And please, my inbox is always open to talk about my aus or my art! Ask questions, send requests, send headcanons or ideas, send fluff angst im open to anything and I try to do all requests sent to me(sooner or later)

Oh oh! and please id you catch any and all the little inspirations or anything let me know

And finally this au is a LAMP au with Remile and Demus on the side

Ahem ahem anyway onto the au!!!

More under the cut so I dont flood your screen too bad!

Ok so! 

This Au was originally inspired by @residentanchor‘s amazing fanfic A Lesson in Practicality and also a little bit by @prettyinaccurate‘s fanged virgil au( I’ll get more into that further down) 

So it takes place in a (currently) unnamed bigger city I based off San Francisco and Sacramento( because I live in Cali and those are the two major cities ive really visited ya know?) The boys are all in various stages of their twenties when they move into a four bedroom apartment together: Patton Foster is the oldest of the roomies at 27, then Logan Masters at 26, Roman Prince at 24, and finally Virgil Collins at 22. They move in together because it all works out for them really, the apartment is in a good distance to all their current jobs, whether by bus or even in Pat’s case in walking distance and with all four of them it was well affordable and was pretty nice. I mean hey it even came with a little communal balcony ( since theyre on third floor of the building) 

Things are understandably a little rocky at first , i mean isnt it always though?

Virgil has alot of anxiety and so he tends not to talk really at all at the beginning unless he ABSOLUTELY had to, mostly communicating in noncomittal noises and soft grumbles, and he was fresh out of collage and barely two years into his job and out on his own for the first time and he wasnt really ready for it either like christ too many people

Patton was bright bubbly and caring. This wasnt his first rodeo with roomies, I mean cmon, hes been sharing a room with his older brother Damian(deceit) on and off almost all his freakin life, nor was it his first time living on his own with strangers(hes lived in two different parts of two when he was job hopping before he settled down in his current part time job)

Roman was extroverted loud and exciteable, he too was used to sharing his living space( he had TWO siblings after all) and before he had moved into the apartment he had tried living on his own and with other roommates while he attended collage, but those just didnt work out well ( he ended up staying with his older brother Remy in his studio apartment across the city while he finished out that semester and searched for a job to keep an income.

Logan was serious minded stern toned and confident, he had a minor degree in teaching that he was slowly repursueing and had been out on his own for awhile before he had moved in. And though cold at first he soon found his group of housemates...enjoyable.

Its about a month into them living together that they learn exactly why despite slowly getting close and getting to know each other Virgil still kept a wide distance: He had entirely sharp teeth.

“ I dunno....I was born with them..theyve always been a sharp pain in my ass...” - virgil, about his teeth

Of course just having sharp teeth wasnt bad enough oh no. You see a few years back when he was about 18 he was young and dumb and made horrifically stupid and reckless decisions under peer pressure and ended up doing something that not only pointedly (haha oh god im not funny) chipped his front teeth but it fucked up his teeth pretty majorly, he went from having a normal overbite to almost having a goddamn underbite and crooked all his teeth, and the only way to fix it( because somehow miraculous for all the damage done it turned out to be mostly reversable aside from the chipping) was getting braces to realign his teeth. So he’s had pretty purple braces over his fangs since he was 18 and they werent expected to come off until he was AT LEAST 25 and he was insecure about them. ( he got mocked for them through his two and a half years of junior collage)

Once the gang finds out they are understanding and helpful and dont make a big deal about it( though virgil gains a significant amount of more vampire related nicknames from roman)

Once they get close and comfortable around each other the apartment is pretty warm and lively! 

Virgil works at the art store as an assistant manager and head stocker( a bit of a dream come true since he was an art student)

Roman works as a part time waiter at a family resturant as well as working at a nearby theater( he was of course a lovely theater major) 

Patton worked at a nearby cafe and bakery as a bit of everything! He helped wait tables, serve behind the counter, and helped in the back in the kitchen( the owners were family friends and he’d been working there almost four to five years at that point, boi knows how to do everything) 

Logan worked at a big name bookstore, and also provided tutoring sessions for highschool students on the side by commision

More FACTS~~

Family ages for the big families go as follows:

Fosters: Damian(28), Patton(27)

Prince: Remy(26), Roman(24, older twin by 10 minutes), Remus(24, younger twin)

Emile is 27 and is a licensed therapist and works as a counselor for young adults that volunteers at the nearby library to ready to children

Remy works as a coffee barista in Emile’s building

Remus does alot of odd jobs, kinda working as an independent for hire and gets a surprising steady flow of work and pay. Hes still a trash man though, but hes a successful trash man( partly thanks to Damian calling in favors with connections)

Damian works at a law firm slowly moving into the position of prosecutor

Virgil doesnt really get along with his family and at some point Emile offers to take virgil in as his adopted brother, with Damian assuring him if he wanted concrete legal papers to start changing his last name, cutting ties with his family, anything needed for it he’d see to it that they’d be providing(something our boi really appreciates)

Remy visits Emile on his breaks since hes literally just...two hallways down and vice versa

Damian and Remus live together in the next, slightly smaller city over because Damian’s work transferred him to a different office in order for him to keep moving up in the ranks so to speak. 

Hes also good at what he does.

Family nights happen whenever they can

Patton got to teach them how to cook alot of complicatied dishes from scratch, a bonding time he adores

Roman got Virgil an Espeon hoodie after they all start dating and virgil loves it and wears it alot around the house because its a thicker hoodie and warm( though he tries to ignore the big ears and the obnovious tail

Virgil also loves visiting Roman’s work on what Ro likes to refer to as “ hellish days” AKA kids day which means goofy kid friendly theme days. His favorite was probably alice in wonderland day when Roman was Tweedle Dee

Roman played J.D at the local theater and likes to hum some of the his songs to switch up the Disney

The balcony is covered in houseplants and and a corner of old blankets and pillows to sit and chill on

Once a month Logan and Patton have what is affectionately referred to as the Cat Discourse

After any particularly rough days at work Patton tends to massage Logan’s shoulders and back to make sure Lo doesnt get any really bad stress knots

in return when Logan sees Patton’s head a hard day he makes Patton’s favorite drink and pulls him into a hug and let the older man fall asleep in his arms while they watch movies

Pat and roman sense each other’s bad days and order in some cliche diner food and hole up in pattons room with Pattons computer and relax the shittiness away with comedy specials and movies 

Likewise Virgil has a knack of picking up Roman’s bad days and always grabs a couple glasses and a bottle kinda cheap wine and they end up curling up together on Romans bed marathoning Disney movies on Virgil’s laptop 

and when Virgil closes himself off more than normal Logan manages to lure him out of his room and they end up sitting out on the balcony quietly talking and stargazing

so loving and fond and soft with each other

you hurt one of them you gonna get BEAT by the others. 

Speaking of getting beat, never EVER mess with Roman or Remus in Remy’s proximity

Remy Andrew Prince can and WILL fuck you right up if you hurt his little brothers. He’s protective.

and where Remy will rearrange your face Damian will ruin you mentally and legally if you so much as mistreat a single freckle on his little brother’s face, despite knowing that Patton is fully capable of taking care of himself. 

Everyone protects Virgil, dont mess with or hurt virgil or you have the pack coming for ya throat

aaaaaaaaaaaaaand thats all I have for right now! Of course more will be added but now its almost three in the morning and I have work at 1:30pm and im sleepy finally! But I hope you guys like this! And please, feel free to talk to me about it, my inbox is always open!!

Taglist: @phantommoonpeople @sweetsweetemo @loganberrysanders

[belovedrival]

This week has kinda sucked

...but there’s a light at the end of the tunnel.

Work has been crazy, people hate each other more with every passing moment over political shit or cultural shit (here’s looking at yooouuuu Game of Thrones), and the weather switched from cold and wet early spring-ish to hello! Summer overnight.

THREE bridges into St. Louis were closed yesterday due to construction and an accident. It took over an hour to go nine miles.

I was almost in an accident. It shook me up, bad.

Covering for someone at work has been a okay-at-first-but-holy-cats-now-all-hell-has-broken-loose kind of thing.

I’m tired.

I was crazy stressed this afternoon and then got on the bus and did NOT relax because I read precisely the wrong Tumblr post at precisely the wrong time, and sort of lost my shit for about half an hour.

Last night at my writer’s group a wise friend said (regarding the breakdown of our national political discourse), “It’s hard to judge someone when they’re sitting across from you at the table.” I immediately wanted to frame that sentiment and apply it to my social media behavior.

Yeahhhh... I already screwed that up. 😑

It’s easy for me to be angry. It’s easy to read something and take it the wrong way, rather than trying to put the best construction on someone else’s words.

I fail at that. I fail a lot, and I fail hard.

Did I mention that Crazypants Family is legitimately suing Mister’s school?

Yeah, that’s happening too.

So this week hasn’t been great.

But there are bright spots.

This evening we drank after work and went to dinner at a local bar (one of the inspirations for the bar called Pedro’s in my Chelsie fic Managing Love). I watched a little Cardinals baseball, and felt better. ⚾️

My bestie high school friend and I texted back and forth. She laughed at me when I said I was drunk. (I was then, I’m not now.)

And then we got home and my dear friend K called. She, her husband J and their daughters will visit us on Memorial Day weekend. Mister and I are having another couple we know come over for a game day that Saturday, so more! People! To! Play! 😄

It’s been a looooooong time since we’ve seen them. I’ve missed them more than I realized. They’ve been way better friends than I deserved.

Other bright spots this week:

I ran into an old friend from the law firm where I used to work (the inspiration behind ML). She and I talked in front of Walgreens for twenty minutes on Tuesday.

L told me that the office manager at the firm had been fired the previous month.

It. was. about. fucking. time. !!!!!!!!!!!!! 🎉🍾🎉

The woman always had perrrrrrrfect hair, like she spent hours on it, and she’d regularly come into the office late. Like, ten o’clock. Or later. And unlike most other office managers, she didn’t have another significant job. She wasn’t a secretary or paralegal, etc. We used to wonder what in the hell she actually did. Meanwhile the rest of the staff worked like dogs. The firm should’ve gotten rid of her years ago.

(Obviously in ML, I wrote Elsie Hughes as the kind of office manager anyone would want to have, not the snooty-too-good-for-you one I dealt with for a decade.)

Other than gossip, it was good to see L. She’s one of those tell it like it is folks, and hasn’t changed much in fifteen years.

Good God, time flies.

Another bright spot:

Writing. Oh goodness, writing. First, actually posting a new update felt SO GOOD - even if it tore everyone to shreds, including me. It always gives me a lift to continue the story and to actually see what people think of it.

I did go to my real life writer’s group meeting on Wednesday. The thing I’ve been bringing there continues to get enthusiasm, and I’m always blown away by the talent other people have, too. It makes me step up my game.

And last but not least, solid travel plans were made to see family later this year. Mister is such a blessing to me - I was well on my way to getting drunk at six o’clock this evening, and told him that I was grateful he understood why I had to go see family - “some of whom are blood, and others who aren’t.”

He replied in his usual way, “You gotta go see your people, I know.”

I love that man.

Maybe this week didn’t suck so much after all.

[butyouvealwaysbeenthecaretaker]

Rationalism: Pros & Cons

I’ve been toying with both adding “rationalist adjacent” to my Tumblr bio, and attending an IRL meeting – but I’m feeling very two-minded. The pros are so powerful and important – but so are the cons, and I’d venture to say the cons are actually worse.

I think it would be good to come up with a new label for a certain sort of Rationalism. The diaspora is very big, and like many social movements, has a lot of different splinters. I’d like to use a new term for “the bit of the diaspora I like”, because there is so much here I don’t want to be associated with. And so much I do.

I really like what Rationalism means on Tumblr, and how I understand it from participating here. We could call it Handmedown Rationalism, 2nd Generation Rationalism, or maybe there is a term for it that I've not encountered. Maybe the term is "Tumblr Rationalism", although I am not positive that using "Tumblr" as a prefix will communicate kindness and gentility well. "Kelseyan Rationalism", perhaps.

You get a radically different vision of what Rationalism means depending on...

You mostly read EY and Less Wrong

You mostly read r/ssc

You mostly read theunitofcaring

You actually live in San Francisco, and these people are in your social structure, not merely your news feed

It's very important to me to communicate "I believe in a kinder world, and want to be part of making it happen". Rather than "statistically, white people are better, and consent isn't evolutionarily sound" or "The biggest issue of our time is a hypothetical technology's hypothetical behaviour, and if you don't sign your children up for cryogenic freezing you are a lousy parent".

I've been researching and reading for months now, and I don't think I can use the term because there's such an huge iceberg of esoteric ideas below the surface, and too many of them are silly, terrifying or wrong. But I think most people who've encountered Rationalism through Tumblr are in a similar place about what they want to communicate when they say "Rationalist", and what they think "Rationalist" means - or want it to mean.

Is there another word? Can we make one?

Under the cut, long post of my “pros and cons” of adopting the label…

Nice things about Rationalism

1) Discourse norms which make me feel comfortable and supported to participate in discussions. The only people I feel entirely safe around on Tumblr. Both: people I always feel safe commenting on or reblogging, and people who rarely if ever put distressing content or behaviour in my newsfeed. The sorts of complex conversations and big ideas Social Justice promised - but no one is yelling at me or weaponising social shame.

2) Evidence-based reasoning, and a call to be open criticism, change your mind, listen to those you disagree with, and back up your positions.

3) Optimism that we can change the world – much needed, in the face of cynicism and apathy. Beautiful traditions like celebrating the eradiction of smallpox.

4) Social structures offering alternatives to the traditional role of religion: whenever core Rationalist bloggers write about their lives, I am deeply envious. Co-living, people who are united by shared values and vision, social norms favouring neuro-atypical people, etc. I would like this in my life.

5) I really like the idea of stepping away from the “Culture War”, because it generates “much heat but no light”. There’s an important kernel of truth there, about focusing on facts and productive work over clickbait and quick wins.

6) Some of their low-level issues are salient for me. This includes – attempting to have a more generous approach to men as a group, a general fear of Social Justice norms, and a belief in experimental self-care/improvement regimens.

7) I really grok Rationalists. I'm on the same wavelength. They're people I want to spend time with. Rationalism makes people happy and gives them purpose; that's always a good.

I think most tumblr people who use rationalist/rationalist adjacent are primarily communicating 1 & 7. They have discomfort with social justice norms: they want the discussion, politics and tolerance, without the shouting and death threats. And they intuitively see Rationalists and think "ah! my people!"

Unsettling things about Rationalism

Pretty much everything in this category boils down to “it is most rational to act effectively to achieve a stated goal. Too many Rationalist community tropes encourage extremely inefficient approaches.”

1) Missing the wood for the trees. Or focusing so hard on the wood you walk into a tree.

Like: politely playing footsie with fascists. There is such thing as too much civility. It’s good to be open minded and question your assumptions – but life is short. I’m OK with calling scientific racism a settled conversation so we can move on to something more important and productive. Like: a lot of the background noise about women, relationships, and consent. Sometimes things can’t be explained from a pure rational stance, and it’s uncomfortable to watch people try. How comfortable am I being associated with a group which includes Robin Hanson…? His writings about rape are - simply awful.

I do not for one moment wish to be mistaken for a person who agrees with those articles, or believes racism deserves a fair hearing when repackaged to sound sciency.

Every group is like this, right? But it's an odds game. I'm OK with identifying as a feminist, because I know our fringe crazies are safely on the fringe and small in number. With Rationalism...the fringe is putting the best ideas into practice effectively, while the core writings and influential figures are so far out the Overton Window they've actually hit the ground and started walking.

2) There’s nothing more stupid than a man who believes he is very clever.

“My idea is more logical than yours” functions a bit like “I’m more oppressed than you” in Social Justice spaces. If the space holds the value that “the most logical argument is king” or “the most oppressed person is prioritised”, then you don’t actually get rational debate or equality. You get a stick everyone tries to use to get ahead. Too many people presenting themselves as clever, not enough actual humility or uncertainty. When more status is granted for Writing Clever Worldbreaking Things, it encourages overconfident pseudoscience instead of authentic, accurate doubt.  

Also: factoring in emotions, impulsivity, and irrationality is a vital part of getting the right answer when it comes to human beings.

3) Subcultural norm against participating in politics. Political engagement is an important tool for changing the world. It’s not perfect, but it’s what we have – ignoring it is dangerous and daft.

4) Related: subcultural norm for starting from scratch over participating in someone else’s project.

The world is changed by those who do the dishes and take minutes at meetings. Lots of big-scale Rationalist projects attempt to duplicate stuff that already exists, or re-invent the wheel, instead of improving something imperfect and building on work already done. The Libertarian streak encourages this attitude towards government, and the urge to set up parallel agencies and initiatives – instead of working at the grassroots. Which is not glamorous, but it is effective.

5) The wrong goals.

You can change the world at a local level – whether that’s pressuring a local store, supporting local people, writing to councillors, becoming a councillor. Focusing on existential risk is…well, to reuse the phrase, it’s a lot of heat and no light. Masturbation and no money shot. Debates without answers, actions, or measurable outcomes. In short – it’s bad activism. Martin Luther King won by focusing attention on a particular cafeteria protest, a particular bus company.

6) Poor use of power.

Rationalism appeals to some of the smartest and most influential people on the planet – well-paid people in tech, who are ambitious, courageous and motivated. I’m pretty furious and horrified the ideology channels this energy towards AI Risk rather than, say, global warming – something which is definitely happening, hurting people right now, and could absolutely benefit from that passion, innovation, money, and a Libertarian alternative to government dawdling. Tech is – worryingly – powerful in the ways that governments are powerful; if you’ve developed a ideology which connects powerfully with people and makes them believe they can save the world, it’s a crime to then tell them to LARP about with imaginary robots. Like Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos farting around with Mars rockets instead of nuking wealth inequality, or setting up top-quality schools in deprived areas, or eliminating HIV, or…

7) Feels like a dodgy pyramid scheme.

“We should pledge to give a percentage of our income in effective ways to change the world” – brilliant! “We define ‘effective altruism’ as ‘AI research done by the founder of our movement’ – even though AI research has minimal impact, and our founder has no credentials.” Hmmm. Also "thank you for donating to our group for teaching Rationalist thinking. We have now decided to change our focus towards the aforementioned AI research. Alas, it's so speculative, don't expect measurable results or accountability for this - just know your money has been well spent, saving the world."

I think it’s very ugly to fill people with beautiful feelings, and then channel them into giving you money.

I think it's unsettling that Rationalism provides community for people who are outsiders, who are disabled, and who have scrupulosity issues - then says "good people in our community donate to our founder. It is the most rational action, and the only way to save the world."

Like, you have a captive audience of people who have - at long last - found their tribe. They're very vulnerable to social pressure which may lead to exclusion from the group. They're motivated by the idea of acting rationally, inspired by purpose you gave them to go out and make a difference - and experience acute distress at thinking they are not doing enough good. Do not. Squeeze these people for money. You asshole.

I don't think it's deliberate - but it's still wrong.

8) I like what the Sequences stand for – but not the Sequences themselves.

Learning how to reason, how the mind works, learning critical thinking, developing flexibility and introspection are all excellent. But I want to learn that from original texts by the best thinkers in the world. That is pretty emphatically not You Know Who.

9) Related: Amateurism.

In theory, I like the idea of teaching individual citizens how to use statistics, analyse scientific papers, how to run experiments, and tailor their own medication etc. In practice, these fields have experts in for a reason. Someone who attempts to use statistics, and does it poorly, is far more dangerous and worse off than someone who does not pretend to know, but trusts a reliable source. Core-Rationalism frequently includes people making definitive statements and presenting themselves as an authority, and being very overconfident about their expertise.

(A lot of this is neurodiverse stuff, right? Setting up your own grandiose project from scratch; being an auto-didact; mistrust of traditional authorities; being very clever etc. I’m too ADHD to function, so I can see where it’s all coming from – but it’s hardly optimised for efficiency or outcomes.)

10) There is no such thing as a safe community, and getting these things right is very difficult.

However, it is discomforting how many people close to the heart of power have credible abuse accusations against them. Also, how one of the key Rationalist organisations responded to an abuse accusation, with an inadequate internal process which concluded everything was fine. They’ve since backtracked. That’s not enough for me, because abuse scandal management reflects your innate understanding, bises, beliefs and background. You can’t backtrack when you realise that it looks bad, because the original misstep continues to reflect your group’s true values.

Also, the wider movement has a lot of beliefs which lay the groundwork for abuse: mistrust of feminism, economic approaches to dating, gender and sex, evolutionary psychology and pseudoscience, key figures arguing that rape is nicer than being cheated on...

11) People who say "I don't like Social Justice", and lowkey mean "I don't like feminism or being nice to transsexuals". Rather than how I mean it: "I don't like being frightened or walking on eggshells, I don't like how rage and shaming are totally OK, I don't like how inflexible and bad faith ideas are, I don't like how I've seen it used in real life as a weapon to gain power and control. I don't like bullies."

We are on the same venn diagram, but not nearly enough of an overlap. (Given the choice between a nasty person who supports my rights, and a kind one who does not, I choose: cutting off contact with humans and never leaving my house again)

12) Rationalism is a mere degree of separation from a lot of online movements and subcultures which are definite problems. The resurgence of polite scientific racism; anti-progressive pushbacks on LGBT rights and feminism; some of the MRA stuff, some of the incel stuff; treating Trump/politics as a dinner party debate rather than an active threat...

Can one promote Rationalism, without accidentally building these movements too...? It feels too close, and wilfully blind.

13) I want what the Rationalists I follow have. When I think about attending the local meetup, I imagine an evening spent with reddit users who think racism is very clever, and use phrases like 'not technically rape". How can I even consider adopting a label when I figure the odds are like...70/30 in favour of the rape Nazis? I do not imagine meeting people I would like to leave my child with. I do not think I will find an IRL mirror of for the cool, compassionate, nerdy people I follow online.

If you even have to ask "what percentage of this group are likely to be rape Nazis?", your have your answer.

[writcraft]

Can I have 18 for fanfic asks? ❤

Hiiiii! Of course you can

#18. Do you have aparticular reading/writing routine?

Not really. I wish I did! I cango some weeks without writing much of anything and then I can have a weekend ofwriting and churn out 20,000 words. I tend to write (and read) pretty quickly(it’s why I like doing pinch hits) but I have to be really feeling the storyand the ship to get in that zone to just write.

I tend to read a lot when I’mwriting a lot. I find reading other fics really inspirational and they tend to giveme motivation to tell my own stories, so when I’m quiet on the writing front I’musually pretty quiet on the reading front too, or just reading old classicsthat I’ve read a million times, lurking, rather than participating actively bycommenting on new stuff, which I do much more of when I’m engaging with fandom myself creatively too. 

My writing schedule also depends onwhat’s happening within the fandom and the work I’ve been doing during the day.If I have had an intensive day of research and academic writing, I tend to feela bit burned out and just want to put on tome reality TV or a film orsomething. Similarly if there’s fandom drama or I have waded into someDiscourse or posted meta, or if something is going on that’s making my dashreally busy and exhausting, that tends to put me off writing for a few daysuntil I get more centered again with fandom and shippy feels. 

To be honest I try to write whenthe motivation strikes. Sometimes little things give me a short burst ofmotivation, other times it’s having a quiet weekend and taking the opportunity to catch up on fests and/or do some writing. I plot/plan on the bus quite a lot,listening to music, and I also read a lot when I’m travelling, so being intransit is always good for productivity! I’m also useless in the morning, so Idon’t do much of anything until I have had three coffees, LOL. But no setroutine, really. I fit writing and reading around the other stuff in myschedule as opposed to setting aside slots for it and I don’t really have aspecific spot I sit in or a routine I follow when I’m reading/writing. It’s usually just opening up a load of incomplete WIPs and coming on social media to moan about how much I have to do instead of actually doing it :D

send me fanfic asks

[farkenshnoffingottom]

Ace Discourse, Here We Go

So. *rubs hands together* I decided it’s time for me to break into the discourse. Largely inspired by recent happenings on @highkingfen​‘s blog. I’m going to bring some theory into this so we can understand why people are so invested in this.

But first, since the first line of attack always seems to be aimed at people’s identities, I’m gonna go ahead and state mine right now: I’m transmasc nonbinary, gray aroace, and sensually, aesthetically, and platonically attracted to all genders. I’m also not able bodied, so I want you to understand the physical toll getting involved in this debate means for me, so that you know I am invested in this discussion. I apologize in advance for any errors, although I think I caught them all. (Long post, so I put it under the cut)

I will use queer in this post because I am queer.* Let’s start with some basic politics of sex, then work our way into queer politics, and then bring it back around to aceness.

In 1984, anthropologist Gayle Rubin wrote an essay called “Thinking Sex: Notes for a Radical Theory of the Politics of Sexuality,” in which she argued that feminism could not take on sexuality theoretically or politically (she was writing in the midst of the feminist porn wars), but that we needed a distinct politics of sexuality. The part that strikes me as most relevant here is when she describes her theory of the sexual hierarchy. 

(While this does not include asexuality, it is fair to say that asexuality can fall behind some of these walls too, because it is not accepted. Underlying the category of “good” sex is the assumption that people will be having sex, so asexual people are a threat to this social order that requires that people have “good” sex to reproduce itself.) I highly recommend you read this article, but I am mainly using it here for the visual. Walls are high, and I would say most people cannot just scale a wall all by themselves. So the way we get around this is to throw each other under the bus, to mix my metaphors. In order to cross the line into “good” and acceptable behavior, people have to step on others, push them further down, to advance themselves (instead of, say, just destroying the walls). It looks a little like “we’re exactly like you, we just love each other, we want to get married, we want to be normal. They’re the ones having public sex, turning tricks on the streets, flaunting their sexuality, etc.”** Anything that buys into the normative narrative gets you a little closer to the “good” side of the wall. 

Now, I’m sort of rambling, but I promise I have a point. That point is that while asexuality may seem diametrically opposed from Rubin’s list of “bad��� sex, it actually is theoretically and politically very similar. Society needs people to have sex to keep itself alive, but it just wants people to have the “right” sex. In a biopolitical way (see part five of the book linked), queer sex is just as threatening as no sex at all. The state is highly invested in controlling their population and regulating its function. This is why "Hyposexual Desire Disorder” appears in the DSM IV (It now appears split into separate disorders for males and females, which I won’t even get to, and now contains the caveat that it isn’t a disorder if someone identifies as asexual). So, improvement, right? Not quite. It still fits into the long history of queer identities and people being pathologized by medical and psychiatric authorities. Our cultural institutions acknowledge the danger asexuality poses to the social order alongside its other queer counterparts.

So, I’m counting that as my theoretical evidence that ace people belong in the queer community and moving on a little bit. One of the critiques I see of including ace people in the community is that asexuals aren’t discriminated against enough to be counted. First, see my very brief discussion of pathologization above. Second, the “cishet asexuals pass as heterosexual, so they don’t experience oppression” argument misses the point. I assume most people in this community understand why heteronormativity hurts. The assumption that you are straight when you’re not hurts. And that’s exactly what this is. The assumption that you’re straight, and that you are sexually attracted to people. And it hurts, except now it’s our supposed community that’s telling us we’re straight even after we say over and over that we’re not. Asexual is by definition not heterosexual. Three, the microagressions: lol you’re asexual, does that mean you reproduce like a plant? Don’t worry, you’ll find the right person some day (remind anyone of “but wait how do lesbians even have sex?” or “don’t worry, you’ll find the right (‘opposite’ gender) one day”?). We can acknowledge that microagressions are bad in other areas, so why can’t we admit that it’s true for ace-spec people too? Four, “corrective” therapy and/or sexual assault happen to us because of our orientations too. Even though I could go on and on, I’ll stop there. Just check my “ace discourse” tag for more. Or don’t. It’s exhausting stuff.

Another critique I see is that this somehow plays into the desexualization of gay people. People who are attracted to their own gender will be hypersexualized or desexualized by straight society as their politics call for.*** It is not asexuals’ fault that people cannot conceptualize the difference between asexuality and desexualization. Asexuality is an identity. Desexualizing someone is an act of perception and political understanding.

Additionally, asexuality is newer (not in concept, but in public visibility) than other queer orientations, and yet no one seems to want to remember that each of those past orientations had to go through the same thing, fighting to be seen as real and not pathological or unhealthy. Sure, we don’t have a legal fight in the same way that homosexual and trans people do, but that is mostly because a lot of people have no idea we exist. I’m going to point you to AVEN for an asexual history, because they’ll do a much better job than me.

Finally, simply this: it is not your job to decide who counts as queer “enough” to be in the community. Another thing we tend to forget when having this argument is that identities shift all the time. It’s politically important when dealing with the straight world to be able to say “it’s not a phase!” But sometimes, your identities shift, and that’s okay. I thought all sorts of things about who I was before I figured myself out, and I’ll probably end up somewhere a little different from where I am now. It is not so cut and dry. People can come out while they’re still questioning, and then realize that they were wrong and are really something else. Some people can be solid in an identity for years, and then start to think maybe there’s something more to it. And that is okay. What’s the point of saying we’re queer if we are just recreating the exact same structures and hierarchies and expectations that we faced in straight society? There is no need for gatekeeping here. I realized I was ace only two years ago, and started to question whether I was aromantic only a year ago. And guess what. I’m still not entirely sure who I am. But that’s fine. It’s okay to explore yourself. You don’t have to be locked into one category forever. Asexuals are not straight, and they are and should be welcome in queer spaces.

*While this should probably be covered in another post, I want to point out how intentional my use of the word is. Queer and LGBT are different concepts, in my mind. See my “queer discourse” tag for some history and theory that others have contributed. Also, read Queers Read This! to get a sense of the approach I take. For now, I will just say that queer has a historical and political meaning that grew as it diverged from the lesbian and gay movement (which was half-heartedly tacking the B and the T to the end of their name) in the ‘90s. Queer as a concept has a much higher capacity to be inclusive of ace-spec identities, because it defines itself and prides itself in its difference from the norm rather than its attempts at being normal. **For a much better discussion of this concept than I can provide here, Michael Warner’s book The Trouble With Normal is excellent, and I highly recommend it.

***Besides, the mainstream movement intentionally desexualized themselves to be acceptable to the straights. The more mainstream turn in our politics was essentially to de-sex gayness. That’s where things such as “love is love” and the gay marriage court cases came from. These were very effective political attempts to play into the normative “good” sex narrative, and distance themselves from all those bad queers doing the things on the other side of Rubin’s walls. Again, I’m going to point you to The Trouble With Normal, even though it’s almost twenty years old, because it just so brilliantly addresses all of this.

ETA: Michael Warner does talk about sex as being essential to queerness, specifically because he is writing his book in response to the desexualization of gay politics. I do not read this as an argument that asexual people aren’t queer, because I don’t think he is trying to account for our existence in this book, and it seems likely that he wasn’t thinking about us at all (which isn’t necessarily a bad thing, because it’s not what he set out to do with his book, and I’m fine with that. You’ve gotta narrow down your scope to something manageable, and he already has a huge topic to address).

[dailydharmadosage2017]

Cherishing Thoughts Of Me And Me Only

It doesn’t matter whether you live in a country at the western part of the world or if I live in the eastern part. It also doesn’t matter if he is a rich and powerful tycoon or if she makes a living driving a bus. We all have the same 2 major problems – self-grasping ignorance and self-cherishing thought.

Self-Grasping Ignorance is where our mind misconceives how things exists and exaggerates the situation. It leads us to think that what our perceptions are definitely correct and creates the big “Me” in us. ��It arises strongly and dominates our rationale to think clearly, especially when we face criticisms from others or when we don’t get what we want.

Self-Cherishing Thoughts. With self-grasping ignorance, our self-cherishing thoughts formed. Our self-cherishing thoughts tell us, “I Am The Centre Of The Universe.” and because we think that we are all that important, we confidently take in whatever our self-grasping ignorance mind tell us, so we determine everything based on whatever our mind conceives.

At this point, we always think that we are being objective when we give our comments, raise our objections  but in actual fact, we assess, evaluate and filter everything based on our perspective.  We blame our dissatisfaction on others because we do not understand that our minds could be wrong. We blame our bosses for extra workload, we blame our family for not keeping the house clean, we blame our neighbours for the noises that their pets make, we blame the government for even the traffic jams.

“Self-cherishing thoughts – at any opportunity, it is always there to remind us about the non-virtues of others, making it hard for us to forget. When you are reminded of others’ non-virtue, self-cherishing thoughts will exaggerate the issue: causing us to have hatred, and wanting to take revenge. ” – Venerable Jing Yuan, BW Monastery

That’s Why We Are Unhappy So with self-grasping ignorance and self-cherishing attitude, we expect people, situations to go according to what think and we think that we are entitled everything we want, and then we get bitter and unhappy when we don’t get what we want or things don’t go our way.

This would explain why we get angry, impatient, upset or uncomfortable when things don’t go our way, because self-grasping ignorance and self-cherishing thoughts influence us to only think of our own happiness. – “Why doesn’t the boss see that my way is more efficient than his?” or “Why can’t she just change her presentations slides based on my comments?” and also “I slogged so much for that promotion but someone else got it!”

Our lives become complicated because we try to enforce what’s around us to work according to how we want it to be. We always think that the problem lies in what’s around us whenever we have a problem, because our self-grasping ignorance reminds us that we are never wrong, and with such self-cherishing thoughts, we become selfish, unfriendly, dissatisfied and to sum it all – UNHAPPY.

And The Point Is … … Once we take a step back and look at what’s going on everyday, we would discover that happiness blooms once we let go of our self-grasping ignorance. We recognize that our views are not the most important and we should consider the view of others too. However it does not mean that we blindly accept what people tell us, but we contemplate and analyze based on different angles, perspectives and points of view, we may or may not agree with their views but we respect them.

“Whatever worldly joy there is arises from wishing for others’ happiness. Whatever worldly suffering there is arises from wishing for your own happiness.” – Engaging In The Bodhisattva Deeds

In this way, we relate to things more objectively and by cherishing what others’ think and say, we open ourselves to compassion and wisdom which leads to harmony among everyone wherever we go.

The above reflections is inspired by Venerable Jing Yuan’s Facebook post  https://www.facebook.com/venjingyuan/photos/pcb.2116625611945583/2116625561945588/?type=3 .  

If dharma teachings interest you, catch more snippets at BW Monastery – https://bwmonastery.org.sg/discourses/

[aion-rsa]

Link Tank: Beta Ray Bill Could Be Coming to the MCU

https://ift.tt/eA8V8J

After a brief Easter egg in Thor: Ragnorak, Beta Ray Bill might finally make his MCU debut in Thor: Love and Thunder.

“One of the few Thor: Love and Thunder plot details Marvel officially confirmed is that it will see Natalie Portman’s Jane Foster turning into The Mighty Thor. That means the film will feature, at the very least, two different versions of the God of Thunder in Chris Hemsworth’s Thor and Portman’s Jane. However, one of the more recent, popular rumors surrounding the film is that it will include the surprise appearances of multiple Thors from different universes. If true, that means Thor: Love and Thunder could very well give Marvel fans everywhere the BETA RAY BILL introduction they’ve long been waiting for.”

Read more at Inverse

Want more of Razor Fist from Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings? Actor Florian Munteanu teases his character appears way more in deleted scenes.

“Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings has no shortage of compelling action sequences, with the bus sequence earning raves from audiences across the globe. The scene centers on Shang-Chi (Simu Liu) fighting Razor Fist (Florian Munteanu), an assassin with a machete blade for a right hand. Munteanu, who previously played Ivan Drago’s son Viktor in Creed II, said that there’s plenty more Razor Fist content that ended up on the cutting room floor.”

Read more at The Mary Sue

Isaac Asimov’s classic Foundation, the alleged inspiration for Star Wars and Dune, is almost here in this behind-the-scenes look.

“Apple TV+’s long-awaited adaptation of Isaac Asimov’s classic sci-fi saga Foundation is nearly upon us, and the streamer wants you to be both excited and prepared. We’ve got a few trailers so far, and now there’s a “First Look” that goes behind the scenes of the series. Prominently featured is the showrunner, writer, and executive producer David S. Goyer (The Dark Knight, Batman Begins, Dark City); for even more from him, you can check out io9’s one-on-one interview from earlier today.”

Read more at Gizmodo

BioShock has amazing gameplay and storylines, but sometimes they don’t perfectly align.

“In 2007, game designer Clint Hocking was taking part in this discourse after having played Irrational’s BioShock, which was released earlier that same year. Though he enjoyed the game, he struggled a great deal with the fact that the directives and incentives within BioShock’s narrative and gameplay weren’t aligned. This is what he referred to as “ludonarrative dissonance,” and it bothered Clint so much that he almost put the controller down and walked away.”

Read more at Kotaku

Jason Sudeikis and Lil Nas X are just two of the many celebrities who should host an episode of Saturday Night Live this season.

“Saturday Night Live’s season premiere is just around the corner: The sketch series returns with new episodes on October 2. Today’s AVQ&A is all about who we’d like to see on the show during season 47. There is a ‘should’ that represents personal opinion, and there’s a ‘should’ that expresses what is bound to happen, and Jason Sudeikis hosting Saturday Night Live during season 47 stands firmly in the middle of that Venn diagram.”

Read more at The A.V. Club

Are you a fan of seeing a director’s true vision unfold? Check out Blade Runner: The Final Cut, and more of the best directors cuts you can stream now.

Since the earliest days of VHS, the home video market has sometimes allowed filmmakers to reconcile their regrets of studio interference and release director’s cuts of certain movies. These editions, which are often longer and feature restored plot points and more fully fleshed-out characters, typically represent the director’s true artistic intentions.

Read more at Mental Floss

cnx.cmd.push(function() { cnx({ playerId: "106e33c0-3911-473c-b599-b1426db57530", }).render("0270c398a82f44f49c23c16122516796"); });

The post Link Tank: Beta Ray Bill Could Be Coming to the MCU appeared first on Den of Geek.

from Den of Geek https://ift.tt/3zujG3C

[goodatyugioh]

actually this should be poor and rural specially because this post was inspired by the bus discourse. because you have people saying very seriously that there should be no cars at all no matter what and everything should be nothing but busses and trains etc etc. and we absolutely should have a functional and good public transportation system and cars should not be the default but that can't be the only thing. there are never going to be trains in very rural places. it's just not feasible. but these leftists who live in big cities see traffic jams and sit in rush hour traffic and think "this would all be better if no one had a car" and yeah for you but that shit isn't going to work for someone trying to go from john day to portland

sometimes i see leftists posts on here and it's so clear these people have never lived anywhere poor and/or rural

[architectnews]

BIT Sports Center, Beijing

BIT Sports Center, Beijing Athletic Space, Basketball Stadium, Chinese Architecture Images

BIT Sports Center in Beijing

24 Nov 2020

BIT Sports Center

Design: Atelier Alter Architects PLLC

Location: Beijing, Northern China

photo ® Highlite Images

Located in Liangxiang, the satellite city of Beijing, the BIT Sports Center, along with the BIT Stadium, frame an entrance to the new BIT campus. The sports center adds about 15,692 square meters athletic space to the school, includes a 3000 seats basketball stadium, a 10 lanes swimming pool, a gymnasium, a martial art space, and rooms for boxing, taekwondo, table tennis, etc.

photo ® Weiqi Jin

BIT is a university focused on military science. The project continues Leonardo Da Vinci’s dialogue on the interdisciplinary discourse between science, architecture and art. After researching on related art and history of material science, the project draws inspiration from Da Vinci’s flying machine, as well as the geometry of trajectory parabola widely used in military science.

photo ©Horizon Aerial

Accordingly, two sets of parametric surfaces are created to suspend in the air as the roof for the building. The topological volume framed by the two curve layers are constructed through space frame structurally and covered by standing seam roofing from above and aluminum curtain wall system from below. Aluminum are used over roof, cantilever and facade to give a uniform tone to the building and to response to the industrial aesthetic in military science.

photo ® Highlite Images

As the Renaissance man in Da Vinci’s time understood intellects as polymaths excelled both in body and mind, the BIT sports center aims for a “multidimensional open campus” that builds students’ body and mind simultaneously and meanwhile, encourages intercollegiate dialogues among students. By doing that, the architecture creates spatial permeability in both urban and architecture scales, through plan and section.

The basketball hall, located at the south east corner of the building, merges the play field with major artery and street life, while the swimming pool at the west is linked to campus central square. Besides urban scale connections, as the seating for basketball hall is elevated for one floor, the programs beneath it are all interconnected and also well connected to the exterior.

photo ® Atelier Alter Architects

A horizontal physical and visual permeability, from street to campus, is established at the ground floor. An enclosed entrance promenade, cut between swimming pool and basketball hall, connected north and south campuses together. In the section, the top of basketball seating at the third floor has a large window overlooking the entrance hall and the swimming pool across the hall, as well as the campus beyond the swimming pool.

At second, third and fourth floors, the programs behind the swimming pool—taekwondo, table tennis and testing center—all have different apertures into the swimming pool and also share the skylight from the swimming. With transparent interface, vertical permeability is achieved by nesting programs within one and another in section.

photo ® Highlite Images

BIT Sports Center in Beijing, China – Building Information

Client: Beijing Institute of Technology Location: Beijing, China Category: Sports Center Architecture and Interior Design: Atelier Alter Architects PLLC Architect of Record: China IPPR International Engineering Co., Ltd. Design Consultant: Beijing Hanhua Architectural Design Co.Ltd Design Principal: Yingfan Zhang, Xiaojun Bu Architecture Design Team: Zhenwei Li, Kai Qin, Ping Jiang, Wei Huang, Tongwei Liu, Dehu Du, Jiahe Zhang, Ran Yan, Lairong Zheng, Jiaming Mei, Lidong Song, Xiaoxiao Zhao, Jingshi Zhang, Bida Wei, Wei Xiong, Weidi Chen, Xiaoqing Guo, Xueyun Da, Bo Huang, Leilei Ma, Hui Cao Structure: China IPPR International Engineering Co., Ltd. MEP: China IPPR International Engineering Co., Ltd. Interior Design: Atelier Alter Architects Landscape Architect: China IPPR International Engineering Co., Ltd.

photo ® Highlite Images

Curtain Wall Consultant: PAG Façade Systems Co., Limited Lighting Consultant: Jingyunyoujin Lighting Technology (Beijing) Co., Ltd，Zhongchen Yuanzhan (Beijing) Lighting Design Co., Ltd， Acoustic Consultant: China IPPR International Engineering Co., Ltd. Construction Management: Beijing Zhongjing Hengji Engineering Management Co., Ltd General Contractor: Beijing Construction Engineering Group CO. Ltd (BCEG) Interior Contractor: Beijing Senghongli Engineering Co., Ltd. Curtain Wall Contractor: Shandong Sky Screen Group Corporation Manufacturers: Hoofovens Architecture System (Guangzhou) Co., Ltd., Taitong Construction Co., Ltd ., Beijing Borongsheng Industry and Trade Co., Ltd. Cost: $23,449,011 Area: 168,907.3 SF 15692 sqm Project Completion: 07.2019

photo ® Weiqi Jin

Photography: Weiqi Jin, Highlite Images, Atelier Alter Architects

BIT Sports Center, Beijing images / information received 241120

Location: Beijing, People’s Republic of China

Architecture in Beijing

Beijing Architecture Designs – chronological list

Beijing Architecture Walking Tours

Another Chinese interior design by X+LIVING on e-architect:

Meland Club Shenzhen flagship store

Beijing Architecture News

Apple Sanlitun, Chaoyang District Architects: Foster + Partners image courtesy of architects Apple Sanlitun Store

Leeza SOHO, Lize Financial Business District Design: Zaha Hadid Architects photo : Hufton+Crow Leeza SOHO Beijing Building

MS-II Restaurant Architects: WAY Studio photographer : Zeng Hao, Fernie Lai MS-II Restaurant in Beijing

Hualong Private Terminal Space, Capital Airport Design: Shishang Architecture photographer : An Li Hualong Private Terminal Space

Comments / photos for the BIT Sports Center, Beijing page welcome

Website: Beijing

The post BIT Sports Center, Beijing appeared first on e-architect.

[busforachange]

Bus Obayomi: My Thoughts on George Floyd and Race Relations “Do more, Be more and make a difference”

It is interesting to read the posts on my timelines. It is probably the most diverse views you will ever read on any Facebook page. It is because the relationships that I have formed throughout my life are varied and extensive. I am blessed to have connected with various people along the way. All these relations are invaluable to who I am today.

I am positive that there is an experience, encounter, and exposure that has shaped our world views and brought us to where we are today. Before we make blanket statements, have you engaged people outside your community? Have you made an effort to listen to others? Can you put a face to those you have encountered? Have they always treated you positively or negatively?

We have a comprehensive institution, but I can tell you we are in the most significant era. We are in an age that no one can control your destiny. Nobody owns you. There is still injustice in our world. And yes, I am against injustice. I also believe that anyone can rise against any obstacle.  I am for righteous anger. But anger that is rooted in bitterness would only lead to chaos.

There are people with wicked hearts who hide behind the position of power and influence. There are many just people as well, whose goal is to live justly and righteously.  Leadership is about service. If your leadership position is a cushion for your comfort, then you have no idea about service.

I am a proponent of civil discourse. There will always be bad apples among us. I am always inspired by those who have risen above all odds and overcome the challenges of their time.

I found inspiration in people like Frederick Douglas, George Washington, Martin Luther King, etc. These people had every right to blame the institution of their time. If they rioted for their lives, they would still be justified, but they did not. They found hope in hopelessness. They saw opportunities amid oppression.

They fought the battle of their time on their knees, but they also came up with ideas. They were change-makers of their era. They invented, came up with ideas, developed themselves, and made themselves indispensable. Because of the upheavals they had to overcome, every word they spoke mattered. Every word they spoke counted. They knew there was an injustice, but they also knew that they had to find solutions.

Sensationalism has a way of making us feel relevant but will never beat logic.

What do I think?

As a Christian, the greatest commandment is to love God with all your heart. And secondly, it is to love your neighbor as yourself. If you are a Christian and this is not the foundation of your belief system, you have a problem

 As a student of American history, there has always been ruggedness in our Americanism. Starting from Slavery, to the assimilation of Irish-Americans, to Italian Americans ( Killing of Sacco and Vanzetti), to Japanese-Americans, and the Jews as well. The history of America has never been perfect. The Italian-Americans mobilized themselves through Mafia (not justifying this), American police force, and started to engage in government. The Irish-Americans did the same as well. My point is, nothing is handed by screaming for human-respect.

As someone with a background in International Relations, I can not stop to think of Armenian genocide, Rwandan genocide and on-going ethnic and religious killings in Nigeria. All I see is human depravity.

 My Asian friends and diverse colleagues always inspire me. They have experienced discrimination from different ends, but they used it as a motivation to improve themselves. Silicon Valley is not white or black; it is brown. Visit Google, Microsoft, PayPal, etc. and you will understand what I am saying. They have the right to be resentful as well, but they found their way in a challenging American society.

There will be a time that America will not be a white or black country as we see it now. My concern is that urban black communities will still find themselves at the bottom of the barrel with the same issues.

Yes, Slavery is evil, but how long would it be an excuse?

 If you believe that protesting is a way to bring attention to issues, please do. But please, violence has never been the answer.

On the death of George Floyd, is it a police case or race issue? Should we have a conversation about policing? Should there be police reform? Should police go through the re-training in handling civilians? Should there be training on prejudices as well? Do we take our stereotypes to law-enforcement as well without checking it at the door?

Anyone with a heart and conscience can agree that George Floyd was murdered. However, if you think looting and the rioting are just, then check your moral compass. Your value system is skewed

  Let's agree to disagree on the approach to injustice. Name-calling is immature and is like a teenager throwing tantrum

I don't believe in the superiority of any race. Yes, there are still fundamental issues that I still struggle with and try to understand. I grew up the Bronx, New York. I have been mobbed few times that I almost lost my eye. I was called names in high school and by black kids like me. My christian faith has empowered and shaped my character. I have always found myself in the minority. My graduate school had few blacks. I have worked for fortune 500 companies, and I am always been in the minority. I have worshiped in places where they are different from me but I have always been drawn to the love of God.  I have served in youth ministry in an urban centers and I have also worked as an educator.  I have also come to a conclusion that failures that are evident in our society is as a result of the breakdown of family.

My advice is, invest in yourself. Improve yourself. Surround yourself with good people of like-minds. Be the answers to the problems around you.

With love,

Bus Obayomi

[radcyclething]

Artifact; Essay Revision #1

Evolution of Protest

The presence of technology changed the language by which society operates. Social media platforms are based on the premise of sight and as long as people are looking, the floor is yours. This language has transcended that of the activist and therefore protest. Modern activism takes it’s board meetings and sharing to the media. On the other hand, “time and money” and logistics were instrumental in the shaping of older movements like the 1950s bus boycott in Montgomery. This is an important aspect of the way in which protests take form in today’s time versus decades ago. Distinctive changes stem in the deliverance of the message. Millions can be reached within a single minute of a post, today. 4.15 million people were the estimated count of participants in the Women’s March in  2017, according to the New York Times. In addition, Four out of 5 of the nation’s biggest protests took place in recent three years. These protests utilized similar strategies as protests from decades ago; with marches, songs, petitions. With a clinging to old “folk politics”, it begs the question of the role of technology in the evolution of protesting in America.

Both Women's’ March and  March For  Our Lives garnered historical support as millions of people flooded the streets but not legal action. In 2011, “Occupy Wall Street” was the battle cry of a largely white working class group that sought an end to the predations of corporate power. Same thing, hundreds of thousands flocked out for the event, but no legal action. The point in protests like these stand in the demonstration. Oftentimes, protesting is lumped as one with politics, however, the act of protest spans past just politics. Politics has changed, so has a society, but, what it means to be human hasn't. Protesting is part of our very instinct to fight for our survival.  One cannot simply look to immediate legislative action as proof of triumph in a protest.  Political columnist, Nathan Heller points out that “time, money, infrastructure and an ability to call in favors” is what shapes politics. However, while those things were paramount to many revolutions of the past, these are different times. In less than 20 minutes, anyone with a smartphone can lend their voice to a movement and be labeled “activist” as long as they bring something to catch the viewer’s attention.  This is a double-edged sword as it poses as a crutch for modern activism. While more people are getting involved, there’s less dependency on money and time.  In addition,  it broadening the scope of focus as now anyone with a voice gets a seat. This could either be a good thing or bad as it comes down to the individual, himself and the audience.

Furthermore, The dialogue behind the demonstrations is what shapes a revolution. During the Civil Rights movement of the 50s and 60s, With less technology than today, they were able to influence laws. Not because of only the work on the street but also due to the dialogue being had between the leaders of the movement and political leaders like the President at the time, Lyndon B Johnson. More than anything, it seems, in juxtaposition to the movements of today, there were more clearly defined leadership. In place of direct leadership, social media platforms serve as a central medium for groups. This medium of leadership, while seeming more democratic,  comes with flaws as it could be confusing for activists and leaders as well. When the Gezi Park occupation in Turkey in 2013 started gaining momentum,  the government conveyed interest to negotiate, but it was unclear who could represent the protesters. Heller observes that the end result was dwindling of the protests that day. The protesters might not have made the change they hoped for. Moreover, their story lives on, due to the media coverage,  and might even inspire others in the future. Despite, causing certain changes in the demographics of leadership across protests, the speed Technological advances allow for the spread of this dialogue worldwide. In addition, without central leadership, it allows for less of a target on individuals. This is not to say that protest today ignore the need for leadership, it’s just evolved into dependence on networking. It makes one wonder if our great leaders like Martin Luther King would still be alive today if leadership was more “horizontal” and therefore trivial to the other side. In addition, The perception that the act in which the group or individual takes on, ranging from sit-ins to street long matches, is the protest, is part of a fallacy. The message is what holds true power because that’s what unites the masses to rise. That's where technology comes in. The dialogue that ensues around a protest is what lasts so Activists are taking to Twitter and other forms of social media to discuss matters of prejudices and unrest while some writing to the congressman and leading marches.

In the end, protesting and forms of objections are a healthy part of society. As the populace sheds light on various problems, it allows candidates to utilize some as running platforms. This is the discourse that’s intended through protest. Technology altered the way in which this discourse takes place as it relies on the fast information which in turn fostered a generation of protests that’s largely mobilized by explosive numbers. This is, in turn, has created new forms of leadership within an organization, as well as new ways to get the message out.