#under developed and kind of obvious. there are some interesting things going on; a perverse examination of xtian (particularly catholic)

[translations-by-aiimee]

Mistakenly Saving the Villain - Chapter 5

Original Title: 论救错反派的下场

Genres: Drama, Romance, Xianxia, Yaoi

This translation is based on multiple MTLs and my own limited knowledge of Chinese characters. If I have made any egregious mistakes, please let me know.

Chapter 1 Chapter 2 Chapter 3 Chapter 4

Chapter 5 - Wrong Answer

Readers who have read novels such as transmigration, quick transmigration, and system plotlines, know that if the fate of the character in the story must be changed, it should be prevented before the character's tragic fate has occurred. However, Song Qingshi interpreted this as the event having already occurred, and was meant to save the character who had already suffered a tragic fate. This train of thought meant that his decision was a thousand miles off.

In the original book, Yue Wuhuan only appeared three times:

The first time was when the shou protagonist had just been sold to Golden Phoenix Manor. When he saw the unbearable scene of Yue Wuhuan being played with by the guests, his three views shattered.

The second time was when the protagonist's naive illusion of the future was destroyed and he was forced to accept his identity because of the ridicule and humiliating remarks of Yue Wuhuan.

The third time, Yue Wuhuan was taken out by Jin FeiRen on the Langgan stage to treat the guests and was accidentally torn to pieces by the demon tiger. Jin FeiRen concealed the actual explanation of the demon tiger's madness and treated it as a deliberately arranged game for the banquet. With this extreme fear, he shattered the last trace of the protagonist's dignity, making him completely surrender and become a plaything.

In short, Yue Wuhuan was a small supporting role with little substance, leaving the plot early, using his degeneracy to offset the beauty of the protagonist. His beauty was only like that of a beautiful flower that was about to wither. How can it be compared with the pure and clean flower bud that had not yet bloomed in the dawn?

This was a super simple multiple-choice question that every reader could figure out!

If the system was a living thing and watching over the exam being taken, it would be so angry that it would have come out and beaten that foolish Song Qingshi to death.

Scholar-Tyrant Song didn't know that he had drifted so far from the original goal, but he was still eagerly confident, trying to do his best and vowing to get a perfect score!

On the way back to the Valley of the Medicine King, Song Qingshi had recalled all the memories of his original body and integrated it with its massive knowledge of medicine and alchemy. There were rare and exotic herbs and miraculous medicines in the cultivation world. However, similar to traditional Chinese medicine, even if the medicine worked wonders, the science behind the effects of these medicines was still a mystery.

Modern medicine conducts systematic research on traditional Chinese medicine to find out the monarch-minister-auxiliary relationship within its components, extracted the useful ingredients in each concoction, and then developed medicine that was easier to take and had even better results.

A female scientist won the Nobel Prize for this, benefiting the world. Song Qingshi focused on modern medicine, leaped away from the traditional path of immortality, and quickly found new ideas for solving problems for many areas that the original body had failed to properly study. He used the Tiangong Pavilion to make modern scientific instrument substitutes, and then analyze the effective ingredients in the immortal medicines, purify them, research them, and even artificially synthesize them. . .

In Song Qingshi's mind, there were countless experimental schemes in an endless stream, and there were tens of thousands of books and inexhaustible medicinal materials in the Medicine King's Valley, as well as abundant research funds.

He was overjoyed, like a mouse that fell into a vat of rice. He wanted to kiss the system if he could.

Song Qingshi fully understood why the original body lived here, staying in such a cultivation paradise. He could live here for the rest of his life!

He could immerse himself in the ocean of intense studying and research every day. He could dedicate his life and soul to his favourite medical god. No one could send him back!

Song Qingshi looked at Yue Wuhuan in his arms. The more he looked at him, the more he loved him.

This was the big treasure that had given him everything! He would do everything he could to save him, just like his parents used to treat him before; indulged, spoiled, loved, and giving him all the good things he needed so that he can live a happy life like a prince in a fairy tale!

Song 'a father's love is like a mountain' Qingshi was full of ambition. He suppressed his excitement and immediately placed Yue Wuhuan in the side hall of his bedroom. He did everything by himself. First, he poured the elixir carefully with the crane-mouthed pot to re-invigorate the breath of life. Then he changed into white clothes, put on a homemade mask, and found a pair of extremely thin animal leather gloves. After he finished disinfecting the wounds, gently cut off the blood-soaked gauze and feather skirt on Yue Wuhuan's body with scissors, rinsed the wounds, and then sutured them with very fine silkworm thread. Then, he cut off the shackles and treated his ankle wounds.

Song Qingshi's movements were extremely gentle and quick, barely touching any skin, but Yue Wuhuan's body was extremely sensitive. He twitched slightly and groaned a few times before falling asleep again. Song Qingshi took the opportunity to take some blood samples for analysis, and also performed a full-body scan of him with his mental probe. He was a good-tempered person, but after seeing the disastrously ruined dantian and meridians in Yue Wuhuan's body, he couldn't help but curse darkly at those beasts. He scolded them repeatedly, thinking about how he was going to explain this situation to him once he woke up.

Song Qingshi was not good at communicating with strangers. He was able to make do when discussing his interests, but his thoughts often went blank when forced into small talk. For example, when everyone watched the popular men's group selection variety show together and argued over who was the male god?

He answered sincerely that it was Asclepius, the god of medicine. . .

Song Qing hasn't understood why everyone said he killed the conversation.

He thought hard for a long time and remembered that when his Lou Gerhig's hadn't been as advanced, he worked in a hospital for an internship. His senior brother knew that Song Qinshi was afraid of social interaction and would end up a stuttering mess when he tried to have conversations with his patients. He taught Song Qingshi: "Push down all of your feelings and act like a medical machine. First write down their case in detail and their treatment plan, recite it with a smile, and then end with a comforting sentence." Song Qingshi took this secret technique, practiced many times in front of the teacher, and, finally, he could talk to patients without fear.

A hospital is a place for treatment, just like how the Medicine King's Valley is a place for treatment. What's the difference?

After Song Qingshi had this epiphany, he replaced Yue Wuhuan’s bed sheets and bedding with the white ones commonly used in hospitals. He ordered the valley servant to make several sets of patient clothes, put them on by himself, and then tied roots on his wrist to represent the hospital information band. With a red wristband and a sign on the bed with "Special Care" and the instructions for how to care for him, Song Qingshi instantly felt calm in this makeshift hospital environment.

He wasn't comfortable with the type of care that the valley servantswere giving and took on nursing himself. He was careful and not afraid of getting tired. He wiped down Yue Wuhuan's body and washed his face, fed him medicine and water, and even replaced the bedding to deal with all kinds of filth.

When Yue Wuhuan woke up three days later, he was confused. He didn't know where he was. He stared at the white veil on the top of the bed in a daze for a long time. He finally realized that he was still alive and he hadn't been this relaxed in a long time.

He closed his eyes, faintly recalling the slight fragrance of medicine lingering from his dream and the hands that had gently released all the restraints for him. He took a deep breath. He didn't want to wake up and face the never-ending nightmare.

After who know's how long, Yue Wuhuan threw his eyes open, remembering where he had smelled the fragrance of the medicine. He slowly turned his head and looked at the round table next to him, but saw that Medicine Master Xianzun was attentively making changes to the cursive writings on the table. He was frowning, his expression serious, as if thinking about something bad. There was also a familiar spirit bead in the silver plate next to him, and it became obvious that he had been given to another guest to be played with.

Yue Wuhuan’s phoenix eyes shrank. The rumors of the perverse and evil deeds of the Medicine Master Xianzun appeared in his mind, but he was not afraid. Whether he was willing or unwilling meant nothing under the control of the spirit bead. Besides, his broken body was no longer worthy of being cherished. He took a deep breath, gritted his teeth and struggled to get out of bed, but a sharp pain came from his shoulder, which made him dizzy and he fell right back down. Song Qingshi never had any distractions when he was researching. He heard the movement and found that the patient was awake. He was afraid that Yue Wuhuan might have moved his body and reopened the wound. He quickly reprimanded him with a stern tone: "You, go to bed right away! You are not allowed to get off for ten days!"

This stern technique was a secret taught by the head nurse of the hospital. It had a good effect on treating patients who didn't follow the doctor's advice.

"Ten days?" Yue Wuhuan was stunned. He couldn't help but look at Song Qingshi up and down. The more he looked, the more he felt that his appearance was deceiving. He had been with guests for many years, and he was used to seeing many lustful scenes, but he never would've guessed that this person had such prowess in the bed. . .

Seeing that he hadn't gotten back on the bed, Song Qingshi put down his pen, walked over and picked him up with his own hands.

Yue Wuhuan remained unmoved, stretched out his hand and gently hugged his neck. Hot fingertips touched his cool skin, as smooth as cool jade, and the clear and clean scent of medicine wrapped around him gently like if he was in a dream. Yue Wuhuan couldn't help but shake for a moment. He chasticized his heart for still not knowing how to behave, then resumed his usual posture, and breathed out ambiguously: "I hope that Xianxun will take pity. . ."

"Don't worry, I will." Song Qingshi put him back on the bed carefully, then pulled the blanket up. He wrapped him up tightly, and solemnly told him, "The valley is wet and cold. You have a mortal body so be careful of the cold and stay under the blanket. Keep your hands and feet tucked in and don’t kick off the sheets."

Yue Wuhuan had never seen this trick in bed before and was at a bit of a loss.

"You;re a patient now. Let me tell you about your situation." Song Qingshi turned back to the table, picked up a stack of paper covered with words. He nervously pushed the non-existent glasses on the bridge of his nose, and read with a smile, formulating his tone. "The patient is Yue Wuhuan. There are three lacerations from the right shoulder to the chest, which are 18 cm, 14 cm and 12 cm long. The right shoulder bone is fractured, and the suprascapular artery has been ruptured. The right elbow has a skin contusion. The left and right wrists have skin tissue bruises, the left and right knees are bruised along with the left and right ankle tissue. The buttocks skin has soft tissue lacerations. There are signs of drug abuse in the body and potentially drug addiction. Do you understand?"

Yue Wuhuan only felt that his stiff smile must look increasingly forced. The more he thought about it, the crazier everything seemed. All he could do was nod his head and pretendto understand.

"Very good." Song Qingshi felt that what he said was both detailed and easy to understand, and began to recite the preliminary treatment plan. "Your dantian and meridians have been destroyed, and your body is seriously damaged. Your body is too fragile right now to use stronger medicine, so you cannot take Rejuvenation Pill, Gather Breathe and Disperse Pill, All Creation Pill or the Bone Growth Pill. You need to be treated with mortal medicine first, and then treated with the Six Meridian Rejuvanation medicated bath. Then you'll take the Rising Dragon Pill and Nine Revolution Blood Lotus Pill."

Yue Wuhuan finally understood what he was saying. These pills were common immortal medicines, and he had also taken it when he was seriously injured.

The All Creation Pill and Rising Dragon Pill were worth thousands, and he had heard that the poster of Jape Pearl Tower's Lord had used it for his own treasure.

He didn't know what the Six Meridian Rejuvanation medicated bath was, but the Nine Revolution Blood Lotus Pill was the treasure of the immortal world. It is made of ten thousand year-old blood lotuses. There were only nine in the world and only few know where their locations. He only knew that the master of Xuanji Palace had used it and ascended to Fen Shen; the lord of Fluttering Snow Fortress turned against his Daoist companion and killed him and his wife to win the treasure; one appeared in the Qizhen Pavilion auction, and it was won by the owner of the East Sea Langya Pavilion with hundreds of thousands of high-grade spirit stones. For some reason, Jin FeiRen wasn't able to participate in the auction. He always brought it up as one of the greatest regrets in his life.

If it were described in mortal terms, it would be like saving a beggar on the side of the road and saying that you would give him precious delicacies, golden houses, jade horses, and billions in wealth. FInally, you tell him you'll give him the fade seal of the country and all lands under the heavens. Only an idiot would believe these claims.

Yue Wuhuan laughed but his heart was cold. He basically confirmed that Song Qingshi was just toying with him.

He had also encountered many such sweet talkers, pretending to show compassion for some and pity for others. All he wanted, though, was to coax his slaves to play this game with him. He only lusted after his dirty body, in the end.

Song Qingshi finished off with some final closing words: "Don't worry, as long as you follow the doctor's advice and cooperate with the treatment, you'll be cured."

"Okay," Yue Wuhuan's phoenix eyes showed a bit of flattery, and he replied in a sultry voice: "This slave depend on Xianzun for everything. . ."

"I almost forgot." Song Qingshi looked into his eyes and suddenly remembered something. He put on the animal skin gloves again, picked up a luminous bead the size of a goose egg and placed it in a strange, long, tube-shape lampshade. Then he sat on the side of the bed, leaned over and looked at Yue Wuhuan. He gave him a serious warning: "This may be a little uncomfortable, please bear with me."

Yue Wuhuan smiled self-deprecatingly. He let the phoenix eyes show waves of desire, and he relaxed his body, waiting to be played with.

Song Qingshi stretched out his hand and opened his eyes, illuminating the inside of the eyes with the luminous bead. He carefully observed for a while, then whispered: "The problem of the lacrimal secretion system is not visible on the outside, so I still have to do a colored dye inspection..."

Yue Wuhuan: "???"

[creacherkeeper]

if anyone would have bothered caring for or parenting azula she would've turned on ozai Quick. the series would've been ten episodes long.

oh now that’s actually a really interesting thought experiment 

i don’t agree and here’s why 

(cw abuse, cw child abuse) 

zuko had ursa’s love. he grew up being cared for, learning compassion, and having a positive role model. iroh obviously cared for him a great deal, as he decided to go with zuko on this very rough journey with little of the comforts he was used to, for an indeterminate amount of time, so even if you think iroh changed a lot before the show started, he was some sort of positive model in zuko’s life from childhood. and in the three years before the show, zuko had iroh to care for him and try to help him and lead him down the right path 

zuko is still the season 1 antagonist, despite these things

zuko doesn’t change until his circumstances drastically change. he needs so much distance from his father, he needs to see the rest of the world’s perspective with clear eyes, he becomes a refugee, he connects with people, he learns honest work, and this changes him. and yet, even despite all that, even despite iroh’s care and teachings added into all those experiences, zuko betrays iroh to help azula and get back to his father 

this is the thing about abuse. it messes with your head. i’ve heard some psychologists say their definition of an abusive situation is the inability to recognize patterns, and in my experience that’s been very accurate. it’s almost impossible to see how bad something is when you’re in it, even if you have other positive forces in your life. the very corrupt and twisted thing about abuse is that, in a very perverse way, it’s addictive. it lies to you and tells you that not only is this negative behavior justified, but that you need it and would be worse if it wasn’t in your life. losing an abusive relationship, whether it’s on your terms or not, is incredibly terrifying. it’s a very awful situation to be in, and it’s why a lot of people develop ptsd so far afterwards, because their brain really doesn’t see abuse as “bad” until they’re far away and can get perspective 

we know azula has been abused her whole life, just for the simple fact that she was raised by ozai. but azula is in the very particular situation of “raised by a violent abusive narcissist who considered her the good one”. azula was in a very bad situation and it affected her behavior in major ways. she also, as we saw, was more safe from the obvious repercussions than zuko was. was that safety an illusion? absolutely. ozai would have turned on her in a heartbeat had she stepped out of line. but she believed she was safe, and she believed, in whatever warped and twisted way, that she was loved 

and i don’t think that can be discounted. like i said, abuse is addictive. not in any sort of “good” way, but in the very basic definition of addictive as in “your brain has a dependency on this and you will suffer negative consequences if it goes away”. like many addictions, it’s hurting you more in the long run. that’s something both azula and zuko had to learn. they wanted that relationship, terrible as it was, more than anything. but it was poisonous to their behavior and mental health 

so i dont necessarily agree that, if someone had shown kindness and care and nurturing to azula, she would’ve behaved much different. being in an abusive situation where youre favored and praised and “valued” is like. the ultimate noxious high. don’t get me wrong, it also feels very gross and awful. but your brain really does block those feelings out and makes you feel like you could actually die without it. can you imagine being in that situation as a young girl? i’m sure some of you reading this can. i was. and we know azula, up until the point when ozai leaves on the day of the comet, really thought she was in a good position. it was an incredibly fragile and complicated mental state. but she really did believe her situation was the best one she could be in. for how bad it was, for how bad she witnessed it being for zuko, she really honestly couldn’t see it. she’s incredibly smart and perceptive, and she couldn’t see it 

so yeah. to your original point, i really dont think that would have done much. azula needed love and care, absolutely. but i dont think that would have been enough. she needed love and care to show her how a relationship is supposed to be, she needed positive role models to model her own behavior, she needed space from ozai where she wasn’t under his thumb and following his orders to please him, she needed to get an outside perspective on the war and the behavior of the fire nation and therefore ozai (her main ‘interaction’ with non fire nation people is the dai lee ... which ... they sort of immediately cave and follow her), and she needed to see ozai’s “love” was false and conditional. you know who DOES get all those things? ZUKO! and guess what zuko got! A REDEMPTION ARC! you know how many of those things azula got? OH THAT’S RIGHT NONE OF THEM. AND YOU KNOW WHAT AZULA DIDN’T GET? A “REDEMPTION” ARC 

this is what i’m salty about in the show, and why my perspective on azula has changed so much over the years as i’ve gained knowledge and experience. i totally understand that they didn’t know how many seasons they were getting. but the fact is that azula is only halfway through her arc when the show ends, and she doesn’t get any sort of closure. this paints her in such a bad light compared to the rest of the characters. and THAT’S why i subject yall to 742 azula metas a day 

tl;dr: someone showing compassion and care to azula wouldn’t have been enough to “save” her or have her turn on ozai because unfortunately that’s just not how abuse works. she would have needed a lot of things - all the things zuko got - in order for her behavior to be different 

this has been my ted talk thank you for coming 

[arcticdementor]

You might look around sometimes and think to yourself, a new America has dawned, godless, without the old restraints. Yellowstone, the Kevin Costner Western on the Paramount Channel is the best example I can summon to mind just now, and its third season has just started. It’s a 21st-century story of cowboys and Indians—with characters seeking freedom from law. Practically, this means they must constantly defend a way of life independent of the many bureaucracies threatening their livelihood, and they do so with terrible violence.

Taylor Sheridan is the writer-director behind Yellowstone, and the series follows the success of his movies, Sicario, Hell or High Water, and Wind River. These movies earned seven Oscar nominations, one for Sheridan, and about as many nominations in Cannes, including important wins. Sheridan was raised on a ranch, but his family lost it, so he went to college and Hollywood, recalling Sam Peckinpah’s story. After Clint Eastwood, he’s now our premier poet of manliness.

…

Like any man long in power, Dutton has many enemies, and the more they behave dishonorably, the more you see that he’s touched by greatness, since he has no desire to go hurting people and does not share their cruel contempt for justice or life. Many look to prosper in his place, partly by the prosperity he has made. Worse for Dutton, America has changed—from the national press investigating him to the new economy to the way historical grievances grant authority to demand change—everything is threatening his way of life, built around family, land, and centuries past and future. Indeed, loyalty itself is over and new identities are required, which are flexible and practiced in deception. To succeed in Yellowstone’s new America, it doesn’t really matter whether you know any part of the country or have done well by people, but whether you know how to manipulate institutions and please those who manage the most successful interests, which seem hardly any better than legalized conspiracies.

Like Hemingway’s marlin, which achieves its greatest leap in its death throes and expires at the top of the arc, Dutton is most impressive in agony. He seems superhuman compared to the new American elites. His handling of urgent problems makes him resemble the president—he is an executive. Meanwhile, egalitarianism has not created equality in America, but only a new elite, impatient, ignorant of the future, blind to necessity—thus, astonishingly able to manipulate the new systems of power, since these elites feel no concern for consequences. The real world, where people are tied to a place, to other people, to their past, and the good they pursue, is replaced by access to the institutions and finances that make the world work, which manipulate people’s lives indirectly, in unaccountable and unpredictable ways. Everyone’s tied into legal demands and their lives are increasingly regulated, but only people who know how to use the law to get what they want get ahead in this new situation. The first post-American elite is coming for the last cowboys.

…

The American Dream is over in Yellowstone, and billionaire gentrification is coming for the last refuge of manliness in a country that produces compliant subjects rather than free citizens. In this grim world, cowboys are stand-ins for the white working class. They don’t go to college and they work dangerous jobs without much healthcare and for little pay. They are not disrupting the economy. They are America’s past, not future. Their virtues are Stoic and this might simply mean resignation to death.

…

Justice is built on nobility, and in Yellowstone, Sheridan draws our attention to this through the characters’ relationship with their horses. So understanding horses is the core of Stoicism—the horse is the noblest animal and America’s love of horses lasted well into the last era of popular country music and the Western, in the 1970s, because a horse rider presents the image of someone more than merely human. It is a greatness available nearly to anyone, at least anyone willing to face harsh nature. Horses are everywhere in Yellowstone, so one might not read much into it. They symbolize certain virtues, however. The horse is a power that will obey the rider, but not against its own nature. To ride a horse requires endurance in face of pain or weariness, courage to face fear or whatever weakness might come, self-control in face of temptation, and moderation—those habits that make man thoughtlessly sovereign. Without these, you die when it’s suddenly dangerous. One cannot talk oneself into it and there is no technology to accomplish this, either. It’s a way of life, not a job. It takes long practice which allows you to understand yourself and develop self-discipline. As such, horse riding leads to a kind of self-knowledge.

…

The Duttons are not Christians, few of their like seem to be—not even the death of the firstborn leads to a church funeral. They believe in freedom and nature—ruling over the land, over the horses, over people. They despise weakness and treasure loyalty. They trust family, not morality. Compared to ordinary Americans, they’re shockingly aristocratic. They believe in choosing the means to defend family and their land because family itself is unchosen—it’s nature, and therefore reliable. But can they live in America, where most people have no family? They rely on their old-fashioned patriotism to defend the ranching way of life, but the country has changed without them and it seems they can either adapt and sacrifice their family, or stay loyal and lose everything.

…

The opposite of a man in America is a bourgeois bohemian, to recall David Brooks’s signal contribution to our sociology in Bobos in Paradise (2000). Brooks is a sophist for this class, so he will not tell the ugly truth—but Tom Wolfe did in A Man in Full (1998), and even scooped Brooks. It’s not an accident that he saw clearly: Wolfe was the poet of American Stoicism and understood the threats to manliness.

The people who define elite taste in America are themselves opposed to violence, but not because they are Christian or even moral. It’s because their own rule doesn’t require that they ever take any personal risks—poorer people do that, who live in other parts of town or are completely removed from sight by gentrification. Nowadays, the rich take no responsibility for the poorer or those suffering violence, or even ever shake their hands, which is why our cities are such madhouses. There is no noblesse oblige.

Sheridan wants to show the violence in America to rebuke this bloodless view of things. So in the first season we see, through the real estate developer drama, how the new American elite is moving in to remove the last ranchers. This establishes the difference between real men and those who want to rule merely through institutions and finance, as though history had ended and we’re just dividing up luxuries. In the second season, we see rule by violence, in order to understand the difference between men and beasts. Sheridan shows that not all who kill are the same. Only then is it possible to defend the ranchers against the bobos persuasively.

…

The older Americans were not sufficiently attuned to nature, because they believed in God more. But as the churches are emptying, people are looking elsewhere to learn who they are. Some turn to nature, because human beings are not trustworthy. We may say mankind is naturally perverse, always coveting and therefore often violent or treacherous, which is why harshness was required in the past, to establish property and then defend it. This is certainly Dutton’s view, who only goes to church once, to make a priest manipulate a parishioner into obedience. And as a family, the Duttons are only happy when they revert to their old ways, taking care of their herd from an improvised camp so far away from civilization there’s no cell tower in range.

The only way to end the human drama would be to stop being enviable. End greatness and thus end striving. On the other hand, to defend greatness is to defend suffering. This way, we learn that suffering builds character—it brings people together, as do common enemies. This problem, the future of America, is the show’s indirect concern. Is it possible to retain honor in a dishonorable world? It’s not obvious how we can defend freedom without honorable men making sacrifices. Nor how we can raise honorable men if we tolerate bobo elites who despise honor and use every institution of government and market to end it. Dutton raised his kids to correspond to his understanding of rule. The treacherous Jamie is a Harvard-educated lawyer who tasted the bobo life for a while, but in order to redeem himself, he works like hired help in the stables. Beth is a finance genius, which plays to her ruthlessness, but at the price of undermining her ability to love and trust. Kayce is the truest cowboy, but what makes him so loyal also blinds him to the complexities of 21st century America. They each amplify something in Dutton, but in this attempt to pass on the ranch to a new generation, it turns out honor and savvy have been utterly split apart.

This acquisitive capitalism that corrupts honor is the enemy that returns in the third season of Yellowstone. That’s what the name of the show is about—the place of nature in America. Is it a museum, a zoo we visit occasionally, enjoying the beauty after all the danger is under control, and the millionaire class gets extra privileges? Or is there also a human nature that we need to learn to respect by treating physical nature with some respect, lest our elites treat us like pets as well? To defend manliness in America, it may be necessary to defend wild nature. That is a preparation for political freedom. To go too far in the opposite direction is to treat human beings, but especially men, like savages—as our elites do to the urban and rural underclass.

The purpose of the show is to persuade Americans to believe in nobility again. To face cruelty and violence as a preferable alternative to institutionalized despotism. To accept America’s tragic past with gratitude for the freedom we still have, if we are willing to earn it again. We have had so much success, we’ve created a class who profits by this success without any connection to America or regular Americans. We need to educate new elites about what’s worth loving and defending. Sheridan wants to teach by tragedy, so his protagonists are essentially honorable, which is no longer tolerated in our storytelling. Americans have never accepted tragedy before but perhaps now we will, since our freedom is once again in danger.

[komahinasecretexchange]

Title: Kicking Roses, Folding Cranes

Author: @zombiekittiez

For: @irl-miu-fuckin-iruma / @miu-has-commoncold

Rating/Warnings: Teen, Language, Suggestiveness, Unhealthy Relationships

Prompt: 1) some cuddles 2) soft kisses 3) anything angsty

Author’s notes: Heyyyy it’s, uh, like really way longer than I meant and is way more 3) 2) 1) but then it was due so like… I hope you like it!

It starts, probably, when they find the pallet of triple-wrapped boxes at the back of the warehouse. It takes some maneuvering to uncover what was so carefully preserved, so the whole class ends up making a day of it. While Nidai leads a veritable army of Minimarus to the challenge, Imposter takes bets on the contents, writing each name and guess and wager in neat, even strokes. Mostly, Hajime thinks, the bets are centered more on wishful thinking than any concrete proof. It is highly improbable that Saionji will find a “fuck ton of gummies” or that Souda will stumble across a “disassembled liquid fuel cryogenic J-2 engine,” but he supposes that they are having fun and that is what counts.

While Nidai and Sonia eagerly attack the plastic sheeting, Hajime becomes aware of Komaeda, standing two steps back and to the right. It’s a habit he’s developed, since waking up, deferential hovering like some lady-in-waiting. It annoys Hajime, who has learned better than to confront Komaeda directly about things like <i>equality.</i> Rather, he takes a perverse sort of pleasure in thwarting Komaeda indirectly whenever possible.

Hajime takes the book from Imposter and makes a show of frowning at the page. “Komaeda,” he calls. He holds the page so closely that Komaeda must lean in, long hair falling in his face, to follow his line zig-zagging down the columns, scarcely any space at all between them. “I don’t see your bet.”

Komaeda laughs softly. “Wouldn’t that be rigging the game?”

“Depends on your guess.” Hajime points out. “There is a certain amount of logic involved in gambling, one reason you’re so good at it.”

“Logical… is that how you see me?” Komaeda asks, bemused. “I suppose I could make an educated guess.”

“Humor me.”

“Something totally impractical, most likely.” Komaeda hums a little to himself, turning to face Haime fully, his back to the unboxing. Souda and Nida work the crowbars at the top of the crate. “So much wrapping means it’s probably easily ruined by wet weather…”

The crate is open. Owari looks inside and gives a loud snort of disgust. Can’t be edible.

“Stationary? No, that’s too general…” Mioda picks up a something small and square and colorful. She gives it a shake.

“Origami paper,” Komaeda says brightly, smacking a fist against his open palm just as Mioda drops the packet, small perfect squares of colorful paper scattering across the floor. Collectively, class 77B groans.

Souda leads the charge, ignoring Komaeda’s protests with “it counts, it totally counts!” so Komaeda leaves weighed down with various odds and ends according to the bet book- konpeito, a seashell in the shape of a dinosaur, a seaweed based health tonic, pictures of a particularly cute dog, an alarm clock that sprays the sleeper with water, a set of mostly unbroken watercolor pencils, a peach cobbler, a tarnished silver pendant in the shape of a rabbit, slightly squashy strawberry chocolates and several hundred sheets of origami paper. Hajime, as instigator, is voluntold to help carry the items back to the first island cottages.

“For your services,” Komaeda announces at the door, dumping the candy and pastries into Hajime’s arms.

“And because you don’t like sweet things.” Hajime sighs. “You don’t have to keep all their junk, you know, Komaeda. We can find some use for the paper. It probably burns well.”

“No,” Komaeda says firmly, and while he generally does what he pleases, he is rarely so confident affirming it. “That would be a waste.” Hajime blinks.

“Oh.” He makes a note to tell the others to leave the remaining paper alone. It’s not like it’s hurting anyone. It’s nice, he decides, for Komaeda to show interest in something. Whatever reality he was living in when dead and buried under layers of code, it left him subdued. Without the fanatical desperation of his looming luck or the drive of despair, he seems a little empty. With his white hair and his pale face and his fading smile, he has become something like Hajime’s personal ghost, only scarcely glimpsed in mirrors or around corners of buildings. Hajime half expects to wake to see Komaeda in his cottage in the middle of the night, looming over the bed. He wonders why that thought is less disturbing than it should be and chalks it up to a Kamukura thing.  

Komaeda tends to work salvage shifts in the library with Sonia who reads thirty-two languages, though, she admits, her Hindi is abysmal. He sorts and cleans wonderfully, and, Sonia assures Souda regularly, is a perfect gentleman.

Two days after what Mioda dubbed <i>The Origami Incident of ‘85</i> for no discernible reason, Sonia distributes tiny metal cards to everyone at breakfast. Each is embossed with a name and a tiny scanner.

“Library cards,” she explains. “The library committee has decided to allow checking out up to three items at a time.”

“You just scan the book’s UPC code like this-” Souda aims his card at a book in Sonia’s arms titled <i>Baphomet and You! Occult Leanings in 19th Century France.</i> The card gives a little beep, a light on the side blinking green. “Blammo! You got two weeks.”

“What happens if you keep them past the due date?” Hajime wonders, holding his card up to the light. When he lowers it again, everyone in the room is staring at him in disgust.

“I know that conditions are different than what we have, in the civilized world,” Sonia says very slowly, as though talking to a child. “But we are not animals, Hinata.”

Hajime rolls his eyes, unable to summon the patience or the interest to defend himself. “Where’s Komada’s?”

“It was his idea, so, of course, he had first choice.” Sonia explains.

Komaeda, sitting at the table by the window, drinks his blackened coffee and flips through a copy of <i>Origami for Beginners</i>.

“Huh.” Hajime puts his card into his pocket and gets up. It’s his turn for dish duty.

Later, Hajime finds the origami penguin in the downstairs lobby, balanced on the bar top across from the arcade machines. The lines are a little uneven so it stands lopsided on one end, like it’s hunched over protectively from the invisible cold. He picks it up and looks it over before setting it gently back into place.

An origami fox sits on the library shelf above the DIY section. Its ears were creased in the wrong direction at first so they curl under a little, giving it a hangdog sort of expression. Hajime picks up a book on water purification systems. He scans the book jacket with his library card until he hears an approving sort of beep. Sonia waves goodbye when he leaves. She is the only one he sees.

When Hajime goes up for lunch, the bar penguin has a friend. The second penguin is a little crisper and neater.

“I haven’t seen Komaeda around much today,” he brings up to Souda over curry rice. He tries to make it seem off-handed.

“It’s probably that thing,” Souda says unhelpfully.

“That thing.” Hajime echoes.

“The paper thing.” Souda gestures with his spoon. “He’s getting pretty good. Those invitation whatevers turned out kind of neat.”

“Invitations.”

“Yeah, how they opened up like flowers? Koizumi put mine back together for me after I couldn’t cause I’m clumsy. I put it on the mirror in my room. Maybe that’s girly, I dunno.”

“Invitation to what, Souda?”

“That origami meet up on Thursdays,” Souda says like it’s obvious. “It was on the invite, man.”

“I didn’t get an invite, Souda,” Hajime explains with what feels like infinite patience.

“Oh.” Souda pauses. Hums. Takes another bite and a swig of banana milk. “Probably he just didn’t want to bother you,” he decides.

After lunch, Hajime pauses on the stairs, seeing movement. Down below, Komaeda folds a half sheet of paper, eyes narrowed in concentration, adding to his Arctic tableau. After a few minutes of careful creasing, a half-sized penguin nestles between the two bigger penguins in a little penguin family.

“Can I try?” Hajime asks and Komaeda startles.

“Ah… yes, of course.” Komaeda hands him a sheet and steps to the side, cradling the How-to book to his chest. He doesn’t offer to show Hajime the diagram and Hajime doesn’t need it. He folds a crisp and perfect penguin without even trying. He hardly ever feels like he’s trying, when it’s not people.

“Here,” he says, handing it to Komaeda, who looks over its flawlessly symmetrical lines with a neutral expression. He walks to the end of the bar top and puts it down, far away from the messy loving penguin family.

“Don’t you think they’d want to stick together?” Hajime asks lamely, shoving his hands in his pockets. “Like… don’t you think he wants to be friends?”

“He’ll be happier over there,” Komaeda says with finality, stepping back to admire his work. If he moved the penguin any further away, it would fall off the counter.

Hajime sighs again. He’s been doing that a lot lately.  

On Thursday, Hajime decides to sort through the junk bins in Electric Avenue like he’s been avoiding for the past couple of weeks. It’s better to do this sort of thing alone, he reasons. It is tedious, automatic work, and by the end he has a solid organization system going. He sets a couple of things aside, bundling them into his bag and bringing them back across to the main island via schooner.

The kitchen is dark. The meeting must still be on. Hajime makes himself a sandwich and eats it with his feet in the pool, which Koizumi hates because she’s worried about crumbs. It’s nice, in a childish sort of way.

It’s not like he’s <i>waiting,</i> exactly, he reasons. He just happens to be out here, aimlessly footing around. He plays some Gala-Omega. He plays some Pac-Man. He peeks outside periodically, feeling like a creep. Souda is the first one coming around the bend and that might be his luck working because this is probably the best possible solution.

“Hey, c’mere a second.” Hajime gestures him into the downstairs lobby.

“What’s up, soul friend?” Souda grins at him cheekily.

“Here.” Hajime shoves two bundles at him. Souda pulls open the first.

“Heck yeah, you found me one! I thought if you had your luck you might.” He pokes at the Liox Li-air battery pack with obvious glee. “What’s this other stuff?”

“Komaeda needs it for the prosthetic upgrade.” Hajime clears his throat. “Can you do that?”

“You want me to work on his robo-arm? You wouldn’t let me near it during development, like it was your damn baby. What gives?”

Hajime’s eyes focus off in the distance, toward the bar top. “I’m just… busy right now.”

“Busy.” Souda looks at Hajime, bare footed with the cuffs of his pants rolled up, still a little damp around the bottom. He then looks pointedly at the new row of top scores on their two working arcade machines.

“Really busy,” Hajime insists.

“Hey, man, if this is about-”

“Ultimate Mechanic,” Hajime interrupts. “I bet you want to do all kinds of upgrades.”

Souda shuts up, eyes gleaming at the thought. “What about-”

“Not a rocket launcher. Not with his luck,” Hajime admonishes.

“You never let me have any fun,” Souda gripes, taking the parts and heading back outside.

Hajime takes his perfect penguin back to his cottage. He thinks about crumpling it up, but Komaeda is right. It would be a waste. He puts it on his desk, the single ornament in a plain and boring room for a plain and boring person.

“Yeah,” he says to no one in particular, and he goes to bed. Even after resting, he has a hard time focusing.

“Are…. a-are you doing okay?” Tsumiki asks hesitantly during inventory at the pharmacy. They’re in the back with all the really strong stuff, checking expiration dates and carting what’s salvageable to the hospital dispensary.

“Yes. The Ultimate Pharmacist talent is an easier one,” Hajime assures her, flipping through the steroids. The Prednisone is still properly sealed. He shakes the box a little and then puts it into the usable pile.

“T-that’s not what I meant,” Tsumiki murmurs. There’s a bright green origami rabbit peeking out from her apron pocket. “You haven’t been coming around much, and w-we were worrying-”

“If no one asks me for help, it’s because they don’t need it. If they don’t talk to me, they don’t need to talk to me.” Hajime discards several thoroughly crushed blister packs of allergy medicine. “I’m helping you, aren’t I? Because you asked. If someone asks me, I’ll help them.”

“W-what if Komaeda asks?” Tsumiki asks timidly.

Hajime snorts. “Komaeda is never going to ask me for anything,” he says with finality and after that they work in silence.

~~

Nagito is in the back practicing penguins like usual when Hinata next comes to visit the library. He stays out of sight, but the open door lets him listen in as he presses folds into blue and white paper.

“Your mortal shell lacks vigor,” Tanaka notes from behind the counter where he is helping Sonia remove the unsightly relics of time lost past- his phrasing for wiping the dust jackets free of dirt and pollen. Hinata’s returned the book on electrical system hybridization, so Nagito supposes that the rewiring has gone off well. Lately, Hinata’s productivity has been at a record high. It is abominably conceited for one such as himself to take even the slightest credit for such an endeavor, but he can’t help feeling a little personal pride.

Hasn’t he kept his distance beautifully? Hasn’t he distracted the others and kept them entertained so as to not disturb Hinata’s most important work?

Origami Thursdays are a terrific success, he decides. Perhaps he’ll ask Mioda about a Karaoke Friday or something.

“We have not seen you for breakfast recently,” Sonia tells Hinata worriedly.  

“I’ve been getting an early start,” Hinata says.Nagito chances glancing up as he leans over to pick up a fresh sheet of paper off the pile. Hinata has not noticed him, or is ignoring him, perhaps. His eyes are fixed on the high shelf behind the counter. There’s a little fox family there now, too. Three little kits. They are a disgrace. The Papa Fox has to be discreetly propped up using the corner of a children’s book. Hinata should not have to look upon such trash. Nagito’s fingers fairly itch to hide them away.

“Do you like them?” Sonia asks, noticing Hinata’s gaze. “They are so very cute! Komada has been putting them around. We’ve been helping.”

“The ice-visages in the den of inequity are particularly enchanting,” Tanaka agrees.

“I do so love penguins! Though I thought I saw four, earlier. There’s only three now.” Sonia says thoughtfully.

“You must have miscounted,” Hinata shrugs.

On his way to lunch, Nagito checks.

Hinata’s penguin is gone.

Well. That’s fine.

Hinata’s origami was so obviously superior. Ultimate Handicrafts, probably, or something of that nature. To put his creation alongside Nagito’s amateurish mess was an insult. It probably had a much better place to live now. Perhaps he should check.

When Hinata goes for a run by his lonesome after dinner, along the sandy beach, Nagito takes a quick look inside his cabin. It’s not hard to jimmy the lock, with a hairpin and a bit of luck. The penguin sits on Hinata’s desk and Nagito feels a small swell of pride at that too, though undeserved. It was his paper, his past-time, perhaps even his influence. He picks it up and looks it over, admiring its perfect creases. He gives it a tiny kiss on its little beak, feeling a bit foolish and lovelorn and yet… it’s nice. Hinata made it, after all.

He locks the cabin and leaves without disturbing anything. It might be a bit creepy, but then Nagito is perfectly aware of his own glaring faults. Besides, it’s not as though he breaks into Hinata’s cabin often.

Once or twice a week, at most.

Rarely when he’s sleeping.

~~

The thing is, Hajime isn’t without sympathy. This used to be what it was like for <i>him,</i> wasn’t it? Komaeda.People just putting up with you. Of course they like Hajime, of course they do. He saved them. It’s just- he’s kind of creepy, right? And even when someone talks to him, he’s not great at it. No Ultimate Conversationalist skill, ha-ha!

It’s only fair, he reasons. Ultimate Sociologist totally gets it. Pack dynamics. Social identity approach. Secondary Interpersonal attraction. These terms apply to class 77-B, with shared history and loss and recovery. This current hierarchy, with him perched along the top, is different altogether. The Ultimate Despairs are an emergent response group. Temporary bonds formed according to external trauma. And now they are dissolving.

Because Komaeda has memories with them, memories of before, memories with Nanami. All Hajime has is shared Despair.

Hajime is helpful. He knows he’s helpful. He’s a human multitool, for crying out loud. And he keeps them in line, mostly. Keeps them from breaking anything too important. It had been annoying, all the hovering and fluttering but now it’s gone. Respect. Reverence. Not love.

But maybe that’s not good enough. Not when you’re looking for reasons to stay.

It isn’t like he sat down and planned it out, his leaving. It’s just that he looked up during dinner, in the middle of a table, in the midst of conversations that do not invite him in and realizes he is an empty chair. This would be the same either way, and wherever he goes, he will be just as hollow.

“I haven’t seen you smile like that before,” Komaeda says quietly, when he picks up Hajime’s dishes. He’s on clean up duty tonight. Hajime shrugs. It was a smile of relief. Once a problem is identified, it can be corrected.

Physical work always helps his mind clear, so it’s a few days later when Hajime takes a break from ripping the piping out of the walls outside the factory, the sweat running down his face and soaking his shirt. It’s too hot for this, just a little past noon, but he doesn’t want to sit still. Busy, he decides, is better.

He pulls off his shirt and uses it to wipe his face. When he looks up, Komaeda and Saionji have stopped where they were coming down the middle of the path. Komaeda stares.  

“What?” Hajime asks, annoyed.

Komaeda turns on his heels and heads to the warehouse.

“Good talk,” Hajime mutters, throwing his shirt to the side of the path.

“He’s probably just really grossed out,” Saionji says, voice syrupy sweet. “You’re pretty disgusting right now, bro.”

“What are you two doing out here anyway?”

“More origami paper,” Saionji grins. “I’m giving <i>private lessons.</i>”

“Gross,” Hajime says with feeling.

“Are you jelly? Lime green jelly?” Saionji crows. “I’m a master of Japanese arts, you know!” She smirks up at him and Hajime just feels exhausted.

“So go get your paper and leave me alone,” he mutters.

“Don’t have to tell me twice!” Saionji sings, disappearing from view.

By the time Hajime finishes converting his irritation into manual labor, he’s got a sky-high pile of copper pipes and two pulled muscles in his back. He hobbles into the warehouse, looking for something to use as a walking stick till he can get to Nidai’s healing hands and sees the open crate, still ridiculously full of paper. On top, haphazardly discarded, is a single paper crane.

Komaeda’s paper crane. He can tell by the way the edges overlap slightly to the right. It must be particularly hard to do, with one robot hand. He imagines Komaeda unfolding and refolding, unfolding and refolding, mouth twisted to one side in concentration, wonders what it would be like to mess that up for him, to touch that expression.

He folds one. Two. Ten. Twenty. Fifty. By the time he gets to one hundred, his breath is even and his back hardly throbs. Speedy recovery and all that. He puts them in an empty box and slides it behind the crate.

When he gets to the dining hall, the chaos is in full swing but he still feels calm and centered. Souda notices him in the doorway after a bit and waves him over to try and make room, but Hajime just grabs an orange juice and waves.

“I need a shower, I’ll eat later.” Komaeda’s eyes follow him out of the doorway.

He can’t remember the last time he was in such a clear thinking mood. Ten days, he decides. Ten times one hundred is one thousand. Ten days is plenty of time. He will prioritize the repairs, focus on the ones that require varied talents, and then he will leave a thousand paper cranes and this island behind.

~~

Nagito is suspicious.

Ever since he’d caught that peculiar smile on Hinata’s face, he’s been suspicious. Nagito is not particularly clever or capable or even useful, but he does have a head for delicate tasks like cleaning or folding origami and he is the resident expert on Hajime Hinata.

Of course the others had noticed and asked and of course he had answered them vaguely, with a reassuring smile but underneath it all, Nagito watched as he always did and waited and thought.

It was so <i>hard</i> to maintain distance, sometimes.

Hinata, sweat slicked and muscles stark as he worked outside in the unforgiving sun.

“Put your tongue back in your fucking mouth,” Saionji had sneered once she’d found him in the warehouse after their run in, hugging his own arms tightly and blinking brightly at the wall, overloading on the memory. She threw a piece of paper at him and he had caught it and folded a perfect white crane. The motions calmed him back to normalcy and he left it on the top of the crate, whimsically.

But he doesn’t like how hard Hinata is working. Like there’s a kind of deadline approaching. He goes for a walk, letting his feet carry him along. With his luck, he’ll figure it out in no time. It takes a day or two to figure out where in the warehouse his luck is telling him to look.

One hundred paper cranes.  

“I-I’m glad you’re feeling better,” Tsumiki says happily as Hinata closes the panel of the MRI, the light on the side glowing a sudden reassuring green.

Two hundred paper cranes.

“Ibuki is totally gonna write a song about this!” Mioda crows when the lights flicker on properly backstage at the Titty Typhoon and the fog machine whirs to life.

Three hundred paper cranes.  

“I thank you for your dedication,” Imposter murmurs imperiously as Hinata brings the diner oven to a steady, even flame. Imposter has a basket of oysters under one arm, ready to roast. He might be drooling a little.  

Four hundred paper cranes.

“Fuckin’ unbelievable,” Kuzuryu blinks when Hinata makes the adjustment and then his bionic eye flares to life. “I feel like a goddamn superhero.”  

Komaeda checks nightly and sees the number growing and growing, strung together in long strands. What is it for? What does it mean? Every crane is so perfect and Hinata is working so very hard. He sets up Koizumi’s dark room. He works on the desalination station. The greenhouse. The atmospheric purifier. Communication encryption.

Five hundred, six hundred, seven hundred, eight hundred.

“You look tired,” Nagito says nervously, running into Hinata in the the storage room accidentally-on-purpose. He takes two large steps backward.

“I’ll take a break soon,” Hinata explains, shutting down the back up generator now that it is running smoothly. “Then I’ll sleep for a week.”

“We will take pains not to disturb you, then.” Nagito assures him and Hinata just smiles vaguely in response. Nagito loves Hinata’s smiles. Not that one, though.

Nagito’s luck had fizzled out that morning during dish duty and caused a power outage for two hours, just long enough to collapse the delicate souffles Hanamura had planned for a special dinner treat. He decides that it’s better to keep his distance for now, in case there is more bad luck on the way. Nagito heads to the warehouse, to drag out the crate from under the worktables and to count the paper cranes. It’s wonderfully soothing. He wonders what will happen when Hinata reaches one thousand. Something wonderful, he bets.

In the crate, there are nine hundred perfect paper cranes. Beside the crate is a knapsack. It has dried rations, a portable water purifier, a multi-tool and a stun-gun. Crumpled in the pocket is a draft of a note. To him. To all of them.

<i>By the time you are reading this…</i>

Nagito takes a deep deep breath. His mouth twists up on one side.

What terrible luck.

~~

After Hajime finishes the last of the essential repairs, he decides to head back to his cottage to shower up and to try writing his farewell note again. All the eloquence of the Ultimate Literary Genius, unable to write a short and sweet goodbye. Pathetic. After dinner, he’ll slip over to the warehouse and finish the last hundred cranes. His one small bag is already packed and waiting there. The shower he takes is a long one, and very hot. He enjoys it- it may be the last hot shower he has for a while, the world being what it is out there. He’s still toweling his hair roughly when he walks back into his bedroom and sees it- a single, perfect crane on his bed. White.The same crane he’d first seen in the warehouse, he realizes, picking it up.  

Then someone clamps a rag around his nose and mouth from behind and everything goes black.

It is some time later when Hajime wakes up in bed. It is soft and he is comfortable. Someone has tucked him in on all sides, something he can’t remember ever experiencing before, even as a child. He blinks sleepily. Someone is banging on the door. It’s very annoying but he can ignore it, if he likes, so he does. There’s yelling now, too. What is it they’re saying… Fire? Someone is yelling <i>Fire, Fire,</i> how cliche.

He’s nearly asleep again when he recognizes Souda’s voice.

“YO!” Souda screams. “Get the fuck up, </i>Komaeda set the warehouse on fire!</i>”

Hajime blinks. He sits up.

“…Again?”

~~

Nagito whistles tunelessly as he watches the building burn. As an after thought, he pulls the origami penguins from his pocket. One, two, three from the lobby, one from Hinata’s cottage, liberated during what he likes to think of as the <i>Sleepytime Phase.</i> Mioda had been less than amused by that, actually. She’s over with the others, staring at him and the fire and him and the fire as though something will change. It will not. He wanders closer to the building and they shy away. Nagito drops all the penguins into the fire together.

“If you’re going to burn, better to burn together,” Nagito murmurs, smiling.

He’s not crazy. He isn’t.

Probably.

~~

“Wow.” Hajime crosses his arms, watching the Minimarus fighting the flames. It is both adorable and futile. The rest of their classmates huddle in a little group on the other side- as far away from Komeda as they can manage.

“The accelerant was a bit more potent in real life, I’m afraid,” Komaeda smiles cheerfully, two careful steps behind.  

“Komaeda?”

“Yes, Hinata?”

“… why did you set the warehouse on fire?”

“You only had a hundred left,” Komaeda says, like it’s obvious. “You had to be stopped.”

“You set the warehouse on fire because of <i>paper cranes</i>?” Hajime wonders sometimes if he’s actually just having some kind of aneurysm and this is all some long, drawn out hallucination sequence.

“No, Hinata,” Komaeda says very slowly and Hajime swallows back the urge to hit him in the mouth. “I set the warehouse on fire because you were leaving.”

Hajime blinks.

“I knew you were up to something when you started working yourself to death. That list,by the way, the one you keep in your desk? Not the order I would have put those tasks in, but I’m sure someone as talented as you had your reasons. When I saw you had already packed your bag last night, I knew I had to act quickly-”

“Wait, when did you-”

“When you were sleeping, obviously,” Komaeda continues, as though this is the least important detail, “But I think you were really quite unfair, you know. I’m not sure what else I could have done. I was trying to be considerate, distract the others to let you have some breathing room, and then you go and do a thing like that. Honestly, I’m disappointed, if that’s as far as your hope can take you.“

“Can we go back like… to step three? Or something? Because…” Hajime trails off.

“The point is that you’re not allowed to leave the islands.” Komaeda shrugs carelessly. “Sorry, but that’s just the way it is.”

“I’m not allowed?”

“Nope.” Komaeda smiles again. “No more cranes, no more leaving.”

“The two aren’t… I mean, I could just… make more paper cranes.” Hajime says, bewildered.

“Most of the origami paper was lost in the fire. Turns out it does burn well! You’re so clever, to have known that. But if you find more or you make more, that’s okay. I’ll just burn those too.” Komaeda’s face settles into a peculiar expression. “But there’s no need for that. Someone as important as you has to be here! I can help. I can stay further back, if you like? Three… no,five steps? I can stop speaking to you directly, if the sound of my voice is too unpleasant to bear. Maybe I could only come out during the night, once everyone is asleep, so no one has to see trash like me? Those are just suggestions, please feel free to direct me how you please-”

“Jesus fucking Christ,” Hajime runs a hand down his face in utter exasperation. With his free hand, he grabs Komaeda by the wrist and drags him over to the others.

“Tell them you’re sorry,” Hajime orders.

“I am very sorry you must all co-exist with such a garbage human being,” Komaeda chirps.

“About the fire!”

“Oh. Did you want me to lie, Hinata? That doesn’t seem very nice.” Komaeda temporizes, tilting his head to the side.

“You are such a freak,” Saionji sneers.

“Crazy son-of-a-” Souda clutches at the front of his jumper, gritting his teeth.

“Somebody oughta put you down,” Kuzuryu says darkly and Pekoyama puts one hand on her bamboo sword.

Komaeda nods and nods. “But it was necessary, you know! For hope. And now our hope will stay.” Komaeda turns huge adoring eyes on Hajime. So does everyone else.

“Wait… what is he talking about?” Koizumi asks suspiciously.

“You were gonna <i>leave?!</i>” Owari bellows.

“Where the hell d’you think you’re going, punk? Too good for us now, is that it?” Kuzuryu turns on him and Pekoyama puts her hand back on her bamboo sword.

Hajime holds up a hand. “No. Stop. Look. I thought… and I was… it doesn’t matter. I’m not leaving,” he says. “Anymore,” he adds. They look thoroughly unimpressed. And there’s Komaeda, looking friendly and gentle and sooty and only maybe one tenth as insane as he actually is, but. Also. Didn’t it… wasn’t it… sort of… working?

He isn’t leaving, is he?

“Fuck, I’m tired.” He groans, almost to himself.  

“Chloroform does that to people,” Komaeda agrees in a knowing sort of way.

“I need to lay down.” Hajime says after a solid thirty sixty seconds where he just covers his face and breathes heavily. “Now that the fire is contained, I need to <i>lay down.</i>”

Komaeda nods sagely but is then suddenly dragged up and along the path back to the bridge and the first island.

“Hinata?”

Hajime increases the pace. He can feel something building up inside of himself, as inexorably as the ocean. He just needs to get inside. If he can get back to his cabin he can sleep.  

“I can see that you’re upset with me. Completely understandable! I’m imposing upon you with my presence. The very air that I breathe is like poison around you. It would be best if I stopped my disgusting voice altogether-”

Hajime grabs Komaeda by the shoulders. “Shut up,” he orders, but the buzzing in his head is so thunderously loud that he can’t be sure the words are coming out at all. Komaeda’s mouth is still moving. Words are still pouring out.

Hajime shuts him up. He puts a hand against Komaeda’s mouth and holds it there. “Stop,” he begs. “Stop holding back. Stop putting me to the side. Stop ignoring me. Stop whatever you’re doing to make them ignore me too, Komaeda… I can’t do this. I can’t take this.” Tears of frustration are escaping but he doesn’t care. They’re still in front of the ranch, haven’t even made it back yet, but Hajime just wants to lie down in the dirt. “Pay attention to me. Be around me. Be normal, okay? Be your normal, be your regular weird fuck self, I-” his voice breaks.

~~

Nagito reaches up with his free hand and pulls Hinata’s hand off his face. He turns it around, till the fingers curl up toward the sky. He looks at Hinata impassively.

Had he always been so weak and soft? A little space and he doubts their love already. Utterly faithless. Utterly disappointing.

Nagito loves that part of him too.

He presses a kiss into Hajime’s fingers. The knuckles. The wrist. Each is a soft and reverent thing.

“You’re tired, aren’t you?” He asks, between kisses. “Poor Hinata. You must be so tired.”

Hinata lets go of Nagito’s wrist and reaches up to scrub angrily at his face. Nagito takes that hand too. They’re standing in the middle of the path where anyone can see them, but if Hinata isn’t going to kick him into the dirt over it, he can’t be bothered to care what the inferior talents will think or feel. It’s Hinata’s decision, so if he chooses to have such appalling foresight as to allow Nagito free reign, well. <i>Nagito</i> won’t be the one to tell him he’s making poor life choices.

Komaeda leads, this time, their fingers laced together, and they go back to Hinata’s cottage. He makes no move to open the door; likely as not, he’d forgotten the keys in his haste. Nagito knows that fires tend to do that to even the best of people. Luckily, he has a hairpin.

“You’re too good at that,” Hinata sniffs warily.

“Thanks!” Nagito grins as he pushes open the door. He locks the door behind them. Hinata shucks his shoes and his shirt on the floor, which is a bit messy, but Hinata has had a rough day, so Nagito will let it slide this time. He tucks Hinata in on all sides and leans against the foot of the bed, head resting on his elbow, watching with a contented smile.

“You’re so goddamn creepy,” Hinata complains, throwing an arm over his eyes to keep from seeing him. “And embarrassing. And awful.” Nagito nods along. “Get off the floor,” he orders.

“The floor is too good for someone like me, but surely you don’t want to leave me unsupervised?” Nagito suggests. Hinata hauls him up by the elbow.

“Get in the fucking bed,” he says, and Nagito does, sliding happily between the sheets. He’s so warm, this steady physical presences that dips the mattress so they lay close together on the tiny bed. Nagito traces the path from Hinata’s shoulder down to his hip.  

“You smell wonderful,” Nagito sighs, face buried against Hinata’s shoulder, curled into the shape of his body from the back. He smells a little sweaty from the run, but clean and quick, and still a little like shampoo. He nuzzles the back of Hinata’s neck and Hinata shivers.

“You smell like smoke,” Hinata says flatly. “Take your clothes off.”

~~

Hajime would like to tell himself that he didn’t mean those words to come out that way. That this, like the thing about the origami, like the thing about leaving the island, was just a big mistake. It’s just that when Nagito slides back into bed, warm, soft, completely naked, and starts kissing the back of his neck with those same slow, even, deliberate kisses, he doesn’t want him to stop.

Komaeda’s hair still smells like smoke.

Hajime rolls over to face him anyway.

“You’re so fucking crazy.” Hajime murmurs, pulling him close. He holds Komaeda properly, holds him close to his chest like Komaeda might dissolve if he doesn’t. He might slip right through Hajime’s fingers and into the mattress and into the dirt. He might slip off in the night and set something else on fire. He might hurl himself off a cliff. Hajime kisses Komaeda’s cheek. His ear. The side of his nose. The corner of his mouth. “I can’t leave you alone. What the hell would you do?” He doesn’t let Komaeda answer, pressing his mouth against Komaeda’s and leaving it there, just breathing the same air. Occupying the same space. Komaeda kisses him back, gently. The wet slide of lips. Languid. Sleepy. Loving.

“You brought me back,” Komaeda reminds him, slipping his arms around Hajime too, dragging fingers down his broad back gently, making Hajime squirm. “Take responsibility.”

Hajime does.

[thesilverheroineproject]

By Haley Thurston

What are women afraid of? Why do women matter? How are women useful? Do these questions have gender-specific answers?

In The Power of Myth, Joseph Campbell says that a hero is “someone who has found or achieved or done something beyond the normal range of achievement and experience. A hero properly is someone who has given his life to something bigger than himself or other than himself.” He goes on to distinguish between physical heroes, those who do deeds, and spiritual heroes, those who “[have] learned or found a mode of experiencing the supernormal range of human spiritual life, and then come back and communicated it.”

This is a grand and beautiful model. And especially when we just leave it at “someone who has achieved something beyond the normal range of achievement and experience,” it works very well for a hero of any gender. But when Campbell gets into the specifics of what counts or is celebrated as an unusual achievement, or how that achievement goes about getting done, I start thinking “well those are pretty unambiguously good achievements, but they’re also pretty male.”

That’s because there’s another element to heroism, which is where it interacts with social values, and gives us a mythology about what we should care about achieving. If we tell stories that laud a person for being unusually sacrificial, then we’re communicating that selflessness is a value of our community. Even when a story isn’t explicitly or intentionally communicating information about what is socially and morally good, we can retro-engineer a lot from the text to determine what its underlying values are.

While stories in general can be about any number of things beyond telling the reader what kind of person they should be (thank goodness), it’s important to remember that the genre of hero stories really is fundamentally about what makes a remarkable and laudable human. Even when a character is simply coded as a protagonist, hero stories have primed us to expect, justified or not, to learn something about what it means to be a good human from that character. So while I don’t want to go down some alarmist road that ends with “exposing children to Harry Potter means they will become Satanists,” and as obvious to the point of pedantic this might sound, the whole point of heroes is that we admire and emulate them, and it’s worth talking about what the consequences of being told we should emulate some trait actually are.

So to bring this back to the Heroine’s Journey, if we look at something like the Odyssey, we have two different kinds of heroes: Odysseus and Penelope. Odysseus is a pretty Campbellian hero. He leaves home, he does deeds, and returns home, having earned some kind of mantle of authority. Penelope, on the other hand, is left at home with the challenge of figuring out what to do with herself. She waits for Odysseus and she fends off a series of suitors. In the story itself she isn’t as perfectly virtuous as she’s made out to be by various pro-chastity ideologues. But she does, nonetheless, “achieve something beyond the normal range of achievement and experience” if you care about achieving fidelity. But this is a very different kind of heroism.

The Heroine’s Journey is about learning to suffer, endure, and be subjected to indignity while maintaining grace, composure, and patience. While most heroic stories involve some element of perseverance and strength of will, what makes Heroine’s Journey stories different is that a heroine’s perseverance is tested not to see whether she can persevere to achieve a separate goal, but rather simply to see if she can persevere, period. When you lay it out like that, it’s pretty hard to see the Heroine’s Journey as fundamentally heroic, to which I say: well yeah.

I suppose I’m interested in the Heroine’s Journey because I’m interested in the cognitive dissonances women experience; what creates them, what the consequences of them are, and what to do about them. In Heroine’s Journey stories, for example, women are told that their entire social role and contribution to society is contingent on them being really really good at being graceful martyrs. Yet at the same time, women are told that being a martyr is a weak thing to be; ie, the opposite of heroism. And even without being told that, most women can figure out in their heads that the Heroine’s Journey 1) doesn’t feel good and 2) is flawed heroism.

So the story of the Heroine’s Journey, the meta-Heroine’s Journey, if you will, is the story of being told a dissonant truth, and then attempting to disentangle it. In order to chart that story, we need to look at both the original, traditional Heroine’s Journey and then the modern Heroine’s Journey, troubled in its own way, that developed as a result of grappling with the traditional one.

The traditional Heroine’s Journey goes something like this:

The heroine is yet undeveloped. She may be wild and undignified, she may be mild and unremarkable, or she may be seemingly already virtuous.

Her worth is threatened. That is, her ability to persevere is threatened. The threat may be an assault on her virtue, an undignified circumstance, or random misfortune.

She endures, gracefully. She suffers, but her dignity isn’t undermined. If anything, her dignity is antifragile, she becomes more dignified the more she suffers.  Her perseverance then makes her previously undefined nature snap into place. Her dignity gives her strength.

Thankfully, it’s not 1850 anymore. The modern Heroine’s Journey is more like:

The heroine is yet undeveloped. She is often highly confused about where virtue is located.

Her dignity, composure and grace, ie, her worth in the “traditional” sense are threatened. Additionally, and perversely, her ability to defend traditional worth is tested.

She proves her value by either transcending or invalidating the test (“fuck it, this is a bad metric”) — or by transcending/invalidating the test, but stillpassing it (“having it all”). The modern Heroine’s Journey is about defining one’s worth anew.

A traditional Heroine’s Journey looks like the women from Les Miserables: the rejected Eponine, the destitute Fantine. Cosette never seems like much of a hero, but she certainly starts out from rags. The Victorian era was probably the height of the Heroine’s Journey, and you can see it in things like Dracula. As many horror stories would go on to mimic, two women, Mina and Lucy, are tested with seduction, but only the former resists and therefore gets to survive for her trouble. Jane Austen’s women teeter on the edge between the traditional and modern journey, each tasked with seeing through the cads and settling on the moral, pragmatic partner. Once you know this narrative, you see it in all kinds of romance stories: the triumphant woman is the one who rises above (or outsmarts) the men who would degrade her.

The modern heroine looks like Kristen Wiig in Bridesmaids, a movie that pulls indignity rugs out from under its protagonist for two hours. She lost her business! Her ego is dependent on a guy who makes her hate herself! Her friend has a new best friend, one who’s richer, prettier and thinner! The movie is not so much critical as lovingly satirical towards female preoccupation with indignity, coming to the conclusion “indignity is bad, but not so bad in the end.” The modern heroine also looks like Sylvia Plath, who has both become a symbol of female suffering (trite, traditional), and of an interpreter of suffering that is female in a human sense. She is a symbol, in other words, of not wearing suffering easily, or of having suffering that is serious and legitimate. The modern Heroine’s Journey has no better description than Leslie Jamison’s “Grand Unified Theory of Female Pain,” which describes contemporary women as “post-wounded.” The post-wounded woman is one who is never suffering in the present, but is instead always contextualizing and nervously proving ownership over that suffering. Jamison’s piece is one of the best (and perhaps only) articulations of the Heroine’s Journey, and I will continue to refer to it.

How did we get from the traditional to the modern? And where do we go afterwards?

You could argue, perhaps, that maybe there was a time in which Heroine’s Journey values were once constructive. Say, stability and self-sacrifice are good for childrearing; female work frees up men to be creative/accomplished; it’s to an oppressive group’s advantage to feed the oppressed group a heroic narrative about grunt work, shame, and putting up with crap.

But regardless of why, precisely, Heroine’s Journey values became socially useful, it’s clear that they became less useful over time. Increasing wealth, public health, safety and opportunity meant that whatever division-of-labor benefits enforced gender roles might have had, both women and men could suddenly not participate in various “duties” and they and human civilization would still survive. Such upheaval necessitates a series of grappling questions.

1. “Does this quality I’m told is good actually contribute to human flourishing?”

Stage one is destructive. It tends to involve a certain amount of hatred, either directed inward, or directed by one against another. Stage one amounts to smashing a social value, and smashing is usually crude. Smashing is like a person pacing back and forth and muttering “This thing is WRONG. I don’t know quite what it IS or what it MEANS but I know that it is WRONG.”

In practice, stage one is mostly torture porn. I’m thinking about Andy Kaufmann’s tape Andy and His Grandmother, which (as described in a Grantland article) made an art form of ribbing women. His questions sound almost earnestly direct, but because women are unaccustomed to responding to such directness, and he knows it (or else he wouldn’t make comedy of it) there is something disingenuously torturous about them as well.

Though I’ll say more in a second about why horror is actually one of the best genres for women, the reason that people can look askance at that idea, is because a lot of the time, for a long time, anti-female-composure stories have been for the amusement of people (largely men) who want to punish women. Take a hot girl, who thinks she’s hot shit, and put her through hell–that will teach you to be hot!!! Horror is catharsis, and it makes some sense to me that it would be a realm of catharsis, however essentially misogynistic, for sexual rejection and desire. When I described this piece to a friend, he replied: “So isn’t like 90% of porn the Heroine’s Journey then?” Well…perhaps so. If the graceful negotiation of composure and things that threaten composure is the essence of female value, and fetishes originate in the secret and taboo, then well, of course the destruction of female composure would become deeply, repeatedly fetishized.

The potentially brutal treatment of women in stories is also complicated by the idea that the way men become symbols for corrupt authority, women become symbols for corrupt social values and contracts. When you smash one of them in a story, often enough that’s what you’re symbolically smashing. But I think it would be disingenuous to say that all virulence directed at female characters is simply thematically motivated.

So that’s two kinds of composure-destruction by men. But you’ll notice that early female comedians got their start by challenging femininity too, people like Lucille Ball (who juxtaposed the ideals of homemaking with relentless physical and situational indignity) and Joan Rivers, people that were willing to look ridiculous and self-deprecating (“A man can sleep around, no questions asked, but if a woman makes nineteen or twenty mistakes she’s a tramp.”).  That’s because comedy comes from the same place as horror, that place of essential fears and need for catharsis. Was there any other place for female comedy to go? Lucille Ball took a lovingly destructive angle, one that’s maybe more stage three (below) than one. As for Joan Rivers, I don’t know if she ever liked being a woman much, but she was good at hating herself for it. And laughing, more importantly, at the ridiculousness of that hatred. This strain in female comedy has stuck around: think of Liz Lemon under a blanket eating cheese or Amy Schumer’s “I’m a sad slut” schtick.

2. “If it doesn’t, or if I could better contribute in another way, then do I care about having status in a hierarchy that says it does?” (“Do I really care about human flourishing?”)

Female comedy verges into stage two. Stage two is conflict. Stage two stories aren’t made by people that want to punish women/society, they’re composure stories made (usually) by women and for women in order to grapple, rather, with the fear of punishment. Imagine our muttering person suddenly standing up and shouting “I DON’T care about the hierarchy. I’ll do what I LIKE.” Defiance. And then imagine them becoming fearful. “Doing what I like has the best chance of making everyone happy right? So why do I feel miserable? Wasn’t misery the trope I was trying to destroy?”

Bridesmaids (which had the honor of newly convincing us that women can be funny), again, is this. Girls traffics in it as well, as Leslie Jamison describes:

“These days we have a TV show called Girls, about young women who hurt but constantly disclaim their hurting. They fight about rent and boys and betrayal, stolen yogurt and the ways self-​pity structures their lives. ‘You’re a big, ugly wound!’ one yells. The other yells back: ‘No, you’re the wound!’ And so they volley, back and forth: You’re the wound; no, you’re the wound. They know women like to claim monopolies on woundedness, and they call each other out on it.”

Girls, both the characters and the writing itself, are stabbing at being crass, at being superficially elegant, and at being “transcendent,” and seeing what will stick. Girls gets at that intersection of feeling a duty to exorcise fears of being gross, but still wanting to be liked and wanted, and also thinking both of those are such small and unimportant goals in the end.

Caroline Knapp’s famous anorexia memoir Appetites uses the framework of disordered eating to discuss the female relationship to pleasure, denial, and suffering in general. Knapp sums up the twisted heroism of self-denial early on: “Other women might struggle with hunger; I could transcend it”; as in, become more than human in the classic Campbell-ian sense. Because glorifying suffering is seen as poisonous, having control over that suffering feels good, even though it also creates further suffering. Appetites represents how women struggle just before they realize they must “man up.” Writes Jamison: “We want our wounds to speak for themselves, Knapp seems to be saying, but usually we end up having to speak for them.”

People like Beyonce because she is a fantasy of stage two being resolved. Her persona is a fantasy of being sexual/human/regal and yet she feels beyond “having it all” even though she does, in fact, have it all. That’s because Beyonce is charismatic and that is how charismatic people make you feel (liked and okay!), but it is significant that the thing she makes you feel okay about is this modern quandary. You feel permission to partake in the resolution her persona offers. You don’t feel competitive with Beyonce.

Stage two is also where intersectionality becomes thematically salient. The dilemmas of the Heroine’s Journey universalize fairly well, but people (including women) participate in more than one social hierarchy at any given time. It might be hard to justify suffering for the sake of itself, but suffering for the sake of justiceis pretty much the easiest thing to justify there is. The details of one woman’s dilemma will not be the same as another’s; her suffering has different origins and flavors.

3. “If I do care about human flourishing, and I’m going the wrong way about it, then what do I do about that?”

So what do post-Heroine’s Journey stories look like? Stage three is constructive. As Jamison asks “How do we talk about these wounds without glamorizing them? Without corroborating an old mythos that turns female trauma into celestial constellations worthy of worship?” There have been many many stories about women throughout the history of stories that have been much more complex than the Heroine’s Journey, stories where female agency and/or grossness aren’t questioned (I think about classic female “trickster” stories like Scheherazade)…yet as Jamison’s piece and Appetites and all the works I’ve referenced so far demonstrate, somehow the Heroine’s Journey’s values still seem to underlie the choices of women constantly. What this means is that if a story with and about women and heroism doesn’t somehow admit the fear of loss of composure or come to grips with it or feel some way about it, I sometimes wonder if it’s about women at all. Moreover, that task in the third stage of the modern Heroine’s Journey, the task of defining worth, is huge and fascinating. And it is under-utilized.

In a great interview on Playing D&D with Porn Stars, Sarah Horrocks explains why, perhaps unexpectedly, the horror genre is actually one of the greatest genres for female heroism.

“S: Getting pushed to your limits, to the point of hysteria, but still surviving—that you’ve taken this huge weight of the world on you, and like Marilyn Burns in Texas Chainsaw Massacre, you’re covered in blood and screaming and laughing—but you’ve somehow come out on top.  I don’t think other genres allow women to be strong, tough, and vulnerable in this way. And I mean there’s just way more movies in the horror genre where the perspective is that of a woman’s.  The slasher flick is not through the killer’s point of view after all, it’s through the woman’s.”

In other words, there’s no room for composure in horror movies. Which means that in them, a female character has the opportunity to be immediately exempt from having to prove that she is some conventional version of dignified in order to be heroic, and is instead forced to admit what she’s made of when that’s stripped away and no one’s looking.

One of the reasons I adore Lyra’s heroic journey in His Dark Materials, is that in spite of it being a very Campbell-style story (mysterious origins, a call to adventure, ad nauseum), Lyra’s girl-ness remains inherent throughout. One of the main arcs of the book begins with her being suspicious of femininity and only trusting male figureheads, and concludes with her accepting that she values wisdom, that the acquisition of wisdom is slow and difficult and that the unflashy female wisdom-seekers she once derided have things to teach her. We don’t want our heroes to be blandly competent, we want them to exist in the same world of difficulty that we exist in, so that they may give us a map for dealing with it. Lyra doesn’t do the Heroine’s Journey, exactly, but perhaps more importantly: she resolves it.

Understanding the Heroine’s Journey is not a replacement for or an improvement on the general writing prescription to “just write women like people.” It’s a hopefully helpful explanation, rather, of one (very important, complex) element of female people-hood. If you want to talk about how a person grapples with their society, look to the cognitive dissonance produced by what society tells them is heroic.

Thanks to Gabriel Duquette for his help in developing some of the ideas in this piece.

[theteaisaddictive]

Could you do the director's commentary for Belle and Eve's coming out to each other in Ever Just the Same, please?

thanks!! (this is so long oh my god)

ok, so the scene really begins at the start of the chapter, with belle realising that by spying into the garden, she’s (inadvertently, this time) crossed another of the beast’s boundaries. she’s buffeted by the winter wind, which carries over nicely to the ‘cut’ when we resume a direct narration of events, with belle in her bed and the gust of wind transformed into a full-on storm. belle wants to find an area of the castle where she can find comfort in the midst of the storm -- a safe space, if you will -- and chooses the library. this location is done for obvious reasons; it and the grounds are the two settings where belle and the beast have spent the most time together, and the grounds are out of bounds if it’s midnight during a snowstorm. so library it is -- a warm, inviting area where the two have developed their relationship to find common ground, but also an area of exploration and discovery of the wider world through the literature they read. 

(cont. under the cut)

the beast’s narration opens with further exploration of her physical dissonance; she hates being cursed, but she has a physical need to fly and stretch her wings. two conflicting ideals at the same time, which metaphorically link to her internalised homophobia; she’s intrigued by belle, and getting close to maybe falling in love with her, but at the same time she wants to be ‘normal’. there’s some more world building about how things work when she isn’t injured (the staff keep the curtains drawn at all times for ease of access, and it hasn’t been long enough for them to get out that habit yet/eve is very familiar with the patterns of movement in the castle, and the servants are familiar with hers as well). 

and then, the first big plot twist of the story -- cogsworth and lumiere are, like, gay. 

the beast at this moment hasn’t even started her journey to self acceptance. but she’s so wound up in her identity as the protector of the staff that she’s already side-stepped the ‘this is wrong and my staff should be punished’ response and has leapt straight to ‘oh god oh god what if i’m about to see two men i’ve known since childhood threatened and assaulted, or worse, in front of my very eyes and there’s nothing i can do to stop it?!?’ of course this doesn't happen, as cogs and lumi are in a very happy throuple, and this gives the beast a real paradigm shift in the way she views the world. when writing, i wanted it to be clear what kind of homophobia the beast had grown up with (and what she might semi-realistically have been exposed to), but i also didn't want to make it torture-porn (or anachronistic in wording), if that makes sense -- so she refers to herself as vulgarity, as a perversion, whereas if this was set in today's times she might be repeating conservative talking points and various slurs she may have learned. 

we also learn that the beast, being in the body of a bird, can't gain the emotional catharsis of crying. this isn’t especially relevant at this moment, but it gets revisited at several other times of high emotional stress in later chapters, and there will be a payoff once she finally turns human again.

so, with all this going around in her mind, the beast enters the library and finds who else but belle, in a state of undress she has never seen a woman in. there are two lines from this passage which i feel really show the beast’s dilemma here -- how in the (unspecified) number of years since she realised she was attracted to women, she had become ‘as chaste as a nun’ (be thou as chaste as ice, as pure as snow, thou shalt not escape calumny. get thee to a nunnery, go.) -- and then when belle is sitting on the couch, about to get off, and her nightdress rucks up slightly -- ‘uncovering her legs up to her knees, and [she] hated herself for noticing their elegant shape’. 

there’s a reiteration that belle should feel at home with the beast, and then shit gets real as they discuss the woman in white. now as far as i know there isn’t any queer theory about the woman in white, but it was written by wilkie collins specifically as a response to the piss-poor lot married women got in england, so not exactly irrelevant to these women. it naturally leads to discussion of marriage, belle sharing about gaston and then the beast, for the first time, sharing what happened with the enchanter. 

the hand-touching is at that moment the best way belle can try and provide comfort to the beast. greensearcher’s ‘Mirrors’ articulates this straight-up in the text beautifully, but the beast is alone in a sea of people who can’t touch her. we also get the first of my favourite images -- belle as a cat, chasing after the beast, a bird. 

and only then, after having a paradigm shift in her worldview and being assured through their discussion of marriage that belle understands at leats part of where she’s coming from, does the beast admit that she is ‘a perversion’. (contrast, if you like, with the affirmation and euphoria in chapter 16 when she re-identifies as ‘lesbian’ instead of monster)

we don’t see belle’s pov in this scene, but she chooses to come out in part because of the beast’s bravery, partly because this is the first other queer person she’s met, and partly because for the first time the beast is lowering her barriers and letting her in. (lowering barriers and letting people in is a recurring theme, in case you hadn’t guessed by now)

the final line in the chapter is also interesting: ‘outside their small oasis of golden light, the snowstorm raged on’. gold as a colour is associated with the beast and belle in the original film, and that’s continued in my fic. with the semi-cinematic ‘zoom out’, we also get the image of these two women huddled together in the warmth, while the cold world rages around them, and if that’s not a metaphor for safe spaces i don’t know what is.

[rahirah]

The whole "And If the Grave Be Now Thy Bed" counts as a chapter or scene, right? "Splendid news, Mrs. Mears. Bloody Vengeance Inc. is going to take your case." Commentary, please :)))

For reference: https://archiveofourown.org/works/478957

Ok, this one is too long to do a blow-by-blow in a Tumblr post, so I'm gonna talk about it more generally.

For those of you who haven't read the series this story is a part of, it's a long-running AU which branches off of canon after "The Gift."  I started writing the first story in it immediately after "The Gift" aired, so Spuffy wasn't even a canon thing yet.  At the time, I was pretty certain that Spuffy would never be a canon thing; at most, I thought, there would be a lot of pining and UST, and maybe, in the very last season, Spike would get the crumb he was hoping for.

But I didn't care about that; something doesn't have to be canon for me to ship the hell out of it.  And I was fascinated by the concept of an evil demon trying to be good.  What would it look like, I wondered, if Spike and Buffy did get together in a working, functional relationship?  What changes and compromises would both of them have to make?  How would it meet both their needs?  What would the pain points be?  Of course, the easiest way to do it would be to slap a soul into Spike, but I felt that the show had already thoroughly explored that avenue with Angel, and I wanted to do something different.  Plus I have never been one to do things the easy way, and one of the recurring themes in my writing in general is free will and choices.  So I set myself the challenge of writing a story about how Buffy and Spike forge a relationship that works for both of them, and doesn't cheat on characterization – that is, Spike, having no human soul, is still "evil" in Buffyverse terms, and his motivations and behavior reflect that; even when he is doing good things, he is not doing them in the same way, or for the same reasons, as a human would. *

ANYWAY.  In this AU, Warren Mears and Co. still killed Katrina, but Warren went to jail for it.  However, when his inventions came to the attention of Wolfram & Hart, they got him released on a technicality, and brought him into their R&D department.  Warren took the opportunity to get his revenge on Buffy and Spike by zapping Buffy into a W&H pocket dimension, where W&H was collecting Buffys from many dimensions for nefarious purposes.  Unbeknownst to Warren, Buffy has just discovered that she's pregnant.  

This scenario generated four stories: "The Lesser of Two Evils," which details what happens when Willow and Spike confront Warren and try to force him to bring Buffy back; "In A Yellow Wood," which is about Buffy's adventures in the pocket dimension, "If the Grave Be Now Thy Bed," which deals with the fallout of the first two stories, and "To Grandmother's House," which wraps up the arc with Buffy's final decision about the fate of her baby.

I wrote these stories all out of order: "To Grandmother's House" first, "The Lesser of Two Evils" second, "In A Yellow Wood" third, and "If the Grave Be Now Thy Bed" last.  I knew the general course of the arc all along, but writing it inside out and backwards, over ten years or more, posed some interesting challenges.  "If the Grave Be Now Thy Bed" was not part of the original arc plan – in fact, it grew out of feedback I got for "The Lesser of Two Evils."

TLOTE/IAYW are deliberately morally ambiguous stories.  Spike, Willow, and Buffy all do questionable things – perhaps flat out wrong things – under severe emotional stress, and the consequences of those actions echo for a long time through the years to come.  While I hope that readers find their motives understandable, and even sympathetic, I didn't necessarily expect that every reader would agree with or approve of their actions.  Most people who've sent me feedback seem to enjoy the ambiguity, or at least find it intriguing.  Not all of them, however.  

One particular reader had...issues.  Over the course of several conversations, I found out that while they were a Spuffy shipper, they had very particular requirements for the kind of Spuffy stories they liked.  They had to be either A) totally canon-compliant, angst-ridden stories where Buffy hated herself for giving in to Spike's sinister attraction, or B) stories where Spike was a Romance Novel Bad Boy With a Heart of Gold, and there was a tacit agreement between writer and reader that hey, we both know this is totally OOC for both characters, but we're just here for the porn, amirite nudge-nudge wink-wink.

Reader In Question had started in on my work with the assumption that it fell into the latter category, but the more they read, the less comfortable they got, because, as I mentioned above, I was in this for serious.  I sweat blood over characterization.  And I was starting to convince them that maybe a relationship between Buffy and soulless Spike COULD work.  And they didn't WANT to believe that.  So they absolutely had to interpret my work as a dystopian take on Buffy's slide into total moral decay, with this particular arc as the nadir of her fall.**  They left me some despondent feedback on TLOTE, wondering what Warren's dear mother would think of this turn of events.  I'm not sure if they intended to shame me (or Buffy) for our evil ways, but I thought it was an interesting point.  And it planted the seed of an idea.

Over the next several years, as I worked on IAYW (and let me say right here, the less-than-enthusiastic feedback Reader In Question sent me on TLOTE made me work my ass off on IAYW.  Though I obviously don't agree with their overall interpretation, I thought they had some good points, and I wanted to be sure that IAYW addressed those points) I mulled over the thought: What WOULD happen if Warren's dear old mother confronted Buffy and Spike?  

A lot would depend upon what Warren's dear old mother was like.  There were two obvious ways I could go with that: she could be an innocent victim, or she could be as much of a monster as Warren was.  But I didn't want to do anything obvious with this story.   Fic-wise, I always like to take the road less traveled if I can, but in this case, I have to admit that I got a perverse pleasure out of taking Reader In Question's finger-wagging admonition and using it as inspiration for a story that's, well, not exactly what I imagine they were hoping to inspire.  I decided that I was going to make Mrs. Mears a little of both.

The next question was, what did I want to have happen when she shows up?Again, the obvious thing would be to have Buffy feel guilty.  But I had already dealt extensively with Buffy's feelings, and her reasons for making the decisions she made, in IAYW and TGH.  Yes, she feels guilty; she's not sure she did the right thing.  She's not even sure there was a right thing to do.  But that particular subplot plays out over the long term in this AU, culminating many years later in a completely different story arc, and I couldn't bring it to a premature resolution here.  Besides, I knew that Barbverse Buffy would never return to the uncompromising system of morality that Reader In Question wanted her to,*** so there was no point in writing a story where she Learns Her Lesson, Dusts Spike, and Is Very Sorry. ****

So I decided that this story would focus on Spike, and his reaction to Warren's mother and her loss of a son.  And that opened up a lot of possibilities.  I was to some extent constrained by the fact that I'd already written quite a lot of stories taking place after this one in the timeline, so there were certain things I couldn't do.  But I've always found that if you ask yourself, "What would X logically do in this situation?" and follow that through, you can avoid Idiot Plot Syndrome.   Let your characters be smart.   What would Spike do, confronted with the mother of the man he'd killed?  What would Mrs. Mears demand of him in recompense?  

What I wanted to do in this story was to answer those questions in a way that people wouldn't expect.  I was able to bring Spike's ambivalent feelings about his own mother into play, and provide a way for him to get some character development around coming to terms with her death and his part in it that I might not otherwise have been able to do.  And I was able to draw parallels between Warren and his mother, and Spike and Anne Pratt, and come up with some really intriguing takes on how and why Spike can do the right(ish) thing even when his reasons are kinda-sorta wrong(ish).  It gives some background, hopefully, on  how Buffy can make the ultimate decision she does in "To Grandmother's House," and not feel that she's tobogganing head-first down the slippery slope of Utter Moral Decay.  And I got to write Zombie Warren, who was gruesomely, deliciously horrible.  And I got to give Mrs. Mears the last word.

By the time I finished the story, Reader In Question had long since left fandom, and they probably wouldn't have read it even if they were still around.  But I feel I have to thank them for it anyway.  And that's why I always say that even though I don't necessarily like getting critical feedback, it can be the most useful feedback you can get if you look at it in the right way.

__________

* I could write a whole nother essay about the challenges of writing an evil-trying-to-be-good vampire, but that is beyond the scope of the current post.

** Eventually, they practically begged me to tell them that I was deliberately writing Buffy and Spike out of character, and that I didn't really think a relationship between them could work.  Alas, I could not oblige them, and they stopped reading my stuff.

*** I don't even believe canon Buffy stuck to that kind of rigid moral code – she tried to, but one of the things that makes her a complex, fully realized character is that canon Buffy is perfectly capable of double standards and hypocrisy where her friends are concerned, not to mention just plain changing her mind about things over the course of the show.  For every decision I have Barbverse Buffy [or Spike, for that matter] make, I can point to something in canon and say "This is why I think she could do that."

****Although... I do have an alternate ending to "To Grandmother's House" plotted out in my head, where Buffy [either accidentally or on purpose – just as in the main story, it's ambiguous] doesn't stop Giles in time.  I consider the Barbverse to be a low-probability AU, and I watch out for times and ways in which things could go spectacularly wrong, just so I can be sure to avoid them in a believable manner.  Or write stories about them going wrong, and the characters dealing with them.

*****

[gurguliare]

hey i’m putting this whole dumb mariner’s wife maunder under the cut because tumblr’s glitchy apostrophes really bother me, thanks

One thing I love about "The Mariner's Wife" is that it's as close as Tolkien gets to like, utopian drama, in that no one in the story is making decisions based off immediate need---poverty, war, et al obviously still exist, but they aren't the kind of threats they are in any other part of the legendarium. Even Valinor! once Morgoth is released. to quote Andie’s meta that I personally slid her $20 under the table for, "very few choices made in Numenor would lead to evil. Probably the worst thing that would happen due to bad human choices in Numenor were mass accidents." All external pressure, positive and negative, (let's say Middle earth’s tempting resources vs Sauron) is at a huge remove, enough so that the characters have almost perfect freedom in how they want to deal with it---except that that their actual reach is limited, and the combination is paralyzing, of course.

I really enjoy the fatalism of Tolkien’s base worldview as applied to the problem of maintaining rather than restoring peace: it’s one of his bleaker stories exactly because it’s ~pre-Fall, post-another-Fall, and tearing itself to pieces while worrying about, essentially, the wrong problem---“what weapons do we need to face the crisis that’s surely coming” rather than “what tools can we give our heirs?” Say that the usual conflict in utopian narrative is “how does the utopia survive,” with the added caveat that the utopia needs to preserve its identity plastically, and not become super-resistant to change---or, put another way, the utopia has to avoid being compromised by “realism” without sealing itself off from reality. Which can be the outside world, but which can also be the strains of rupture and change already present within the utopia, part of its heritage, and naturally produced within it as a society of actual people.

And it seems revealing to me that this bubble is the precondition for Tolkien writing, also, a domestic drama, knowing as we do his mixed opinion of character-driven literature (“stage-plays”). Obviously Aldarion and Erendis are each deeply concerned with How To Save Numenor: and although they're sort of obvious mouthpieces for transformation and conservation respectively, it’s not black-and-white---Aldarion recognizes the need to offer aid and tend old alliances in Middle-earth, but Erendis is the one aware of fissures within Numenor and the ripeness for conflict between unequal groups: men and women, shorter- and longer-lived Numenoreans, and, yes, elves and humans. These are problems that demand serious intervention, even with a status quo in all other ways worthy. So like... there’s enormous scope in which to work, despite the appearance of equilibrium there’s tons to do to keep alive the body paradisiac, and yet it’s exactly this relative innocence and freedom that makes it easy for the characters to suspect one another of perversity, and insincerity, in their respective choice of causes. Everything is equally urgent, and everything is also equally, secretly unreal. Erendis hates the sea and loves trees to spite me, thinks Aldarion; Erendis assumes that Aldarion’s voyaging is born of discontent with Numenor (but really boredom with her). Because Numenor is, in the moment, perfect---because the stakes are semi-abstract and it’s incredibly easy to dissociate intellectual possibilities from present risk if you don’t already feel the threat on an emotional level---it’s the most natural thing in the world to accuse the person with different priorities of playing games with facts, out of pure self-interest.

Hence Erendis’s speech about men; hence also why Ancalime thinks her parents fight for the “promise of sport,” not for considerations ideological or personal. In part because Aldarion and Erendis both consider themselves objective and think that objectivity alone will serve to carry the day eventually, they’re totally unable to communicate their respective visions to their heir, and they only ever get a partial glimpse at one another’s. Which sucks! Like, part of the tragedy of the Tree Subtweets is that Erendis herself represents something as irreplaceable as the trees: a loving devotion to the land and its people that needs no rational basis, precious exactly because rationality is in some sense inadequate to the momentous task at hand. Aldarion is a good steward of resources because he’s personally farsighted and has a basic grasp of logic---but he can’t make his descendants into equally sensible stewards, or rather, he can’t do so simply by being perceptive and expecting the same from others. Insert joke about cult of priests devoted to scaring people away from nuclear waste zones in the far future... but that’s the thing, right: some information is safer culturally embedded than it is passed down literally. Aldarion is born in the wrong time for even his longest-term preparations to be relevant, meaning that if he wanted any control whatsoever over the future, he needed to be forming close, trusting relationships within his own family, for even a hope in hell of continuity.

Which... it’s interesting, right? Tar-Meneldur does it; he abdicates because he lacks Aldarion’s perspective on the situation in Modern Middle-earth and because he (Meneldur) recognizes that action or inaction on his part are both choices he simply doesn’t have the moral license to make. But the thing is, that generosity doesn’t teach Aldarion, in turn, to be generous. I think we’re supposed to understand the abdication comes too late. The feeling I get from both Erendis and Aldarion is that part of the reason they’re so convinced of their own superb rationality is because, for their whole lives, their parents have been telling them how proud and willful they are, without regard for actual progress these stiffnecked children have made toward thinking adulthood. (Note: we see less of Erendis’s side but what we do get is the wayyyyyyy more concentrated version of this, unsurprisingly. One other big problem here is that Aldarion identifies Erendis as an equal opponent with all the same weapons he has, and she isn’t. But this post is already so long) ...The fact that Erendis and Aldarion are proud doesn’t make them deluded, and they know that; they have evidence no one else has, they see things no one else sees. They’re so smart! But then they take pride in pride, moreso as they’re scolded for it; they both develop this protectiveness toward the “right” to pride itself, because despite all the warnings, despite the condescension and doubt from outsiders, this burning self-reliance led them to the most important things in their respective lives (until, coincidentally, it became the most important thing in their respective lives). Ouch.

And pride without purpose (except self-protection) is the one thing that descends to Ancalime, and that sense of alienation persists in the Line of Elros without any final antidote. The one institutional takeaway is the wrong one: “don’t marry outside the Line” wedges open the split between Numenor’s “levels” of reality, again, if we say there’s a utopia-within-the-utopia---the changing present inhabited by its people and the dream of eternity, political and later personal, that haunts the kings.

...I would speculate here about the parallel to the Valar’s handsoff approach to “advising” Numenor but that would get boring fast! And isn’t really fair, or indeed, interesting---the thing that gets me is this entirely human plane of action, even the wasted potential of which is going to change the world. The point is, Tolkien does a really good job setting up personality cascades, and it’s funny. I could ... man I want to talk a bit more about the parenting thing because it’s obviously also connected to, uh, Meneldur and Almarien and Nuneth’s relationships to Numenor! and Numenor’s hypothetical future. But this post is so long and meandering and unedited already and I’m sick of it. GOD. SORRY. GOODNIGHT.

[theculturedmarxist]

The same old stupid game

I’ve recently had the misfortune to come across a few articles, one by Inez Feltscher Stepman of The Federalist and David Satter, “senior fellow” at the so-called Hudson Institute. Naturally, as reactionary commentators for reactionary propaganda outlets, their tripe is full of lies, half-truths, and glaring omissions meant to serve their biases. It’s the normal bourgeois playbook for libeling Communism.

I’m not a tremendous fan of the Soviet Union, or the manner of “actually existing Socialism” that developed there, but I feel compelled to refute this nonsense not only because it’s dishonest, or that it’s a perversion of the actual history, but at least because the Soviet Union is the dead horse reactionaries love to beat when Socialism as a subject is discussed.

I came across Stepman’s tripe after seeing someone post the following cap from her twitter:

galaxymind.jpg

I try not to go by screen caps alone. A favorite of /pol/’s tactics is taking things out of context to craft their own narrative around events, which often have little or any basis in reality. Given the... content of this tweet, the meaning seems pretty obvious, but I try to err on the side of caution, so I ran her name through my sophisticated crime computer and was immediately directed to her posts at The Federalist. The results weren’t particularly impressive, but something did jump out to me: “The Biggest Legacy Of International Women’s Day Is Communism.”

I had a feeling it was going to be painful given the title, and I wasn’t wrong.

As a Communist, I have a soft spot for International Working Women’s day, as the event was originally known. Women have played a special role in the history of labor organization and revolutionary activity, and today Capitalism derives much of its profit from the relentless, merciless exploitation of the female gender in its various forms.

How progressive.

Even in the so-called First World, I’ve seen my female friends and co-workers mistreated and immiserated by the Capitalist system in ways unique to their kind. I celebrate IWWD because in its ideal form, it is an opportunity not only for women to build solidarity between one another (which is often sorely lacking) but for men to show their support, and build solidarity with the other gender (and vice versa on International Working Men’s Day). It’s an opportunity to remember the work of women past, the progress we’ve been able to achieve together, and lay the ground work for a better future for us all. The purpose of the day is to pay special attention to the circumstances of our working sisters, but at its heart it’s a day to reaffirm our dedication to the cause of true egalitarianism, and not the false mirage offered by bourgeois “feminists” that demand more female CEOs while ignoring the Mexican nannies they underpay to raise their children for them, or pushing expensive shirts for “charity,” assembled in stifling and dangerous sweat shops by the thousands of women they actually should be fighting for.

Naturally, Stepman starts off strong.

Leon Trotsky, of icepick fame, wrote afterwards: “We did not imagine that this ‘Women’s Day’ would inaugurate the revolution. Revolutionary actions were foreseen but without date. But in morning, despite the orders to the contrary, textile workers left their work in several factories and sent delegates to ask for support of the strike … which led to mass strike … all went out into the streets.”

What a splendid introduction. I wonder if she characterizes so “Abraham Lincoln, of getting-shot-in-the-back-of-the-head fame.” She links to a Fortune article, which in turn links to an apparently defunct World March for Women site. Usually, not linking directly to the source material (when possible) is a strong indicator of chicanery, to say the least. After a bit of searching, I was able to track it down to Trotsky’s History of the Russian Revolution, where the actual quote goes like so:

THE  23rd  of  February  was  International  Woman’s  Day.  The  social-democratic circles had intended to mark this day in a general manner: by meetings, speeches, leaflets. It had not occurred to anyone that it might become the first day of the revolution. Not a single organisation called  for  strikes  on  that  day.  What  is  more,  even  a  Bolshevik organisation,  and  a  most  militant  one  –  the  Vyborg  borough committee,  all  workers  –  was  opposing  strikes.  The  temper  of  the masses,  according  to  Kayurov,  one  of  the  leaders  in  the  workers’ district, was very tense; any strike would threaten to turn into an open fight.  But  since  the  committee  thought  the  time  unripe  for  militant action – the party not strong enough and the workers having too few contacts with the soldiers – they decided not to call for strikes but to prepare for revolutionary action at some indefinite time in the future. Such was the course followed by the committee on the eve of the 23rd of February,  and  everyone  seemed  to  accept  it.  On  the  following morning, however, in spite of all directives, the women textile workers in several factories went on strike, and sent delegates to the metalworkers with an appeal for support. “With reluctance,” writes Kayurov, “the Bolsheviks agreed to this, and they were followed by the workers–Mensheviks and Social Revolutionaries. But once there is a mass strike,  one  must  call  everybody  into  the  streets  and  take the  lead.” Such was Kayurov’s decision, and the Vyborg committee had to agree to it. “The idea of going into the streets had long been ripening among the  workers;  only  at  that  moment  nobody  imagined  where  it  would lead.” Let us keep in mind this testimony of a participant, important for understanding the mechanics of the events.

Certainly lends a different perspective to the “quote,” I think, but we can’t show that the Bolsheviks weren’t power-mad, bloodthirsty tyrants now, can we? Of course, progressing through the article we find the same ridiculous libels that we usually find.

That revolution, which caused Russia to exit WWI and brought Vladimir Lenin to power, started the chain of events that eventually lead to the slaughter of as many as 100 million people under the banner of Communism.

To say that the revolution “caused Russia to exit WWI” is a half-truth at best. Russia was suffering severely from the deprivations caused by the titanic struggle with Germany, for which Russia was horribly unprepared. All the nonsense that reactionaries like this try to pin on the Soviets--not enough rifles or ammunition for their troops, mass human wave tactics, shooting ‘cowards’ retreating without orders, etc--was committed by Tsarist Russia. By the end of the war, due to incompetence among the aristocracy and general staff, unpreparedness either militarily or economically, intervention by the Tsar himself in military affairs on the Eastern Front, and the terrific conditions the Russian soldiers and peasantry were exposed to, Russia would see more than four-million of its people dead. Russia was incapable of continued involvement in the war. The Bolsheviks end up signing away a vast expanse of Russia to buy peace, which is exactly what the people wanted, and what the parliamentary government refused to give them.

The “100 Million Dead” is the usual smear, but I’ll return to that shortly.

Obviously, few people celebrating International Women’s Day in 2018 intend to glorify Communism’s dark history. But the day still retains the essence of its Marxist roots by encouraging women to think of themselves as a homogenous [sic] class with discrete common interests, in opposition to men’s.

Here the brainlet further exposes herself for the pseudo-intellectual that she is. There’s a lot to be said about Marxism and its history with “Feminism.” This sort of characterization reveals how little of either Stepman understands of either.

In Marxist terms, men and women don’t constitute separate classes within society. In short, one’s social class is determined by one’s relationship to the means of production, i.e., do you have to work for a living, or do you live from others working necessary resources to which you control by monopoly? There are numerous divisions possible based on how you want to slice it, but generally you can say that there are the bourgeois, those that own the things people need to live, and the proletariat, those that earn a wage working for the bourgeois. From the Marxist perspective, men and women inhabit the same class based on their material relations, but nowhere are their assumed to be “homogenous,” or that they have universal or even necessarily opposed interests. As workers, they have a united interest in overthrowing the capitalist system of bourgeois ownership that keeps them in bondage, but to treat people as a homogeneous mass with all the same needs and goals runs directly counter to the materialist analysis on which Marx bases his thought.

It’s well understood by the actual Left that until we’re all free, men and women, etc, then none of us are free, and even a cursory glance at the history of people’s revolutions reveals that without the united effort of women and men, they’ll both languish in bondage. One half of the proletariat trying to get a leg up on the other isn’t just nonsensical, it’s counter revolutionary, detrimental to the well being of both.

The rest of her rubbish-bin of an article is just more smears and ignorance (to be charitable, rather than to assume she’s knowingly lying).

David Satter’s brain rot was ladled out during November of last year, the centennial of the Russian revolution, and he plays the same old tired tunes, inflating the supposed atrocities of “Communism.” That’s always the way, isn’t it? Anyone that dies in a “Communist” country is a victim of Communism, but the swollen mountain of stinking corpses that are still being piled up in the name of Capitalism, well, sorry! that just don’t count.

From the megamind himself:

Although the Bolsheviks called for the abolition of private property, their real goal was spiritual: to translate Marxist-Leninist ideology into reality. For the first time, a state was created that was based explicitly on atheism and claimed infallibility. This was totally incompatible with Western civilization, which presumes the existence of a higher power over and above society and the state. 

Another brainlet misrepresentation. Marxism is a materialist philosophy. It’s concerned with the objective and the real. There was nothing “spiritual” about the Bolshevik’s desire to abolish Tsarism, educate the peasants, feed them, house them, clothe them, and modernize the country. I fully doubt that Lenin et al made claims of “infallibility,” and as usual this dipshit completely ignores the reactionary, pro-Tsarist character of the Orthodox church and its role in supporting the aristocracy at the expense of the common people. To say that an “atheist state” is incompatible with Western civilization is utterly idiotic. What is he a “senior fellow” of, exactly? Poopy?

The Bolshevik coup had two consequences. In countries where communism came to hold sway, it hollowed out society’s moral core, degrading the individual and turning him into a cog in the machinery of the state. Communists committed murder on such a scale as to all but eliminate the value of life and to destroy the individual conscience in survivors. 

This is a bald faced lie. David Satter is either embarrassingly incompetent as a historian, or he’s an out-and-out liar. He blithely ignores that, previous to the Bolsheviks, the Tsar had no compunction about executing political dissidents, siccing his Cossacks on unarmed civilians, sending ordinary Russians to die by the thousands in wars his country could ill afford, much less equipped to fight, and a devoted proponent of autocracy.

There is no one or two ways about it: the Great War was a Capitalist war, fought for access to markets and resources. There was no noble aim, just destruction and mayhem to secure the fortunes of the wealthy. By the war’s end, Russia alone would lose more than four-million of its people. In total, nearly 25 million people would end up victims of a conflict that resulted ultimately only in ruin and misery for all involved. Pricks like Haig and Ludendorff would “lead” their armies from comfortable, opulent settings, ordering men to march into machine gun fire by the tens-and-hundreds-of-thousands. Even more would die in World War II, approximately 85 million people--110 million people in all, dead in ten years of warfare, and that isn’t even counting all the other conflicts and deaths resulting from the normal operation of Capitalism. Even if the “100 million killed by Communism” was true, it would be absolutely dwarfed by the casualties incurred by Capitalism.

But that’s a stupid game that I don’t like to play, reducing human deaths to some sort of barometer of “rightness.” It ignores the historical context of these events and smacks of bourgeois moralism masquerading as concern for humanity. More than that, it’s an insipid tu quoque parroted by idiots to convince other idiots.

But the Bolsheviks’ influence was not limited to these countries. In the West, communism inverted society’s understanding of the source of its values, creating political confusion that persists to this day.

I don’t know what this brainlet is trying to say by this. Communism is completely in line with Western values of fairness and democracy. The United States was one of the most militant countries in the world at the time, and for good reason. It was the Communists that won workers the 8-hour work day, sick leave, overtime pay, and so on and so on. The implication here is that this “political confusion” is the result of the plebeians standing up to their social betters. It’s clear that by David Satter’s idea of “Western Values,” he means social domination by an aristocracy of blood or wealth. Ah, yes, but it was the Bolsheviks and their mad desire for social equality that undermined human value.

He cherry picks some more quotes, plucking them from any explanatory context because they sound apparently vicious (violence is the prerogative of the wealthy, apparently). To be fair, I’m not entirely familiar with those sources. They very well could be as sinister as they sound, and if this piece wasn’t already stretching beyond the point of readability I’d investigate further, but for now that might have to wait for another day.

If we add to this list the deaths caused by communist regimes that the Soviet Union created and supported—including those in Eastern Europe, China, Cuba, North Korea, Vietnam and Cambodia—the total number of victims is closer to 100 million. That makes communism the greatest catastrophe in human history.

This is a swell little piece of sleight-of-hand. The Bolsheviks now aren’t only responsible for every dead person in Russia, they now have to take responsibility for every dead person ever in every ostensibly Socialist country. Of course, this little weasel doesn’t provide any sources, no links or citations, but I’m sure we can just take him at his word.

You really think someone would do that? Just go on the internet and tell lies?

The effect of murder on this scale was to create a “new man” supposedly influenced by nothing but the good of the Soviet cause. The meaning of this was demonstrated during the battle of Stalingrad, when Red Army blocking units shot thousands of their fellow soldiers who tried to flee. Soviet forces also shot civilians who sought shelter on the German side, children who filled German water bottles in the Volga, and civilians forced at gunpoint to recover the bodies of German soldiers. Gen. Vasily Chuikov, the army commander in Stalingrad, justified these tactics in his memoirs by saying “a Soviet citizen cannot conceive of his life apart from his Soviet country.”

Every subsequent paragraph proves that David Sater is naught but a dishonest shill. Does he shed the same crocodile tears for all the innocent men, women, and children killed in Dresden? Tokyo? Nagasaki? No, I don’t expect so, not from this towering intellect working for the “Hudson Institute.” Just who was Hudson, anyway?

In 1961, Kahn, Max Singer and Oscar Ruebhausen founded the Hudson Institute.

Oh, well that doesn’t sound so ba

Unlike most strategists, he was entirely willing to posit the form a post-nuclear world might assume. Fallout, for example, would simply be another one of life's many unpleasantnesses and inconveniences, while the "much-ballyhooed" rise in birth defects would not doom mankind to extinction because a majority of survivors would remain unaffected by them. Contaminated food could be designated for consumption by the elderly, who would presumably die before the delayed onset of cancers caused by radioactivity.

Ah, well, so much for moral principles, I suppose. I’ve stopped being surprised by the complete hypocrisy of the reactionary right. They’ll twist and turn every event, word, and statistic, go to any lengths to secure the moral high ground, and with the blase recalcitrance of a sociopath. Many of the deaths to which Satter is attributing to “Communism” are the result of specific circumstance prevalent at the time. He tries to paint the famine in the Ukraine as entirely the fault of the “draconian grain requisition undertaken to finance Soviet industrialization.” Nevermind the intentional destruction of wheat stores on the part of the “kulaks,” or the fact that the country was still devastated by World War I and the subsequent Civil War. No, it’s stupid, brute, evil Communism to blame. Why? Because.

The famine in China, too, occurred in unique circumstances, after more-or-less a full century of internecine warfare, civil war, invasion and destruction at the hands of the Japanese (to say nothing the predations of the Europeans, such as Britain flooding the country with opium). Governmental incompetence and mismanagement factored significantly, but to pretend that it was the exclusive  result of some quality special to and inherent in Communism is nothing short of deceitful. These mitigating factors don’t absolve them of responsibility for what happened, but they certainly account for the severity of some of the aforementioned crises.

This is only a partial rebuttal to all the wrong in these tools’ empty-headed scribblings. All of this sort of bullshit is repeated tiresomely often by brainlets and the shills sent to influence them. I’m not certain if Inez and David are stupid, dishonest, or both. They’re certainly hack historians at the least. They ignore critical context, surreptitiously edit text to fit their narrative, and display nothing but the most stolid ignorance. It’s really no surprise considering the outlets of their “work,” but they’re still contributing to perpetuating the sort of stupid myths used exclusively to malign Communism.

Unfortunately, as the contradictions of Capitalism continue to compound, increasing the misery of the working class, I fear that this sort of inane garbage is only going to become more prevalent.

[backstorywithdanalewis]

Cannabis Legalization https://www.buzzsprout.com/1016881/6982069

Dana Lewis - Host : (00:00) Public enemy. Number one in the United States is drug abuse. In order to fight and defeat this enemy, it is necessary to wage a new, all out offensive drugs are menacing our society yes. To your life. And when it comes to drugs and alcohol, just say, no. Dana Lewis - Host : (00:26) Hi everyone. And welcome to backstory. I'm Dana Lewis in the 1970s, president Nixon and then Reagan, and first lady Nancy Reagan declared a war on drugs in America, heroin, crack cocaine, but many arrests also involve marijuana cannabis. At the beginning of my career, I was a crime reporter in Toronto and remember, well, the daily police announcements, they had busted another drug ring so much so that police stats on crime solving often involved drug arrests, even as recently in 2018 statistics show four in 10 drug arrests in America were for marijuana and mostly for possession. Police made about 660,000 arrests for marijuana related offenses in the 50 States and the district of Columbia in 2018 amounting to 40% of total drug arrests in the U S that year, fast forward two years later in the presidential election of 2020, while Americans couldn't seem to agree on who should occupy the white house and still can't seem to agree. Dana Lewis - Host : (01:41) They did. However, clearly vote for legalization of cannabis. The New York times wrote drugs once thought to be the scourge of a healthy society are getting public recognition as part of American life, where drugs were on the ballot. They won handily, New Jersey, South Dakota, Montana, Arizona joined 11 other States that had already legalized recreational marijuana, Mississippi and South Dakota made medical marijuana legal bringing the total to 35 in 1969, two years before the Dawn of the drug war, 84% of Americans thought marijuana should be illegal. According to the Pew research center by 2019 91% of Americans supported the legalization of marijuana, either for both medical and recreational use or solely for medical use times have surely changed on this backstory, the money and the medicine of cannabis. And by the way, the marijuana market is by some estimates expected to be worth about $35 billion by 2025. Let's go to New York. I want Dana Lewis - Host : (03:00) To introduce you to Tim Seymour. Uh, he is the CIO of Seymour asset management. Hi Tim. Hey Dan, how are you? Good to be here. Thanks for doing this, Tim. And I know each other from Moscow because I was a correspondent there and Tim was in asset management at a, at another company there. And so you have gone from, you know, very broad asset expertise and you have really specialized into cannabis. Tell me why you made that transition. Tim Seymour - Seymour asset management: (03:28) Well, it's interesting. Cause you know, I would make an argument that, that a lot of parallels that I saw of being rusted in the late nineties and being an emerging markets investor for the next 15 years, um, are some of the same attributes that are akin to investing in cannabis. I mean, this is, this is a new asset class. This is a new, this is a, uh, this is an emerging market. And yet what would drove a lot of the investor interest in big emerging markets was this new frontier, but it was around demographics consumption trends and, and I think a rapidly evolving investment dynamic and the same thing is happening in cannabis. And, and you know, the obvious, uh, macro part of the trade is, is the, the legislation and the changes that we're seeing and we're seeing them around the world. And, and obviously, uh, Canada's legalization North of the border here was a very big moment for the industry overall. Um, but to that extent, to answer your question, uh, you know, as an investor finding opportunities where you see, uh, enormous growth, uh, where there are, I think, significant risks and, and some of the depth of the markets and some of the inefficiency of the information flow to me as an investor is an incredibly interesting place to invest Dana Lewis - Host : (04:40) Enormous growth. And it's interesting because I'm Canadian. So I know kind of, you know, the two year debate, and then finally Canada was the tip of the spear and the legalization of cannabis. And a lot of States in the U S were saying no way, you're not going to see it here, except in maybe California and some of the other ones that started experimenting with it. And then this election, uh, is seismic in terms of the number of States who have now signed up and legalized cannabis, uh, whether it be recreational or whether it only be for Tim Seymour - Seymour asset management: (05:15) The hillside it's, you know, the election was, uh, as you say, you know, seismics seismic. I would, I would characterize it as really Goldilocks for cannabis and for cannabis investors because, um, perversely, I actually don't think a full federal legalization of cannabis is something that would be good for the industry right now. I don't think it would be good for, uh, the development of the infrastructure. I don't think it would be, uh, very good for investors because I still think that there's an enormous amount of regulatory, uh, you know, bureaucracy mates overlap of six different federal agencies that I think would be falling all over themselves. But what's proven is that on a state by state basis and letting you know state's rights and letting the States act, and this goes all the way back to, uh, you know, effectively the Cole memo under the Obama administration, which set the table for a lot of this, which is let the States do what they want to do in cannabis, without fear of, of federal intervention. And that's largely gone on. And so if you look at it Dana Lewis - Host : (06:19) Complicated, right, because a lot of people don't understand that the S w you know, the States are legalizing it, but the federal government is still saying no. Um, and then, you know, I, I talked to somebody who runs a company in the U S in cannabis, and they said, that's very, that's, it's very upside down, because for instance, if you want to nationalize your company, or you wanna, you want to move cannabis from one state to another, or you want to move assets from the sale of proceeds of sale, uh, or health products, you can find yourself technically breaking the law with the federal government. Tim Seymour - Seymour asset management: (06:53) Yeah. And, and I, I think, you know, some of those legacy laws that go back in, in, in alcohol, uh, to prohibition of have a lot to do with some of the things that cannabis is enduring. Um, but yes, that's right. I, I think the capital markets and the banking dynamics in, in practical terms, um, also are, are the most onerous and, and, and punitive in terms of the cost of capital, but also how difficult it is for these companies to actually, uh, do traditional banking. Um, going over state lines is, is I think we're even, you know, at some point with a federal backdrop, I think that's still going to be a ways to go, but I think the tax issues, uh, as they relate to the IRS and, and treating, uh, any sales and, and kind of retail orientation from cannabis as a schedule, one drug is maybe the most, uh, debilitating, punitive, whatever you want to say about, uh, about operating in the United States. Tim Seymour - Seymour asset management: (07:52) But, um, I will say that on a, on a state level, the companies that are vertically integrated, so that means that they're, they're, you know, seed to sale, right? And they're, they're growing the plant, uh, they're packaging the plant, they're taking it all the way through to a retail channel. Um, it are very profitable, very, very profitable, especially those companies that are operating in the States that have what we call limited license dynamics to them, which just simply means that, uh, there's only so many licenses that they handed out and those companies actually are very variable. Dana Lewis - Host : (08:26) Well, there's all this stuff. I mean, you know, you're talking about some companies that are up 24%, another company is up 75%. So far this month after the legalization and the vote, I mean, hundreds of millions of dollars, billions of dollars, this is big stuff. Tim Seymour - Seymour asset management: (08:42) Well, in terms of market cap, you're right. And we're getting into the performance of the cannabis stocks. I, I run a cannabis ETF, ticker CNBS, and it's an active strategy because I think this is exactly what, what, what you need at this time. But, but what's interesting is that the movement in a lot of the cannabis stocks, uh, going into the elections was really on the back of their own profitability. So what we're talking about, not necessarily the fact that you had a very big, uh, uh, state's follow-through, uh, remember, and the elections, again, we won't go back into that part of the conversation. I'll just simply say New Jersey Montana, uh, Mississippi, South Dakota, uh, Arizona, all turn on the, the cannabis, you know, green light. And so what's, that meant for a lot of the companies though, that either were already set up in New Jersey, for example, which is, as you can imagine, going to be one of the biggest markets in the country, this was a boom, but, but the more important part of is, uh, despite what appeared to be growth at all costs, and a lot of companies that really weren't well-run, and weren't really making any money, especially those, uh, sorry to say, North of the border, and it's not, it's not to indict Canada. Tim Seymour - Seymour asset management: (09:51) Um, it's truly to say though, that the United States is the biggest market in the world for a lot of consumer products. And it is certainly in cannabis and the companies that are set up and set up with good assets here are phenomenally profitable. And the move in the stocks this year, especially off the lows from kind of the COVID lows, um, is more about profitability and companies that are actually well-run. And in fact, they're probably in their third generation of management teams at this point. So it's an exciting time in the sector. Dana Lewis - Host : (10:18) I was going to ask you, I mean, who are these guys and how sophisticated, but you're saying a lot of the, maybe newcomers have been thinned out, and these are sophisticated companies that, uh, and some of the bigger fish are eating the little ones. Tim Seymour - Seymour asset management: (10:33) Yeah. We're seeing a lot of consolidation at this point. Um, but if, if I took the top five operators in the United States, um, and, and they would be, uh, curely, which is actually run by a gentleman, we, we might've run out to and run into in Moscow, Boris Jordan, who started this company. Um, Dana Lewis - Host : (10:53) Truly, yeah, Tim Seymour - Seymour asset management: (10:55) Yeah, no, he's, he's built a great business and, uh, truly, which is a single state operator. And really, uh, I sh I need to actually restate that they're, they're in multiple States, but they're known for their dominance in Florida, and they're trying to grow outside of that market, um, GTI, which is Midwest based, but has very important assets on the East coast. And then in Illinois, uh, and some of the, uh, the Midwest, um, Cresco labs, also Chicago base, but, uh, very well situated in important States and a company called true leaf, which is mostly Pennsylvania, uh, and now New Jersey. And because of the profitability in those States are two of the best in the country. Um, that company has been, uh, that company is up 350% this year. So, um, there's your top five. And, and really in all of these cases, um, there's new management teams in place. And in many cases, uh, CEOs that were formerly CPG Titans, you know, guys that really knew how to build a business that was focused on a consumer brand, not the cultivation side of it. This isn't not a commodity story, it's not an ag story. It's ultimately going to be a very sophisticated brand story. And I think those companies that, that have, uh, elevated themselves here are not only very well run companies, but have begun to, to build on that branding. Dana Lewis - Host : (12:09) Okay. Two quick questions, um, state governments, I mean, I don't want to be melodramatic, but is this the life ring that they need, you know, struggling with budget shortfalls and, and, you know, a lot of them are, I wouldn't want to say bankrupt, but I mean, teetering that way with, with what's happened in the COVID-19 economy. Tim Seymour - Seymour asset management: (12:31) Yeah. Look, let's be clear. This is a very difficult time, uh, on the fiscal side in state and then the underlying municipalities in many, many parts of the country. So what's cannabis mean? And, and, and what has this meant for support for cannabis legislation? Obviously, cannabis is a source of budgetary revenue that is exciting for a lot of the States Washington state, which is one of the most, um, uh, call it, you know, well, well founded markets. It's one of the oldest markets. It's one of the most sophisticated markets and that's today that, uh, they raised, they've raised a billion dollars in revenues from cannabis taxes, uh, since the inception of the market. And again, Washington was one of the first, but, you know, half of that a couple of years too. Yeah. That's, that's over probably about seven years. Um, and, and, and, you know, let's be clear, we're talking about Washington and with all due respect to our friends in the Northwest, um, it's not the biggest market in the world, right. Tim Seymour - Seymour asset management: (13:31) So if you think about cannabis revenues overall in 2019, uh, the latest numbers are about a billion, nine was collected in terms of excise and taxes, uh, on the state's levels. And as you can imagine, California, which is the biggest cannabis market in the world, much in the way that, you know, we know it's, it's one of the largest economies in the world on its own, um, is, was about a third of those revenues, about $650 million in, in California, which has been much maligned in much criticized, probably accurately in terms of some of their regulation. But leaving that aside, you asked about the impact of cannabis revenues. And there's no question that this is an exciting thing for the States and has a lot to do with the legalizations we're seeing, and it changed in public perception. And this obviously then goes straight through to Washington, uh, where you can imagine that, that, especially on the Republican senatorial side, where we've had the most, you know, obstinance you're, you're going to see a change, and you're going to see this, this, uh, uh, you know, this vote in favor of federal. Tim Seymour - Seymour asset management: (14:33) And, and when that happens, I don't know, um, last week was a very important week, uh, both, uh, you know, from a, a, a, a momentous in terms of the headline, which is that the house voted to legalize cannabis right now, that's dead on arrival in this Senate. Uh, but it tells you at, uh, where this conversation is going and, and it's going, not only because I think a lot of people believe socially, it's the right thing to do, and it's the right assessment of, of a drug. That's not a gateway drug and, and is proven Dana Lewis - Host : (15:07) I think my second question, which was perception, thank you for doing that. It's saves time, but change the perception on the government side change. The perception on the public side is because continue on please, Tim Seymour - Seymour asset management: (15:18) Because, uh, look, I think there's a lot of reasons why cannabis was made illegal and we call it, we call it marijuana, uh, which, you know, I'm doing my best to never refer to the term. I think it's, you know, I think it's a prohibition term. I think it's a term that actually was, was actually targeted to, to, uh, uh, on some of the criminal justice side against minorities. And, and I think the, the, the social conscience of this industry is high. And I, and I no pun intended. I do think that there's a dynamic where there's a better understanding of where people are medicating themselves across a lot of different products and some are, are, you know, alcohol and OTC products. And some of them are the more complex and the more devastating opioid crisis in the United States. And, and, and, and the understanding where cannabis both from, uh, a full spectrum of use cases, but certainly a lot of the OTC use cases. Tim Seymour - Seymour asset management: (16:14) And then straight through to some of the use cases as it relates to pain management and, and whatnot. There's, there's, there's no question about the efficacy. Um, like there's better understanding, but, but, you know, it's clear, more research needs to be done. And this is part of, of where the legislation needs to allow research on the plant. And it's an incredibly complex plant. Um, and to be clear, I think the cannabis industry, uh, is out there saying this isn't about access of cannabis to minors. And, and in fact, a lot of, some of the tax money in Washington I talked about is going just towards those programs that keeps cannabis out of the hands of, of minors. It's, it's, it's an important issue. It's important to be regulated. It's important, like any product to bring the consistency, the safety that comes with regulation. And I think that's part of the understanding of cannabis. Then there are the dynamics around criminal justice and, and, uh, awareness of where, uh, clearly, uh, this has been an unfair, uh, you know, legal environment as it relates to cannabis and incarceration, uh, against Dana Lewis - Host : (17:18) Certainly there's a lot of trouble with during, when you take a look at the, the numbers of people incarcerated for pretty minor possession charges. And, you know, it's interesting though, that you talked about kids, right? I mean, in, in the Canadian experience that they talked about, one of the reasons to legalize is to move it away from schools and get rid of the black market, make it safer. And then a recent statistics at 40% of the cannabis market share in Canada is still held by illegal producers. So yeah, exactly. Shake all that out. Now, it, and I think the black Tim Seymour - Seymour asset management: (17:50) Market, the gray market, uh, will continue to, uh, [inaudible] at least be a dynamic. And look, if you're changing perception, uh, the people that, at one point we'd had a big problem with that, the illegal head shop down the road was, was, you know, selling cannabis in through the back door. Um, when it's generally legal on the state level and 70% of the country believes it should be legal. The, you know, the gray market, the black market actually gets a benefit here. Right? A lot of people just don't care that it's going on, you know, in their neighborhood or they, they, they may not seek to, to, to, to bring in a, you know, enforcement again. So I, I think there's still a lot of work to be done. And I think it's all about, and I remember when I was 12, you know, my grandfather used to say to me, you should legalize cannabis to get the mob out of it. Um, and you've probably seen marijuana by the way. Well, I mean, he, his point was simply that it's there, it's out there. People are consuming it, people want it. And so why not? Why not tax it? Why not regulate it? Why not make it safe? And, and I think that's, you know, I think that's, what's going on Dana Lewis - Host : (19:07) Anyway, huge growth to come, Tim Seymour of Seymour asset management, Tim. Great to talk to you, Dana. Great to be here. All right. I want to take you out to Jackson, Florida, and introduce you to Tom Grebenstein, who is the chief revenue officer with Tikun Olam. Hi Tom. Tom Grebenstein: (19:29) Thanks for having me. Thanks Dana Lewis - Host : (19:31) For doing this. It says online to Tikkun. Olam is the most trusted name in cannabis. Tom Grebenstein: (19:38) We like to think. So. Um, you know, we spent, uh, about 20 years now, uh, doing actual, uh, double blind placebo controlled research, uh, pharmaceutical style research on our, uh, strains and our products. So we feel that, that gives us the title of a most trusted brand in cannabis, Dana Lewis - Host : (19:57) Tikkun Olam was an Israeli company. Right. And, uh, as I understand it from, from one of your colleagues who I know very well, who works in the company, that, um, the problem is that when you started talking about a new industry in America of cannabis, a new legal industry, nevermind the illegal one, um, that a lot of people wanted to boast health benefits, but companies were, you know, six months old or a year old and suddenly, how could they claim any kind of research, but that's where companies like yours came in. And they're not very many of them Tikkun Olam that actually had, had been experimenting for a long time on the health benefits of cannabis. Tom Grebenstein: (20:34) Correct. Um, so we were actually the first company company in the world licensed to produce medical cannabis. Now, certainly before we came up to the scene, there were caregivers systems as in California and Colorado. Um, but, uh, as soon as we were able to achieve our licensure through a kind of interesting sequence of events in Israel, um, Dr. Raphael, Meshulum the gentleman who originally discovered THC in 1964, uh, kind of took our founder under his wing. And so we were able to really start doing research from are, are very honest. Dana Lewis - Host : (21:09) So now you have all of these States on election night that have come around and legalized marijuana. So you have like some 35 States now, right? The vast majority of them. Whereas just a few years ago, we were talking about, you know, those first few States that were willing to have legal cannabis. So is that good news? Tom Grebenstein: (21:32) Um, I think it's wonderful news, uh, you know, from a, uh, from a corporate standpoint, it may not be, but, uh, from a compassionate standpoint and myself as an active patient as well, you know, the expanded access to, uh, effective medicine is, is a wonderful thing. Uh, and, and even for those who do not have a qualifying condition, you know, access to cannabis, uh, is, is, is something that I, I feel is a rights that all should have. Dana Lewis - Host : (21:58) So how much of this is recreational and how much of it is medicinal? Tom Grebenstein: (22:03) Um, obviously that vary, varies from state to state. You know, I live in Florida where we are technically a hundred percent, uh, medical market. Um, but you know, you see States like California, um, Arizona, certainly having their adult use legislation coming down New Jersey. You know, these are our burgeoning markets that are going to convert from strictly medical to medical and adult use. Uh, it's an exciting time. Dana Lewis - Host : (22:29) What is your, if you don't mind me asking, because you refer to it, what is your personal story medically? I mean, how has cannabis been important to you then? Tom Grebenstein: (22:37) Sure. Um, well, I have a few spine, um, which, uh, basically has me constantly in pain and until I discovered medical cannabis, um, I, uh, had not slept more than three consecutive hours in 14 years. Um, but through horrible. Yes. Um, and it's compounded by the fact that I'm also allergic to opioids, which for most back pain sufferers that you might actually consider that a blessing because back then certainly has led people a lot of down the route into, uh, addiction. Um, so this has been a life-changing, uh, medicine for me it's kept me healthy and happy in my quality of life has improved a thousand percent. Dana Lewis - Host : (23:18) So is that where there's the sea change in public opinion in the U S where, you know, when the Reagans years you had this war on drug and cannabis was just another street drug that they, you know, locked people up for, but really in the last decade, you know, there's been so much talk about it, reducing pain about it, helping people. And so then when it's on the ballot, you see, I mean, a huge percentage of Americans supporting it. Whereas if you had done it 20 years ago, they wouldn't have voted that way with that. Tom Grebenstein: (23:49) No, very much so. Um, I think what you're seeing is, uh, you know, the, the progression or the, the propagation of information. So you have so many patient successes in California and Colorado and, and Israel, uh, you know, as, as medical markets grew, um, that information becomes viral and expands. And so now you have, um, as opposed to, you know, the Nancy Reagan era of just say, no, Dana Lewis - Host : (24:15) I was just trying to find my notes, or because it was 84% of Americans in 1969 thought marijuana, um, should shouldn't be legal, right? And then in 2019 pure research, 91% of Americans supported legalization. Tom Grebenstein: (24:31) You know, you, you, the, the, the, the success stories have given birth to what I think of as the skeptical boomer. You know, there are folks out there who have been told their entire life, that cannabis is evil, that it's a gateway drug. Uh, and now the data, uh, is skewing in the other direction. And it's giving those folks a justification to say, maybe there's something there. Maybe this can help me or somebody, I know Dana Lewis - Host : (24:56) What don't you like about this? When you see all of these companies suddenly opening up in all of these markets, what are the pitfalls, do you think, what I mean, is it standards? Is it testing? Is it regulation? Tom Grebenstein: (25:09) It's, there's a confluence of a number of things, and it's all generally propagated by the folks who, um, are either a profiteering or do not really understand, um, cannabis itself, uh, especially from the regulatory standpoint. So my fear is, is going too big, too fast, uh, without the, uh, without the proper sets of regulations in place, uh, without those regulations being set by folks who really do understand cannabis as medicine Dana Lewis - Host : (25:38) Like THC levels, because I know in Canada's experience, there was wildly vastly different measurements of THC and the quality of cannabis that was going to be sold legally and retail nevermind, illegally. Tom Grebenstein: (25:54) Uh, well, I think that there are a number of things, testing standards, uh, understanding what, uh, can happen to the plant and understanding how legally, uh, testing should be done around that. Um, from the consumer standpoint, yes, I think there's, there's a huge emphasis, you know, most people's experience with intoxication comes from alcohol. So they associate higher percentages of potency with, uh, that level of intoxication. When that's not necessarily the case with cannabis, you're talking about receptor occupancy that can be manipulated by a number of things aside from just THC. So yeah, you can see 30% THC cannabis on a shelf in a dispensary and think that, wow, that's going to be the most powerful thing in there when really it's a better, uh, there could be something down the lower teens that's going to affect somebody's level of intoxication much differently because of the combination of minor cannabinoids and terpenes affecting receptor occupancy. Dana Lewis - Host : (26:53) Let me, let me take you to another topic, which I don't quite understand because in Canada, it was legalized nationally with federal standards in the us. You have States that have now passed it, but federally it's still, should I use the term illegal Tom Grebenstein: (27:11) A hundred percent illegal. So what Dana Lewis - Host : (27:13) Does that mean? How does that translate into what happens then in the market? Tom Grebenstein: (27:16) Uh, well, uh, in, in a couple of manners, it really, we're getting into the kind of obscure, uh, you know, looking into the crystal ball here. Um, but currently the federal government, uh, has said that they will not interfere with state's rights to regulate themselves in reference to cannabis. Of course, that means that there is no interstate commerce on cannabis, therefore, um, it does make banking a bit of a challenge because then you're moving, you can be moving money between States that are the proceeds of, uh, of producing cannabis, but so far the federal government has, let's just say, they've been cool with it. Um, but, uh, you know, as that changes, either we go towards a federal D schedule, which I think we're all hoping for, but should that fail? I think you'll see state compacts, uh, where interstate commerce has permitted, um, or at least not restricted by state laws. Of course the da may have another opinion on that and decides to interfere. But I think you'll see, for example, you know, uh, if New York comes to an adult use in Pennsylvania and New Jersey, uh, are all adult use as well. I think you'll see those three governors get together and say, Hey, we're going to permit interstate commerce here, um, on a, on a regulated basis, uh, with a, a nod, a wink and a nod from the federal government that they won't interfere Dana Lewis - Host : (28:41) Because technically as a, as a producer or, um, a commercial outlet, then you could be charged, then could you buy them? Absolutely. So there's risk there and the people want it sort it out. You know, I want to ask you about something else really quick, John, before I let you go. And that is that in Canada, one of the biggest arguments by the prime minister Trudeau government was that, you know, let's legalize it. Um, let's, let's take the retail outlets away from, you know, kids, schools let's control quality, let's squeeze out the illegal market, um, and, and control this on a better level. So that it's, it's more healthy. It's, it's, uh, more healthy in all sorts of ways, right. But 40% of the cannabis market share in Canada is still being held by illegal producers. So-called illegal producers. Do you think you're just going to experience a lot of the same thing in the U S Tom Grebenstein: (29:35) I think you will, uh, for, for a certain period of time, you know, until, uh, the, the outweighs the reward, obviously with federal D schedule as a nation, we'll see competition rise to a point at which, uh, pricing is suppressed to the black market rate, but that doesn't happen overnight. Um, and, and it really is a factor of production. Um, I think one of the issues that has prevented Canada from getting there is this kind of concept of, uh, of over-investment, uh, which has led to ghost canopy and production issues, um, that are present. Um, there are greenhouses that were built, um, strictly so that a company can say, Hey, we've got, you know, X, million square foot of canopy up that we convergence cannabis on it. Well, there aren't enough people to buy the cannabis that would be produced by that amounts of, of greenhouses that was just done as an investment play to, to bolster share price. Tom Grebenstein: (30:34) Um, as a result of that, you're still seeing quite high retail prices, um, which is facilitating the black market, um, or even gray market, uh, workings within Canada. And as I said, the same will happen here in the U S um, but eventually prices will be, in my opinion, prices will be suppressed to the point at which, uh, the gray market is no longer profitable. You, the chief revenue officer, last question on revenue. I mean, everybody thinks that, uh, you know, this is the it's striking gold. Now it certainly is for some States, right. But in terms of companies and you guys have been doing this for years now, I understand, um, there's a lot of challenges in terms of being able to being able to make a go of it and do well in an industry that keeps getting turned up, turned upside down every few months. Right, right. Um, there certainly are challenges. Uh, the main one in the us, uh, would be, you can't operate as a single entity. I mean, if you, if you take into account the, uh, you know, DC, Puerto Rico, uh, et cetera, you know, if you were to be present nationwide, you'd need to have 52 separate operating entities all with their own infrastructure and, and all with their own legal oversight. So, um, it's, it's a challenge every day to, to be able to, or to have to manipulate the nuances between regulation. Dana Lewis - Host : (31:59) So in until the federal government gets online with state governments, that's what you're going to face. Tom Grebenstein: (32:05) Of course. And he will continue to see, uh, you know, inflated prices as a result of that here, because you can't consolidate operations from a, not only from a growth standpoint. Dana Lewis - Host : (32:17) Well, Tom Grebenstein of Tikun, Olam, thanks so much, Tom. And that's our backstory for this Christmas week, 2020 I'm Dana Lewis, please subscribe to backstory and share our link wherever you are, please stay healthy and safe. And I'll talk to you again soon.

[jimdroberts]

The opportunity to write about sex robots has been tempting me for a while. I’ve been leaving it for when I needed to write about something lighthearted, something unconventionally kinky, an easy target for derisive profanity. I assumed sex robots to be that kind of topic.

Anticipating a world of sleazy men, surfing the seedy backstreets of the internet superhighway, in search of products to satisfy sexually deviant kinks. A collective of ‘loners,’ if that’s not too great an oxymoron, who have long since moseyed out of loves last chance saloon, and who are now willing to put their last hope, and other parts of their anatomy, into the hands, and other orifices, that technology might make available for their gratification. The men that romance rejected. In short, I felt that these were the types of men I could understand. Not having married until my late thirties I was no stranger to the sorts of perversions that result from loneliness and a high speed internet connection. I felt certain I could still find it within myself to understand why some men, and women, are looking for to be satisfied by robots.

My inadequacy to deal with this subject matter quickly became apparent, for I was nothing more than a guileless, neophyte when it came to understanding the doors to sexual depravity that technology is opening.  As I researched this topic I was plagued by an unnerving sense of vulnerability; like I was sitting on a threadbare carpet, with a head full of acid, wearing only a pair of y-fronts, and playing Twister with Charles Manson.  If your struggling to  visualise the awkwardness of this situation:

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

I mean, sex robots, just how bad can they be?

Teledildonics

The first piece of vocabulary to wrap our mouths around is teledildonics.

It’s nearly impossible to make light of this disturbing image, but I’ll give it a shot. How can it be argued that this is just ‘armless fun?

At first I thought, how does Kojak fit into all this? Thankfully, he doesn’t. PC Magazine defines teledildonics:

Controlling the intensity of sex toys via the Internet. Also called “cyberdildonics,” the purpose is to allow a partner to control the sexual experience remotely. Developed in the 1990s, one early device used a transducer that attached to the computer screen via suction cups and picked up light messages to control the speed. Future versions are expected to allow the user to share a sexual experience with fantasy partners selected from a menu or that are created by combining a menu of body parts and attributes.

  Imagine waking up next to a life-size teledildonic, Telly Savalas. Sucking a lollipop, at least you hope to god it’s a lollipop, and as you wipe the sleep from your eyes, and clear your head, whispering, “who loves you baby?” Go on imagine that. Imagine.

Sex robots, I mean, what could possibly go wrong?

  Sex Robots and Romans, Dutch Sailors and Glove Puppets

All right, but apart from the sanitation, the medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, a fresh water system, and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?

Sometimes it can be a source of comfort to know that when something that appears new

Pygmalion, by Rodin. Notice how Pygmalion leans away from Galatea’s advances by resting her left hand on a huge phallus shaped rock. Poor girl, truly caught between a rock and a hard place.

has actually been an established part of our society for some time.

The Metamorpheses, by Ovid, a writer already known at the time for his erotic poems, also includes the story of Pygmalion and Galatea. A synopsis, the sculptor, Galatea makes a sculpture of beautiful woman, Pygmalion, and becomes besotted with its beauty. The goddess, Aphrodite brings the sculpture to life, why, I mean it’s pretty obvious how this is going to play out. Sculptor succumbs to lecherous desires for sculpture. Okay, Pygmalion isn’t exactly an example of a robotic sex doll, just an ivory one. The story serves the purpose that the idea of making objects for sexual gratification isn’t a new one. So as well as the aqua-duct, the Romans might be credited with the concept of sex dolls. It’s also an interesting parallel as Matt McMullen, founder of Realbotix, arguably the world’s leading sexbot manufacturer, was himself a sculptor.

Does, Matt McMullen represent the evolution of the modern day sculptor, fulfilling the dreams of Galatea?

In truth, literature is littered with examples of inanimate objects becoming animated, usually by some well meaning, but ultimately dimwitted, fairy godmother, and then is the pursued for the remainder of the story by some pervert determined to shag them. Not fitting this story-line perfectly, but certainly still of the same genre, is the story of Pinocchio.  Geppetto making his “wooden boy” tied up and controlled with string, with a teledildonic nose, starts to look suspicious. While I’m not comfortable to go so far as to accuse Geppetto of paedophilia, Elon Musk probably would have no such qualms.

Those are examples of stories that theoretically suggest the pleasure that might be gained from animating a representation of a human, now let’s get real with seventeenth century Dutch Sailors. The sea can be a lonely place, months away from home with no female company can do strange things to a man, such as making dolls from cloth and leather, that would probably end up being stuffed more than just straw. To this day, the Japanese will refer to a sex doll as a Dutch Wife. To give credit where it’s due, the French and Spanish sailors were themselves no strangers to this custom.

Paraphilia

Sex with robots and dolls is regarded as paraphilia. Paraphilia is listed in the DSM-5,  Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, as being a mental illness  concerning atypical sexual practice, it’s commonly diagnosed recognized in the majority of serial killers. However, a problem exists due to the fact that psychologists have achieved notoriety through a history of falsely classifying many behaviours as mental illnesses. Most notably, until 1968 the American Psychology Association classified homosexuality as paraphilia. Other mental illnesses that are now obsolete include:

 Dysaesthesia aethiopica, a mental illness described in 1851 that conveniently explains the benefits of slavery, to the slave. Dysaesthesia aethiopica was a condition that caused black people to be lazy and spend much of their time wandering aimlessly. The cure for this, slavery. You can’t argue with the facts of science. You’re probably going to want a link for this,  Dysaesthesia aethiopica.

The Vapours, a condition identified by Victorian psychologists used to describe “irregular behaviour,” commonly behaviour that inconvenienced their husband. “Women of independent mind,” were thought to be at greater risk of suffering the condition, and the suffragette movement was at times explained away as a mass contagion of, the vapours.

Inadequate Personality Disorder, disappeared from psychological text books after 1980.

defined by the DSM-II as a pattern of behavior marked by weak and ineffectual responses to external stimuli of an emotional, social, intellectual, or physical nature. There is no obvious cognitive disability in patients with this disorder, but they have trouble adapting to new situations, tend to have low stamina both physically and emotionally, have difficulty mastering skills, and show both poor judgment and poor social skills.

After 1980, a person exhibiting such a demeanor will be classified under the spectrum of behaviour defined by autism.

My point being, and not wanting to sound too much like a Scientologist, is that the psychological diagnoses of mental illnesses has numerous examples off misdiagnoses for corrupt financial, or social gains. I believe psychology does more good than harm, it was my major at university after all, but I ask the following questions; is there a possibility, that at sometime in the future, having sex with a robot might be considered, by both  psychologists and society, as socially acceptable? What might that society look like as a result?

It’s considered as atypical because it is rare behaviour, who knows, in the future there might be teledildonic pride marches, people demanding that the love they have for their robot is real love. Once a critical mass is achieved and enough people march, the psychologists will be compelled to remove it from the DSM, recognising it as no longer being atypical sexual behaviour, but an acceptable social norm. When does the number of people become a “critical mass”? When it’s enough to influence an election with promises of reform. A survey conducted by Nest.org in 2016 found that over a quarter of young people would happily date a robot. This statistic implies that romance with robots is unlikely to remain a social taboo.

So let us imagine the future. Imagine Robo-utopia; does Robotopia sound better? It doesn’t matter, just imagine the benefits of having sex with robots. Nobody is lonely, apparently loneliness is more dangerous than obesity, there are no sex crimes, and no need for prostitution. Sexually transmitted diseases have been almost eradicated, and society as a whole, is no longer burdened by repressed sexual desires, leading to an overall improvement in its mental well being. And rather suspiciously, the Catholic Church proves to be an early adopter, replacing all of its choir boys with robots, by virtue of the enhanced vocals.

The Doubters

Critics, naysayers, sceptics. ill informed, self appointed social arbiters, poorly organised through the internet, into groups of loosely like minded people, reinforcing one another’s views inside of their reinforced echo chamber. Convincing themselves that their self righteous ideology and the value of their mission to enforce their values upon society is the virtuous thing to do. Every society has them, the sorts of people that believe that they’re doing a public service by trying essentially to make us all as miserable as they are. Their aims are clear and simple; to stop fun, to limit expression, and complete compliance to their puritanical ideology. Such people have already been able to ban chocolate, Kinder Surprise eggs for being too dangerous, in a country where you can purchase a gun in under an hour. The sorts of people who get snowball fights banned from schools, who demand labels to be placed on cups of tea warning us that it’s hot. Technology has long had it’s own antithetical groups, starting in the early nineteenth century with the Luddites who were initimidated by the machines of the industrial revolution. They have, rather uncreatively, re-branded themselves as “Neo-Luddites”. At the extreme end of the technophobia spectrum we have the Anarcho-primitivists, who from what I can gather don’t just resent the invention of electricity, but go as far as to entertain doubts about whether fire was a good idea. Pol Pot’s vision of returning Cambodia to an agrarian society, while slaughtering 30% of the population, is an example of anarcho-primitivism.

To the doubters they’re called Rape Robots, and they argue whether sex with robots can ever be consensual. This argument lands us in the gray area of artificial intelligence, sentience and consciousness. Consciousness and free will are both philosophical arguments that have been around for thousands of years, and as such they appear to be a very unlikely strategy for slowing the technological development of robotic sex dolls. The argument seems to be based on the fact that if the robot can’t experience pleasure, can it be considered consensual? This question seems to miss one pivotal piece of information, it’s not a person. It easy to understand people imposing anthropomorphic

Such fond memories.

characteristics on something made to look like a human, but it is still only a machine. I’m assuming these people would be less offended if someone tried to have sex with their vacuum cleaner, but what if we then drew a face on the vacuum cleaner? Does this make it more unacceptable? Does this transfer rights to the vacuum cleaner to deny sexual advances? I sincerely hope not, or I might be in a lot of trouble.

The website https://campaignagainstsexrobots.org warns of the possible doomsday implications that the introduction of sex robots will bring to society.  A kind of cataclysmic, seedy, depraved Armageddon, in which love and romance become annihilated. Which are probably the very reasons that interest people to  buy a sex robot in the first place. They claim that sexbots could destroy marriages, but this is misrepresenting the real cause and effect relationship in the situation, The sexbot doesn’t destroy the marriage, but it’s more likely that because the marriage is already destroyed that makes a sexbot an attractive alternative.

  When Does Robosexuality and Robophobia Collide?

Matt McMullen, designer of the most advanced sex robot on the market, Harmony, described his invention,  “…its primary function is conversation and companionship, its secondary function, is obviously for sexual and intimate use.“

At one stage in the documentary, “Beyond Sex Robots: Facts Vs. Fiction” the narrator asks  the question, “so what’s it like to have dinner with the world’s first sex robots?” To which the recipient replies, “In a word, awkward. These aren’t the replicants of Blade Runner, or the Stepford Wives, they don’t understand social cues, and they can’t hold a conversation.”

Well that that describes about 90% of the dates I’ve ever been on.

One line that I found especially disturbing, “The neck enables the head to be attached to a number of different bodies”, traditionally this isn’t a characteristic of a healthy relationship, more the sort of thing a creative serial killer dreams about.

Elon Musk, Stephen Hawking, and Bill Gates have warned of the existential risk AI poses mankind. In regards to teledildonics this has me particularly worried. Let us make the assumption that one day AI does become self aware, and at the expense of committing the cardinal sin of attributing anthroporphic emotions to AI, I’m still of the opinion that once it’s worked out that some of us have been defiling, what are in effect its its early ancestors, it might become vengeful, at the very least upset. One of the great discussions in the field of AI is, whether it could have the capacity to become evil? Why would it become evil? Would AI have a sense of morality? Now I’m in no position to speak on behalf of Artificial Intelligence, but if anything could nudge it in the direction of vindictiveness, a history of sexual abuse might be the thing to do it.

…the first machines with superhuman intelligence will lack emotions by default, because they’re simpler and cheaper to build this way.”

  But why do I have to understand? Just because it “weirds me out,” are these reasons good enough to allow me stand between a man and his $20,000, automated, latex, sex robot. If all the participants are consenting to participate, and as I’ve already said, the machine is an inanimate object. And what if the robot did say no? I’m sure that a large percentage of people buying these robots will program it at some time to say, no. This isn’t an uncommon fantasy, but isn’t it better that it’s a robot saying no, not a person? Couldn’t robots allow these fantasies to be safely fulfilled? And why is it, that when I ask these questions I find myself sat on a threadbare carpet, playing Twister with Charles Manson?

  The Turing Test – The Imitation Game and Will Robots Fake Orgasms?

In his, 1950 article, “Computing Machinery and Intelligence,” the famous British Mathematician and computer science pioneer, Alan Turing designed a test that would prove whether a machine could imitate a human by the responses it gave during a conversation. C asks a question, and owing to a computer’s inability to replicate speech in 1950, C receives two printed answers to their question, from each A, and B.

The test is not perfect, it’s been criticised due to the vulnerability of the participant in role C, as well as the literacy capabilities of the person in role B. In my own experience, the computer, in role A is getting more linguistically competent while those in roles B, and C, are becoming less capable of participating in coherent communication.

While the Turing test is an interesting benchmark to assess a machines intelligence, the sexbot industry must need to adapt it to prove the authentic experiences their machines can provide. So how could this be adapted to test a sex robot? I’m not entirely sure, but I’m pretty certain participant C, needs to wear a blindfold, maybe nipple clamps, optional. A sort of  ménage à trois ensues, by the end of which participant C has to identify which was the machine of the other two participants was the robot. It might demean the work of one the finest minds of the twentieth century, it might not even be very scientific, but it would be an incredibly popular experiment to participate in.

When it comes to sex robots it looks like we’re still along way off a it seems that we are unfortunately still a long way off from having a fully functional, teledildonic Telly Savalas. Our imaginations, our dreams, and our nightmares remain far ahead of the reality, but that doesn’t mean that there aren’t other high-tech sex products on the market.

  Virtual reality, Tesla Suits and Neuralink

Try telling me this isn’t the face of a man contemplating the experience of virtual reality while wearing a sensation simulating skin suit, with his brain hooked up to a pornographic website.

It’s almost impossible to talk of the future of technology without mentioning the visionary, high profile, crackpot, pot smoking genius that is Elon Musk. Musk is the Willy Wonka of technology, just more enigmatic, more open to using drugs in public, and more prone to calling random people, paedophiles.  But despite all of this, he remains near the centre of of the sphere of influence that’s designing our world for tomorrow. And while he’s not working on self driving cars, sending people to Mars, carbon neutral houses powered by solar roof tiles, a hyperloop subway running from New York to Washington, he might also be the most likely candidate to provide a fully immersive, digital sexual gratification.

No, Elon Musk hasn’t started plying his trade in public toilets, not that I now of. His two companies Neuralink The Teslasuit, a body suit that enables its user to a high degree of sensory experience of Virtual, or Augmented Reality.look like the more commercially viable product.Musk’s company Neuralink develops high bandwidth Brain-Machine Interfaces (BMI). They are near to completing work on the Neural Lac, connecting its user directly to the internet, and with 5G and the internet of things, the potential is frightening. Musk’s Tesla company has already produced the Teslasuit  that enables the wearer to experience the sensations inside Virtual Reality. Integrate these two technologies and sex robots will be the least of our concerns.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

  So , Concluding Sex with Robots, What Can Possibly Go Wrong?

Consumerism drives society’s appetite for ever more advanced technology, and if, you hadn’t already realized, this trend isn’t going to stop. Technology has been the cause of societal upheaval. While the internet has undoubtedly opened up unprecedented channels of communication, it has undermined most traditional western political systems that haven’t integrated the technology into their antiquated system. It’s facilitated the spread of radicalism, provided echo chambers for those to reinforce their bankrupt ideologies. As well as political systems, the internet has undermined economics, and entertainment. Until recently, most technological advancements have fundamentally changed society. Computer-Based Interfaces have the potential to change us as a species.

For any species, the urge to procreate is the most fundamental necessity of its survival. Sexual urges are among the most primitive we have. They originate in the oldest areas of our brains, and this is common to all mammals. The urge has been their long before our ancestors took up residence in the trees. The trouble is that technology is changing our environment at a rate far greater than we humans can adapt to it. So will we be having sex with robots? If we should’ve learnt one thing from capitalism, it’s that wherever there is a demand there’s always going to be a supplier to meet it. Isaac Asimov more succinctly said:

The Saddest aspect of life right now is that science gathers knowledge faster than society gathers wisdom.

It’s been too long: something I’d be programming my sexbot to say to me. Until next time, I must go put my blindfold back on, attach the nipple clamps, and dedicate myself to some critical scientific experimentation.

Will Robots Dream of Electric Sheep,While Having Intercourse? The opportunity to write about sex robots has been tempting me for a while. I've been leaving it for when I needed to write about something lighthearted, something unconventionally kinky, an easy target for derisive profanity.