#although i’m not sure i want actual dialog in the sense of anyone responding to this

[rotationalsymmetry]

Why it’s bad — not just not helpful, but actively harmful — to go out on your way to shit on* people who might not vote Biden:

(Premises: truth is good and important, kindness is good and important, my audience is generally left of center and does not like Biden’s opposition, anybody reading this basically wants to do the right thing, the idea that the means justify the ends is kind of situational: sometimes how important your end goal is does actually affect what methods of getting there are appropriate (pushing someone away from you is excessive if they said something you didn’t like but appropriate as defense against assault), but also some things are always just wrong. Also, that climate change is a global existential threat, covid-19 is real, imperialism is bad, Black lives matter, there is no moral justification for the US to restrict immigration at all let alone anything about how undocumented immigrants are being treated, the prison system is extremely racist in practice and not actually a good idea in theory either, etc.)

People are stubborn cusses who don’t like being told what to do. Personally I’m not going to hold up “be nice to me or I might do the opposite of what you want just to spite you” as a threat because fuck I’ve got more self control than that and I know the stakes are sky high. But realistically: some people really are contrary enough to do that. So, demanding rather than asking or arguing for a thing is always a risk. (Demanding often feels safer. But that’s an illusion.)

People are stubborn cusses who don’t like being told what to do. And especially certain kinds of people — people with a history of being bullied or abused — tend to be very sensitive to being pressured, manipulated, or coerced into doing what other people want them to do. So it can harm relationships between people and between factions of the Left when some people/factions are demanding that others act a certain way, especially when the demands come attached to negging-like statements. (I get there’s a place for eg just shutting down terfs or Nazis. This isn’t that kind of thing; no one’s argument is based on the idea that other people aren’t really people here. At least not on the “don’t tell me what to do” side of this. Also, it’s possible to deplatform people without telling them they don’t really believe what they say they believe.)

It’s not polite and is not really ethical either. Consider: “if you cared about me you’d wash the dishes”, vs “hey, it’s your turn to wash the dishes.” “If you really held progressive values, you would vote Biden (and by implication, not criticize him until after the election)” follows the same pattern. “The fewer people vote Biden, the more likely it is that (the Republican candidate) will win the election” is a neutral statement of fact, and not one of the things I’m objecting to. It’s also not something I’ve actually heard anyone say this election cycle.

It’s not constructive, because getting people who are already likely to vote Democrat to actually vote is a better use of everyone’s time than trying to persuade someone who has already decided not to.

It’s not constructive, because if you want to change someone’s mind this is not how you do it. See point 1.

It’s not necessary: it’s possible to express support for Biden as a candidate and encourage people to vote for him without mentioning the existence of people who might not vote for him at all. Even if in the moment you feel motivated to express support for Biden because you read a post by someone expressing a lack of inclination to vote for him.

If you’re not sure about that claim that it’s not constructive (fair — you should be suspecting me of motivated reasoning), look at what people who actually run campaigns do. Is Biden insulting people who don’t want to vote for him on Twitter? Is the Democratic Party asking volunteers to insult people who don’t want to vote Democrat, as a way or contributing to the campaign? Is it paying people to do that? No? I wonder why that is? Maybe that’s because insulting people who don’t want to vote for a candidate doesn’t actually win campaigns?

Put yourself in someone else’s shoes. Remember a time when someone insulted you for not agreeing with them. How did you feel? Conversely, think of a time when you changed your mind about something. How did that happen?

Why it’s actually OK to talk about being unenthusiastic about voting Biden (even if you really want him and not his opposition to win the election):

Well, fuck, look for another post on the subject I guess.

Some notes on impulse control:

Sometimes, another person says something on tumblr and you’re like “fuck yeah” and it just feels right to you and you reblog it. Maybe that’s where some of this is coming from: people who’ve decided to definitely vote for and fully support Biden (reservations notwithstanding) see a post, feel frustrated, go “yeah that’s right,” and reblog without really thinking about how it’s going to come across. That’s understandable. People tend to use social media to relax and unwind; we don’t necessarily bring our full game to it.

If that’s going on, maybe learn to recognize this pattern (recognize when a post that’s a feel-good vent to you is really hurtful to someone else, because it’s manipulative af) and think twice before clicking post? Maybe in general get in the habit of taking a breath/five seconds before posting or reblogging something? I realize for many of us that’s easier said than done, and it can be a work in progress. I’m not proud of everything I’ve hit post on even after I’ve given it some thought.

Maybe some people have an attitude of “well, if anyone is hurt by this, I don’t want them on my blog anyways.” I’d suggest, as an in between measure, tagging this stuff. “Biden” or “us politics” or “election 2020” or something. Explanation for why people who might have this kind of reaction might still be people who share your values either right before this post or right after, depending on what order I decide they’re done in.

Now, I messed up here. My first five or six reactions to this sort of post was not a positive one, but I wasn’t sure whether I had a good reason to not like them or was just...reacting. I have mental health issues and sometimes have much stronger reactions to things than the things warrant. So I just...didn’t say anything or do anything until it got to be too much and I lost my shit. Not ideal. If I had to do it over again, I’d send politely worded messages to people I wanted to keep following who were posting this stuff, asking them to not do that and briefly explaining why. But, I’m at a point where I can’t do the politely worded thing, which makes actually directly addressing the people who are doing this a much trickier proposition. So. Here we are. And I’m blogging to whoever the fuck reads my blog (other than my husband, who really doesn’t deserve any of this) like that’s actually going to help.

At least it’s making me feel better.

* “shit on”: this isn’t about the sort of posts that are all “vote for Biden!” Or “vote for Biden because ... ” or “I’m voting for Biden because...” or “here’s some non-straw-man arguments for not voting Biden that I’m going to disagree with in a way that basically respects that someone can make one of those arguments and be a fundamentally decent person also.” This is about the posts that are all “if you’re considering not voting Biden you are a tentacle monster from the dimension of non-Euclidean geometry, and also incredibly stupid because the only reason someone might do this is this tissue-thin straw-man argument.” And it’s certainly not about the posts that are “you might want to deliver your mail in ballot in person if that’s possible where you live” or “check to make sure you haven’t been dropped from the voter registry” or other posts that actively address barriers to voting or getting one’s vote counted. Those are good, keep doing those.

[defaultinourstars]

Repost From my old Blogger.com. Game Review of Lydia

Overall Score: 9.7 1 sentence summary: Lydia is an incredible, emotional work of art that moved me deeply and looks like an animated short film but controls like an ant trapped in honey. The Full Review: Lydia is an adventure game by Platonic Partnership. It is fairly short and can be finished relatively quickly. It is essentially a linear game where the player progresses forward mostly by walking up to objects and pressing a button or selecting dialog choices. It is probably one of the best examples of video games as art I have encountered in about five years. Lydia is a game which does an incredible job of using very little to say so very much. As a content warning, the game contains very realistic depictions of neglect and emotional abuse, so realistic I had trouble finishing the game. In the game, you play as Lydia, a small child who lives in poverty in a non-specific country, although it is most likely the United States based on the nature of the poverty as depicted in the animations. The game bounces all over Lydia’s life, from childhood to early adulthood. As the chapters unfold a complex narrative of the main character’s life unfolds, mostly centered on her relationship with her parents, particularly her mother. I will not include too many spoilers, but before I break down the typical score I use on a game, I want to re-iterate that this game is a work of art. All games are art, but this one in particular is very aware of its status as art and the capabilities of the medium. Rendered in 2D art, the game plays more like an interactive story rather than a game, but despite the limited field of movement and player choices, I was carried along in the experience and was glad I was. As always. I review based on two separate scores. The Soft "fun" score which is more how I subjectively felt about the game, and the hard "technical" score that evaluates mechanical execution. Before I get into it I want to say that just because a game has technical problems does not mean that it is a bad game. Did I enjoy playing this game? Yes, but in a different way. 2 points. Enjoy is an interesting word. I think that a lot of the time all video games are perceived as entertainment, and are consumed like that. I paid for this game with the intention of being entertained for a few hours. I do a lot of blind-buys on indie games to see what I get, that is, I often purchase games without really doing any research into what they are. My default expectation for a video game is that I am engaged by the experience, that I have fun. I did not have fun with this game. I didn’t enjoy it. I was enraptured by it. Much like a great piece of visual art or shocking performance, I was less entertained than I was enriched by playing this game. I give it 2 points because I was completely taken in by the story and let my feelings be caught up in it. I don’t think I could do multiple play-throughs to explore different endings. It will suffice to say I felt deep feelings of sadness, loss, and hopelessness while playing this game. After I played it I felt like I had just had a good cry. Soft Score: 9/10 Is this the kind of game that other people are interested in watching or playing with me? No. But it is still good. 1 point. No. Definitely not. My spouse watched me play this game. They had to stop watching. It was too emotionally taxing for them. They agreed that it was a well done piece of storytelling but it was too close to their experiences growing up. Neither of us knew the content of the game when I started playing it, so it took us both by surprise. Is there synergy between the mechanical/technical aspects of the game and the story? Yes. 2 points Unfortunately this played a lot like an internet flash game when it comes to controls. I think that the game creators may have done some of this on purpose. Controlling a 4 year old who moves slowly and doesn’t respond quickly makes sense. However, there were times where I felt I was fighting with the controls. I think dialog option selection as well was tricky, in particular because the game does not respond quickly when switching between selections.This was very frustrating at times. However I want to laud the developers both for their use of the dialog options tree and limited movement capabilities in relation to the theme of the game itself. Whenever your character can move, they really don’t have anywhere to go but further through the story. Your dialog options almost always end up in the same place or don’t go anywhere, and this creates a sense of helplessness on the part of the player that mirrors the helplessness of the character in the game itself. Sometimes dialog options for the player will produce different effects in game than what it stated. For example, there is a section where the character is talking to a couple in a park after a fight with her parents. All of the dialog options available to the player state things to the tune of, “Nothing is alright everything is wrong”. When selection that option the character on screen replied, “I’m fine.” The mismatch between the option selection and what the character actually does on screen is brilliant. I feel as though this element was designed to show how someone might intend to be more assertive or transparent but can’t bring themselves to do it. Is the game enriching? Yes, but like enriched uranium. 2 points. Yes. I can say with certainty that the game is enriching, but in the way that getting a filling is. It is painful, uncomfortable, but ultimately worth it. Will I play it again? No, but the game really doesn’t need to be replayed. 2 points. No. It is too taxing emotionally for me to play more than once. Technical score: 7/10 Is the atmosphere cohesive (Are the aesthetics well- crafted?) Oh YES! 2 points From a technical standpoint, the game really excels in the audio and visual design. The toned down color and limited controls do manage to convey a very depressing atmosphere that reminded me of poverty stricken parts of the united states. I have been places that were highly suggestive of the scenes depicted in this game. The use of color, lighting, and limited controls were used effectively to created a sense of hazy, claustrophobic helplessness. Are the gameplay mechanics well-executed? Yes. 2 points The mechanics of this game are so simple anyone familiar with flash games from the early 2000s would have no trouble playing through. They were well implemented and fit with the core theme. Story-driven games like Lydia usually do best when the mechanics focus on advancing the story, and the relatively straightforward progress and simplicity of the game itself make the experience better. How are the controls? :( 0 points. The...Controls...Suck! If there is anything to complain about with this game, it is how the controls are so clunky. There were several scenes, particularly early on, where I was absolutely fighting with the controls. The game is more or less a point and click adventure game with dialog selection, but there were times where the delay in movement when making a selection resulted in me repeatedly selecting the wrong options or repeating options. When moving the character, they respond slowly and move slowly. It felt like I was trying to wade through mud, which is not the greatest. There was a slight delay in response from the character on screen which at first was not so noticeable, but as the game went on it got increasingly annoying. Fortunately there is no point in the game where a quick response is required. I played the game entirely in TV mode, so I am not sure if the touch controls would have been better, but the controls were not great. As I mentioned before I suspect some of the sluggishness might be on purpose, but there were times where I lost immersion because of the controls. Does the difficulty enhance or ruin the experience? Enhance. 2 points. The game is not difficult. My grandma could have played and completed this game no trouble. The lack of difficult comes from Lydia basically being a linear story with some small branching and player choice. I think the lack of difficulty actually meshes very well with the game’s overall goal of telling a story, as it prevents a break in flow. The only sections that feel difficult are ones that require the correct dialog options, but choosing the wrong ones actually helps expand the story a little more. Technical Execution: Does the back-end execution affect the experience? Eh. 1 point. This game is not a technical masterpiece. The clunky controls, as mentioned above, do interfere with the suspension of disbelief at times. The aesthetics and music are spot on for the atmosphere the game is trying to build. I would say that the technical parts of the game are adequately executed for the purposes of the story. I didn’t finish this game because I was amazed at the technical skill that went into creating it, I finished it because the story is enrapturing. Overall this is an incredible game, I just wish that they had put more effort into the controls. If you do play it, I recommend preparing yourself emotionally first.