#lauren infantilism

[alexander-hamilton-is-ambitious]

Intro Post

Rules

No NSFW

If you have nothing nice to say, don’t say anything at all

No homophobia

Roleplaying is fine

Stuff to Know

My main is @evan-at-deaths-doorstep (a marauders centric blog)

John’s blog is @john-laurens-is-reckless (ran by me)

I’m a minor!!

I write on ao3 as AnyThinForourMoony

The art on the pfp was by depressedrevolutionariesinlove (I think), I found it on Pinterest. I didn’t draw it, and I’m not taking credit for it.

I’m a history nerd

Feel free to join the rp

I love reading, so any book recs would be wonderful!!

Stuff to Know About Alexander

Redhead with blue eyes

Has freckles

Small/malnourished frame (do not infantilize him)

Average height at 5’7” but short compared to others

Anxiety !!!

Really likes reading and writing

Doesn’t love making friends, but does get clingy

Lightweight

Flirty af

Serious abandonment issues

Jokes to hide sadness

Fluent in a few languages

“Sleep is for the weak”

Can and will fight anybody

Wasn’t married to Elizabeth at this time

[librarycards]

Reading [Desire/Love], I came to recognize the irony of trying to trace my desire’s paths in order to figure out what my story should be. As Berlant’s accounting of psychoanalytic theories of desire demonstrates, desire is a fundamentally unstable force that constantly misrecognizes its objects. The thing we really desire (to return to our imagined infantile cohesion with our environments) is impossible and maybe even never existed in the first place. Instead, we are doomed to simply repeat these misfires endlessly. The objects of your desire are merely “things and scenes that you have converted into propping up your world”—they are “shaky anchors,” certainly not enough to build a whole identity on.

That is not to say that sexual identity is meaningless. This kind of categorization via, say, labels that allow for visibility for non-normative identities or relationships (sexual and otherwise) is of course useful, in that it gives people a context in which to understand themselves and each other. It’s also politically important, in that it allows us all to build alliances through our shared investment in imagining and protecting possibilities beyond existing norms, which are “white, Western, heterosexual, and schooled to the protocols of ‘bourgeois’ privacy” (as Berlant puts it) and thus actively harmful to many people. But reading Desire/Love, I was able to see that who I fuck, their particular understandings of their genders or sexualities at that time, and my particular understandings of those things, is not in and of itself a path toward answering that existential question “Who am I?” or even “What should my life be?” even as the conventional cultural pairing between desire and self can make me think that it is.      

Christina McCausland, Losing the Plot: On Lauren Berlant's Desire/Love. [emphasis mine]

[hotchfiles]

Ok so something I’ve always wanted to say is that a lot of members of the team are randomly mean to each other, sometimes with reason and sometimes without, but why do people hyper focus on it when they’re mean to Reid? Being mean is obviously not something that should be normalized but like it happens, you know? From everyone to everyone and sometimes people just gotta accept that it’s ok to be mean to someone (not ok as in it should happen, but ok as in it’s something that does happen, like don’t get too hung up over it, you know?) like chill sometimes a person is mean and sometimes it’s not even really personal but you don’t have to take out your torches and pitchforks because Reid is on the receiving end. Thank you.

DO NOOOOOOT GET ME STARTED ON THIS !!!!!

That's one of the points I feel where people not only infantilize him but also project themselves too much on him.

Derek isn't mean to Spencer, that's how he shows his affection, they bicker like an old couple, everyone on the team appreciates Spencer even if he's annoying sometimes.

AGAIN. BEING ANNOYING IS NOT A CRIME. FINDING SOMEONE ANNOYING IS NOT A CRIME. We neurodivergent yappers are annoying sometimes, that is FINE. And Spencer KNOWS THAT, you can see sometimes he does it on purpose to annoy them, like when he speaks about the traffic reports and he notices how much it pisses Derek off he keeps talking about it to tease him.

The only two that get on my nerves about it sometimes is JJ, not because she finds him annoying or because she cuts him off, but because she supposedly is in love with him and how can you be in love with someone that you never ONCE showed interest in what he says. Like, never once. It's literally a joke to the point Rossi and Derek imitate his speech patterns and topics to get her to fall asleep. So that annoys me.

The stop being you scene used to annoy me A LOT because that specific line is hurtful as fuck to neurodivergent because it's all we really think about. But then I stopped focusing on Spencer, who, by the way, did not take offense in this, and noticed how DISTRAUGHT JJ is, she's talking about the guilt she has been carrying because she lost her baby and she doesn't even have a word for what she's feeling.

THE SEAVER SCENE ANNOYS ME TOO I DON'T FUCKING CARE, SHE'S ANNOYING, HER ACCENT IS ANNOYING AND HER BACKSTORY CAME OUT OF A GODDAMN FANFIC ANYWAY but it annoys me because she JUST GOT THERE, you know? We tease friends, not a coworker you just met. But honestly I just took notice of this part on my last rewatch, before that I just disliked her accent and her backstory. I also do not like the fact she was brought into the series because they wanted a younger female to bring audience but that's not her fault. (I do like her during the Lauren extravaganza)

ANYWAY ALSO. LIKE YOU SAID, THEY ARE ALL MEAN TO EACH OTHER AT SOME POINT. Hotch, Spencer, Emily, JJ, Rossi AND DEREK are awful to Garcia at one point or another, Garcia yells at Hotch, Spencer is a bitch to Emily during his addict arc, Derek and Hotch do not hold back when they are frustrated with each other. So, I mean, you know? It's family, things get heated. And Spencer doesn't even get much heated shit thrown at him, at all times it's just light banter.

[schatzi23]

Se vuoi cambiare il mondo, ama un uomo, amalo sinceramente. Scegli l'unico che possiede l'anima che chiama la tua, chiaramente. Colui che ti vede. Colui che ha abbastanza coraggio di avere paura. Ricevi la sua mano e guidalo dolcemente dentro il tuo sangue, perché possa sentire il tuo calore addosso e trovare pace. Guarda dentro i suoi occhi, in profondità, e osserva quello che lì dorme o veglia.. timido o pieno di aspettative.

Guarda dentro i suoi occhi e leggi la sua storia, le sue guerre e pazzie, quelle che i suoi fantasmi hanno combattuto, in altri posti e altri tempi.

Osserva i suoi dolori, le sue lotte, le sue sofferenze e le sue colpe; senza giudicare, e poi... lascia andare tutto. Senti dentro di lui e sappi che quello che cerca è un riparo sicuro dentro di te. Farlo sciogliere nel tuo sguardo fermo. E sappi che non hai bisogno di rispecchiare la sua rabbia, perché nel grembo tuo giace la dolce e profonda magia che sa guarire le vecchie ferite. Se vuoi cambiare il mondo, ama un uomo. Amalo davvero.

Siediti davanti a lui, con dignità e femminilità, nel respiro della tua vulnerabilità, nella giocosità della tua innocenza infantile, nella profondità della morte. Sii un invito luminoso di dolce devozione che si apre alla sua virilità. Perché possa venire da te e nuotare nel grembo della terra, insieme, con consapevolezza.

E quando si ritirerà nella sua tana... e lo farà... allora raccogli intorno a te le tue antenate e fatti abbracciare dalla loro saggezza.

Ascolta i loro bisbigli rassicuranti, tranquillizzando il cuore della bimba spaventata che è in te. Stai tranquilla e attendi il suo ritorno.

Siedi e suonagli la melodia della memoria, perché lui possa trovare pace un altra volta. Se vuoi cambiare il mondo, ama un uomo. Amalo tutto. Non suscitare il bimbo che è in lui con malizia e astuzia, seduzione e inganno, solo per attirarlo in una rete di potere, caos e odio.

Non c'è niente di femminile in questo.. è solo vendetta... è solo veleno. Non dà nessun potere a una donna. Mostrargli che sei capace di tenerlo... ora... Tienilo e guidalo dentro di te, nelle tue profondità. Non lo punire per le sue ferite, quelle che non coincidono con le tue aspettative. Se vuoi cambiare il mondo, ama un uomo. Amalo senza difesa. Amalo abbastanza da essere nuda e libera. Amalo abbastanza da aprirgli corpo e anima.

Sii abbastanza coraggiosa per essere fragile.

Fargli bere i fiori inebrianti del tuo essere. Fargli sapere che ti può tenere e proteggere. Lasciati andare nelle sue braccia e fidati di lui, perché lui ti possa accogliere. E anche se sei stata fatta cadere da altri in passato, insegnagli la dedizione, dandoti a lui.

Se vuoi cambiare il mondo, ama un uomo.

Incoraggialo, nutrilo, ascoltalo, tienilo, permettigli, guariscilo....

E tu sarai nutrita, sostenuta e protetta dalle sue braccia e dai suoi pensieri. Se vuoi amare un uomo, ama te stessa!

Sii grata per tutte le esperienze e le guarigioni e quando starai davanti a lui, trova in lui il seme per tutto quello che verrà.

Lauren Wilce

[androxys]

A study of teen-girl characters in comics of the 1980s through the 2000s thus needs to be considered with its intended audience of young men in mind. Rather than producing an image of the “teen girl” to real-life teen girls (or even a broad audience including teen girls, soon-to-be teen girls, and former teen girls), the characters and narratives in superhero stories of the Modern Age produced an image of “teen girls” primarily aimed at adolescent and young adult males ... Much is at stake in understanding the ways adolescence and femininity intersect in texts aimed at their male peers—the stories of girl Robins of the late twentieth and early twenty-first century reify perception of girls as infantilized corollaries, crutches, or cautionary asides to the real story, which seemingly belongs to the men. (from Robin and the Making of American Adolescence by Lauren R. O'Connor)

[anhed-nia]

BLOGTOBER 10/18/2022: BLOODLINE (2018)

Spoilers be here.

Sometimes I have to include a movie in my Blogtober program just to be like, "Have you guys seen this shit?!" BLOODLINE is a real oddball, and even if it isn't going to be my favorite discovery of the season, it's the kind of thing I love to stumble upon: A thriller starring a known Hollywood quantity that offers a perplexing blend of ponderous philosophizing and lowdown sleaze.

Seann William Scott, whose name I have been misspelling, plays Evan Cole, a caring social worker who counsels at-risk high school students in the suburbs. At home, his gorgeous Italian wife Lauren (Mariela Garriga) has just given him a little boy, whom he also councils out loud at night. Evan is so devoted to the young because of his own abusive childhood, but social service and fatherhood are not the only outlets for his lingering angst: He is also a serial murderer who takes out his rage on the school district's bad dads.

By now you may feel like you have a handle on the tone of this thing, but it's actually very slippery. Having read the plot summary, I wondered if I were watching the wrong movie when it begins with a graphic shower scene at the end of which a hot, naked nurse is brutally slashed to death by an unseen killer. But no, soon enough we're introduced to Evan's world as expected, where the children of pedophiles, selfish drug addicts, and violent bigots are are surreptitiously freed from their torments by their righteously indignant guidance counselor. The film's CHILD'S PLAY-like color palate enforces a sense of stunted youth, as Evan is most confident in the company or service of children. Meanwhile at home, he struggles with the tension between his wife and his mother Marie (the inimitable Dale Dickie), who battle for supremacy over both Evan and the baby.

The extreme violence with which Evan dispatches a series of cartoon bad guys seems to stand in ironic juxtaposition to the his infantilized status at home, but actually, all this material is a part of the same continuum. The ultimate question of BLOODLINE is not about whether Evan can grow up and manage his subverted frustrations in a more mature way before he gets in too much trouble; it's about whether Lauren is going to be able to get with the program, as she slowly begins to realize what's going on. As it turns out, Evan and Marie are both serial killers, her career having started with Evan's bad dad. Therefore, innocent Lauren is the aberrant one, and her aversion to violence translates to disloyalty to the family—even disloyalty to her husband's whole ethos, which requires him to abandon her and their baby at night to "help" other families. Lauren doesn't have the benefit of Evan and Marie's solidarity, as she is said to have no family at all, having survived her youth by doing things no one dares to mention. Suddenly, it starts to feel like it's really Evan's beautiful young wife who has lost the plot, lacking the philosophical fortitude and sense of commitment enjoyed by her husband and mother-in-law. From there, the movie proceeds accordingly.

I'm not totally sure what BLOODLINE wants from me. It seems to make the mistake of hanging its entire existence on an ironic twist to which all other narrative elements are subservient. The ostensible hero needs no character arc as long as the point of the movie is just to make sure everyone else is on his side. All the gesturing about familial integrity seems kind of silly when it's interspersed with spurting gore effects (and a particularly hilarious and audacious "live birth" scene), and it becomes less and less convincing as the family takes the lives of less and less guilty victims. It's as if TEXAS CHAINSAW has been transplanted to the 'burbs, and the audience is meant to hope with all our hearts that they get to preserve their way of life. With all that said, I have the impression that BLOODLINE would work better as a comedy instead of being so relentless grim—something I practically never prefer! But in the meantime, I enjoy the feeling of being baffled, and of being led to this bizarre conclusion.

[rosekevitch]

Cómo está la relación de L y C ahora con todo el circo de los Pr's? C parecía enojada y L triste que pasó cuando supuestamente estuvieron juntas en NY antes de C ir a Latinoamérica?

Creanme que mi principal tarea en el trabajo es ver el compartamiento de ustedes, para asi llevar a las chicas por otro lado, pero juro que nunca habia visto unas teorias tan fumadas como el de: lauren fue a brasil, llego tarde y camila se enojo por eso🤣🤣🤣 es que joder nunca me imagine a camila tan infantil🤣🤣🤣 pero no el enojo de camila es por algo que paso y bueno por mi querido kevitch, respecto a lauren nose donde le vieron los ojos tristes🤔🤔🤔 marihuanos talvez, pero triste?. Naaaaa

[secularprolifeconspectus]

Why did Randall Terry kick his daughter out of the house after she became pregnant 2x before the age of 18? He also called Muslims terrorists. Tried reading about him since he started Operation Rescue, but he doesn't seem like a great leader or example

You should just tweet at him and ask him yourself— @randallterry. He's literally just a person, and he's very open about how he reconciled with his children, as well as about any other question you may have. He will talk to you!! Don't believe what the pro-abortion media has said about him; obviously they lie to spin a narrative, and I know they misquote him regarding his condemnation of violence all the time.

Let's be real: Randall is a christofascist, and a bigot. He is a product of the puritanical protestants of his time. And he's also fighting to deprogram himself over time. He's softened on so many of his rigid stances. I told him my intersex friend is going to be his protégé. He grimmaced at first but then shook his head, laughed and said, "I'd love to talk to them." And he did! He listened to them explain their biology and everything!!

I respect Randall because he respects me. That's the thing about fundamentalists: they practice true tolerance because they also know how to be intolerant. If he looks you in the eye and says "I disagree with you", he means he sees you as an equal worth disagreeing with. He's not going to infantilize you with some relativist bullshit. He tells me I'm wrong and still works with me because he respects me. So I do the same: I call him out, I tell him he's an asshole, then we laugh and get back to our mission of saving preborn people.

You know that thing that happens where you become so radicalized on the left that you come full circle and end up agreeing with the radical right? Like how both the rad left and rad right are like fuck voting, but for completely opposite reasons. Randall and I come at pro-life issues from seemingly incompatible foundations and with polar reasoning, but we agree that direct action is the way forward. He's a street preacher and I'm antifa, we are both radical idealists at the end of the day, each in our own way.

The reason no other progressive pro-life group has made it as far as PAAU is because we ally with people we disagree with over the controversy we agree on: the preborn are people and we need to act like it.

Ultimately Randall isn't advocating for or doing violence against other people. His words can be harmful, but I have firm boundaries and I practice detachment. I am not aligned with him, but I tolerate him and I am his friend. Friendship changes people and opens their eyes to care for people unlike themselves. Everyone should determine their own boundaries with Randall depending on their own windows of tolerance.

Randall took care of Terrisa and Lauren when they developed PTSD from discovering the DC Five. He lead the Jfor5 press conference because he has decades of experience dealing with the media, especially when the media is actively lying about you. He inspired and mobilized thousands and thousands of people, so we take pages from his book and leave behind what does not serve us (i.e. the bigotry).

Randall will often say to us "I don't understand why I'm friends with any of you" and smile. He is kind. He is feisty. He loves unconditionally. I believe we are in his life for a reason, and he in ours. If we truly believe in restorative justice, then we must accept that people can change and grant them mercy. Randall is changing by knowing us and loving us; I can see it in him.

Also, you should check out his album, it's hilarious.

Ps. To whomstever compared Ted Cruz to Hitler in my DMs: first, omfg, get over yourself. Second, he's the zodiac killer, not Hitler, get your references straight. Third, he offered to help us because he actually gives a damn about the babies. Fourth, we are not aligned with him, we are allied with him on this issue because it is pragmatic. If you're comfortable in your coalition, then it's too small. Just as hunters and animal rights activists must come together to save the forests, we must work with people with whom we have fundamental differences in worldview to end legal baby murder.

Fifth and final, if this anon is who I think it is, I have a message for you: you've abandoned and betrayed the babies. Get off my DICK. Get your ideological and moral puritanism out of my DMs. You're just as much of a fundamentalist as Randall and you can't even SEE it, which makes you a hypocrite too.

[fettesans]

Top, screen capture from Mario Santamaría, The Phantom of the Mirror, 2013, selfies of the Google’s Art Project robocam captured in the many mirrors of the museums it was photographing. Via. More. Bottom, screen capture from The Wayward Cloud, directed by Tsai Ming-liang, 2015.

--

Medusa's petrifying gaze is much more complicated than I thought as a kid. For example, Medusa does not have the equivalent of laser beams shooting out of her eyes. That is, getting turned into stone by Medusa is something that occurs essentially by the victim's choice. In order to become a stone of yourself you must: 1) look directly at Medusa while 2) she directly meets your elective gaze. I think we can deduce this much from the story of the polished shield. In other words her "petrifying gaze" is really an automatic and unstoppable consequence of choosing to look at Medusa and of then receiving her eye contact. There is something close to a supercultural (that is, "humanistic") understanding of us at work here: we are the animal that can't not look. (...)

There is also a quality of being damned-to-fame in Medusa's curse. This goes beyond her famous ugliness. Medusa leaves a trail of sterile human pillars behind her. It mocks the way she once made men hard—an overtone I don't think would have been lost on a Roman audience. Medusa is the nightmare of a certain idea of female modesty.

Lazenby, from What does the myth of Medusa mean?, April 2023.

--

Capitalist notions of product and profit, which have intensified their organization and exploitation of the body during the last century, would also be overturned by this notion of the subject who becomes an entity outside of the triangulated Oedipal “Mommy-Daddy-Me” prison of psychoanalysis. This radical way of reading the subject’s construction by her desire not only refuses the view that the subject is a traumatized infantile core knotted up by the compulsion to repeat a normative erotic organization, but also produces ways of reading sensation that has the subject’s affect inevitably exceeding the normal and proper codes that try to organize her, as she moves through the world becoming impacted by and different within the event of her encounters. On the other hand, as we have seen, desire’s restless drive toward finding spaces and shapes will always be met if not overmatched by the coercive and seductive forms of propriety, virtue, and discipline that organize societies, and individual will cannot dissolve these by force or by theory. What is the status of desire’s excesses for the individual or social order, then? Can anything general be said about it?

Lauren Berlant, from Desire/Love, 2012. Via.

[franronc]

Se vuoi cambiare il mondo, ama un uomo, amalo sinceramente. Scegli l'unico che possiede l'anima che chiama la tua, chiaramente. Colui che ti vede. Colui che ha abbastanza coraggio di avere paura. Ricevi la sua mano e guidalo dolcemente dentro il tuo sangue, perché possa sentire il tuo calore addosso e trovare pace. Guarda dentro i suoi occhi, in profondità, e osserva quello che lì dorme o veglia.. timido o pieno di aspettative.

Guarda dentro i suoi occhi e leggi la sua storia, le sue guerre e pazzie, quelle che i suoi fantasmi hanno combattuto, in altri posti e altri tempi.

Osserva i suoi dolori, le sue lotte, le sue sofferenze e le sue colpe; senza giudicare, e poi... lascia andare tutto. Senti dentro di lui e sappi che quello che cerca è un riparo sicuro dentro di te. Farlo sciogliere nel tuo sguardo fermo. E sappi che non hai bisogno di rispecchiare la sua rabbia, perché nel grembo tuo giace la dolce e profonda magia che sa guarire le vecchie ferite. Se vuoi cambiare il mondo, ama un uomo. Amalo davvero.

Siediti davanti a lui, con dignità e femminilità, nel respiro della tua vulnerabilità, nella giocosità della tua innocenza infantile, nella profondità della morte. Sii un invito luminoso di dolce devozione che si apre alla sua virilità. Perché possa venire da te e nuotare nel grembo della terra, insieme, con consapevolezza.

E quando si ritirerà nella sua tana... e lo farà... allora raccogli intorno a te le tue antenate e fatti abbracciare dalla loro saggezza.

Ascolta i loro bisbigli rassicuranti, tranquillizzando il cuore della bimba spaventata che è in te. Stai tranquilla e attendi il suo ritorno.

Siedi e suonagli la melodia della memoria, perché lui possa trovare pace un altra volta. Se vuoi cambiare il mondo, ama un uomo. Amalo tutto. Non suscitare il bimbo che è in lui con malizia e astuzia, seduzione e inganno, solo per attirarlo in una rete di potere, caos e odio.

Non c'è niente di femminile in questo.. è solo vendetta... è solo veleno. Non dà nessun potere a una donna. Mostrargli che sei capace di tenerlo... ora... Tienilo e guidalo dentro di te, nelle tue profondità. Non lo punire per le sue ferite, quelle che non coincidono con le tue aspettative. Se vuoi cambiare il mondo, ama un uomo. Amalo senza difesa. Amalo abbastanza da essere nuda e libera. Amalo abbastanza da aprirgli corpo e anima.

Sii abbastanza coraggiosa per essere fragile.

Fargli bere i fiori inebrianti del tuo essere. Fargli sapere che ti può tenere e proteggere. Lasciati andare nelle sue braccia e fidati di lui, perché lui ti possa accogliere. E anche se sei stata fatta cadere da altri in passato, insegnagli la dedizione, dandoti a lui.

Se vuoi cambiare il mondo, ama un uomo.

Incoraggialo, nutrilo, ascoltalo, tienilo, permettigli, guariscilo....

E tu sarai nutrita, sostenuta e protetta dalle sue braccia e dai suoi pensieri. Se vuoi amare un uomo, ama te stessa!

Sii grata per tutte le esperienze e le guarigioni e quando starai davanti a lui, trova in lui il seme per tutto quello che verrà.

Lauren Wilce

[eavanyhuang]

The Depressive Realism of Addiction

Today’s podcast is, again, from Frontline Herbalism, an episode in which Nicole interviews her partner Rob about his experience of and thoughts about substance addiction. While I have known some advocacy for decriminalizing drug use in North America, Nicole is right that there is not much organizing around addiction, especially as a public health issue, in social movement spaces. This makes me into wondering if and to what extent “organizing” itself is narcotic, as well as how modernity-coloniality relies heavily on addiction-based affective structures to operate. But before it goes too far, I want to take notes on a couple things they discussed that are important.

First, being addicted to substance, especially in the current society that stigmatizes, infantilizes, criminalizes, and dehumanizes addicts, is extremely traumatic. Such trauma is disproportionate, considering other completely normalized forms of addiction, such as work, heteronormativity, ableism, standardized body image, meritocracy, hierarchy, capital, consumption, screen time, toxic positivity, etc., because the way modernity deprives societies of their medical sovereignty. It is particularly hard to maintain any kind of relationship with the world, such as medical professionals and schools, not to mention building and sustaining close communities of friends and family. Even those who built a bond among themselves often lose members to incarceration, sudden death, and/or displacement. In addition to this, the amount of anxiety produced by the unpredictability of the dosage and components of the drugs they get each day is insane. A big part of the high rate of relapse among addicts is exactly this traumatic experience and the sense of pain and isolation it induces, which drives them to seek more solace from substances.

Second, it takes coordinated social support to help, which in and of itself should be a political campaign. It is not easy to “come clean” once you are addicted to substance and forced to live on the street in the current society. On the street, drug addicts usually need to work extra hard to fund their habit via risky choices, a reality that Rob describes as a “full time job”. In such circumstances, community detox cannot happen. Only when there are funded infrastructures providing safe and free drug use and temporary staying spaces, as well as resourceful communities coming together to help individuals in need of healing and recovery, would the whole weaning off process be likely to succeed.

Third, drug addiction should be framed, thought of, and treated as a disease instead of a moral failure. At the end of the episode Rob corrected the language of “enabling”, as addicts don’t need drug dealers to “wave it” in front of them, they would seek it out themselves. By using such language, the society encourages the deprivation of substance from addicts as the ultimate solution, whereas in reality it could be deadly and immensely traumatic to them. Instead, addiction is a condition of sickness that manifests in substance abuse, the latter of which is the symptom not the cause.

I find addiction extremely generative for thinking about modern-colonial affect, not as a metaphor, but as a description. What if modernity-coloniality is a form of addiction, the forms of substance of which, as Rob points out, do not really matter. As I mentioned above, this could be work, heteronormativity, ableism, standardized body image, meritocracy, hierarchy, capital, consumption, screen time, toxic positivity, information, professionalism and authority, commodities, etc.. The objects can shift and change, but addiction per se is the disease left untreated. This helps formulate a loving critique of Lauren Berlant’s discussion of cruel optimism that limits itself in the confine of “American dream”’s brutal awakening: it’s not even timely, but applicable to modern-coloniality at all times. In the first chapter of Cruel Optimism she offers an interpretation of Charles Johnson’s Exchange Value that has stuck with me for a couple years. The story is about two black brothers, who grew up in poverty, robbing their possibly dead neighbor, ending up with a giant amount of money. They each approach this very differently, one through binge consumption, the other compulsive hoarding. She comments, in her usual style of depressive realism, on page 41,

“’Exchange Value’” demonstrates the proximity of two kinds of cruel optimism: with little cultural or economic capital and bearing the history of a racial disinheritance form the norms of white supremacist power, you work yourself to death, or coast to nonexistence; or, with the ballast of capital, you hoard against death, deferring life, until you die. Cooter is the realist; he can see that there’s no way out, now, no living as if not in a relation to death, which is figured in all of the potential loss that precedes it.”

Here she makes clear the disproportionately high cost of the transparency thesis on the black Subject. He simply cannot afford it because of the materiality of race. Throughout the whole book there were cases after cases of deep insightful analyses of why people of various backgrounds stay attached to the visions of a “good life” that do not work anymore. It is the kind of work that provide a descriptive account that is itself powerful in decluttering the affective barriers in the way of collective action and liberation. But in liberation work, there is only so much decluttering can and should do. I think “the good life” and the cruel optimistic attachments to it explains the choice of objects of addiction very well, but remains unhelpful for thinking about the root source of addiction in our organism. This is precisely why I want to holistically consider the attachment to the modern Subject expressed in Ricoeur’s golden triangle: ethics, morality, and justice. The economies of care, recognition, and power can only coexist harmoniously in the minority rich white Subject. The rest are forced to reinvest their excessive energies in one category at a time, readily sacrificing the others.

[dark-sirenparis]

About: Paris Ness

PERSONAL:

Full Name: Paris Aegon Ness Nickname: N/A Do they like their nickname?: N/A Birthday: January 28, 1459 Birthplace: The Dead Sea Hometown: The island Delos Species: Siren Ethnicity: White Religion: None Pets: None, he doesn't want any Subject: Sculpting & Carving Current Occupation: Professor Sexuality: Heteroflexible Relationship Status: Married, to Selene Ness Do they drive? What kind of car do they own? He drives an ivory Aston Martin Vanquish

PHYSICAL APPEARANCE:

Height: 6'2 Body Type: Athletic Hair Color: Sandy Brown Hair Type: Curly, wavy if it gets too long Eye Color: Blue Glasses/Contacts?: Not needed Prominent Features: A very square jawline, his bright eyes Scars: One, from a incident with 16th century pirates - on his tail, it shows up as a white line by the fins, and on legs, it’s a six inch curved line above his ankle, on his shin. Tattoos: None Piercings: None Health Problems or Conditions: None Style: Sharp dressed, tailored suits. Expensive sunglasses, designer clothes every time. Vacation-wear is always Ralph Lauren, Armani, Gucci, and Saint Laurent Notable Jewelry: A necklace with his wedding ring around it, sometimes on its cord, or a substitute on his finger. Grooming: Well kept together

PAST:

Mother’s Name: Kalliste Mother’s Maiden Name: Status: Alive Relationship: Paris was a bit of a momma's boy when he was younger, and sometimes if he's home to his family for too long, he reverts back to that Father’s Name: Ambrose Status: Alive Relationship: As good as any father/son relationship can be. They aren't very affectionate, and when they get together, it's often talk of business or the arts, nothing very emotional. Siblings: Bastion (+3) and Dmitri (-4) What was their childhood like?: Fine, the Ness boys all had their early responsibilities, so there wasn't much childhood and mostly preparation for adulthood. Not a ton of play, but Paris never felt he missed out on much. He was still able to be rebellious, to hop onto land and mess around with the humans in his teen years. Earliest Memory: Happiest Memory: His wedding day Saddest Memory: Education: He's gone to university settings a few times, with degrees in Philosophy, Art History, Painting, and Sculpture. Past Jobs: He's ran all sorts of business in his life - statues, woodshops, art galleries, clothing lines, furniture brands. Police Record: He's a ghost, never had any issues. Major Past Trauma/Illness - Are they still affected?:

SEX & ROMANCE:

First crush: Selene's sister, technically First sexual experience - Was it a good or bad one?: With an island maiden, they snuck off together during a rainstorm. It was fine, it was one of his first times on land and he managed to figure sex out pretty quickly. Never saw her again. Sexual Type: Dominant Turn Ons: Oral Sex, Hypnosis, Choking, Bondage, Voyeurism, Exhibitionism, Shower Sex, Multiple Partners, Sensory Play, Body Worship (Receiving) Turn Offs: Bathroom Play, Blood Play, Temperature Play, Feet, Clinginess, Wax Play, Infantilism Love Type: Devotion. He's only devoted to Selene, though, and everything else is just a fling. Nobody has ever caught his attention like her, and while they may sleep with others outside their marriage and have their own relationships, focus is never lost. Significant Past Relationships: Just Selene. They married young, were engaged young. He's only ever known life with her by his side.

MENTAL WELLNESS:

Psychological Issues/Mental Illnesses: Short Temper Outlook on Life: It has always benefited him, so life can be a beautiful thing he thinks Myers-Briggs Personality Type: ESTJ Temperament: Choleric Sun Sign: Aquarius Moon Sign: Leo Rising Sign: Gemini Venus Sign: Pisces Alignment: Neutral Evil Hogwarts House: Slytherin What/Who do they value most?: Selene What/Who are they willing to die for?: Selene, maybe his mother Personal Philosophy: That he is priority, everything else is secondary. His needs and wants matter the most Biggest Fear: Submarines of too curious explorers Are they superstitious?: Yes, but he doesn't let on that he is Greatest Strength: His voice Greatest Weakness: Obsession - if things catch his strong obsession, it's difficult to veer him off that course Good Characteristics: Passionate about his interests, will raise up people he thinks are good at their jobs or deserving of some help - which is rare. Bad Characteristics: He is extreme at everything, which can be a problem. He has a horrible temper and is very demanding to his students and employees. He's very selfish - he doesn't see it as a bad thing, but the kind of selfish with no regard to people, even if their lives are at stake. Favorite thing about themself? Why?: His looks and tenacity. Least favorite? Why?: There is none - what's to dislike? Biggest regret: Proudest moment: He was the first to do any college, so his first day truly on his own. Quirks: He stays on his routine like his life depends on it. Music during sex is preferable. Very neat and needs everything in a certain order. Very particular about the way his kitchen of all places is laid out. Do not touch any of his art equipment. How are they in crisis? Excellent, unless is personally affects him. Then, not so well. What do they wish to change most about themself?: He doesn't believe there's anything wrong with him.

SPEECH & COMMUNICATION:

Pace: Slow and Deliberate Voice Tone: Typically a bit condescending, more when he is talking to someone he believes is below them - which is most people Accent/Dialect: Mostly British, a bit of Greek in there with certain consonants Speech Patterns: Very enunciated, very proper Favorite Words/Phrases: "No." Mannerisms/Demeanor: Demeanor is always suave and confident, he speaks very surely of himself Posture: Always poised Gestures: Normally none, but the more worked up he gets, the more he talks with his hands How good are they at lying? Excellent

BEHAVIOR:

Finances: Paris is excellent with finance, but he can also afford bankers and accountants for the necessary upkeep and investing Alcohol Use: Not an alcoholic, but it wouldn't matter anyway since it doesn't typically affect him. He likes having a drink with dinner, sometimes with lunch. Drug Use: He doesn't bother. He doesn't need any - but certain fish or jellyfish when consumed can give similar affects, he learned in his youth. Morning/Night Person?: A morning person primarily, but can function at being both. Morning Routine: Paris wakes up early, and exercises almost immediately. He showers and eats a lavish breakfast, preparing everything for the day. Day Routine: He dresses, takes any calls in the morning he needs to take. None of his classes are offered past 2pm, so he spends the days in his university office, grading projects and papers and teaching. Lunch is brought in by one of the slaves, typically, sometimes he pulls one in to have sex in his office. Evening Routine: He has an early dinner typically, and does any of his personal work. He'll usually have some alone time swimming in one of the pools in his home, or just in the ocean. He calls or spends time quality with his wife. Night Routine: He stops by the trench or checks in on one of his other ventures on the phone. He is in bed by a reasonable time, and rarely is he ever alone - but, typically, once he's done with them, he makes them sleep on the floor or kicks them out of the house altogether so he doesn't have to worry about them in the morning. Sleep Habits: Not for very long, he only sleeps about 5 or 6 hours in the night. Special Skills: Swimming, he's an incredible artist. He plays most string instruments - his favorite is the guitar, but he does enjoy a harp. Excellent dresser. Very good singer, but that's a given. Unskilled at: Being patient. Not the greatest with technology, but he's learning. Video games. Not a good writer. Bad at finishing television shows. Hobbies: His art, woodworking, gardening/landscaping, reading.

FAVORITES (AND OTHER MISCELLANIA):

Book: The Odyssey by Homer Movie: Picnic at Hanging Rock TV Show: Mad Men Album: Get Your Wings by Aerosmith Artist: Frank Sinatra Song: Love Me Do by the Beatles Sport/Sport Team: British Football, Manchester City Color: Blue Meal: Garlic and Parmesan Crusted Salmon Drink: Gin Martini Snack: Caviar on fresh baked bread slices Outfit: 3 piece black suit with a teal tie and matching pocket square Quote: Suave Mare Magno Prized Possession: His wife

[educatic3]

Classroom-screen

Datos de identificación: Classroom-screen, cuyos autores son Laurens Koppers y Sebastián de Vries (Países Bajos) https://classroomscreen.com/

Fecha de evaluación: 2018-2019, actualmente está actualizada.

Destinatarios: Los destinatarios son los alumnos de educación infantil y primaria. Ayuda al maestro/a a que sus alumnos se concentren en su tarea.

Descripción del recurso: Es una herramienta que incluye 19 widgets (pequeñas aplicaciones o programas) para crear expectativas claras para sus estudiantes, respaldar su gestión del tiempo, recopilar comentarios y mucho más.

Primero hay que elegir un fondo de pantalla del proyector, después se pueden incluir cuadros de texto para poder añadir anotaciones para los alumnos y luego diversos widgets. Los widgets más populares son; temporalizador, herramienta de dibujo, semáforo (tiene varios usos, uno de ellos es, indicar a los alumnos cuando pueden "molestar" o no al docente), nivel de sonido, encuestas, nombre aleatorio (selecciona aleatoriamente el nombre de un estudiante de la lista)… etc.

Áreas/asignaturas en que puede ser utilizado: Es una herramienta que se puede utilizar para cualquier tipo de asignatura, ya que su objetivo es que los alumnos se concentren y no se distraigan a la hora de realizar una tarea.

Contenidos que se trabajan: Desarrollo de nuevas capacidades, habilidades y actitudes, ampliación de conocimientos.

Recursos técnicos necesarios para su utilización: Proyector/ pizarra digital, barra de sonido, webcam, acceso a internet.

Tipo de acceso: Su disponibilidad es totalmente gratuita, se puede usar sin registrarse o creando una cuenta gratuita para obtener acceso a más funcionalidades.

Forma de utilización: Puede usarse de manera individual y/o grupal.

Incluye corrección/feedback sobre la actividad realizada: Tiene un widget, que es totalmente opcional, según el docente desee, que indica las afirmaciones y errores posibles de cada actividad realizada en el aula.

Actividades sugeridas para realizar conjuntamente con el recurso: Es una plataforma que trabaja conjuntamente con los alumnos durante una actividad determinada.

Duración estimada de utilización: La duración de la utilización de este recurso depende del docente.

Observaciones: Classroom-screen es una plataforma que también puede ayudar a docentes en el aprendizaje a distancia. Para usar Classroom-screen con este propósito, es necesario compartir su pantalla con sus alumnos. A continuación, encontrará instrucciones de diferentes aplicaciones de conferencias sobre cómo compartir su pantalla.

[levysoft]

Origini di Bayonetta: dietro le quinte della registrazione della canzone a tema

[…] Testi e voci

Il testo della canzone ci racconta i pensieri di Cereza. Sono sicuro che molte persone si chiedono in che lingua sono le voci, ma non è una lingua fittizia.

Bayonetta ha trascorso il suo tempo da bambina e apprendista strega in Europa, quindi è stato fissato fin dall'inizio che i testi sarebbero stati in una lingua celtica, che sono una famiglia molto antica di lingue dell'Europa occidentale.

Siamo stati abbastanza fortunati che il compositore irlandese Michael McGlynn fosse in grado di scrivere testi in lingua irlandese (noto anche come gaelico irlandese). Abbiamo pensato che si sarebbe adattata perfettamente all'essere parte della storia delle origini di Bayonetta, quindi abbiamo deciso di andare con i testi irlandesi. Michael è ben noto per aver scritto testi che suonerebbero belli anche ai Celti d'epoca. Grazie a questi meravigliosi testi scritti in un linguaggio che si adatta così bene alla storia, la traccia trasudava il mondo di Bayonetta Origins: Cereza and the Lost Demon.

Inoltre! Non possiamo assolutamente dimenticare la giovane donna che ha fornito la voce, riunendo il tutto!

Il suo nome è Lauren McGlynn ed è in realtà la figlia di Michael!

Quando cercavamo un cantante, volevamo una ragazza che avesse circa la stessa età di Cereza. Non ci sono davvero molte ragazze che si adattano ai criteri di avere 9-15 anni con voci forti che potrebbero anche cantare in una lingua celtica. Tuttavia, non solo Lauren ha spuntato tutte quelle caselle, ma ha anche una voce chiara che ha evocato perfettamente l'adolescenza di Cereza, non troppo infantile ma non ancora adulta. Abbiamo finito per sceglierla per il lavoro senza pensarci due volte.

Il giorno della registrazione, è entrata in studio con un'adiscente adorabile nel suo vestito leggermente da strega che aveva scelto in particolare. Chi avrebbe mai pensato che questo 13-year-old avrebbe poi poi per abbellirci con una voce così incredibile. Nonostante la sessione di registrazione fosse così lunga, Lauren ha lavorato duramente fino alla fine. È grazie a lei che possiamo provare le vere emozioni dei testi, e si è rivelato molto simile a Cereza.

(tradotto via [Dev Blog] Bayonetta Origins: dietro le quinte della registrazione della canzone a tema | PlatinumGames Official Blog)

[noobchancc]

the party never ends

[trekkiepirate]

I added on to a post about Joey Batey and the torture scene from season 2. The OP was of the opinion that Joey was grossly mistreated and/or harmed in the shooting of the scene.

I firmly, truly believe he was not. I have a whole long rant below, but I will sum up into two paragraphs instead of a half dozen if you don’t want to read under the cut.

My thesis statement is this: "But thankfully, I'm surrounded by people who kind of know me. You can easily just go, 'Joey needs a banana, and he needs it now, because his blood sugar's just dropped...'"

JOEY IS/WAS FINE. Was it a difficult and challenging scene? Yes! Was he in any legitimate danger or badly treated on set? No, no he was not. There were many, many people, including health and safety reps (possibly also stunt reps, depending on how they classified the scene) not to mention the directors (I included ADs here) AND Lauren AND any PAs AND an actual union-required MEDIC watching him to make sure the SLIGHTEST worrying thing was dealt with immediately. As he mentioned in the bit about the banana, it was! He is “THANKFUL[LY]” that people know him well enough to know when he was feeling bad before he even had to say it. Someone thought he looked a bit peaky and they made sure he was given a break and ate a banana and they probably waited til his colour was back up before they moved on. He wasn’t just forcefed a banana and they continued on immediately. I have had my blood pressure drop on set with me visibly doing Not Well and every. single. time. someone helps. The director notices or more likely an AD or PA or a scene partner does. All this before I feel bad enough to bring it up myself. And I have worked on big shows similar in scale to how The Witcher is a big show (as background so not even REMOTELY as fussed over as Joey would be as a recurring guest star). Current Health and Safety standards on a big show like this are very meticulous. Joey was at no point in any actual danger or harm.

As for the dark places he had to go mentally, he CHOSE the acting method he used. It was a challenging one and he had to take time to shake it off. But he DID shake it off. No one was forcing him to use Method acting or whatever technique/mixture of techniques he used to achieve the BRILLIANT acting in that scene. A director DIRECTS, tells you how they want you to think of the scene or what kind of motivation you should tap into. They guide you, yes that is true. But the director did not tell him he had to use American Method (which is usually total BS that part is very true Fuck American Method acting) or any other specific technique. No one FORCED HIM to use the techniques he used. He made a choice and it is infantilizing to say he had no voice or no say in what happened to him that day.

Also notable, I don’t hear ANYONE comparing his torture scene with Anya’s scene with Stregobor where she is also restrained. Or her season 1 transformation scene. I put those at equal to or greater physical and mental strain and yet, we’re just focusing on one interview Joey gave. Speaking of!

Joey talks over and over about the support he was given on set (we can look at the many other interviews where he specifically MENTIONS THE SUPPORT HE WAS GIVEN) and if he had been struggling too much, I feel sure he trusted people enough to ask for a break or something. And he would have been given it. Even if he didn’t ask, it is required by the actor’s union that breaks are taken. As an actor, I am CERTAIN he was constantly checked in with between takes and given every opportunity to call a time out if he required one. I don’t think he would thank anyone for trying to demonize his friends/colleagues/coworkers over the difficulty of this scene. He trusts his crew. We should too.

(EDIT: I’m not making adding this to call out anyone or say anyone is bad or stupid or whathaveyou for believing that there was mistreatment or any dangerous things happening here. I’m just trying to put his words into context and explain how this sort of thing is done on a set like The WItcher to put everyone’s minds at east)

Okay, the long version of any already not short post: Joey is FINE. Yeah, something like that is hard to shake and yes, he was tied up, but he also mentioned people noticing his blood sugar was dropping and getting him food. He was given breaks, including a whole lunch hour (standard on any set). It was steadicam so there were less changes of angle and lighting, one assumes, so he didn't get as many breaks as he might have on a scene without steadicam, but he got breaks. Heck because a steadicam requires less angle changes and such, it’s probably why it was ONE 12 hour day instead of MULTIPLE 12 hour days. He had chances to stand up and stretch and take a walk and then sit back down and be tied up again. He was not tied up for 12 hours straight and forced to ask for any breaks. He was given many, many breaks over that 12 hour day. Was it physically taxing? Oh hell yes; I do not take that from him. It was exhausting I am sure. I know from similar but reduced experience. But there were people, multiple people looking after him to make sure he was okay. No production this big is ALLOWED to put their actors knowingly in harm's way. It would be a legal NIGHTMARE for everyone if Joey had passed out or had any lasting effects from being tied up. But he didn't. It was one grueling day and it was challenging af, but Joey is FINE now.

As for where he went mentally, Joey CHOSE to use that method to get the performance he gives. He wasn't forced into it. It's a brilliant performance BECAUSE he made the choice to go into the dark parts of himself for it. Joey did that, knowing it would be hard to shake, but also knowing he eventually WOULD shake it. Jaskier is a tough character to play (I did one scene for my acting class and we did three or four takes before I could drop Jaskier and I was so keyed up so I can only IMAGINE Joey having that for months), especially this season. But Joey is a professional and a grown man. He was NOT ill-treated, or forced to do anything. And I’m sure once it was wrapped, everyone was very kind to him and he smiled at them and shook himself and said he was fine. But he had to walk back from his darkness himself because he walked himself into it.

Believe me, health and safety standards for scenes like this, scenes requiring an actor being tied up are WELL AND ABOVE what they were before. A set medic would have been there the entire time just in case anything happened to Joey. And a big, union production like this means there were even more people keeping an eye on him. Joey endured a really tough day, but he endured. He mentions no lasting physical effects and once he was able to shake off the mental ones, he just moved on with his life and his work. Hell, for all we know some of ruin was written as he delved into those dark parts for his performance.

If you’re still here and want a more personal account of this sort of thing: Maybe five years ago I was cast in a show. One of those crime scene recreations on cable TV, barely a budget. For my part, I had my hands tied behind me with strong exercise rope. I could NOT have gotten out of it without help. After every take EVERY SINGLE TAKE, the director asked how I was doing and if I could go ahead or did I need a break. (being who I am I would rather power through and get it done than have to stretch it out and reset and focus on continuity and I feel Joey probably does something similar) I asked for a break one time because my hands felt stiff and my hands were immediately untied. I stretched out my hands, stretched my wrists and then I was fine and we did the next take.

This was a VERY small production that was just barely SAG-AFTRA (US actor's union who dictates how things like this can be shot. The UK has a similar entity doing the same). I think there were maybe five crew members total and two other actors, all shooting in some house in Beverly Hills. That scene was the bulk of the day because I had to wake up, be struggling against the bindings, and then be knocked unconscious (I later woke up and ultimately my murderer pushed me down the stairs, which was also TRICKY af and there were so many safety measures in place to make sure I didn't hurt myself and I didn't even FALL down the stairs, I dropped out of frame to my knees and caught myself on some padding on the stairs below me. I remember thinking it was all overkill and again, this was for a very small production. So I have every confidence the health and safety standards for Joey during that day were even more strict to make sure he was fine. He knows and trusts the crew he was working with. I had met all the crew I worked with that day and still felt like I could trust them to tie my hands in a way I couldn't undo myself. And I COULD trust them. Joey could trust his production team as well.

This does not seem the kind of set where horror stories would come from. Joey himself mentioned in multiple interviews how supported he felt. People seem to really like the cast and crew assembled and that makes my heart happy because some productions do not have that family atmosphere. Some actors WOULD HAVE felt uncomfortable or like they couldn’t ask for a break.

BUT NOT JOEY. JOEY IS/WAS FINE. I don’t think he would thank anyone for trying to demonize his friends/colleagues/coworkers/the show itself over the difficulty of this one scene. It was difficult af? Yes. He was probably physically and emotionally uncomfortable? Yes. It took him a bit to regain his equilibrium (which we know is a requirement of Jaskier, even when not in demanding or dramatic scenes)? Yes. But was Joey taken care and safe and given breaks, whether he asked for them or not, as part of health and safety and general set standards? Yes.

Also, I don’t hear ANYONE calling out how difficult it must have been for Anya to shoot her transformation scene or the Stregobor scene. Not even comparing those scenes when the comparisons are RIGHT THERE for the making in terms of physical and emotional requirements made of the actor. No one wants Joey to be always happy and safe and loved and cherished more than me, and if I truly thought he had been mistreated, I’d be leading the riot, y’all. But Joey. Is. And. Was. Fine.