#unreliable reporting

[bluukive]

gone from enfp to isfj somehow

[maruyaaya]

limited omniscient 3rd person pov my beloved <3 i need my narrator to be so unreliable that you have no idea what any of the other characters are like because you can’t tell when the narrator is telling the truth and when they’re just flat-out making stuff up

[azurefaire]

oh my gosh!! my carnivorous plants devoured nicky and only left her acrylic sweater!!

"nicky is too intelligent to be outsmarted by a plant"

this one?? this one that grew back??? nicky sweater regenerative limb?? nicky little the half starfish?? what kind of radiation...

[snowstories]

I do dislike how watered town the concept of an 'unreliable narrator' has become at least on this website. Any time a narrator shows even the slightest bit of bias they're deemed an unreliable narrator when like.... that's called being human? Everyone's worldview is subjective and the way you view the events around you is inherently biased. A limited POV is going to reflect this bias. Unless this bias distorts the narrative at hand on a fundamental level (see: Lolita), that does not make the narrator unreliable. Being wrong about things does not make you an unreliable narrator. If it did, it'd render the term worthless because then literally everyone ever would be an unreliable narrator.

[tol-skirt]

i had to ask myself why it seems I'm only hurt by the same grief and then I remembered Achilles' heel is where her mom held her as she soaked in the Styx and it all came together. i wanted to ask why it couldn't be a new hurt why it couldn't be a different hurt why I had to suffer the same pain over and over and over and the answer is obviously that it's the place least armoured. it's the place I was first marked and it's the only place I can be hurt. Achilles was always invincible except for the place her Mother left her tender.

[bigcats-birds-and-books]

Books of 2024: ALWAYS NORTH by Vicki Jarrett.

To me, the scariest place on our entire planet is the Arctic, partially because the scariest thing on our entire planet are polar bears, which have been stalking my nightmares since middle school. So, of course, when I saw a fucked-up polar bear on the cover of a weird and fucked up maybe mystery maybe thriller definitely apocalyptic sci-fi adjacent book that takes place in the Arctic, I thought, "Oh yeah I should definitely start reading that at nighttime IMMEDIATELY while winter still nibbles on the edges of the weather, this is foolproof."

Reader: I am the Fool™.

I'm 80 pages in, and so far we've got weird inexplicable shit going on that we're trying to ignore, and we've been warned about bears SO Many Times All Over The Place (yikes), and we're now being stalked by a polar bear who has a History with the captain (borderline Moby Dick but make it a vicious land-capable predator), and time is fake because it's Always Daylight and we are doing Science on a Boat but make it Evil Capitalism also, and there's some neat textual framework going on with chapter headers, and I'm excited to see where this all goes!!

[cmgirlie]

Bryan Alvarez has completed a grand total of 0 days in the shut the fuck up and stop talking about Cm Punk challenge

[comicsandslushies]

THIS

I am in so may servers just so I can get updates on games and such and it would be so much easier if they were forums I could check in on every once in a while!

[lucydacusgirl]

Thank you Jack Antonoff for Modern Girls

[eightw]

oh my goddd that post about unreliable narrators was good until it added the life of pi onto the end and now it's just pissing me off. life of pi is not "the narrator has survived a traumatic experience and copes with it by turning it into a wonderful tale". the entire premise of the book is that it's a story that will "make you believe in god". the point isn't that the "true" story is pi making up the tiger stuff to deal with his own trauma, because there is no "true" story. it's a book - it doesn't end with the author going, "surprise! the story was all fake!", it ends with the reader having to choose which ending they believe - kind of like faith, you know, that thing the entire book is about. almost as if he spends half the book talking about religion, and explicitly shits on agnostics for not "making a choice" in what they believe.

like seriously, if the "point" of life of pi is that the narrator survived a traumatic experience and copes with it by turning it into a wonderful tale, it would be so shit. it would forsake the entire story for a last minute plot twist that literally comes in the last ten pages of the book. it's about faith and what you choose to believe. and that means there is no "true" ending.

[in-tua-deep]

Thinking about murderbot being a rental unit and how that interacts with its trauma

Bc like. The most important bots it meets are all from vastly different situations and backgrounds than it. ART has been valued and loved by humans its whole life - its dad is literally the captain and its sister is one of its crew! And they clearly cherish, love, and value ART. Miki is a less sophisticated bot, but also so clearly loved and cherished. They ordered it to protect itself! And it had the capability to reject that order! That says a lot about the love, trust, and mutual respect they had for one another.

Even Three, another secunit, seems pretty different from murderbot. It was made by the company it’s working for and the vibe I got was that it and the other two secunits were sort of permanently assigned to that ship?

Which, look. Humans imprint on anything and build familiarity. The more time we spend with something the more sentimental we might get about it. If Three was on that ship for a long time, I wouldn’t be shocked if at least some of the humans on board were pretty chill or even affectionate towards it (in a condescending and dehumanizing way probably, but still). And even so, the length of time spent around the same secunits clearly allowed Three to establish bonds with its fellow secunits if nothing else!

But being a rental unit means murderbot went from group to group. The other secunits it worked with were always Temporary Company (will never see them again after this contract likely) and also Active Threats to murderbot bc they’re the most likely to notice murderbot is rogue and be forced to report it. Even the humans were Temporary, so even if there were Nice Humans they’d be swapped out with Bad Humans soon enough.

Like. No wonder it insists it doesn’t have friends. If you don’t have Feelings about people then those feelings can’t be hurt when you’re inevitably torn away and never allowed to see them again (or have your very memories of them torn out of you and erased)

(Feelings about media are okay because the media can go with you, right?)

It’s funny to point at Three when murderbot makes sweeping generalization about secunits bc it’s an unreliable narrator but also. Just having feelings about how specifically being a rental unit effects murderbot and its relationships to others

[kerkhofbloemen]

This always struck me as likely a lie. Dean was trying improve Sam's opinion of John here. He'd say anything to get them all back together.

dean telling sam “even when you two weren’t talking, [dad] used to swing by stanford whenever he could, keep an eye on you, make sure you were safe” as if that is not one of the scariest things you could learn your abusive parent who you broke contact with was doing

[bamsara]

I think that one thing people fail to understand is that unsolicited literary criticism coming from an online stranger who is reading with no knowledge of what the authors intended goal is, is not going to be received the same as say: the authors beta reader or friends who know what the authors intended goal and has the sufficient knowledge and input to help the author reach that desired outcome.

"But I'm only trying to be helpful" How do I know you have the knowledge and literary skill for you to be able to actaully do that when we don't know each other and you are essentially a stranger to me? Are you applying this criticism based out of personal biased experience and desire to see the story or characterization be driven in another direction or tweaked, or do you know the author's intentions for the character? If the story is incomplete, are you basing your criticism of a character on the incomplete narration with only partial information available of them or are you building up a report until the story's completion? Did the author provide you with the information needed to make a fully informed criticism?

Have you discussed with the author what their plans are or are you assuming them based off the narration, especially if the narration is proven or implied to be unreliable or missing key points of the plot? Are you unbiased enough to help them reach their desired outcome for the characters and story regardless of your personal feelings towards the characters/antagonists and setting? Can you handle being told your specific input isn't wanted because you're a reader and/or have no written anything relating to their genre or topic? Do you understand and respect that the author's personal experiences might influence their writing and make it different than how you would have done it personally? Do you understand if an author only wants input from a specific demographic relating to their story?

If it's for fanfiction or other hobby media, are you holding a free hobby to a professional standard? Are you trying to give criticism because you feel like the author has produced 'subpar job performance' of their fic? Are you viewing their work as a personal intimate outlet or something that must conform with mass media? Are you applying rules and guidelines when the fic is shared for simple sharing sake? Is your criticism worded appropriately and focused on the parts where the author has requested input on rather than a general dismissal and or disapproval?

Have you put yourself in a place where you assumed you have the input needed for the story to evolve better, or have you asked what the author needs and what they're having trouble with? Can you handle having your criticism rejected if the author decides their story doesn't need the change and not take it as a personal offense against your character? Are you crossing that boundary because you think you are doing the author a favor? Are you trying to be helpful, or do you just want to be?

I think sometimes when people hear authors go 'please don't give me unsolicited writing advice or criticism' they automatically chalk it up to 'this author doesn't want ANY constructive feedback on their stuff at all' and not "i already have trusted individuals who will help me with my writing goals and- hey i don't know you like that, please stop acting so overly familiar with me'

[crossdreamers]

Real scientists unmask the anti-transgender Cass Review as methodologically flawed and misleading

The Cass Review, a widely cited report on gender-affirming care in the U.K., has been heavily criticized by researchers for its methodological flaws and unsupported claims.

A new peer review published in BMC Medical Research Methodology found that the review lacked statistical rigor, misrepresented evidence, and excluded key studies without justification.

Headed by pediatrician Dr. Hilary Cass, the Cass report dismissed gender-affirming medical care as unreliable, recommending "exploratory therapy," which critics argue is akin to conversion therapy.

The review applied biased analytical methods, misquoted previous studies, and selectively adapted assessment tools to justify anti-trans conclusions.

It also advocated randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for puberty blockers, which experts denounced as unethical. Despite its flaws, the Cass Review influenced policies, leading to a U.K. ban on puberty blockers and contributing to restrictive health measures in the U.S.

Chris Noone and his colleagues write:

Using the ROBIS tool, we identified a high risk of bias in each of the systematic reviews driven by unexplained protocol deviations, ambiguous eligibility criteria, inadequate study identification, and the failure to integrate consideration of these limitations into the conclusions derived from the evidence syntheses. We also identified methodological flaws and unsubstantiated claims in the primary research that suggest a double standard in the quality of evidence produced for the Cass report compared to quality appraisal in the systematic reviews.

Experts urge policymakers to reject the report, calling for research centered on patient autonomy and accurate scientific analysis.

See Them for more.

The science paper can be found here: Critically appraising the cass report: methodological flaws and unsupported claims

[fideidefenswhore]

The rumor about returned gifts, since two informants separately revealed it to him, sounds like an invented event to assure Chapuys of Jane's honor and to neutralize the earlier rumor about Henry's presenting her with gifts. Considering the Seymours' social status and political ambitions, surely they would not have permitted their female relative to refuse presents from the King.

Elizabeth of York and Her Six Daughters-in-Law: Fashioning Tudor Queenship, Retha Warnicke