#like there’s a lot of issues but there are a lot of benefits too

[tanadrin]

Was there anything actually juicy in Clinton's emails? The media behavior reads like half an attempt to appear more principled b/c of the criticism they got in 2016, and half an attempt to swing the election for Trump because he's better for their business.

not super juicy. i do think there's a differential in how the media covers trump vs other candidates (even other republicans) bc he's so bizarre and they don't know how to handle them, but i don't think it's as calculated as "he's better for their business"

you have to remember that conservatives have spend decades screaming about how the media is unfair to them and biased in favor of liberals and bc media figures want to be the important biased neutral arbiters of democracy (bc that is how they perceive themseves) and they want to try to preserve access to political figures, they have spent a lot of time and effort trying to perform neutrality. this doesn't work of course--there's a reason why the right eventually spawned its own media ecosystem; no amount of bending over backwards to both-sides issues like global warming will appease basically dishonest actors--but it has produced this weird asymmetry where they report on trump like he's a much more normal candidate than he is, reported on his administration like it was a much more coherent realization of policy goals than it was, and sane wash a lot of statements that are either simply incoherent or are menacing and deranged. and they reassure themselves that he can't possibly mean the menacing and deranged things, or that if he does he won't be able to realize them, and after all wasn't the first trump term pretty OK after all?

obviously, i think this is a mistake--the first time around trump was impeded by his own incompetence and that of the people under him, and the fact that, not really knowing what to expect, some actually sane people ended up attached to his administration. i don't think that's likely to be quite the same in a second go-round. but normalcy bias is powerful. it affects a lot of people who aren't journalists, too. and even if you think he isn't likely to succeed, i think the responsible way to report on someone declaring that they are going to attempt to deport millions and seize direct control of major cities and shut down media outlets that offend them is to report that they intend to sdeport millions and seize direct control of major cities and shut down media outlets that offend them, not to try to interpret their pronouncements through the lens of anodyne "economic policy" or w/e. if the flagship outlets of media were really making a rational risk-benefit calculation on whether a second trump term would be good for them, they would be much more strenuously opposing him, because he has promised a scorched-earth campaign of revenge against them, you know?

but actually a lot of the dysfunction of american political coverage is the result of a social incentive structure that's been slowly emerging for more than forty years, driven in part by the incestuousness of the beltway media-political environment and the self-conception and ego of media figures. honestly i think it started as the conspiratorial right moved into mainstream conservative and republican politics in the last three decades of the 20th century. in order for that conspiratorial attitude to really take hold, you had to creative a social structure that isolated people from the broader political consensus, to get them to stop trusting shared sources of authority and information, and that resulted in sustained attacks against the supposed flagrant bias of american news media as a whole, and this process accelerated as distinct right-wing outlets like fox were established. but it was a frog-in-the-pot situation, and many republican politicians were willing to take on this new style of rhetoric that seemed to win votes (and no doubt many believed it to some extent, since it flattered their preconceptions).

but eventually the break became too great--birtherism, the tea party, qanon. mainstream republican politicians realized they'd called up something they couldn't put down; but it was too late to right the ship. trump is the avatar of all that conspiracism and rage, and he took over the republican party. but the tectonic social forces that produced him have been slow and kind of indirect, and a lot of people are still coasting on attitudes and approaches to politics that are ten, twenty, thirty years out of date.

[son1c]

In all honesty thank you to responding to that anon like that, I have no idea how to articulate to people that criticism is not negative and it is so necessary to make something better, without people getting defensive and angry.

I will do anything to avoid conflict (due to some personal issues I have to work through) and I feel like I am never allowed to say anything without being put in the firing line of irrationally angry fans.

Anyways, all that to say, thank you for not letting people try to stop you from saying things that are necessary and in all actuality make the content more enjoyable for others

yeah, i feel like "criticism" has gotten a bad rap in recent times.

in reality, taking a "critical look" at things is neither positive nor negative; it, by definition, simply means "to question." why were these decisions made? who benefits from them? what are they trying to accomplish? these questions and more can help you deepen your understanding of a work.

it's unfortunate that so many people are so adverse to criticism. in my opinion, it's fun to think about things on more than just the surface level. to "dig deep" is, to me, what fandom is all about.

but things have changed. people don't want to think too hard about the things they "consume" anymore. "fast fiction" and media that's meant to be binged, not watched slowly and savored, are the norm now. it's created this frantic atmosphere that i don't like. people barely talk about one thing before already moving on to the next. where's the fun in that?

that being said, i don't think a lot of people who are the so-called "critics" do it correctly. i like to be overdramatic as much as the next guy, but spewing endless hate and writing "critical" posts that consist solely of exaggerated statements about things you clearly don't like is not criticism. maybe that's why people conflate criticism with negativity so often now. because those "critics" are really just haters.

it's a fine line. i think being able to tell the difference between good faith, well thought out, well researched criticism and rage-bait hatred is in and of itself, critical thinking. and i think it's a skill people on the internet desperately need to develop or at least improve.

because people getting defensive at the first whiff of anything less than 100% positivity isn't good for them. it makes you complacent. it lowers your standards. don't you want not just good shows, but GREAT shows? don't you want full, rich texts that are meant to be savored, not just consumed in a day and then thrown away?

if the people who make subpar media never get any pushback, then they never have a reason to make anything better, because they know whatever they make, no matter the quality, it will make them money. and i'm just not happy with that. i demand better. don't you?

[mytholegy]

.

[caffeinatedopossum]

I kind of hate how just because I don't subscribe to any religion or believe in any specific god, people assume that means that I *disbelieve* in god(s)

I simply don't have much reason to think about whether or not there's a god, besides when I just want to enjoy some good old philosophical/hypothetical thinking or conversations.

Like people will hear I'm not Christian and go "how come you don't believe in god?" like no, no you misunderstand me. I don't NOT believe in god, I just don't believe in *your* god. And if your god is real, then it changes nothing about how I'm going to live my life. The Christian god is an ass and not someone I'm going to worship. I'm just gonna spend my life trying to do good, and if your god doesn't like that, then he's not a very good god, is he?

[giantkillerjack]

Uh-oh! You are like, SOOO awkward!!

You're so awkward that it is occasionally mildly uncomfortable for people!

You're so awkward that sometimes people are confused by you and then there are awkward silences!

You're so awkward ...... that ultimately no one is harmed!!

Oh damn!!! What a vile crime you have committed! What an unforgivable thing it is to make a fellow human briefly confused!

Why, if *I* were ever briefly confused and kind of uncomfortable as a result, I'd be devastated.... by the absolute net zero change in my happiness and health! - From which I might never recover!! Yes indeed! No punishment can ever be enough for you!!

So you better absolutely hate yourself for it.

Better be SO MEAN to yourself about every single missed social cue so you don't forget your horrible crime! Meaner than you'd ever dream of being to someone else for the same thing! This is YOUR responsibility!

You need to show the world that you KNOW you are bad by punishing yourself constantly! After all, think of all the people who BENEFIT from you punishing yourself! - No, really! Think about it! Think about who benefits from your pain.

Think of alllllll the definitely-good people that your definitely-necessary self-torment definitely helps! I mean, you can't just cut off their definitely-life-sustaining supply of your suffering, right?? Sure, everyone else has a breaking point, but you're probably the only person in human history who doesn't, right? Best not to question it probably. Sure, it's a symptom that billions of people with trauma have had, but who knows? You could be a one-in-seven-billion exception. Anything's possible!

Instead, better just accept that idea that bullies carry like guns in holsters - the idea that people who have trouble with social cues deserve to suffer. Better carry on the burden they placed on you until you drop. Aid the cause of the callous by enforcing shame and suffering upon yourself extra hard; try your best to do their work for them. They're very busy.

Better not recognize that you need patience and kindness to heal from your trauma. Better not find out that it was trauma rather than personal weakness filling your head with self-hating thoughts. Better not find out it wasn't your fault.

Better not find out that awkwardness is not inherently harmful or unkind, and, in fact, the people who act like it is *are the ones enacting harm and being cruel.*

Better not get righteously angry when you realize just how much unnecessary damage this has done to you. After all, if you get mad, you might realize you deserve better. You might even feel brave enough to DEMAND better! You might build boundaries that keep you safe! You might make other people think they deserve to feel safe too! And we obviously can't be having that, so...

Better not show yourself even a little kindness a little bit at a time.

Better not make a habit out of it after all that practice.

Better not get confident.

Especially if you can't first wipe out every trace of awkward. (And you probably never will. Because people who experience absolute social certainty at all times tend to be insufferable assholes that enforce the status quo. And you just don't have the stock portfolio for that.)

Better not be confident and awkward because then you might confuse and delight people

- you might accidentally end up making other people feel less shame for their social difficulties

- you might make isolated, traumatized, and shy people feel like they deserve to be included in social situations

- you might even make them feel they can be themselves around you

- you might start loving the effect you have on a room

- you might enjoy conversations more

- you might forgive yourself and bounce back from shame more easily and frequently

- you might come to enjoy some of those moments of harmless confusion you cause because NOBODY expects the Confident Awkward, and that can genuinely be an advantage in social situations

- you might stop apologizing so much.

- you might find that socializing is like a video game: it requires practice but also a safe space for it to be fun and positive.

Or if you can't become assertive and confident, better not remain awkward and shy and quiet, and then love and forgive yourself anyway!

Why, it would be carnage!!

In either scenario, you run the risk of finding out that it's not your fault that safe spaces full of kind people can be really hard to find, create, and nurture. You could end up building a skillset that helps you do those things if you're not careful!

If you start giving yourself even the tiniest amount of grace at a time, you will find that you've accessed a gateway drug with extreme long-term side effects:

- You might realize that it was never your fault that it took so long to like yourself.

- You might realize that you were always worth talking to, even when you didn't like yourself and communication felt impossibly difficult.

- You might realize that you'll still be worth talking to even if communication becomes harder as you age and/or experience disability.

- You might come to know that you deserve to be heard even on bad days when words come slow and blurry.

You might discover that you were always deserving of kindness, first and foremost from yourself.

So. As you can see, it's FAR too much of a risk to start granting your awkward self free pardons for your many heinous and harmless crimes. Better to just leave it there.

[contagious-watermelon]

what is it with the aro community basically reinventing amatornomativity but including (some of) us this time. acting like QPRs are the solution to your problems and obviously theyre more meaningful and important than friendships and what do you mean you don't want a platonic life partner? well if you're "just friends" they're gonna leave you for their romantic relationship eventually — no, no, you can't mean that, "best friend" is either just the same thing as a QPR or not good enough to stay in your life forever. you don't like how you probably won't ever be able to have kids because who's going to let a single trans man adopt a child, and even if they did how would you support them, and no for the last time i don't want to marry anyone even platonically. i do not want a partner ever. ever.

but don't you know that all of us hate amatonormativity? but we're fine with it when we're included. oh and don't you know aros can date too? did you know? did you know you can date too?

you have problems? society isn't structured for you? you have to learn to navigate socially and legally in a world that's built for couples and that's a very distressing experience and you're invisible if you don't loudly proclaim your aromanticism after every room you walk in — but we're gonna keep arguing about shipping. what do you mean you have more problems than people being stupid in fandom? what, is the one aroace character who got "confirmed" off-screen and never mentioned outside of that at all not good enough for you? that doesn't actually change anything for you societally?

but you surely want a QPR. it's totally not just us forcing some watered-down romance on you after you said you didn't want it (but did you know aros can date too? surely you didn't forget that. aros can still love and we hate that you're implying they can't). all of your problems with society hating you for your singleness and aro-ness would be solved if you just got a partner — no, a platonic one, why would you assume otherwise? this is nothing like telling a gay man to just suck it up and marry a woman. see, that would be homophobic, but you? didn't you know that aros can still date?

[doomedpuppetyuri]

splatoon fans can we as a fandom agree that we take things way too seriously and just. calm down

[waywardsalt]

linebeck is probably so god damn paranoid all of the time

[solvicrafts]

Personal pagan thoughts

There's this attitude that's circulated in the broader pagan community for quite a while that like... you either have to be a reconstructionist following one single pantheon or a fluffy woo neowiccan. Obviously not all pagans think that way and in more recent years I've seen more and more people step away from that mindset.

BUT

When I was in my early teens going from studying pagan cultures academically to kind of gradually starting to pursue paganism as more than just a niche interest, I was absolutely inundated with pressure to just PICK A SIDE and nearly 20 years later it's still an issue for me.

I've always felt this pressure to just conform and pick a side and be done with it. Put myself into a neat little box as un-offensive in design as possible and all that.

And the truth is I just can't do that no matter how hard I try.

And that's actually the main reason I don't often talk about my beliefs on here. Because while I've used "Hellenic Polytheist" as a label to describe myself and while it is more or less accurate, there's also so much more that goes well beyond that.

Basically... my beliefs and practices are messy. That's probably a big ADHD brain thing.

And I didn't start feeling okay with that until roughly this past year, when I finally started letting go of that pressure to fit into a neat label.

Are the Theoi particularly thrilled that I also have a budding relationship with a few deities outside their pantheon? Eh, probably not, but the feeling I get from them is that they're not terribly fussed about it. At worst I imagine them being like "yeah okay fine you can take my follower out to dinner just make sure you bring them home no later than 10."

Are the Theoi absolutely trembling with rage because I occasionally dabble in my own form of ~magic~ (but without that woooooo special K nonsense)? Nah, at worst they just think it's silly.

Do the Theoi give a shit that I sometimes incorporate imagery and themes from some of my favorite fictional settings into my practices? Again, probably not; those spider lights look damn cool on my shrine and as sad as it is that my khernips bowl broke this year, the spider-webbed replacement bowl is JUST as useful and pretty.

People act like the only legit pagans are the ones that are super serious all the time, NO FUN ALLOWED and like... yeah, okay, I'll admit that pagans can be reeeeaally cringe, but you know, I think it's okay to be a little cringe once in a while as long as you still remain grounded in reality (as in: crystals are not a substitute for modern medicine and sometimes that thing you think is a sign from a god is actually symptoms of a gas leak or something) and don't make a point of being an asshole, so what? Be cringe.

Maybe there's ONE TRUE RELIGION that has all the answer. Maybe NO religion has the answers. At the end of the day, none of us truly know. So why not have fun?

[homosexchad]

man i haven't even had top surgery yet and it's improved my life sm lol

years of glugging nicotine air? defeated. cravings are so much easier to deal with when there's a purpose to it aside from "well maybe in 20 years i won't be incredibly ill"

eating healthier, with good portion sizes? started doing it! it's so much easier to feel a lil bit hungry and find alternatives to comfort eating when there's a purpose other than "well i guess i'll feel a little bit better and in like 20 years i won't be incredibly ill"

actually taking rest breaks from binding? jesus christ, it's so much easier knowing that in 4 weeks i won't have to bind again, or at least i'll be able to use tape (if there's some kind of complication or i have excess tissue leftover). i've gone from 14 hours a day to just wearing it for when i'm out and about / at work, which is a maximum of 9 hours a day. hoo boy. my skin elasticity? better. my skin in general? glowing. i’d forgotten what that felt like after 7 years of….. slightly unhealthy binding habits 😅

also the combination of losing a bit of weight, quitting vaping/smoking, and resting from binding means that my lung capacity and stamina is THROUGH THE ROOF.

not only am i fucking like a machine, but i can arrive to work (a mile walk away) without looking like i've run a goddamn marathon

[bibiana112]

Finished Danganronpa Lapse and tbh nobody gets it like I do because every review I've seen wasn't made by someone who's played zero escape Why did Echo do that? ZTD shifting strats that's why! Lyle's canonically a zero escape nerd who brings up the morphogenetic field as a quick joke and is introduced arguing about the funyarinpa, do I think all these references get in the way and that it's a bit underwhelming when this comes unexplained out of nowhere? Absolutely! But it's so clearly an element the creator was inspired by and wanted to include and play with rather than a lazy last minute deal to fix 'plot holes'

[timeisacephalopod]

I saw a post the other day that kinda pushed back on the way all coming of age movies are about sexuality and all high school stories basically center around who wants to fuck who and how that's like. Not really all coming of age and high school stories should offer since you know. Youth isn't about who you have a crush on and probably coming of age stories in particular should be far more diverse in subject matter than they are.

Honestly as someone who, when I was 'coming of age' age, hated coming of age stories and still do for the exact reason listed above (see the weird scene in It where we all sexualize a 13 year old girl because boys have crushes and surely there's no other way to portray this than feeling a child up with a camera to demonstrate boys have ~feelings~ Bev gets no equivalent scene because she's the object of affection rather than the subject feeling desire) I also wish there was diversity in those stories. And coming of age stories about adults- we don't stop going through huge life moments that change everything forever, but back to kids. When I was a kid I could have desperately used a coming of age story where the character has a sick and dying parent who does die by the end of the story and what happens after that. Granted I did just fine without it, but even without being asexual it's always irked me that coming of age stories don't seem to appreciate that kids have way larger problems and way better stories to tell then first crushes and first kisses for shit sake give kids who went through what I did as a kid some kind of story about what happens when your parent gets cancer and how complicated that is and stop assuming the biggest thing that happens around puberty is discovering sexuality that, if you were queer, you probably already noticed what you felt wasn't in a coming of age story anyway.

[heatwa-ves]

augh I love d4dj but it's strength is really not in storytelling and the missed potential of some stories I've read is really bothering me

[jentlemahae]

-

[entropy-sea-system]

Rift made instant hazelnut coffee... it tasted very good..

[zindagood]

Dunno why ppl take what producers n actors say about a show in interviews so srsly, esp when the text seems to hold up on its own so well. Like its p likely they need to tone down their own discussions to be more palatable in the media or whatever sooo idk id rather rely on what im seeing there on screen than if the cast n crew rly think race is involved in the writing or not. It obviously is, i dunno why it matters if the some actors might hedge around that topic during an interview. Them censoring themselves in front of a camera is a different discussion entirely that does deserve to be criticised maybe but ultimately, i dont think it affects what has already gone into the show. Idk i just think ppl should treat all that as supplementary info that can make the text more interesting, not necessarily the entirety of what cast n crew think and feel about it