#to see people advocating for some people's rights

[alostwanderernotfound]

HIV and COVID

A major barrier to preventing the spread of HIV is accurate test results.

There is a high chance there are many people with HIV that have it and do not know. We do not know how long this undetected time period is (lentiviruses are often associated with long periods of time of virus activity that goes undetected- 5 to 10 years or more), but there is a chance many individuals with HIV go undiagnosed for many years. Individuals during this time before an HIV diagnosis complain of fatigue and many undiagnosed disabling symptoms during that time period. HIV is able to cause changes to immune cells that prevent HIV tests from finding the infection. Some people get negative HIV tests when they are HIV positive. This means you could be HIV negative, but still have HIV in your blood and can spread HIV to other individuals.

Getting a COVID vaccination (and sometimes other vaccinations like the flu vaccination) can help the body identify HIV hiding in the body. This allows earlier treatment and intervention. Once HIV has been identified, it also reduces the risk for all individuals in our population to be exposed to more severe infections.

Getting tested regularly for HIV used to be part of our federal public health recommendations.

This just further emphasizes why this information is so important to know and healthcare needs to start testing for more diseases in more people and do these tests more often.

People often assume their infection came from an unfaithful partner, but in reality HIV has been spreading unknowingly to many in the medical community and still in the public sphere no one is talking about it like the huge deal it is.

This potential means people could be raped as a child, never have sex again, never encounter drugs, and then be miserable & living with an active HIV infection into their early 20s and they would never know. Once they got a positive test result they would have no idea where the infection even came from.

Our entire understanding of these types of diseases has to change and the seriousness of this topic has to be addressed by the world. This was theorized as a mechanism of HIV spread due to how many people were getting diagnosed but had no identifiable cause of their HIV, but now it’s proven and right in front of us. This is disastrous.

To everyone that told the truth about how they didn’t know how they got these types of diseases & how they had no idea where they got it from then faced judgement from others and even the medical community- you aren’t crazy.

On behalf of everything these types of diseases did to destroy families, relationships, and your body, I’m going to apologize right now for all the individuals that I know won’t ever give you an apology for what they did and what they said.

I believe you. I always did.

Without you telling your truth , we never would have been able to figure this out about HIV.

HIV is spreading in “HIV negative” individuals to other individuals as some researchers theorized.

The mRNA vaccination technology developed is now the foundation for the next generation of HIV treatment and disease control. We must continue to push and advocate for improving the lives of all people with disease and we all just took a huge step forward.

You do not have to be sexually active to develop HIV. Your sexual trauma doesn’t have to define your life for the rest of your life- you are stronger than you know and braver than you feel.

Find a place to get tested for HIV here:

I still recommend getting a NAT or “viral load” test done as the first test to see if you have HIV.

I think considering what we know about HIV and in consideration of all the things we still don’t know that this is the safest option. Any other test for this condition available today has too high of a chance of producing a wrong result. I find it extremely uncomfortable we still use the other types of tests in the hospital and doctor office settings.

If you choose to order a test through an online service be aware some tests only tell you about either HIV-1 or HIV-2 and will not always provide you information related to type 1 and type 2.

For example, here:

This will provide you information related to ordering a test that looks for both types of HIV instead of just one strain of HIV.

Stay safe.

[gemmahale]

Okay, I'm home, I've been on the road for the better part of 4 hours today due to a miscommunication and a cancelled event, and I've had this rant brewing.

Being Anti-Military and Pro-Veteran are stances that can mutually exist.

Games like CoD and whatever other FPS/Military Simulation game is out there is propaganda. It’s meant to make you want to sign up or support military action.

The military (I’m speaking specifically to the US, as I am most familiar with them by proxy) uses some incredibly underhanded techniques to ensure they have the warm bodies soldiers they need to keep the system working as intended.

This includes but is not limited to: promises of paying for education, aspirations of “seeing the world”, provision of job security, access to healthcare, a stable job and housing, etc. They use things like “patriotism” and “glory” and “security” to lure people in.

And then, when that person is wholly and completely reliant on the military - for a paycheck, housing, healthcare, you name it - they spit them back out into the world with a "thanks a lot and good fucking luck."

Into a world where:

Financial support for care has been axed and axed and axed again under "budget cuts"

Care is secured with red tape so thick you can tightrope walk across it

Care is denied for things the military caused (by saying "it didn't happen while you were serving".) *Yes, that's a direct quote from a doctor to one of Kallen's peers. When assessing a life-altering injury sustained while they were in country overseas, it was deemed as "non-service related injury”.

In comparison to civilians:

Veterans are ~40% more likely to be homeless.

Veterans are ~80% more likely to suffer from untreated mental and physical health issues - PTSD, hearing loss, nerve damage, etc.

Veterans are ~60% more likely to turn to addictive substances - alcohol, drugs, etc.

Veterans are ~70% more likely to commit suicide.

This isn’t limited to combat vets. Logistics specialists, administrative specialists, IT specialists all get screwed when they leave.

Ask just about any veteran that has served, they are incredibly likely to be staunchly anti-military.

The military causes a tremendous amount of damage to every person involved, even if they aren't aware of it at the time.

It’s a cult, it’s an abusive relationship, it’s predatory. Treat it as such.

Support veterans, advocate for their care. They made choices you may not agree with, but they made them because of what they thought the military was offering to them. Many thought they were doing the right thing for their country - that was the lie they were fed from 9/11 on (in the US). Then they were chewed up, spit out, and left for dead by the same people that made all those promises to them.

Here are some US-based, apolitical Veteran Support groups (many have International chapters/members):

22 Until None - 501-C3 that provides support to veterans by veterans. There are local chapters on Facebook that are all active and are listed on the website

Disabled American Veteran - Veteran help association; involved in legislation and local assistance, connections to VA advocates to help navigate the VA

Wounded Warrior Project - 501-C3 charity supporting disabled veterans.

Note: I am absolutely not doing the "not all servicemembers" thing here. I'm saying "veterans are living with their choices, and still deserve access to care."

[year2000electronics]

Ford is such a fascinately flawed character, If he not keep in check he unintentionally brings ruin to everyone around him.

this is literally how i feel talking about ford. ^

because dont get me wrong at many times i am a ford defender when people slander him for the wrong reasons, but also a lot of the time i will be like "YOUR HONOUR HE DID THAT SHIT AND I THINK HE WAS HOT WHEN HE DID IT" and then at other times i will be like "YOUR HONOUR HE DID THAT SHIT AND ISNT IT AMAZING THAT SUCH A COMPLEX AND FLAWED CHARACTER IS NOT DEMONIZED AND VILLAINIZED BY THE NARRATIVE BUT INSTEAD GIVEN A CHANCE TO GROW". so a lot of the time i just end up walking in circles rotating him a lot because i end up wanting to play devils advocate from like literally every angle of "so how much harm did ford do Really"

but i think when you look at ford in the show, hes a very interesting character, specifically because he's this very "loadbearing" character. he's the author, so he has to be the driving force behind the mystery, but he also has to have met and have ended things badly with mcgucket, so we have their falling-out as a tease to the mystery. we need him to cause conflict in the show thanks to his arrival, so he'll do some unlikable things like punch stan and demand his house back and offer dipper the apprenticeship. but he cant be TOO unlikeable because this is a member of the family stan has fought for 30 years to get back, and he also needs to be integrated as Officially A Pines in the VERY limited time we have with him on screen. not only that, but you have to explain his entire backstory in one episode where he harms and is mean to a character who has had two seasons' worth of love behind him SEVERAL TIMES. but you also need to make us feel for him, and you have to make stan's part of the conflict sting too. and THEN! ON TOP! OF ALL! THAT! YOU ALSO NEED TO PAY-OFF THE SETUP YOU HAD OF BILL CIPHER AND THE AUTHOR'S MYSTERIOUS RELATIONSHIP!

and so a lot of the time what i end up thinking is yes, ford is flawed. yes, he can be really callous and unfeeling at times. but i think because he's constantly needing to carry like 10 different plot elements on his back at once, constantly needing to drive conflict along, he ends up being really divisive to people- especially since he has no time to just goof off like everyone else!

so i circle back to this idea of ford as the "ruin-bringer". i think about that wording most meticulously. because that walks this VERY delicate line between saying something about fords character, his flaws, his backstory, and dipping right into "omg lets blame ford for EVERYTHINGGG!" but you think a lot about ford and his self-isolation and his EGO and the way he lifts himself above others both out of pride and out of shame.

ford is almost doing that to himself, really. making himself this common denominator black hole that people keep getting sucked into. because he is of the opinion that there are Special People who need to rise above, he ends up either isolating himself or isolating others to Join Him on the Path. and obviously that in and of itself is a gesture of companionship, of reaching out, because he says "i see the same greatness in you that i do myself"! but of course there IS no secret hidden greatness! so its all inherently flawed! you cant be rising above simply because youre "special" and you "deserve it"! but "special" is the only thing ford knows how to be!

ford is deeply hurting i guess. he seems deeply hurt the way that stan does to me, where everything he does just BLEEDS his trauma. you can see it staining everything. stan's need for companionship and ford's self-isolation. ford's hurting and he needs a healthy outlet but he has a path of destruction in his wake. and that just makes it so much crazier

[mariacallous]

Arvind Narayanan, a computer science professor at Princeton University, is best known for calling out the hype surrounding artificial intelligence in his Substack, AI Snake Oil, written with PhD candidate Sayash Kapoor. The two authors recently released a book based on their popular newsletter about AI’s shortcomings.

But don’t get it twisted—they aren’t against using new technology. “It's easy to misconstrue our message as saying that all of AI is harmful or dubious,” Narayanan says. He makes clear, during a conversation with WIRED, that his rebuke is not aimed at the software per say, but rather the culprits who continue to spread misleading claims about artificial intelligence.

In AI Snake Oil, those guilty of perpetuating the current hype cycle are divided into three core groups: the companies selling AI, researchers studying AI, and journalists covering AI.

Hype Super-Spreaders

Companies claiming to predict the future using algorithms are positioned as potentially the most fraudulent. “When predictive AI systems are deployed, the first people they harm are often minorities and those already in poverty,” Narayanan and Kapoor write in the book. For example, an algorithm previously used in the Netherlands by a local government to predict who may commit welfare fraud wrongly targeted women and immigrants who didn’t speak Dutch.

The authors turn a skeptical eye as well toward companies mainly focused on existential risks, like artificial general intelligence, the concept of a super-powerful algorithm better than humans at performing labor. Though, they don’t scoff at the idea of AGI. “When I decided to become a computer scientist, the ability to contribute to AGI was a big part of my own identity and motivation,” says Narayanan. The misalignment comes from companies prioritizing long-term risk factors above the impact AI tools have on people right now, a common refrain I’ve heard from researchers.

Much of the hype and misunderstandings can also be blamed on shoddy, non-reproducible research, the authors claim. “We found that in a large number of fields, the issue of data leakage leads to overoptimistic claims about how well AI works,” says Kapoor. Data leakage is essentially when AI is tested using part of the model’s training data—similar to handing out the answers to students before conducting an exam.

While academics are portrayed in AI Snake Oil as making “textbook errors,” journalists are more maliciously motivated and knowingly in the wrong, according to the Princeton researchers: “Many articles are just reworded press releases laundered as news.” Reporters who sidestep honest reporting in favor of maintaining their relationships with big tech companies and protecting their access to the companies’ executives are noted as especially toxic.

I think the criticisms about access journalism are fair. In retrospect, I could have asked tougher or more savvy questions during some interviews with the stakeholders at the most important companies in AI. But the authors might be oversimplifying the matter here. The fact that big AI companies let me in the door doesn’t prevent me from writing skeptical articles about their technology, or working on investigative pieces I know will piss them off. (Yes, even if they make business deals, like OpenAI did, with the parent company of WIRED.)

And sensational news stories can be misleading about AI’s true capabilities. Narayanan and Kapoor highlight New York Times columnist Kevin Roose’s 2023 chatbot transcript interacting with Microsoft's tool headlined “Bing’s A.I. Chat: ‘I Want to Be Alive. 😈’” as an example of journalists sowing public confusion about sentient algorithms. “Roose was one of the people who wrote these articles,” says Kapoor. “But I think when you see headline after headline that's talking about chatbots wanting to come to life, it can be pretty impactful on the public psyche.” Kapoor mentions the ELIZA chatbot from the 1960s, whose users quickly anthropomorphized a crude AI tool, as a prime example of the lasting urge to project human qualities onto mere algorithms.

Roose declined to comment when reached via email and instead pointed me to a passage from his related column, published separately from the extensive chatbot transcript, where he explicitly states that he knows the AI is not sentient. The introduction to his chatbot transcript focuses on “its secret desire to be human” as well as “thoughts about its creators,” and the comment section is strewn with readers anxious about the chatbot’s power.

Images accompanying news articles are also called into question in AI Snake Oil. Publications often use clichéd visual metaphors, like photos of robots, at the top of a story to represent artificial intelligence features. Another common trope, an illustration of an altered human brain brimming with computer circuitry used to represent the AI’s neural network, irritates the authors. “We're not huge fans of circuit brain,” says Narayanan. “I think that metaphor is so problematic. It just comes out of this idea that intelligence is all about computation.” He suggests images of AI chips or graphics processing units should be used to visually represent reported pieces about artificial intelligence.

Education Is All You Need

The adamant admonishment of the AI hype cycle comes from the authors’ belief that large language models will actually continue to have a significant influence on society and should be discussed with more accuracy. “It's hard to overstate the impact LLMs might have in the next few decades,” says Kapoor. Even if an AI bubble does eventually pop, I agree that aspects of generative tools will be sticky enough to stay around in some form. And the proliferation of generative AI tools, which developers are currently pushing out to the public through smartphone apps and even formatting devices around it, just heightens the necessity for better education on what AI even is and its limitations.

The first step to understanding AI better is coming to terms with the vagueness of the term, which flattens an array of tools and areas of research, like natural language processing, into a tidy, marketable package. AI Snake Oil divides artificial intelligence into two subcategories: predictive AI, which uses data to assess future outcomes; and generative AI, which crafts probable answers to prompts based on past data.

It’s worth it for anyone who encounters AI tools, willingly or not, to spend at least a little time trying to better grasp key concepts, like machine learning and neural networks, to further demystify the technology and inoculate themselves from the bombardment of AI hype.

During my time covering AI for the past two years, I’ve learned that even if readers grasp a few of the limitations of generative tools, like inaccurate outputs or biased answers, many people are still hazy about all of its weaknesses. For example, in the upcoming season of AI Unlocked, my newsletter designed to help readers experiment with AI and understand it better, we included a whole lesson dedicated to examining whether ChatGPT can be trusted to dispense medical advice based on questions submitted by readers. (And whether it will keep your prompts about that weird toenail fungus private.)

A user may approach the AI’s outputs with more skepticism when they have a better understanding of where the model’s training data came from—often the depths of the internet or Reddit threads—and it may hamper their misplaced trust in the software.

Narayanan believes so strongly in the importance of quality education that he began teaching his children about the benefits and downsides of AI at a very young age. “I think it should start from elementary school,” he says. “As a parent, but also based on my understanding of the research, my approach to this is very tech-forward.”

Generative AI may now be able to write half-decent emails and help you communicate sometimes, but only well-informed humans have the power to correct breakdowns in understanding around this technology and craft a more accurate narrative moving forward.

[vacuously-true]

Trans rights and intersex rights are always going to go hand in hand. No one should be prevented from accessing gender affirming medical care and no one should be forced to undergo unwanted medical interventions to make them conform to society's binary sex ideal. It's about choice and bodily autonomy.

If your arguments for the rights of one of these groups ignore the other, idealize the experiences of the other, or tokenize the other without actually advocating for its rights (example: "cis kids have easy access to the same treatments trans kids desperately need!" ignoring that many of those cis kids are intersex and not necessarily undergoing those treatments willingly), you're both missing the point and your proposed policies will have massive holes in them so that they may not actually fully support either group, or may even make these worse for one or both of them.

Abortion/contraception access is always going to go hand in hand with access to fertility treatment and eliminating nonconsensual sterilization. No one should be forced to have a child they don't want or prevented from having children they do want. It's about choice and bodily autonomy.

If your arguments for one of these issues ignore the other, idealize the other, or tokenize the other without actually advocating for that issue (example: "if the men in the government aren't going to let women have access to abortion and contraception, they should all have vasectomies!" advocating for unwanted sterilization), you're both missing the point and your proposed policies will have massive holes in them so that they may not actually fully address either issue, or may even make one or both of them worse.

Et cetera et cetera. Every time an issue is about bodily autonomy it may have two sides: restricted access to desired treatments, and forced infliction of unwanted treatment. And these will have to be addressed together to be addressed at all.

[the-paris-of-people]

The past couple days online have been... interesting. I consider myself a leftist, think capitalism is corrupt, and think that it needs to be seriously reformed/overthrown. I admit that while I've thrown around phrases and terms like "burn it all down" and "the revolution needs to come" out of frustration without actually thinking about what a revolution entails: excellent organization, unity, and strategy to defeat the United States, the world's largest military superpower which has inflicted political and social destabilization across the majority of countries around the world. There also needs to be superb infrastructure and community to support the disabled, elderly, and poor populations who rely on government assistance and programs, healthcare, and accommodations while this so-called revolution rages on.

All I've received from the far leftist movement are lectures from condescending intellectuals who rattle off academic citations regarding ideological theory rather than practical, tangible steps to advocate for change in our local and regional communities. I have not seen one of them actually discuss conversations they've had with their friends, family, or Americans about what they want to see reflected for the future of the country. I have not seen one of them discussed how destructive, detrimental and traumatic a Trump presidency was for social prejudice and morale in the United States. I understand that for many marginalized groups they've been living in a facist state for centuries so the possibility Project 2025 doesn't galvanize them to see the two parties differently, but I don't think it is fair to white leftists falsely equivocate the election of both parties for the entire American population at all??? Or like at least specify the issues you're referring to in which you view both parties as the same????? Literally one TikTok creator who I used to follow talked about how true leftists are so much better than liberals because they aren't waiting for a presidential candidate to save the world NOW due to the accelerated apocalypse due to climate change but when asked how to change the world they suggest sharing ideas of your future utopia with other leftist groups. How the fuck is sitting around talking about living in a walkable community is great considered "saving the world now"? How are you going to dismantle and restructure American infrastructure to create these communities? How are you going to remove existing racial and social tensions to create a community where everyone lives happily side by side? Do people not consider reality at all?????

And is it not wrong for people to have a fucking sliver of optimism and hope at incremental change that's achieved within the corrupt bipartisan system of American politics, even if they know it's propaganda??? Is it wrong for people to have a singular fucking moment of relief in feeling like their values, beliefs, and lives will be better protected and THEY can advocate for change better??? Is it wrong when there's a couple months until the most pressing election in recent history for people to make the choice they feel will reduce the most amount of harm???

[unganseylike]

for others who disliked adams greywaren ending, what do you think about the part of his ending with transferring schools?

Personally, i can see arguments for transferring (in terms of adam not having his fantasized perfectly linear path to success), but i want to see him stay and deal with his lies and mistakes. ik that sounds mean, but i intend it in the kindest way possible. like it could be helpful for him to distance himself from the person he invented at harvard and try again, but i want him to contend with that and reconcile his invention with the person he really is; i don’t think they are mutually exclusive!

maybe this comes down to your opinion of his crying club- whether you think theyre really his friends or not- but to me, i don’t think this effort to build community was wrong, even though it was unhealthy that he had to lie about his background to do it. i think adam needs to think about why he had this drive to create a friend group and why he felt like he couldn’t be the same person he was in henrietta. i want him to feel like he can be honest with the crying club, or at least that he can his genuine self with people outside the gangsey. he doesnt have to suddenly dump the whole truth on them, but i wish he could slowly let himself trust them, as they have trusted him with their troubles.

Obviously it was important for him and his character arc to leave henrietta and for him to want to leave behind the person he was there (and the fact that everyone there knew he was poor and a victim of abuse), but i’d like to see adam stay in place somewhere and work through who he is there. I feel like if he leaves and starts somewhere new, he’ll still have that instinct to leave behind this old version of adam and reinvent himself.

what do you all think? i know we all hate the adam becomes a fed thing, but wasnt sure what opinion is on this part

[squidslugs-art]

personally i think their dynamic is objectively hilarious

[autumnrory]

this season of ted lasso saying sam should forgive racists who vandalized the restaurant and  then you know, dropping anything to do with that storyline immediately afterwards

and the saying jamie should forgive his abusive father bc hating him apparently isn’t good for him or whatever

doesn’t feel great tbh

[aloeverawrites]

Reblog this if a second Trump presidency would endanger you or impact your life in some way.

[snekdood]

ive literally never understood antisemitism and i dont think I ever will. literally 0 basis for any of the conspiracy theories. its always just projection from christians.

[unproduciblesmackdown]

ok another one in that i went over everything again expressly to pick up murder mystery clues, especially in the beginning

noted as the first appearance of mordecai, hanging out in the garage. to be perched on the hood of a car, leaning back, is so whimsical for him. jaunty. but also, being the earliest appearance in the comic / its own timelines, you know. more informatively, it sure seems like atlas was shot or something there. looks like it matches his design even from the mostly obscured look we get at it, and presumably there's any all the more unobscured view available to everyone in-universe. it's also presented as part of someone's file, so that's noted re: drago, though it may just be the required framing to present it as a photograph that'd exist at all

then introduced to mitzi in the next page, and i've helpfully added the arrow b/c i was looking for it like "well, based on this Theory that the basis of mitzi and mordecai being in cahoots and having an understanding about it is their mutually having a personal/emotional connection to atlas (at least on their end b/c we see so little from atlas and hear even less. even when people would usually say one is personally connected to their wife. are they)....might mordecai show up at the glimpse of atlas's funeral" and i'm noting how closely that design there aligns with mordecai's, even though this isn't high res enough to be absolutely certain. but: seems to have a shaded-in coloration, center streak in the ear, sharply triangular corner of face (especially a feature in these earliest depictions, rather than this triangularity incorporating a bit more waviness / curve later), light uhh muzzle nose mouth area, what could be the outline of the light stripe under the eyes, light eyebrows >:c ly arched, & pince-nez or just glasses if that's the only option when you're cats....there's a lot of "wow that really could be mordecai huh" design alignments that are otherwise just a lot of coincidences like, whoops drew this background rando who matches so closely one of the main cast members....characters. getting theatrical out here. and what's then also noticeable is: none of the other background randos resemble any other characters, even when if mordecai is simply here as an Important Employee, where's viktor, where's anyone else we know was already around, where's the employees who remained steadfast who are shown immediately after this, versus mordecai who, as an employee, did Not loyally stick around at lackadaisy, but as someone with enough emotional investment in atlas for that to indeed be the foundation of his and mitzi's murder mystery Understanding, to then also maybe be the only lackadaisy employee at atlas's funeral (presumably with mitzi's knowledge), to have left lackadaisy out of grief rather than professional interests....hmm

mordecai also in this picture, where again everyone's hanging out, next to atlas and singled out by being the only person not sitting. did he just get there, maybe. is he On The Job still, i.e. maybe by being something of an [almost always active personal bodyguard] here. seems he'd face more Away from atlas for that. but not like i know what he's up to otherwise, and Thee Point may be to more symbolically have him standing apart. with even viktor also there, sitting and chilling, to show how mordecai Might also be doing that....but isn't. also of course tingling with mystery senses about what mitzi was going to have said to wick here, about how she would hate to, dot dot dot...then changes her mind upon Considering Atlas

here's mordecai Standing Near atlas again while socializing is happening. while he is also distinct from a) mitzi, in that this is confirming (if somewhat implicitly) that mordecai was in fact already associated with lackadaisy & atlas before atlas met mitzi, and b) viktor, who was still stationed with the arbogasts' funeral home, wherein i'm also considering this relevant b/c naturally it emphasizes that the professional viktor & mordecai duo's existence doesn't make them interchangeable: backing up that mitzi sure may have had a reason beyond a coin flip for having this secret with mordecai rather than viktor (and, of course, the reason probably isn't just "i need to work with some lackadaisy employee who can fire a gun" in the first place)

a couple more points being

mordecai going on and on about professional approach all the time; could simply be his preference, could be an expression of the like precision / methodical perspective that makes him good at biting and killing, could be [that] plus just how he deals with his job being biting and killing when it's unlikely he was up to that before the train ride ft. atlas and atlas taking him on for that success....i also wonder if he took a Professional Approach to killing atlas / thinks of it in that way, even if that reason for [secret mystery involvement with mitzi on this] was an emotional one, and that being recent and tumultuous has him like tripling down on this. even though mordecai may not have killed atlas either, even presuming atlas Was shot and killed. and knowing that mitzi gave him a gun, or mordecai gave her the gun, or they passed it back and forth a few times for obfuscation

the pig farmers start wandering into a dark area of lackadaisy's caves and there's bones back there. what goes on in said caves....all this coming about b/c atlas opportunistically took advantage of the cave access, seems like the kind of environment with real potential for some figurative resonance. like also the rivers.

mitzi telling wick that atlas was the murderous one in the relationship....not necessarily that significant when like, technically who around here Isn't murderous. just like there having been "here's the body stashing cave section" isn't necessarily extraordinary in its literal existence, but with the symbolism of wandering into the caves and finding an area with no light, where you start walking on old bones, and are about to be killed yourself....hmm. and re: atlas's murderousness, sure is possible to team up to kill someone to protect a fourth party, even though like, who. and that would add another layer of "mitzi and mordecai care about the same person" on top of their presumed [handshaken] emotional regard towards atlas. possible, but like, who would that be. it seems unlikely atlas would, say, threaten ivy or something. and how would that incorporate that [there has to be the Mitzi's Asserted Culpability] element. but these things are sure noted

not directly related to the mystery but i will leave off again on the mordenico agenda. even though, also, it is a "bite me a zillion times, two zillion times shy on me" situation like, what are the odds the [inroad of intrigue over shaking up the glitter in your funny little guy who everyone usually just would rather ignore] situation is actually bound for working out. yet [Also Everything Else. like in this scene and the prior Hotel Room Fête encounters] and declaring yourselves as the same and trying to stay friends no matter what....we can dream

[cherriko-art]

Today's random thought:

It's always so disheartening to see when different sectors of art/creators don't align.

Morals and advocacies are bound to clash bc none of us are perfect and we're all different, but it still hurts to witness. Seeing actors promote generative AI, or seeing artists pirate novels online, or crafters stealing artwork and designs, etc.

I feel that any sort of creative, no matter what area you create in, has faced the unjust reality of other people taking/stealing/profiting/undermining your work. Art has always been kicked around at the bottom of the bucket bc people believe they have the right to our work, that it's "just art". We've experienced this so often.

That's why I think it hurts even more when I see other creatives do the same to other creatives. Like an art-on-art crime.

[coldflasher]

currently experiencing The Horrors (thinking abt the fact that i have to start going into the office again from tomorrow)

this will either fix me entirely or cause me to descend so deeply into my burnout sinkhole that i will never be seen or heard from again

[threepreludes]

.

[probablyasocialecologist]

In this book you focus on the idea of gender as a global ‘phantasm’ – this charged, overdetermined, anxiety- and fear-inducing cluster of fantasies that is being weaponised by the right. How did you go about starting to investigate that? Judith Butler: When I was burned in effigy in Brazil in 2017, I could see people screaming about gender, and they understood ‘gender’ to mean ‘paedophilia.’ And then I heard people in France describing gender as a Jewish intellectual movement imported from the US. This book started because I had to figure out what gender had become. I was naïve. I was stupid. I had no idea that it had become this flash point for right-wing movements throughout the world. So I started doing the work to reconstruct why I was being called a paedophile, and why that woman in the airport wanted to kill me with the trolley. I’m not offering a new theory of gender here; I’m tracking this phantasm’s formation and circulation and how it’s linked to emerging authoritarianism, how it stokes fear to expand state powers. Luckily, I was able to contact a lot of people who translated Gender Trouble in different parts of the world, who were often gender activists and scholars in their own right. They told me about what’s happening in Serbia, what’s happening in Brazil, Chile, Argentina, Russia. So I became a student of gender again. I’ve been out of the field for a while. I stay relatively literate, of course, but I’ve written on war, on ethics, on violence, on nonviolence, on the pandemic… I’m not in gender studies all the time. I had to do a lot of reading.  There’s a lot of focus in the book on how the anti-gender movement has moved across the world in the past few decades, and how it’s inextricable from Catholic doctrine. It was clarifying for me; domestic anti-trans movements in the UK mostly self-identify as secular.  Judith Butler: In the UK, and even in the US, people don’t realise that this anti-gender ideology movement has been going on for some time in the Americas, in central Europe, to a certain degree in Africa, and that it’s arrived in the US by different routes, but it’s arrived without announcing its history. It became clear to me that a lot of the trans-exclusionary feminists didn’t realise where their discourse was coming from. Some of them do; some people who call themselves feminists are aligned with right-wing positions, and it’s confusing, but there it is. There’s an uncomfortable history of fascist feminism in movements like British suffragism, for instance. Judith Butler: Yes, and of racism. But when Putin made clear that he agreed with JK Rowling, she was probably surprised, and she rightly said, ‘no, I don’t want your alliance’, but it was an occasion for her to think about who she’s allying herself with, unwittingly or not. The anti-gender movement was first and foremost a defence of Biblical scripture, and of the idea that God created man and woman, and that the human form exists only in this duality and that without it, the human is destroyed – God’s creation is destroyed. So that morphed, as the Vatican’s doctrine moved into Latin America, into the idea that people who advocate ‘gender’ are forces of destruction who seek to destroy man, woman, the human, civilisation and culture.