mixelation

[mixelation]

Hi! Do you have a favorite plant or animal?

My favorite animal is penguins!! I also like crabs

[mixelation]

does tori have a birthday

i decided not to include any dates (except for tori mentions half-o-ween) so as the passage of time can be whatever you want and for the timeline to equal the mobius strip of the canon timeline. but if you must know it was going to be march 12

[mixelation]

feeling the sads tonight. who wants to send me asks

[mixelation]

me trying to write any Irish word: if I just hit some letters I know are in there, can google tell what I mean? No? Not even close? okay well thanks for nothing

[mixelation]

Oh yeah, I saw Weapons (the movie) last night! It was really good. I told my friends who are babies about horror that they wouldn’t like it because the first half of the movie is pretty tense/spooky/has some jump scares. But if you can get through that, the later half of the movie is just fun (with some violence and body horror).

[mixelation]

Do you ever wonder if the older akatsuki members like sasori or orochimaru played a role in developing some part of rain village? Assuming that Hanzo was overthrown earlier in the series, Nagato and Konan would have had to learn how to manage a village at 20 at the oldest, and I’m personally convinced they’re both barely literate

Hmmm, no, I don’t think they’d like letting outsiders directly influence the village/country. It’s not like they wouldn’t have other actual Ame-nin to help them. I’m also not sure in the manga that they’re explicitly the leaders? Like Pein calls himself “god” so maybe he has a ninja pope who does most of the actual paperwork stuff.

(Using Tobi’s help to make Akatsuki is okay because obviously Pein and Konan are just using Akatsuki for their power and are immune to outside influences, duh)

[mixelation]

i'm halfway & also last night i looked up the author

so it turns out jeanine pirro is our trump-appointed u.s. attorney for the district of columbia and got into some controversy about spreading the idea that the 2020 election was rigged.

tbh i'm not super surprised based on the tone of her book? pirro has headed some very pro-women movements, but there's also a sort of egotism and weird double-standards happening. like she complains the media will focus on her appearance over what she actually does, but then go out of her way to describe her outfits (including dropping name brands) and that she was included in people magazine's 50 most beautiful. sometimes this makes sense/is interesting (like she mentions she always wears red at the beginning of a trial to get people's attention, or she talks about wandering around a galveston beach in heels as a way to paint a sort of clash between her big cuty new york style and the more laid back approach in texas), but often it's just there because... it's there? i definitely get being proud of one's appearance AND wanting people to focus on professional accomplishments, but this duality isn't navigated well and sort of comes off like she's just saying whatever comes to mind without trying to make a real point. oh, also she frequently references just giving in to men's demands (or, when she has more power, she kind of saying "no" and then not taking further action) in a very dismissive "that's just how men are!" way. so it's very like.... yeah, i can see how this sort of attitude leads to one becoming one of the many high-ranking female republicans lol

oh, she also talks about her job with the supposition that high numbers of convictions are a sign she and her office are doing a good job, because (based on her attitude), she seems to assume that anyone being brought to trial is already guilty. i will agree, based on what is presented in this book, crime statistics, and the fact that he low-key confessed (and DEFINITELY confessed, on record, to mutilating his dead neighbor's body, but not that he killed the guy first?), that robert durst is likely guilty.* however this attitude is common in true crime spaces and largely annoys me. like i totally understand why a prosecutor thinks like this (or how thinking like this leads one to become a prosecutor), but it's also like.... idk, for me & my experiences it's a normal attitude for someone in the 90s and early 2000s, but AGAIN it's sort of like "yes i see how this could lead to you thinking 2020 was rigged"

*i looked it up. he was convicted of the murder of a woman he was good friends with, who was killed right after the news that the case had been reopened went public. he was finally charged with the murder of kathleen durst but passed away before it could go to trial.

curiously, her wikipedia page says she's written 7 books, but she's definitely written eight. the list is missing this book, AND robert durst's page also has no mention of this book. wikipedia does not list this book at all.

overall the tone of this book is pretty bizarre. it cannot seem to decide if it's meant to be pirro's autobiography or a book about the durst case. TBH pirro's life seems interesting enough to have a biography worth reading AND her sassy wording makes reading about legal explanations entertaining, but given this is marketed as a book about catching a murderer.... it comes off as disrespectful and bizarre in several places. for example, i feel like i know very little about kathleen herself, but i do know what type of car jeanine rides around new york in. or: so, they reopen the case in 1999, their key witness susan berman is murdered in december 2000 and a couple of articles that the case has been reopened go public, and then september 11, 2001 happens. that 9/11 would pause an investigation makes complete sense, but there's several pages of pirro describing how her office helped victims. that's great, but honestly she could have cut that down to a few paragraph in order to stay on-topic to the case. the way it's presented, it comes off like she's going on an aside to pat her own ego

i also wish the book went more into the police work/forensics. they touch on it (like re-interviewing witnesses), but i think a major aspect of what draws me to true crime is like seeing how we know what we know from evidence, and arguments for/against what that evidence could mean. but no one ever wants to deviate from a clean, direct story :(

a book i impulse bought more recently is a 2.9 on storygraph and also true crime so. wish me luck

[mixelation]

horse girl story but it’s a girl and her pathogenic bacteria

[mixelation]

turns out it was cause they were just straight up eating the poisoned food out of rat traps which has a blue dye in it and had just developed a near total immunity another W for the glorious hog

[mixelation]

When i get rich i'll commission you thousands to write your boob fics. For now i can pitch in like, $2 to a kofi here and there if you started one

Okay but it’s $2 PER boob

[mixelation]

If you set up a kofi account I will pay you money just so you can write more unhinge Tori fics

aw thank you!! i do feel super weird about the idea of basically being paid for fic tho. what if i came up with some other trick

[mixelation]

btw if any of you are ultra wealthy and willing to pay me for stupid shit please make yourself known

[mixelation]

for example i don't think i have ever read someone on here make a cognizant comment on sample size, only that any study that they don't like doesn't have a big enough one. i want to see the unhinged criticism

one day i hope i find my own research on one of those posts where everyone argues if the study design is good or not and it's very clear no one knows anything about design or the subject. i think it would be fun

[mixelation]

one day i hope i find my own research on one of those posts where everyone argues if the study design is good or not and it's very clear no one knows anything about design or the subject. i think it would be fun

[mixelation]

i guess i'm liveblogging reading

the book is he killed them all by jeanine pirro, which i picked up from a bargain bin because of the attention-grabbing title. i bought it because i've been meaning to try reading some true crime books to see what they're like for "read what you want to write" reasons* and also it was marked down to $4

*i do not want to write true crime. i want to write about about people who work in true crime and fans of true crime. (i do consume a reasonable amount of true crime content and get the appeal, but it's podcasts/youtubers and i have a lot of criticisms of it as a genre)

in 1999, pirro was the distract attorney who okayed reopening the cold case of kathleen durst, a medical student who went missing in 1982. the book jacket says pirro felt a kinship with kathleen, which is why she then spent the rest of her life dedicated to making the case that kathleen's husband, mega-wealthy and NYC old money robert durst, killed her. the jacket then went on to say the world cast pirro as "the bad guy" which i thought was... kind of a weird framing for a book about a missing woman.

the first two chapters are about pirro now (well, "now" as in when the book was published in 2015), doing her TV show on Fox and going to a watch party of a documentary on robert durst, where she describes how much make-up you have to wear for TV and what her outfits are like. this already is kind of weird to me. it's also all worded like i should have already watched one of multiple documentaries on robert durst (he's been accused of three murders, including kathleen's), but i have never heard of this man before. it took piecing together asides about his crimes to put together any information, and i gave up trying to keep track of the name drops she was making. when it was just the first chapter, i thought maybe it was just meant to be in media res style tease that went on a little too long for my tastes, but no, it's the first TWO chapters.

third and forth chapters (where i've read to) finally start to get into kathleen's case and has some background on pirro. this part is actually pretty interesting and i got through the two chapters quickly. by going over her own professional history (pirro went to law school during a time when this was NOT common for women, and then headed one of the first domestic violence units in the country), we get a better sense of what new york city and its surrounding counties were like at the time of kathleen's disappearance, especially in terms of how the police and legal system approached domestic violence and women. pirro also goes over how the case was brought to her attention and why she wanted to reopen it, and flaws she found in the initial investigation. (basically, that there wasn't much of an investigation at all-- the lead detective essentially just took Robert's story at face value, talked to like two witnesses who corroborated it, and called it a day, then actively ignored more information brought forward by one of kathleen's friends.)

but.... pirro still comes off as super opinionated, and does stuff like go into detail about what her DA's office looked like and other extraneous details. i understand that sometimes "unnecessary" details about what people involved in the case are like (appearance wise, how they behave, etc) can help keep a reader interested and also inform why things unfold they way they did. but it also in places comes off as pretty self-aggrandizing. like, is this about kathleen or pirro???

a book i impulse bought more recently is a 2.9 on storygraph and also true crime so. wish me luck

[mixelation]

do you think book club victims would end up forming their own post-book club support group?

no, they really know about each other. also most of them don't consider themselves "victims"-- tori is genuinely trying to befriend a lot of them and there's nothing wrong with book club. it's a gathering of well respected people in the hokage's residence. maybe you walk out feeling terrified and refusing to ever return but no one is like "i was targeted by a maniac and bullied"

[mixelation]

in the introduction the author (the prosecuting lawyer on... something) claims she knew the guy was guilty based on "guts and instinct" and i got up to get something to write notes on

i've had some very high-concept ideas for stories about fictional crime which criticize truecrime as a genre and i've been meaning to collect some notes to self about. one of them is the persistent narrative of "oh but we ALL KNOW they did it!!"

a book i impulse bought more recently is a 2.9 on storygraph and also true crime so. wish me luck