#Recognizing Trend Reversals

[beatmyfeet]

Female Supremacy

A New Chapter for Humanity

Throughout the centuries, gender roles have seen significant transformations. Female supremacy, perceived as an evolution of power dynamics, does not necessarily imply the domination or subjugation of men. Instead, it represents the emergence of women as influential leaders in various domains of public and private life. It's the story of a world finally recognizing the vast potential of over half of its population.

The rise of women to positions of power has become increasingly visible. In politics, women are leading some of the world's largest countries, shaping national and international policies. In business, we see women heading multinational corporations, driving innovation, and influencing global economic trends. In academia, an increasing number of women hold high-ranking positions, shaping education and research on a global scale.

This new reality holds the potential to bring about substantial shifts in how our world operates. Historically, patriarchal societies have often favored conflict, competition, and exploitation of the environment. As women gain power and influence decisions, we observe a trend towards fostering collaboration, equity, and sustainability.

Female supremacy is not a threat to gender equality but rather a significant step towards realizing it. It doesn't aim to reverse gender roles, but to balance power, so that women have as much influence and opportunity as men.

However, it's essential to note that female supremacy is not a panacea for all the world's problems. Like any form of power, it can be misused, and it's necessary to ensure that all people, regardless of their gender, are held accountable for their actions. True gender equality requires a fair share of power, responsibilities, and opportunities, regardless of gender.

Female supremacy is a new chapter in humanity's story, an era in which we recognize and value women's contributions at all societal levels. This era offers hope for a more balanced and just future where men and women can work together to tackle global challenges.

[brucenorris007]

“Game Sonic doesn’t have it in him to kill Eggman.” -Someone on IG comparing Movie Sonic to Game Sonic per something written in StH 2′s script. Have... have you played or even seen the Sonic games? Especially those prior to Forces and Frontiers?

Okay, maybe that’s somewhat unwarranted. Still.

He doesn’t prioritize killing Eggman the way Shadow occasionally or Omega (always) do, but he’s not exactly opposed to seeing, ah, spilled yolk on any sort of principle, either. Eggman just doesn’t occupy anymore space in Sonic’s mind than he warrants at any given moment; the doctor might be obsessed with crushing this teenager who keeps humiliating him, but the reverse?

Sonic at one point says, when asked in Sonic X where Eggman is on a day he’s not actively destroying things or hurting people:

“I don’t care.”

Newer iterations of the blue blur confuse it a bit–starting around Lost World, I believe–but let’s go down the Games timeline; explore the evolution of Sonic’s general attitude toward killing and by extension, cracking the egg.

Classic Sonic is a younger, less powerful and perhaps more unhinged hedgehog. Like I said in another post, Sonic’s first priority is doing what’s Cool; stomping Eggman’s machines and rescuing his animal friends have fit his personal definition of cool from day one.

Every time Sonic and Eggman clash, Sonic stops attacking once Eggman does; that is, once his contraption of the week gets thrashed. Eggman’s smart enough to flee by that point, and while Sonic would keep fighting if the doctor attacked him again, striking an enemy in the back while they’re running away doesn’t fit his definition of Cool.

Sonic doesn’t go out of his way to kill an enemy who isn’t actively trying to kill him, but neither does he go out of his way to save Eggman from falls that could easily end his life. (Refer to: The conclusion of most fights between Robotnik and Super Sonic pre-Dreamcast era)

A trend that carries through at least Sonic Unleashed; if Sonic had a truly immovable stance against killing Eggman, he wouldn’t just stand by and watch his contraptions fall to pieces around him until the doctor spirals in just a pod or console seat at terminal velocity per Sonic 06. I wouldn’t be surprised if Eggman keeps Heal Units on hand for personal use when cartoon physics aren’t enough to prevent grievous injury.

I predict this is going to get longer than I expected; have a cut.

And Eggman knows this. After so many years as arch-enemies, how could he not recognize the pattern? Factor it into his schemes and calculations, his fail safes, however much he loathes the idea of losing again?

There are two Mobians in the franchise who consistently hold back and put a check on themselves out of consideration for others. Two Mobians who, should either snap, are capable several times over of wreaking untold havoc across the planet and ending the doctor’s career in evil permanently.

Knuckles, and Sonic.

This echidna is strong enough to trigger a fault line that can sever an entire zone off of Angel Island with a single blow; who, coupled with his familiarity with chaos energy and channeling the merest fraction of the M.E., can sucker punch someone out of their Super state. Destined Child’s self-control of his strength is a more significant act of kindness than just about anything else he could do.

And Sonic’s maximum speed, in his normal state, cannot be accurately measured even by Eggman’s machines. Oh, he can work out medians and means for the hedgehog’s typical velocity, enough that his robots can put up a decent fight and track/predict the blue blur’s movements.

But Sonic pulls stunts that should not be possible even in the fantastic world of Mobius on the daily; he’s fast enough that he can and has joked about light speed being casual for him, and at one point in his career he outran a black hole for upwards of half a minute. Again, without the aid of his Super state.

Sonic’s reasons for holding back coincide with Knuckles’ somewhat, but they don’t match one to one. A) He holds back for others’ sake and safety: pulling a friend along when he pours on a speed boost, pacing himself when he’s carrying someone (often, though not limited to, princesses...) and, one can infer, limiting himself to just fast enough to break the sound barrier most of the time so he doesn’t constantly destroy/reshape the terrain he’s running on. Sonic’s a rebel, and he enjoys breaking stuff, but only when he’s making a point through the stuff he’s breaking. Aimless destruction isn’t quite his wheelhouse.

And B) he holds back for the sake of having more fun. There are a lot of reasons Sonic’s persisted as a character for three decades now, and one of them, setting him apart from a lot of other ‘cool’ stoic characters I could name, is that Having Fun falls under his definition of Cool.

This is the only way Sonic’s approach to things in the Riders games, his rivalry with Jet in particular, makes any kind of sense; he chooses to race using Extreme Gear because the sport, the banter, the push toward the finish line alongside his best friends are fun, he enjoys all those things. If beating Jet or proving that he’s faster was truly the highest priority for him, he’d ditch the board and just break a half dozen laws of physics on foot like he always does.

Like I mentioned, Eggman’s aware of that; of the fact that Destined Child and Some Guy are, 99% of the time, exercising self-restraint. And factors it into his schemes. He doesn’t quite fear Knuckles snapping as much, since there are years of evidence proving that taking advantage of the echidna’s naivete isn’t enough to make him lose it, and because he understands that Knuckles sees himself as a Guardian on and off of Angel Island. Born to protect; only harming in service to that role, and certainly not to kill.

Compared to Knuckles, Sonic’s conditions for losing it, for going berserk are much more apparent; namely excessive, grievous harm to his friends. In particular, his best friend Tails.

There’s a reason why Eggman ejected Sonic from the ARK in a time bomb space pod in SA2 before facing off with the fox, and it wasn’t simply because he was outnumbered. He was holding Amy hostage with Tails in the room well before Sonic arrived. He could have demanded Tails exit the Cyclone and killed the fox. He didn’t need two hostages.

But he knew better than to think he could predict how Sonic would react to seeing his sidekick (in Eggman’s mind) motionless on the floor of the ARK. Worse case scenario, four bodies end up careening in free fall towards the Earth’s atmosphere.

Eggman knows Sonic has it in him to kill; are other Mobians more likely to try killing him? Yes, but the possibility still figures into Eggman’s plans and is one of the reasons the blue hedgehog occupies most of the doctor’s attention, second to his obsession with returning all the humiliation Sonic’s visited on him over the years.

All that being said, there is a moment in Sonic’s career that marks the beginning of a shift in his attitude toward killing.

Emerl.

Gemerl’s predecessor and the focal point/main character of Sonic Battle, for the uninformed.

Sonic found this battered robot, abandoned by Eggman in a fit of impatience and frustration; this machine designed to be the ultimate combat weapon, capable of observing and evolving based on those it interacts with like a whole-ass person would. In the penultimate chapter of the game, Emerl acquires the seventh chaos emerald and achieves a perilous state where the right words might make or break the world, and Shadow picks the right ones that allow Emerl to function autonomously without posing a danger to the planet.

Obviously, in the ultimate chapter, Eggman has to come and fuck that up.

With Emerl out of control and beyond the reach of words or reason and only minutes between him and the planet’s destruction, Sonic has no choice but to destroy–to kill–this robot he practically raised like a child of his own to save the world.

Sonic doesn’t hesitate in doing so, though it’s clear he doesn’t want to. And of course, it affects him.

It’s that moment that begins to change his attitude from “I don’t kill in cold blood/don’t kill anyone with their back to me or running away” to “I don’t kill if I can help it.”

Make no mistake, though: Sonic wouldn’t shed a single tear for Eggman’s funeral. At most, he’d consider life marginally more boring without an arch nemesis and then get over it.

Sonic is capable of cracking the egg; he prefers avoiding it, but under the right circumstances, avoiding it falls way down his list of priorities.

To this day in the games, Eggman doesn’t go after the hedgehog’s friends in earnest until he believes the blue blur has been dealt with first.

That is very, very intentional on his part.

@generic-sonic-fan

[adarkrainbow]

Spooky season fairytales (1)

I have been covering it these past weeks, and it is a perfect fit for Halloween: Hansel and Gretel.

This is one of the creepiest "popular" fairytales, that has terrified many children. The witch in the gingerbread house not only exemplifies so many bogeymen that caused children's nightmares, but is also one of the two most famous examples of witches in fairytales - and we know Halloween is one of the witchy holidays. And the whole story revolves around a house made of sweets - in modern day interpretations, Hansel and Gretel is THE candy-fairytale. And Halloween is THE holiday for treats and sweets.

Despite being an obvious choice to make fairytale horror movies, and the fairytale having inspired several great horror classics (the scene I posted before in Stephen King's IT involving the witch of Hansel and Gretel), the tale doesn't actually have a lot of treatment in the world of horror... Yeah, it is surprising, but the first true "horror movie" about Hansel and Gretel would be the Korean 2007 movie of the same name, that was recognized as a great Korean horror piece and a very touching tragic story, but is not an actual retelling of "Hansel and Gretel" - or rather it is a twisted, reversed-retelling that mostly uses Hansel and Gretel as a motif and reference rather than actual plot material.

To have "Hansel and Gretel" REALLY enter the horror movie world, we would have to wait for the year 2013, and a dual release. The first one is a famous movie by fairytale enjoyers, that is still quite popular online: "Hansel and Gretel: Witch Hunters". This movie is what the 2005's "Van Helsing" movie was to Dracula.

What to say about this movie? It is a dark fantasy, action-movie acting as a sequel to the original fairytale and depicting the two protagonists as gun-and-arbalet-wielding witch hunters. It is everything you except from a a big studio classic action gritty-fantasy movie. In fact, that's the main flaw of the movie: it is extremely generic, formulaic and "by-the-book". There's no real inventivity or uniqueness in terms of plot, setting or characters. If you played dark fantasy action video games, you watched this movie already. It didn't even invent the concept of Hansel and Gretel as witch hunters - Fables for example had done it already by making Hansel a fanatical Puritan witch hunter in the style of the Salem witch trials. As a result, what could have been a really good, inventive, interestng movie is just... a neutral, generic movie. The kind you can watch and enjoy but that won't transcend anything and isn't groundbreaking in any way.

Not that the movie is bad, it has some highlights and qualities to it that avoid making it bad. For example, several of the actors in this movie are really good and give their best despite playing bland or generic characters (and in fact it sames some flat characters, who are given depth by their actors' work) ; and there is a true visual work, with some fascinating designs. This all makes the movie enjoyable in several aspects - but just having good actors and good visuals won't make the movie good given how generic it is in plot and style, and how incoherent the worldbuilding and the tone feels, tiptoing around anachronisms for the sake of "let's make it cool and steampunk", and failing to find a balance between dark comedy and serious movie. (Oh yes and it also dreadfully suffer from the awful "3D movies" trend of the time)

And to this movie answered another movie: 2013's "Hansel and Gretel", aka The Asylum's Hansel and Gretel. A movie which is the perfect twin to "Witch Hunters" - in fact you could say they are the yin and yang to each other.

This movie is a full horror movie, not a dark fantasy/action piece. This movie is a retelling of the original story, not a sequel to it. This movie takes place in modern day, the 21st century, instead of a fantasized Germany of unclear era. And whereas "Witch Hunters" kind of fails at meeting the hype it built up, and is a neutral, average, not-good not-bad big budget movie, this movie is... surprisingly good for what it is, and ends up much better than what it should be.

If you do not know The Asylum, the group behind this movie, they are well-known producers of mockbusters, unofficial sequels and B-movies, and very proud of it. In fact it is their goal: make mockbusters to propose a cheaper alternative to big-studio movies, and turn the making of "second-rate" movies into a true art. They make their movies very fast, they release them against big studios movie they openly took inspiration from, they use cheap special effects, they select for actors either "no-names" or "has-beens"... I think I can sum it up enough by the fact they are the makers of the "Sharknado" movies. As a result, this movie was probably going to be an utter mess and ridiculous schlock...

... But it was surprisingly good. Better than what it should be. Of course The Asylum's marks are still there. The movie opens and closes on two very ridiculous scenes (the first victim's flight in the night ; the explosion of the house), there is some cheap "sexy-horror" audience-appeal (it is no mistake the only victims to be eaten are women that are forced in underwears before being pushed in the oven), and the plot is basically Hansel and Gretel X The Texas Chainsaw Massacre. BUT all that being said, this movie actually works! In its own, small-budget, no-real-ambition way. It doesn't try to be too snobby or arrogant - it knows it is a small, derivative, B-horror movie, and it stays in its lane. There are some interesting scenes and concepts (such as the drugged-colorfed nightmares). They do manage to create some disturbing elements - while also purposefully breaking several horror stereotypes and cliches. They try to keep a "maybe magic, maybe mundane" approach to the story in their own clumsy way but that is interesting. And more importantly - the character of the witch is SO GREAT!

I can't say enough how I enjoyed the witch (Lilith) on screen, and I do believe that this is due to the incredible work of her actress. Because she is played by none other than Dee Wallace (a horror movie regular who began her career with E.T.) - and she manages to make the character entertaining and disturbing. It really works, and I suspect that if a bad actress had been placed there, the role might have felt flat and generic. But she brings extremely well the disturbed state of mind, the humanity of the monster, and the true descent into horrible madness of the character. They are notably the first movie, to my knowledge, which actually acknowledges and reflects upon the special relationship between Gretel and the Witch, invoking elements that would later become common in "Hansel and Gretel" retellings, such as the witch wanting to make Gretel her "heir", or seeing her as a daughter substitute.

Beyond the year 2013, of course, now, you hit "Hansel and Gretel - horror" in any web research system, and you get the recent horror movie by Oz Perkins, the 2020's "Gretel and Hansel".

I do believe that this movie, and The Asylum's movie, truly reflect the two sides of horror movies and how one same story can be treated under these two lenses. The Asylum's is a gory, brutal, low-budget but decent and interesting horror movie, that still works in its limitations and intends to be just your random "fun little horror slasher movie" ; this movie is the artistic, big-budget, much more stylized and psychological disturbing horror movie that veers more into dark fantasy sometimes and tries more to be an actual nightmare, in the most abstract and eerie sense.

Personally, I did enjoy the movie as a whole and I think it is a good Hansel and Gretel movie. I do think they did a good job at mixing the fairytale with the entire Christian myth of the witch as built by the witch-hunts and other countryside superstitions (they weaved in the story for example the topics of the magical ointments and the idea of witches feasting on the dead) ; and I did love the dark twists and reveals at the end ; and I also liked very much the subtle references to other fairytales slid in the story (Little Red Riding Hood, and The Juniper Tree).

However it is not a movie without flaws - and I would never call it a perfect movie. It got the ideas, the visuals, the will, the inspirations, but... sometimes it does too much, there's unecessary things that could have been cut out and do ridiculize a bit the movie (the first third of the movie is filled with unecessary and random moments like the bizarre hostile man in the abandoned house, or the "mushroom" scenes, which clearly were not needed - there's also jumpscares that are just... there, for jumpscare sakes, when this movie clearly does NOT need jumpscares). There is also the fact that while often it manages to drive its themes, messages and topics in subtle or clever ways (the dialogues of Gretel and the witch, about things such as power, womanhood, the world, are all very well done), a few times it becomes suddenly very clumsy and awkward (one particular moment was the line of Gretel about "the system" in her very first scene, which felt definitively too political and modern to fit in the context).

I do remember the so-called "debate" there was when this movie was released, and the so-called "scandal" of putting Gretel's name first. But it makes full sense when you understand that Gretel here is the main character, that we are told the story through her, and that it doesn't try so much to be a Hansel and Gretel retelling, as rather a dark and morbid fantasy movie that uses the Hansel and Gretel tale as a driving plot to explore more things - the European witchcraft myth, the theme of "Faustian deals", etc, etc... And despite some clumsiness here and there that do flaw the movie (I haven't mentionned it, but the choice of the tattoos for the witch's "final" form seemed very random and ill-thought, which is one of the several little details that don't work ; balanced by details that do work, such as the idea of having a more modern architecture for the witch's house), it still works for most of its course.

To conclude this post, I need to talk about one last "Hansel and Gretel" movie. A movie which American audiences are not actually familiar with. Because it is a German movie, that got released around Europe (I saw it in French), but to my knowledge never crossed the Atlantic. Made by Anne Wild and written by Peter Schwindt, this movie is probably the eeriest Hansel and Gretel adaptation I have seen. It is not "disturbing", "shocking" or "horrifying" - it is just creepy and unsettling. It is not a rewrite or a "retelling" per se, because it stays faithful to the original tale and barely changes anything. Out of the five movies I present you, this is the most faithful movie when it comes to adapting the brothers Grimm fairytale.

EDIT: I originally wrote this part thinking the movie was very hard to find... TURNS OUT IT WAS POSTED ON YOUTUBE! The full movie is on Youtube - in its original German though

This movie made the fairytale eerie with two things. 1) Little unsettling and creepy details in terms of style and movie editing. This movie actually has several things in common with the 2020's Gretel and Hansel - such as the heavy use of the forested landscape to make one feel both lost and trapped at the same time (helped by the fact the protagonists are here played by actual children), and bizarre camera angles and movements (including disturbing close-ups and brutal cuts). The score also includes eerie songs and creepy children whispers, that add to the general spookyness. 2) A work on the realism on the tale. There's still magic and supernatural in there, definitively. But overall it is all... "realistic" in style, making it all more unsettling. Hansel and Gretel behave like actual children - and are in fact often unaware of the danger they are getting themselves into. The color palette is drab and lightless.

Don't get me wrong: this is not an adult-aimed movie, it is not a horror movie. It is still a kid-oriented, fairytale movie, with some moments of humor (though it is mostly dark humor, such as Hansel, blissfully unaware of the witch's plan, coming to enjoy his life in a cage eating good food all day long), a happy ending, and many beautiful visuals (the witch's bedroom is especially interesting - slight spoiler but there is the beautiful visual of the witch keeping petrified birds and butterflies in her room, that come back to life once she is dead). It has poetry to it - but it is definitively not a Disney movie and not what we usually think of as "fairytale movie for kids". It is a quite dark one.

One good illustration of this would be the family dynamic at the start of the tale, and how this movie slightly changes the whole abandonment episode. In this movie, the character of the mother is actually sick - and having her suffering from what will be a deadly disease puts her entire character into a very different light. Another major change they did is that the second time the children are abandoned - the parents do not hide the fact they are abandoning them. Hansel and Gretel know it, and the parents don't bother lying or even pretending, but there is still this sort of untold shame as they don't openly admit it and flee from their crying children... It hits hard.

The creepiest part of the whole movie is however, without a doubt, the witch. By gosh, this is one of the creepiest incarnations of the character I saw. She is a perfect embodiment of the uncanny valley: she is not some cartoonish monster, she is just this pale middle-aged woman that never blinks. She does perform magic, but her magic keeps with the "realism" style of the movie - no flash, no music, no smoke. When she teleports, she is just here one moment, another the next. She prevents Gretel from leaving by casting a spell that makes it so that each time she walks away, she ends up finding herself in front of the house - despite it being impossible. Her rhyming "Who's nibbling on my house?" is actually a disembodied whisper in the ears of the children as they see nobody, making their answer "It's just the wind" an actual comforting sentence they say to themselves thinking they imagined it all. Her bedroom cannot actually exist because it is located in an impossible part of the house that does not appear from the outside. And there are those little details that do hint at her maybe not being actually human but just looking like a human - when she moves sometimes her bones crack, and other times her voice seems to double itself in a strange echo... And when she is pushed into the oven (light spoilers too) - she doesn't scream. She doesn't make a sound. Once she is pushed and the door is closed, it is dead silence, and that makes it even more disturbing than if she actually screamed in agony.

And there are other little morbid details in the movie - too many for me too count. But one thing that does stick with me was the way Gretel pieced up together the witch's real intentions for Hansel (because of course she didn't tell them she was going to eat them), by noticing little details straight out of Pan's Labyrinth - such as Gretel noticing the witch's wind-chimes is made of bones and hair ; and the witch keeping in her house a closet filled with an ungodly amount of toys in various states of aging. This latter detail was notably taken back by "Gretel and Hansel", where the first hint of the witch's previous victims are toys scattered in the wilderness around the house. In fact, I do wonder if Perkins didn't take some inspiration from this 2005 movie, because there is definitively something similar between the two.

And with this, you have to my knowledge the perfect Hansel and Gretel movies for the spooky season.

The supernatural tragedy inspired by, and a famed piece of Korean horror. The surprisingly good B-horror movie that turns the story into a new "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre". The dark fantasy action-packed blockbuster that is just halfway there. The recent, heavily stylized, witch-hunt inspired artsy/socio-political horror movie. And the eerie, unsettling, faithful retelling as a dark German children movie.

[stevetonyweekly]

SteveTony Weekly - November 12

Happy weekend, friends! I’ve got a short list for you this week, which tbh, is gonna be the trend for a while. Work is increasingly busy, as are family commitments, and grad school is scheduled for January. Sorry about that. Anyway--enjoy these recs and be sure to leave a comment/kudo for your fic authors! 

~*~

stellar collision by Pandemic

He turns sixteen in front of his bathroom mirror with a chill across his skin, goosebumps on his arms, and a burn across his sternum. A wet laugh bubbles up from his mouth, too close to tears, as he watches avidly as ink pours across his skin. He thumbs the mark, presses into it, and gasps when he feels his stomach twist and a feeling he can’t shake that his soulmark is somewhere out there doing the same.

"I loved them instantly. It’s remarkable. Where was that love before? Where did you acquire it from? The way it is suddenly there, total and complete, as sudden as grief but in reverse, is one of the wonders of being human.”

Dedicated to You by mariana_oconnor

Steve Rogers is happy with his life. He runs a small bookshop, has good friends, and he fervently believes that the printed page is not obsolete. He's not expecting Tony Stark, billionaire inventor of the best e-reader on the market and perennial prey of the gossip magazines, to walk through the door.

His friends think he's crazy not to at least get the man's number, considering he's had a crush on Tony for years, but as luck would have it Steve might just get another chance.

A Notting Hill AU.

it's a small world after all by earliebirb 

“Great speech.”

Smiling at the compliment, Tony turns around. “Thank y—”

And nearly drops his champagne flute.

His world comes to a stop.

They had only spent a night together, but Tony would recognize those baby blues anywhere.

It’s Steve.

Steve from Tony’s London business trip. Or, as Rhodey has become accustomed to calling him—The Soulmate That Got Away.

Selvage by elwenyere

When a mysterious knight is wounded in battle while protecting King Anthony Stark, it's hard to tell who's more frustrated: the king, who has so far failed to discover any clues to the missing man's identity, or the king's personal attendant, Steven Rogers, who can't believe King Anthony took the field in the first place.

What Lies Inside by Penumbren

When the Avengers discover Captain America in the Arctic sea, they find more than just a new team member: Tony Stark discovers his fated mate. The problem is, Steve Rogers is a man out of his own time and apparently straight, and Tony's not about to force anything on the man he loves--even if it means his own death. Besides, Tony's spent his entire life keeping secrets. How can he possibly tell Steve that he's really Iron Man, let alone a werewolf?

this is the long haul by meidui

It takes them eleven years to go on a first date.

the steve rogers rating system by meidui

Tony has an internalised Steve Rogers rating system, but it’s not standardised. It’s also not a foolproof system because Steve behaves in ways that crash it all the time.

Advice for the Modern Merman by KandiSheek 

It's been ten years since technological advancement finally allowed merpeople to join the regular human society. Steve never thought he'd be dating the man who made it all possible.

Or Call Me Something Else by FestiveFerret

There are things Steve Rogers doesn't like about the future - see: Instagram - and there are things Steve Rogers loves about the future - see: hot, wild, no-strings-attached sex with Tony Stark. That is, until Tony drops the "b" word, and Steve realizes that what he thought was casual fun was something much more serious to the other man.

A platform for love by BladeoftheNebula 

Single parent Steve has a scary moment on the subway, but thankfully a handsome stranger saves the day.

Can't Write One Song (That's Not About You) by FestiveFerret 

Ten years ago, Tony fell in love with his roommate: funny, handsome, kind, smart Steve Rogers, who also happened to be the lead singer and guitarist of a band, The Howlies.

Then The Howlies made it big, Steve moved away, and Tony vowed to avoid any mention of the band, their songs, and the man he missed his chance with.

But chance has a way of giving you exactly what you need, even if you don't know it yet...

you'll be mine and i'll be yours by complicationstoo 

Five words ruin Tony's life.

“He doesn't love me back,” Steve says, and Tony feels his world crumble to pieces at his feet.

Steve loves someone, and Tony knows it isn't him.

The warmth of your cheek against mine by BlossomsintheMist

Steve's hurt. Tony looks after him. Established relationship.

I'll turn hours into gardens by nanasekei

Every week, a plant arrives.

Double or Nothing by RurouniHime 

One of these days, they're actually going to get that sleepover.

Steve's patient, Tony's determined, and Bucky is... wait, what's the opposite of helping? (otherwise known as the sex-filled sequel to Place Your Bets)

Sugar Seeking Sugar by NotEvenCloseToStraight

After Howard kicks Omega!Tony out, Tony is left to raise baby!Peter by himself. Working a crappy job and barely surviving, the Omega is desperate for help. When Omega!Clint suggests a Sugar Daddy, Tony is first horrified then resigned to what might be his only option to keep food on the table.

Alpha!Steve has a career, a big house, and money but is lonely every day of his life and doesn't know how to change it. When Alpha!Bucky suggests a Sugar Baby, Steve is first scandalized and then hesitantly open to at least trying.

The Sugar Seeking Sugar Agency matches Tony and Steve, and sparks fly right away between the pair. One date leads to two, then shopping trips and sleepovers, and Tony has money for bills, diapers and baby clothes while Steve is happy with the company and quickly falling in love.

Alphas usually don't want to deal with another Alpha's kid, so Tony keeps Peter a secret as long as he can but eventually he has to tell Steve about his past, his complicated life and what it might mean for their relationship.

Will the truth put a stop to their slowly progressing romance, or is a family with Tony exactly what lonely Alpha!Steve has always wanted?

[darkmaga-retard]

https://www.globalresearch.ca/proxy-states-use-big-powers-serve-interests/5867279

Proxy War in Reverse—Client and Proxy States Can Also Try to Use Big Powers to Serve Their Interests

By Bharat Dogra

Global Research, September 07, 2024

Big powers have often tried to use smaller countries to fight their wars against other countries, particularly against other big powers. The widespread prevalence of such proxy wars is well-recognized. The USA has been involved in several proxy wars. The Ukraine war has been widely discussed as a proxy war of the USA which uses Ukraine to harm Russia as much as possible. Such wars are increasingly preferred by a great power like the USA as any loss of its own soldiers is avoided and so the chances of the public opinion at home turning against the war are significantly reduced.

However a reverse trend has also been noticed and may play a big escalatory role in the near future under certain conditions. In such situations a smaller country or a client country may make efforts to involve a bigger country or even a great power supporting it in a wider war with the aim of serving its own narrow interests. 

At times it has been noticed that Ukraine’s present regime has tried to take certain provocative measures which are likely to escalate the war in such ways that the higher involvement of the USA or NATO member countries becomes more likely. This can be beneficial for the present regime of Ukraine at a time when it is suffering military reverses. If big powers can be involved in this war as their own war, and not just a proxy war, then things become much bigger and it is possible for the regime to avoid the blame for military reverses. Of course if the war becomes much wider and also more destructive then the actual harm suffered by the people of Ukraine is likely to be higher, but the stigma attached to a military defeat of Ukraine may be avoided by the regime and the support for the regime from the USA and NATO would be higher, thereby strengthening its position and international role.

This can be seen even more clearly in the context of Israel. Even though at one level Israel may be a client state of the USA under its present regime, but still this regime has a high faith in its ability to influence US policy. It feels that by provoking Iran, Hezbollah, etc. in a big way a wider regional war can be started. Such provocative actions on the part of the Netanyahu regime have been seen several times, in their most extreme form in early April and late July this year. The involvement of the USA and close allies in such a wider war can be seen as a way out of several problems faced by the present regime and its leaders who are entangled in a big mess of their own making. Despite all the destruction that a wider war is likely to bring, the regime sees the issue from a very narrow standpoint of finding a way out of the present mess and ending the war on a note of victory and glory as per its own badly distorted vision.

[mental-mona]

Excerpt:

In 1979, Iran underwent an Islamic Revolution that reversed decades of progress in economic development, women’s rights, education, health, and more. But why would a country that had taken such strides toward a promising future undergo a revolution? To understand this, it's important to recognize that the so-called Islamic Revolution in Iran was not purely Islamic — it was initiated by leftists and executed by both leftists and Islamists.

Many Mullahs, including Ayatollah Khomeini, grew increasingly enraged with Iran's rulers, Reza Shah and his son Mohammad Reza Shah (the last of the Pahlavi royal dynasty) due to their progressive reforms concerning women's rights. These reforms, perceived as Westernized and contrary to Islamic values, were instrumental in inflaming the discontent that fueled the Islamic Revolution. However, the Mullahs themselves lacked the political skills necessary to instigate a revolution on their own.

In the years leading up to the revolution, Iranian leftists, deeply influenced by revolutionary communist theories and literature, were also growing restless and impatient. Lacking the means to mobilize a people’s revolution independently, these leftists found allies in the Islamic clerical establishment. The mullahs, with their extensive network in mosques and influence over the populace, provided the perfect machinery for an uprising. Together, they were powerful enough to overthrow the system.

...

A key architect in building the ideological framework for the Islamic Revolution was the Iranian sociologist Ali Shariati. Influenced by his time among Parisian radicals in the 1960s, he sought to reinterpret Islam with a strong emphasis on social justice and anti-imperialism by incorporating elements of revolutionary Marxism. He aimed to synthesize these schools of thought to mobilize the Muslim masses (especially the youth) against imperialism, and to promote social change within an Islamic framework. His Islamic-left ideology was the single most influential doctrine that led to the 1979 revolution.

The revolution succeeded. The Pahlavi shahs were deposed and the Ayatollah Khomeini emerged as the leader of Iran. It didn’t take long after the success of the revolution, however, for leftist ideals to be jettisoned.

...

In 1988, the Islamic Republic began coordinating extrajudicial mass executions of political prisoners, including the Tudeh Party and members and supporters of other leftist political groups. The main target of the killings was the People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran, also known as Mojahedin-e-Khalq (MEK), a militant leftist group. Khomeini issued an order for their execution referring to them as "moharebs" (those who war against Allah) and "mortads" (apostates from Islam), using their alleged non-Islamist beliefs and actions as a justification.

...

Iran today ranks among the least free countries in the world. LGBT people have virtually no rights. Same-sex behavior between gay and bi men is a crime that carries a maximum penalty of death. Indeed, thousands of LGBT people have been executed by the Iranian regime since the 1979 Revolution. Women who refuse to wear the hijab risk brutal attacks, imprisonment, or even death, as the much-publicized case of Mahsa Jina Amini showed. And political and religious minorities live as second-class citizens or worse. How might things have turned out if the progress prior to the revolution had been allowed to continue?

The trends, behaviors, and beliefs that led to the disastrous Iranian Revolution threaten to repeat themselves today in the West. We have already begun to see early glimpses. The most prominent example is the ongoing wave of mass anti-Israel and/or pro-Hamas protests following the Oct 7th attacks. Not only has Hamas been a disaster for women, LGBT people, and their own civilians, but the Palestinian “one state” solution would result in a country as unfree as Iran —  and one equally antithetical to left-aligned values. Other warning signs include the case of Hamtramck, Michigan, where a progressive-backed Muslim-majority town council voted to ban Pride flags, or the spate of young TikTokers siding with Osama bin Laden’s 21-year-old “Letter to America.” This goes beyond Islamism. Segments of the far-left and Christian far-right are more than willing to team up, as we’ve seen in recent years with European populist movements, the opposition to defending Ukraine from Russian conquest, and radical lefties voting for Donald Trump to “let the empire burn.” The question is: why?

There is a particular strain within leftist thought that often exhibits a fascination with revolution and a drive to dismantle and disrupt, sometimes indiscriminately. Young (and some not-so-young) radicals see the problems that exist today, and with no appreciation for how far we’ve come, pronounce society to be irredeemably flawed. The only solution is to tear it all down. Whatever rises from the ashes, this dubious logic goes, cannot help but be better than the status quo. This perspective, while rooted in a desire for human betterment, usually leads to the precise opposite. Such revolutionary zeal is not just a desire for change, but an impulse to break the existing order, often “by any means necessary”, as so many recent anti-Israel protest signs can attest. This includes allying with any group or ideology that opposes the current power structures. This “enemy of my enemy is my friend” approach leads to alliances that are, at best, ideologically inconsistent, and at worst, counterproductive to the values that many leftists traditionally uphold.

In their pursuit of anti-establishment goals, many leftist factions find common ground with Islamist movements, not because of shared values, but because of a shared opposition to perceived imperialist or colonialist forces. The fact that Islamic fundamentalists oppose women’s rights, secular governance, and basic freedoms; the fact that they criminalize homosexuality and bisexuality in every society they control, is willfully overlooked by the far-left in the pursuit of a common adversary. But the blanket romanticizing of perceived underdogs, often without a critical assessment of their values or intentions, risks empowering forces that, given requisite power, could establish regimes far more oppressive than those they replace. In their quest for a radical overhaul, they’re willing to discard tangible progress in the pursuit of an idealized, hypothetical future. In Iran, decades of progress in economic development and women’s rights were thrown away in the revolution. The West today, which is so much further along, has even more to lose.

[dumb-cdc]

UNRWA and the Problem of Data Stewardship

Every single Registered Palestinian Refugee™️ took a grave risk to maintain their legal claim to their ancestral land. A deadly risk. UNRWA now stewards this data and all claim to land that Palestinians past, present, and future depend on. Even if UNRWA wishes to deny that it grants any type of legal status, it cannot deny that it is stewarding validated data that Palestinians lived on their ancestral land before 1948.

---

Three weeks ago, I was digging into population data for Palestine. Population pyramids offer a crude picture of health for a population, and unsurprisingly, Palestine's trends failed to show population stability. Due to premature death, many children do not age into adulthood and few adults grow old to become elders. Typically, members of a population only "exit" a population in two ways: 1) death and 2) physically leaving the geographic bounds that define this population. This leaving could be a willful emigration or a forced displacement. It's one thing to locate data for death rates and survivorship curves. It's another thing to track down refugee data. For the Occupied Palestinian Territories (oPt as defined by the U.N.), refugee data is poorly defined and deeply political. And this data is stewarded solely by the U.N. Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA).

If it were the 90s, I would be slumped over a series of bloated desktops like Julia Roberts. *adjusts tin foil hat*

On January 26th, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled that Israel could no longer act with impunity and had to immediately permit the delivery of basic services and essential humanitarian aid to civilians in Gaza. However, Israel has moved to accuse UNRWA staff members of conspiring with Hamas for the October 7th attack. The United States and Western nations have taken their cue to suspend funding to UNRWA.

To recap: now that the ICJ has ordered humanitarian aid to enter the Occupied Palestinian Territories (oPt), Western nations have cut funding to the U.N. arm delivering that very humanitarian aid in the region.

152 UNRWA workers have been killed and 145 UNRWA facilities have been damaged or destroyed. Over 1 million Palestinians are currently taking shelter in ~154 UNRWA buildings (via OCHA's reliefweb). Al Jazeera reports that the United States, Germany, the EU, and Sweden together fund ~62% of UNRWA's total funding. As these countries suspend their funding, it's predicted that UNRWA will run out of funds within weeks.

29 January 2024 statement from NGOs:

The suspension of funding by donor states will impact life-saving assistance for over two million civilians, over half of whom are children, who rely on UNRWA aid in Gaza. The population faces starvation, looming famine and an outbreak of disease under Israel's continued indiscriminate bombardment and deliberate deprivation of aid in Gaza. We welcome UNRWA's swift investigation into the alleged involvement of a small number of UN staff members in the October 7th attacks. We are shocked by the reckless decision to cut a lifeline for an entire population by some of the very countries that had called for aid in Gaza to be stepped up and for humanitarians to be protected while doing their job. This decision comes as the International Court of Justice ordered immediate and effective action to ensure the provision of humanitarian assistance to civilians in Gaza. 152 UNRWA staff have already been killed and 145 UNRWA facilities damaged by bombardment. UNRWA is the largest humanitarian agency in Gaza and their delivery of humanitarian assistance cannot be replaced by other agencies working in Gaza. If the funding suspensions are not reversed we may see a complete collapse of the already restricted humanitarian response in Gaza.

Letting UNRWA sputter out and die has grave implications for Palestinian refugees past, present, and future. Why? UNRWA is the only recognized entity that grants Palestinians their legal claim to their ancestral land and their refugee status. Piecing together the data on Palestinian refugees is Kafkaesque. The U.N. Refugee Agency (UNHCR) operates in 135 countries and estimates that ~108.4 million people are forcibly displaced globally. However, UNHCR is a distinct entity from the U.N. Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA). The U.N. Refugee Agency (UNHCR) serves every single country but Palestine. UNRWA was established in 1949 and is mandated to serve Registered Palestinian Refugees™️. Registered Palestinian Refugees™️ are defined as "any person whose normal place of residence was Palestine during the period 1 June 1946 to 15 May 1948 and who lost both home and means of livelihood as a result of the 1948 conflict" (UNRWA FAQs). Registered Palestinian Refugee™️ status extended to biological and adoptive descendants of male lineage only. Registration closed after the 1950s and re-opened decades later in 1992 to allow new appeals for registration from persons "able to produce valid documentation proving their 1948 refugee status." Only in 2006 could Registered Palestinian Refugee™️ women have their own husbands and descendants registered as Registered Palestinian Refugees™️.

Census data has never been used to build UNRWA's registry of Registered Palestinian Refugees™️. All registered persons are registered voluntarily.

So here we are in 2024. The current database of Registered Palestinian Refugees™️ only captures individuals who voluntarily registered to maintain their legal claim to the land they were displaced from. Individual men who, from 1949 to 1959, had physical documents proving that they and their family lived in Palestine. Individual men who, over 40 years later, submitted physical documents (themselves or posthumously through their children) proving that they and their family lived in Palestine. Then, individual women, who almost 60 years later, submitted physical documents (themselves or posthumously through their children) proving that they and their family lived in Palestine.

Violence since 1948 has repeatedly displaced Palestinians. Most notably is the 1967 Naksa, when Israel annexed the remaining Palestinian territories after the Six-Day War. Though UNRWA serves Palestinians who have been displaced "as a result of the 1967 and subsequent hostilities," these persons are NOT Registered Palestinian Refugees™️ — they can receive services from UNRWA, but only persons and lineages connected to the 1948 Nakba fall under the definition of Registered Palestinian Refugees™️.

This wholly fucks up the numbers.

This data is hardly complete. It is miraculous that there are any Registered Palestinian Refugees™️ given how bureaucratically violent and prohibitive this process is. How do you present documentation when the registration window finally re-opened in 1992... if your entire family line was wiped out? How do you present documentation of where your family lived some 40 years after they were driven from their home with just the clothes on their back? In public health, it has been widely studied and proven that stigma, violence, and distrust are durable drivers of surveillance avoidance. Victimized people will refuse to engage systems that capture any of their identifying information because of their fear of surveillance. They are, rightfully so, afraid of being revictimized by peoples and powers beyond them.

And so: Can you imagine having your home seized by a Western-backed nation, your family dying and suffering on a Trail of Tears, and then being asked to sign up for a Western-backed registry tracking your genetic family lineage?

Every single Registered Palestinian Refugee™️ took a grave risk to maintain their legal claim to their ancestral land. A deadly risk. UNRWA now stewards this data and all claim to land that Palestinians past, present, and future depend on. Even if UNRWA wishes to deny that it grants any type of legal status, it cannot deny that it is stewarding validated data that Palestinians lived on their ancestral land before 1948.

UNRWA only operates in 5 regions: Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, West Bank (including East Jerusalem), and Gaza. It cannot operate outside of these regions. With that said, the U.N. is only tracking Registered Palestinian Refugees™️ who are internally displaced within the Occupied Palestinian Territories (oPt) or have crossed borders into one of these 5 regions. Apparently the U.N. banks on Palestinians being unable to find resettlement outside of these 5 regions. From VOA News:

UNRWA does not have the authority to give Palestinians refugee status under the 1951 Geneva Convention. Nor does the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees have that authority while they are in UNRWA's area of operations; it can designate Palestinians as refugees only when they are outside UNRWA's jurisdiction. "The Refugee Convention was written such that it excluded [Palestinians] from protection and consideration by the UNHCR," Yael Schacher, director for the Americas and Europe at Refugees International, told VOA.

Unsurprisingly, there have been continued efforts to dissolve UNRWA. Doing so would transfer its mandate over to Arab powers within the 5 regions and subsequently dissolve the registry of Registered Palestinian Refugees™️. 

In a 2021 letter, UNRWA's Director of Legal Affairs pens a letter "at the request of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees ('UNHCR') for the purposes of describing the Agency's mandate and services that it is able to provide, and limitations thereto."

The letter defines the purpose of UNRWA and the state of its funding as such:

UNRWA's fields of operations are Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and Gaza. The Agency does not have a mandate to operate outside of its five fields, and therefore, other than maintaining regional representative offices, does not have offices anywhere else. UNRWA pursues its mission within its five fields of operations through the provision of humanitarian assistance and mandated services. UNRWA mandated services are concerned with: - Basic education, - Primary health care, - Relief and social services, - Infrastructure and camp improvement, and microcredit, and, - Emergency assistance, including in situations of armed conflict.

The Agency contributes to the protection of Palestine refugees both through its service delivery and by advocating for their rights with relevant stakeholders. UNRWA does not have a mandate to seek durable solutions for Palestine refugees. UNRWA does not manage refugee camps and is not responsible for protecting the physical safety or security of Palestine refugees or maintaining law and order in UNRWA's five fields of operations. The Agency cannot guarantee any individual's physical security. Ensuring the physical security of Palestine refugees residing in any of UNRWA's five fields is the responsibility of the respective host state or authority. [...] Operating within a resource-constrained environment, and reliant on voluntary funding, UNRWA allocates its limited resources among the services provided to Palestine refugees, prioritizing the needs of the most vulnerable. The level of services that UNRWA is able to provide depends on the Agency's funding situation, which is largely dependent on voluntary contributions by States, and may not correspond to the needs of Palestine refugees. The Agency's funding situation, which has steadily deteriorated over the past several years, reached a critical point in 2020. UNRWA received US$ 940 million, US$ 649 million short of total requirements and US$ 60 million less than in 2019. The Agency's financial situation remains uncertain with a shortfall of US$ 100 million as at mid- September 2021.

As stated, UNRWA does not operate or fund refugee camps, as they can only deliver services; refugees become the financial responsibility of the host nations. Thus, pushing Registered Palestinian Refugees™️ across borders is to the advantage of UNRWA in a few ways. If Registered Palestinian Refugees™️ are pushed outside of UNRWA's 5 regions, through the Rafah crossing into Egypt let's say, then UNRWA washes its hands of these refugees from both a financial and jurisdiction standpoint.

To reiterate from before: At least 152 UNRWA workers have been killed and most of UNRWA's physical infrastructure has been blown up and destroyed. Over 1 million Palestinians are taking refuge in remaining UNRWA buildings. Nations that account for ~62% of UNRWA's total funding and are now suspending their funds one-by-one. It's predicted that UNRWA will run out of funding within weeks.

Sounds like a convenient solution for the problem of Registered Palestinian Refugees™️. And again, this brings up concerns regarding data stewardship.

If UNRWA dies, then all Palestinians would be absorbed into the umbrella title of Internally Displaced Persons™️ (IDP) -- forcibly-displaced persons who do not cross borders. "People become internally displaced when they are forced to leave their homes due to conflict, violence, human rights violations, natural hazards, or other crises within the borders of their country. This can include situations where people move voluntarily to seek safety or to access essential services" (via OCHA).

IDP is a regionally-agnostic and globally-used term, as opposed to Registered Palestinian Refugee™️. The U.N. body primarily concerned with IDPs is the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA). Defined solely by geographic bounds, IDPs are not refugees, even if they've been displaced for generations. Those IDPs are just experiencing protracted internal displacement: "Protracted Internal Displacement refers to IDPs who, for significant periods of time, cannot take steps to progressively reduce their vulnerability, impoverishment and marginalization, and find a durable solution" (United Nations Secretary-General’s High-Level Panel on Internal Displacement, 2021).

There is a current movement to apply the term IDP to Palestinians. On one hand, it's accurate and helpful in garnering resources. On the other hand, it further erodes the UNRWA classification of Registered Palestinian Refugee™️.

The Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre (a Norwegian organization) put out an interesting report in 2015 regarding this language shift and foreshadows a mandate shift for UNRWA:

Until 2006, local NGOs, INGOs and the media generally referred to Palestinians displaced by house demolitions and evictions as "homeless", not as IDPs. At that time, some did not see the utility of the IDP label, especially given that the status of Palestinian refugee used by the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) conferred some degree of assistance to Palestinians. Over time there has been growing recognition of the validity of the IDP label in Israel-Palestine and its potential to ensure greater visibility. This new awareness of internal displacement and its triggers and consequences in the region was reflected in the 2008 creation of the Inter-Agency Displacement Working Group (DWG) led by OCHA under the auspices of the Protection Cluster chaired by OHCHR. It rapidly grew to include over a hundred members, including UN agencies, Palestinian and Israeli local organisations, INGOs and donors. They collectively acknowledged the local applicability of the IDP definition provided by the Guiding Principles and started considering as IDPs all Palestinians, including UNRWA-registered refugees, who have been displaced as a result of policies associated with the Israeli occupation of the territories annexed in 1967. Accompanying this conceptual shift there has been increasing recognition of the applicability of the term "forcible transfer" to describe Israeli practices in the oPts.

Without UNRWA's registry of Registered Palestinian Refugees™️, the public identity of Palestinians will irrefutably change. Both in the region and on the world stage.

Just another internally displaced person. Just another refugee. Displaced from where? Refugee from where? Not any place that they have claim to, legally or anecdotally; not any place that they have power to return to.

This is the problem of data stewardship that needs to be answered. Anyways, a depressing rabbit hole I found myself in.

[marketinvestopedia]

Gap Trading strategies and tips

Understanding Trading Gaps: A Comprehensive Guide

Trading gaps are one of the most intriguing and potentially profitable phenomena in financial markets. They occur when there is a significant difference between the closing price of one trading session and the opening price of the next. These gaps can be caused by a variety of factors, including news announcements, earnings reports, and changes in market sentiment. Understanding how to identify and trade gaps can be a valuable skill for investors and traders.

Types of Trading Gaps

There are four primary types of trading gaps: Common Gaps, Breakaway Gaps, Runaway (or Continuation) Gaps, and Exhaustion Gaps. Each type has distinct characteristics and implications for future price movements.

1. Common Gaps

Common gaps are usually found in relatively calm, sideways markets. They often occur without any significant news or events driving the price change. These gaps typically fill quickly, meaning the price returns to the pre-gap level within a few days. Common gaps are not usually indicative of a strong trend in either direction.

2. Breakaway Gaps

Breakaway gaps occur at the beginning of a new trend, often after a period of consolidation or a significant chart pattern. They signify a strong shift in market sentiment and are usually accompanied by high volume. Breakaway gaps can lead to substantial price movements as traders and investors recognize the change in market direction and act accordingly.

3. Runaway (Continuation) Gaps

Runaway gaps, also known as continuation gaps, occur in the middle of an existing trend. They reflect a surge in market momentum and can indicate that the current trend is likely to continue. These gaps are typically accompanied by increasing volume, signaling strong interest from traders and investors. Runaway gaps can be a powerful indicator of sustained price movement in the direction of the prevailing trend.

4. Exhaustion Gaps

Exhaustion gaps appear near the end of a significant trend. They often signal that the current trend is losing steam and a reversal or significant correction may be imminent. Exhaustion gaps are characterized by a sharp price movement with high volume, followed by a rapid reversal and a decrease in volume. Traders should be cautious when they identify an exhaustion gap, as it can mark a turning point in the market.

Gap Trading Strategies

[sketching-shark]

Do you think its funny that the fandom treats the Monk kinda the same way he treated Wukong, he kinda deserve it but can we at least something different about him (like I don't see anyone make bug jokes or about all the poetry)

AUGH well anon as I've said before I'm well aware that the internet is were nuance goes to die & while yes I know fandom is a place were people often just want to have fun & not think to hard, I do find it funny but also increasingly frustrating how even though fandom often purports itself as a place of massive diversity more and more it seems to be structured around creating an Official Version of characters' personalities & relationships rather than trying out many different things, or even considering the implications of the source material.

Now of course it has to be acknowledged that a lot of this is often due to what's in the canon work itself (like Wu Cheng'en himself seems to have deliberately written Tang Sanzang in large part as a caricature of fussy Confucian scholars), but in addition I feel like the popular understanding of a character as one extreme or another goes double for stories where the only easy access that an audience may have to it is from translated works or from cartoony retellings. Speaking for myself for example it's been pretty wild having gotten into Journey to the West before Monkie Kid came out & now it often seems like the lego show version of the story (well that and the sarcastic youtube retelling) is the only version of Xiyouji that people in the western internet audience primarily know/care about. But I'm coming from a position where I had the time & access to both read through the entirety of the Anthony C. Yu English translation (which as per usual I need to remind people you can access for free in PDF format on multiple posts on this hellsite) as well as was able to access some of the scant few scholarly works in English about the story. And that's just not something that a lot of people know about or have access to.

As such, it's pretty understandable why many people wouldn't know about all the poetry because well that's never even been brought up in the versions of Journey to the West that they've encountered, or wouldn't make bug jokes because there's little mention of Tang Sanzang having been Golden Cicada in any retelling that they've seen, or if it is it's just presented like fun trivia rather than one of the primary reasons why Tang Sanzang was even chosen to be on the journey in the first place (or what the religious significance of the cicada was in China). Add everything that can easily get lost in translation to the further simplification that cartoony retellings demand, and you can see why many people's understanding of the Tang monk would just be "whiny idiot who's constantly getting himself kidnapped, falling off his dragon horse, & torturing the monkey," especially since between Sun Wukong and Tang Sanzang the monk is by far the more static character (although a lot of Chinese retellings add scenes of him actually recognizing he was wrong & apologizing to the monkey in a reversal of the simplification trend afeawsdf).

Plus, well, I mean it's not like a cartoon is going to include all those scenes of Tang Sanzang tied up & sobbing his eyes out because he's literally in a gore-bespattered cave surrounded by yaoguai who plan to eat him, and they're especially not going to include the times when he's sexually assaulted. In a different approach than usual these things and the resulting trauma could be presented as explanations (but not excuses) for Tang Sanzang's ongoing hostility towards Sun Wukong (who lest we forget is the first yaoguai to try to kill him), but doing that well takes a level of nuance and care that's vanishingly rare in both big budget & fanon retellings of Xiyouji. Hell, in retrospect it's not even handled that well in Xiyouji itself, as if memory serves correctly the kidnappings & near death/consumption are mainly just framed as things that the monk needs to endure to get to the next stage in the journey, and Sun Wukong even makes fun of Tang Sanzang after he was molested by a female yaoguai for an entire night.

So YEAH I often do wish that Tang Sanzang was treated with more nuance (like I would LOVE to see a retelling of Xiyouji where he's more of an intelligent rule-breaker like the historical Xuanzang), but between how he was written in canon & the tendencies towards tropes & simplification in both big-budget retellings and fanon tendencies you can see how he would end up Journey to the West's Most Hate-able Character.

[random-movie-ideas]

Predictions for One Piece Live Action, Season 2

Having just watched from after the Arlong Park arc to the end of the Alabasta arc, which will likely be the plot of season 2, these are how I predict the season will go.

Assuming we will keep up the eight episode format, split into pairs by director, the episodes will go as follows:

EPISODE I and II: Everything from Loguetown to Whiskey Peak, with Loguetown making up the bulk of episode one and likely cutting off as they head down reverse mountain into the Grand Line. Episode two will cover the whale at the bottom and then cover all of Whiskey Peak, ending with Vivi joining the crew. We will also likely see quite a bit of Vivi and Igaram investigating and learning the identity of Baroque Works' leader, leading to Nico Robin calling in Mr. 5 and Miss Valentine. This call will give us the giants of Elbaf in a "Don Krieg"-style cameo, with 5 and Valentine helping Mr. 3 try to capture them, before 5 receives the call, and they leave 3 to deal with it on his own. We will also start intercutting Smoker and Tashigi's side plot following the Straw Hats into the Grand Line, taking the place of Garp and Koby's side plot from the first series (though we might see Smoker and Tashigi visit Marine Headquarters somewhere in their side plot and we get to see Vincent, Morgan, and Aidan reprising their roles, and showing Koby and Helmeppo's training).

Returning characters will include Luffy, Zoro, Nami, Usopp, and Sanji, as well as Buggy and Alvida. Newcomers will include Smoker, Tashigi, Vivi, Nico Robin, Igaram, Mr. 5, and Miss Valentine for sure. Dragon's role is small enough to be awkward but still important. The old man from the tavern might stick around, but it would be fun if Luffy comes across Dragon, doesn't recognize him in the cloak, and hears the story from him. I would prefer to keep the lighthouse keeper that tends the whale, but I could see him being cut if they want to save the whale's story for Brook or something. Either Mr. 9 or Miss Monday could be cut, but I hope they stick around. If Mr. 3 or Miss Goldenweek appear, it is only a cameo. And Mr. 13 and Miss Friday will be cut altogether.

Jolly Roger titles: If not Luffy's again, I would expect a Smoker-based title with a heavy marine focus for the first. The second would include Baroque Works' skull symbol with slight Vivi touches.

EPISODE III and IV: These would take up the entire Drum Island arc. I'm not totally certain where the divide would be between them, but I'm partial to when Nami wakes up and finds Chopper working over her. This I would expect would be when Smoker visits Marine Headquarters and we get to see Garp, Koby, and Helmeppo again.

Newcomer characters would include Chopper, Wapol, Dr. Kureha (as played by Jamie Lee Curtis, obviously), Dr. Hiriluk, and Dalton for certain. Given the trend so far, I could see one of the other of Wapol's minions being cut, but I think we'll see both. We will probably get our first Ace cameo as well.

Jolly Roger titles: Episode 3 would be Wapol's Jolly Roger, with a heavy steel theme to the letters. Episode 4 would be Dr. Hiriluk's cherry blossom Jolly Roger, with Chopper's hat and a few doctor flourishes.

EPISODE V and VI: These two will bring us to Alabasta and take us from Nanohana all the way to Rainbase, with all the desert traversal in-between. The cutoff will likely be as the Strawhats approach Rainbase, allowing for the desert to take up most of Episode Five, and all of the events of Rainbase to fill Episode Six. Ace will also stick around for the entirety of Episode Five, leaving them after Yuba. We will also start intercutting with Koza and his rebels, and King Cobra and his men, getting the backstories there. The sixth episode would end as Crocodile throws Luffy's body into the sand pit.

Newcomer characters will include Portgas D. Ace, Crocodile, Bon Clay, Koza, Toto, and King Cobra for sure. The remaining members of Baroque Works are all up on the chopping block for cuts, but Mr. 1 and Miss Doublefinger are the most likely to be kept. Pell and Chaka are also both in the realm of at least one being cut, and if I were a betting man, I would say Pell would be kept and Chaka would be cut.

Jolly Roger titles: Episode 5's will be the Whitebeard Jolly Roger, with Ace's hat on it and fire everywhere. Episode 6's will be entirely based around Crocodile, with the skull mirroring him, and the colors of his casino making up the letters.

EPISODE VII and VIII: The battle in Alubarna is so meaty, I suspect they will use both episodes for the entirety of it. I'm not sure where the split will be exactly, but I'm sure the move from the castle to the underground temple will take place in Episode Eight.

Hina will likely debut here, but otherwise all major players will have already shown up in the story.

Jolly Roger titles: Episode 7's will be based around the Alabasta royal family, with touches of King Cobra, Vivi, their castle, and their officers. Episode 8's will be based on Nico Robin specifically, with her hat on the skull, and poneglyphs covering everything.

Wanted Posters will include:

Luffy - He will mug with the same expression behind it.

Buggy - It will interrupt him as he's monologuing and will shoo it away in frustration.

Alvida - If they do her makeover, she will grab it and hold it up to point out her new look.

The Giants of Elbaf - Broggy and Dorry will both knock them out of their way as they charge at each other.

Wapol - He will eat it.

Ace - He will be in the middle of eating. He will smirk and brush it away nonchalantly.

Crocodile - His will appear after he mummifies the pirate band, flashing over his face as he steps over their bodies.

Nico Robin - Hers will appear the moment Tashigi identifies her, and she will simply scowl and ignore it.

What do you think? Come back here on release date to tell me if I got it all wrong or not!

[spiciestmarinara]

Ya’ll I’m really nervous the next character to have Something Happen to Them is Julie.

(Wild Mass Guessing under the cut, I’m so sorry I only want to talk about Welcome Home)

Like, I’m trying to piece it together in my head. Sally does all these plays and songs for/with her neighbors and was frustrated no one (besides Eddie 👀) recognized her costume at her Halloween Party and didn't tell any good scary stories before that spooky monologue- then her picture was “reversed” on the old website before it was taken down.

Eddie likes being of service to his neighbors, whether it’s actual mailman duties or supporting/participating in activities in the neighborhood. He gets frustrated (admittedly to a bigger degree) when he’s worried about not being useful. Then the end to Commercials happened.

I was thinking about how Eddie interacts with Julie a lot to the point he worried about her safety and she hypes him up during ‘Eddie’s Big Lift’. And that one can see how Julie might be the needed bridge for characters like her best friend Frank and Sally to get along.

She takes pride in her creativity and entertaining her neighbors and making them happy.

I’m not sure if I’m actually picking up on a trend, just something about my own Red Yarn Web is making me nervous for Julie specifically. For all we know this trend of ‘Update= Something Bad Happening to a Character’ might break.

[mariacallous]

In case you hadn’t noticed, the world economy’s gone rather topsy-turvy.

Japan is up while China is down—and in danger of Japan-like deflation. The United States is practicing Japanese-style protectionism and industrial policy, while Japan is championing what Washington used to promote: newer, better open trade rules.

These trends represent a virtual reversal of the neoliberal narrative we had grown used to since the end of the Cold War, when the disintegration of Soviet communism appeared to discredit the whole idea of government-directed economic growth. This was followed by the collapse of Japan’s bubble economy in the early 1990s, which in turn touched off a long period of slow, geriatric growth in the granddaddy of the East Asian “miracle.” But the economics profession, having made so many bad calls since this long, strange trip of globalization began, can’t keep up. That’s because most mainstream economists still have trouble admitting that their model of free-market fundamentalism—the “Washington Consensus”—has failed catastrophically, and in several dimensions.

While Brexit has proved a disaster for Britain and the U.S. is floundering with ever-worsening inequality, Japan may well have entered a new chapter of its extraordinary postwar story. It is enjoying a new spurt of activity, including annualized growth of nearly 5 percent in the second quarter and some price and wage increases. These indicators “suggest the economy is reaching a turning point in its 25-year battle with deflation,” as the government said in its annual white paper. Japan also remains socially stable to a degree that should make Americans envious, since it doesn’t suffer the huge income inequality problem that bedevils the United States, though Japan is, of course, far less ethnically diverse. Japan is hardly a perfect model—it is still backward, for example, in recognizing women’s rights—but its Human Development Index is rising among the rich countries. Whether measured by equality, life expectancy, or its stellar jobless rate of 2.7 percent, Japan is today in the “top rung of the most affluent and most successful societies in the world—and now seven and a half years longer than for America,” as economics historian Adam Tooze puts it.

Other economists who have long invoked the Japanese and East Asian “middle way” of market-sensitive government industrial support agree. “I wouldn’t attribute too much to Japan’s quarterly growth rate—but I would give them some credit for not leaving as many people behind,” said Nobel-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz of Columbia University. “The big advantage they had was that before their malaise set in, they had achieved a far more egalitarian state.” Or as International Monetary Fund (IMF) economists Fuad Hasanov and Reda Cherif conclude in one recent paper, the Asian miracles’ economic models—mainly the ones used in Hong Kong, South Korea, Singapore, and Taiwan—“resulted in much lower market income inequality than that in most advanced countries.”

How did East Asia do it? By focusing on export competitiveness and forcing subsidized firms to compete in global markets, these countries created good jobs for the middle class and avoided the pitfalls of failed “import substitution” policies that have characterized bad industry policy in the past across countries from Latin America to Africa. Building upon that, they also imposed progressive tax systems.

By contrast, there is also some agreement that one reason for China’s slowdown is that its dictatorial leader, Xi Jinping, has cracked down too harshly on the market part of the economy, disturbing the delicate balance of government-vs.-market control that began in the late 1970s. Xi “doesn’t seem to know how to use the levers of government with subtlety or within a market framework,” Stiglitz said.

All this is surprising, because in the policy debate with advocates of East Asian-style market intervention, the Washington Consensus had until fairly recently been winning, hands down. “Industrial policy” of the kind practiced by Japan and other East Asian nations was toxic and had to be practiced, at best, below the radar, especially in the United States. Capital flows were heedlessly unleashed around the world and market barriers eliminated at the insistence of both Democrats and Republicans in Washington. When the Asian financial crisis hit in the late 1990s, the neoliberals at first claimed vindication, saying corrupt crony capitalism and heavy government interference were to blame. But after the 2008 crash sank Wall Street—and nearly the entire U.S. financial system—it was clear that the crisis was, in fact, one of global capitalism and the excesses of neoliberalism. The problem in both the U.S. and Asia wasn’t the heavy hand of government so much as its opposite: totally unregulated capital flows and financial markets, not to mention (in the United States) regressive tax policies that favored Wall Street and capital gains earners.

As Eisuke Sakakibara, Japan’s former vice minister of finance and international affairs and one of Asia’s intellectual champions for an alternative model, told me presciently back then: “Global capital markets are responsible to a substantial degree. If you look at the so-called Asia crisis, the root cause has been the huge inflow of capital into Malaysia, Thailand, South Korea, and China. And all of a sudden … all of that has [fled] from those countries. Borrowers have been borrowing recklessly, and lenders have been lending recklessly. And not just Japanese banks. American banks and European banks as well.” Sakakibara proved to be correct, and something similar—indeed, much worse—struck the U.S. economy nearly 10 years later.

Beyond that, it was also clear during this three-decade period that China was paying scant attention to trade rules, deploying among other systematic violations industrial espionage, investment controls, currency manipulation, and intellectual property theft. During the same period, American confidence was badly misplaced that the nation’s high-tech advantages would automatically translate into a new manufacturing age for the middle class. It wasn’t just American capital that was fleeing abroad: By the mid-1990s, it was obvious that Silicon Valley-style startups don’t take one’s economy very far when most of the scale-ups—the manufacturing and downstream jobs, in other words—are happening overseas in low-wage countries.

So neoliberalism’s been dying ever since, and Donald Trump and Joe Biden have delivered the death blows. The most significant failure, perhaps, was not purely economic but social and political. It has become clear that in the United States, as well as in other major Western economies such as Great Britain, deepening inequality brought about by an almost religious devotion to neoliberal thinking has generated jarring social instability and populism on the right and left. Trump and former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson turned the two democracies that built the postwar global economic system into anti-globalist, inward-looking confederacies. Trump focused his ire on starting a trade war and crippling the World Trade Organization (WTO), and Johnson stormed out of the European Union. How did we get to this topsy-turvy place? A little historical perspective might help.

What’s been playing out on the global stage all this time has been nothing less than a historic test of alternative approaches to economic development—and an unprecedented test of social stability, too.

It began about three decades ago, when U.S. President Bill Clinton rolled into office in the triumphalist aftermath of the collapse of the USSR and decided that markets and globalization were the answer—even for formerly progressive Democrats like him. Command economies were utterly discredited. So was big government in the United States. And in the developing world, government intervention—so-called import substitution, meaning the support of domestic industry and the closing of trade barriers to foreigners—had also been an abysmal failure, especially in Africa and Latin America, leading to corruption and endemic poverty.

But then there was that strange outlier, East Asia. The East Asian “Tigers,” inspired by the postwar champion of managed economies, Japan, had dared to tinker with market forces like demiurges playing with elemental fire, and they had largely succeeded. Around that time, Masaki Shiratori, Japan’s executive director at the World Bank, lobbied passionately for a study of East Asia’s unusual success, its unique and savvy combination of deft government promotion of markets.

The World Bank came up with one—350 pages long—that hesitantly concluded that “market-friendly state intervention” might sometimes work. But it was so heavily hedged that it had little impact. Washington didn’t want to risk turning countries like India into government-supported export giants with East Asian-style policies, especially when U.S. markets were already seen as being under assault and Clinton was preaching “jobs, jobs, jobs.” And U.S. policymakers didn’t want countries like Russia to find excuses for only half-reforming their way out of command economics.

Mainstream economists rolled out their big guns against the idea that East Asia had a viable alternative. In a 1994 Foreign Affairs article, “The Myth of Asia’s Miracle,” Paul Krugman argued that pouring all that capital into industry at home was only going to yield “diminishing returns” and compared the Asians to the Soviet Union, saying that people forget “how impressive and terrifying the Soviet empire’s economic performance once seemed.” Krugman cited in particular the work of economists Alwyn Young and Lawrence Lau, who argued that East Asia’s “total factor productivity” numbers showed East Asian economic growth was entirely based on “inputs” such as rapid labor force increases, not on improved efficiency. It was merely “economic growth on steroids,” Young told me in an interview for Institutional Investor magazine in 1993. “You look impressive, but inside you’re rotting.”

Young and others pointed to Japan’s slow-growth period as evidence of this, but he and other economists failed to take into account the ultra-long time frame of the East Asian model—the fact that these countries were laying the institutional groundwork for later improvements in productivity and efficiency. And all the while neoliberalism was being slowly undermined by the departure of U.S. capital for foreign shores, along with cheaper labor. What the Clintonites and their advocates failed to see was that “[a]s capital becomes internationally mobile, its owners and managers have less interest in making long-term investments in any specific national economy—including their home base,” Robert Wade—then a renegade World Bank economist—argued at the time.

Wade and others were, of course, ignored. The historical tide of neoliberalism was too powerful, and the Japanese too meek about asserting their views. Japan, as ever, was bad about “forming universal theories from the economic success of Japan,” Naohiro Amaya, one of the country’s legendary bureaucrats, told me in 1992 when I lived there. It was a culture of pragmatism; the Japanese had no Keynes or Marx of their own. And frankly, few bureaucracies were as savvy as those of the East Asians, with their agile technocratic class and Confucian tradition of service. India, for example, which had grown up with Nehru socialism, had suffered for decades under the “license raj,” which involved a bureaucratic tangle every time someone wanted to start a business.

Yet much of this long-entrenched economic “wisdom” is now cracking—much like the melting glaciers that neoliberal capitalism, during its rampage across the planet, has helped to promote. As Cherif and Hasanov write in “The Return of the Policy That Shall Not Be Named”: “Our summary of 50 years of development showed that only a few countries made it from relative or absolute poverty to advanced economy status,” giving rise to the idea that government can’t make much of a difference. East Asia proved that it could, but “until recently, the experiences of the Asian miracles have been mostly considered as ‘accidents’ that cannot and should not be emulated, at least from the point of view of standard development economics.”

That is no longer the case. For better or worse, a new global economic consensus is being born, if rather painfully. As John Maynard Keynes wrote in the preface to The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money: “The difficulty lies, not in the new ideas, but in escaping from the old ones…”

The new look in economics is being driven by two related factors. One is the anger of the Western middle class—which has been hammered by globalization and the spread of technological advances around the world—and the other is the rise of China. As if awakened collectively from a Pollyannaish, post-Cold War dream, the U.S. political class has, in the space of a few years and across both political parties, cast off Reagan-era free-market thinking and re-embraced the mindset of the early Cold War. In particular, the China threat has reawakened memories—so long buried—of how successful industrial policy was back then.

As Wade—author of one of the original East Asia studies, Governing the Market—has pointed out, the U.S. remains by far the most innovative economy in the world due in no small part to an ongoing, if stealthy, industrial policy. The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, the National Institutes of Health, and several other federal agencies have helped produce U.S. breakthroughs in “general purpose technologies.” Among them, the National Science Foundation funded the algorithm behind Google’s search engine, and early funding for Apple came from the Small Business Innovation Research program. In her 2013 book, The Entrepreneurial State: Debunking Public vs. Private Sector Myths, economist Mariana Mazzucato notes that all the technologies that make the iPhone “smart” are also state-funded, including the internet, wireless networks, the global positioning system, microelectronics, touchscreen displays, and the voice-activated SIRI personal assistant.

Hence a new conventional wisdom has come out of the closet, economically speaking—at least among policymakers. This fresh approach amounts to what one critic, Douglas Irwin, a Dartmouth College economist and nonresident senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, disapprovingly calls “the new Washington-Beijing-Brussels Consensus of building up certain national industries through government subsidies and trade restrictions.” Instead of the Washington Consensus, we are seeing the rise of what some are calling the “Washington Constellation,” a collection of many disparate growth theory concepts.

But the economics profession itself is still not sure it ought to abandon its neoliberal convictions. “Prominent people in the profession still have convictions against this,” said Nathan Lane, a young economist at Oxford who wrote a pathbreaking paper that employed neoclassical economics to explain the success of South Korea’s state investment in heavy industry. “It’s a very uncomfortable thing that’s going on, which is economics made this empirical turn the past couple of decades, and people like myself, who are not attached ideologically to the Washington Consensus, said, ‘We’re just empiricists. Let’s explore this.’ People said, ‘Don’t do that.’ People get extremely reactive to even asking the question of whether it works.”

At the IMF, once the face and voice of the Washington Consensus, acceptance of industrial policy has been an uphill battle over the past few decades. That’s why, in 2019, Hasanov and Cherif were forced to coyly title that working paper “The Return of the Policy That Shall Not Be Named.” A year later, they followed with a higher-ranking departmental paper, “The Principles of Industrial Policy.” But the IMF still published a rebuttal from Irwin this past June.

“The debate over industrial policy has long been locked in a stalemate,” Irwin wrote. “Some see it as essential to productivity growth and structural transformation, while others see it as abetting corruption and fostering inefficiency.” Irwin echoed generations of neoliberal thinking in concluding that “quantitative models suggest that the gains from even optimally designed industrial policies are small and unlikely to be transformative.”

Yet new empirical data from the last few years indicates that many of East Asia’s industrial policy investments from decades ago have paid off big time. Younger economists such as Ernest Liu of Princeton University have debunked some of the old biases against industrial policy—mainly that it lacks the reliable information necessary to target appropriate sectors—by showing that new measures of market distortions can supply just that.

Even as the Biden administration has fully adopted industrial policy, it uses, instead, the term “industrial strategy.” As IMF First Deputy Managing Director Gita Gopinath said in a speech earlier this month, the fund’s advice is “to tread carefully. History is replete with examples of IPs [industrial policies] that were not only costly, but also hindered the emergence of more dynamic and efficient companies.”

Nowhere does the success of industrial policy play a greater role in the world today than in Taiwan. One of the reasons Taiwan has become such a hot issue geopolitically—as the U.S. and China vie over its future as a state—is because of its world-beating semiconductor industry, which produces an astonishing 60 percent or more of the world’s chips. This was not the work of the private sector alone but the creation, in 1987, of the Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, which received at least half of its initial funding from the government and over subsequent decades emerged as the preeminent maker of advanced chips. In South Korea, the World Bank once advised against setting up an integrated steel company, saying it wasn’t in Korea’s comparative advantage. But what became POSCO (formerly Pohang Iron and Steel Company) “fairly soon became the most efficient steel plant in the world,” Wade said.

So it’s unavoidable to conclude that a subject that was once taboo—the idea of government-directed industrial subsidies, along with semi-closed markets and economic nationalism of the kind practiced by Taiwan—is being embraced on all sides. A paper summing up these effects, “The New Economics of Industrial Policy,” by economists Réka Juhász, Nathan Lane, and Dani Rodrik, is slated for publication early next year by the mainstream Annual Review of Economics. And the chairman of Biden’s Council of Economic Advisors, longtime progressive economist Jared Bernstein, has invited the co-authors to speak to the council later this month, according to Lane.

In the last two and a half years, Biden has enacted what his former National Economic Council director, Brian Deese, calls its “modern American industrial strategy” based mainly on “four foundational laws”: the American Rescue Plan, which brought our economy back from the brink, and more recently the Bipartisan Infrastructure Deal, the CHIPS and Science Act, and the Inflation Reduction Act (under which Washington is subsidizing low-carbon technologies and prioritizing homemade technological leadership).

What this means, Deese said, is that rather than “accepting as fate that the individualized decisions of those looking only at their private bottom lines will put us behind in key sectors,” the government plans a long-term strategic investment “in those areas that will form the backbone of our economy’s growth over the coming decades, areas where we need to expand the nation’s productive capacity.” There have been some promising early results: U.S. manufacturing employment has hit its highest levels since the early 2000s, and the White House boasted in June that nearly 800,000 new manufacturing jobs have been created under Biden, while private-sector companies have announced more than $480 billion in manufacturing and clean energy investments since he took office.

The key factors: building sophisticated industrial sectors with government seeding, export orientation, competition, and accountability for the support received. While the policy is not yet fully articulated, the administration is seeking to emulate some of the key principles of the Asian miracle’s success—and at the same time recognize the deficiencies of neoliberalism.

“If neoliberalism is going to generate inequality, then you need government to compensate the losers,” said former World Bank economist Nancy Birdsall, referring to education, retraining, and other major investments. “That didn’t happen in the U.S. The government came up with sort of pathetic little programs that did not come close to dealing with the China shock” of jobs moving there in the last two decades.

In a recent essay in Foreign Policy, Adam Posen, president of the Peterson Institute, argued that while industrial policy is occasionally useful, the “zero-sum” economics it embraces is bound to backfire based on “four profound analytic fallacies: that self-dealing is smart; that self-sufficiency is attainable; that more subsidies are better; and that local production is what matters.”

Deese has sought to address these common neoliberal objections to industrial policy, arguing the administration is not cherry-picking winners and crowding out private investment but instead seeking to use “public investment to crowd in more private investment, and make sure that the cumulative benefits of this investment strengthen our national bottom line.” By this he means transportation infrastructure, which “literally lays the groundwork for private investment”; government-funded technological innovation; and government investing in STEM education and training at schools and universities nationwide. Harking back to the glory days of the Cold War, Deese said Biden is “making a larger investment in innovation than even President [John F.] Kennedy and the Apollo program that took us to the moon.”

Another major area for industrial policy is clean energy, Deese said. “We know the climate crisis cannot be addressed by market forces alone. We know public leadership and investment is key to the solution. And yet for decades, our country stood by. But now, with our industrial strategy, we’re making the largest investment in clean energy ever in our nation’s history” so as to “encourage the private sector to invest at massive scale.”

And yet aspects of the new policy scheme remain incoherent. One such area in Biden’s plan is his embrace of Trump’s tariffs: Economists such as Hasanov say the East Asian model works much better if there is a vibrant export market around the world to sustain competition.

These inconsistencies arise partly “because the mainstream is still coming up with bogus arguments about crowding out other ‘good’ investments,” Stiglitz said. “It’s an embarrassment. The U.S. is all over the place. The Republicans have no coherent framework for thinking about the role of industrial policies—other than the market can’t compete with China. The Democrats can’t come up with the kind of coherent approach that is needed because of the politics of [Sen. Joe] Manchin—the policy is whatever we can get through Congress.”

Today, ironically, Japan is one of the countries carrying the banner of free trade in the absence of Washington. During the Trump administration, Tokyo helped resurrect the Trans-Pacific Partnership after Trump pulled out by joining with other members such as Canada to renegotiate the successor Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership. In a 2019 interview, James Carr, Canada’s then-international trade minister, told me that “the Japanese position, attitude, and support for the rule-based multilateral trading system and fair trade has been exemplary and very important.” This year, Japan sought to rescue the WTO by joining the Multi-Party Interim Appeal Arbitration Arrangement, a multilateral framework that duplicates the Appellate Body by enabling members to resolve WTO disputes among themselves.

The European Union is also embracing industrial policy, launching the Green Deal Industrial Plan and Net-Zero Industry Act—which emulates Biden’s IRA by giving member states greater flexibility to incentivize private investors and match foreign subsidies such as those available under the IRA. The European Commission also recently launched a European Critical Raw Materials Act, to aid in identifying and securing access to those raw materials that are critical across various sectors of the European economy, and is leading multiple initiatives in artificial intelligence and digital technologies. Today, it is the policymakers who are surging ahead, while economists straggle behind.

[morlock-holmes]

"But in terms of political power, you often see an alliance between conservative religious people and certain business interests. Like, for example it's very easy to have a politics where you maintain all the economic forces that make women want to work outside the home while simultaneously vilifying them for doing so." These factions might ally for other reasons, but you're weirdly implying that it's a natural alliance, which makes no sense. If some faction wants women to work outside the home, then that's made harder, not easier, by villifying the idea of them working outside the home, and vice versa. Also it's been decades since anyone but fringe schizoposters on social media cared about that -- I am _begging_ you to recognize that it isn't 1981 any more.

It's not a natural alliance, or even necessarily an alliance at all.

It's more, you can get into a mind-set that sees everything as uncomplicatedly a result of individual ideology.

Like, you can say, "The only reason so many homes have two working parents is because women's lib has taught women to hate their natural role as homemakers. So if we want more women to be full-time caretakers we have to fight against women's lib."

But suppose the prevalence of households with two working parents is not simply a matter of women choosing between two equally plausible choices for how to raise their kids; suppose it is *also* due to the feeling that it is economically necessary to have two incomes in order to pay for your childrens' needs?

In this case negative reinforcement, say, guilting women for taking jobs outside the house, might be generally ineffective, because women might simply take those jobs and feel guilty about it.

There's no gaurantee that someone who is very angry about a social trend can actually reverse it.

[blueweave8]

Horizontal Directional Drilling Market Demand, Trends, Forecast 2022-2029

BlueWeave Consulting, a leading strategic consulting and market research firm, in its recent study, estimated the Global Horizontal Directional Drilling Marketsize at USD 9.46 billion in 2022. During the forecast period between 2023 and 2029, BlueWeave expects Global Horizontal Directional Drilling Marketsize to grow at a significant CAGR of 5.7% reaching a value of USD 13.21 billion by 2029. Major growth drivers for the Global Horizontal Directional Drilling Marketinclude the increasing adoption of HDD technology for precise and minimally invasive drilling operations. This technique facilitates the drilling and reverse reaming of pipes with precision, navigating through obstacles in the underground terrain while minimizing harm to ecosystems. Market expansion is further fueled by increasing investments in shale gas projects and the ongoing development of high-speed connectivity in the telecom industry. Notably, The global surge in oil and gas activities has spurred an increase in horizontal directional drilling (HDD) worldwide. Recognizing the environmental impact of conventional drilling methods, there is a growing emphasis on employing eco-friendly drilling technology, leading to the expansion of the Global Horizontal Directional Drilling Market. The horizontal directional drilling approach stands out for its precision and reduced power consumption compared to vertical maneuvering techniques. Another significant driving force is the rapid globalization and urbanization, fueled by the escalating energy and fuel demand in developing nations. This surge in demand is closely tied to ongoing infrastructure development, utility system construction, and advancements in the telecommunications sector, including 5G testing. These factors, along with related developments, are anticipated to contribute significantly to the market's swift growth during the forecast period. The increasing utilization of horizontal directional drilling products in surveying, designing, and installing subsurface electrical systems for subterranean cables further propels the expansion of the market. Also, the rising demand for natural gas and electricity distribution in middle and upper pipeline lines is expected to drive market growth. The use of horizontal directional drilling fasteners in utility, communications, and oil and gas industries offers benefits such as increased stability, enhanced device management, and improved treatment and monitoring outcomes. However, high costs and technical challenges are anticipated to restrain the overall market growth during the forecast period.

Impact of Escalating Geopolitical Tensions on Global Horizontal Directional Drilling Market

The Global Horizontal Directional Drilling Market has been significantly impacted by intensifying geopolitical disruptions in recent times. For instance, the ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict has disrupted supply chains decreased service demand, and increased uncertainty for businesses. This turmoil extended to energy markets, causing turbulence due to Russia's significant role as a major gas supplier, resulting in noticeable price fluctuations. In addition, the sanctions imposed on Russia by the United States and other have had widespread implications, injecting a level of risk for investors across various sectors. Beyond the war zones and disputed areas, the ongoing crisis jeopardizes stability on a global scale. It becomes imperative for businesses and investors alike to comprehend and adeptly manage these interconnected challenges.

Despite the current challenges posed by geopolitical tensions, there are potential growth opportunities for the Global Horizontal Directional Drilling Market. The ongoing infrastructure projects, utility installations, and the continuous expansion of the telecommunications industry. This demand underscores the market's resilience. Emphasizing strategic adaptation is crucial in navigating these complex circumstances, ensuring sustained success amid global challenges and uncertainties.

Sample Request @ https://www.blueweaveconsulting.com/report/biodegradable-sanitary-napkins-market/report-sample

Global Horizontal Directional Drilling Market – By End User

On the basis of end user, the Global Horizontal Directional Drilling Market is divided into Oil & Gas Excavation, Utilities, and Telecommunication segments. The oil & gas excavation segment holds the highest share in the Global Horizontal Directional Drilling Market by end user. The existing and robust infrastructure generates a significant demand for drilling rigs, contributing to the predominant market position of the oil and gas excavation segment. Also, efforts to manage the increasing expenses linked to exploration and production endeavors in untapped regions are anticipated to strengthen the prominence of this segment. Meanwhile, the telecommunications segment holds the highest share in the Global Horizontal Directional Drilling Market. The increasing need for faster broadband access propels telecommunications operators to adopt advanced and reliable drilling services, including horizontal directional drilling. This method facilitates the expansion of optic fiber cable networks by deploying conduits and pipes through holes nearly 4 feet in diameter and 6,500 feet in length, particularly in offshore locations. The growing demand for 4G and 5G networks is expected to contribute significantly to the segment's growth throughout the forecast period.

Global Horizontal Directional Drilling Market – By Region

The in-depth research report on the Global Horizontal Directional Drilling Market covers various country-specific markets across five major regions: North America, Europe, Asia Pacific, Latin America, and Middle East and Africa. North America holds the highest share in the Global Horizontal Directional Drilling Market. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, liquid fuel consumption in 2022 was reported at 8.8 billion barrels per day. The growing prevalence of infrastructure and utility projects in North America is a key driver for the increased demand in horizontal directional drilling equipment and services. The Middle East and Africa (MEA) region emerged as the second-largest user of drilling services for oil and gas excavation activities.

Competitive Landscape

Major players operating in the Global Horizontal Directional Drilling Market include Baker Hughes Company, Barbco Inc., China Oilfield Services Limited, Ellingson Companies, Halliburton Company, Helmerich & Payne Inc., Herrenknecht AG, Nabors Industries Ltd, NOV Inc., Schlumberger Limited, The Toro Company, Vermeer Corporation, Weatherford International plc, Drillto Trenchless Co. Ltd, Laney Directional Drilling, Prime Drilling GmbH, XCMG Group, and TRACTO. To further enhance their market share, these companies employ various strategies, including mergers and acquisitions, partnerships, joint ventures, license agreements, and new product launches

Contact Us:

BlueWeave Consulting & Research Pvt. Ltd

+1 866 658 6826 | +1 425 320 4776 | +44 1865 60 0662

info@blueweaveconsulting.com

[realtorjamier]

Home Decor in 2024. What’s Hot & What’s Not?

Pink’s out. Peach is in.

Pantone’s Color of the Year for 2024 is soft and subtle “Peach Fuzz,” replacing last year’s vibrant “Viva Magenta.” Pantone is recognized globally as a leading source of color expertise. 

“In seeking a hue that echoes our innate yearning for closeness and connection, we chose a color radiant with warmth and modern elegance,” says Leatrice Eiseman, Executive Director of the Pantone Color Institute™. 

If you’re looking to revamp your space, consider PANTONE 13-1023 and its complementary colors: everything from creamy, brown and tan neutrals to shades of teal, lavender and mint green. Note: gray is not listed. For those who went wild with gray or greige tones during that trend, you might want to roll up your sleeves and buy a new paint roller.

What’s out?

Say goodbye to Barbiecore (think pink). What else is losing favor? Here’s a quick rundown of trends that seem to be going by the wayside in home decor:

Sliding barn doors (Let’s face it – they don’t even do a great job of blocking light, smells, and sounds.)

White-on-white kitchens

Extremes – whether that means bare minimalism or over-the-top Grand Millennial

Heavy industrial style

What’s in?

Back kitchens

AKA butler’s pantry or scullery, this separate space keeps secondary or backup items hidden from site, tidying up the more public area. Here you can house additional refrigeration and freezing, warming drawers, wine storage, lesser-used mechanical devices, formal entertaining dishes and cutlery, etc. Appliance garages have been around for a while, but they seem to be gaining popularity as another way to streamline kitchens.

Bespoke bedrooms and bathrooms

Behind the scenes, highly personalized spaces offer homeowners comfort and creative freedom. Feel free to layer these rooms with your favorite monogrammed fabrics, artwork, family photos, and heirlooms. Make it meaningful.

Casual luxury

It may sound like an oxymoron, but  luxury doesn’t have to mean formal. Rather than opulent and imposing, choose comfortable, lived-in furniture that is still beautiful and lavish.

Bold wall treatments

Add depth and personality to walls by treating them as large canvases. Incorporate wallpaper, paneling, 3D wall coverings, stone or wood features, decorative molding. This is a take on dopamine decor – which continues to be popular – creative touches that make you feel good when you walk into a room. 

Separated spaces

Demolishing interior walls to create all-in-one living/working/playing areas is seeing a bit of a reversal. Delineating spaces by incorporating walls that still have good flow through the use of doorways and openings allows for rooms with purpose and intention.

Mixed metals

This may come as a relief. Chrome, brass, black, copper, bronze – all can be used when harmoniously paired. Trying to keep up with what’s in shouldn’t mean having to change out plumbing fixtures annually!

Mixed materials

Kitchen countertops don’t have to be one solid matchy-matchy mass. Add interest and dimension to this horizontal space. Consider a mix of materials for visual, tactile and utilitarian variety – natural wood with granite, or quartz with sleek stainless steel. 

Outdoors in

Windows seem to be taking center stage – becoming bigger and bigger. The view outside is more of a focal point than an after-thought. Biophilic design is also a way to get the feeling of nature inside your dwelling by adding large indoor plants and natural wood and stone finishes.

Mud-laundry rooms

Combining a laundry with a mudroom is a space-efficient idea. Storage components can serve double-duty: hooks, cabinets, cubbies and drawers.

Sustainability

Cheap, mass-produced furniture is becoming increasingly unpopular. People are gravitating toward quality pieces that are higher end and/or repurposed for a lesser environmental footprint.

A word of caution

Before you revamp your space with all the latest trends, carefully consider which ones truly work for you. If you’re thinking about selling your home soon, reach out to me and let's talk about what changes will give you the biggest bang for your buck.

[kp777]

By Robert Reich

Common Dreams

May 9, 2023

The Republican Party knows it’s doomed unless it radically restricts voting, or goes full throttle and wholly adopts Trumpian fascism.

A new progressive era is dawning in America, and almost nothing Republicans can do will hold back the tide — unless Republicans destroy democracy altogether (more on this in a moment).

Start with the recent victories. In Chicago, progressive Brandon Johnson, a once little-known county commissioner and union organizer, won the mayor’s race over his more conservative Democratic opponent, Paul Vallas, who ran on a tough-on-crime platform and was endorsed by a police union.

In Wisconsin, Janet Protasiewicz, a liberal Milwaukee County judge, won a high-stakes race for a seat on the state’s Supreme Court.

A progressive now holds the mayor’s office in Los Angeles, and progressives compose a majority on the board of aldermen in St. Louis.

Progressives have swept into statehouses in Colorado, Connecticut, and Wisconsin (where two Democratic Socialists this year revived a socialist caucus inactive since the 1930s).

John Fetterman successfully campaigned for Senate in Pennsylvania. In Virginia, progressive Jennifer McClellan became the first Black woman to represent the state in Congress. The House’s Congressional Progressive Caucus has added 16 new members, bringing the total number of the organization to 102. It is now among the largest caucuses in Congress.

These newly elected progressives view America’s widening inequalities of income and wealth as dangerous. They believe government has no business forcing women to give birth or telling consenting adults how to conduct the most intimate aspects of their lives. They want to limit access to guns. They see climate change is an existential threat to the nation and the world. They want to act against systemic racism. They want to protect American democracy from authoritarianism.

***

The bigger news is that these progressive leaders couldn’t have gotten to where they are without a fundamental transformation occurring in America: Voters who also believe these things are rapidly becoming the majority.

First, consider the age of people who believe these things — including the huge millennial generation now in their late 20s to early 40s.

According to a recent analysis by the Financial Times, if millennials were following previous trends, someone who is now 35 years old would be about 5 percentage points less conservative than the national average and would gradually become more conservative as they aged.

But, in fact, millennials are 15 points less conservative. Today’s 35-year-olds are the most progressive cohort of 35-year-olds in recent history.

Why? Millennials have faced an inequitable economic system, a runaway climate crisis, and the herculean costs of trying to have a family — including everything from unaffordable child care to wildly unaffordable housing. They’re demanding a more equitable and sustainable society because they desperately need one.

***

Next, consider women. Young women have become significantly more liberal over the past decade — while the political identity of young men has remained largely unchanged (see chart, below).Young Women Are Much More Liberal Than Young Men

(Source: Gallup Poll Social Services)

Part of this is the result of anger over abortion rights, but the trend started before the Supreme Court reversed Roe v. Wade.

Researchers point to diverging views about societal change, with young women more likely than young men to support fluidity over gender identity and sexual preference, LGBTQ rights, children having gay or lesbian parents, men staying home with children, and women serving in the military. Young women are also more likely to loathe Donald Trump and any politician who emulates him.

Over the next two decades, these women will be moving into positions of power and leadership. That’s especially likely in that women now compose a remarkable 60 percent of college undergraduates.

***

Next, look at the growing percentage of Americans who are (or who consider themselves) people of color.

The United States is projected to become a majority-minority nation sometime between 2041 and 2046 (depending on the amount of net immigration into the U.S., birth/death rates, and intermarriage rates over the preceding years).

By 2050, the Census Bureau projects that the number of white people in America will be falling, the number of Black people will have grown by roughly 30 percent, the number of Latinos will have risen by 60 percent, and the number of Asian Americans will have more than doubled.

Not all these people believe in all the progressive values I mentioned above, of course. A sizable share of Black voters are uneasy with LGBTQ rights. Some Latino voters —specially those who fled Cuba during the Castro regime — reject socialism. (Biden won Latino voters by a 59 to 38 percent margin, yet that was a net 17-point decline from Hillary Clinton’s 66 to 28 percent victory in 2016.)

Overall, people of color are deeply concerned about the nation’s widening inequalities. They’re committed to social justice. They want to act against systemic racism, and they want to protect American democracy.

***

Finally, consider college graduates, who are overwhelmingly more liberal and progressive than non-college grads.

Republicans argue this trend has been offset by people without college degrees, who have become more conservative. True, but irrelevant.

Here again, look at the trend. Over a third of Americans now have a college degree, double the percentage in 1980. If the trend continues — and given the demands for educated workers in an ever-more-complex economy, that seems likely — by 2040, a majority of Americans will have college degrees.

***

All these trends point to a new progressive America — in about 20 years.

Twenty years is a long time, of course. These trends have already ignited an anti-democracy backlash — especially from Americans who are older, whiter, straighter, without college degrees, and mostly male — that is, from people susceptible to authoritarian strongmen peddling conspiracy theories and stoking hatred.

The Republican Party knows it’s doomed unless it radically restricts voting, or goes full throttle and wholly adopts Trumpian fascism.

So, my friends, the stakes ahead could not be higher.