darklordgorblax

[darklordgorblax]

The "Real" Story of Encanto

I've been thinking about magical realism and magic as metaphor. I've also been thinking about Life of Pi and the idea that we get to choose the stories we tell and telling the version of the story that's better, regardless of whether or not it's true. As I ponder these ideas, I can't stop dwelling on the "real" story of Encanto. The idea that Encanto is Mirabel's story, but it's the one she wants to tell instead of strictly adhering to the facts. Obviously Mirabel is fictional in the first place, but I wanted to outline what might have "really" happened to the Madrigal family.

So first off, Abuela Alma's story is largely free of magic or anything unrealistic, so it can be taken at face value until the end. Young Alma falls in love with Pedro, they get married, and have triplets. While the triplets are still babes in arm, men on horseback attack their village and the Madrigal family flees along with many others from their village. As they're running some of the attackers catch up. Pedro turns back to stop them and... something happens. A miracle or a coincidence, something like an earthquake or a rockslide kills Pedro and their pursuers.

Now the story turns more towards the magic. Did the villagers just happen to find a magical house in the middle of the jungle and gift it to Alma? A more grounded explanation of Casita is that the villagers, having seen Pedro turn back to defend them all, could hardly let his widow and mother of three infants fend for herself. The villagers come together and prioritize building her house first, and in a place of honor.

Then come the gifts. I think Alma, being a person of conscious Alma could let herself live on the graces of others. She had to give back to the village for their kindness to her, so she comes up with a scheme. When the triplets are old enough she gives them a "gift" and a job to serve the community. Julieta was always the level headed one. Alma teaches her cooking and nursing skills tells her she is gifted with healing food. Bruno was always observant, he is gifted with foresight. He's supposed to help the village predict when bad things are going to happen. Pepa was always a wild one with her head in the clouds. Does her mood affect the weather? Or does the weather affect her mood. Pepa learns to read the skies and predict oncoming storms; it just happens to make her very grumpy when she sees a storm on the horizon.

Of course as the triplets grow up they know that their "gifts" aren't magic, but they still dutifully perform their duties to serve the village and "earn the miracle" (of the villagers helping out the widow of their literal savior). Of course the more the Madrigal family serves the village, the more the villagers feel they owe back to the Madrigal family, and the cycle continues. Julieta and Pepa have children, and are given gifts of their own. Bruno, being the observant man that he is, helps Abuela in choosing useful gifts and jobs for the grandchildren.

By the time Isabela comes of age and is ready to receive her gift there are 3 Madrigal babies and not a boy in sight. It therefore will become Isabela's responsibility as the eldest granddaughter to bring a husband into the family. She's always enjoyed playing in the garden, so her interests there are channeled towards making lovely flowers and just being an all around perfect princess ready to be married. This is mostly fine by little Isa, she's not exactly upset at being pampered and doted over.

Dolores comes next, and with the issue of having a marriable granddaughter settled not as much is expected of her. She is quiet and always, always listening. She is tasked with helping Bruno by listening in the village for problems anyone might be having so that the family can swoop in to help.

By the time Luisa comes of age it's increasingly obvious that having no boys is not exactly ideal for their ability to serve the village, so Luisa becomes "the strong one." She's told she's supernaturally strong and she can help out the village by helping carry heavy things. And so little Luisa sets out doing just that.

By the time Camilo comes of age Bruno notices that the older grandchildren are starting to resent their "gifts" and their jobs. Isabela knows she's not magically making flowers grow, and she's a bit spoiled to boot. He thinks about his and his sisters own childhoods working hard to serve the village, and kinda doesn't want to keep doing this to the grandchildren. Camilo's "gift" is essentially doing funny impersonations. His job is making people laugh. That can't really turn into a burden, can it?

Then comes Mirabel. Bruno decides enough is enough. When Abuela tells him to choose Mirabel's gift he confronts her for pushing her grandchildren to work so hard. Mirabel's gift should have been her embroidery, but Bruno did not want to see little Mirabel slaving away over that when she should be having fun like all the rest of the kids in the now very happy and healthy little village. This turns into a blow-up argument that ultimately results in Bruno storming off in anger. In Abuela's own anger she decides that fine, if Mirabel doesn't get a gift and a job, she doesn't get a room. She'll stay in the nursery, never properly "coming of age". This is aimed at Bruno, but of course Mirabel has no idea what's going on.

And that catches us up to the present day, the day of Antonio's coming of age celebration. The thing is, between Mirabel's disastrous coming of age party and the present, Abuela never had a way to take back what she did to Mirabel. Everyone is insanely stressed because they know how ridiculous it is that Mirabel is still staying in the nursery while Antonio is going to get a room, probably the room that supposed to be Mirabel's. There's a resentment that Mirabel was never given a "job" while everyone else is working their butts off performing their own "gifted" duties, but also a sense of pity at how hard Mirabel is working while being treated like a literal baby. Why does Alma snap at Mirabel's attempts to help? Because she's embarrassed that she denied Mirabel's entire coming of age ceremony in her anger at Bruno. Without Bruno's help, Antonio's gift is, 'I don't know he's always liked animals, right?' and his job is, 'we'll figure it out later.'

Anyway, what is Mirabel seeing in all this? First, Antonio's coming of age celebration goes off without a hitch, so she really did get personally snubbed. Also, everybody is walking on egg shells around her because of... well, everything... So she starts investigating. She talks to Dolores who's all "don't ask me, go talk to Luisa!" What's Luisa going to say? She can't exactly trauma dump her resentment to Mirabel about having to do all the heavy lifting while Mirabel doesn't get a job at all, while also feeling guilty that Antonio just moved out of the nursery into the room that was supposed to be Mirabel's. So she does her best to couch it better. She's struggling with always needing to be the strong one. She wants a break! When Mirabel hugs her, well just like in the movie all the stress just evaporates. How could she be resentful of her precious little sister. It's not like Mirabel is the one pressuring her to be strong. Luisa tells Mirabel to go to Bruno's old room for answers about what's going on.

So, what's really in Bruno's room? Well, probably not a shattered green glass image of Mirabel destroying the house. More likely it's burnt scraps of Bruno's notes. Bruno wrote down his observations and predictions. After their blow-up fight on Mirabel's birthday, Abuela throws most of his notes in the fire. Mirabel gathers up scraps and cryptically pieces together the idea that she's going to destroy the family? That doesn't make sense; It's time to find Bruno!

Why don't we talk about Bruno anyway? Well, the truth is Bruno wasn't just hiding away in the walls. Many of the villagers knew he was still around, but being reasonable people they didn't want Abuela Alma to find out. And she will find out because... well has anyone seen Dolores recently? We don't talk about Bruno because nobody wants to have Alma breathing down their necks about what they know, because they let something slip while Alma's little spy was hanging around.

Anyway, back to Mirabel. Mirabel finds Bruno, who is in a pretty sorry state. She demands him to explain wtf he meant by the scraps of notes she found. Also, he has to help her fix things. It's not easy to explain, but Bruno did happen to see how Mirabel helped Luisa, so he has an idea. He doesn't show her a new prophecy, he shows her Isabela moping around the garden. He points out how unhappy Isabela is, and if Mirabel wants to fix things, she can start by going and giving Isabela a hug. WHAT!?

Ok, Mirabel has to give Isabela a hug, no problemo. Only at the sight of Mirabel Isabela is pissed, and she does not show the same restraint as Luisa. Mirabel did just ruin Mariano's perfect proposal to her. She lays out all of her grievances and aims them directly at Mirabel. Mirabel is determined to turn things around though. She asks why Isabela puts up with all of that. Why does Isabela have to be the perfect little princess? Why does Isabela have to marry Mariano? Yeah... That's a bit embarrassing for Isabela. She realizes it's not really Mirabel that she's mad at, it's everything else. So what next? They hug. They roll around in the dirt and have fun, and when Abuela gets back to the house with Mariano in tow, Isabela, covered head to toe in mud tells Mariano she never liked his stupid face and that he can take his stupid poetry and shove it up his ass.

Everyone is shocked to say the least. Abuela absolutely loses it. She sees Mirabel comparably mud-covered to Isabela and pieces together what happened. She lays into Isabela who is cowed, but saves some especially choice words for Mirabel. Just as she's hitting the crescendo of her tirade, disaster strikes. Another rockslide happens destroying Casita. In the confusion Mirabel runs away. When the dust settles and they're making sure everyone is accounted for they realize Mirabel is nowhere to be found. An absolute dread washes over Abuela, fearing the worst as she recalls what could have very well been her last words to her granddaughter.

Abuela's fear is broken when someone mention that they thought they saw Mirabel slipping way towards the river after the house collapsed. Abuela hurries off to find her. With great relief Abuela finds Mirabel and apologizes. She lays it all out there. Not just the story of how Pedro saved everyone in the village, but also of the guilt at receiving the villager's kindness. She finishes her story by apologizing about Mirabel's coming of age party all those years ago. She talks about Bruno for the first time in a very long time, and wishes that she could apologize to him too. With one of her signature heart melting hugs, Mirabel tells her she can. Bruno is still hanging around looking after everyone from afar.

Abuela is shocked to say the least. She sends Mirabel off to re-assure the rest of the family that she is safe and sets out to track down Bruno and give a long overdue apology. Everyone is happy to see Mirabel and later Bruno. Abuela apologizes to everyone about the whole gifts thing. Mirabel gives a nice pep talk and gets everyone moving on what they're supposed to do about the destroyed house. Enough with the gifts! Everyone can help out as best as they are able. And of course the villagers show up to help too. The Madrigals are an important part of the community. They never resented helping Alma out, and while the Madrigal's assistance throughout the years was always appreciated, it was never expected. It's just what good neighbors do for each other!

When the house is rebuilt and Mirabel is given the honor of opening the door to their new "miracle". A miracle founded on trust and love as a family, not the burdens of perceived debt and traumas of the past.

[darklordgorblax]

A Very Good Story About Capitalism Chapter 5

One day Barbara the Baker hears about how her old classmate's bakery burned down and had never been rebuilt. She had heard that Bonnie was a communist, and had died. This made her sad that Bonnie had been tempted to the evils of communism before meeting her unfortunate end. That didn't sound like the Bonnie she remembered from baking school. Barbara set all that aside though for the sake of the opportunity she saw before her. If Bonnie's bakery had never been rebuilt, then surely the city was in need of a baker! Barbara was just the baker the city needed.

Barbara approached Carol to look into taking over Bonnie's old bakery. Carol's first reaction is to chastise Barbara and remind her that Bonnie never had a bakery in the city. The bakery was Carol's and Carol's father before her. Barbara apologizes for her mistake, but persists in her offer. Could Barbara rent the bakery and get it running again? Carol, who is very good at owning things, agrees this is an excellent opportunity. Every good bakery needs a baker after all. Barbara and Carol agree that Barbara will pay $1100 per month to rent the bakery and run her baking business out of it.

After striking the deal Barbara asks Carol how quickly the bakery can be repaired. Carols says she has no idea, but Barbara is more than welcome to build or repair whatever she needs at the bakery to run her new business out of it. Barbara explains that she can't possibly afford to repair the bakery before even starting her new business. Carol just sees a new opportunity. Carol is more than happy to loan Barbara the money she needs to make the necessary repairs, and Barbara can just pay her back over time (with interest of course) on top of her rent payments. Barbara doesn't really know anything about owning things, but if this is the cost of getting her new bakery started then so be. Barbara agrees to the deal.

The rent plus loan payments is very difficult for Barbara to pay with her bakery business, and she works at the bakery until the day she dies. Carol lives happily every after.

The End

[darklordgorblax]

A Very Good Story About Capitalism Chapter 4

The people aren't very happy about there being the burnt out husk of a building in the heart of the city's commercial district. They recognize it's Carol's right to do whatever she wants with her bakery, but it's hurting everybody else's business. People don't like shopping within eyesight of that eyesore. They come together to talk about a plan, even though that sounds like a very communist thing for them to do. They all agree that the right thing to do is for someone to buy the bakery from Carol and rebuild it. Ursula the upstart agrees to take on the challenge. How very enterprising of her.

Ursula approaches Carol and offers to buy the burnt out bakery for $500,000. She's doesn't have as much money as Carol, but she's been doing very well for herself all the same. She thinks this should be more than enough money. After all, it's not like Carol is even using the bakery any more. It's just sitting there being an eyesore. Carol refuses the offer. She says that the Bakery is worth at least $2,000,000 for all the investment her and her father had put into it, not to mention it was her father's bakery before her, and she just couldn't bear to part with it.

Ursula finds this all very confusing. Surely $500,000 now would be better than a burnt out bakery that's just sitting there not making Carol any money. Ursula can't afford to spend that much money just to clean up the burnt out lot. Carol tells Ursula that it's ok to be confused, but she still won't sell it for a penny less than $2,000,000. Ursula is just very new at owning things and not as good at it as Carol is. Carol says that Ursula will understand one day if she ever owns as much as Carol does.

And so Ursula goes home without purchasing the bakery. The people are sad at the way the burnt out bakery is affecting their business, but they respect Carol's right to do whatever she wants with it. They also recognize that Carol is much better at owning things than them as evidenced by how many things Carol owns, so she probably knows what's best.

To Be Continued

[darklordgorblax]

A Very Good Story About Capitalism Chapter 3

Carol has had enough of dealing with Bonnie's communist antics. If she isn't going to get rent from Bonnie, there's no reason for her to let Bonnie keep using her bakery. Enough with trying to collect rent, it's time to evict. Carol hires Susan the Soldier for $500 to evict Bonnie. Her father taught her that sometimes losing money on a deal is the right thing to do to take a principled stand, and this seemed like one of those times. Carol shows Susan the piece of paper saying she owns the Bakery, and tells her she no longer wants Bonnie working there. Susan agrees and goes to evict Bonnie.

Susan goes to the bakery and starts moving things out of it and into the street. Penny isn't sure what to do. Her job is to stop people from beating up Bonnie, but that has nothing to do with moving things out into the street. When she confers with Susan about what's going on, and Susan assures her that everything is fine. Carol owns the bakery, and Carol has decided to shut it down. This makes sense to Penny. Bonnie tells Penny that she won't be able to afford to pay for protection if she can't keep running the bakery, but Penny says that can't be helped. It's Carol's bakery; there's a piece of paper that says so.

Bonnie comes up with a new plan. She talks to Penny and Susan to explain it. It might be Carol's bakery, but wouldn't it be enterprising of them to run the bakery out of it anyway? After all, it's not like Carol knows anything about running a bakery. She just owns the building, she's not going to be using it for anything. What if Bonnie paid Penny and Susan to protect her from being beat up and from eviction as well? Maybe $500 per month just to ensure that Bonnie can keep the bakery running and stop Carol from interfering in any way. Penny and Susan are very suspicious of this proposal. It sounds a lot like communism, and Bonnie is known to be a communist. At the same time $500 per month is more money than they can imagine making anywhere else, so they agree to the deal. It is enterprising of them after all.

This is completely unacceptable to Carol. She's been left with no choice. If Bonnie is going to continue using the bakery after being evicted, she'll just have to get rid of the bakery. She decides to pay Annie the Arson $500 to burn down the bakery. After showing Annie the piece of paper saying that she owns the bakery and has every right to burn it down Annie agrees it's all perfectly acceptable. Annie sneaks into the bakery at night at burns it down.

A couple of nearby buildings also accidentally catch fire, but that's fine. Carol owns those buildings too, and after explaining to Irene the Insurer that she was only trying to burn down the bakery, not the nearby buildings she recovers enough money to rebuild them. She also docks $499 from Annie's pay for bungling the job. Annie finds this upsetting, but she does agree that she was only supposed to burn down the bakery, so it's only fair. The life of an arson sure is difficult.

Bonnie, Penny, and Susan die starving and penniless in the streets and communism was conquered. Carol congratulates herself again for being so good at owning things.

To Be Continued

[darklordgorblax]

A Very Good Story About Capitalism Chapter 2

Some time has passed and Bonnie is still struggling with the reputational damage to her Bakery from the communism article. Also, Carol kept the rent at $1010 even though she didn't need to pay for any more articles to be written. She explained that obviously since Bonnie could afford the rent increase, there's no reason for her to lower it again. Carol congratulates herself again for being very good at owning things.

Bonnie's had enough though. She doesn't care if she gets called Connie the Communist. She's not going to keep paying rent when Carol has done nothing but harm her business. When Carol doesn't receive her $1010 from Bonnie she already knows exactly what to do. She pays Penny the Policewoman $5 to go beat up Bonnie and collect $1020 from her in rent. She shows Penny the piece of paper that says she owns the bakery, and Penny agrees to the deal. We can't have evil communists refusing to pay the rent they owe after all. Where would society be if we allowed such things?

Penny beats up Bonnie, takes the owed rent from the safe, and delivers it to Carol. Carol pays Penny for her services and congratulates herself again for being so good at owning things. Things aren't going so well for Bonnie though. It's much harder to run a successful bakery with the reputation of being a communist and having been beaten up.

Another month comes and goes, and Bonnie once again refuses to pay rent to someone who is making her life so difficult. Carol once again hires Penny to beat up Bonnie, but this time Bonnie is prepared. When Penny comes to beat her up she manages to get a word in. She asks Penny how much she's getting paid to beat her up. Penny says $5. Bonnie asks her how beating her up has anything to do with protecting society, surely beating people up is a bad thing. Penny agrees beating people up is generally a bad thing, but it's her job to do it so she's just doing her job.

Bonnie asks Penny if she's open to a better paying job. This peaks Penny's interest, after all isn't a counter offer of a better job just the free market at work? And isn't the free market the cornerstone of a successful society? Bonnie offers Penny $50 each month to not beat her up, but instead to protect her from other people that Carol might send to beat her up. Penny agrees.

Carol does indeed hire other people to beat up Bonnie raising the rent each time, but none of them are able to get past Penny. Penny is a very good and strong policewoman, and she's very good at stopping people who are trying to beat up other people. Any time someone is able to get past Penny, Bonnie is also able to offer them more money to join her security force. Carol is furious and everything is awful.

To Be Continued

[darklordgorblax]

A Very Good Story About Capitalism Chapter 1

Far in the future the people have achieved a capitalist utopia. The government has been abolished because governments just introduce waste and inefficiency to the free market. Everyone still believes in the benefits of capitalism and the free market though, because capitalism and the free market are the cornerstones of a successful society.

One day Carol the Capitalist's father dies. She is very sad about this, but in her inheritance she receives, among other things, a billion dollars and a very successful bakery right in the heart of the city. This makes her happy. Her father was a very good businessman, and she is proud to be taking over her father's businesses. Carol doesn't know anything about baking or running a business, but she learned a lot about owning things from her father, so she is well prepared to take on the challenges of owning a bakery.

Some time passes and Carol starts getting complaints from Bonnie the Baker who runs her bakery. The heater needs to be replaced, and apparently some pipes burst so now there's some water damage to be fixed too. Carol isn't sure why this is her problem though. If Bonnie needs a new heater and the water damage repaired to run her bakery, Bonnie should take care of it herself and pass the costs on to the customers. Carol tells Bonnie to do just that, and pats herself on the back for being so good at owning things.

The next month, for some reason Carol doesn't receive the usual $1000 in rent from Bonnie. Bonnie says that since she had to pay for the heater and water damage herself, she wasn't going to pay rent until the she had recouped those costs. That's ridiculous! Carol didn't force Bonnie to make those repairs. Bonnie still needs to pay rent. Bonnie says something about wondering why she's paying Carol rent if Carol won't even maintain the building. Bonnie's the one doing all the work of running the bakery. This just sounds like communist talk to Carol though.

Carol decides to pay Janet the Journalist $5 to publish a story in the newspaper about Bonnie's Communist talk. The headline reads "Bonnie the Baker? More like Connie the Communist!" Everybody knows that Communists are evil so many people who saw the article stopped shopping at the bakery. Bonnie is upset by this. She's not a communist. Carol tells her to prove she's not a communist by paying rent, also that rent has been raised to $1010 to cover the costs of having the article published. Bonnie doesn't want any more trouble so she agrees to pay the rent.

To Be Continued

[darklordgorblax]

Maybe You Can Outgrow Video Games?

I'm sure I'm not the only one to notice that "Gamers" seem super miserable these days, while we've been seeing some of the most amazing games getting released. I'm sure there are better explanations, like social media fomenting outrage for engagement, but I had a thought.

My mom always used to tell me, "you know, you'll outgrow video games one of these days." I laughed and defiantly told her that's never going to happen. I'm sure I'm not the only one with a similar experience. To my credit, I was right so far. It's been decades and still feel such joy every time I play.

What if she was right though? I mean, obviously not about me, but in general. Maybe I'm stuck in neverland having the time of my life, but so many other people are not. They grew up, but they told themselves they would never outgrow video games, and so every time they play all they're feeling is a longing for the joy that games used to bring them, and anger that they're unable to find it again.

I really struggle to understand the mind of the angry, miserable gamer. Disappointment and frustration I can get. Sometimes a game just doesn't live up to your expectations, and for many people that represents a significant wasted expenditure. But anger?

I always tell folks who are ranting about how much they hate whatever game that nobody's forcing them to play it. They always snap back with platitudes about consumer rights or how criticism is important for making games better, but it always hollow to me. Like pat responses that they've learned over the years to "win" the argument.

Maybe the truth is somebody is forcing them to play it. Maybe they're forcing themselves to play it, because if they admit that they just don't find video games fun anymore it means they were wrong. They did outgrow them, and they don't know what that means for their lives.

[darklordgorblax]

I Hope You're Right

To everyone who could have voted for Kamala Harris but didn't, I hope you're right.

To the MAGA faithful who voted for Donald Trump because you think illegal immigrants and queer people are destroying this country, and Donald Trump will stop them and save America, I hope you're right.

To the Republicans who voted for Donald Trump because you agree with the Republican platform, and think fears about the damage he will do are overstated, I hope you're right.

To the conservatives who voted for Donald Trump because you think a woman is unfit to be President, and you'd rather take your chances with Trump despite his flaws, I hope you're right.

To the apolitical who stayed home because it's stressful and confusing to think about politics, and you think it can't really hurt you, I hope you're right.

To the libertarians who voted third party because you saw Trump's authoritarianism, but feared Kamala Harris would irreparably bring the USA towards the horrors of Communism, I hope you're right.

To the progressives who voted third party or stayed home in protest because Kamala Harris represents the continuation of the unacceptable status quo, and we'd be better off burning it down and starting a new, I hope you're right.

To everyone who could have voted for Kamala Harris but didn't, whatever your reasons were, I hope you're right.

Some words from Anne Frank's Diary have always stuck with me: "In spite of everything I still believe that people are really good at heart." If a young Jewish girl hiding in an attic from the Nazis can hold onto the belief that people are essentially good, then I, in my relatively privileged life, can do the same.

I truly believe that each and every one of you simply did what you thought was best. I think you were terribly, terribly wrong, but on all that is still good and right in the world, I really hope you are right.

[darklordgorblax]

The Audacity Bias

I don't know if this is a thing that other people have talked about, so feel free to point me at it if you've got some good sources. I want to talk about a cognitive bias that's a subset of Horns bias (a la Halo/Horns bias) that I'm call The Audacity Bias.

Imagine your lawn is getting to be a right mess, and you just haven't had time to get out and mow it. Finally you give up on ever getting around to it and decide to hire a professional. You find a landscaper that seems to have good reviews, you send them some pictures and dimensions and get a quote. $50 is quoted. A reasonable price so you decide to hire them. A crew comes out and does a wonderful job cleaning it all up. You couldn't be more satisfied.

Another month or two goes by, the lawn is a mess again, so you decide to give them another call. As you're getting things scheduled the administrator lets you know there's a note on your file. The team noticed last time that your hedges were also getting overgrown, and they'd be happy to clean those up too for another $100 if you'd like.

Your hedges *are* looking pretty messy, another chore you never got around to, but $100! Surely it wouldn't take them more than 15 minutes to do. It couldn't possibly cost them that much additional to just take care of the hedges at the same time as the lawn. This is clearly predatory pricing. The audacity! Your glowing praise of them from earlier in the summer evaporates. You don't think you want to keep working with them, or if you do you certainly won't leave them a positive review.

Objectively, nothing changed. Nothing about their service changed. Nothing about their price changed. You don't have hire them to trim the hedges, they simply offered to if you wanted them to. Why did your opinion change? It's the audacity of the offer, of course! Before they offered you weren't even thinking about the hedges, but now that they've pointed it out, and tried to swindle you in the process you're quite upset.

[darklordgorblax]

come join our tea party! 🍵

[darklordgorblax]

[darklordgorblax]

DAE have their weird musings play out as dialogue in a tropey movie scene?

Some Bond/Batman Villain: Ok, Mr Hero, I'll give you a chance. I'll flip a coin, and if you correctly guess the result I'll let everyone go. What will it be? Heads, or Tail?

Bondman: You monster! I choose heads, but I'll have your head for this!

V: Wrong! But that was a little bit unfair, wasn't it? So random! I'll give you another chance. Tell me, what is the probability that the coins came up heads? Answer correctly, and I'll follow through with letting everyone go.

B: That's obvious, if it's a fair coin, there's a 50% chance. You're not cheating are you?

V: How dare you!! I always play by the rules. Nevertheless, you're wrong again! I already told the result was not heads, so there is a 0% chance that it was. You fool!

*Maniacal laughter while pulling the giant lever* *Bondman swoops in and saves everyone anyway*

[darklordgorblax]

Zooey Zephyr

Gender: Transgender woman

Sexuality: Bisexual

DOB: 29 August 1988

Ethnicity: White - American

Occupation: Politician (Democrat), activist

Note: One of the first trans woman to be elected to the Montana legislature

[darklordgorblax]

I had a bit of a moment when I realized that "freedom" isn't a core part off my worldview. Not that I think individual freedom is bad or anything, it's just not foundational. It's more of a means to an end.

It was just a bit of a shock for me as an American, because I'm so surrounded by rah rah freedom go 24/7. It really makes sense though once I thought about it. After all, if "your freedom ends where your fist meets my face," there is obviously at least something that we value above individual freedom.

My core values are 1) Humanitarianism, 2) Democracy, and 3) Utilitarianism. In that priority order. Freedom is just not on the list! It certainly serves all three of them to various degrees, but if individual freedom in a given case is getting in the way of those other values, I'll gladly sacrifice it as needed.

Personally, I think this realization makes it much easier to think about "when is it ok to infringe on someone's freedom." If some restrictions on free speech make the world a more humanitarian, democratic, and utilitarian world, why should I angst about it. Some people like to imagine something as straightforward as taxation is a violation of their freedoms. I no longer need to argue that it's not, because I just don't care.

Some additional spice to this line of thinking comes from self-determination theory. The theory says that there are three core needs that humans need to feel happy and satisfied with life: Mastery, Autonomy, and Relatedness. It's a very common misconception that Autonomy means Freedom here.

Freedom can certainly aid with a sense of autonomy, but they are subtly different feelings. Freedom is the idea that you can do what you want, autonomy on the other hand means that you want to do what you are doing, and that what you do matters. In this way a slave could feel autonomy if everything they must do is what they want to do in the first place. At the same time existing in a dull world where you have perfect freedom to do anything you want, but there exists nothing that you want to do(and nothing you do really matters) would still leave you craving more autonomy.

So to put a final point on the subject. Like many values we take for granted, and assume to be inherent rights, calls for freedom ought to be supported by something else. I don't think everyone needs to share my top 3 values, but I now think that the burden of defending freedom in a given case is on those pushing for it, because on it's own it just doesn't hold up.

[darklordgorblax]

Pride = Inclusivity + Consent. There's no right or wrong way to love and be yourself. You don't have to match everyone else's vibe, but you do have to help us all celebrate everyone living their life out loud!

As we come upon the gay month, here is a friendly reminder about something because it comes up literally every year for me. In general and around this time.

If you see a post that is about or includes positivity about kink and sex and sexuality, please don’t comment “ewww sex” or “this !!! but without the sex part”.

And this is not to say you have to like sex. I am well aware that this heteronormative society places way too much emphasis on sexual chemistry in relationships. And that there are plenty of people who don’t experience sexual attraction, sexual enjoyment, or are sex repulsed. And that’s okay. And society shouldn’t be putting the pressure on you to want or enjoy sex.

This is to say that enjoying and indulging in sex and sexuality is a very important part to tons of communities, and it would be very helpful to not chime in on sex positive posts saying you don’t like sex. It’s almost like a “don’t yuck my yum” thing. ‘Cause like. I’ve noticed a ton of LGBTQ+ people feel the need to hide the sexual part of their identity. And emphasize “actually my relationships are totally emotionally fulfilling” but keep the sex part hush hush. And they shouldn’t have to avoid expressing sexual joy if they don’t want to. They should get to go “I fucked someone NASTY” or like “I masturbated in such a gender euphoric way” without feeling like they’re gross. ‘Cause they’re not! That’s awesome!

And it isn’t appropriate to go on posts celebrating and caring for people not having sex or not desiring sex or being sex repulsed and say “omg but what if you had sex” or “but sex is so good though!!!”.

Let’s all celebrate our experiences with sex and sexuality, whether sex is something we have and crave or not and not step on each other’s toes. ‘Cause we’re not supposed to be each other’s enemies. Infighting is a weapon oppressors use against us. So let’s all celebrate instead.

[darklordgorblax]

The thing is, I'm always 100% Gay

One of the common "I'm not homophobic, but..." lines about media representation is all this forced diversity. You know, realistically only X% of people are minority Y, so really we're entering this space of overrepresentation. It's unrealistic. It's tokenism. It's blah, blah, blah...

Ok look. I don't really care what percentage of the general population is gay (in the same way I suspect that you don't really care either). 100% of me is gay. Every piece of media I consume will be viewed through the lens of my personal experiences. So respectfully, shut the fuck up! You are not oppressed. There will always be media for you to consume that represents you and your lived experiences. Me being part of a minority population doesn't immediately follow that a majority of media should erase people like me.

I'm not even saying that 100% of media should be queer. It's just that what we're after was never reality; it's representation. I'm just tired. I've seen a kajillion movies, and played a kajillion games, where the protagonist runs around being all straight and everything. Then someone has the audacity to claim that modern media has an unrealistic number of gay people? Why do I have to suck up the discomfort that virtually every action hero has a straight romance side plot, but audiences still get squeamish about an on screen m/m kiss? "So now the perception is, yes, women are here to stay. And when I'm sometimes asked when will there be enough [women on the supreme court]? And I say when there are nine, people are shocked." - Ruth Bader Ginsburg

[darklordgorblax]

Why does Mass Effect hate Gay Men?

So, I know I'm pretty late to the party, and plenty of people have said it better, but I've finally been getting around to playing the Mass Effect games, and I can't sleep until I get this out there. Also, apologies that I'm all over the place. It all just adds up, you know?

Disclaimer: There is a lot to really like about Mass Effect. This isn't a review, just an attempt to voice a frustration.

Where to start? I first played Mass Effect in ~2010. I was in college, and still very repressed pretending that homosexuality is totally a choice. Like most people, I imagine, I really appreciated the way that I could tailor Shepherd to my vision. He wasn't a blank slate self-insert, but had just enough flexibility that it was really easy to slip into that skin and imagine I was a badass commander out saving the galaxy.

Then the end happened and Ashley raped me. Obviously with Shepherd it was consensual, but for me identifying and connecting with Shepherd it felt deeply violating. I was leaning heavily into Paragon, and genuinely thought I was just being a good nice person. I had hardly ever spoken with Ashley, and I didn't think I had said anything particularly suggestive that was the direction I wanted to go. As a result I swore off everything Mass Effect for over a decade.

I've grown a lot since then. It's finally time to give it a fair shake. I still don't want any unpleasant surprises, so I did a bunch of research to figure out what I want to do about romance. Of course I ran into the same problem that every gay man playing Mass Effect runs into. Where are the m/m romance options? It's fine though. I decide I'm going to save myself for Gay Kaiden, and honestly it's very poignant. It's frustrating that it took 3 entire games to pay off, but even that worked into the character arc nicely.

So I played through the trilogy, hated the ending, but overall really appreciated the moments I got with Kaiden. It was pretty emotional for me too, just because it made me realize how much I needed that kind of representation. It was a catharsis to the trauma of being pushed into sleeping with Ashley a decade ago.

Moving on to Andromeda, there's still not nearly enough gay representation, but it's ok. I'm down with Gil. Then there was the scene that set off this spiral. Gil casually mentions that his only friend Jill gives him crap for being a gay genetic dead end. I tell him that's not cool, and he brushes it off. This is deeply uncomfortable, but maybe they salvage it. I have to know more.

End preamble, begin rant: Why does Mass Effect hate Gay Men?

What the ever living fuck. Gil's *entire* character ark is his "best friend" pressuring him into being her baby daddy. The first thing I had to know is who wrote this and are they gay. If they're gay themself, then maybe they're just speaking to personal experience that I happen to find distasteful and unrelatable. I couldn't find out much about the guy, but I suspect not.

So first - To straight writers writing gay characters: Just write them straight. Kaiden was written in such a way that it works either way, and it *works*. Yes, I want gay characters that deal with uniquely gay issues, but I don't trust you. To explore something as deeply personal and fraught as a gay man choosing whether or not to have children and how is not a plotline you just slap together. Just write them straight and then flip the pronouns and descriptors when appropriate.

But now I'm just gah! We've already established they're extremely lacking in the m/m romance options, but let's take a look. Gil and Cortez, the two exclusively gay men. Why are there no gay men party members? For fuck's sake! Every single exclusively gay (and lesbian?) romance option is confined to the ship. Just... I think you already know how fucked up that is, so I'm going to stop.

To move on to character arcs. I've seen people defend this, but frankly shove off. It's like these narratives' primary purpose is to make sure that everyone knows they're gay. It's show don't tell gone horribly, horribly wrong. You want to know how you show that a gay man is gay? Show them flirting with men. You don't need to consume the entire character arc showing how Cortez has a dead husband and Gil might not have children. I can cut Cortez some slack since dead spouse isn't a specifically gay arc, but even the way it's presented just puts way too much emphasis on the "husband" part.

But speaking of specifically gay character arcs... Maybe whether or not to have children isn't specifically to highlight that Gil is gay... Oh wait it totally is. This game is *loaded* with interspecies romances that will never have children. Why is the only relationship where this "problem" is highlighted the one for which it might be deeply traumatic?

I can't talk about interspecies romance without talking about the Asari. Perhaps it's the first problem, but for me it will have to be the last. I know it's been beaten to death, and scrutinized from every angle, but it's just so bad. In many ways the Asari are at the heart of the "Why does Mass Effect hate gay men" problem. A mono-gendered, naturally bisexual species that exists to fetishize lesbians for the benefit of a straight male audience. (Anyone who says they aren't technically female deserves to be punched in the face)

So with that I'll conclude: Bioware owes gay men big time for this travesty. Make a mono-gendered, naturally bisexual species that's coded as male. I dare you.