#to be clear this is a major source of research and there are MANY articles about this

[quaranmine]

it is kind of crazy to me that we live in such a polarized, absurdly nationalistic, patriotic country and yet when evidence that nearly 50% of bald eagles, our national bird and icon of America, suffer from chronic lead poisoning and one third from acute lead poisoning there is not some massive outcry to fix this instantly. people are just like nooooooo but i wanna keep using lead fishing weights :((((( and the NRA is like over my dead body will you take our lead ammunition

like obviously this affects other types of animals too but i would've thought that the bald eagle would be THE charismatic species for the USA to take action on behalf of but. nope

[etz-ashashiyot]

So what’s the modern interpretation of the laws about keeping slaves? I’ve heard that said laws where a lot more kind to slaves then the surrounding nations but, like, it’s still slavery?

Hi anon,

With Pesach coming up, I'm sure that this question is on a lot of people's minds. It's a good question and many rabbanim throughout history have attempted to tackle it. Especially today, with slavery being seen as a moral anathema in most societies (obviously this despite the fact that unfortunately slavery is still a very real human rights crisis all over the world), addressing the parts of the Torah that on the surface seem to condone it becomes a moral imperative.

It's worth noting that the Jewish world overall condemns slavery. In my research for this question, I came across zero modern sources arguing that slavery is totally fine. I'm sure that if you dug deep enough there's some fringe wacko somewhere arguing this, but every group has its batshit fringe.

Here are some sources across the political and religious observance spectrum that explain it better than I could:

Chabad (this article is written by Rabbi Tzvi Freeman, a wonderful rabbi whose words I have learned deeply over the years. He is one of my favorite rabbis despite not seeing eye to eye with a lot of the Chabad movement)

Conservative (to be clear: this is my movement; it's not actually politically conservative in most shuls, just poorly named. We desperately need to bully them into calling themselves Masorti Olami like the rest of the world. It's [essentially] a liberal traditional egalitarian movement.)

Conservative pt. 2 (different rabbi's take)

Reform (note that this is from the Haberman Institute, which was founded by a Reform rabbi. Link is to a YouTube recording of a recent lecture on the topic.)

Chareidi (this rabbi is an official rabbi of the Western Wall in Israel, so in a word, very frum)

Modern Orthodox

I want to highlight this last one, because it is written by the Rosh Yeshiva of Yeshivat Chovevei, which is a progressive Modern Orthodox rabbinical school. They work very hard to read Torah through an authentically Orthodox lens while also maintaining deeply humanist values. As someone who walks a similar (if not identical) balancing act, this particular drash (sermon) spoke very deeply to me, and so I'm reposting it in its entirety**

[Edit: tumblr.hell seems real intent on not letting me do this in my original answer, so I will repost it in the reblogs. Please reblog that version if you're going to. Thanks!]

Something you will probably notice as you work your way through these sources, you'll note that there are substantially more traditional leaning responses. This is because of a major divide in how the different movements view Torah, especially as it pertains to changing ethics over time and modernity. I'm oversimplifying for space, but the differences are as follows:

The liberal movements (Reform, Renewal, Reconstructionist, etc.) view halacha as non-binding and the Torah as a human document that is, nevertheless, a sacred document. I've seen it described as the spiritual diary of our people throughout history. Others view it as divinely inspired, but still essentially and indelibly human.

The Orthodox and other traditional movements view halacha as binding and Torah as the direct word of G-d given to the Jewish people through Moshe Rabbeinu (Moses) on Mt. Sinai. (Or, at a minimum, as a divinely inspired text written and compiled by people that still represents the word of G-d. This latter view is mostly limited to the Conservative and Modern Orthodox movements.)

Because of these differences, the liberal movements are able to address most of these problematic passages by situating them in their proper historical context. It is only the Orthodox and traditional movements that must fully reckon with the texts as they are, and seek to understand how they speak to us in a contemporary context.

As for me? I'm part of a narrow band of traditional egalitarian progressive Jews that really ride that line between viewing halacha as binding and the Torah as divinely given, despite recognizing the human component of its authorship - more a partnership in its creation than either fully human invention or divine fiat. That said, I am personally less interested in who wrote it literally speaking and much more interested in the question of: How can we read Torah using the divinely given process of traditional Torah scholarship while applying deeply humanist values?

Yeshivat Chovevei does a really excellent job of approaching Torah scholarship this way, as does Hadar. Therefore, I'm not surprised that this article captures something I have struggled to articulate: an authentically orthodox argument for change.

[evidence-based-activism]

Hope this isn't a weird question, but do women do well in positions of leadership? The constant statement that women are too emotionally to lead is getting tired.

I feel like that's a really unfair statement anyways considering women were kept out of leadership positions, and now many women refuse to lead. That's okay, not saying women must. However for the ones that do, I'd like to know some female leaders I could look up to.

Not weird at all! In short, literature on this topic suggests that women in leadership positions perform either the same or better than men.

First, there are a few laymen oriented articles that address this topic [1, 2, 3]. These were written by the American Psychological Association [1] and Forbes [2, 3] and are heavily sourced. I'll be referencing some (but not all) of their sources as well, but they should be easy to follow if you want to read more. The articles use links instead of a reference list, however, so if you find a broken link, consider using the WaybackMachine on archive.org to find a copy of the source.

Subjective Perceptions

The Harvard Business Review has gathered a large dataset on subjective ratings of leader performance as evaluated by peers, superiors, and subordinates. From this dataset, they found that women outscored men on 17 of 19 "leadership capabilities", replicating their earlier results and indicating that on-average female leaders have a greater subjective performance than male leaders [4].

The American Psychological Association (APA) conducted a meta-analytic review of "16 nationally representative U.S. public opinion polls ... extending from 1946 to 2018" [5] found that a public opinion shift took place over this time, such that women are now rated as either equally or higher than men for competence, intelligence, and communion (broadly: concern for others). Men have retained a slight advantage in ratings of agency (broadly: self-oriented goal attainment).

Beyond that, the "mere presence" of a female leader led people to anticipate fairer treatment [6].

And a Pew Research Center survey from 2008 found that people ranked women either equal to or higher than men on most leadership traits (e.g., honest, intelligent) and political performance skills. Almost 70% of people indicated women and men make equally good political leaders. However, despite women's clear advantage when asking about specific skills, when directly asked who makes a better leader only 6% of people said women and 21% said men. This suggests that people's answer to this second question may be driven by sexist stereotypes (i.e., despite ranking women's leadership skills as better, people still default to belief in male leadership). [7]

All in all, this suggests that people believe that women are either equally or more qualified than men to lead (even if that doesn't translate to an explicit endorsement of female leaders over male leaders). So ... what about objective measures?

Political

A 2020 review on the impact of female political leaders [8] found strong evidence that more women representatives is related to lower levels of corruption, along with some evidence that more women in politics leads to better implementation of social programs, more legislation on neglected issues, and less conflict/human rights abuses. Women in politics are also more likely to prioritize human rights and access to "care" (e.g., health care, welfare, education, international aid, equal rights, etc.).

Another report [9] linked increased women’s political representation with greater legal equality and economic performance, and suggests that women's political representation leads to these outcomes. (While causation cannot be definitively established, the longitudinal research suggests a causal relationship such that having more female leadership leads to these positive outcomes.)

One way to objectively evaluate differences in men's and women's political leadership, is to examine differences in outcomes from a major global events like the COVID-19 pandemic.

This 2021 review [10], found female leaders (at country and state level) had a quicker response to the pandemic onset, lower fatality rates, and greater humanitarian response than male leaders. Given the comparatively low number of female leaders, some of these results were not statistically significant, but the pattern of results is still strongly suggestive. In any case, female leaders were at least as capable as male leaders in responding to the pandemic.

The above results are confirmed by a 2022 country-level analysis [11], and these results were strongly statistically significant, indicating that female leaders resulted in lower cases and deaths.

In fact, a Brazilian study [12] found that in addition to female leaders outperforming male leaders (in terms of a lower rate of COVID deaths and hospitalizations), local female leaders were able to mitigate the damage done by an irresponsible national leader (Bolsonaro). In short, "when faced with the decision between enforcing health measures against COVID-19 or trying to conquer the votes of local Bolsonaro supporters, our results suggest that female mayors were more likely to prioritize measures that can save lives".

All in all, female political leaders are either equal to or better than male political leaders.

Corporate

To start with, this 2017 review [13] indicates that some literature on financial outcomes suggests "firms run by female CEOs often report better ROA [return on assets], ROE [return on equity], and sales performance". However, they also indicate that research looking at a broader population (i.e., beyond "large firms in the United States"), does not always find this relationship. Even then, however, women's financial performance under a female leader is still equivalent to financial performance under a male leader.

An additional review [14], found similar results, with some finding a positive impact of female leadership on firm performance and others finding no difference between male and female leaders.

Other sources indicating increased profit under female leaders include:

A McKinsey & Company report [15] found greater diversity (i.e., sex and race) was associated with greater profitability. Specifically, the top 25% (top-quartile) most diverse companies worldwide had a 21% likelihood of outperforming their bottom-quartile peers.

A report by S&P Global, found firms with female CEOs and/or CFOs generated $1.8 trillion in excess profits and superior stock price performance [16].

An additional study [17] on 2 million companies across 32 countries in Europe found "a strong positive association between the share of women in senior positions and firms' ROA [return on assets]".

Beyond pure profit indicators, female corporate leaders are associated with:

Greater corporate responsibility [13]

Better internal management [13]

Lower firm risk [14, 20]

Better corporate credit rating [14]

Greater (bank) stability [18]

Fewer environmental violations [21]

Greater innovation [22]

Now, a reasonable criticism of all of this, is that this research is correlational and cannot establish causation. (The omnipresent problem in social research!) To a degree, this is a problem that cannot be fixed (i.e., there is no way to definitively prove causation without a controlled experiment). However, there are techniques that can provide strong support for causation. One such paper provides support against "reverse causation" (i.e., the idea that firms increase female representation when performing well), and found female representation among corporate board leadership predicts positive future performance [19]. This provides support for (but, again, cannot technically prove) a causal relationship between women's leadership and corporate performance.

Again, this indicates that female corporate leaders are either equal to or better than male corporate leaders.

Other

Political and corporate leadership are the two big categories where most of the research has been done. There are a few other relevant studies I'll describe here:

UNICEF (a part of the UN) reports that "women-led schools may perform better than men-led schools" as "learning outcomes ... for both girls and boys in female-led schools are higher" [23]

An experiment investigating team performance found "a positive and significant effect of female leadership on team performance" specifically "driven by the higher performance of team members in female-led teams" [24]

Unfortunately, the above study also found that "in spite of the higher performance of female-led teams, male members tended to evaluate female leaders as less effective, whereas female members have provided more favorable judgments", suggesting that men's interpretations of women's leadership abilities doesn't align with objective outcomes [24]

While not specifically about female leadership, a large study found that the "collective intelligence" of a group (essentially the IQ of a group rather than an individual) increases with the proportion of women in the group [25]

In addition, this review [26] describes a number of female leaders, so you may interested in it for "some female leaders [you] could look up to"

Women and Emotions

Lastly, I wanted to address "the constant statement that women are too emotionally to lead".

In terms of objective (or, as objective as we can get) measurements of emotional variability, there is little evidence that any sex differences exist, and if they do exist they are likely to be so small they would be (practically speaking) negligible [29].

However, an interesting study [27] examined "emotional expression content" by considering "feminine display rules" (suppression of negative emotions + simulation of positive emotions) and "masculine display rules" (suppression of positive emotions + simulation of negative emotions). As expected, women tended to follow feminine display rules, while men followed masculine display rules. However, this paradigm suggests it's not the amount of expressed emotion that varies by sex but the type of expressed emotion. Importantly, they also found that only the feminine display rules were associated with subjective distress.

A different study [28] examined sex differences in emotion regulation, specifically looking at two prosocial mechanisms and five antisocial mechanisms. They found women and men reported similar endorsement of 1 prosocial and 1 antisocial mechanism, women reported greater endorsement of the other prosocial mechanism, and men reported greater endorsement of the other 4 antisocial mechanisms.

One of the first articles I linked [2] discusses how women outperform men on prosocial behaviors/emotions (e.g., self-control, kindness, moral sensitivity) and men "outperform" women on antisocial behaviors/emotions (e.g., narcissism, aggression, etc.). To be clear, this is almost certainly a result of differences in socialization. That is: these differences are not "biological" or predetermined, instead society expects women to be more prosocial and men to be more antisocial, and we (tend to) meet those expectations.

All together, this suggests that men and women are both expected to modify their emotional expression (although the expectation for women is more likely to cause distress), women are more likely to display more prosocial and less antisocial emotions/behaviors, and women are more likely to deal with emotion constructively.

Ironically, based on the literature in the previous sections, society's expectations for women (i.e., empathy, team work, care for other people, etc.) are part of what drives their superior leadership performance over men.

TL;DR:

Women are either equal or better leaders than men based on: subjective evaluations, objective evaluations of political leaders, and objective evaluations of corporate leaders.

Women — in general and in leadership roles — improve the performance of people in their group.

Women and men likely don’t differ in emotional experience, but are both expected to modulate their emotional expression (in different ways).

Socialization and societal expectations induce more prosocial behavior in women and antisocial behavior in men. (Likely contributing to women’s superior leadership.)

References under the cut:

Novotney, A. (2023, March 23). Women leaders make work better. Here’s the science behind how to promote them. American Psychological Association. https://www.apa.org/topics/women-girls/female-leaders-make-work-better

Chamorro-Premuzic, T. (2021, March 7). If women are better leaders, then why are they not in charge? Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/tomaspremuzic/2021/03/07/if-women-are-better-leaders-then-why-are-they-not-in-charge/

Chamorro-Premuzic, T. (2022, March 2). The business case for women in leadership. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/tomaspremuzic/2022/03/02/the-business-case-for-women-in-leadership/

Zenger, J., & Folkman, J. (2019, June 25). Research: Women score higher than men in most leadership skills. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2019/06/research-women-score-higher-than-men-in-most-leadership-skills

Eagly, A. H., Nater, C., Miller, D. I., Kaufmann, M., & Sczesny, S. (2020). Gender stereotypes have changed: A cross-temporal meta-analysis of U.S. public opinion polls from 1946 to 2018. American Psychologist, 75(3), 301–315. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000494

Joshi, M. P., & Diekman, A. B. (2022). My fair lady? Inferring organizational trust from the mere presence of women in leadership roles. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 48(8), 1220–1237. https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672211035957

Men or women: Who’s the better leader? (2008, August 25). Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2008/08/25/men-or-women-whos-the-better-leader/

Cowper-Coles, M. (2020). Women Political Leaders: The Impact of Gender on Democracy. https://www.kcl.ac.uk/giwl/assets/women-political-leaders.pdf

Wyman, O., & Weh, D. (2023). Representation matters: Women political leaders. Oliver Wyman Forum. https://www.oliverwymanforum.com/global-consumer-sentiment/2023/sep/representation-matters-women-political-leaders.html

Luoto, S., & Varella, M. A. C. (2021). Pandemic leadership: Sex differences and their evolutionary–developmental origins. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 633862. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.633862

Chang, D., Chang, X., He, Y. et al. The determinants of COVID-19 morbidity and mortality across countries. Sci Rep 12, 5888 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-09783-9

Bruce, R., Cavgias, A., Meloni, L., & Remígio, M. (2022). Under pressure: Women’s leadership during the COVID-19 crisis. Journal of Development Economics, 154, 102761. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdeveco.2021.102761

Gipson, A. N., Pfaff, D. L., Mendelsohn, D. B., Catenacci, L. T., & Burke, W. W. (2017). Women and leadership: Selection, development, leadership style, and performance. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 53(1), 32–65. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886316687247

Serena, Z. (2020). Do women leaders improve firm performance? European Journal of Economics and Management Sciences, 2, 21–26. https://doi.org/10.29013/EJEMS-20-2-21-26

Dame Vivian Hunt, Lareina Yee , Sara Prince, & Sundiatu Dixon-Fyle. (2018). Delivering through Diversity. McKinsey & Company . https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/people-and-organizational-performance/our-insights/delivering-through-diversity

Sandberg, D. J. (2019). When Women Lead, Firms Win. S&P Global. https://www.spglobal.com/content/dam/spglobal/corporate/en/images/general/special-editorial/whenwomenlead_.pdf

Christiansen, L. E., Lin, H., Pereira, J., Topalova, P., & Turk, R. (2016). Gender Diversity in Senior Positions and Firm Performance: Evidence from Europe. IMF Working Papers, 16(50). https://doi.org/10.5089/9781513553283.001

Sahay, R., Cihak, M., N’Diaye, P., Barajas, A., Kyobe, A., Mitra, S., Mooi, Y., & Yousefi, R. (2017). Banking on women leaders: A case for more? IMF Working Papers, 17(199). https://doi.org/10.5089/9781484318164.001

Qian, M. (2016). Women’s leadership and corporate performance (ADB Economics Working Papers). Asian Development Bank. https://www.adb.org/publications/womens-leadership-and-corporate-performance

Perryman, A. A., Fernando, G. D., & Tripathy, A. (2016). Do gender differences persist? An examination of gender diversity on firm performance, risk, and executive compensation. Journal of Business Research, 69(2), 579–586. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.05.013

Liu, C. (2018). Are women greener? Corporate gender diversity and environmental violations. Journal of Corporate Finance, 52, 118–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2018.08.004

Chen, J., Leung, W. S., & Evans, K. P. (2018). Female board representation, corporate innovation and firm performance. Journal of Empirical Finance, 48, 236–254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jempfin.2018.07.003

Brossard, M., & Bergmann, J. (2022, March 8). Can more women in school leadership improve learning outcomes? | Innocenti Global Office of Research and Foresight. UNICEF | for Every Child; UNICEF. https://www.unicef.org/innocenti/stories/can-more-women-school-leadership-improve-learning-outcomes

De Paola, M., Gioia, F., & Scoppa, V. (2022). Female leadership: Effectiveness and perception. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 201, 134–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2022.07.016

Woolley, A. W., Chabris, C. F., Pentland, A., Hashmi, N., & Malone, T. W. (2010). Evidence for a collective intelligence factor in the performance of human groups. Science, 330(6004), 686–688. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1193147

Abdul Wahab, Shazanah; Mohamad Rasidi, Nuur Mohamad Firdaus; Wahab, Samsudin. Influences of Women’s Leadership Performance Towards the Corporate, Political and Social Success: A Review and Research Agenda. Asian Journal of Research in Business and Management, [S.l.], v. 2, n. 4, p. 54-68, dec. 2020. Available at: https://myjms.mohe.gov.my/index.php/ajrbm/article/view/11571.

Simpson, P. A., & Stroh, L. K. (2004). Gender differences: Emotional expression and feelings of personal inauthenticity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(4), 715–721. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.89.4.715

Zimmermann, P., & Iwanski, A. (2014). Emotion regulation from early adolescence to emerging adulthood and middle adulthood: Age differences, gender differences, and emotion-specific developmental variations. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 38(2), 182–194. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165025413515405

Weigard, A., Loviska, A. M., & Beltz, A. M. (2021). Little evidence for sex or ovarian hormone influences on affective variability. Scientific Reports, 11(1), 20925. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-00143-7

[meeravandaseera]

Introductory Waterfolkology literature or books Masterlist

This is a list of books which, in my opinion, tend to be swell for introducing waterfolk, for example merfolk, mermaids and mermen and the like.

All of them are pretty good to get introduced into waterfolk only. While I still have many more in my shelf, most of them are pretty limited for getting introduced. What I refer to is being thrown into this topic like being thrown into a cold pool. "Beyond Faery" by John T. Kruse for example only explains British waterfolk and not all the other ones that one should know about. Basically, I cherry-picked some books for this list. I wrote down some of my personal pros and cons, mostly like a bullet list. Questions are welcome. My personal favorites are more on the surface of this list. Cited sources, accurate information, included lesser known or mentioned information (this is more based on my own intuition from what I have read on what is "mentioned less", take it with a grain of sea salt), and different topics are a high-priority, yet folklore being a more major one. I'm pretty critical, but that is because I have a soft spot for more accurate and reliable sources that cite their information and whatnot. Some information in even the greatest literature tends to be biased. I do sound pretty dry here, but I cannot turn the tide for this one, sadly.

Many are well-researched meanwhile others are not so much. Of course no book can include literally everything when being more general about this topic. Some are older, but still have accurate information because usually folklore is something that is not based on the most up-to-date information, yet some information is. They are not meant to be one's one and only source because most do never manage to portray something in the entirety, leaving information out or giving us wrong information. Literally almost all of them include the false sighting of John Smith. That's why such a wide variety of literature is pretty good. Some books are out-of-print. I got many second-hand.

All of this is my own opinion and one should also read other reviews when sea-riously considering what to get. There are so many of these and one should really think twice about what one should get, at least physically. One can try to lend a book from a library or get it in E-Book format, of course.

>>Mermaid and Other Water Spirit Tales From Around the World<< by Heidi Anne Heiner:

Pros: Essential and satisfies my critical side. A treasury of more accurate and literal accounts of waterfolk in folklore taken from more direct sources. (Obviously not the original sources, but mostly the directly translated ones). Even includes full older articles like "Sea Fables Explained" or the waterfolk section of "Superstistions of the Sea and Sailors". Includes various notes on sections in order to add or explain some things about each sourced text. Directly cited sources. Includes lesser known waterfolk like the Kaffirs of Xhosa belief on pages 732-735. Includes many different versions of some tales like the ones of "The King's Son and Messeria". Includes ballads and all their different versions. Is not afraid to leave direct, lengthy and repeating things inside (It is okay to sum such lengthy tales up, but I am happy that such a book exists when one needs to check the actual account).

Cons: Some language of the past might make it harder to understand some sources. Need to look up some vocabulary. Stories like "The Little Mermaid" or "Undine" included within the sea of oral tradition, out of the tide.

>>The Penguin Book of Mermaids<< edited by Christina Bacchilega and Marie Alohalani Brown:

Pros: Essential. Scholarly and descriptive. Includes direct and accurate source texts and important notes to explain a source or to describe it. Makes it clear what is literary and what is not by giving it a separate section. Has some lesser known literary tales. Includes many lesser known waterfolk like the karukayn from North Australia or Persian watermaidens. Cited sources nicely.

Cons: Only includes one version each for the ballads.

>>The Mermaid Atlas: Merfolk of the World<< by Anna Claybourne and illustrated by Miren Asian Lora:

Pros: Quite essential as it dives into a wide range of waterpeople from across the world's waters with a substantial fishing net cast into the sea of these books. Mentions more obscure waterpeople like the lamiak, Ji-Merdiwa, Sumpall, Avatea, Lobasta, Peru waterfolk etc. Introduced me to many of the aforementioned waterpeople from obscure depths and uncharted waters. Illustrations are nice to look at and they do depict them well to an extent. Succinct, yet descriptive about each type of waterperson. Includes sightings and makes it clear that those featured are only some of them.

Cons: No sources for any information are stated and one is left to search by oneself in order to get the full wave. Included one literary waterperson, namely the little mermaid and mixed it up with all the other ones from oral tradition. It's a bit out of the tide.

>>Mermaids: The Myths, Legends & Lore<< by Skye Alexander:

Pros: Includes many lesser known waterpeople like Squant the sea-woman to whom it introduced me. Goes into folklore, but also symbolism and other topics alongside. Mentions lesser known waterfolk sightings. Many obscure waterfolk depictions, but only all of them in teal. Has somewhat good reference pages.

Cons: Some things are mentioned twice. No direct sources cited for any sections alongside for the depictions. Information tends to be scattered around and mixed together in the book and thus is not very easy to follow.

>>Merpeople: A Human History<< by Vaughn Scribner:

Pros: Essential. Partly made available online on articles like "What Merpeople Say About Us" on Nautilus, "Mermaids and Tritons in the Age of Reason" on the Public Domain Review and also some interviews. Descriptive, academic, scholarly. Written by a historian. Dives into many a many of obscure sightings and puts forth many ideas on that topic. Has much information on all the different frauds and includes much more obscure information. Goes into some folklore and influence on pop-culture with many great examples. Great waterfolk depictions, including some lesser known ones. Sources cited for depictions and information. Explains the fraud of John Smith's "sighting".

Cons: Does not include all too much folklore from around the world, covers only more basic knowledge in that section. Primarily only focuses on sightings and hoaxes etc.

>>Solving Mysteries with Science: Mermaids<< by Lori Hile:

Pros: Dives into sightings and theories including answers on the existence of waterfolk. Has somewhat lesser known information, hoaxes, and sightings. Covers why one might have believed in them. Has some folklore still. Succinct.

Cons: Mostly only about waterfolk sightings and hoaxes.

>>Sea Enchantress: The Tale of the Mermaid and Her Kin<< by Gwen Benwell and Arthur Waugh (1961):

Pros: Academic, scholarly, and very well-written. It's descriptive and written by scholars, obviously. They were members of the British Folklore Society and devoted several years to research this topic alone. Somewhat essential. Many diverse topics ranging from the shallow takes on waterfolk that they are "only sirenians" up to different sightings and folklore from the entire world. Includes lesser known waterfolk like the Finnish Aino in the Kalevala and the nixen in the Nibelungensage from Germany or the almost obscure Jalpari of the Punjab district in Kulu in India's mythology. Includes a small variety of diverse depictions ranging from illustrations to sculptures, but only in black and white. Has a list of waterfolk depictions in British cathedrals and churches. Dives into some more 20th century popular waterfolk media.

Cons: Sometimes only describes waterfolk with not-so-much detail. Short sources are cited, but not always, only rarely. Has a tendency to be more talking about European waterfolk than others, especially those of the British Isles. Fewer waterfolk from other countries. Does not acknowledge the misconception of Dagan, the supposed fish-god. Just assumes that Dagan is a fish-god while he most likely is not, more of an agriculture god.

>>Mermaids: Art, Symbolism, and Mythology<< by Alex Müller, Christopher Halls, and Ren Williamson:

Pros: Academic, thorough, and scholarly. Written by scholars. Includes a big list of references and sources for the depictions. Dives into different topics like the ancient waterfolk of Mesopotamia and Greece, waterfolk in early Christianity, some sightings and explanations, art and modern 21st century influence. It has many nice and essential depictions from the past and even sculptures. Describes in neat detail how some depictions came to be and where they are featured etc. Has a graph showing how the sirens changed from half-bird to half-fish with many variants.

Cons: No directly cited sources in the text. Mostly only more well-known waterfolk.

>>Mermaids<< by Beatrice Philpotts:

Pros: Descriptive. Has nice waterfolk depictions including lesser known ones. Goes into folklore and sightings with some hoaxes including answers. Some lesser known information like the supposed sea-god incarnation of King Chen.

Cons: Almost no directly cited sources. Information is quite mixed together.

>>The Mermaid Handbook: An Alluring Treasury of Literature, Lore, Art, Recipes, and Projects<< by Carolyn Turgeon:

Pros: Dives into many things from folklore to 21st century fashion and pop-culture like the name above suggests. Sources cited for the depictions and some of the texts included like smaller poems. Includes few lesser known older depictions of waterfolk. Mentions some somewhat not very well-known waterfolk like Dahut of the city of Ys or the Ben-Varrey. Some interesting speech or interviews by people on the topic of waterfolk like "A Young Man's Guide to Picking Up Mermaids".

Cons: No directly cited sources in the folklore section, not even in the back. I was quite surprised by that. While it does have a bibliography, it does not give direct citations. Does not always cite depictions on those large two page spanning ones. Mixes "The Little Mermaid" and "Undine" literary tales to the oral tradition folklore seaction with the Melusiné, it's a bit out of the tide. On page 86 it says that "it's impossible to catalogue the endless types of glitzy aquatic hybrids that exist in almost every culture", that is not very true because Theresa Bane, for instance, made a whole encyclopedia of humanoid mythical beings from the entire world. If one is daring to do so, it is possible.

Notes: Cozy list of seaweed at the end, it's nice. Interesting DIY projects.

>>Scaled for Success: The Internationalisation of the Mermaid<< edited by Philip Hayward:

Pros: Available online on ResearchGate. Descriptive. Dives into many topics like folklore and pop-culture. Includes lesser known information like about the Filipino sirenas that they could control water etc or the types of yawkyawks like the ngalworreworre of the Wugularr people in North Australia. Dives into 21st century media that have not been regarded by the Western world. Diverse. Good bibliography. Lesser known depictions included.

Cons: There tend to be no directly cited sources. Some depictions have low quality.

>>Seduction and the Secret Power of Women - The Lure of Sirens and Mermaids<< by Meri Lao:

Pros: Descriptive and academic. Goes into mythology of the sirens and their interesting evolution. A bit of other Greek mythology waterfolk alongside. Includes many interesting and more obscure aspects and theories. Has some information about waterfolk aside from the European ones. Includes some obscure waterfolk like the Morrigan from the swamps of Pilgar. Section on sightings with some lesser known information like those sightings of Sicilian seamen. Many interesting lesser known depictions of waterfolk. Cites sources for depictions and some information.

Cons: Language is more complex, need to look up vocabulary. Does not go into many different waterfolk from around the world. More basic knowledge on general waterfolk, but more complex knowledge focusing only on the sirens. No directly cited sources for some information.

>>Creatures of Fantasy - Mermaids<< by Kathryn Hinds:

Pros: Goes into folklore from around the world including some lesser known waterfolk like the Halfway People, the watermaid of St. Brendan or the mermaid of the Iona Isle in Scotland. Dives into some sightings. Has some lesser known depictions.

Cons: No cited sources for information and depictions. Mixed up a sighting with folklore from other countries at the back. Mostly shallow and not all too many details included.

>>Mermaids and Mermen<< by Shannon Knudsen:

Pros: Goes into folkloric waterfolk from the world in folklore also with some lesser known ones like the Gwenhidwy, Halfway People or adaro. Includes information like sightings and frauds such as the more obscure Filipino incident of waterfolk being claimed to be held in a lab in 2009. Some vague pop-culture at the end.

Cons: Not much detail and quite shallow in some aspects. No cited sources, only very vague references.

>>Mermaid Folklore<< by Elizabeth Andrews:

Pros: Includes lesser known waterfolk like the yacaruna. Has some interesting sightings included. Depictions do represent the waterfolk well to an extent.

Cons: Mixed up sightings with folklore oftentimes. Literally no cited sources. Includes much literary information that it does not discern from the folklore. Misconception about shellycoat being humanoid, John T. Kruse in his "Beyond Faery" clears up that it's just a foal. In some tides it's more of a fictional retelling. Sometimes hard to read when text is printed on images of paper notes on the paper. Least suggested.

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Erin Reed at Erin In The Morning:

The New York Times has a disinformation problem regarding transgender people, their rights, and their medical care. A primary source of this issue is their opinion columnist, Pamela Paul. Four months ago, Paul published a 4,500-word, error-filled article so severely flawed that she later released a follow-up piece in response to criticism, backpedaling and admitting a lack of knowledge. Now, it appears any self-professed ignorance has been discarded. In her latest piece, Paul claims that gender-affirming care "doesn’t work," and asserts that anyone who supports it — including some of the largest and most credible medical and psychological organizations in the world, backed by dozens of scientific studies — is merely "pretending." However, Paul's writing falls far short of supporting such a claim. A fact check of her latest article reveals it is built on much of the same often-debunked disinformation that underpinned her earlier work.

Before proceeding, it is important to recognize the philosophical underpinnings of Paul’s opposition to transgender people and their care. Pamela Paul has targeted LGBTQ+ organizations for including those who identify as queer and has implicitly accused transgender people of "erasing" women. In her previous piece, Paul defended marriage and family therapist Stephanie Winn, who suggested that transgender people be subjected to acupuncture as a way to dissuade them from being transgender. Winn stated this was to "see if they like having needles put in them," implying that "the child’s hatred of needles could spark desistance." This is a clear form of aversive conversion therapy. Paul misrepresented Winn’s horrific advice by portraying it as "approaching gender dysphoria in a more considered way," without actually explaining what it entailed. Like Paul’s previous work, her latest piece utilizes a “Gish Gallop” approach, spreading several false and misleading claims throughout a lengthy article, making a comprehensive fact check challenging. This fact-check will highlight clear examples of her most egregious errors and disinformation to illustrate the lack of consideration for truth that, some may argue, was intentionally woven into the article.

Claim: Dr. Hillary Cass, author of the UK-based Cass Review targeting transgender care, only met with DeSantis’ handpicked, anti-trans medical board members a single time and thus could still be considered “unbiased” and “neutral.” Fact: Members of the Cass review held several meetings with DeSantis appointees to ban care and even testifying in favor, challenging claims that that the team was “unbiased” and “neutral.”

[...] Claim: Gender dysphoria is temporary, transgender youth grow out of being trans, and we should treat transgender youth with therapy alone. Fact: Transgender identification is rarely temporary. The vast majority of transgender youth continue to identify as transgender many years later. Even the Cass Review only found fewer than 10 detransitioners out of 3,000 patients. [...] For any disinformation researcher on transgender care, one of the first red flags indicating a poorly fact-checked article is the claim of high desistance or detransition rates. Pamela Paul has used such claims before: in her previous article, she stated that "eight in 10 cases of childhood gender dysphoria resolve themselves by puberty and 30 percent of people on hormone therapy discontinue its use within four years." These figures rely on heavily debunked and outdated information contradicted by newer studies. The 80% figure comes from outdated diagnostic criteria that conflated feminine gay boys with transgender people, whereas the latter statistic comes from a study on the use of Tricare during the Trump trans military ban and only looked at people who used Tricare to cover their medication, not the actual discontinuation of medication. Although neither of these studies are directly cited in Paul’s latest story—likely due to previous fact-checks on her work—her latest piece instead links to an old journal article from Dr. Kaltiala that refers to those same older studies. Claims of high desistance from being transgender originate from conversion therapy advocate Ken Zucker’s 1990s research or Steensma’s 2011/2013, studies, both with the same methodological shortcoming: they used old gender identity disorder criteria, which lumped in overly effeminate boys and overly masculine girls with no desire to be another gender as “disordered."

Modern studies, using current diagnostic practices, present a very different picture. A review by Cornell University found that regret rates for gender transition range from 0.3% to 3.8%. 

[...] Claim: Gender-affirming care is overly risky and results in bone loss for transgender youth, infertility, the inability to achieve orgasm, and other negative impacts. Fact: Fertility counseling is routinely provided to transgender youth, ensuring they understand the potential impacts of treatment on fertility. Bone density loss is typically minuscule and can be treated and prevented with calcium supplementation. Additionally, most transgender individuals report satisfaction with their sexual functioning, including the ability to achieve orgasm. According to an article published in the Journal of Adolescent Health, the idea that gender-affirming care is "unsafe" is a misconception. When presented with evidence and expert testimony, an Arkansas judge overturned the state's gender-affirming care ban, stating that "adverse effects from gender-affirming care are rare" and "the risks associated with [gender-affirming care] are comparable with many other treatments that parents are free to choose for their adolescent children after weighing the risks and benefits."

In many cases, the risks Paul mentions are overstated or even entirely incorrect. For instance, Paul claims that gender-affirming care causes significant bone density loss. However, a review by Yale researchers on disinformation in debates over gender-affirming care bans pointed out that puberty blockers have “minimal” or “negligible” effects on bone density, and these effects are reversible. Even when bone density loss is a concern, it can be prevented and treated through calcium supplementation and exercise. As such, pediatricians routinely advise calcium supplementation for transgender youth receiving gender-affirming care. The informed consent form explicitly addresses this potential risk and its mitigation, stating, “It is important that patients on Lupron Depot® take other measures to protect their bones: keeping active and ensuring good calcium and Vitamin D intake.” [...]

Claim: Dr. Cass showed that there is no evidence that transgender youth will turn to suicide if denied care. Fact: Transgender youth who transition are at a much lower risk of suicide. Additionally, whistleblowers in the NHS in England reported a spike in suicides after restrictions on transgender care were implemented, which Dr. Cass reportedly chose not report.

Erin Reed expertly fact-checks NYT columnist Pamela Paul’s latest anti-trans screed that baselessly asserts gender-affirming care to be “risky” and gave praise to the faulty anti-trans Cass Review, among other anti-trans lies.

[sophieinwonderland]

Has The Satanic Temple's Ableist Grey Faction Taken Over The ISSTD Wikipedia Page?

While looking for information about the ISSTD, naturally one of the highest results is always going to be Wikipedia. And it's... pretty weird.

There is a massive list of so-called "controversies" which are all just Grey Faction talking points. The controversies are longer than the description of the organization and its history. And when you look into them... a lot of them aren't even real controversies.

Like this...

The organization offered to integrate itself into the International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies, a group to which a number of ISSTD, then ISSD members, interested in trauma, but no longer interested in multiple personality, had switched their allegiance. “Unfortunately,” Barach reports, “the ISTSS did not accept the proposal.”

They wanted to combine with another group. The other didn't want to? What is the controversy about?

Also, "switched their allegiances" like this is a nation or a god? People move from one organization to another. That's normal. What is with the manipulative wording here?

Another example is this one about how the organization changed the named of their RAMCOA group, without even saying what it was renamed to.

In October 2020, the ISSTD Board of Directors issued a letter to membership informing them that the special interest group formerly known as RAMCOA SIG (Ritual Abuse, Mind Control and Organized Abuse Special Interest Group) had been renamed due to “stricter rules for the provision of Continuing Education (CE) and Continuing Medical Education (CME) credits”, largely due to growing concerns about the organization’s presentations which included sensationalized and controversial statements regarding “mind control.”

And the source for the reasons it was changed? The Grey Faction.

Actually, a lot of their sources are from the Grey Faction/Satanic Temple. As are articles written by the group's founder, Douglas Mesner/Lucien Greaves.

Even most of the ones that are legitimate controversies aren't directly related to the ISSTD as an organization. Just individual members.

All of this started with a user named Jintshire in 2019 who renamed the "legal cases" category to controversies, and began sourcing the Satanic Temple and the Grey Faction as evidence for these controversies.

Upon further research, Jintshire seems to have a particular interest in The Satanic Panic and ISSTD, without many contributions outside of that.

Through 2021, many of the additions were from another user named Lefthandalion who also seemed to deal with the ISSTD, Satanic Panic, the fictitious False Memory Syndrome, and "recovered memory therapy." (Which is a term made up by the False Memory Syndrome Foundation.)

This includes the paragraph I mentioned earlier about the renaming of RAMCOA that linked to The Grey Faction as its source.

It seems that most of the major contributions to this Wikipedia page are from people who have an interest solely in the Satanic Panic.

Now, I'm certainly no fan of the ISSTD...

But it deeply concerns me how the narrative around a psychiatric institution on Wikipedia appears to currently be driven by a religious organization with a clear agenda. An organization doesn't even believe in dissociative identity disorder, that editorializes to make up controversies that didn't exist before, and that I believe to be citing their own made-up controversies as sources on the Wikipedia page.

[hatboyproject]

Advances in the Voice Synth Discussions

Due to recent developments in the modding scene, I would like to make something perfectly clear regarding my advocacy for AI synth use by fans in fanworks: I do not support the use of this technology in the creation of pornographic mods. I believe it is a grossly invasive violation of consent and misuse of this technology to distribute such material. I believe that to use this technology in such a way is harmful to the VAs personally and professionally.

I am a strong advocate for modders using cloned vocal synth technology in non-commercial fanworks. This is something I have gone to bat for in a big way - I presented my case to the National Association of Voice Actors (NAVA) and continue to be a part of the ongoing discussion surrounding this. I take these ethical issues very seriously.

Any advocacy I do for this technology is aimed towards transformative works that are respectful and source material appropriate. Arguments regarding fair use, transformative work, and artistic value have merit, but can only go so far. At a certain point, a line must be drawn. Because this technology can produce audio that is indistinguishable from the original speaker to the typical listener, I see this as fundamentally different than other forms of transformative works. I believe it is more than fair for VAs to ask for major players like Nexus to initiate a blanket ban on hosting porn mods that use this technology without personal written consent. (And as we know, due to IP, obtaining consent for such is basically impossible.)

As it stands, VAs in general are gaining a better understanding of what mods are. In addition to doing their own research, I like to think that, in some small way, I have contributed to this. Many are willing to entertain my arguments and do see the value in projects like my own, as well as others that are being made.

I'm very pleased that recently, Jennifer Hale herself took a moment to clarify to a fan on Instagram that she personally doesn't have a problem with tributes to games! I am not confusing this remark she made for explicit consent, because it is not; however, the sentiment is absolutely lovely and goes a long way towards making me feel secure that my work can safely continue:

This was in response to the Instagram version of a Tweet quoted in a PCGamer article. In this tweet, Hale was very direct in stating in reference to AI that if one does not have permission to use her voice, then one does not have permission. I actually think this user meia101sa may be referring to my work specifically here, which is fun - it's pretty neat to see my stuff get mentioned "out in the wild," as it were!

The outcry recently has been about a Skyrim mod which used the tech in this way and several of the original VAs objected. The mod was flooded with reports, yet at the time of this writing, it still remains up. I have been informed by NAVA that the VAs have filed takedown requests themselves, personally.

I'm not on Nexus staff myself, but as I had a hand in helping to inform Nexus' stance regarding AI use in mods - which stipulates that only takedown requests filed by VAs or their legal representation will be honoured - I consider it personal that I do all I can to ensure those requests are honoured.

Big name VAs have shown they are willing to hear us and look out for us, even on these controversial issues that personally affect them. I sincerely want to reciprocate in any way I can.

[power-chords]

In the popular media, pornography has seemingly become the default source of blame for any and all sexual problems. Why are we in a “sex recession?” Porn. Why do we have such a big problem with sexual violence? Porn. Why are sexual difficulties like erectile dysfunction so common? Porn.

As support for these and other claims claims about the dangers posed by pornography consumption, media articles often reference the writings of anti-porn advocacy organizations—organizations that see no place for porn and warn of its “addictive” potential. However, what many fail to realize is that these organizations are rooted in ideology, not science. Some of them may claim the banner of science in an attempt to gain legitimacy, but they cherrypick and distort the findings in order to provide a one-sided and inaccurate story: that porn is categorically bad and a major threat to public health and safety.

The truth, however, is that science has a complex and nuanced story to tell about the effects of porn. It’s neither inherently good nor bad, and it can have different effects on different people. In fact, the effects for some are very positive. For example, research has found that the couples who are the most sexually satisfied are actually more—not less—likely to make porn a part of their sex lives [1]. Why is that? Porn is one of many ways to add novelty to your sex life or to vicariously live out your sexual fantasies and, as such, it can help boost passion and excitement.

At the same time, however, we also know that porn can be a source of disagreement and conflict in other relationships—although it’s not always clear whether porn use itself is the problem in these cases, or if porn use is the symptom of another problem. For example, research has found that in couples involved in sexless marriages or who otherwise have sexual desire discrepancies, it’s not uncommon for the higher-desire partner to report turning to porn as a sexual outlet [2]. In situations like this, porn is often incorrectly labeled as the source of the problem when, in actuality, there’s a much deeper desire discrepancy that’s masquerading as a disagreement about porn.

Again, all of this points to the fact that understanding the effects of porn isn’t easy and that anyone who’s trying to give you a simple, black-and-white answer about the effects of porn just isn’t being truthful.

[bugslaststraw]

Overwatch: the art of writing bad stories on purpose

Clocking in at just over 4k words: a semi-coordinated rant on the topic of Blizzard's history of lawsuits, Overwatch'es history of canonical queerness, and the strange marketing techniques that tie the two topics together. Written by someone who got into the game less than a week ago and likes it in a hatewatch "I love garbage" sort of way, intended for those less familiar with the topic at hand. I tried to source claims but it didn't work so let it be known that I did actual research but I'll probably get stuff wrong anyway so I tried to be funny about it here we go:

Section 1: Frat Boy Snowstorm and it's attempts at being progressive.

Try to focus. This is the most boring part.

So as I hope you all know by now, Blizzard is a pretty shit company. I say shit, because controversial sounds too unbiased. Most of us are familiar with the lawsuits against the company relating to sexual assault charges, unsafe working conditions for female employees and a quote "frat boy environment," of which they've been under fire for since 2018, but recently (early April '23 to be precise) they've also faced a lawsuit for sneakily coming up with a way to underpay their eSports champions. (Both of these are easy to look up if you want more info.) However, the company is a giant, that along with Overwatch released Call of Duty and a bunch of other games I don't recognise (fuck me I'm not an FPS person,) and, aside from the money they easily paid out, they really haven't faced any major consequences for their scummy behaviour.

This is exactly what they want, of course: for the whole thing to blow over as quickly as possible. Keep this in mind as we move on. That's the whole reason Section 1 exists: to remind you that Blizzard, like Disney, is a Big Corporate Company that will go to ridiculous lengths to make sure that the actually relevant controversies are forgotten in favour of smaller stupider shit.

If there's one thing Blizzard loves to do more than make their female employees uncomfortable, it's to tote around their progressiveness. Of course, this usually doesn't extend to Call of Duty or any of their more "grounded" "gritty" and generally masculine domains, but Overwatch specifically is a testing ground for all kinds of bullshit and we can't go a season without one billion articles about "Overwatch first game to have character of xxx nationality on playable roster" etc etc etc. People absolutely shit their pants every time the game announces a new queer hero or whatever, because since it's a Big Corporate Company and it's just barely achieving the bare minimum of inclusivity, of course, that's got to be a big deal right? Except of course that like Disney, Blizzard will do literally fucking anything to make sure their games stay relevant and that more people buy and play them, and these attempts at inclusivity can be assumed to be preformed mainly out of a desire to make money and cover up their scandals, and not because the people who call shots actually care. It becomes incredibly clear how Blizzard sees inclusivity as an idea when you consider their viral invention from last year, the Diversity Space Method.

To some of you this may look like a good thing at first, and originally I think it was, as the idea was to keep track of how many of their characters weren't any of these things displayed above so that they could keep that number down, but as soon as someone came up with the idea to assign a certain number of points to each character, the whole concept crashes and burns. You see, according to this chart here, (and as another Tumblr user famously put it), Torbjörn (3) is older than Lucio (2) is black. And I'm pretty damn sure that's not how that works.

No doubt a percentage of the artists and writes for the game had some sort of passion. After all, there is genuine treasure to be found in the character designs, animations and even some of the voice acting. But you know how it is when it comes to inclusivity; the artists so often never get to do more than drop hints and leave people guessing. Which leads us neatly into the next section.

Section 2: This game's kinda shit!

And I don't mean the game itself. Idk about that, I never played it (and my friends who do all have wildly varying opinions.) I am talking about the stories. When I first started "researching" (hatewatching) the shorts and comics for this game, I was angrily wondering why they all felt so hollow. It was like looking at AI generated art, it was like looking into the eyes of what you thought was a person and seeing two camera lenses staring back, it felt empty, it felt bland despite all the good character designs and the lore and the concepts and the colors and the nice clean lines. Something was missing, and it was uncanny as hell! Eventually though, I managed to narrow it down to a few key issues:

A lot of comics and shorts feel like ads above eveyrthing else, they're made to sell the game rather than be good, and they therefore lack passion.

Possibly as a result of this, they operate almost entirely on "tell don't show" rules, thereby feeling even more empty.

These stories still manage to lack substance and they don't really canonise a lot about the world or characters, especially regarding relations between characters, and,

the really interesting storylines are usually left uncontinued or unexplored, possibly due to aformentioned lack of passion and an egotistical but sadly fulfilled hope that people will download the game or at least read the rest of the comics to find out more.

All this put together make for a very strange experience in which you can, if you squint, see the fuzzy outline of a good story, good worldbuilding and interesting characters, and imagine that the details make sense. Which, granted, is usually what people do. If you use your brain or have experience in writing, however, it all falls apart.

Section 3A: Overwatch is a knock-off

Well, not exactly. But it does have a strange habit of borrowing from other games. For example, did you know I'm a TF2 fan? Probably. Did you know each individual TF2 class has an Overwatch equivalent? Me neither, until now. Scout and Tracer, Medic and Mercy, Sniper and Widowmaker, Spy and Sombra, hmm I'm sensing a pattern here, Demo and Junkrat (we'll get back to him later,) and so on.

"That's a coincidence," you say. "They're similar games, of course there are equivalents," you say. To that I says: you may be right. We may all collectively be overthinking this. We may all also collectively be overthinking the Omnic crisis as a whole and why it's so damn similar to Fallout's synths, they've both got robot racism and violent groups who want to kill the robots one of which is in Australia, which is a plot point in TF2 as well oh look at that, but again I'm sure it's all a big fucking coincidence right and sorry sorry I'll stop now.

It is actually genuinely possible that those are coincidences, no sass intended, but considering how Blizzard operates on the whole, I doubt it. They've already proven to be rather lazy with their stories. There's nothing wrong with having similar ideas or being inspired, but when it's as noticeable as this, along with everything else, I just can't help but feel disappointed.

Section 3B: Overwatch is also a porn category

Oh yeah, speaking of never properly canonizing relationships between the characters (and aging their underage characters up to eighteen for hitherto mysterious reasons, and releasing all those horny fanservice skins,) here's an utterly ridiculous fact: when Overwatch dropped in 2016, quite a lot of people didn't know it was a game because there was so much (animated, drawn etc) porn of it that it flooded and quickly rose to the top of the "games" category on most popular sites (hard to source for obvious reasons, but I've had a friend check for me.) It still sits up there, by the way, surpassed only by funny space bean game (I'm not kidding.) Why? Two reasons. One: all the game's female characters are impossibly beautiful and (in every case but like two post-launch releases) skinny and generally conventional as well. No surprise there. Two: the game models are well rigged, high quality and incredibly easy to get at, making it so that people can tank them down and use them for whatever they like without issue. Rumour has it that this is on purpose.

My question is, what has this influx of smut done to the game? You see, if there's one thing Blizzard loves more than making their female employees uncomfortable, bragging about inclusivity, and copying other games, it's pandering. And they pander to everybody, or at least to as many people as possible, usually all at the same time if they can get away with it. This, I have to theorise, is why all the characters seem to be flirting with one another, but only one or two actual relationships are canon. They simply don't want to piss off any part of their demographic, which they force as wide open as possible because money money money money money. This means embracing the porn and making sly references to that part of the fanbase with skins, voice lines, and odd comments in interviews.

Anyway, back to the lawsuits, or rather the consequences of them. You see, canon queerness in Overwatch comes in threefold. This is the story of two thirds of it.

Section 4: Toy Soldier and Knock-off Scout Adventures

This is Soldier 76. And he's gay.

Everybody clap for Blizzard now. It's coyly canonised in a short story titled Bastet. 76 here was never a very popular Overwatch character, lore wise, so I guess this move makes sense. I can see why, too. He's very plain and simple design wise, almost grounded, but not enough that you notice it at a glance. He looks like a plastic toy. Anyway, his queerness wont piss off too many dudebros long-term, since fewer people play him, but it gives everybody else something to chew on, so everybody wins right?. When was Bastet released again? Oh, January of 2019? What else happened around that time? The settling and aftermath of the first lawsuit? Great. That totally wasn't a cover-up for anything. Definitely not.

It's not like 76 is the first character to be confirmed as queer though. Blizzard's favourite Overwatch character Tracer is too, being confirmed as having a girlfriend named Emily all the way back in 2016.

That's good right? I mean, that was before the controversy even started! Surely they did this for normal, innocent reasons and oh who the fuck am I kidding she's a conventionally attractive female character kissing another conventionally attractive female character in a game dominated by male players with male devs and a porn category more expansive than the Bible and we know damn well why that happened.

We can but pray that someone who was in on this gave a shit. Maybe the artist. The writer. Somebody. But this is a barren and cold world and I dare not hope even for that.

Not to mention, both of these things were distinctly one-off notes. It's mentioned once, and then never again, and after 2019 there was a four year radio silence on the whole subject of queer characters that didn't change until the release of OW2. And yet, Blizzard loved to brag about how inclusive they are at every turn even back then. "Look at us," they say, as the characters stare at you from the computer screen with their dead, hollow eyes, "look at how good we are! Please buy our game."

The status quo would change significantly in 2023, however, with the introduction of their latest addition to the roster; Lightweaver. Lifeweaver. Lightweaver? Wait hold on

Section 5: The most annoying twunk to ever grace the earth flings you into the stratosphere

This is Niran "Bua" Pruksamanee, also known as Lifweaver.

He debuted on the 11th of April, 2023, and he's The First at a lot of things, which, of course, made headlines. "First Thai character in a major FPS game" was probably the most common one. I'd feel better about that if I didn't know it's most likely the result of Blizzard trying to cash in inclusivity points. The second First he has is the more controversial one, however: First Overwatch character to be confirmed queer on launch. That's right, after four years of Jack Shit, they're back on it! And, well.

You see, to fully understand my emotions about this you need to know who Lifeweaver is. Despite Overwatch being a game with Mr black-hole-head toes-out "yet another poor-taste representation of DID" Sigma and a football-sized foul-mouthed hamster in a mechsuit in it, neither of them manage to be very funny. Lifeweaver, however, is objectively fucking hilarious, for these main reasons:

His amicable, light hearted healer-character personality clashes with his backstory, in a way that actually works. Lifweaver is a scientist who dropped out of a prestigious academy to stop people from trying to A: steal and B: jail him for his invention: biolight (which is exactly what it sounds: light that grows like plants, or vice versa.) Because of this biolight stuff, he is canonically wanted in seventeen countries and counting. And yet he's so glad to be here, you can hear the smile in his voice, he's kind, he's carefree. And he flirts.

With, like, everybody. Notably Mercy, and apparently he was roomates with Symmetra and speaks very fondly of her. On top of that he's (very) low-key implied to at least want to flirt with Roadhog of all people (can't say I blame him, anyway I'll get back to him,) and, uuh. Baptiste? Who's Baptiste? Nope, never heard of him. Ex-mercenary who regrets his actions and now plays support to make up for all the murder he did? Is what you may be asking yourself. Seriously, nobody talks about Bap. Maybe that's why he's being brought back into semi-relevance now, as Lifeweaver canonically (and smoothly) asks him on a date at a nice restaurant, to which he, unsurprisingly, says yes. He's always been very flirty himself. That should technically make it four canon queer characters in the game, but Baptiste still has some plausible deniability because of his personality, so arguments can still be argued, as they say.

Back to Lifeweaver. More specifically his playstyle. This bright pink healer wants nothing but to help people and further science! His players, however, will gladly ruin your day for shits and giggles. You see, it's become a bit of a gimmick of Overwatch as a whole to let you move your enemies around the battlefield. Junker Queen has her magnetic gauntlet thing, Roadhog has a hook, everybody and their mom have knockback, etc. Lifeweaver, however, can move his friends around. He has an ability to pull his teammates towards himself which he can also use to sling some of them across the map if they cooperate and/or move wrong. He can also raise a platform under any player that tosses them (or their lifeless corpse) into the air. This is incredibly useful in a coordinated team where everybody's using voice chat, eg. the way Overwatch is actually meant to be played. Overwatch is, however, never played how it's meant to be played. Hilarity ensues.

The circumstances of Lifeweaver's release. Here's the thing. On the 4th of April 2023, exactly one week before his release, Blizzard was sued again, this time for underpayment and mistreatment of their eSports champions. Although it's impossible to create a whole character in a week, it's fully possible that at least some parts of Lifeweaver's personality and some of the stuff he calls to canon (we'll get to The Thing later I promise, be patient,) were influenced by this. It's comically well timed that such a controversial character dropped so soon after that scandal, and while the model and animations were definitely finalized before that, any given set of voice lines could've been phoned in on the night of April 4th for all we know.

Put together, all of this is either infuriating or ridiculous. Some days it's one, some days the other, and some days, I'm just not sure. Originally I hated Lifeweaver. He felt predictable to me, a cheap coverup, a stereotype, and an annoying one at that. But eventually I sort of came around, because he got so annoying that I kind of had to respect him for it. From there, I eventually ended up here. And I think a lot of other people, notably the players themselves, felt the same. Go figure.

Section 6A: No scummy marketing tactic is complete without queerbait!

Valuable life lesson: it is very, very hard to tell wether or not something is queerbait by looking at the media itself. The possibilities that the perceived homoerotic tension is an accident, or a hint that's left vague for stylistic reasons, or simply a slow burn, are all present and impossible to rule out. The real way you find out if something is queerbait is by looking at the actual marketing. Listen to what devs say in interviews. Look at promotional material. Et cetera. Because I don't have the patience to watch those interviews, I can't actually say wether what I'm about to discuss is queerbait or a series of unfortunate accidents made as a result of Blizzard's bad habit of pandering, so I'll let you form your own conclusions and possibly go look it up on your own. (And then come back here and tell me about it because I'm so so curious.) I am probably going to go into excruciating detail on this next part. I am so sorry. I can't help but have favourites. So without further ado;

This is Jamison "Junkrat" Fawkes.

Or at least, it was back in OW1. (I promise the full body transparent background image is crucial.)

Anyway, this absolute bastard is a favorite of mine. (Having favourite OW characters? I am cringe but I am free.) He was in the game from launch, and remains one of the more interesting and, shall we say, least soulless characters in the game to this day. Not that there's that much to him. He never shuts up, he's clinically insane as a result of several concussions and a lot of radiation, and he really really likes blowing things up. Together with Roadhog, he's a freelance mercenary with little to no morals whatsoever, taking on whatever job gets them both cash, action, and buildings to explode.

Oh yeah, right. Mako "Roadhog" Rutledge, the quiet, stoic and occasionally terrifying two meter tall shit brickhouse with a stitched gas mask shaped like a pig snout and a massive hook on a chain. Sadly, although he's crucial to the segment, I can't really discuss him as much as I would like to because he has like five voice lines in total (an exaggeration) and half of them are just him telling Junkrat to shut the fuck up (not an exaggeration.) "Stoic, silent characters can be interesting without speaking," I hear you say. Yes, I reply, if they're well written. But this is Overwatch. Never ever get your hopes up about Overwatch.

Anyway, the trash rat and Mr Whole Hog here have an interesting history. Originally, they were simply friends, running around and doing Hilarious Antics™ (that were never very funny, other than in concept.) They feature in several comics together (none of which are very good,) they chat a lot in game and they have their own animated short called The Plan (which is the first Overwatch thing I ever consumed, also not very good, but hey, it landed me here.) And before I get into the queerbait part of this segment, let me just say that studying just this small part of Overwatch tells volumes about the writing all on its own. The tell-don't-show, the inconsistencies, the rampant ludonarrative dissonance... Stars, the comics want you to take Roadhog so seriously. They're leaning super hard into the edge with a brutal backstory and focus on making him as menacing as possible. Meanwhile, in game he, and I cannot stress this enough, walks around ass out the entire time. Google at your own risk. Don't say I didn't warn you!

There is this one voice line, triggered when interacting with one another, where Junkrat says somthn' like "You'll hook 'em, I'll cook 'em!" and Roadhog just sighs in frustration, but then there's another line, triggered the same way, where HE begins the saying, "I'll hook 'em..." "And I'll cook 'em!" In short, fuck you consistency, and this contrast could be really interesting if it was well written. But of course Overwatch will Never Ever elaborate on this, as per usual.

As the years went by, however, things got... A bit weird. Junkrat has always been friendly. According to him, he and Hoggie (he calls him that, not me) are the bestest of friends. And although Roadhog acts as though he hates Junkrat a lot of the time, this is very obviously just tsundere behaviour used to mask the fact that he does really like him quite a lot. But in what way? "Gayass," said half the fandom. "No, fuck you," said the other half, "this is clearly a father-son dynamic." "You're all homophobic," said the first half. "Maybe we are," said the second, "what are you gonna do about it?"

And Blizzard... Did nothing. Well, they did canonise their ages at some point, and there is about two decades inbetween the two (Junkrat is allegedly 25 although I find that hard to believe, I mean look at him, and RH is in his late forties) which one would assume suggests their support of the father-son thing, right? Man, if only it were that easy. First of all, the writing is so nondescript and vague that their actual dynamic doesn't resemble a parental one even in the slightest, especially not on Junkrat's tounge, and seeing as he's both more affectionate and more talkative I'll lend that it's appropriate weight. Predictably, there is also one line that is inexplicable, unexplainable and clearly an innuendo, where if you run Junkrat and eliminate an enemy RH, he'll say something like "I guess we know who's on top now, don't we?" This doesn't appear to be a reference to anything, trust me, I've tried to check. Excuse me while I take a sledgehammer to Blizzard's servers. Again, we can't assume anything's ever on purpose, but c'mon. Who greenlit that?

So, unsurprisingly, Blizzard is being annoyingly non-commital again, so as not to piss off either half of their fanbase. Things went kinda quiet after that. Anything released was, again, purposely vague.

And then OW2 happened.

Section 6B: Subtlety, lack thereof, and the art of applying a metallic texture to a default Blender orb

This is Junkrat, as his current in game model. Sad, right? How they forced him to take a bath before letting him into OW2? How they regrew his hair and ripped off his cooler patches? It's a fucking travesty. People are calling him "Cluttermouse" as a joke now. Why would they do this? They massacred my boy.

Anyway, if you're observant you'll notice he's got an earring now. Yeah, on his right ear. Yeah. What's that? You were on Tumblr in 2016? You remember all the circling posts about "earring on the right ear means person wearing it is gay" posts? You grew up a bit and assumed that was made up or blown out of proportion? You asked your mom one day and she confirms it was a very widely known symbol until around the century change? Some fans must've noticed. Most of them didn't, though, because most of them are twelve. Anyway, I tell myself (and you) that it doesn't actually have to mean anything. If you look at the design again you'll see Rattie here is very asymmetrical, and leaned to his-right-your-left, both of his prosthetics being on that side. (He even walks unevenly, which I love.) It's likely that the modellers simply had no clue about the earring symbolism thing, and just wanted to play into that asymmetry. Right?

...and then Lifeweaver dropped.

And then everyone lost their fucking minds.

Ya see, dearest readers (thank you for making it this far,) Lifweaver, Pink Petal Supporthero McGoodguy, has not one, but two conversations with Junkrat in game. One of them feels fairly normal, with them discussing the price on Lifeweaver's "noggin" and laughing about it a bit. The other one, oh boy, the other one goes like this:

🌸"Are you and Roadhog together?"

🐀"Do~ you ever see us apart?

🌸"No. I meant: are you couple?"

🐀"Yes!! A couple of dashing rouges! Not sure... What you're missing here."

Yeah. I'd lose my shit too. I guess I kind of did, but not for the reason you think. You see, this right here, in terms of pure writing talent, is fucking genius, because it manages to be controversial without actually confirming anything. By that I mean, that because Fawkes said "yes" quite enthusiastically, the half of the fandom that said "gayass" think he meant yes, but because he noped out of that yes with the "couple of dashing rouges" bit, the other half of the fandom think he meant no! This is where I really start to wonder if they called Junkrat's voice actor at 2 in the morning and went "hey bud take a few extra grand and help us record another few lines will you? We just got sued again."

This shit is simultaneously funny as hell, sad, and absolutely infuriating. In reality, Junkrat has approximately two braincells rattling around in his skull, of which he is constantly frying, due to all the concussions. He probably doesn't even know what his relationship to Mako is. That might've been the case, and it would've been a good joke, had Overwatch been a well-written game. Sadly, it's all shitfuck at worst and boring at best, and this latest little oddity just makes me even more convinced that Junkrat and his partner have been banished to Queerbait Limbo for the foreseeable future.

Section 7: In conclusion,

Blizzard is shitfuck company, Overwatch is shitfuck game, I spent at least three hours writing this up and probably more editing it together and in less than a month, it's June and Overwatch'es first in-game pride event drops. Needless to say, I'm scared.

How much time did you waste reading? Did I state fake news? Do you have additional trivia? Do tell. I'm so curious. This has been four thousand words of nothing. Goodbye.

[aronarchy]

Anarchist Studies, Volume 14, Issue 1, pp. 84–91 2006

Research Note: Αναρχία—What did the Greeks actually say?

URI GORDON

Doctoral Candidate in Politics University of Oxford uri.gordon@mansf.ox.ac.uk

ABSTRACT

This article examines a range of uses to which the word “anarchy” and its derivations were put in ancient Greek sources. Perhaps not surprisingly, the majority of instances indicate that the negative application of the word as a synonym for confusion and disorder was prevalent from ancient times. However, there are also several eminently political uses, which are quite telling in their prefiguration of contemporary anarchist values—namely the Athenians’ reference to 404 BC as the “year of anarchy”; the uses of the word by Plato and Aristotle in their critiques of democracy; and the association of anarchy with the defiant actions of Antigone in the plays of Aeschylus and Sophocles.

The ancient Greek origin of the word “anarchy” is a matter of common knowledge, and it has become a predictable convention to mention it at the outset of almost any discussion of anarchism as a political movement in the modern era. At the same time, as far as I am aware, no one has ever looked at the actual functioning of the word in classical sources. Instead, anarchist and non-anarchist commentators alike have inevitably satisfied themselves with second-hand exercises in Greek etymology, removing the word from its discursive context and ignoring the complex array of meanings it had for ancient writers. What I propose here, then, is to give attention to the actual uses to which the word was put in classical Greek. As I think will become immediately clear, such an exercise is of more than a merely historical interest.

Greek political culture revolved around citizenship in the polis, the city-state form that dominated political organization in the Hellenic world form the archaic period (c.800 BC) to the strong-armed unification of Greece under Alexander the Great (356–323 BC). Due in part to the peninsula’s geographic conditions, which meant that many settlement-clusters developed in relative isolation, poleis bringing together hundreds of farming households were largely self-sufficient and enjoyed economic and political autonomy for centuries. The typical Greek polis was a complex hierarchical society, with chattel slavery in agricultural households serving as its economic base. Sharply separated from domestic life was the citizen body, in which a certain rough equality obtained among male property owners. Citizenship was not necessarily “democratic”—in Sparta, all soldiers/citizens belonged to an assembly that elected a ruling council, which had legislative authority and advised the King. But in whatever form, the ideal of citizenship in a united political community seems to have been universally accepted by all literate classes. The polis itself was a matter for collective pride and was valued beyond question as the hallmark of the superiority of Greek civilization to the lifestyles of surrounding “barbarian” tribes. (See the bibliography for some further reading on the history and character of Greek political societies.)

Given the pervasive currency of this worldview, it is perhaps not surprising that, as T. A. Sinclair notes, “there was no philosophy of anarchy in Greek political theory.”[1] There are some possible exceptions to this observation: there were Cynics such as Antisthenes (a pupil of Socrates, c.444–365 BC) and his own pupil Diogenes of Sinope (412–323 BC), who looked with disdain on conventional values, wealth and social status, and who would have seen government as opposed to a life in full accordance with nature. Unfortunately only small fragments of Cynic writings have survived, but their ideas are thought to have later influenced Zeno of Citium (333–264 BC), founder of Stoicism, “who distinctly opposed his conception of a free community without government to the state-utopia of Plato… repudiated the omnipotence of the state, its intervention and regimentation, and proclaimed the sovereignty of the moral law of the individual.”[2] However, the Cynics’ purism drove them to oppose any organised intervention in politics, making their “anarchism” philosophical at best. While the ease with which later developments in Stoicism were appropriated for the peace of mind of the Roman emperor Marcus Aurelius (121–180 AD) shows that its anarchist resonances were neither obvious nor perennial. Finally, neither Cynics nor Stoics are known to have used the actual concept “anarchy.”

Surprisingly, the entire corpus of electronically surveyable literature in ancient Greek contains only 47 instances of the word “anarkhia” or its derivations.[3] Compared to 549 instances of “demokratia” and 422 of “oligarkhia” in the same database, the word does not seem to have occupied a significant place in the literary vocabulary of the time. Among these 47 instances, moreover, the majority of cases employ the word just as many non-anarchists might do today—as a catch-all synonym for confusion, disorder, tumult and license. Thus in the play Hecuba by Euripides (c.480–406 BC), the heroine, fearing for her daughter’s body, says that “the mob knows no restraint, and the unruliness [anarkhia] of sailors exceeds that of fire.”[4] Another playwright, Aeschylus (c.525–456 BC), has his Clytaemnestra (wife of king Agamemnon, who fought against Troy) recalling the warning that “the mob’s anarchic will [dêmothrous anarkhia] might overturn the Council.”[5] While the historian Thucydides (c.460–395 BC) attributes the military failures of the Syracusans in part to “the troops’ disorder [asyntakton anarkhian].”[6] The same type of usage is also found in the historical work of Herodotus (c.484–430 BC), as well as with later Greek-writing historians such as Diodorus Siculus (fl.50 AD) and Flavius Josephus (c.37–100 AD). We can thus see that, far from being a subsequent “corruption,” the negative and condemnatory connotations of the word anarchy have burdened it from earliest times.

Let us look, however, at other cases from ancient Greece in which the word anarchy is used in a more distinctly political sense. There is, for instance, the single occasion when a Hellenic population appears to have matter-of-factly used the word to refer to its own situation: the Athenian “year of anarchy,” 404 BC. This is something of a curiosity, since the circumstances of that year were anything but anarchic. As a matter of fact, Athens was at the time under the very strong rule of an oligarchy—The Thirty—installed by the Spartans following their victory in the second Peloponesian war of that same year. Moreover, there was literally an Archon in place, installed by the oligarchs, in the person of Pythodorus. However, according to the historian Xenophon (c.430–355 BC), the Athenians refused to apply here their custom of calling the year by that archon’s name, since he was elected during the oligarchy, and “preferred to speak of it as the year of ‘anarchy.’”[7] Despite its counter-intuitive appearance, this first popular application of the word anarchy is very telling. It resonates with a mass symbolic defiance, refusing the recognition that a ruler was supposed to receive in everyday language. It was this defiance which led to the restoration of democracy in Athens the following year.

Democracy, of course, was far from a positive ideal for the great political theorists of ancient Greece, Plato and Aristotle. And it was always in the context of discussing democracy that they made their rare uses of the word anarchy—making for the close association between the two concepts which would prevail well into the modern era.[8] The two philosophers’ famous mistrust of democracy, rooted in their contempt for popular power of any kind, was expressed in their arguments for democracy’s inherent vulnerability and its preponderance to deteriorate into tyranny. However, it should be noticed that what enabled Plato to present such arguments in the Republic was the complete detachment of his account of democracy from the realities of such systems of government, in Athens and elsewhere. Nowhere does his description reflect the constitution that sentenced his mentor Socrates to death, the structured, lawful and impeccably stratified Hellenic democracy. Instead, we find an account that comes very close to what we might intuitively call anarchy, though for Plato this is an entirely negative affair. In democracy, he says, there is no enforceable political authority or stability of the state, “no necessity… for you to govern… even if you have the capacity, or to be governed, unless you like, or to go to war when the rest go to war, or to be at peace when others are at peace, unless you are so disposed.”[9] This portrayal is what sets the ground for Plato’s account of such a state’s subsequent deterioration into tyranny. Democracy in his view makes for far too much equality. It loosens what Plato considered to be the natural hierarchy and authority obtaining between slave and master, man and woman, parent and child. His allegorical youngster’s soul, divided between an oligarchical self and a democratic self, is besieged by the corrupting and evil influence of the latter. Democracy causes the soul to “drink too deeply from the strong wine of freedom,” breeding desires whose false councils introduce “insolence and anarchy and waste and impudence hymning their praises and calling them by sweet names; insolence they term breeding, and anarchy liberty [anarkhian de eleutherian], and waste magnificence, and impudence courage.” So pervasive is the corruption that “anarchy finds a way into the private houses, and ends by getting among the animals and infecting them.”[10] In order to avoid the dangers of anarchy, Plato concludes that habits of dominance and obedience must be instilled deeply into the soul of the individual. “This task of ruling, and being ruled by, others must be practised in peace from earliest childhood; but anarchy must be utterly removed from the lives of all mankind, and of the beasts also that are subject to man.”[11]

It is important to note that, for Plato, anarchy is never a distinct class of political association. Since the concept is entirely subsumed into his discussion of democracy, it is not understood as requiring a separate theoretical category alongside oligarchy, tyranny, democracy, etc. Nevertheless, Plato’s account does supply us with an important understanding about anarchy that remains intact regardless of his crusade against it. This is that anarchy represents not merely the lack of government conceived as statelessness, but also the thorough erosion of rank in non-governmental spheres—between classes, age-groups and genders.

Aristotle’s association of anarchy with democracy is essentially identical to although his depiction thereof is never as colourful. The concept appears again as a form of democratic deterioration, but in keeping with Aristotle’s method it is appropriately situated in empirical observations rather than in metaphorical speculation. In democracies such as Thebes and Syracuse, we are told, the upper classes were motivated to stage a coup by their contempt for the prevailing “disorder and anarchy [ataxias kai anarkhias]” in the affairs of the state.[12] Also, in many cases the nobles will form factions with one another, and create them among the masses, “and so bring about a suspension of government [anarkhian].”[13] Alternately, in a tyranny Aristotle sees “democratic” features, namely “license among slaves” [anarkhia te doulôn] as well as among women and children. “A constitution of this sort,” he concludes, “will have a large number of supporters, as disorderly living [zên ataktôs] is pleasanter to the masses than sober living.”[14] Aristotle, like Plato, was not interested in delineating anarchy as a separate political form. However, unlike Plato, he is able to see anarchy as more than an abstractly corrupting influence, since its connection with democracy portrays it as desirable by the masses, and even as an implicit goal of popular insurrection.

The explicit connection of anarchy with a conscious human will appears only twice in classical Greek literature. This is perhaps the most intriguing example since, although penned by two different authors over a gap of several decades, they both refer to the same act by the same person. If we are looking for the first-ever anarchist, here she is:

Antigone: I at least will say something to the rulers of the Cadmeans: even if no one else is willing to share in burying him I will bury him alone and risk the peril of burying my own brother. Nor am I ashamed to act in defiant opposition [apiston tênd’anarkhian] to the rulers of the city. A thing to be held in awe is the common womb from which we were born, of a wretched mother and unfortunate father. Therefore, my soul, willingly share his evils, even though they are unwilling, and live in kindred spirit with the dead. No hollow-bellied wolves will tear his flesh, let no one “decree” that! Even though I am a woman, I will myself find the means to give him burial and a grave, carrying the earth in the fold of my linen robe. With my own hands I will cover him over—let no one “decree” it otherwise. Take heart, I will have the means to do it.[15]

In the person of Antigone, a long-standing inspiration to feminists, we also find a clear prefiguration of two of the most important concepts attached to anarchist practice in its contemporary idiom: disobedience and direct action. First, Antigone openly refuses to abide by the rulers’ decree to leave her brother Polyneices’ body unburied, as punishment for his participation in the attack on Thebes. She asserts that the bond of siblings born of a common womb stands above the authority of political powers, and rejects the legitimacy of any decree that transgresses this bond. While her appeal to values that stand above the law as a justification for her actions is by no means an exclusively anarchist refrain, and while on some interpretations these values are themselves grounded in a form of authority—the higher authority of the gods—it is the disobedient and insubordinate character of her action that she, in her own words, associates with anarchy. It should also be remembered that it was only in recent decades that the notion of justified, “civil” disobedience to the law acquired popular moral legitimacy. In earlier times, including those of the anarchist movement in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, the distinction between contingent and wholesale (i.e. anarchist) rejection of political authority was not as clear as it is today.

Second, we find in Antigone’s speech a striking example of the concept of direct action. She has no intention of appealing to the authorities in order to convince them of the immorality or illegitimacy of their decree, but rather takes that illegitimacy as her starting point, and sets about to take matters into her own hands and create by herself the alternate reality that she desires. Aeschylus, we may also note, has his chorus openly endorse Antigone’s defiance at the close of the play. Whatever action the authorities might take against her, they say, “We, at all events, will go and bury him with her, following the funeral procession. For this grief is shared by all our race, and the city approves, as just, different things at different times.”[16]

Picking up the narrative in Antigone, Sophocles has the autocrat Creon warn his son Heimon (who is also Antigone’s lover) of the dangers of her intended action:

Creon: There is no evil worse than disobedience [anarkhias de meizon ouk estin kakon]. This destroys cities; this overturns homes; this breaks the ranks of allied spears into headlong rout. But the lives of men who prosper upright, of these obedience has saved the greatest part. Therefore we must defend those who respect order, and in no way can we let a woman defeat us.[17]

Again the translator has well chosen to reflect the disobedient core of anarchy, whereas Sophocles himself cleverly exposes here the ambiguity and half-heartedenss of all rulers’ moralistic declamations in defence of obedience and authority. Is the issue here really the potential damage to the collectivity of such an act of disobedience going unpunished? Or is it rather the danger that such an example of defiance would posit to the stability of power itself and, even more poignantly, to the principle of male supremacy?

To be sure, neither the classical Greek nor any other historical antecedents of the uses of the word anarchy should have any deciding influence on how we might understand the concept today. However, the foregoing analysis of the ancient literature does lead to two significant conclusions about the discourse surrounding the word. First, we can see that the negative connotations of anarchy with disorder and confusion have been widespread from the very beginning, as evident in the first citations I offered. This shows how deep-seated are the preconceptions which anarchists have had to deal with when re-articulating the word as a positive ideal. Second, we can see that despite these widespread connotations, some writers were capable of understanding anarchy as an eminently political concept—even if it had an entirely negative role in their writing. Moreover, these political formulations of anarchy already contain, in their most ancient form, the notions of social equality, popular resistance and disobedience to power which anarchists associate with their project to this day.

Acknowledgements: My thanks to Dimitrios Kyritsis and Juan Coderch for verifying Greek translations.

NOTES

Sinclair (1951:83).

Kropotkin (1910), Marshall (1992:68–71).

The figures here are taken from the comprehensive database of the Perseus Digital Library at Tufts University.

Euripides, Hecuba II.606–8.

Thucydides, The Peloponesian War, bk.6 ch.7 §4.

Aeschylus, Agamemnon, II.883–4.

Xenophon, Hellenica, bk.2 ch.3 §1.

Before Pierre Joseph Proudhon became the first to use the word in a positive sense in 1840, “anarchists” was a widespread pejorative for “democrats.” See Williams (1976:37–8).

Plato, Republic, bk.8.

Ibid.

Plato, Laws §942c. Note that here as in the previous citation, Plato seems to be hinting at a continuity between hierarchy among humans and the domesticated state of non-human animals, with anarchy corrupting both. One wonders whether our contemporary anarcho-primitivists would appreciate such a strange bedfellow…

Aristotle, Politics, bk.5 ch.3.

op.cit., bk.2 Ch.10.

op.cit., bk.6 ch.4.

Aeschylus, Seven Against Thebes, II.1032–1045. Dated at 467 BC, this also happens to be the earliest recorded use of the a-word.

Ibid., II.1074–1077.

Sophocles, Antigone, II.672–678.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Works cited

Aeschylus 1926. Aeschylus (trans. H. W. Smyth). Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press.

Aristotle 1932. Politics (trans. H. Rackham). Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press.

Euripides 1938. Hecuba (trans. E. P. Coleridge). New York, Random House.

Kropotkin, P. 1910. “Anarchism,” Encyclopaedia Britannica article.

Marshall, P. 1993. Demanding the Impossible: A history of anarchism. London, Fontana.

Plato 1901. Republic (trans. B. Jowett). New York, P. F. Collier.

Plato 1926. Laws (trans. R.G. Bury). New York, Putnam.

Sinclair, T. A. 1951. A History of Greek Political Thought. London, Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Sophocles 1891. Antigone (trans. R. Jebb). Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

Thucydides 1910. The Peloponnesian War (trans. R. Crawley). London, Dent.

Williams, Raymond 1976. “Anarchism,” Keywords. London, Fontana.

Xenophon 1985. Hellenica (trans. C.L. Brownson). Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press.

2. Background on ancient Greek politics

Andrewes, A. 1971. Greek Society. Harmondsworth, Penguin.

Baslez, M. F. 1994. Histoire politique du monde grec antique. Paris, Nathan.

Brock, R. and S. Hodkinson (eds.) 2000. Alternatives to Athens: Varieties of political organization and community in ancient Greece. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

Meier, C. 1990. The Greek discovery of politics. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press.

Nielsen, T. H. (ed.) 2004. Once again: Studies in the ancient Greek Polis. Stuttgart, Franz Steiner.

Rhodes, P. (ed.) 2004. Athenian democracy. Edinburgh, Edinburgh University Press.

Sinclair, R. K. 1988. Democracy and participation in Athens. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

Starr, Chester G. 1986. Individual and community: The rise of the polis. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

[mitgrant]

Customer Journey Mapping - Sonos

The benefits of proper customer journey mapping are clear. If a company can anticipate one’s activities, motivations, questions, and barriers, they can preempt those to accelerate a customer’s journey through the funnel.

I see two major challenges that firms face when trying to build customer journey maps. First, employees and insiders suffer from the curse of knowledge, and may think they can create a customer journey map themselves without performing the research, which might not target actual concerns. Or, even as they do listen and build a map from the potential customers, the solutions devised might still be biased to someone from a position of knowledge. There is no substitute for sourcing these maps directly from customers and testing possible solutions to people who are new to the product.

This brings us to the second point. Building a good customer journey map is expensive. There are no two ways about it, paying for customer interviews, collecting data, ideating, creating, testing all takes time and money. To cash strapped startups, this may not seem palatable, but is arguably one of the most important tools to bring in actual sales, build loyal customers, and get referrals.

One product that I really loved unboxing, setting up, and using was the Sonos sound system. While something like this could have been challenging as the article described, the instructions were clear, the app guided me through the process, the sound quality was great, and I now have seamless audio throughout my apartment. They anticipated and preempted many challenges that I might have had, and the result is that I love the product and convinced a friend to go with them over competitors because of the experience.

[aromantisk-fagforening]

Norwegian newspapers and "pressestøtte"

[unchronological introduction: basically I started this as a "how does the state pay newspapers" but it also is a description of a couple notable Norwegian newspapers, or rather, the ones the state considers notable, but also don't have enough money I think. introduction end, enjoy the "me actively researching while writing" format]

i was looking into something else, but now I'm confused by how newspapers in Norway work.

I already knew the average newspaper is owned by a political party. or like, is related to one. and many, if not all, have a clear center geographically. - NRK is kinda the exception to both, but they basically just have different geographical sections, and they're supposed to be politically independent afaik. (obviously excluding debate articles).

But then I saw some newspaper talking about (not getting) "pressestøtte", which is like, monitory support from the state to the press. and so, I asked myself why they weren't getting it.

[this is long, but it should be formatted well so I hope someone reads this lol]

the requirements are apparently:

[Norwegian to keep the wording]

produksjonen har dagspressekarakter,

har en ansvarlig redaktør,

tar betalt fra leseren og

selger mesteparten av opplaget til abonnenter.

Videre settes det krav til opplagets størrelse

og hvor ofte avisen kommer ut

[translation]

the production (i.e. newspaper) has the character of a daily newspaper

has a responsible editor

takes payment from the reader (i.e. it costs money)

sells most of the papers* to subscribers

Furthermore, requirements are set for the size of the circulation*

and how often it's released

*(translation note: I can't translate this confidently because I don't understand it, but its like what they print, not sure if "size" is pages or number of papers)

considering they said "how often" (Norwegian : hvor ofte) as the last point I think they meant that the news are about current events when they said "the character of a daily newspaper" (Norwegian: dagspressekarakter)

so I took this info from this subjekt.no article, but it's probably just a law, I'll cite that when I'm on PC.

but yeah, they go on to point out this:

There are a total of eight newspapers that receive more than NOK 10 million, while three newspapers receive between NOK 5 and ten million. In total, these 11 newspapers receive more than NOK 220 million in 2021.

The others - a total of about 140 newspapers - share the rest, i.e. NOK 140 million.

(the conversion rate for most major cash to NOK is like 10 NOK = 1 [insert valuta], but lately NOK has been weakened, so it's more like 12 to 1 € etc)

this is not the only monitary support newspapers and such get, but it's like a big one, if I understood correctly.

I don't know exactly how to translate this section but basically you see a name then the amount they get

Klassekampen får cirka 42 millioner kroner. Bergensavisen får 35 millioner kroner. Dagsavisen får nesten 35 millioner kroner. Vårt land får 31 millioner kroner. Nationen får 21 millioner kroner. Dagen får i underkant av 18 millioner kroner. Fiskeribladet får nesten 12 millioner kroner, og Morgenbladet får vel 11 millioner kroner.

[disclaimer for the below statements, I used Wikipedia as a source, the articles seem well-made (especially the tone), but obviously they're not guaranteed to be flawless.]

[second sidenote: I decided not to talk about the WW2 stuff, but obviously when the nazis (upon the request of the Norwegian traitor Vidkun Quisling) invaded/controlled/operated in Norway they made certain newspapers illegal (Norwegian: illegale, as opposed to ulovlig), or every? idk. but yeah. that's a whole 'nother thing. ] [also: Norway in WW2? I'm probably massively misinformed (i.e. seeing Norway in an overly positive light) due to my biggest source of info being the Norwegian education system]

Klassekampen is a leftist newspaper, "the class struggle" / "the class fight" / "the class war". according to Wikipedia they were started as a marxist-leninist paper (not clear whether they're still that, I don't know enough to determine that). they used to belong to the socialist people's party, now they're owned by the party called red (rødt/raudt). they have people in Oslo (capital, east), Bergen (second largest city, west) and Trondheim (third largest city, middle). but yeah, they get the most from this system, 42 million Norwegian krowns (kroner / kr / crowns / NOK).

[link to the Wikipedia article for the above paragraph/newspaper, read 2 september 2023]

Bergensavisen is an explicitly local newspaper, "Bergen newspaper". often shortened to BA, originally titled "Bergens Workers magazine" (Bergens Arbeiderblad). The newspaper was originally belonging to the party that has since been divided into NKP (unpopular communist party, zero seats nationally, some local), and AP (recently less popular and more centre, but previously very popular left party, currently in charge nationally together with the protectionistic centre party SP, previously known as the farmers party). That was a mouthful, but yeah. they get 35 million NOK.

[link to the Wikipedia article for the above paragraph/newspaper, read 2 september 2023]

Next up, Dagsavisen, "daily newspaper" / "day paper". Oslo newspaper. it has been owned by various unions (fag-foreninger / subject-area organizations) historically. This party was also owned by the party that used to be NKP & AP, but this one got kept by AP, because there was little communism (Leninism/ML) in Oslo. If I understood correctly they've been party independent since 1999.

[link to the Wikipedia article for the above paragraph/newspaper, read 2 september 2023. sidenote: this article is long as fuck (in Norwegian at least) so I barely included a fraction of what it says. also there's some repetition cause there's a lot of shared ownerships between these, at least historically]

Vårt land, "our country" (technically could also mean "our land"). this one's a christian newspaper. the Wikipedia doesn't say much more. Their recent news are mostly related to church election thing. And they use viking symbolism in their logo, according to them it's to represent freedom. They're owned by mentor media.

[sources: Wikipedia (barely), their website. september second 2023 still]

Nationen, "the nation" is a newspaper that describes themselves as the districts' (i.e the less populated parts of the country)'s business paper. they have offices in Oslo, Trondheim and a lot of freelancers. They used to be owned by SP (centre party, previously the farmer's party). they're politically independent, and focus on district politics (as mentioned, this basically just means non-city politics, places people live far from each other), agriculture, food production and food security, business and the EU. they used to be right leaning, but now their against centralization, moving from villages and EU-membership. I think that still means SP-like in terms of politics, usually considered centre on the political spectrum and protectionistic. (all/most leftist parties in Norway are against the EU cause of worker's rights* & Norway first thinking).

*an example is that leftist parties like Red don't want temporary employment. (which they managed to work against in the Fylke (political area) around Oslo (Viken) within builders. basically workers (employees) over customers/demand/economics/capitalism.

oh and btw if you're not aware, Norway is currently in EØS/EEA which is like EU-light. basically we get to say no to laws we don't want (for our country only), but we don't get to vote.

[link to the Wikipedia article & Store Norske leksikon [big Norwegian lexicon/encyclopedia] or the above paragraph/newspaper, read 2 september 2023. definition of "district" is from SNL (lexicon).]

Dagen "the day" is a christian newspaper from Bergen. originally made by like two (christian) missionary groups. They are also active in politics. (but don't belong to the christian party (KrF)).

[link to the Wikipedia article for the above paragraph/newspaper, read 2 september 2023]

Fiskeribladet, "the fishing magazine" is a fishing magazine, a "coastal business magazine" (fishing, it's fishing, it's just fishing, and economics & politics of fishing) for the entire country. they print papers thrice a week, but online it's daily.

[link to the Wikipedia article for the above paragraph/newspaper, read 2 september 2023]

Morgenbladet, 'the morning magazine' is a national weekly newspaper for society, culture, debate and research. [direct quote from Wikipedia]. Owned by Mentor media. an old newspaper (like many others on the list). It's a right-leaning paper, being run by Christian Friele for a bit (the Friele name is also a coffee brand and a gay activist's (like 100 years later), it's very Bergen, originating in Germany (Hansa and that) (I still don't know if they're related though)). They seem to be associated with the Steinar philosophy (steiner schools as such, which are freer schools, basically organize your time yourself, but they're private to be clear, people who go there are considered weird by the mainstream) (there are few of those, 43 total in Norway) (apperantly known as "Waldorf schools" other places).

sorry this went on tangents I have been writing this for like 2 hours idk.

[link to the Wikipedia article for the above paragraph/newspaper, read 2 september 2023]

translation note: there's technically "magasin" which means "magazine", but "blad" is also kinda magazine. "avis" is newspaper. "blad" I think can be both idk.

[bucket-of-grass]

hai can i hear about the theories used to explain spontaneous human combustion ^_^ that sounds quite fun

HECK YEAH YOU CAN !! this is going to be long, also I’m pretty sure i got into wick effect because of a matpat video?? I cant be sure, anyway some of the debunked theories about it are so silly (such as ‘it was ghosts 🤷‍♀️’ and inventing a particle out of thin air that fistfights body cells as a hobby) so yes it’s so quite fun

Warning theres a couple gory details as you might expect from SHC so just watch out and all lol for anyone reading

SPONTANEOUS HUMAN COMBUSTION: Ok so, spontaneous human combustion/ SHC, defined as a phenomenon where a human will ignite without any clear cause. It’s a bit of an enigma and no proof that it actually exists hence all the theories about what it actually is and the general notion about it being all like spooky scary and paranormal.

THE THEORIES: Wick effect (we’ll come back to this one, my fav). — Excessive amounts of alcohol in the body making victims more flammable, this one was because the majority of SHC victims were proven alcoholics, the association of SHC with alcoholism was made during early research during the Victorian Era. — Methane buildup in gut bacteria leading to it reacting to the enzymes in the intestines during digestion, this was however debunked as species like cows produce substantially more methane than we do and they’re not spontaneously combusting. — Static electricity build up in the body or from some external like geomagnetic source. — Some self-proclaimed ‘SHC expert’ Larry Arnold said that it was a new particle, pyroton, interacting with the bodies cells creating small explosions, as of 2018 there is no evidence of the existence of pyroton, good try Larry. — In 1976, Michael Harrison blamed the work of poltergeist, Harrison also wrote a book about SHC titled Fire From Heaven I haven’t read it tho lol. — Lastly, as many victims were of old age, intoxicated, disabled, or in any other way possibly unable to quickly respond to a threat, it was theorized that there was simply an external ignition that the victim was unable to get away from and caught fire, the main issue with this theory is that it does not account for the characteristics that set SHC apart from just,,, catching fire normally. — Oh and some people, more so earlier in SHC research, just said it was god which isn’t surprising i guess.

CHARACTERISTICS: A 1938 article from the British Medical Journal written by L. A. Parry, using research from the book Medical Jurisprudence (1823), listed chronic alcoholism, elderly women, an external lighted source coming in contact with the body (lamps, cigarettes, etc etc), hands and feet separating from the body (yikes), environment around the body is intact, greasy and ashy residue was a harsh odor with the body, as common characteristics of most SHC victims. Another notable characteristic, not mentioned in this article, is that many of the cases (especially those supported by wick effect) remained ignited for a pretty long time (think like 8-13 hours, i made up those specific numbers but it’s around that long) and burned at a low temperature.

WICK EFFECT: alr we got a looooot to get through on this one so buckle in. Wick effect explains most if not all of the characteristics of SHC cases and is kind of fun and interesting so its my favorite lol. Wick effect is essentially the theory that the body can act as an inside out candle, idk how much sense that analogy makes to me either but thats why it’s called wick effect so i figured I’d mention it anyway. SO what that means is body fat acts like the wax of the candle (fuels the wick and keeps it burning for extended periods of time), and the clothes or hair acts as the wick (houses the flame). The kicker of wick effect is that the hair or clothes were ignited by some sort of outside source, so not really “spontaneous”. Anyway, as the body fat (flammable) melts, it seeps into the clothing and hair which keeps the fire going. The melting body fat is also what would be causing the greasy residue noted in most SHC cases. Wick effect also explains why the space around the body is mostly unaffected by wick effect as it’s not in contact with the “wick”. Wick effect also explains why the hands and feet are often separated from the body, there isn’t enough body fat on the hands and feet for it to burn/melt to the same extend as the rest of the significantly more fatty and therefore more flammable body so they just kind of,,, fall off when the rest of the body is burned.

CASES SUPPORTED BY WICK EFFECT: — Mary Reeser (1884-1951) Ignited herself with a cigarette, her clothes acting as the wick. Supported by the body fat found in the rug near Mary during investigation. — Leeds (1963) An experiment in wick effect, wrapping a small amount of human fat in cloth and then igniting it with a Bunsen burner, taking over a minute to light. After removing the burner, it took about an hour for the entire amount of fat to be burned, leaving behind grease and soot. This gave insight into the extended amount of time it takes for a wick-effect-supported-case to run its course. — Oregon murder (1991) After two hikers discovered an adult female body in a well oxygenated area of woods, many factors made this case very likely to have been an example of wick effect. The upper body had been stabbed several times, leaving the body immobile, allowing the flame to run it’s course over wick effects signature long-amount-of-time. Only the center portions of the body were severely burned/ damaged (upper legs, torso, mid chest, fleshy parts of the arms, and the spine which was entirely disintegrated, yikes) which checks out with wick theory as the ends of the body did not catch. The offender had also soaked the clothes and body of the victim in almost a pint of barbecue starter fluid and ignited her which would have allowed even easier ignition. — Forensic scientist John DeHaan (1998) This experiment by DeHaan was publicized on BBC, he wrapped a pig’s body in a blanket and lit the blanket with petrol. The pigs body fat liquified, feeding the flame. Most of the pigs flesh and bones turned to ash (not including the feet) although the rest of the room remained almost untouched. All lining up with the criteria of wick effect. — Geneva (2006) The body of a man was discovered in his home. His body was mostly disintegrated between the mid-chest and knees. The death was likely caused by the victim having a heart attack (inability to escape or put out the fire) while smoking (ignited by the cigarette). The man and the chair he was sitting on were burnt as they were both in contact with the “wick”, but the rest of the area was untouched outside of the grease left by the melted fat.

Anyway for more info i highly suggest just like poking through the wiki on SHC bc theres so many more details i didn’t include here that are so fun and also a few theories i didn’t have in my notes and whatever so YEAH SHC AND WICK EFFECT

[enterprisewired]

Challenges of Starting a Business

Source: Pranithan Chorruangsak from Pranithan Chorruangsak's Images

Share Post:

LinkedIn

Twitter

Facebook

Reddit

Pinterest

Starting a business of your own lately has become a trend by seeing people grow, and be successful. But in reality is not as glamour as it seems to be. Though it comes with financial freedoms, comfort, a better lifestyle, and personal fulfillment you have to go through a journey to get to that end goal.

Becoming an entrepreneur means facing hustles at every point and proving yourself by being patient and resilient. There are numerous challenges of starting a business from financial constraints to marketing competition, which requires proper planning and execution. In this article, we will understand some major challenges an entrepreneur faces before reaching their end goal and get insights on how to navigate those situations and grow in the market.

1. Financial Constraints

One of the biggest challenges of starting a business is securing adequate funding. Many aspiring entrepreneurs struggle to gather enough capital to get their venture off the ground. Whether it’s purchasing inventory, renting office space, or hiring employees, the costs can quickly add up.

Funding options, such as personal savings, loans, angel investors, or venture capital, can be helpful, but they often come with risks and conditions. For instance, loans require repayment with interest, and investors typically expect equity in return. Managing these financial pressures while trying to establish a revenue stream can feel overwhelming.

How to Overcome This:

Start small with a minimum viable product (MVP) to reduce upfront costs.

Create a detailed business plan to present to potential investors or lenders.

Leverage government grants or crowdfunding platforms to raise initial funds.

2. Identifying the Right Market

https://enterprisewired.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/1.1-Identifying-the-Right-Market-Image-by-Cecilie_Arcurs-from-Getty-Images-Signature.jpg

Understanding your target audience is crucial, yet it’s one of the more complex challenges of starting a business. Misjudging market demand or failing to identify your ideal customer base can lead to wasted resources and poor sales performance.

Many entrepreneurs fall into the trap of assuming their product or service is for “everyone.” Without a clear market niche, it becomes difficult to tailor marketing efforts, set the right pricing, or even define your brand identity.

How to Overcome This:

Conduct thorough market research to understand your audience’s needs, preferences, and pain points.

Use tools like Google Trends, surveys, and social media analytics to gather data.

Test your product or service with a focus group or beta customers before launching.

3. Fierce Competition

Competition is inevitable, regardless of the industry. Established players often have more resources, brand recognition, and loyal customers. As a newcomer, breaking through the noise and gaining a foothold in the market can be one of the toughest challenges of starting a business.

Competing with big brands can make it difficult for startups to gain visibility, particularly when those companies have larger marketing budgets and established supply chains. Small businesses must find unique ways to differentiate themselves to stay relevant.

How to Overcome This:

Focus on a unique selling proposition (USP) that sets your business apart.

Build strong customer relationships through excellent service and personalized experiences.

Embrace digital marketing strategies like SEO, social media, and email marketing to maximize your reach on a limited budget.

4. Lack of Experience and Skills

Many first-time entrepreneurs dive into their business without fully understanding the operational, financial, or managerial aspects required to run it. This lack of experience often leads to poor decision-making and operational inefficiencies.

For example, an entrepreneur with a background in product design may excel at creating a product but struggle with sales, marketing, or managing a team. Filling these knowledge gaps is essential to overcoming the challenges of starting a business.

How to Overcome This:

Invest in continuous learning through workshops, online courses, and mentorship.

Hire experts or consultants to handle areas where you lack expertise.

Join entrepreneurial communities or networking groups to gain insights from experienced peers.

5. Navigating Legal and Regulatory Requirements

https://enterprisewired.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/1.2-Navigating-Legal-and-Regulatory-Requirements-Source-antheminjurylaw.com-.jpg

Compliance with legal and regulatory requirements can be overwhelming, especially for those new to entrepreneurship. Registering your business, obtaining licenses, and understanding tax obligations are just a few of the administrative tasks involved. Failure to meet these requirements can result in fines or even the closure of your business.

This is one of the often overlooked challenges of starting a business that can derail even the most promising ventures if not addressed promptly.

How to Overcome This:

Consult with a legal expert or business attorney to ensure compliance.

Use online resources or software tools to simplify tax and licensing processes.

Stay updated on changes in laws or regulations affecting your industry.

6. Building a Reliable Team

No business can succeed without a strong team. However, attracting and retaining skilled employees is another common challenge of starting a business. Startups often struggle to compete with established companies that offer higher salaries, better benefits, and greater job security.

Moreover, fostering a positive company culture and aligning team members with your vision can take time and effort. High employee turnover can disrupt operations and increase recruitment costs.

How to Overcome This:

Offer competitive non-monetary benefits like flexible work hours or professional development opportunities.

Communicate your business mission and vision clearly to inspire potential hires.

Invest in team-building activities to strengthen employee loyalty and collaboration.

7. Maintaining Work-Life Balance

Entrepreneurs often find themselves wearing multiple hats, juggling various roles to ensure their business thrives. This can lead to burnout, strained personal relationships, and even health issues. Balancing the demands of a startup with personal life is one of the intangible yet significant challenges of starting a business.

The pressure to succeed can lead many entrepreneurs to neglect self-care, which, ironically, can hinder their productivity and decision-making abilities.

How to Overcome This:

Set boundaries by creating a structured work schedule.

Delegate tasks to trusted team members to reduce your workload.

Make time for hobbies, exercise, and family to recharge and maintain perspective.

8. Adapting to Market Changes

The business landscape is constantly evolving, and startups must be agile enough to adapt. Market trends, customer preferences, and technological advancements can shift rapidly, making it difficult for new businesses to keep up. Failing to adapt can render even the most innovative business ideas obsolete.

How to Overcome This:

Stay informed about industry trends through market research and competitor analysis.

Be willing to pivot your business model or offerings if necessary.

Invest in technology and innovation to stay ahead of the curve.

Conclusion

The challenges of starting a business can be tough and not impossible to overcome. You just need to work hard and do proper planning and execution. You should have the will to learn and adapt in any situation and overcome these situations. By facing your challenges you can grow and improve to make your venture successful. 

Passion is not the only which is needed to start a business but you also have strategic thinking and perseverance. You should be prepared for the upcoming obstacle to become an entrepreneur who can turn their vision into reality by creating their empire in the market.

[lifechanyuan]

Evidence of Self-Directed Death

Deiform Buddha

June 15, 2006

(Translation edited by Qinyou)

“I have shared with several Chanyuan celestials that humans have the ability to control their own life and death. If necessary, death can be completed through the power of the mind. However, before death, one must be clear about where to go afterward. When you thoroughly understand the heavenly realm you should reach and have repaid all debts of the human world—after resolving all earthly attachments—you can decide the time to leave the human world at any moment. This may sound incomprehensible and incredible, but it is indeed true. As for how to control death, it involves the secrets of Lifechanyuan and will not be disclosed now, but you can gain insight from the facts below.

Older Chanyuan celestials should contemplate this issue carefully, read this article seriously, and seek a perfect conclusion in their practice and cultivation. The selected article below includes a story about a white mouse, illustrating that life only holds hope when a direction is determined. Lifechanyuan has clearly pointed out the direction of life and revealed the principles of understanding one's destination after death and how to reach the ideal shore through the eight levels of thinking and the Eight Major Mysteries of Life. This should be deeply contemplated.

Evidence from Science

Where does the human mind come from? Can the mind be naturally produced within the human body?

For a long time, people believed that the mind was naturally produced by the brain. To answer how the human mind differs from that of animals, it was necessary to find the fundamental differences between the human brain and animal brains. Many scientists devoted their lives to seeking evidence, but later scientific research proved that much of this evidence was flawed.

The average weight of the human brain is about 1300 grams, but this does not signify much. Larger animals have proportionally larger brains. For example, an elephant's brain weighs about 4000 grams, and a whale's brain weighs about 7000 grams.

Later, people invented the method of comparing brain volume to body weight to explain the origin of the mind. However, this method proved to be ineffective. Look at the data: humans are 1:38, whales are 1:2500, elephants are 1:500, and gorillas are 1:100. Humans seem to have an advantage, yet a white mouse is 1:26, a gibbon is 1:28, and a sparrow is 1:34, all superior to humans in this aspect, but they do not possess a mind.

With the further development of brain science, it seemed that humans had finally discovered the source of the mind: the many convolutions of the human brain, causing the mind to flow like spring water from mountain valleys. The surface area of the human brain's hemispheres is about 2250 square centimeters, equivalent to the size of a large newspaper, while the surfaces of mouse and rabbit brains are relatively flat. This seems reasonable! However, scientists soon discovered that dolphins in the ocean have brain convolutions that are no less than humans and even more. If we judged the richness of the mind based on brain convolutions alone, the result would likely not favor humans but rather an unexpected animal.

Some people believe that the number of brain cells in humans exceeds that of other animals, which is why humans can generate a mind. Unfortunately, the facts do not support this. If we use the number of brain cells per 0.0001 cubic millimeter as a standard, we find humans have 10.5, whales 6.8, cats 30.8, and mice 105.0. The smaller the animal, the higher the density of brain cells.

Evolutionary biologists have pointed out that the human frontal lobe is much larger than that of other primates, suggesting it to be the source of our creative thinking and language abilities. However, scholars at the University of Iowa believe that the size of the human frontal lobe is not significantly different from that of other primates. Researchers Marsh and Semendeferi at Iowa scanned some primates, including humans, using magnetic resonance imaging and measured the size of each brain part. They found that the human frontal lobe is not markedly different from that of primates: gorillas have 31.7%, chimpanzees 36.1%, and humans 36.8%. Chimpanzees have 5.4% more than gorillas but are not significantly smarter. Humans only have 0.7% more than chimpanzees but are much smarter. Thus, the size of the frontal lobe does not explain much.

Scientific discoveries indicate that the brain, as a natural information processing system, exhibits consciousness that, in terms of its physiological mechanisms, differs from that of other animals only in complexity, not in essence. Both are manifestations of a common biological electrical and biochemical process.

In a hospital in Virginia, USA, a peculiar baby was born whose entire cranial cavity was essentially a cyst filled with water, making the baby effectively brainless. Doctors predicted that this brainless baby would not have any mental activity, would never laugh, and would be very lucky to survive a few weeks. However, contrary to the prediction, the baby exhibited some human-like awareness, enjoyed watching TV, and would laugh at interesting TV programs. It lived for a full five years. Where did this baby’s consciousness come from? Surely, it cannot come from water!

Modern science has proven that the brain will die completely within a few minutes in the absence of oxygen. In former East Germany, an experiment was conducted where a head was severed from a body after a car accident, in which the body had been shattered, but the head remained intact. The severed head survived without oxygen for 146 hours. Electronic instruments continuously tracked the electronic signals from the head. For 76 hours, the head functioned normally and could communicate by blinking. After that, it gradually declined, and brainwaves disappeared after 146 hours. This is an unconventional example of the existence of consciousness that is difficult to explain with modern brain science.

At the University of Sheffield in northern England, there was a student in the mathematics department with consistently high intelligence. He excelled in all exams and was well-liked by his peers and professors. However, during a physical examination, Professor John Lorber, a neurology expert at the University of Sheffield, made a surprising discovery while performing a CT scan on the student. Despite the student's high IQ, he had almost no brain. His cerebral cortex was only 0.3 millimeters thick, whereas a normal person’s cortex is about 4.5 millimeters thick. Beneath his cortex was cerebrospinal fluid. The professor was astonished and could not understand where the student’s high intelligence came from.

In modern life, with the increasing maturity of neurosurgery, more and more people survive after having half their brains removed. In Kunming, a patient had half his brain removed in 1960 due to illness but functioned almost normally and was able to perform his job effectively after starting work in 1973.

All evidence seems to suggest that the human mind likely exists independently of the physical body. The mind exists as an independent entity apart from the body. If this hypothesis holds, then all early human theories about the soul should be reconsidered.

An American psychologist conducted a psychological experiment in which a subject was brought into an empty room while screams could be heard from an adjacent room. The psychologist told the subject that the experiment was to test the limits of human pain endurance. The window was opened to show the entire process. A person was tied tightly to a chair, and nearby a furnace glowed with red-hot coals. A doctor used tongs to take out a red-hot coin from the furnace and placed it on the person's arm. There was a hissing sound, the arm began to smoke, and a scream of excruciating pain followed. After the experiment, the person stumbled down from the chair, clutching their burnt arm, with a coin-sized burn scar clearly visible on their arm.

The psychologist showed several similar experiments to the subject. Afterward, the subject was taken to the experiment room and tied tightly to a chair. A red-hot coin was taken from the furnace, and the psychologist said, "I am now going to place this coin on your arm." The subject suddenly felt a hot object on their arm, followed by intense, piercing pain, and screamed loudly. The doctors found that the subject had developed a third-degree burn scar the size of a coin on his arm.

In fact, all the experiments were fake—the burns and screams were simulated. The true experiment subject was the last one. The coin placed on the subject’s arm was only slightly warmed, just above body temperature, and could not cause burns. Therefore, where did this third-degree burn scar come from? Since there were no external factors, it must be attributed to consciousness and mind causing the body to burn because the mind believed the body should burn under such conditions. In this experiment, the possibility of the body causing its own burns was eliminated because the body can only passively react to external stimuli.

This experiment proves that the mind has absolute control over the body, allowing the body to react in unimaginable ways under certain conditions. The body is merely a slave or tool of the mind.

This conclusion from scientific experiments is similar to various religious views on the soul. For example, Taoism believes that the body is merely a furnace for cultivation, where one refines their "Three Treasures" to achieve spiritual evolution. Buddhism also believes that "Buddha-nature" can control the body.

The American journal Biopsychology published an example of a psychological experiment by psychologist Kratz, which originated from a legal case involving a death.

At a university in the United States, a group of college students orchestrated a prank. Late one night, they suddenly put an unsuspecting friend into a bag. Without saying a word, they carried the bag to a train station, chose a long-abandoned railway track, and placed their poor friend on it. Then they squatted nearby to watch. At that moment, the sound of a train leaving the station echoed from a distance, and the ground began to tremble slightly. The friend lying on the tracks started to struggle, unaware that the railway track he was on had been abandoned and that the approaching train would pass by on another track. As the train got closer, the pranksters noticed that when the train was still about 100 meters away, their poor friend stopped moving. The roaring train passed with an ear-piercing sound of metal clashing.

However, when the pranksters went to their friend's side after the train had passed, they found that their friend was dead.

In the subsequent autopsy, the coroner found no signs of damage to any internal organs. So, how did this person die? Was it homicide or suicide? How should the law rule on this case? This incident became a hot topic of discussion.

Psychologists did not partake in the idle chatter; instead, they conducted a series of psychological experiments to unravel this mystery. Among the many psychological experiments, one was conducted by Crat, and it went like this:

They placed a small white mouse into a large pool to observe its behavior under dangerous circumstances. It is well known that mice generally have strong swimming abilities, and the pool, although large, was within the swimming range of the mouse. When the mouse fell into the water, it did not swim immediately but circled around, squeaking. It was assessing its location, using its whiskers as sensors to detect its surroundings. The mouse's squeaks would bounce off the pool's edges and reflect back, allowing the whiskers to detect the size, direction, and distance of the target. After squeaking and circling a few times, the mouse swam energetically in a chosen direction and soon reached the shore. This happened repeatedly in the experiments.

The psychologists then selected another mouse, this time cutting off all its whiskers before placing it in the center of the pool. The mouse circled around, squeaking, but without its whiskers, it could not determine its location. It continued circling and squeaking anxiously but to no avail. Soon, this mouse drowned at the bottom of the pool.

Psychologists explained the mouse's death as follows: because the mouse's whiskers were cut, it could not accurately determine its location. In its mind, it was surrounded by water and believed there was no way to escape. In such a situation, the mouse stopped all efforts and forcibly ended its own life. In reality, the mouse had died before it sank to the bottom, effectively killing itself.

Psychologists concluded that all animals, when confronted with utterly hopeless situations, would forcibly end their own lives. This is known as "mental suicide." When the person on the railway track heard the train approaching and felt the track vibrating, he struggled to escape the danger. But, tied in a bag, he knew he couldn't escape. To avoid the agony of being dismembered by the train, he ended his life when the train was still about 100 meters away. Therefore, he died by suicide.

So, what is the mechanism behind his suicide? In this case, we once again see the role of the independent spiritual life separate from the physical body. In fact, there are countless examples supporting this argument. In deep hypnosis psychological experiments, we are often baffled by phenomena such as unexplained increases in blood sugar levels. These experiments all point to one conclusion: the mind is independent of the body and can control the body. Ancient religious beliefs held this view, as do rigorous traditional Chinese medicine and scientifically inclined Taoist theories. Modern scientific experiments have also proven this point. This series of clues convinces us that this conclusion is correct.

In fact, there are numerous examples in the history of human scientific development that can prove our point, though these experiments were previously overlooked:

In 1934, in New Delhi, the capital of India, several psychologists sought to conduct an unusual psychological experiment, but finding subjects proved challenging. After much effort, they found a criminal who was about to be executed with the help of the police and the courts.

One day, the police brought the criminal to a laboratory and told him: "Because of your heinous crimes, we have decided to drain your blood to death." They then tied the criminal to a bed, stretched out his arm, and fixed it. The criminal's line of sight was blocked.

A doctor held a gleaming scalpel in front of the criminal and said, “I will use this scalpel to cut your artery.” He lightly cut the artery, causing minimal bleeding that soon stopped. However, psychologists placed a metal basin with good echo properties under his arm and used a drip to drop water into the basin.

The dripping water made a ticking sound as it struck the metal basin. The room was silent, and everyone held their breath to observe the criminal's expression. Occasionally, the disguised psychologists would say things like, "300 milliliters already" or "Almost half a basin." As the ticking sound continued, the criminal's face turned pale as if he had really lost blood. After a while, his breathing weakened, and he eventually died, his face deathly pale.

After the experiment, psychologists were left puzzled: how did this criminal die? Was it a case of homicide or suicide?

Modern psychological therapy often uncovers strange phenomena of life. Let us examine two real psychological experiments.

In a hypnosis test, the doctor casually picked up a cup of plain water and told the subject: “This is a cup of water filled with a lot of sugar. It’s very sweet, and you will feel very comfortable after drinking it.” The subject, under deep hypnosis, drank the plain water. As we know, when we drink a sugary beverage, the sugar is absorbed into the blood through the digestive system, increasing the blood sugar concentration.

Strangely, after the subject drank the plain water, they were immediately awakened, and blood tests were conducted to check the subject's blood sugar concentration. The result was unexpected: despite the digestive system not absorbing any sugar, the subject's blood sugar concentration was significantly higher, as if they had drunk a very sweet beverage. Where did this mysterious sugar come from? Who produced this sugar?

In another hypnosis test, a person was deeply hypnotized, and the doctor told him: "When you wake up and see me pick up the cup, you will throw this pen out of the window." The subject was then awakened. After a considerable amount of time, when the doctor picked up the cup, the subject actually grabbed the pen from the table and threw it out of the window. Later, when asked why he threw the pen out of the window, the subject had no idea why they did it. This is a thought-provoking result.

The separation of mind and body is also evidenced by other scientific experiments. In 1966, when doctors opened one skull and stimulated a specific area of the brain with tiny electrodes, they found a delay of 0.5 seconds between the start of the stimulation and the corresponding reaction of the body. If consciousness were a function of the brain, the stimulation and reaction should be simultaneous. This situation suggests only one possibility: consciousness and the brain are not one entity; consciousness is independent of the brain.

In 1978, Nobel Prize winner and neurophysiologist Eccles summarized his years of research and proposed a shocking new viewpoint: brain excitation is not equivalent to mind and consciousness. He believed that humans have a "self-aware mind" independent of the brain, and the brain is merely its material tool. He said, "Each of us has had non-material thinking and self-awareness capabilities during some period of embryonic development or early childhood. This “soul” endows us with human characteristics: consciousness, thought, love, hate, fear, etc." He speculated that the non-material "self" continues to exist after the material brain dies.

What Eccles referred to as "self-aware mind" is not the type of consciousness typically derived from brain function but something similar to the "soul" in religious and mythological contexts.

The issue has come full circle and returned to its original starting point. We have spent hundreds of years realizing that the viewpoint of "mind-body separation" may not be mere absurd religious superstition.

This article is excerpted from the book Humanity Was Once Destroyed, by Li Weidong.

[darkmaga-returns]

Measuring the Real State of the World

NE - Naked Emperor Newsletter

Dec 11, 2024

Remember to add your book recommendations in the comments below.

Today’s book is:

The Skeptical Environmentalist: Measuring the Real State of the World by Bjørn Lomborg

Bjørn Lomborg, a former member of Greenpeace, challenges widely held beliefs that the world environmental situation is getting worse and worse in his book, The Skeptical Environmentalist.

Using statistical information from internationally recognized research institutes, Lomborg systematically examines a range of major environmental issues that feature prominently in headline news around the world, including pollution, biodiversity, fear of chemicals, and the greenhouse effect, and documents that the world has actually improved. He supports his arguments with over 2500 footnotes, allowing readers to check his sources.

Lomborg criticizes the way many environmental organizations make selective and misleading use of scientific evidence and argues that we are making decisions about the use of our limited resources based on inaccurate or incomplete information.

Concluding that there are more reasons for optimism than pessimism, he stresses the need for clear-headed prioritization of resources to tackle real, not imagined, problems.

The Skeptical Environmentalist offers readers a non-partisan evaluation that serves as a useful corrective to the more alarmist accounts favored by campaign groups and the media.

Bjørn Lomborg is an associate professor of statistics in the Department of Political Science at the University of Aarhus. When he started to investigate the statistics behind the current gloomy view of the environment, he was genuinely surprised. He published four lengthy articles in the leading Danish newspaper, including statistics documenting an ever-improving world, and unleashed the biggest post-war debate with more than 400 articles in all the major papers. Since then, Lomborg has been a frequent participant in the European debate on environmentalism on television, radio, and in newspapers.

You can buy the book here (Amazon link).