#to [questioning whether you have the capacity to make choices] as an extension. lens on ableism / disability justice is in Everything

[unproduciblesmackdown]

it's not about that you "have" to get to exercise your autonomy. b/c like, yes you do, but not in the way that "if i don't get to do that Now i will explode & evaporate (& die)" which is what people keep leveraging to be like "so you don't have any valid argument for getting to act out your own choices"

therein is another issue of "why do you need a 'valid argument' to get Exceptions as ruled by this person to exist autonomously, unpunished" like why's this person an authority who gets to punish you. nonrhetorically, why do you have to appeal to their maybe possibly deciding to Let you be a person. should you "have" to.

and if you don't get that Permission that you supposedly "have" to get, you also will not immediately explode and die if you do that unpermitted thing, but shocking how "you don't Haaaave to" is only invoked re: things you want to do for yourself, and not what they want you to do for them....because it's Not Really About "Literally literally Haaaaving to"

the alignment between people getting on one for years about asexuality, and while doing so maxing out the saturation on their bullshit on any & everything, b/c you're just getting into anti autonomy, so ofc you're also just stoking & expressing "arguments" against autonomy that are deployed in plenty of other contexts, including against other queer identities....and that particular resonance with biphobia & transphobia, and how either groups are theoretically thwarting the Truest Gays because how will we have a valid argument against the truest cishets agenda if we can't convince them we haaaaaave to be like this instead of that no, we won't explode & die if we have to be repressed or at least closeted another day, and another, and you won't explode after another, either, etc. rather than thee point of "asexuality autonomy = queer autonomy = Your queer autonomy = Anyone's Autonomy" and "why do we 'have' to Convince anyone to go 'oh alriiiight' abt one's choices about how they express their identity, what decisions they make about having sex"....it's about anyone having the power to preclude & restrict others' autonomy & constrain their existence between one kind of more imminent, immediate harm/death & a more drawn out one where you exist as a resource for others' use but at least you aren't Literally dead today. so what if someone's saying "well i don't think your gender/sexuality stuff is Real" so long as they can't get in the way of other people living that out anyways. so what if someone's supposedly like "well, but everyone could be bi" (which they don't. just like ppl were never 'pretending' to be asexual to nefariously stand around in the queer space that never rigorously vetted everyone anyways? Making Up A Guy To Get Mad At) to supposedly argue that if all of you are bi you can just restrict yourself to the Cishet Appearing manifestations (which they don't) where what's that even matter if this [guy to get mad at] can't make that anyone else's problem? if he can, why can he. should he be able to. that's the problem, not "have we all tried the constant biphobia wherein they're always thwarting & sabotaging the rest of us?? like how trans people are keeping us from being legitimate?? with the opportunity for some trans people to also try declaring other noncis people Not Legitimately Trans?? well the cishet agenda loves asexuals, actually, they want everyone to never have sex ever (they don't want that, and that's not what being asexual is)"

using the "you can't Know through Direct Perception or extrasensory phenomena what someone else's Thoughts And Feelings are" both ways; wherein their assertion of their intentions, true or not, gets to be treated as an assertion of Reality, meanwhile b/c Your intentions/thoughts/feelings can't be directly observed, you're just lying or exaggerating or misremembering or failing to Express yourself correctly b/c they would've surely interpreted it correctly otherwise, or [anything else] re: your inner experiences that you can't "prove" are one way or another, so this other person gets to always decide for themself what they must be (why?) and if they just so happen to decide they Must be in alignment with what they want (good) or unacceptably, evilly, incorrectly Against Them, they also get to flex their control over the entire situation via their Authority / control over resources / the person's lack of other options b/c of isolation & that, say, breaking away from a family, job, marriage or just deemed correctly romantic relationship, is punished by the larger system of How Things Are, through a lack of resources that makes you more vulnerable in general as well as vulnerable to further punishment in how you might try to respond to that situation, through the general stance that maintaining cohesion of a Unit like the nuclear family, the "romantic" "man"/"woman" couple, is good, so breaking from it is deviant........anyways it's like. if you're like "well i'm having sex b/c i want to" and someone is like "well i say YOURE LYING" like, what? "isn't there someone you forgot to ask" shit. why should that get to affect things. whether you're like "oh no. what if they could say 'you're lying...b/c how do i knowwww you're not BI. where you could want to have sex with someone BESIDES this one person rn?? or ACE??? if you Don't have sex rn and you Don't explode and die 5 min later we will Know you Could Be Asexual" like, this isn't how it works anyways obviously but theoretically if it did: we would not be like "oh sorry guess that's what matters" unless what mattered was some people's being lower on a hierarchy and at the quite literal disposal of those with more power than them. what would the crisis be of someone going "well i think. every gay person? is bi" or someone going "you've just told me your name is gloria but i think your name is actually tetris...." or "i'm so embarrassed i wish everyone but me was dead" if none of these things can hinder the existence of people having sex w/autonomy for all involved or people getting to tell you their name or all other people being alive

the banger quote on my imdb page was saying "no, i don't 'Have' to, but i'm going to" to an authoritarian in my life, concluding several minutes' "negotiation" of [i 'have' to hang up on this call now b/c the movie i'm standing in this movie theater to see is about to start. no i won't explode and die if i don't. i also won't explode and die if i don't keep "talking" to you (being Talked At / lectured & upbraided from afar)] funny how that works. i also Know this was a checkmate b/c that person gave up on responding (or, technically, switched to The Silent Treatment, which worked even worse via phone than in person) and i did hang up rather than miss the movie i showed up for and then they had to resort to Other Methods: telling someone willing to take on the enabling cop mode that i had Essentially said Go Fuck Yourself. like well that's right, and the fact that it's a "go fuck yourself" to get to say "i am going to end the call b/c i choose to do something else" and then actually do so is a real testament to this relationship. and if one had said "i can't keep talking, i have to go" and someone's like "sldfj you mean thou MAY not keep talking" teehee i don't know, CAN you have the peas????? it's like this obviously doesn't matter. i can choose to do shit and choose to not do shit without exploding and dying right this very second, except for taking 5 sec to eat a deadly bomb with a timer set for 5 sec. This Is Not The Point. why is autonomy off-limits to Anyone.

[carnivaloftherandom]

Art and consequences

Art is a mirror. Art is a lingua franca of our psychosocial selves, both individually and collectively. It can be aspiration or illustration, and it can also be invitation or incitement. What it cannot be, is neutral. All art comes from a point of view, it is inherently subjective (everything is, but if you haven’t familiarized yourself with inherent/implicit bias yet, you have Google,) and it can, in the best and worst ways, be dangerous.

Before anyone opens their mouths to cry, “Freedom of speech/expression,” I’m not saying people CAN’T make difficult art, or that anyone is excluded from tackling any subject. What I’m saying is: we need to stop thinking that just because we CAN, that we have the right to. Just because we can, doesn’t mean we should.

Alternative history, in fiction, is often predicated on specific points that are contentious in our contemporary lives. The big, “What if’s?” reduced to, “The Nazis won,” “The Conferedacy won,” “JFK weren’t assassinated,” and in America, yes, these are extraordinarily powerful cultural and historical moments, but there’s an inherent laziness to those questions that represents both a denial of our contemporary reality, and which almost always denies the voices of those marginalized by society who have also been the TARGETS of extreme violence, by the history that already exists.

Art can absolutely represent a danger to the status quo, but that danger is not singular in focus. The status quo may be a power structure which is abusive, or the fragile gains already made towards disrupting it. If we’re producing fictions which posit the victory of what the majority collectively accepts as evil (Hitler, the Holocaust, the Civil War, Slavery, et al,) or the eliminating an evil event, (the assassinations of JFK, MLK, RFK, etc,) we’re still, very often simply playing pretend in ways that don’t require us to truly confront either the roots of that evil or the fact that even avoiding what we view as turning points in our history, doesn’t change who we are now, nearly enough. Most of Alternative History in fiction, is a pulled punch.

A fictional lens of “Alternative History,” also ignores that we not only live in an era of, “Alternative facts,” right NOW, it completely elides that what we even call, “History,” is an extensively Bowdlerized, sanitized, often US or European-centric version of things, to begin with. The daily gaslighting of the current US administration, the convenient deletion of documentary evidence from the digital sphere, the competition for control of the narrative, these are neither new tactics nor do they lend credence to the assertion that fictions can be illustrative to the masses in a productive way, even with the best intentions. Which leaves me wondering why we don’t see more fictions that subvert what we think we know about history to begin with. The answer of course, is that those subversions would lead to questions which make us uncomfortable. If we looked at history and said, “What if people we think of as Other, were instead dominant, or even just important within the narrative as we know it, what does that look like?” Having non-white people or women or people with disabilities or Queer folks as central figures might be a little too dangerous to the power of the status quo. We’re waging daily battles for what is and isn’t true in the Now, and we’re not prepared to accept that everything we know and accept as true, might be wrong.

Within 24 hours, I witnessed HBO announce Confederate and a piece of DC Comics’ licensed Junior’s apparel bearing the Superfamily symbol in the colors of the Confederate Battle Flag, in a SW Pennsylvania Walmart. These things are not unrelated, and that is terrifying. Our present is the history of the future, and that present is full of a small, but incredibly vocal and violent group of people who want to be affirmed in being “Patriots,” who want a, “Race war,” who think that there’s no disconnect between, “Truth, Justice, and the American Way,” and the colors of an army who committed treason and sedition, and who LOST their bid to secede in order to preserve the enslavement of human beings to perpetuate their wealth and economic dominance. A piece of fiction that shows a contemporary or near future where they won, or at least won ENOUGH, not only validates their ideology but empowers it with the possibility that if it were fought again, they could indeed win, isn’t a deterrent at all. This, on top of the year and change of, “What if Captain America was a Nazi all along,” (spare me the party line on “Hydra aren’t Nazis,” we’re really not going to have that debate and I started reading comics in 1977, you are not in any way equipped to have that debate WITH ME, or my MOM who started reading comics in the 1950s. Shoo.)

I often write about the power of social inhibitors and the danger of social disinhibition. Media is a powerful vehicle for ideas, art is a powerful vehicle for ideas. Studies of how story can expand our capacity for empathy and alter our thinking and behaviors in daily life, back me up on this. When we internalize concepts, good or ill, they stick. If we collectively decide that we accept/don’t accept things, we exert pressure to conform. Sometimes we enact laws to that effect (the 13th amendment, with its infamous loophole, is a prime example of both the good/ill. Slavery is not acceptable, but punishment for a crime voids that.)

Sometimes, we simply exert gradual social pressures (It’s not acceptable for Non-Black people to use the N-word, and we respond to it negatively in most contexts,) which evolve over time, but where consequences are not legally enforced. It’s not illegal to be a bigot, outside of narrow definitions, but you may be ostracized for it. When that threat of being socially shunned disappears, as we’ve seen in the last couple of years, behavior changes. When a candidate/officeholder encourages bigotry, people become more willing to express their own bigotry without fear of consequence. We’ve had a rise in hate crimes, online abuse has skyrocketed, and policies which enable bigotry are being enacted daily.

Art is a mirror. It is a choice whether that mirror reflects a reality that validates our worst impulses or our better angels. Every single person who creates, has to make a choice about what they’re trying to say and how they say it, and most especially, whether THEY are the right person to say it. Once it is made and out in the world, you can’t take it back. That’s something that ought to give creators pause, when engaging in complex ideas: You can’t take it back, and you will be held responsible. It doesn’t mean don’t engage in those ideas, it means that if you think your intent and execution will be crystal clear, you’d damn well better talk it through with the people who will pay the price for it, if you’re not.

Art has consequences.

And with regard to the over reliance on genocidal history for alternative exploration, a personal note: it’s really easy to tackle those periods with the, “What if they won?” scenario. The conflicts are built-in. If you’re writing alt-history, you might consider what happens if these massive evils never existed at all. For example, What If:

- the transatlantic slave trade never happened

- the Roman Empire did not fall under the rule of despots. (Including the Roman Province in Africa)

-The Irish Potato Famine never happened

-The Black Plague never happened

-The Conquistadors were repelled by the Indigenous peoples.

-Columbus was lost at sea

-The Inquisition never happened

If you can’t look at the ripple effect of those events and work out the ways in which the world power balance, economic, social, religious, and scientific discovery shifts, along with the new conflicts that would arise on a geopolitical axis with their absence, perhaps you should rethink your qualifications to write alternative history at all because world-building is bigger than one thing.

*if you find any of my writing valuable in any way, the tip jar is: PayPal.me/kristenmchugh22

[netunleashed-blog]

Asus ZenFone 5 review: Can this budget flagship challenge the OnePlus 6?

http://www.internetunleashed.co.uk/?p=22865 Asus ZenFone 5 review: Can this budget flagship challenge the OnePlus 6? - http://www.internetunleashed.co.uk/?p=22865 The ZenFone 5 comes packing a Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 processor (Image: Express Newspapers)ZENFONE 5 REVIEW • £356PROS - Premium build, unique wide-angle camera lens • all-day battery life • incredible 1080p screen • Unbelievably cheapCONS - Annoying software bugs • Battery charging issue • Lacklustre main camera • Questionable longevityUnfortunately we have to use the word "almost" because the ZenFone 5 is ultimately hampered by software issues that tarnish the phone and make it incredibly frustrating to use at times.The Asus ZenFone 5 is the company's mid-tier smartphone that sells for £350 and on paper appears to pack enough punch to challenge the likes of the more expensive OnePlus 6.The most striking thing about the ZenFone 5 is just how premium it looks - there are no ugly asterisks to be aware of on the design front and it even includes a headphone jack - something that can’t be said for many of its more premium rivals which now lack this popular port. Asus ZenFone 5 review - new budget smartphone pictures Fri, July 27, 2018 The Asus ZenFone 5 is a brand new budget smartphone that almost rivals the OnePlus 6 Express Newspapers 1 of 7 In typical Asus style the back of the phone glows exuberantly in bright sunlight thanks to an ever-so-subtly rounded pattern.The ZenFone 5 comes packing a Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 processor, an Adreno 509 GPU and 64GB of storage.Although the internals don't boast anywhere near as much horsepower as a OnePlus 6, Galaxy S9 or an iPhone X, after using the phone for just over a week we can't help but feel the ZenFone's hardware isn't being pushed to its limits.Instead Asus' ZenUI software running on top of Android Oreo appears to be at fault for sluggish performance at times.During testing there were multiple occasions where we went to open the camera app only to be greeted by a black screen.The user interface of the app remained on-screen, but the shutter never opened like it should, meaning we missed out on plenty of photo opportunities.Experiences like this occur in other apps across the board and are incredibly disappointing because there is a ton to like about this phone.Software bugs aside, performance is generally snappy and the latest games on the Google Play Store hold up surprisingly well.The ZenFone 5 is ultimately hampered by software issues that tarnish the device (Image: Express Newspapers)Performance is generally snappy and the latest games on the Google Play Store hold up well (Image: Express Newspapers) We have to recommend users hold off on the ZenFone 5 and opt for the slightly more expensive OnePlus 6 instead EXPRESS.CO.UK Call quality is good - during testing the person on the other end said they could hear me loudly and clearly.Unfortunately the Asus ZenFone 5 is not water resistant in any capacity, however such a feature can be forgiven for the incredibly low price tag.But an area that never failed to impress us is the 6.2-inch display Asus is dubbing a "Super IPS+" panel.Technical jargon aside, this is the best 1080p screen we've ever laid eyes on.While colours are clearly exaggerated, the display consistently looks like a sticker slapped on the front of the phone - consuming content or just browsing the web is an absolute treat.Asus opted to include a notch on the ZenFone 5, but it doesn't seem as well thought out as the OnePlus 6 or even Apple's iPhone X.When watching video on the ZenFone 5 you have the option to watch in full screen or to leave black bars on the side of the display.If you choose to fill the screen the notch is cut off, but for some reason Asus decided to curve the very far corners of the display that lead into the notch. Asus ZenFone 5 review - budget smartphone camera samples Fri, July 27, 2018 Asus ZenFone 5 camera samples Express Newspapers 1 of 18 Asus ZenFone 5 camera sample pictures Once you notice the odd design choice it is incredibly difficult to un-notice it.Such a strange move is one of many features that leave the ZenFone 5 feeling half-baked and make us believe Asus should have focused its efforts on key features rather than trying to mimic other flagships on the market.The phone has a camera feature dubbed ZeniMoji that feels like an incredibly cheap copy of Apple's popular Animoji software.The feature struggles to keep up with facial movements, only serving to highlight the stark differences in front-facing camera technology between itself and a leading flagship.But instead of throwing frustrating-to-use features onto the ZenFone 5, Asus should have refined features users are going to need most, such as a reliable camera application.The Asus ZenFone 5 features a dual camera setup on its rear with a 12-megapixel f1.8 aperture lens doing the majority of the heavy lifting while an 8-megapixel f.20 wide angle lens accompanies it.The main shooter manages to capture a good amount of detail and photos are pleasing to look at on the 1080p screen.However, conditions in darkness or bright sunlight are ultimately the ZenFone 5's downfall in the camera department.The most striking thing about the ZenFone 5 is just how premium it looks (Image: Express Newspapers)We took pictures on a bright summer day and for the most part the sky was massively blown out as the main sensor struggled to cope with the vast amount of light.Although images look decent enough from afar, zoom in and you will ultimately see washed out colours and grainy details.At night the camera quality really takes a dip - any lights in a backdrop for instance can ultimately ruin a picture.Images are marred with grain on the main lens and look worse on the wide-angle camera.Asus appears to be aware of the second lens' shortcomings as the phone actively advises you not to use it for low-light photography.Overall the wide-angle lens is one of the most unique features about the ZenFone 5's camera setup and it has us wishing the Samsung S9+ came packing the same functionality.Being able to cram more into a photo is much more useful than a better quality zoom in our opinion and Asus should be applauded for putting the feature in such a budget device.The ZenFone 5 is also capable of capturing Portrait Mode shots on both the front and rear cameras.Lighting in the background can ruin photos taken on the ZenFone 5 (Image: Express Newspapers)Sublime conditions are required for the phone to accurately apply a bokeh effect (Image: Express Newspapers)However these require sublime conditions for the phone to accurately apply a bokeh effect.During our extensive testing the phone struggled with hair and even covered arms, showcasing the hit and miss nature of the technology.The Asus ZenFone 5 packs an audio punch thanks to a dual speaker setup.While the listening experience is not as crisp as leading flagships, it is a premium feature to have on such a budget device that is greatly appreciated.A sizeable 3300mAh battery sits inside the ZenFone 5 and allows you to easily get through a day of use.The phone's detuned processor and lower resolution screen surely play a huge part in giving users tons of juice.That is when the phone actually charges properly - we initially attempted to charge the phone with a USB-C cable and compatible brick that works with all our devices that require it.The phone told us it was charging, but when we came back to it about an hour later it had stopped and had less juice than when we first plugged it in. (Image: EX)The issue reoccured using the same cable and put an air of doubt in our mind when using any wire other than the official one provided in the box.Asus has made a valiant effort with the ZenFone 5 - the company has managed to cram a litany of flagship features in a phone costing only £350.But ultimately software issues and a lacklustre camera hamstring the ZenFone 5, especially when its higher-speced OnePlus 6 rival is only £119 more.Although technical hiccups could be addressed by Asus in a software update, the fact the phone is hampered by them from the outset means our confidence in the phone's longevity is severely questioned.Your smartphone is now the device you look at and use more than any other, and for that reason alone we have to recommend users hold off on the ZenFone 5 and opt for the slightly more expensive OnePlus 6 instead.Express.co.uk has asked Asus whether any of the issues noted in this review are expected to be addressed in a future update. Source link