#what they're doing here is quite frankly unethical

[hopeinthebox]

we all have our thing 🤷‍♂️

[shoobydoo]

Why I, a radical feminist, hate Taylor Swift

This Blog will be divided into two parts! Because my Text exceeded the maximum character count. :)

1/2

I was seriously soooo positively suprised about Taylor Swift when the documentary about her came out but praising her as a feminist icon is embarrasing to say the least. How much tangible activism has taylor provided herself, but most importantly, for other women? she is stamped on making symbolic gestures, talking and talking and talking about her few experiences with the same mysoginy that paid her enough to life without ever having to work again. Oh sorry, I forgot she propably wants to keep up the lavish lifestyle she's living; eating out in fancy restaurants, throwing million dollar 4th of july parties, flying back and forth with her private jet every two to three days, owning several penthouses in the US and running around town wearing gucci fanny packs. Does she really need that? In her songs she claims that the only thing fullfilling her is her boyfriend (see All the Girls). So why this completely unnecessary and sick need for this overkill of materialistic and most of all enviromentally harmfull property? There are a few people living with far less than her and being happy with it but mostly there are millions of people living with far less than her and being on the verge of death, if they're "lucky" poverty. Libfems will attack me for saying this by claiming I am criticizing Taylor simply because she is a woman using her money and by that her freedom for her own pleasure. And yes, that is exactly what I am criticizing. Because Money shouldn't be the shortcut to freedom or pleasure. So I am quite frankly sick and tired of Taylor blurping out some ethical statements about women, gays and poc's here and there. Every Person who has more money than he or she needs and don't decide to use it to help people in need is deeply unethical to me because you are automatically just becoming the oppressor. Her misuse of her ressources will lead to the ruin of millions of other people's lives, most importantly women. May I remind you, that women are still paid far less than men? But obviously, this doesn't affect Taylor, so why should she care? She ONLY started speaking up about feminism when mysoginy affected her negatively. Until then she was all about women vs women (See Better than Revenge, You Belong with Me) and being "the nice girl who doesn't force feminism on you uwu". She was about 8 years into her career when she first spoke up about feminism. At that point she was already hella rich and famous. She claims now to distance herself from white supremacy but when alt-right's worshipped her for her crypto-conservative image and her "aryan beauty" she did not want to position herself, she just wanted those tweet's deleted in silence. When Climate change will hit hard she will have enough ressources to survive it while sipping a martini and watching everyone else drown. Girl Power! And while she is completely caught up by any man who gives her the slightest bit of attention, she really has the nerve go put out a line like "and the voices that implore 'you should be doing more' to you I can admit, that I'm just too soft for all of it". Oh, I'm so sorry that standing up for people who suffer the same oppression you have suffered but in very very more severe ways is so hard on you Taylor. Maybe you wanna take a quick Holiday in Hawaii or South Italy before you decide to speak up about it again? Or maybe you just wanna fly back and forth from your numerous penthouses in the US to lie on your couch and write songs if that helps you? I promise after that you can go straight back to eating out in fany restaurants and going clubbing with the mysoginistic dickhead Matty Healy.

[pynkhues]

If an actor were to go to Europe during the ongoing writer strike and film in a foreign country, would you consider that to be crossing the picket line and unethical? just wondering...

Mmm, that's a complicated question that I think depends a lot on the context, anon.

In the US right now, I think it's very important that actors and crews show solidarity to their writers. After all, without the work of those writers, those productions wouldn't exist at all, and by refusing to read and film those scripts until the writers get what they're owed is a powerful statement in and of itself.

That said, European writers aren't on strike, and European cinema has its own unions, its own standards and is, quite frankly, it's own industry. In that sense, no, I wouldn't personally view that as crossing a picket line at this stage (although my answer would / will be different if SAG-AFTRA goes on strike too).

It's also I think worth noting too that a lot of the international unions are currently in contact with the American ones.

I'm a member of the Australian Writers' Guild and we've had reps who've had meetings with the WGA to keep lines of communication open and to work not necessarily with the WGA, but to follow recommendations to ensure we aren't working against them. This has been distributed to all AWG members and ensures we know what we're doing, don't scab, cross picket lines or harm the WGA strike. That doesn't mean production in Australia has shut down in the way that it has in the States though. Australia has its own industry, just like Europe does, and these industries are still currently operating.

I know a number of Australian productions have American actors in them who are definitely members of SAG-AFTRA, but the projects being made here are covered by MEAA (the Media Entertainment Arts Alliance which is the banner all Australian writing, film, tv, theatre and journalism unions fall under, including the actors union). Knowing that MEAA, through AWG, has been in touch with the WGA makes me believe they've very likely been in touch with SAG-AFTRA too when it comes to working out what's appropriate for American actors in Australian productions in light of the strike.

I'd like to think it's at least fairly similar in different countries across Europe with the unions reaching agreements between themselves and recommendations being made as to the ways American actors are able to work in foreign industries outside of Hollywood right now.

Again though, I do think that'll change if SAG-AFTRA does go on strike too.

[david-box]

I'll try to be concise but some of the surface level discourse around fast fashion frustrates me because people seem to be extremely willing to file it under "no ethical consumption" as in "quit asking me to do shit" instead of "capitalism at it's core is unethical and relies on subjugation beyond the worker-boss dynamic" or any other definition.

Individual consumer choices (...made as a group) are an important part of handling the negative effects of the textile industry. We obviously need to change the industry, we can do this in part with different habits around our clothes -> decreasing the demand for a clothes, it's not impossible at all, and the political changes are going to require consumer ones either before they're made or after.

I'm going to skip over the part where I talk about how the industry makes too much clothes and too much of it plastic etc. etc. because I feel like people on here already know that but here's the epa report anyway. Like if you've clicked on this I assume you already know about microplastics and sweatshops and shit on at least a surface level.

A lot of people complaining about industry effects on the environment seem to just not want to think that a change in demand could do anything at all and will directly say that it doesn't, but it does, I swear to god. If people buying more of their clothes online can kill Forever 21 imagine what we can do like, on purpose.

Like I think we all saw the supply chain issues being partially because people didn't buy shit for a good amount of time, so supply went down. Because demand went down. I don't know how to keep explaining this I'm just tired of people saying or implying this.

The fast fashion industry relies on, is fueled by, and drives demand for cheap, quick clothes. You need sweatshops if you want it cheap, you need petroleum if you want it fast, and you need a marketing team for people to buy your cheap quick shit clothes. The people who drive this collective western habit have every ability to ignore the marketing that drives it.

The demographic who does buy H&M or whatever has the ability to change their habits. They aren't too poor to change, again it's common knowledge poor people already shop secondhand and try to make their clothes last like we they have for literal centuries. They aren't struggling to find their size and therefore can't stop, because most of the time fast fashion doesn't carry non-"standard" sizes (I had to learn to sew lol). Frankly, it's people offline that like to shop for clothes and keep up with trends that don't know what the industry is like or don't keep it in their heads, and people online wanting ad money for $200 hauls.

A change in the fashion industry is already happening to a certain extent: people asked for more sustainable fashion and the industry responded and made it a selling point. I don't know how honest this response is, but you get my point.

We will not be able to effectively regulate the textile industry on a national or international without changes in the way we buy and treat clothes. We can demand fairer wages for the people who actually sew the clothes, but if companies still have tons of profit from their polyester bullshit it'll be harder to fight them (although the effects of boycotting during any labor activism is it's own discussion but again you get my point I hope). We can demand better dumping practices for unsold clothes but if we never decrease the amount made it'll be harder because those clothes have to go *somewhere.* We can try to control dumping from the secondhand industry (because that's how much clothes we have, even secondhand stores have to dump perfectly good shit) but again, if we have the same amount of secondhand clothes... you see what I mean.

Frankly, if we do completely reshape the fashion and generally the textile industry into something more sustainable and less sweatshop-polyester-nightmare-y without changes in habits, our habits will have to change anyway. Better wages don't *have* to make prices go up but they will probably hike those prices up realistically speaking. Less dumping areas across seas might not make production go down, but it probably will, so there'll be less supply, so higher prices again unless demand goes down with it. Even if it doesn't, less clothes being made/available will require those middle-upper class consumers and everyone else to have different clothing habits. Genuinely why not just start now.

Individual consumer choices are not a rat race towards $300 ultra sustainable bullshit or living off the grid. Buying less clothing and making what you do wear last longer helps!!! It's necessary, it works, it can continue to work, it's very possible, and our habits are going to have to change in the long run anyways. We need to leave this "oh but what about the fact that ALL clothes are unethical :-///" discussion behind and focus on how we will actually make these changes on the ground level and then *do them*.

[swithe-ist]

Hi, I'm quite new to Holby City and I'm a huge fan of the Gaskell storyline, as well as your commentary. I was watching S15E13, and I noticed there were maybe some things that might become relevant, or could be if the writers are smart about it. Henrik's dad could be a mirror for John, seeing as they're both scientists using unethical methods for the greater good, whereas Henrik would be a mirror character for his mother. (continued in next ask)

The comparison is drawn in the fact that Henrik took his mother's name, and this line here: "Have you never wanted to escape? Feel that weightlessness one only feels in water? Finally feel truly free. I'd like nothing more." When he thinks about dying, it's always the way that she did. I think that'll be important given that we know emotional Henrik scenes were filmed at a lake for this season. (continued again!)        

The interesting thing is, Henrik learns that his mother killed herself not because of his dad's unethical practices, but because she couldn't live without him when he left. It would be interesting if the Henrik/John storyline called back to that situation in some way. What do you think?            

-- --

Wow my first ask! *chinhands*

Thanks so much for the feedback, it made me smile! And I love your idea - this is presupposing, unfortunately, that they’re committed to having Johnrik be a thing, which, despite a lot of teasing and plausability, still not a sure thing. I have this horrible feeling they’re going to pull the rug out and make it unrequited or something like that.

It would be cool (you know, relatively) and poetic for the story to echo Henrik’s parents thing. It’s freeing for the writers, I think, for him not to be CEO anymore. They’re free to explore his character and his heart properly, without him having work to hide behind so much.

I despise that they’re teaming him up with Essie (tho I guess he seduced her too) to work through what happened. I would much rather him be paired with the characters he actually has bonds with --- Dom/Lofty - much, much stronger rapport and frankly their storyline is way too sidelined considering they’re about to be MARRIED. It’s such an easy tie-in!! Seeing how fucked up Henrik/John’s relationship was and for so long (~IF IT'S EVEN REAL~) might give the boys something to mull before entering wedlock. And Lofty, despite being a dumbass, is really a very good facilitator for conversation when it’s not between him and Dom.Henrik would also get to reflect on his relationships and his parents and why he’s so fucked up!

Ideally also with Jac, because of the parent-thing except Gaskell’s fucked her over good and proper and they didn’t talk after Fredrik so.... not holding my breath.

Anyway I’m off on a tangent. My main point being - and I think you’d agree - the writing’s not fantastic. But nothing’s wrong with a little optimism, right? Maybe they’ll commit.... maybe..............