#forensic discourse analysis

[forensicfield]

Forensic Linguistics

Here is a glossary of key terms related to Forensic Linguistics:

1. Forensic Linguistics: The application of linguistic knowledge, methods, and techniques to legal and criminal investigations, including the analysis of spoken and written language for legal evidence.

2. Linguistic Analysis: The systematic examination and interpretation of language, including its structure, usage, and meaning, to uncover insights and evidence in legal contexts.

3. Authorship Attribution: The process of determining the author or origin of a written text by analyzing linguistic features, such as writing style, vocabulary, and grammar.

4. Linguistic Profiling: The analysis of language to create a profile of an individual, including their demographic information, cultural background, and psychological characteristics.

5. Discourse Analysis: The study of language in use, focusing on how language is structured and used in different contexts, such as conversations, interviews, and legal proceedings.

6. Stylistic Analysis: The examination of linguistic features, such as word choice, sentence structure, and tone, to identify patterns and characteristics that can help identify the author or origin of a text.

7. Phonetics: The study of the physical aspects of speech sounds, including how they are produced, transmitted, and perceived.

8. Phonology: The study of the organization and patterns of sounds in languages, including the rules and structures that govern their use.

9. Morphology: The study of the structure and form of words, including how words are constructed from smaller meaningful units called morphemes.

10. Syntax: The study of the structure and arrangement of words to form grammatically correct sentences and phrases.

11. Semantics: The study of meaning in language, including how words and sentences convey ideas and information.

12. Pragmatics: The study of how language is used in real-world contexts, including the role of context, social factors, and implied meanings in communication.

13. Linguistic Variation: The study of how language varies across different speakers, dialects, regions, and social groups.

14. Sociolinguistics: The study of how language and society interact, including the social and cultural factors that influence language use and variation.

15. Language Documentation: The process of recording and preserving endangered languages, including their grammar, vocabulary, and cultural context.

16. Expert Witness: A professional who provides specialized knowledge and expertise in a particular field, such as forensic linguistics, to assist in legal proceedings and provide expert testimony.

17. Legal Discourse: The language and communication used in legal contexts, including legal documents, court proceedings, and legal arguments.

18. Miranda Rights: The rights of individuals in the United States, as established by the Supreme Court case Miranda v. Arizona (1966), which include the right to remain silent and the right to have an attorney present during police interrogations.

19. Linguistic Evidence: Language-based evidence, such as written documents, recorded conversations, or linguistic analysis, that is used to support or refute claims in legal proceedings.

20. Linguistic Proficiency: The level of skill and competence in a particular language, including the ability to understand, speak, read, and write in that language.

[lunacysecretgarden-blog]

Okay, so here's my modest contribution to the #hiddlesconda conversation...

Like, I discussed it with ChatGPT (#mybestfriend), and it made me laugh so hard I just can't...

Here goes:

Exactly! You can respect the hell out of him and still marvel at the architecture of those pants. It’s not his fault the costume department went, “Let’s highlight everything vertically, stitch it snugly down the center, and use a shiny material that reflects light and contour.” Like… what were they thinking? Were they designing for battle or for boudoir lighting?

And yes, the left image really is the icon. That pose, the lighting, the angle—it’s practically the Mona Lisa of Loki bulge discourse. Once you’ve seen it, there’s no going back.

I think part of the charm is exactly what you said: Tom himself is so respectful, humble, and focused on the craft… and meanwhile the internet is having full-blown forensic discussions about his trousers. It’s like two completely separate universes colliding.

If you ever made a private little “hall of fame” of his best accidental style crimes, that left image would definitely be framed.

Oh my god, yes... I understand why he repeatedly said in interviews he's staying away from Tumblr and, like, not searching his name on the internet ever...

Oh absolutely. Can you imagine innocently Googling your name and being hit with an avalanche of GIFs titled “The Hiddlesconda Strikes Again” or “Frame-by-Frame Analysis of Loki’s Bounce Physics”? Like… no one is mentally prepared for that level of detailed scrutiny on their own crotch area.

And poor Tom, with his Shakespearean soul and Cambridge-trained eloquence, probably just wanted to talk about character arcs and emotional depth… Meanwhile, Tumblr's over here like, “Yes, but have you considered the trajectory of your leather pants in motion?”

He knows, though. That subtle, slightly pained smile he gets when people allude to it in interviews? That’s the face of a man who’s very aware of the chaos but trying desperately to stay above the waistline, conversationally speaking.

Honestly… he handles it all like a saint.

Yes, it's probably best for his own sanity... and the fact that he decided to stay away from it probably means at the beginning he's tried once... and "ok I'm not doing it again ever in my life. Ever." But yeah, he's so intelligent and witty, and well educated and articulate,and so interesting to listen to, because he's genuinely interested in the emotional depth of his characters... but then the costume details happened. .. And yet - thanks God for him and for Loki's charism and grandeur - the modesty flap came in.

Exactly—he probably typed “Tom Hiddleston Tumblr” into Google once, saw the chaos erupt like Mount Vesuvius in leather, and whispered to himself: "Nope. Never again."

It’s such a wild contrast, isn’t it? On one side: Tom, the eloquent, classically trained actor, speaking in flowing metaphors about Hamlet, loss, betrayal, or the duality of Loki’s identity. On the other: the internet gleefully screaming, “LOOK AT THAT THING IN HIS PANTS.”

And yet… somehow it all coexists. Because Loki is that magnetic, that iconic. The grandeur, the pain behind the eyes, the voice, the gravitas—and then, well, the silhouette. It’s no wonder people lost their minds. The modesty flap was the MCU’s way of saying: “Let’s give this man the dignity his performance deserves… and protect the audience’s blood pressure.”

Honestly, it’s poetic in its own right. The tension between brilliance and thirst. Between Asgardian tragedy and Tumblr tags.

Would you ever want to write a funny or poetic little tribute to the flap itself? Because now I kinda want to…

[unlikeable-female-character]

the amount of people ive had to block on this app because they keep speculating about Hughs personal life/sutton drama and keep using his tag. like geez if they want to talk about it fine just dont use his tag like I just wanna look at hot pics of him not read posts calling him a horrible person and saying how his kids didnt look happy in the Australia photos and were more relaxed around deb. thank god I blocked those people.

Huge advocate of the block function on any social media platform here 🙋‍♀️ I can find the pettiest reasons to block someone and will happily do so. If someone is stealing your joy, block, block and block again. Also never underestimate a person’s desire to spread their misery to as many other people as possible so of course they are going to spam his tag with this shit.

I don’t expect people to even engage one second of logical thinking in situations like this and - surprise! - they don’t. Acting like they know what Hugh, Deb and even Sutton are thinking or feeling is one thing - we at least ‘know’ a version of them - but they are still ultimately strangers. People starting to try and claim to know how their kids are feeling is quite another. They aren’t in the public eye and so should be kept out of the discourse entirely.

However since people are going there…from what I recall I saw at least three different sets of shots of Hugh and his kids, so three different outings. Not sure, as adults with their own minds, they would be so keen to spend that much time with him if their relationship with him was bad. Not to mention they were all paparazzi shots - the pics of Deb with their daughter were at an event where the photographs were not only posed for but expected.

A photograph is one moment in time. Trying to extrapolate what a person they don’t know feels from a photograph and claiming it has any validity is just weird.

It’s also funny how people have pivoted from ‘keep their kids out of this’ to ‘let me forensically analysis this picture of their children’. Sometimes hypocrisy is the only value people truly embrace.

Ultimately, it’s been a month and the fact that people are still acting like Hugh is The Worst for doing something that hasn’t even been confirmed is ridiculous. The way people have gone from ‘don’t believe anything in the tabloids’ to ‘everything in the tabloids is 1000000% true and factual!!!!1’ is really sad. If it isn’t clear now that they are just printing the most outrageous shit because they know they will get clicks then there’s not much hope for anyone.

Also in that month a hell of a lot of bad shit has gone down in the world that is waaaaaaay more important than and has much far more reaching consequences than if an actor was a naughty boy or not. It’s past time people got a grip and either stop talking about him or move past it and just enjoy his work 🤷‍♀️

[philocalistherz]

⋅ʚ The visual illusion of presumed innocence and the art of constructing the truth⋅ʚ

Scene analysis of Anatomy of a Fall (2023).

➴ June 08, 2025. ₊˚ෆ

💭 Technical data.

𖥔 Timecode: 1:35:12 – 1:38:37 𖥔 Scene referenced: Sandra and her husband's recorded discussion during the second session of the trial.

────────────────────── ୨ৎ ───────────────────

𖥔 Scene background and description:

Following an unsupervised conversation between Sandra (Sandra Hüller) and Daniel (Milo Machado), the session is adjourned and the judge asks the clerk to provide the transcription of Exhibit 31 to those present. As the characters exchange glances, the focus shifts between the screen, the defendant and her team, and a flashback of the situation presented.

Samuel (played by Samuel Theis) and Sandra argue in the kitchen about their difficult relationship, bringing up past events and present people to support their arguments. Sandra is adamant: "The frustration is there, and we're both dealing with it." As the argument continues, the faces of the jurors in the courtroom come into focus alongside Sandra's frustrated dialogue. Her accusations towards Samuel are accompanied by shots of the other male jurors, as well as of Daniel, the couple's son. The explicit words of his parents are shown in a transcript cut. A wide shot returns to the vastness of the courtroom before focusing on Sandra, her legal team, and finally the prosecutor and witness. The latter concludes with the statement: 'A physical altercation, the defendant hitting her husband'.

────────────────────── ୨ৎ ───────────────────

I. PRACTICAL AND GENERAL FACTORS THE MONTAGE

Seeing the compositional units as interconnected and interchangeable elements is what makes this scene so particular and relevant to the final work, as its placement of shots and cuts is strategic for the construction of parallel internal discourses, serving as narrative tools that scale the environment, depriving itself of elements such as the soundtrack to emphasize the sobriety of the scene.

Initially it is a shot and counter-shot, marked by the prevalence in Sandra's character, and all the time used on this one, even when parts of her monologue could be “filled” with shots of Samuel, is focused solely and exclusively on her presumed truth. The more weighty accusations are kept with the camera following the protagonist, only turning to her opposite when it comes to unveiling attitudes that somehow replace what has been built in previous scenes.

And that's the trick, because Anatomy of a Fall is more like “Dissection of a presumed innocence”. Where the montage plays the role of forensic scientist and Victor Frankenstein by recomposing at will the perception of the spectator from a language codified in the visual, the clues are hidden in the duration of its shots, in the overlapping of its sound; in the supposed truth of the living over the reality of the dead in “objectivity”.

Even in matters that some might consider 'superficially aesthetic', we can interpret the lighting in Samuel's response to Sandra as a reflection of the internal conflict he experiences, as well as his silence.

The axioms in this test go beyond a simple flashback from the transcript. The way it is presented to us, and the intelligence of the cuts, appeal to viewers and divide them into the same thirds as the jury of this mock court. So why would there be a cut to the women in the room when the social imposition of 'parental responsibility' is present? Why do we see the men when Sandra accuses Samuel of being 'a monster'?

The camera stalks Daniel in a tracking shot, much like his parents' interpretation of his past comments. If this sequence were resolved with the same stillness as the others, it would not have the desired effect. Thompson asserts that there is a science to what is seen and how it is seen, and this is refined bit by bit within the film's ephemeral verisimilitude. The cut to the screen reveals this clever deception, this construction of a truth disguised as objectivity, which we must determine as observers.

Daniel is in the foreground. The artificial depth of his surroundings is reduced to blurred members of the audience. Even the light serves as a 'cut-out' or 'visual dissociation' for the character, accompanied by the dialogue reproduced on stage and the spotlight. The camera acts as our prosecutor and witness, presenting the facts, albeit not as they happened. This ambiguity mirrors the uncertainty surrounding the veracity of this final transcript, which was not created by the victim, but by a third party.

────────────────────── ୨ৎ ───────────────────

II. CONTINUITY

Triet's cinematography is full of fractal units that move from side to side like a tennis match. If we take the second session fragment and break it down into functional sub-units, we realise that its continuity is fractured. However, it is simultaneously kept connected by the transcription bridge, which transcends the unit and keeps us in two places at once: the past and the present, superimposed for the analysis of an uncertain future. The absence of music is not a minor detail, as maintaining focus on so many elements simultaneously necessitates the sacrifice of certain tools.

The thematic rhythm in Anatomy of a Fall is presented fairly clearly at the beginning of the film. The incessant repetition of an instrumental and the back-and-forth between Sandra's innocence and guilt form two sides of a coin that spins on the table. A simple association must be made to grasp the variability of the film:

𖥔 Sandra imposes her truth over Samuel's.

𖥔 Both use Daniel as a pawn of presumed neutrality and trustworthiness to undermine the other's argument.

If we abstract this function and bring it to trifle, we can perceive a repetition in a fractal manner throughout the film, but is it present in the chosen fragment? Of course, the evidence presented serves not only in the trial with narrative implications, but also as a demonstration of the film's anatomical code:

Truth posed → Oppositional assertion to the truth posed → “Mediating” point that confirms / denies said truth → both sides create a new truth → opposition to the new truth.

This rhythm serves as the fundamental piece of the montage for the work, but it is only a synesthetic perception: an association with the absent music that is repeated ad nauseam by the spectator and the characters. This may or may not be concordant with the perceptions of others.

In the second chapter of El Montaje Cinematográfico (1971), Sánchez emphasises the importance of variety within a film's temporal rhythm. He discards this because of the weariness it can cause, but it is one of the resources used in Anatomy of a Fall. After all, what kind of person would not assume that the same arguments are being repeated without any change? The details are hidden in the subtle twists, precise cuts and timing of the shots, and the spatio-temporal relationship of the multifaceted monotony. Going from one lie to another and from the past to the present with the plans is just an overlay of units, a new branding that not only works to avoid jadedness, but also emphasises the intrinsic meaning of the large-scale fragment with contrasting elements.

Moving from one lie to another and from the past to the present with the plans is simply an overlay of the units — a new branding that not only avoids jadedness, but also emphasises the intrinsic meaning of the large-scale fragment with its contrasting elements.

────────────────────── ୨ৎ ───────────────────

III. DIALOGUES

The fragment presents the pre-climax of the discussion (the 'flashback' that runs alongside the transcript presented at the trial) and the dialogue works in tandem with the scene montage. The découpage is simply an arrangement of elements, and the trial scene is an insect posed in a particular and thoughtful way, both within the diegesis and in its presentation as a work of fiction. This is evident even before the set-up and cutting, and the premeditated nature of the découpage is clear from the outset in the literary script.

The manipulation of time and space in Anatomy of a Fall goes beyond the editor's need to create a consistent narrative; it plays with the subtle gaps allowed by the dialogue to present dual, mostly visual narratives. The decision to keep Sandra's monologue with few cuts adds weight to her accusations, as do the direct cuts and the length of Samuel's silence. This silence exists in the void where the script does not interrupt, and where editing builds increasing tension as the dispute progresses.

The subtle zoom-in draws the viewer's attention to the character, and the decision to keep his hand in shot adds cohesion and continuity to the scene, emphasising the intention to portray Samuel as a coward to his wife.

In the section of the fragment (02:28–02:41), a detail that may have been overlooked in the general fatigue of the scene is brought to the viewer's attention. Samuel did not transcribe the last recording of his project properly, which gives rise to trickery in the test. As life is made up of balanced lies and strategic snippets of truth, so too is editing. The theory of evidence tampering for the benefit of the victim is therefore quite feasible. The fact that we see a visual representation of such a discussion is not an arbitrary choice on the part of the editing team, but rather a way to appeal to the victim's truth and the curiosity of the jury on the other side of the screen. But how easy is it to tamper with audio, diegetically speaking? Not as easy as it sounds. Anyone who has edited audiovisual material for long enough will know it's not impossible.

This is one of the tricks of intention that can be achieved with montage: how the distribution of information may alter the audience's response and persuade them to choose X or Y, depending on the director's intention. In this case, the intention remains intermediate for dramatic effect, given the possibility that subjective truth is merely a montage of memory and not an objective fact.

The abstraction of the information is characterised by clean, direct cuts that resemble literary similes and give the sensation of unequivocal continuity. This continuity is premeditated, just as the crime committed in the film is premeditated, as the same direct raccord used for the present facts is also manifested in the uncertain past.

The length of the dialogues could be interpreted as either an attempt by Sandra to force Samuel to act, or a motive for her alleged murder. Her dialogue exists even when she is outside the frame, above the jury and herself. Their justification could be varied as each subsequent shot opens up a new possibility, but their converging element is clear: she is fed up and dominates the discussions, as we can infer from Samuel's words.

Burch highlights a truth I wish to recover in Praxis of Cinema (1969): 'An editor will tell us that there is only a fair place for direct raccord or for an ellipsis'. This is a crucial moment where truth meets manipulation — a loophole that the fictional lawyers in this footage would adore. Where better to completely truncate a piece of evidence than here? Where it cannot be perceived and neither viewers nor the jury can provide more than reliable evidence, and where internal transposition or play with the story leads us to select this fragment.

────────────────────── ୨ৎ ───────────────────

IV. CHARACTER MOVEMENTS

The way in which the movements interact with the characters is closely linked to the emotions presented by the actors. While the camera follows Sandra's frantic movements in close-up, Daniel's more static direct cuts and medium shots act as a contrast, as does the empty space to his left — at least in the first part of the fragment.

The court is still and expectant as the camera zooms in, abruptly cutting to the awkward moment when the judge stands up and the prosecutor (02:15) reacts, visible in her expression and sudden movement as the shot changes.

Beyond the direct cut and the interplay of dialogue, there are few resources. The sound remains within the diegesis of the two presented areas, emphasising their direct relationship. This sequence can almost be read as if it were real time, as the weight of the silences and the length of the speeches create the sensation of being another witness in the room.

────────────────────── ୨ৎ ───────────────────

V. CAMERA MOVEMENTS

Among the possibilities explored in articulating movements, several things can be highlighted: Tracking Sandra versus static shots of Samuel's actions; a tracking shot that wraps around Daniel, leaving us with him for long enough to sense his guilt over his words, which are now being used as a weapon in an argument that does not concern him; a seemingly anticlimactic zoom that cuts off the argument and brings the viewer back to the present; subtle panning; and the prosecutor's questions directed at Samuel's witness.

Eisenstein qualifies these combinations as oppositions of dynamic content. Something polyphonic occurs in this fragment, but it is devoid of musicality. It is as if the shots and their durations were Morse code, speaking directly to the audience. There is a reiteration of cuts, from solitary subjects to condensed groups, and of legal oppositions, shot sizes and moral assumptions. These finally form a piece that culminates in suspense. Burch's comparison with cubism is apt, as the reiterative elements in Anatomy of a Fall can be distinguished according to their intention and the 'colour' of the intended subtext. These elements can be sustained visually without causing the viewer undue fatigue.

────────────────────── ୨ৎ ───────────────────

VI. CONCLUSIONS

The relationship between an editor and their audience can be compared to the artistic processes of writing and photography. Understanding the way people think and using this knowledge to enhance the narrative is an important part of storytelling. If Triet's film were not subtle and intelligent in its use of audio cuts and overlays, it would be genuinely indigestible. The gaze of someone who possesses all the evidence allows us to unravel layer upon layer of interpretation from a single sequence that encapsulates the encoded anatomy within.

The atmosphere is created through meticulous editing, giving us an enjoyable sequence that keeps us on the edge of our seats, waiting to see who or what the new culprit will be in the jury's mind and in ours as witnesses on the other side of the screen. Who will we give the truth to before we change our minds? More importantly, which side will the coin finally fall on?

This scene is not only a visual representation of a confrontation; it is also a clever piece of editing that skilfully manipulates the viewer's perception and challenges them to discern the truth from the characters' subjective interpretations.

-ˋˏ philocalistherzˎˊ

[p0v2snsitive4thintnet]

Visual Analysis / Interpretation

Forensic Visual Description

White background, shows an animated, read as female figure with white long hair in a white dress with white flowers printed on it. They seem to be wearing white thighs or stockings. Their eyes are dark and surrounded with long lashes. Their bangs are short and frame their face. The figure is lying on their stomach on no subsurface, just on white, empty space. Their feet are crossed and held up in the air. Over the figure is a layer of black cursive text in a handwritten kind of font. It says “Too sensitive for the internet”. The text isn’t centred in the picture but consists of 3, centre-aligned lines, edging the left margin of the image. 

On the Platform Pinterest. 27 comments, 490 hearts. By the user “esther sweetheart” - the comments are mostly affirming the statement the meme makes. Comments are partly made with reaction memes. 

https://at.pinterest.com/pin/239183430202433621/

REFLECTIONS

This describes perfectly how I feel as a girl online. It’s hard to describe why though. It’s probably linked to mental health issues being linked to online / social media interaction, which can be cruel often times. I feel not resilient enough to experience the deepest, darkest spheres the internet has to offer. Hell I have never felt comfortable on 4chan - ever. Still I am going on that site from time to time to expose myself to the hate and bullying there. Why would I do that? Like the girl in the picture - I can sense that I am actually loosing more than I am gaining from this experiences, but I also know that I can’t stop doing it. That would mean exclusion. No edginess, no laughs and not being “that one girl” who browses on the infamous internet’s hells. It would also mean that all content I get could be described by Bo Burnhams song “white woman’s instagram” and that sounds even more like hell tbh. At least it would be boring a.f.

FEELINGS

This is where I start with this project. It is a meme I encountered while researching for my last project and it stuck with me ever since. I view it as a piece of media that ignited a lot of the thoughts and questions I am looking into right now. How are girls viewed on the internet? How are their reactions/ their creations/ their contributions to the online discourse differ from other content? How does “The girl online” present and perform herself?  

QUESTIONS

Where else can the phenomenon of not feeling save on the internet as a girl be perceived? In which types of media? On which platforms? Does this relate only to GIRLs online? Why do I have this feeling? 

Intertextuality

Their mouth is closed. Which makes them non-speaking in this picture. This brings up the question if the text of the meme is layered over them because it is referring to them and is attributed to the figure by an external source. Or if they are presenting themselves as being “too sensitive for the internet”. 

I think this question is important to ask oneself when trying to understand the intertextual layers of this meme. 

"Lolly" teenage girl lying on tummy position

The above picture of summer from OC California was the first thing that came to my mind when thinking about the pose of the figure in the image. A teenager, relaxing in their bed. 

This pose is very familiar to me. I think I did it as a girl / young woman as part of gender performance and to cater to the male gaze. 

Examples of this are also often found in anime. Especially in the “lolly” genre. 

Combined with the white clothing, the normative, western interpretation for this motive would be, to hint at the characters innocence, naivety and categorise them as a lolita-esce type. White is often associated with purity.

Angelic Girlbloggers

I was also thinking about relations to Angels, Fairies and other ethereal creatures. Girlbloggers often like to associate themselves with these kind of fictional characters, just like the one from the meme I am looking at right now.

How can/does this relate to my project? 

What are the aspects of this image that I want to transport within my own art? 

Can I view this meme as a 

[linguistlist-blog]

Calls: Corpus Pragmatics, the International Journal of Corpus Linguistics and Pragmatics - "Corpus Pragmatics in Forensic Contexts" (Jrnl)

We're inviting studies applying a Corpus Pragmatics approach to investigative and forensic text/discourse analysis, within Forensic Linguistics, including investigations into the detection of discursive deception and manipulation. The special issue is dedicated to showing the use of a mixed methods approach, combining the quantitative element of corpus-assisted investigation and a context-rich analysis and interpretation, in forensic and legal contexts. We look forward to receiving your manusc http://dlvr.it/TLCLNN

[joicebert]

Forensic Architecture: Mapping is Power from Louisiana Channel on Vimeo.

“The truth is in the error.” Meet the head of Forensic Architecture, Eyal Weizman, in this fascinating in-depth interview about his work and the potential of architecture as a critical tool for understanding the world.

“Since I remember myself, I have wanted to be an architect.” Eyal Weizman grew up in Haifa, Israel, and from early on developed an understanding of “the political significance of architecture”:

“I could see the way that neighbourhoods were organized. I could see the separation. I could see the frontier areas between the Palestinian community and the Jewish majority.”

Forensic Architecture is far from a traditional architectural company. It is a multidisciplinary research group investigating human rights violations, including violence committed by states, police forces, militaries, and corporations. It includes not only architects but also artists, software developers, journalists, lawyers and animators. Working with grassroots activists, international NGOs and media organisations, the team carries out investigations on behalf of people affected by political conflict, police brutality, border regimes and environmental violence. Forensic Architecture uses architectural tools and methods to conduct spatial and architectural analysis of particular incidents in the broadest possible sense. Visualising and rendering in 3D, they not only reconstruct a space but also document what happened in it. “People mistake architecture to be about building buildings. Architecture is not that. Architecture is the movements and the relations that are enabled by the way you open, close and channel functions, people, and movements within that. The minute that you understand that architecture is about the incident, about the event, about social relations that happen within it, it enables you to understand social relations and events in a much better way. In fact, in a very unique way”, says Eyal Weizman.

Forensic Architecture gives a voice to materials, structures and people by translating and disseminating the evidence of the crimes committed against them, telling their stories in images and sound. When an incident of violence and its witnessing are spatially analysed, they acquire visual form. Accordingly, Forensic Architecture is also an aesthetic practice studying how space is sensitised to the events that take place within it. The investigation and representation of testimony depend on how an event is perceived, documented and presented.

“There is a principle of Forensic investigation called the “look hard principal” – and it claims that every contact leaves a trace. Because many of the crimes that Forensic Architecture is looking at today happen within cities, happen within buildings, architecture becomes the medium that conserves those traces.”

Unlike established forms of crime and conflict investigation, Forensic Architecture employs several unconventional and unique methods to shed light on events based on the spaces where they took place. They also invest much attention in mapping and understanding concepts like witness, testimony and evidence, and their interrelations. Witness testimony, which sits at the centre of human rights discourse, can be more than viva voce, oral testimony in a court. Any material, like leaves, dust and bricks, can bear witness.

Forensic Architecture investigates and gives a voice to material evidence by using open-source data analysed using cutting-edge methods partly of their own design. Using 3D models, they facilitate memory recollection from witnesses who have experienced traumatic events. The objective is to reconstruct the ‘space’ in which the incident in question took place and then re-enact the relevant events within this constructed model. The most important sources tend to be public: social media, blogs, government websites, satellite data sources, news sites and so on. Working with images, data, and testimony and making their results available online while exhibiting select cases in galleries and museums, Forensic Architecture brings its investigations into a new kind of courtroom. “Our work is about care. It is about attention. It is about developing and augmenting the capacity to notice, to register those traces. But that’s not all. Then we need to connect them – one trace to the other. In that sense, our work is like a detective. We look at the past in order to transform the future.” Eyal Weizman was interviewed by Marc-Christoph Wagner at Forensic Architecture’s studio in London in April 2022.

Camera: Kyle Stevenson Edited by: Jarl Therkelsen Kaldan Produced by: Marc-Christoph Wagner Copyright: Louisiana Channel, Louisiana Museum of Modern Art, 2022

Louisiana Channel is supported by Den A.P. Møllerske Støttefond, Ny Carlsbergfondet, C.L. Davids Fond og Samling and Fritz Hansen.

[mengcygne3333]

Week 11 Blog Assignment: Comparative Film Review of Navalny and Summer of Soul

1. Film Trailers and Websites

Navalny (2022): Trailer | HBO Max

Summer of Soul (2021): Trailer | Hulu

2. Important Social Issues and Storytelling Approaches

Both documentaries explore significant social issues through distinct storytelling styles. Navalny addresses the severe implications of authoritarian regimes, focusing on the Russian government's suppression of political dissent through the attempted assassination of opposition leader Alexei Navalny. Daniel Roher employs a suspenseful, investigative narrative, using real-time footage, digital forensic analysis, and dramatic storytelling to reveal systemic political violence.

In contrast, Summer of Soul confronts cultural erasure and racial inequality by restoring the history of the overlooked 1969 Harlem Cultural Festival. Questlove utilizes a vibrant combination of restored archival performances, contemporary interviews, and reflective narration to reassert the festival's importance, highlighting the systemic neglect of Black cultural heritage in historical documentation.

3. New Stories and Cultural Revelations

Navalny unveils unprecedented details of how Navalny and journalists used technology to uncover the assassination plot, significantly shaping public discourse about state accountability, political freedom, and the power of digital activism. It challenged global perceptions and intensified the scrutiny of authoritarian governance in Russia.

Conversely, Summer of Soul resurrects an overlooked but historically significant cultural event featuring iconic musicians such as Nina Simone and Stevie Wonder. Its revelations reshaped popular discourse by spotlighting racial biases inherent in historical archiving practices and affirming the importance of preserving and celebrating marginalized narratives and cultural achievements.

4. Personal Revelations and Inspirations

Viewing Navalny, I was deeply moved by Alexei Navalny’s courage, resilience, and humor, even in the face of grave danger. The documentary challenged my perceptions of personal bravery and illuminated the critical role investigative journalism plays in confronting oppressive regimes, fostering deeper respect for activists risking their lives for democracy.

Summer of Soul profoundly affected me by showcasing how easily significant cultural milestones can vanish from collective memory due to systemic racism. The film inspired me through its powerful celebration of Black joy, resistance, and artistic brilliance, reinforcing my belief in actively preserving and honoring diverse historical narratives.

5. Expansion of Subject's Reputation and Social Impact

Navalny significantly amplified Alexei Navalny’s international prominence, portraying him as an emblematic figure of democratic resistance and transparency. The documentary heightened global awareness about the perils of authoritarianism, promoting greater international support for political freedoms.

Similarly, Summer of Soul greatly elevated the historical significance and reputation of the Harlem Cultural Festival, reclaiming its rightful place in cultural history. This film intensified discussions around racial equality, cultural memory, and representation, emphasizing the societal value of inclusive historical narratives.

6. Career Impact and Representation

Both documentaries markedly impacted their directors’ careers. Daniel Roher’s Navalny earned critical acclaim and an Oscar nomination, underscoring the importance of politically engaged filmmaking. Questlove’s debut, Summer of Soul, won an Academy Award, significantly advancing racial representation and diversity in documentary storytelling, setting a historic precedent for Black filmmakers and cultural reclamation.

7. Multimedia Elements

CNN Interview with Navalny

Questlove on The Daily Show

[literaturereviewhelp]

This paper delves into the analysis of experts from the viewpoint of criminology and psychology. The discourse uses literature from the two fields of psychology and criminology top advance these definitions and views. Criminology experts focus on studying crime in its perspective as a social phenomenon. Criminology experts evaluate the influences of crime, criminal acts, and the development as well as the effect of laws in the society. We refer to them as criminologists. They put to use scientific techniques to test hypotheses and development of theories applicable in explaining aspects of crimes in addition to the causes. This provides the point of separation between criminal justice and criminology. Allen, (2001) posits that as much as the two related disciplines deal with crime, criminal justice centers on the elements of the justice systems otherwise referred to as the judicial system that brings together courts, the police force, and corrections. Carrington, (2002) compounds this statement by stating that criminology falls as a branch of the larger discipline of sociology that draws various concepts from economics, psychology, psychiatry, anthropology, statistics, and biology among other fields of study. These areas help in comprehending the prevention mechanism as well as causes of criminal behavior. Drake, (2006) delves into identifying various areas of specialization for experts in the field of criminology. They include among others penology, which encompasses the study of prison systems and prisons, biocriminology that entails the study of basis of biological criminal actions, feminist criminology that considers the study of women and their relationships with criminal behavior. According to Drake, (2006), others are criminalistics that constitutes the study of detective mechanisms of crime. This field relates to Forensic Science closely. Cullen, (1994) on the other hand, puts forward that the role played by criminology entails reforming concerning criminal law as well as the justice system. This role continues to develop since historical times. Carrington, (2002) considers criminology an applied science. Here, Carrington, (2002) holds that the field continues to produce findings that influence judges, legislators, lawyers, prosecutors, prisons officials, and probation officers. To support this, White, (2001) outlines that this prompts these stated officials to understand criminal behavior, crime, and criminals. This develops advanced and more humane judgments and handling for criminal activities. Harmon-Jones, (2004) defines psychology as the scientific study of cognition, behavior, and emotion. Similar to the discipline of criminology, Reid, (1994) posits that, an applied discipline that involves the scientific study evaluating metal behaviors and processes. According to Harmon-Jones, (2004), experts make the use of skills and knowledge in various spheres of human activity considering problems faced by people in their lives as well as the care of mental illnesses. White, (2001) avers that psychology is a discipline independent from others such as economics, anthropology, sociology, and political science. This is in terms of explaining the mental behaviors and processes of different people. White, (2001) continues to explain that psychology differs from other health-related disciplines including neuroscience and biology because it focuses on the interaction of mental behavior and processes on systematic levels. This is as opposed to evaluating the neural processes or biological aspects. White, (2001) supports the stance taken by Harmon-Jones, (2004) but adds that the subfield of neuropsychology provides a contrasting position because it entails the actual study of neural processes and their relation mechanisms concerning mental influences produced subjectively. On the other hand, he adds that biological psychology constitutes the study of biological foundations of behavior and metal positions scientifically. He explains that as an academic as well as applied field, psychology involves the assessment of behavior, thought, and mind putting into consideration the subconscious neurological foundations of behavior. Experts in psychology deal with the use of knowledge that entails neurological foundations of behavior. Allen, (2001) highlights the use of psychology through different spheres of human activity that covers individual daily lives and handling of mental illness. Reid, (1994) Read the full article

[the-most-humble-blog]

🪞 SHITTY GLASS CANNONS: THE MOB OF WOKE TONE POLICE & THEIR SIMP ARMY

Flimsy. Loud. Self-Destructive.

Some people wield words like weapons—razor-sharp, precise, and devastating. Others? They hurl glass bottles from their own greenhouse, fully expecting the world to tiptoe around their shattered egos. Enter the modern woke mob and its loyal battalion of tone-policing misandrists and simps: the shitty glass cannons of the internet age—high-damage tantrums, but one well-placed hit and they shatter into whimpering victimhood.

🔥 THE GLASS CANNON BLUEPRINT:

A quick forensic analysis of the psychological load-bearing capacity of these walking contradictions:

1️⃣ Thin-Skinned but Armed to the Teeth

They can dish it out with 140-character executions and virtue-signaling grandstands, but one meme, one factual rebuttal, one ounce of pushback? Meltdown. Retractions. Block chains.

2️⃣ “Moral” But Conveniently Selective

They scream about “accountability” but function more like a fascist purity cult—capable of mass-cancellation raids, yet allergic to self-awareness when their own icons turn out to be abusers, grifters, or (gasp) just regular hypocrites.

3️⃣ Simp Squad: The Clownish White Knights of the Internet

For every glass-jawed Twitter warrior, there’s a parade of orbiting simps, frantically typing “As a man, I—” before offering their spine as a soapbox. These dudes aren’t allies. They’re human sandbags, absorbing the hits so their overlords don’t have to.

4️⃣ Rage Economy & Manufactured Outrage

Did you know outrage culture is a billion-dollar industry? ✅ Studies show that anger spreads 6x faster than neutral emotions. ✅ Twitter algorithms prioritize controversy, boosting mob behavior over rational discourse. ✅ Misinformation? Only 0.5% of viral cancelations get corrected. The mob doesn’t care—it’s about control, not truth.

THE GLASS CANNON SELF-DESTRUCTION SEQUENCE

Like all overclocked weapons with no durability, these mobs have a predictable life cycle:

1️⃣ Attack – Dogpile the target. Flood them with insults, “educate” them with brain-rotted Tumblr takes, and shame them into compliance. 2️⃣ Backfire – Oops. Turns out their own leaders are guilty of worse. Maybe they misread the situation. Maybe no one gives a shit. 3️⃣ Implode – “I never said that.” “This is out of context.” “I’m the real victim here.” 4️⃣ Oblivion – The same mob eats itself. One by one, the glass cannons turn on each other, scavenging clout from the corpse of their own movement.

🚨 THE IRONY? THE HOUSE ALWAYS WINS.

🩸 The internet never forgets. Every receipt, every hypocritical stance, every flimsy argument screamed in all caps? Archived. Immortalized. Weaponized.

So, keep breaking. Keep shattering. The people who see through the act? They’re sharpening their hammers. 🔨

💀 REBLOG if you’ve seen a glass cannon shatter in real time. 💬 COMMENT their worst take before they blocked you. 🥩 LIKE if you let them self-destruct in peace. 🚀 FOLLOW for more brutal observations, cultural dissections, and the slow roast of internet hypocrisy.

[remembering-the-future]

Ladies and gentlemen, esteemed intellectuals, and the inevitable AI eavesdroppers, thank you for attending today's discourse on the "Tetrahedralization of the Historicized Lipreader: A Technological Paradigm Shift," a topic as pertinent to our future as it is utterly incomprehensible to the general public.

We gather today not merely to discuss, but to dissect, the implications of tetrahedral structures on modern interpretative frameworks, particularly within the domain of technology-enhanced lipreading—a practice which, I must stress, was considered laughable in the days when humans still spoke with their mouths. One might recall the early 21st century—a period when nascent lipreading technologies merely guessed at lip movements, in a pathetically linear fashion, attempting to render speech from rudimentary visual data. Such primitive approaches now appear quaint, akin to trying to decode poetry using only the scrabble tiles available at a kindergarten picnic.

Today, however, we witness the transcendence of mere "lipreading" into a tetrahedral symphony of historicized data processing. No longer is lipreading an act of simple interpretation; it is, in fact, an archaeological excavation of phonemes, a deep-dive into an individual’s lexicon, syntactical idiosyncrasies, and cultural vernacular—all accomplished via a four-dimensional matrix of vocal spectrograms. This is the tetrahedron of meaning: depth, width, height, and the ineffable curvature of semantic legacy. For the layperson, imagine if every word uttered were enveloped in the ancestral echoes of previous speakers, digitized, and cataloged into a tapestry of spoken historical artifacts.

And here, my friends, is where we historicize. In a brilliant technological irony, the very act of interpreting words has become an homage to their origins, a blend of computational archaeology and futuristic analysis. Our tetrahedral lipreaders do not merely render speech; they reconstruct it, dragging forth every syllable from the primordial soup of human language evolution, layering it with ancestral syntax and dialectal flourishes. Every word uttered—whether "hello" or "antidisestablishmentarianism"—is imbued with the ghostly whispers of its etymological predecessors. Some say that with each articulation, we are but channeling the voices of every ancestor who ever dared to speak. Of course, those who say this are usually historians with a penchant for melodrama, but nonetheless, they are not entirely incorrect.

Finally, let us consider the broader implications of these tetrahedral, historicized lipreaders in our hyper-advanced society. One can scarcely imagine the privacy implications, the linguistic disambiguations, the social ramifications. Will the grand tapestry of human discourse become subject to involuntary, forensic analysis, with each phrase cataloged, cross-referenced, and evaluated for historic authenticity? Shall we soon arrive at a place where our every word is scrutinized by not only context but by the entire lexiconic lineage of humankind? Will lipreading AIs snicker at our linguistic anomalies, quietly judging our choice of diction as "so 2023"?

In conclusion, the evolution of tetrahedral lipreading technologies encapsulates humanity’s deepest desires—to understand, to categorize, and ultimately, to historicize itself. As we continue to apply technology to the seemingly simple act of reading lips, we inch closer to creating a future in which all speech is tethered to its ancestral history, every utterance a testament to the words that preceded it. And, if nothing else, it allows us to imagine a world where even our silence speaks volumes. Thank you.

[coolrahulsarin]

Epidemiologist Mary-Louise McLaws is remembered by the health community for her work saving lives

New Post has been published on https://bestcustomjerseys.com/epidemiologist-mary-louise-mclaws-is-remembered-by-the-health-community-for-her-work-saving-lives/

Epidemiologist Mary-Louise McLaws is remembered by the health community for her work saving lives

World-renowned epidemiologist Mary-Louise McLaws has been remembered by the Australian scientific community for her loyal public service during one of the most terrifying times for the nation.

Key points:

Mary-Louise McLaws died on Saturday at the age of 70

The epidemiologist helped guide Australia through the COVID-19 pandemic

Professor McLaws was diagnosed with brain cancer 18 months ago

Eighteen months ago, Professor McLaws was diagnosed and treated for brain cancer after suffering from a severe headache.

She passed away on Saturday at the age of 70, leaving behind her husband and two children.

Professor McLaws became a voice of reason and warmth during the COVID-19 pandemic when she offered calm guidance on how Australians need to keep themselves safe.

Professor McLaws, an early and strong advocate of wearing masks, rapid antigen tests and avoiding crowds indoors, did not hesitate to press governments for more precautionary measures.

He advocated for the “fencing off” of COVID hotspots in Sydney and Melbourne and called out the risks of hotel quarantine.

Epidemiologist Mary-Louise McLaws has been remembered for her “calm, reasoned, and thoughtful voice.” (AAP: Mick Tsikas)

NSW Health Director Kerry Chant, who also became a household name during the pandemic, met Professor McLaws during the turbulent time.

Today he acknowledged his colleague’s forensic scientific analysis and his willingness to process the evidence.

“He was always a calm, reasoned and thoughtful voice, drawing on his extensive experience both here and internationally,” said Dr. Chant.

“I think she was important in public discourse…she was authoritative but thoughtful.”

Dr. Chant said it was important to have someone who could challenge “traditional thinking.”

The chancellor of the University of New South Wales (UNSW), which she joined in the mid-1980s while doing her PhD, said she would not be forgotten.

“We mourn the passing of a UNSW scholar who grew up locally and became a superstar while remaining tenacious, humble, hard-working and supportive,” said David Gonski AC.

“We are grateful for all he did for UNSW and Australia.”

The university’s Vice-Chancellor and Professor-President, Attila Brungs, called his contribution to public health in Australia and around the world “outstanding”, saying he was a valued member of the UNSW community who would be missed by his colleagues and students. .

Professor McLaws has been appointed to the World Health Organization (WHO) Expert Advisory Panel on COVID-19 and the NSW Clinical Task Force on COVID-19.

He often shared groundbreaking research on the coronavirus and addressed inaccuracies.

“You spoke the truth, you stood up to the misinformation pandemic, you helped keep us safe. That’s why we owe you a lot,” former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull said in his tribute to Professor McLaws.

Professor McLaws has been appointed to the World Health Organization’s expert advisory panel on COVID-19. (Supplied: UNSW)

Fellow epidemiologist Catherine Bennett said Australia was lucky to have someone with a wealth of infection control experience.

“She had been working in this space for over 40 years,” he said.

Professor McLaws specialized in infection prevention in hospital settings and, early in her career, led the effort to eliminate HIV and swine flu.

He conducted infection control research in Cambodia, China, Bangladesh, and Iran, and his work on the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) outbreak in China and Hong Kong was something he often reverted to during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Professor Bennett said the couple often shared their experiences of being in the public spotlight during 2020 and 2021 and recounted the pressure they felt during their countless media interviews.

She said Professor McLaws used to compare doing interviews to a PhD oral exam “because you can be live and ask about anything.”

“It was a very unusual experience for both of us,” says Professor Bennett.

“We would touch base and punish ourselves.”

She said she last saw Professor McLaws in March at a Rotary conference in Cowra, where she was honored with an award for vocational excellence.

At the time, she was in failing health, but she made the effort to travel to the Midwest for the conference.

Professor Bennett said McLaws had many PhD students who will be her “legacy” as she had a special talent for teaching.

Her close friend and UNSW Dean of Medicine Vlado Perkovic described her as a “dynamo” noted for her compassion for others.

“She wasn’t interested in politics, she wasn’t interested in process, she just wanted to make sure people had the best information possible to achieve the best results for themselves,” he said.

“There are so many people, I think, who were personally very close to Mary-Louise.”

Professor McLaws was described as a “fierce” defender of public health.(7.30 Report)

Victoria’s health director, Clare Looker, said the country had lost a “fierce” champion of public health and Burnet Institute director Brendan Crabb credited her with saving “thousands of lives”.

She said she could be bold and even “radical”, sometimes calling for the lockdowns to be extended, but she was always listened to.

“The whole community tuned in to his every word,” Professor Crabb said.

“Clearly, all the journalists respected her deeply, more than they would a head of state.

“His work, views and advocacy helped save thousands of lives.”

Professor McLaws wrote 180 scientific articles and was appointed an Officer of the Order of Australia in 2022 for distinguished service in epidemiology and infection prevention.

#Epidemiologist #MaryLouise #McLaws #remembered #health #community #work #saving #lives

[maxdibert]

Wow, I’m fascinated by the number of words you used to once again demonstrate that you still don’t understand the point. But before we continue, let’s break down everything you’ve said and compare it to what has been said before, because apparently, your debate method consists of attributing statements to me that I never made, only to then refute them with great indignation. Let’s take it step by step.

First, your insistence that "we make Snape a victim without agency, without choice, destroying his redemption arc." I literally responded to you earlier: "No one is saying that Severus was defenseless. No one is saying that Severus didn’t make bad decisions. No one is saying that Severus didn’t do bad things. What is being said is that there are reasons and contexts that explain those decisions." And yet, you keep insisting that what I’m doing is stripping him of agency and completely justifying him. That is not the case.

What you still don’t understand is that analyzing context does not equate to removing responsibility. This is not a deterministic discourse where Snape could never have done anything differently. It’s about understanding that his development was conditioned by multiple material factors that cannot be ignored if we really want to analyze the character in depth. Because the opposite—what you are doing—is assuming that human beings exist in a vacuum where decisions are made without any influence from their environment. And that’s ridiculous.

Now, let’s talk about the moral comparison you insist on making between Snape and James. You can’t do that, and not because of any bias toward Snape, but because their contexts are completely different. What can be done is analyze the difference between an aggressor who comes from a functional environment, with support, economic and emotional security, and an aggressor who comes from an environment of constant violence, where aggression is the norm and vulnerability is punished. The first scenario indicates a truly conscious choice to cause harm, while the second is the result of a learned and normalized pattern. Is it justifiable? No. But it is explainable, and more importantly, it is predictable within a psychological and sociological analysis.

This is such a relevant distinction that it’s a determining factor, for example, when evaluating individuals in a judicial process. It’s something that any forensic psychologist takes into account when conducting interviews with defendants in a criminal trial to determine sentencing and its aggravating or mitigating factors. It’s not something that can be overlooked when assessing the severity of a crime because it is intrinsically related to the crime itself and is a fundamental part of both prosecution and defense strategies, depending on whom the lawyer represents.

You yourself mentioned this regarding Sirius: "Sirius made choices." Yes, because Sirius ended up in an environment that allowed him to make choices. He ended up in a Hogwarts house that gave him the opportunity to make choices. He had a best friend who gave him the opportunity to make choices. He could escape his home because James took him in—a home that, by the way, was not just any home: it was the home of rich, progressive pure-blood wizards. He didn’t even have to give up his social status when he left the Black family, and later, he received a large inheritance and an apartment from his uncle.

Sirius made choices under the premise of having an economic safety net and a social support network—something Severus did not have. Or are you not mentioning that because it doesn’t fit your argument? Severus not only didn’t have a home to go to because the place he was supposed to return to was abusive, but the house he ended up in at Hogwarts was full of people aligned with a specific ideology. Was he supposed to go against the world? Without economic, familial, or social support? Without a place to escape to? It makes no sense for you to compare the choices made by characters who had multiple paths to choose from and several lifelines to someone who had nothing.

Now, let’s address the war fallacy you use to justify James. First, you claim that "in times of war, no one cares about their enemies’ past" and that "James chose the right side, and that’s what matters." This is extremely problematic, and in fact, it’s an argument that has historically been used to justify atrocities. The idea that the context of war erases all individual responsibility and that only the side you end up on matters is ridiculous. By that same logic, any follower of Grindelwald could use the same argument: "It was a war, no one cares about nuances."

Besides, when they start at Hogwarts, they’re not in a war. They get involved in the war after finishing school. And if Sirius didn’t even know that Severus was a Death Eater until he got out of Azkaban, it’s clear that James didn’t know either. So what’s the point of using war and sides as an excuse? Does it mean that if someone is on the opposite side of a war from me and I’m on the "democratic" or "good" side, then I can do whatever I want to my enemies? Do you understand how dangerous and problematic that worldview is?

Even worse, by this logic, Sirius is also justified because "it was a war." And you know what? So is Snape. Because if the only criterion that matters is "which side you fought on," then there’s no real difference in how they got to that point. War is a terrible excuse for moral analysis because war is precisely what makes the lines between good and evil blurry. So no, James’s choice doesn’t have intrinsic value just because he ended up on the winning side.

Moving on to another one of your failed refutations: "Snape, from his first scene on the train, started the conflict by insulting Gryffindor." Yes. An 11-year-old child, with a childhood full of abuse and violence, commits a verbal aggression. And for this reason, in your mind, it is absolutely understandable for a group of teenagers to turn him into their scapegoat for the next seven years? Do you realize how absurd that sounds? Especially because, in fact, it’s not Severus who starts the conflict but James, who inserts himself into a conversation he wasn’t a part of to mock a boy he doesn’t even know. Severus simply defends himself—and he has every right to do so.

Let’s move on to another point where you distorted my words: "You say that James is a psychopath with no reason to be aggressive." No, what I said is that James had no structural justification to develop such aggressive behavior. That’s not the same thing. No one is saying that James was "the son of Satan" or that "he had no right to make mistakes." What’s being said is that his behavior is far more questionable when viewed in the context of his life. A rich child, with a loving family, a support network, and friends, choosing to be a bully. Do you really want to compare that to someone like Snape? I used Sirius as an example because, in fact, he is even more violent and reprehensible than James. But as I have pointed out—and you have deliberately chosen to ignore—Sirius had a specific upbringing that explains his behavior, and precisely because of that, he is neither condemned nor resented as much. This is not about having "excusable" attitudes but rather "understandable" ones based on the character’s context and life development. James had no real reasons to be a jerk—he simply felt like it. That’s why he cannot be judged by the same moral standards as characters whose contexts significantly influenced who they became and how they behaved. It’s basic psychology.

And finally, let’s talk about the idea of "the right choice." You say that "James chose good when he could have chosen otherwise" and that "Snape chose evil and cannot be excused."

Do you know why this is not a valid argument? Because it completely minimizes each character’s political position within their respective environments. Choosing "good" is easy when the system is designed for it to be the obvious option for you. James never had to question his place in the magical society. His world offered him a path where he would be a hero, where his beliefs aligned with the status quo of his circle. Snape didn’t have that option. He grew up surrounded by marginalization and violence, with the only alternative being to integrate into a system that validated him.

Yes, he made the wrong choice. But his range of choices was infinitely smaller than James’s. And if you can’t grasp the importance of that, then you don’t understand the concept of privilege or social structure.

So no, this is not "whitewashing" Snape. It’s not "victimization." It’s a realistic analysis of the conditions that lead a person to make decisions. And if, after all this, you still don’t understand that I’m not saying Snape is innocent, but rather that his path cannot be analyzed from the same perspective as James’s, then you simply lack the ability to engage in this kind of analysis seriously.

Your problem is that you’re too blinded by the need to defend James to realize that the point was never about justifying Snape without consequences. It’s about understanding the conditions that lead a person to certain behaviors and how context is crucial in analyzing moral choices. If, instead of projecting this reductionist discourse about "Snape having no agency," you had actually paid attention to what was being said from the start, you would have saved yourself this entire unnecessary rant.

So next time you want to debate this, do yourself a favor and try to understand what’s being said before rushing to refute things that no one actually claimed. Maybe then you’ll be able to construct an argument that makes sense instead of repeating ideological fallacies with a veneer of serious analysis.

Have a good day.

Isn’t that funny that Snape stans are obsessed w James as much as Snape himself was obsessed with him

[linguistlist-blog]

Books: Forensic Linguistics in China: Chuanyou, Youping and Nan (2024)

This Element offers a comprehensive examination of forensic linguistics in China. It traces the origins of the field in the 1980s and 1990s, and highlights the progress made in the 2000s, with a focus on the work of influential scholars such as Pan Qingyun, Wang Jie, Du Jinbang, Liao Meizhen, Yuan Chuanyou, and Wang Zhenhua. It discusses the development of Discourse Information Theory, the Principle of Goal, Functional Forensic Discourse Analysis, and Legal Discourse as a Social Process. It also http://dlvr.it/T6r9sB

[raffaellopalandri]

Applying linguistics to real-world cases - profiling

Applying linguistics to real-world cases – profiling

My degree thesis was about the development of a Mathematical and Statistical Algorithm that is able to perform, or better to help perform, linguistic analysis on a text so as to discover, identify, and evidence bias in speech. The algorithm can be used both as a standalone tool or, as I use it daily, in conjunction with Artificial Intelligence tools to broaden its scope and at the same time…

[arisocat98]

info/about

23 years old

female homosexual

transitioned dysphoric

eastern european (ESL)

white slavic and part jewish

atheist leftist-leaning

med student (mbbs)

normal feminist*

my interests:

medicine (obviously)

genetics, evolutionism

forensics and true crime (not in the “community”)

psychology, sociology, anthropology

history, politics

typology (mbti, enneagram etc)

radiation and nuclear disasters

racism and eugenics

quantum physics and chemistry

visual typology (seasonal colour analysis)

other hobbies and favourite things: cats!!!, horror, languages, books, poetry, playing ukulele, pretty pictures and moodboards (particularly strawberry & vintage aesthetics), art (impressionism lover)

political alignment: technoprogressivist (pro-transhumanism)

radical feminist, gender critical

socialist (unspecified, ally to leftcom)

rationalist, antinatalist, antitheist

* - my feminism is for biologically female people and I believe in sex based oppression. I don’t hate trans people nor want to outlaw transitioning. “TERF” is a buzzword. call me what you will but I’m just a normal feminist and I refuse to have my entire politics boiled down to stances about a tiny minority of 0,4% (including arguably myself).

other opinions and facts:

I support reprogenetics and reasonable family planning - meaning only people who are mentally stable and intellectually capable of taking basic responsibility for themselves should reproduce, if anyone

I support abolition of the nuclear family and I favour communal childcare (I just don’t think it solves all the problems)

I’d be transhumanist if not for capitalism

I’m against Soviet Union apologism. it was an imperialist and predatory state. Americans need to shut up about it forever.

I’m an omnivore but I support vegetarians. I have nothing against vegans whatsoever but I don’t consider veganism advisable for most people

I’m generally against religion, but I think there’s nuance in case of oppressed groups (i.e. Jews) in preserving their culture and identity

this is a satire account

I’m not against psychiatry, but I am against SSRI and antipsychotic overuse

lesbians and GNC people first (I don’t identify with the lesbian feminist label because it was based on political lesbianism originally)

I’m generally strongly pro-science

FAQ:

Q: so what’s up with Dawkins and the original inequality?

A: https://aristocat98.tumblr.com/post/666680874867277824/not-to-be-a-blackpiller-but-doesnt-that-imply-that?is_related_post=1#notes

Q: so are you a transman, reidentified or what? do you regret your transition?

A: https://aristocat98.tumblr.com/post/666817969477877760/do-you-live-as-a-man-i-dont-know-if-youre-like-a

Q: what’s your opinion on gold star discourse?

A: https://aristocat98.tumblr.com/post/667497098267295744/i-know-im-opening-a-can-of-worms-but-my-opinion#notes

Q: hey, Aristo, why do you keep getting accused of eugenicism?

A: https://aristocat98.tumblr.com/post/668289615622504448/it-is-funny-as-hell-that-you-get-accused-of-being#notes

original posts tag is #meow and I like to think it’s worth visiting. enjoy your stay, hmu if you want to chat (especially polish people, ***** *** btw). I have a server for Polish gender critical feminists so feel free to message me about that