#by the same people giving them increasingly unrealistic demands

[magioffire]

6 , 26

munday questions ; accepting

who  was  your  very  first  muse ?  would  you  consider  writing  them  now ?

my first muse....my first character i rped was a warrior cat oc so...probs not bringing that back LOL. but my first real bonafide character more in line with what i write now would be my vampire oc, lilith, a queen of vampires esque character. i actually wrote a short novella with her serving as the main antagonist and protagonist (the novella took place from two points of views: lilith's and the monster hunter well..hunting her) i would be tempted to bring her into the rp scene if i wasn't already so engrossed in the beatha universe. lilith has her own story and universe and trying to focus on developing that *and* beatha would be very difficult. however maybe one day...

is  there  something  about  the  roleplay  community  that  irks  you ?

honestly im not nearly as bothered by things that used to drive me up a wall before. maybe ive matured or maybe ive become jaded but a lot of the things that used to irk me/piss me off/annoy me for a while in the rpc now feel like very minor annoyances. ill come across certain habits of the rpc that annoy me a bit but i often just let it roll off me. ive also found myself a community that is pretty good natured and low on drama. BUT like any salty bitch i still have things to pick at, mostly big overarching problems ive seen in fandom spaces in general, not just rpc.

(this is kinda long lol)

i think the consistent irritation i find within the roleplay community on a general scale is the mentality some people have of entitlement, and on the flip side 'i dont owe anyone anything' syndrome.

the amount of times ive seen passive aggressive anons slung at people complaining about people not rping enough, or not rping a specific thing, or rping too much of a specific thing or with specific people, is so annoying to see. people being called elitist for rping with the rp partners and friends they mesh well with.

theres already an unsaid pressure within the rpc to be regularly active but not just that, regularly writing, and having people go on anon to complain about people's output just makes the environment feel even more pressured and uncomfortable for everyone. if you feel concerned about someone's level of interaction towards you personally or in general, thats something you gotta figure out in private. understand theres a person behind the screen and that its okay for people to have favorites, or for their tastes/current writing desires to shift.

and maybe stop expecting your rp partners devote themselves entirely to the rps they have going with you, or drop everything to start a new rp with a completely new rp partner when they are already swamped with threads. you guys gotta remember that the vast majority of people on this site have multiple rp partners -- one of them, multiple others. its selfish and unrealistic to expect someone to devote the same amount of time equally to absolutely everyone.

and then you got people who have the mentality of feeling like they dont owe anyone anything, not even communication and common decency. the kinda people who drop and softblock their rp partners like a sack of hot potatoes when they get bored or are mildly annoyed by them or they take too long to reply. or the kinda people who reply to any sort of criticism, even if its constructive, with their snotty, inflammatory 'i dont owe anyone anything' attitude. i've unfollowed people for this kind of attitude in the past, it bothers me so much.

ive seen where that sort of mentality goes sometimes and it can leads to justifying shitty, anti-social behavior. i understand that people had to develop a defensive mentality of not giving away every single shred of their time and mental well being to strangers on the internet, in a world where its increasingly easy for strangers to invade your space and demand you pay attention to them and adhere to their standards...sometimes you gotta tell a fucker whose getting too assumptive or is too entitled to kick rocks.

but like...not preforming emotional labor for every single person you meet is NOT the same as giving people common decency and doing your best to give clear standards and communication. 'i dont owe you anything' honestly it feels like people assume that mentality and take it to its natural extreme because of laziness and a fear of conflict. its easier to just absolve oneself of any responsibility towards others with an attitude like that, but you wont end up with very many long term rp partners in the end.

also speaking of people expecting others to adhere to their standards...i cant fucking stand the anti and pro shipper discourse. like please god. shut up. this is the most asinine discourse ive ever seen. please stoppp. ive seen that sort of discourse bleed into the rpc and its just....it lacks any sort of nuance.

its super annoying to go onto someone's blog and have someone call you a freak (and not in an affectionate way) and equates you to a predator if you dare to like toxic or questionable ships looool.

its okay to not like certain things, its okay to think certain things are a bridge too far for you personally, its okay to just *not like something*. there doesnt need to be a whole moral reason behind it, you dont have to find a way to demonize everyone who writes things you dont like. i have limits, you have limits, we *all* have limits, and those limits are okay to have, but they are not okay to impose onto others.

its also annoying to go onto someones blog and see that they give absolutely no shits about putting any sort of warning on their non con monster ra/pe farm g/uro vo/re saltwater enema kidnapping whump destruction roleplay and then call you a snowflake pussy when you decide to dip outta there because thats not your cup of tea and theres no way for you to reasonably block it. im not saying you cant write that. in fact ill fight for your right to write whatever the hell you want with other consenting adults as long as it doesnt stray into the realm of something illegal (like ch/ild p/orn or re/venge po/rn).

im just saying you cant call others the bad guys or 'overtly sensitive' for not being into something that is obviously very taboo and/or dark like you are. (it is important to have a standard/boundary of what is and isnt okay for you personally, and you can do that without policing others!!) like lets have some common sense here

#ooc. #ask.

[ultraviolet-techno-ecology]

A workplace that tells you to “take care of you mental health” is a workplace reminding you that any loss of productivity due to stress or trauma will result in your unemployment. 

#capitalism #watching my friends experience this in real time #being told to take time for mental health #by the same people giving them increasingly unrealistic demands #like calling people into work physically who are at risk for COVID complications #anticapialism #labour rights #ableism

[stereostevie]

“I sacrificed the quality of my life to help people experience something that had been unreachable before then,” Grammy winner says in rare interview

In the late Nineties, the story of popular music became the story of Ms. Lauryn Hill. She first rose to fame as an actress and a member of the Fugees, whose second and final album, 1996’s The Score, remains one of that decade’s biggest albums. Then, at just 22 years old, Hill took a huge leap and decided to go solo. Released in 1998, The Miseducation of Lauryn Hill filled clubs, radio stations, and MTV with her smooth voice and biting rhymes. Hill herself became as big as her music, appreciated in the fashion world and sought after by movie executives for roles she would eventually decline.

Miseducation took home five Grammy Awards and led to a huge tour. But by the early 2000s, Ms. Hill left behind the fame and the industry almost entirely. She has never released another studio album; her last full-length release was MTV Unplugged No. 2.0 from 2002, where she performed new songs in an acoustic style to a largely tepid reception.

The Miseducation of Lauryn Hill lives on. More than 20 years after its release, it is still regarded as one of the best albums ever made, landing at Number 10 on Rolling Stone’s voter-based 500 Greatest Albums of All Time List this past fall. Many of her songs continue to permeate culture, like the single “Ex-Factor,” which has been sampled or interpolated on major hits by Drake and Cardi B. Beyond that, the album’s impact on multiple generations of musicians is unmistakeable. Everyone from Rihanna to St. Vincent has cited Hill as having heavily influenced their own music.  

The years that followed Miseducation have been complicated. After the album’s release, some of Hill’s collaborators filed a lawsuit claiming she did not properly credit them for their contributions; that suit was settled out of court three years later on undisclosed terms. In 2012, she was charged with tax fraud, and went on to serve three months in prison. More recently, she has found herself back on the road more frequently, sporadically releasing music but mostly basking in the collective love and power of Miseducation through special performances of the album.

For the latest episode of Rolling Stone’s 500 Greatest Albums podcast, Ms. Hill granted a rare interview on the making of Miseducation as well as what happened after. Over e-mail, she spoke candidly about protecting her family and the little support she had after her first album cycle ended. Excerpts from the interview can be heard in the podcast episode, available on Amazon Music, along with tales from several of the musicians who were part of those sessions, like “Commissioner Gordon” Williams, Lenesha Randolph, and Vada Nobles. Ms. Hill’s written responses are here in full.

When you began recording Miseducation, you were 22 and already experiencing immense success with the Fugees. What were you hoping to prove with this album? As far as proving myself goes, I think that’s a larger and more involved story best told at a later time, but I will say that the success of the Fugees absolutely set up The Miseducation to be as big and as well received as it was. When I decided that I wanted to try a solo project I was met with incredible resistance and discouragement from a number of places that should have been supportive, so that had a motivating factor, but it was less about proving myself and more about creating something I wanted to see and hear exist in the world. There were ideas, notions and concepts that I wanted to exist, I set off in a particular direction and kept going. Initially, I intended to work with other producers and artists but found that what I wanted to say and hear may have been too idiosyncratic at the time to just explain it and have someone else try to make it. It had to be made in a more custom manner. The team of people who would ultimately be involved, we all witnessed as it took form. It was unique and exciting.

You’ve said you found yourself especially creative during your pregnancy. How did that experience shape you as a songwriter?

It’s a wild thing to say but I was left alone during my pregnancies for the most part. It was like all of the people with all of their demands had to check themselves when I was pregnant. The resulting peace may have contributed to that sense of feeling more creative. I was pregnant with my first child during the making of The Miseducation and the situation was complicated, so I was motivated to find more stability and safety for myself and for my child, that definitely pushed me to disregard what appeared as limitations. If I struggled to fight for myself, I had someone else to fight for. This also introduced my first son’s father, Rohan Marley, into the picture, who at that time, was a protective presence. If there were people or forces attempting to prevent me from creating, he played a role in helping to keep that at bay.

During those times especially, I always wanted to be a motivator of positive change. It’s in all of my lyrics, that desire to see my community get out of its own way, identify and confront internal and external obstacles, and experience the heights of Love and self-Love that provoke transformation. I sang from that place and chose to share the joy and ecstasy of it, as well as the disappointments, entanglements and life lessons that I had learned at that point. I basically started out as a young sage lol.

When you look back on it now, is Miseducation the album you intended it to be? I’ve always been pretty critical of myself artistically, so of course there are things I hear that could have been done differently, but the LOVE in the album, the passion, its intention is, to me, undeniable. I think my intention was simply to make something that made my foremothers and forefathers in music and social and political struggle know that someone received what they’d sacrificed to give us, and to let my peers know that we could walk in that truth, proudly and confidently. At that time, I felt like it was a duty or responsibility to do so. I saw the economic and educational gaps in black communities and although I was super young myself, I used that platform to help bridge those gaps and introduce concepts and information that “we” needed even if “we” didn’t know “we” wanted it yet. Of course I’m referring to the proverbial “we.” These things had an enormous value to me and I cherished them from a very young age.

I also think the album stood apart from the types and cliches that were supposed to be acceptable at that time. I challenged the norm and introduced a new standard. I believe The Miseducation did that and I believe I still do this — defy convention when the convention is questionable. I had to move faster and with greater intention though than the dysfunctional norms that were well-established and fully funded then. I was apparently perceived by some as making trouble and being disruptive rather than appreciated for introducing solutions and options to people who hadn’t had them, for exposing beauty where oppression once reigned, and demonstrating how well these different cultural paradigms could work together. The warp speed I had to move at in order to defy the norm put me and my family under a hyper-accelerated, hyper-tense, and unfortunately under-appreciated pace. I sacrificed the quality of my life to help people experience something that had been unreachable before then. When I saw people struggle to appreciate what that took, I had to pull back and make sure I and my family were safe and good. I’m still doing that.

This album permeated culture in a way that few albums have before it existed and made you a massive star. How were you handling the public gaze at the time? There were definitely things I enjoyed about stardom, but there were definitely things I didn’t enjoy. I think most people appreciate being recognized and appreciated for their work and sacrifice. That, to me, is a given, but living a real life is essential for anyone trying to stay connected to reality and continue making things that truly affect people. This becomes increasingly harder to do in the “space” people try to place “stars” in.

The pedestal, to me, is as much about containment and control as it is adulation. Finding balance, clarity and sobriety can be very hard for some to maintain. For example, being yes’d to death isn’t good, and people fear stardom can only result in this, but if the actual answer is yes, being told no just to not appear a yes-man is silly. Never being told no if the answer is no by people afraid to disappoint will obviously also distort the mirror in which we view ourselves. On the other hand, a person with a vision can be way ahead, so people may say no with conviction and resist what they fear only to find out later that they were absolutely wrong.

The idea of artist as public property, I also always had a problem with that. I agreed to share my art, I’m not agreeing necessarily to share myself. The entitlement that people often feel, like they somehow own you, or own a piece of you, can be incredibly dangerous. I chafe under any kind of control like that and resist expectations that suggest I should somehow dumb-down and be predictable to make people feel comfortable rather than authentically express myself. I also resist unrealistic expectations placed on me by people who would never place those same requirements on themselves. I can be as diplomatic and as patient as I possibly can be. I can’t, however, sell myself short through constant self-deprecation and shrinking.

“The entitlement that people often feel, like they somehow own you, or own a piece of you, can be incredibly dangerous.”

Is there a version of “Lauryn Hill” that you feel people expected of you, and how did that compare to how you saw yourself? Absolutely, which I touched upon in the answers before this one. Life is life, to be lived, experienced and enjoyed with all of its dynamism and color. If you do something well that people enjoy, often they want the same experience over and over. A real person can be stifled and their growth completely stunted trying to do this without balance. It’s not a fair thing to ask of anyone. We all have to grow, we all have to express ourselves with as much fullness and integrity as we can manage. The celebrity is often treated like a sacrifice, the fatted calf, then boxed in and harshly judged for very normal and natural responses to abnormal circumstances.

I saw someone lambasted once for discussing episodes of anxiety before going on stage, as if anxiety was only a condition of the non-famous. It was absurd, like someone with a record out can’t get a common cold. Someone in love with the art doesn’t not experience fear or anxiety, they just do their best to transcend it or work beyond it so that the art or the passion can be made manifest. Some days are better than others. For some people it gets easier, for some it doesn’t. The unfairness, the harshness was excessive to me. I didn’t like how I was being treated at a certain point. I just wasn’t being treated well and definitely not in accordance with someone who’d contributed what I had. I had a ton of jealousy and competitiveness to contend with. That can exhaust or frustrate your efforts to make anything besides primal scream music, 😊.

Provoking that kind of aggravation was probably intentional. You have to find reasons to still do it, when you’re exposed to the ugly.  People often think it’s ok to project whatever they want to on someone they perceive as having “it all” or “having so/too much.” Hero worship can be an excuse for not taking care of your own sh#t. The flip side of that adulation can turn severely ugly, aggressive, and hostile if people make another person responsible for their sense of self-worth. You can either take that abuse or say no to it. After subjecting myself to it for years, I started to say no, and then no turned into hell no, then hell no turned into f#ck no…you get my point. 😊

If you could talk to yourself at 22 now, what would you say? I’d share the things I do now with my 22-year-old self. If I had known what I know now, things would probably have unfolded differently. I would have continued to invest in people but I would have made sure I had people with the love, strength, and integrity around me to really keep their eye on the prize and my well-being. The world is full of seduction and if they can’t seduce you, they go after the people you love or depend on in some way. I would have with greater understanding tried to do more to insulate myself and my loved ones from that kind of attack.

Looking back on that period of your life, do you have any regrets?

I have some periods of woe, some periods of sorrow and great pain, yes, but regret is tough because I ended up with a clarity I might not have been able to achieve any other way. I would have done a few things differently though if I could go back. I would have done my best to shield myself so that I could better shield my children.  I would have rejected the manipulation, unfair force and pressure put on me much earlier. I would have benefitted from having more awareness about the dangers of fame. I would have been more communicative with everyone truly involved with The Miseducation and fought hard for the importance of candid expression. I would have demanded what I needed and removed people antagonistic to that sooner than I did.

You have released music since Miseducation and have continued to play live. Do you ever foresee releasing another full-length studio album? The wild thing is no one from my label has ever called me and asked how can we help you make another album, EVER…EVER. Did I say ever? Ever! With The Miseducation, there was no precedent. I was, for the most part, free to explore, experiment and express. After The Miseducation, there were scores of tentacled obstructionists, politics, repressing agendas, unrealistic expectations, and saboteurs EVERYWHERE. People had included me in their own narratives of THEIR successes as it pertained to my album, and if this contradicted my experience, I was considered an enemy.

Artist suppression is definitely a thing. I won’t go too much into it here, but where there should have been overwhelming support, there wasn’t any. I began touring because I needed the creative outlet and to support myself and my family. People were more interested in breaking me or using me to battery-power whatever they had going on than to support my creativity. I create at the speed and flow of my inspiration, which doesn’t always work in a traditional system. I have always had to custom build what I’ve needed in order to get things done. The lack of respect and willingness to understand what that is, or what I need to be productive and healthy, doesn’t really sit well with me. When no one takes the time to understand, but only takes the time to count the money the fruit of this process produces, things can easily turn bad. Mistreatment, abuse, and neglect happen. I wrote an album about systemic racism and how it represses and stunts growth and harms (all of my albums have probably addressed systemic racism to some degree), before this was something this generation openly talked about. I was called crazy. Now…over a decade later, we hear this as part of the mainstream chorus. Ok, so chalk some of it up to leadership and how that works — I was clearly ahead, but you also have to acknowledge the blatant denial that went down with that. The public abuse and ostracizing while suppressing and copying what I had done, (I protested) with still no real acknowledgement that all of that even happened, is a lot.

“I wrote an album about systemic racism… before this was something this generation openly talked about. I was called crazy.”

I continue to tour and share with audiences all over the world, but I also full-time work on the trauma, stifling, and stunting that came with all of that and how my family and I were affected. In many ways, we’re living now, making up for years where we couldn’t be as free as we should have been able to. I had to break through a ton of unjust resistance, greed, fear and just plain human ugliness. Little else can rival freedom for me. If being a superstar means living a repressed life where people will only work with you or invest in your work if they can manipulate and control you, then I’m not sure how important music gets made without some tragic set of events following. I don’t subscribe to that.

Lastly, I appreciate the people who were moved by this body of work, which really represented a lifetime — up to that point — of love, experience, wisdom, family and community investment in me, the summation of my experience from relationships, my dreams, inspirations, aspirations and God’s ever-present grace and Love in my life through the lens of my 20-something but wise-sage existence, lol. I dreamed big, I didn’t think of limits, I really only thought of the creative possibilities and addressing the needs as I saw them at that time. I also had the support of a community of talented artists, thinkers, and doers, friends and family around me. Their primary efforts (THEN) seemed to be to help clear a path and to help protect. However, when you effectively create something powerful enough to move the bulls#t out of the way, all kinds of forces and energies may not like that. They may seek to corrupt and discourage, to disrupt and distract, to divide, and sabotage…but we bore witness to the fact that this happened — a young, black woman through hip-hop culture, a legacy of soul, Spirit and an appreciation for education and educating others communicated love and timeless and necessary messages to the world.

The music business can be an industry of entanglements, where a small number of people are expected to be responsible for a very large number of people. It’s hard to find fairness in a situation like that. Now, I look for as much equity and fairness as possible. I appreciate being loved for my contributions to music, but it’s important to be loved for who you are as a person just as much, and that can be a delicate but extremely important balance to achieve. Experiencing that is important to me.

#black women #fame #hip-hop #lauryn hill #ms. lauryn hill #music #music industry #r&b #robert glasper #rollingstone #soul #the fugees #the miseducation of lauryn hill

[smitten-miqitten]

A Fine Gift

AO3 Link

“Your nameday’s coming up soon, isn’t it Chief?” Biggs inquired, wiping down their latest prototype model of manacutter. Mk.6, or some such.

“Oh yes, the day people get to tell me how ancient I am. Don’t remind me.” Cid pouted, clearly not looking forward to the prospect.

Era looked up from her book, confused. “But you’re not old, and you certainly don’t look it”. He cheered a little at this, flashing her a grateful smile.

“Chief’d  look even  less old if he’d just shave every once in a while”. Wedge chimed in.

Jessie looked up from her ledger in agreement, “Exactly! We’ve been telling him for ages. The Chief has the absolute worst case of baby face I’ve ever seen. You wouldn’t think it, with how brawny he is. Looks years younger. A trim is long overdue.”

“I’m not shaving it!!” Cid bellowed. It was plainly a subject that had been brought up many a time before, and certainly would be again.

“You know, I actually can’t really recall what you look like without it. I only ever saw the once, with the echo, and the echo is always so blurry”. Era mused, struggling to imagine Cid’s beard bereft visage.

“Should I shave it, then?” Cid asked genuinely, not an onze of his previous vitriol present. He gave his beard an absent minded stroke, trying to decide how long he could bear to part with it.

“N..no! You don’t have to go that far…” Era stuttered, only to be shouted over by an irate Jessie.

“Oh, so you’ll shave for her, but not for us? Time and time again we’ve asked…”

“There are several things I’d do for her I wouldn’t do for you lot”, Cid shot back, a slight smirk growing on his face.

“Cid!” Squeaked the bright red Miqo'te, having caught his meaning.

Cid just grinned, loving how embarrassed she got at the smallest things. “Beard or no, someone will find a way to call me old. The fewer people that remember my nameday, the better I say.”

“Still”, Era argued, recovering somewhat from her mortification, “We should celebrate just a little bit, at the very least. It’s not your nameday every day. Is there anything you want?”

“Peace and quiet?” He suggested hopefully.

Era grinned, “Come now, let���s be realistic”.

“How about a day off?” Biggs offered, tightening bolts here and there on the manacutter.

Jessie snorted, “With the backlog of orders we’ve got going thanks to his wandering about at random? You wish!” She slammed the ledger shut for emphasis. It was true Cid had been out and about a rather lot of late, volunteering to assist the Scions largely for a chance to leave the workshop once in a while.

“A party then? After work, with the Scions and friends?!” Wedge added helpfully as he passed Biggs another wrench.

Cid groaned. “That’s the exact opposite of peace and quiet. If you want an excuse to see Tataru, I’m sure there’s something that needs repairing at the Rising Stones”, he said, having used much the same excuse to see Era on occasion, “I just want everyone to forget it. No nameday, no jokes about going grey the day I was born, just an ordinary day”. He returned his attention to his work, growing deaf to any further debate on the matter.

Nobody was quite satisfied with this, but Cid didn’t seem liable to budge on the issue, stubborn as he was. They all silently resolved to convene in secret, to come up with some way to celebrate.

…………………

Gathered around a small dusty table within  a storage room in the Rising Stones, lit almost ominously by handful of dim lanterns, Era, Biggs, Wedge, and Jessie began to brainstorm.

They had a consensus on the small details: a quiet, low energy gathering. A nice dinner, cooked by Bismarck-trained-chef Era, cake again prepared by Era, and gifts. The gift, they decided, had to be good enough to make up for the blandness of the rest of the event. They contemplated each inventing something for him, though the idea was deemed a flop on the basis that it would be nigh impossible to keep them a secret.

Era also wanted to provide him something other than her cooking, as she cooked often anyway. It wouldn’t be special. She wanted to give him something permanent, something he could use. But what could she get him that he could not make better himself? She only knew of a few craftsmen more skilled, and even they were specialists… Oh.

“Looks like little miss has an idea”, Biggs noted, breaking the long silence that had permeated the room in the wake of their combined deliberations.

“Perhaps…I was thinking that Cid might appreciate new tools. Lazy though he can be at times, he truly loves his work. Higher quality tools surely would make him happy. And it could be a group gift, as I know nothing about tools. I’ll need your expertise”.

“It’s  a good idea, for sure”, Jessie began, though the ‘but’ was evident. “Tools better than the ones he has would be a small fortune, though. He made a lot of them himself, after all”. She sounded rather disappointed; new tools would be just the thing to get him inspired to work consistently again.

Era nodded; she knew that in any other situation her suggestion would be entirely unrealistic. But she had an ace up her sleeve, or so she hoped. “I may actually be able to get such things free of charge, or for relatively little. I happen to know a master goldsmith who may be willing to make them as a favor to me, as I’ve helped his son out of a number of tight spots in the past. I can’t guarantee he’ll do it, of course, but if you all can provide me with specs for the tools, I know he’ll have the skill to make them if he does agree”.

“Who would that be?” Wedge asked, feet kicking back and forth as they dangled from his too-high chair.

“Godbert Manderville”, she said, shying away from their surprised gasps and shouts, shushing them lest their secret meeting be discovered.

…………………

As the Ironworks Crew gathered up all the details needed to make the tools, Era set to work getting in contact with Godbert. She hadn’t seen Hildy in some time (thank the Twelve), and so had not met Godbert in quite a while. Knowing he often did business with the Fortemps family, she reached out to her adoptive father Edmont, who happily arranged tea for the three of them. Godbert agreed nearly immediately, citing her dedication to his son’s well being (she neglected to point out she often had no choice in her interactions with Hildy), and so the rest of tea was spent regaling both Hildy’s father and her own with tales of her adventures, at their combined request.

With the specs from Biggs, Wedge, and Jessie, as well as the high quality materials Era gathered and provided, it took Godbert next to no time at all to craft a full set of of the finest instruments imaginable. Truly, his craftsmanship was a  wondrous thing to behold. Era couldn’t thank him enough, expressing her gratitude profusely until Julyan demanded she hush up already and be on her way. Packed away in a custom case, everything was now ready for the big day.

…………………

Cid’s nameday started, as he had requested so vehemently, as any other. He did, however, take a bit more time that morning to sleep in, indulging in early morning snuggles with his darling Warrior of Light. After stretching with a loud series of pops emanating from his joints, Era teasingly asked after the state of his ‘aged bones’, earning her a furious tickling until she relented and apologized, laughing away.  A light breakfast was followed by a surprisingly easy day of work, during which Cid was curiously allowed to work on whatever he pleased with no pressuring about impending deadlines. He couldn’t possibly miss the air of excitement emanating from his employees and sweetheart, and began to brace himself for whatever surprises they had in store for him despite his prior protests. But that’s part of what he loved about all of them; they never truly listened to everything his damnfool ass said, ever insistent whenever they thought themselves in the right, all just as bullheaded as he.

Era prepared a truly marvelous meal and equally marvelous cake, just as he suspected she might. Regardless of the quality of her training, her culinary talent was astounding. It struck him as rather a missed opportunity, that she could not live indulging in her love of botany and cooking. A greenhouse and cafe would be perfect for her, surely to rival the finest establishments in Eorzea. It saddened him a little, but he had little time to mull over the misfortune, as everyone became increasingly antsy, whispering amongst themselves as if he couldn’t hear. Biggs reached into one of the taller cabinets, one Cid often had trouble reaching and thus avoided out of frustration, and pulled out what appeared to be a rather ornate toolbox. It had several bows looped around the handle, cheesily colored in the Ironworks blue.

“Open it!”, they all said in unison, their excitement uncontainable. Chuckling and doing as bade, he opened the box to reveal the finest set of hammers, wrenches,screwdrivers, and myriad other oft used tools he had ever lain eyes on. Surely, a set of this quality must be worth all of Mor Dhona. “How in the seven hells…” Cid started, baffled eyes searching the four staring back at him with baited breath.

“I called in a favor”, Era offered in a hardly sufficient explanation, beaming away.

“Go on then”, Wedge prompted, bouncing up and down in his seat, “give the hammer a try!”

Cid did, finding the grip perfect for his hands, the weight of the implement ideal. Words were lost to him, though by the looks of his companions’ faces, his reaction was more than sufficient. He was positively itching to use the set now, countless inventions springing to mind unbidden. Standing upright, he began to gather up the box, already sketching out plans in his head. The Excelsior would appreciate a tune up, right?  Giving Era a loving kiss and the others a mighty hug, he near bolted from the room, followed by their fond laughter. They knew him only too well.

#ffxiv #ff14 #era hess #cid garlond #jessie jaye #biggs #wedge #my self indulgent minifics

[jamielynnheartfelt-blog]

The Point of Cowboy Tai Chi - self awareness in horsemanship

The skills that we teach in clinic’s and lessons and through the correspondence course are largely based off this thing we call “Self-Awareness.” We want to adapt that concept to interacting with horses on a variety of levels, primarily from a point of leadership and partnership.

I suppose one way to look at it is that we must mindfully be seeking a deeper level of self-awareness in order to develop what Ray Hunt and the Dorrance brothers called “FEEL.” Or feeling of the horse so that horse and human can learn to feel together.

If you have been around horses long enough, you will find that horsemanship attracts people who want to a “feel” of their horse to achieve that highest level of connection and communication. With that desire being an attracting factor, so much of how we help students is to begin creating Neural pathways that allow for mindful searching to achieve self-awareness.

I meet people all the time, whom, like myself, want to help horses and bond with their horse, but often get in their own way of achieving their goals. They in essence, (I know, I have been there in my life) cannot find a way to set aside their ego and emotional imbalance to see the horses needs clearly.

As the understanding of horses, Neuro Chemistry is recognizable and common knowledge myths about how horses think, feel, play and act need to be re-examined. Horsemen are going to have to adapt accordingly.

What I spend an increasingly larger amount of time coaching is how to help the student set aside their ego’s, low self-esteem and most importantly the unrealistic expectations of their horse. This requires one to face the fact that horses do not possess the brain capacity to have ego’s, or plot against us. They have reactions or respond with their own sense of reasoning largely based on their innate instinct to survive.

Simply understood, horses live in the moment, so we must learn to share that moment with them. This is called being present. A concept that is fairly elusive to our on-demand world availalble with a flick of the thumb.

When I see a human putting pressure on horses to hurry up and comply, as a result of being chased, abused, drugged or harassed, I will try and intervene on the horse’s behalf and cause the human to actively develop self-awareness. The results are generally wonderful for all involved too.

When I think back to my list of amazing teachers of Horsemanship, the very common observation they have, is, at least when they were working with a horse, they demonstrated a strong sense of self-awareness and emotional fitness.

Self-Awareness is having a clear perception of your personality, including strengths, weaknesses, thoughts, beliefs, motivation, and emotions. Self-Awareness allows you to understand other people and likely horses too, how they perceive you and your actions, your attitude and your responses to them in the moment.

How to develop and increase self-awareness around horses (and in everyday life)

1.    Look at yourself objectively. Do the same for your horse!

2.    Keep a journal, find a way to measure progress. Phases are a great measure of progress. Journal what phase you do on any given day, then check back to see if your horse is getting lighter! Our emotions often make us critical due to ego, money and time constraints.

3.    Write down your goals, plans, and priorities, keep track of your horse’s progress and your own journey of growth.

4.    Perform daily self-reflection.

5.    Practice meditation ,quiet times or mindfulness habits. To apply this directly to your horsemanship, practice the art of doing nothing with your horse. Or add a meditation or quiet-time to your work out. (Life changing practice for my own journey)

6.    Ask a trusted instructor to describe you and your progress with your horse. Education and experience see things that you may not know to look for yet!

7.    Allow your horse to give you feedback and take it with a sense of humor and a shot of tequila. Some days, when we lack connection and emotional fitness, we can leave a not so positive feel on our horse. If your horse develops any sort of behavior that you would otherwise call: stubborn, cheeky, spooky, arrogant or naughty, this is likely your horses way of telling you he is not feeling safe or cool with what has been happening. Take a deep breath, think objectively and find a solution if you pinpoint something obvious.

8.    Check your emotions at the gate. You can carry compassion and a sense of humor with you, nothing but positive feel should come from you. Your horse can only sense if you are excited or relaxed. When a horse feels our heart rate rise and sees our grumpy face, he only has the brain capacity to assume you are a hungry predator excited about eating. (Could be why he runs from you?)

 Want to Be a Good Leader? Step One: Know Thyself around horses

The principles of Heartfelt Horsemanship are to create strong leaders, if only for horses.

1.    Keep an open mind. Understand the horse’s idea first.

2.    Be mindful of your strengths and weaknesses. Don’t go so far outside your comfort zone that you cannot come back.

3.    Stay focused or the better way to say this is: Remember your intent. Be clear in your intent and keep it simple. Horses cannot think 20 goals at a time!

4.    Set boundaries.

5.    Know your emotional triggers and get help in coping with those.

6.    Embrace your intuition.

7.    Practice self-discipline.

Tips for improving your self-awareness.

1.    Get out of the comfort zone. No one grows there. Adversely don’t go farther than you can safely manage. Build goals.

2.    Identify your triggers.

3.    Do not judge your feelings. Learning horsemanship is tough, and sometimes can be frightening. Be kind t yourself.

4.    Don't make decisions in a bad mood around horses. You will regret it. Rather hang it up for the day and try when you are refreshed!

5.    Don't make decisions in a good mood either, good horsemen are objective and neutral!

6.    Get to the birds-eye view.

 By Jamie Lynn,

Lead Instructor a Heartfelt Horsemanship

Clinician of Natural Horsemanship

Author

#heartfelthorsemanship #horses of tumblr #horsesofinstagram #jamielynn #garethmare #naturalhorsemanship #mildfullness #tomdorrance #rayhunt #horsessouthafrica #sttdp #senseofhumor #emotionalfitness #horsemanship #hearfelthorsemanshipambassadors

[donald-clemons]

How To Respond to Negative Reviews Online

Negative customer sentiment is, unfortunately, inevitable for any business regardless of the level of quality and service they provide. While dealing with unhappy customers one-on-one can be challenging, dealing with unhappy customers who are publicly airing their grievances online adds an extra layer of complexity: potential customers will be able to see the entire exchange for years to come. For this reason, it is imperative to approach negative reviews with care. Below, we’ve outlined some prudent steps to take when confronted with negative online reviews as a part of your online reputation management strategy.

Before Responding to Negative Reviews

It may be tempting to jump right in and defend yourself as soon as you see that an unflattering review has been posted. But before you start typing, take a few minutes to follow these steps so that you can prepare yourself with a more collected and informed response:

1. Take a deep breath.

Negative reviews can be upsetting, but it’s important not to take them personally. Give yourself a few minutes to cool off so that any negative feelings you have don’t come across in your response. Very few responses made in the heat of the moment have yielded positive outcomes.

2. Search for the customer in your system.

Based on the information left in their review, try to find the customer’s order or account information in your system. This very well may not prove helpful, but it could give you some additional background information into their experience that you can use toward fixing the problem.

3. Determine the root of the complaint.

Read the review a few times to fully understand why the customer is upset, and what they are hoping to gain from their review. Is the product a bad fit? Did something in your process fail? Did the customer have unrealistic expectations? Are they simply lashing out? Put yourself in their shoes and determine what kind of response would satisfy you if the roles were reversed.

4. Aim for a quick turnaround.

If you can, try to respond to the review within 24 (business) hours. However, don’t rush with a response—it is more important to have a thought-out strategy than to respond quickly. If the problem is going to take several days to fix, respond publicly that you are working on a solution and then continue working to address the problem offline.

How to Respond to Negative Reviews

With a calm mind and the background information you need, you are ready to write a well-informed response to your negative review. As you draft what you’d like to say, make sure you incorporate the following concepts:

1. Use a professional, yet sympathetic tone.

As you begin writing your response, make sure you are approaching it in a manner that will reflect well on your business, and that makes the customer feel like they are heard, understood, and valued. Of course, if your business’s general tone is a bit more playful than professional, you can approach similarly—as long as you do it well (consider KFC’s relatively well-received 2018 apology ad).

2. Address the reviewer by name (if provided).

In a world where personalization is taking a front seat in all areas of customer service and marketing, this adds a personal touch to your response—plus, it helps the customer feel like you are viewing them as an actual person rather than a completed sale.

3. Apologize.

Whether you are apologizing for the misunderstanding or the inconvenience, or because you messed up, an apology can go a long way. This doesn’t mean that you are wrong, but it doesn’t hurt to admit that you are sorry the person had a bad experience. It also shows potential customers that you care about their experience.

4. Don’t be defensive, accusatory, or aggressive.

There have been many instances where business owners have responded in this manner and it backfired, resulting in everything from lawsuits to losing the beloved business they were simply trying to protect in the first place. It also just plain looks bad—consider whether you would want to do business with someone who responds in that manner.

5. Be brief.

This will help you steer away from being defensive if you lean toward that type of response. The main objective of a response is to let the customer (and others) know that you are willing to improve the experience of someone who is dissatisfied—you don’t have to explain everything that happened.

6. Take the discussion offline.

In a best-case scenario, you will be able to communicate with the customer back-and-forth to try to resolve the issue to their satisfaction—but the rest of the internet doesn’t need to see every single aspect of that interaction. As long as the public gets the impression that you are willing to work with the reviewer in some way, that will go a long way in repairing their opinion of your business.

7. Try to solve the issue.

This should go without saying, but make sure you really are doing what you can to make the customer happy offline. Some people simply cannot be satisfied, but as long as you’ve made an effort to meet them in the middle, they should have some appreciation. After all, if you promise to work offline with the customer and never follow up with them, they could very well leave a second review calling out your response for empty promises.

Handling Responses to Your Review Responses

The last thing you want to do is create an endless public back-and-forth with a customer who cannot be satisfied. However, some unhappy people will do everything they can to have the last word and make your business look bad. If you cannot reach a resolution with the customer and they continue to respond publicly with negativity, leave one final comment politely apologizing that an agreement could not be met and stating that you consider the matter closed. Do not respond to any additional comments or responses. If the customer’s demands are unreasonable, potential customers will likely be able to recognize it themselves from the discussion.

Learn from Your Negative Reviews

While negative reviews seem terrible, they can provide valuable learning opportunities on how to improve your business (and prevent future negative reviews). With each negative review, consider whether anything could have been done beforehand to prevent it from occurring. If a problem is easily preventable, adjust your process to accommodate a fix. If you see the same complaint repeatedly that is not a small fix, you may need to make some bigger changes.

In Conclusion

While you cannot fully satisfy 100% of your customers 100% of the time, it's important to understand that most customers simply want their frustrations to be heard. As people are increasingly turning to other shoppers’ advice when making purchasing decisions, handling negative reviews in a positive manner is pertinent for the success of businesses. Keep in mind that your customers are your greatest learning tool for discovering ways to improve.

How To Respond to Negative Reviews Online published first on https://yousweetluxury.weebly.com/

[scripttorture]

Hi and thanks a lot for your blog ! I am writing a fantasy novel where there is a sadistic character who tortures people only for his pleasure (with the excuse of scientific experiments). So I wonder, how can I write this character without being unrealistic and cliché, and can he be someone manipulative and charismatic or would that be impossible ?

It wouldn’t be impossible butit would be unlikely he’d be particularly charismatic.

 With the caveat that I still don’t have the most up-to-date research ontorturers out there (I’m trying to find a translation at the moment)- theevidence is pretty consistent that torturers aren’t generally…good with peoplebasically.

 Essentiallytorturers tend to suffer from exactly the same symptoms as their victims.

 Torture is mentally, emotionally and physically demanding and it tendsto leave torturers as wrecks.

 All of that said- there aren’t very many studies specifically ontorturers and, as with victims, we can’t predict who will develop whichsymptoms. Which means it’s possible that the symptom this particular characterhas don’t prevent him from being charismatic and manipulative.

 But the memory problems, anxiety, panic attacks, aggression and PTSDwhich are just some of the most common symptoms all make both pretty unlikely. I’vealso seen both traits (manipulative and charismatic) used pretty regularly infiction.

 I don’t want to tell you ‘no’. I think this falls pretty firmly into thecategory of things that are down to the writer and how the writer uses them.

 It’s unlikely and I have seen it done fairly often before. But I’ve seenit done well as well as badly and I think it’s perfectly possible for you towrite a torturer with these traits and stillshow realistic effects torture has on them.

 Whatever you decide I’d suggest picking 3-5 symptoms from the list ofcommon symptoms in the Masterpost I’ve linked to and showing them consistently.Because we can’t predict symptoms I tend to suggest picking symptoms you feelfit the character and story.

 If you want the character to be charismatic and manipulative I’d suggestsocial isolation, addiction, hyperviligance and chronic pain could all be agood fit. They’re also things a character could realistically blame onsomething else or hide to some degree.

 Personally I’ve approached writing torturers a couple of different waysin different stories.

 I generally try to avoid making them too intelligent or sociable becauseI often see them portrayed that way and that’s rarely the reality.

 In one of my stories I have a torturer character who is essentially modelledon the historical Inquisitions. She’s a zealot who believes in her causeabsolutely. Her inability to force a confession from the main character feedsinto her depression. She sees it as a profound personal failing and worse shesees it as preventing this character from getting some form of absolution. Overtime she responds by becoming increasingly obsessed with her work, isolatingherself from the outside world almost entirely.

 She’s a profoundly sad character whose own awful choices have trappedher in a situation that she’s finding increasingly unlivable. She can’t reallystep back into ‘ordinary’ life easily because she’s been apart from it so longshe’s not really sure how to.

 In a different story I’ve got a character who used to torture. He was part of a brutal police force in anauthoritarian regime and he knew that what he was doing was wrong. He suffersfrom flashbacks, nightmares, anxiety and a pretty profound difficult relatingto other people.

 A big part of his character arc is him trying to work out who he wantsto be, who he can be now. He tends to put on a brave face for the outsideworld. He cracks off colour jokes all the time and talks an awful lot ofrubbish. He’s trying to reintegrate himself back into ‘normal’ life but most ofthe time he doesn’t know what that really means and he’s looking to his youngercolleagues to show him how to act appropriately.

 Neither of them are exactly charismatic. The first is far too withdrawnand the second generally comes across as a tad annoying and immature.

 They’re also not really manipulative. The second has a pretty goodunderstanding of people’s motivations but when it comes to practically usingthat information I have him give that information to younger colleagues who aremuch better at navigating complex social situations. The first is too wrappedup in her own feelings and depression to ever really manipulate.

 Neither of these characters is the ‘right’ way to portray torturersbecause ultimately they vary quite a bit as people.

 If the story has room for it and you’re worried about your characterbeing too ‘typical’ you could include another torturer and use them to showdifferent symptoms and different responses.

 If it doesn’t I do still think you can write your character well withthese characteristics. I’d feel it was a more realistic portrayal if you tookthe time to show that social situations are difficult for him. Controllingwhen, how and how often he has contact with other people would help. Showingthat he finds social interaction, including his manipulations, tiring wouldalso be a good addition.

 Essentially he can be good atsomething and still find it difficult. Showing him having difficulty, showinghim planning his social interactions in advance to an unusual degree, thatwould go a long way in my mind to balance the fact he’s unusually good atsocial interaction.

 If you’re still in the early stages and willing to change his charactertraits a little I’d suggest getting rid of the charismatic aspect over themanipulative aspect.

 The reasons for that are partly realism and partly writing. You can geta lot more plot wise from a character being manipulative than you can from acharacter being charismatic.

 And in terms of how torturers behave and the symptoms they tend to showI think being charismatic, being likeableis generally more difficult for them. Their symptoms can and do cause massivemood swings, violent outbursts of temper, panic and a lot of other things whichcan make them extremely difficult and unpleasant to interact with. Acharismatic torturer is working against all of that.

 Like I said, it is possible, but in most cases I think it would take adegree of effort and hard work that torturers generally don’t seem to want toinvest in. Being charismatic would probably be difficult for a torturer.

 There’s a few different options there. Hopefully some of them fit withwhat you want for your story. :)

Disclaimer

#tw torture #torturers #behaviour of torturers #effect of torture on torturers #common psychological effects of torture #Anonymous

[autodidact-adventures]

World War I (Part 59): More Politics

After the February Revolution and the Battle of Arras & Nivelle Offensive, political turmoil increased once again, with struggles for power erupting in Russia, Germany and Berlin.

Russia

In Russia, the tsar's regime had been toppled; the tsar's ministers were under arrest and rival factions battled for control of the provisional government.  The politicians had to decide what form of government to use, and how to organize its worsening economy.

For the first half of 1917, there was still strong support for continuing the war.  Minster of Justice Alexander Kerensky claimed that the revolution had been partially an angry reaction to rumours that the Romanov government might settle for a separate peace.  He and the general staff were preparing a summer campaign, one that was smaller than the late 1916 Chantilly one.

But resistance against the war was growing, especially among the army and industrial workforce, which was where the most support was needed.  By May, over 35,000 troops were deserting each month.  On the home front, the situation was still volatile.  Soviets had been recently formed, representing soldiers, sailors and workers; they were very skeptical about what Kerensky was doing.  Lenin had returned from exile and was now in charge of the Communist Party's Bolshevik faction, which was stirring up opposition and becoming more & more bold in doing so.

Germany

In Germany, the struggle was simpler, focusing on who would be in control of the government.  Nearly all the elite of German society were united against any meaningful reform, and their only real opposition was Chancellor Bethmann von Hollweg.  The kaiser floated between both camps, and was overall a fence-sitter.  He often agreed with Bethmann – for example, in 1917 he issued an Easter message endorsing his proposals for electoral reform.  But he knew that he was being increasingly overshadowed by Hindenburg and Ludendorff.

These two blamed Bethmann for pretty much everything.  They claimed that his failure to keep control over domestic policies was lessening the Reichstag's loyalty.  Trying to arrange peace negotiations was making Germany look weak, and also encouraging the Entente nations to keep fighting.  When strikes broke out in Berlin, they blamed him for that, too.

A standoff between them and Bethmann was lasting for months.  A conference was held on April 23rd, where Hindenburg & Luidendorff demanded a war aims memorandum be approved – one that declared Germany's intentions to annex parts of Belgium and France, and large parts of the Balkans.  Bethmann didn't resist, but a week later he placed a note in the files, in which he stated that he viewed the memorandum as meaningless – it implied Germany's ability to dictate peace terms to the Entente, which was completely unrealistic.  He wrote, “I have co-signed the protocol because it would be laughable to depart over fantasies.”

On May 15th, he gave a speech to the Reichstag, declaring himself to be “in complete accord” with the generals on war aims, but also willing to offer Russia a settlement “founded on mutually honourable understanding.”  These two things contradicted each other, of course, and caused Bethmann to lose potential support in the Reichstag – there was a growing number of Reichstag members who realized that the U-boat campaign was failing and wanted a negotiated settlement.  On the other hand, Ludendorff became even more hostile towards Bethmann because of the peace-with-Russia section.

There were two sources of support for Hindenburg and Ludendorff – the first was their success as generals going all the way back to the Battle of Tannenberg.  The second was from the most powerful & conservative parts of German society.  This elite believed that only victory could prevent the ordinary people from demanding reform of the entire system after the war finished.

Pressure began to grow for Bethmann to be dismissed.  The kaiser resisted strongly (to a surprising degree), because he realized that the new chancellor would be Ludendorff's pawn, which would cause the end of Bismarck's system.  But the pressure was great – even his wife and son (the Crown Prince Wilhelm) took part.  And the generals were willing to do almost anything to get what they wanted, whereas the kaiser was not.

Britain

Here, as in Germany, the struggle was between the head of the government (PM David Lloyd George) and the general staff, but apart from that there were few similarities.  Unlike in Germany, a military-based challenge to government control of policy was impossible.  The struggle was only over control of the BEF, but was still very intense.

Lloyd George faced off against Douglas Haig and General Sir William Robertson (Chief of the Imperial General Staff, and based in London). As the summer of 1917 began [June], the question of what to do with the BEF was paramount.  Lloyd George's government had began shakily, but now had solid public support; he was very skeptical about the generals' tactics and strategies (with good reason).  Any inclination he might have previously had to leave military things to the military, had been destroyed with the failures at Arras and the Chemin des Dames.  He insisted that they wait for a great number of American troops to arrive before launching any more large offensives. He pushed for an Italian offensive while the French and Russians recovered & rested, and the Americans got an army ready.

There was actually no guarantee that America would send a whole lot of troops into the field.  After Wilson's declaration of war, it wasn't certain that they were going to do anything more than send money, equipment and ships to their new allies.  The Chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee declared that “Congress will not permit American soldiers to be sent to Europe,” but Wilson quickly proved him wrong on that.  However, America didn't have much of an army yet – until a gradual buildup was authorized in late 1916, their regular army had only 130,000 men (barely putting them among the 20 biggest armies in the world).  They had no tanks, almost no aircraft, and very few machine-guns (even though the machine-gun was an American invention).  The general staff was legally limited to only 55 officers, with only 29 being allowed to be based in Washington – the country distrusted military establishments.

Also, their largest army unit was a regiment – there were no divisions.  The military quickly organized a First Division and sent it to France to show theyr were serious.  It was led by General John Persing, who had begun his career in fighting against the Native Americans.  On July 4th, it marched through the streets of Paris to an enthusiastic reception.  But it was much too small to be of any importance, and wasn't ready for combat.  There weren't any other divisions ready yet.

The first draft since the Civil War was authorized.  By mid-1917, every male from 21-31yrs was registered (it would later be 21-45yrs). 32 training camps were built within two months, each covering 8,000 – 12,000 acres (32.4 – 48.5 square km), and with 1,500 buildings capable of holding 40,000 men.

Nearly every noncom in the regular army was commissioned.  New schools (with specialties from gunnery to baking) were established along the East Coast.  The Entente sent veterans over to America to train American instructors in modern war.  The French specialized in artillery, tactics, liaison and fortifications; the British specialized in mortars, machine-guns, sniping, bayonets and gas.

In order to manage all this, the War Department and general staff had to be greatly expanded and restructured.  But even with all this expansion, Washington was not prepared for Pershing's estimate of how many troops he would require within a year.  Soon after he arrived in France, he reported, “It is evident that a force of about one million is the smallest unit which in modern war will be a complete, well-balanced and independent fighting organization.  Plans for the future should be based...on three times this force – i.e., at least three million men.”

Battle of Messines

Douglas Haig was still obsessed with Flanders, believing he could make a breakthrough at Ypres.  The Royal Navy leaders agreed with him – on the Belgian coast, their naval guns could support the infantry; and it was a strategic objective that they had to take. The Admiralty had been working on plans for an amphibious invasion of the region since 1915.  By spring [March-May] 1917, they were building huge floating docks that could land infantry and tanks.

Haig and his staff decided to seize this opportunity.  With his staff, he worked out a plan to combine a new offensive out of the Ypres salient with an amphibious landing.  They would thus be attacking Germany from two different directions, and force them to give up the Belgian coast.  They might even be able to drive Germany out of Belgium entirely, by giving them no room to manouevre.  And with their flank exposed, they might be forced back from the Hindenburg Line.

At the very least, the British would capture the Belgian ports of Ostend, Zeebrugge and Blankenberge.  Germany would lose the ports that they were using to send some of their smaller submarines out from into the Channel – and this would strengthen Britain's position when it came to any peace negotiations.

But although the amphibious landing was a new idea, the Ypres offensive would be the same old strategy that had just failed in the Nivelle Offensive – a massive artillery bombardment followed by an infantry attack, supposedly leading to a breakthrough that the cavalry could exploit.  Lloyd George was angry when he heard about it; and the amphibious landing wouldn't be possible until this supposed breakthrough had been achieved.

Haig attempted to placate Lloyd George by laying down a specific definition of the breakthrough – it would be counted as real once they'd captured the town of Roulers (11.3km into German territory), and then they would start the amphibious landing.  Lloyd George, however, believed that Roulers was out of reach for them.  Haig and Robertson believed he was being presumptuous to have an opinion on such things.

Weather was a very important factor in western Belgium.  The region of Flanders is extremely flat, with scattered farmhouses, small villages and some patches of trees, but very little else.  The ridges and hills of the Great War battles are barely noticeable today as more than wrinkles.

Flanders is also a very low part of the northern Europe's great coastal plain.  The inhabitants spent centuries installing drains, canals and dikes so that it could be farmed, as previously it was practically an extension of the sea.  Even today, it is the wettest a terrain can be without being an estuary.

Even in “dry” weather, you only have to dig a few spadesful of earth to strike water.  It almost always rains heavily in late summer [August], and the whole area turns into mud.  Because of the soil composition, it turns into a bottomless, gluey mess.

Haig was warned about this.  Actually, the summers of 1915 & 1916 had been very dry for Flanders, unusually so.  However, his staff looked at records going back to the 1830's, and reported that usually “in Flanders the weather broke early each August with the regularity of the Indian monsoon.”  The London Times military correspondent was a retired Lieutenant Colonel, and he warned Haig against trying to launch a major offensive in late summer: “You can fight in mountains and deserts, but no one can fight in mud and when the water is let out against you.  At the best, you are restricted to the narrow fronts on the higher ground, which are very unfavourable with modern weapons.”

“When the water is let out against you” would be referring to the Belgians in 1914, when they'd opened their dikes to flood the countryside east of the Yser River to hold back the Germans.  The Germans would have learned from that, and might also use it against the British.  Furthermore, heavy bombardment might wreck the fragile drainage system & cause flooding.

Haig didn't completely ignore these warnings, but he carried on anyway – he was impatient to begin while the Flanders region was still dry.  As soon as the Battle of Arras was finished, he began building up an attack force at Ypres.  Lloyd George hadn't given approval for this, and Pétain had warned Haig that this plan had no chance of success (this warning wasn't passed on to Lloyd George.)

For preparation, Haig wanted to establish a new strongpoint on the salient's edge, which could be an anchor for troops moving outwards. And he had a perfect way to do this, thanks to General Sir Herbert Plumer, who had been commander of the Second Army on the salient's edge for the past two years (during that time, ¼ of Britain's casualties had been at Ypres).

In 1915, Plumer had ordered tunnels to be dug towards the German positions opposite his line.  In 1916, he expanded these tunnels into the biggest mining operation of the whole war – there were 20 shafts, some almost 800m long, and many over 30m deep to escape detection.  They were drained by generator-driven pumps.  The tunnels were extended towards the Germans, eventually reaching to below the Messines Ridge, which had been an excellent vantage point for German military spotters to survey the region.  One of the mines was discovered & destroyed by the Germans, but the other 19 were finished and packed with explosives without the enemy finding out.

The Battle of Messines began with a week-long artillery bombardment, with the heaviest concentration of artillery of the whole war so far (one gun for every 7m of front).  Then on June 7th, at 3:10am, the mines were detonated.  They exploded nearly at the same time, blowing up the entire ridge into the air.  Tremors were felt as far away as London, and David Lloyd George heard a faint boom at 10 Downing Street, where he was working through the night.

A lieutenant with a machine-gun corps later said, “When I heard the first deep rumble I turned to the men and shouted, 'Come on, let's go.'  A fraction of a second later a terrific roar and the whole earth seemed to rock and sway.  The concussion was terrible, several of the men and myself being thrown down violently.  It seemed to be several minutes before the earth stood still again though it may not really have been more than a few seconds.  Flames rose to a great height – silhouetted against the flames I saw huge blocks of earth that seemed to be as big as houses falling back to the ground.  Small chunks and dirt fell all around.  I saw a man flung out from behind a huge block of debris silhouetted against the sheet of flame. Presumably some poor devil of a Boche.  It was awful, a sort of inferno.

A member of a tank crew said, “We got out of the tank and walked over to this huge crater.  You'd never seen anything like the size of it, you'd never believe that explosives could do it.  I saw about 150 Germans lying there dead, all in different positions, some as if throwing a bomb, some still with a gun on their shoulder.  The mine had killed them all.  The crew stood there for about five minutes and looked.  It made us think.  That mine had won the battle before it started.  We looked at each other as we came away and the sight of it remained with you always.  To see them all lying there with their eyes open.”

All that was left was a line of 21m-deep craters – the ridge had been destroyed, with very few British casualties.  They'd penetrated about 3.2km into the German lines (at their farthest point), but Haig didn't want to advance any further at the moment.  He'd achieved his objective; he didn't want to Second Army so far ahead that the artillery couldn't protect it; and he wanted to dig in before the Germans could counterattack.  For a few hours, there was an opportunity to break deeply into the German lines, and possibly even through their broken defences, and it wasn't taken advantage of. Plumer was a capable commander, and perhaps the most important part of this battle was that he saw the advantages of a limited attack.

Lloyd George, however, still doubted Haig, and Haig still didn't have approval for the main attack.  On June 19th, Lloyd George summoned Haig to a meeting with his recently-formed Cabinet Committee on War Policy.  Haig was to explain his plans in detail, and Robertson also attended.

William “Wully” Robertson was born in 1860, the son of a tailor & postmaster; he was educated at the local church school and later became a pupil-teacher there.  He joined the army at 1917, despite his mother's shame, and spent 10yrs in the ranks.  A commission changed him from the army's youngest sergeant major to its oldest lieutenant.  He served for a long time in India, learning several languages there.  He served with distinction in the Boer War (1899-1902) and then returned to England.

After his return, he was a reform-minded authority on military training, and also an expert on the German army.  He is the only English private soldier to have risen to the rank of Field Marshal (he was given that rank at his retirement, and also a baronetcy). Throughout his career, he made no attempt to get rid of his rough Lincolnshire accent.

Robertson had been focused on victory on the Western Front from early on in the war – he'd opposed alternatives such as the Dardanelles Campaign.  In December 1915, he'd been appointed Chief of the Imperial General Staff, and become Haig's most important supporter. Because of this, Lloyd George distrusted him as well.

The June 19th London conference lasted three days.  Haig laid out his plans and what he expected to achieve; Lloyd George questioned him constantly.  He wanted to know: why they thought a Flanders offensive could succeed this time; what they thought the casualties would be; how the German forces were arranged; what the consequences of failure might be.  He wasn't satisfied with the answers, and he made that very clear.

The Royal Navy was brought in, and they sided with Haig & Robertson.  Admiral John Jellicoe (the sort-of hero of the Battle of Jutland) stated that Britain wouldn't be able to continue the war for much more than a year unless they captured the Belgian coast.  This was actually unlikely – Germany only had a small number of smaller submarines going out from those ports.  But Lloyd George couldn't prove them wrong because the claim was so completely speculative. The army & navy representatives were impatient with Lloyd George and his meddling (as they saw it).

Eventually, Lloyd George had to give in.  By the end of the discussion, he only had one other committee member firmly on his side.  The Conservative leader Andrew Bonar Law was also doubtful about Haig & Robertson's claims, but he said that he didn't think the committee could “overrule the military and naval authorities on a question of strategy” (which was pretty much what Bethmann had said 5 months earlier about the unrestricted submarine warfare issue).

Lloyd George knew that if he overruled Haig & Robertson without strong support (from both Liberal & Conservative members) then he would be exposed and vulnerable in the House of Commons.  And Haig promised that if his plans didn't succeed quickly, then they'd be called off (like Nivelle had falsely promised).  Lloyd George was still very much against the plan, but he told Haig to proceed with preparations while he waited for the final approval.

While the generals had won their case, this situation showed the strength of the British political system.  Haig and Robertson hadn't won control of strategy overall – they'd only got permission for one more attack, and this permission had been granted by the civil government, whose authority was not diminished in any way.  The PM had insisted on the conference, and it had been held, and he had had the last word.  Everyone knew & accepted (if reluctantly in some cases) that Lloyd George and his committee had the ultimate authority, even if they'd given in.  The constitution remained intact.

Germany's constitution was supposed to work in the same way, but it didn't.  The chancellor was supposed to be in control – when Bismarck was chancellor, this had been the case, even though the kaiser was allowed to dismiss him at any time, and did so in the end. But the government leaders had no actual power base of their own – they weren't chosen by the legislature (as they were in Britain), and so the complications and problems caused by a lengthy war were causing the chancellor to lose his grip on control.  Eventually, the system broke down, and a new one had to be improvised.

Hindenburg could have improvised the new system (he was the one person whom nearly all of Germany trusted) but he had no interest in it.  So it fell to Ludendorff, who had been elected by no-one, and whom the kaiser greatly disliked.  The war turned Germany's political system into a true military dictatorship, the first time that Germany had really had one.

Russia

The Russian authorities were struggling to hold their forces together.  Rudolf Hess, who would be one of Hitler's top henchmen during WW2, was a newly-commissioned officer commanding troops opposite the Russians, and had recently returned from being wounded in action.  In a letter to his parents, he described the chaos among the Russian troops:

Yesterday we saw heavy fighting, but only among the Russians themselves.  A Russian officer came over and gave himself up.  He spoke perfect German.  He was born in Baden but is a Russian citizen. He told us that whole battles are going on behind their lines. Their officers are shooting each other and the soldiers are doing the same.  He found it all too ridiculous.  They can all get lost as far as he's concerned.  We invited him to eat with us and he thanked us. He ate well and drank plenty of tea before going off.  There was a lot of noise coming from the Russian side yesterday.  They were fighting each other in the trenches.  We also heard shots coming from their infantry but they were fighting at each other.  Charming!”

But on July 1st, Kerensky launched his promised offensive (the Kerensky Offensive).  Not enough troops were available for it to be as big as what had been promised before the revolution, but it had over 200,000 men and over 1,300 guns on a 48km-wide front.  General Brusilov, now Commander-in-Chief, was in charge.  It took place in Galicia – this was where Brusilov had had his earlier successes; Russian forces were more organized here & had better morale than in the north; and nearly half the enemy was Austrian rather than German.  They were also well-equipped in artillery & aircraft thanks to their allies.

The offensive went very well at first – the initial bombardment destroyed much of the enemy's forward defences, and the infantry attack took a lot of territory.  But the Russians didn't know that even the Austrians were using Ludendorff's new defensive system, and when the counterattack came, it was the final straw for the troops. They didn't even desert – they just quit the war on the spot, refusing to obey any more orders.  They shot dead officers who attempted to restore order.

Only July 8th, the Russian Eighth Army basically ceased to exist.  On the 18th, Brusilov was relieved of command. (He had had misgivings right from the start, but Kerensky had ordered him to carry out the offensive.)  By July 19th, the Germans were driving a disorderly mob of Russians before them.  Max Hoffmann (now Chief of Staff on the Eastern Front) was in command. Wherever the Germans advanced, the Russians fled; they even fled from the Austrians when they joined in.

This was basically the end of the war in the east.  Russia had suffered only 17,000 casualties (including missing & wounded), which was relatively low compared to the last 3yrs.  But the general collapse meant that they were finished.  The Germans would attack again later in the north, but success there would be extremely easy. This was also the end of the provisional government – the way was cleared for the Bolsheviks.

Germany

Their success in routing Russia on the Eastern Front emboldened Hindenburg & Ludendorff even further, and they were determined to settle the political struggle in Berlin in their favour.

On July 6th, Matthias Erzberger had delivered a speech that shocked the nation.  He was the leader of Germany's Catholic Centre Party, a moderate and a monarchist.  In his speech, Erzberger showed that the submarine campaign had failed (he used information from international contacts who had been made available by the Vatican).  He demanded reform and a stronger role in government for the Reichstag.  He also insisted that Germany renounce territorial gains to secure a “peace of reconciliation”.

At this point, there was great struggle for control over policy (with many factions & many different positions).  Erzberger's speech outraged the conservatives, and those who believed the Reichstag should be annexed attacked Bethmann.  But the kaiser continued to support him.

Until Hindenburg & Ludendorff played their final card.  On July 12th, a telegram arrived from their headquarters announcing their resignations.  It stated that other resignations from the general staff were sure to happen as well, and that the reason was the impossibility of working with Bethmann.

The kaiser was angry, but could do nothing.  (In Britain or France, these blackmail resignations would have been accepted without comment.)  He asked Hindenburg & Ludendorff to come to Berlin to see him.  Bethmann resigned.

The timing of this was not good.  Monsignor Eugenio Pacelli (who would become Pope Pius XII in 1939) had spoken to Bethmann shortly before his resignation, and presented an offer made by Pope Benedict XV – the pope would mediate between the warring sides to try and end the war.  Pacelli said that the first step would have to be for Germany to declare their intentions with regards to Belgium.  Unless Germany was willing to restore Belgium's prewar borders, peace talks would be impossible, and the Vatican realized this.

The kaiser had long insisted that they needed to control at least part of Belgium, if they were to keep the country secure.  But even he understood by now that it wasn't realistic.  Bethmann had told Pacelli that Germany would agree to restoring Belgium's prewar borders if Britain & France also did so (he didn't ask the army for their agreement on this).  He even talked about dealing with the Alsace-Lorraine issue to mutual satisfaction.

The Reichstag had a liberal majority, and that majority was growing. If they'd been given the opportunity, they would almost certainly have supported Bethmann.  But now there was no such opportunity, and the Vatican's attempt came to nothing.

Factions put forward their candidates for the a new chancellor, but were rejected.  Eventually, Georg Michaelis was chosen.  He was an obscure bureaucrat whom the kaiser had never even heard of.  He would prove to be a useless choice – he lacked experience, good judgment and strength of character, and even Ludendorff (whom he was eager to please) would soon be disappointed in him.

Ludendorff didn't actually want to be a dictator (suggestions he should become chancellor were ridiculed), but found himself responsible for everything, with no-one of any importance or any use to help him with the politics or diplomacy.  Neither he, nor his agents, nor Michaelis managed to bring the Reichstag under control.

On July 19th, a large majority of the Reichstag approved a resolution that declared, “The Reichstag strives for a peace of understanding and the permanent reconciliation of peoples.  Forced territorial acquisitions and political, economic or financial oppressions are irreconcilable with such a peace.”  This infuriated the conservatives, and the government remained at war with itself.

#book: a world undone #history #military history #ww1 #february revolution #battle of messines #kerensky offensive #russia #germany #britain #alexander kerensky #vladimir lenin #theobold bethmann von hollweg #wilhelm ii #paul von hindenburg #erich ludendorff #david lloyd george #william robertson #john persing #herbert plumer #alexei brusilov #matthias erzberger #eugenio pacelli #georg michaelis

[waringawaw153-blog]

What else you know about Farm Manager 2018

I've been longing for a match like Farm Manager 2018. As a baby, I took part in a ton of competition like Sim Farm, Knights and Merchants, Caesar III, and SimCity. I got into console gaming, that (until relatively recently) didn't offer much in terms of real-time strategy (RTS) matches with city-builders, therefore they dropped off of my radar a little bit. Fast forward to present day – I've be a big blow of sports with an agricultural focus such as Farming Simulator and Staxel, enjoying strategic gameplay which inspires careful planning. When I first noticed of Farm Manager 2018, the prospect of the activity to melded my passion of farming (full disclosure: I grew up on a farm also the day responsibility is agriculturally-related) with the strategy and managing normally associated with city-builders was incredibly exciting.

This isn't to convey to Farm Manager 2018 isn't without problems or possible locations for recovery. But the main incident is immersive, deep, and most important, fun. Having grown up on a dairy farm, I have a basic good sense of some of the 'behind the scenes' management that goes about during farming operations, i really feel quite qualified to determine the level of realism to Farm Manager 18 delivers, and farmsimulator.eu Farming Games PC the amount of a 'farm management simulator' that really is (notice that this game doesn't claim to be a 'simulator', that is clearly our design regarding what it's trying to reach). And in my opinion, it saves a great impression of managing a growing farming function without actually making it feel like drive. Over my own moment with the sport here were a few occasions of frustration with disorder, but once the dust settled (pun intended) I sense really pleased by the robust and fulfilling understanding how the game provided.

The game includes three different approaches, which really vary the level of instruction of which is provided on the person. Campaign mode walks people through various steps in the (re)development of the family's old, run-down farm, presenting the gambler for the playoffs mechanics and different parts in providing relatively honest and quickly achievable goals. Scenario mode provides the gambler with a stretches of something else conditions to fly into that trial their power to work towards some goal in a given timeframe, like as to make 30 greenhouses. Finally, free mode gives you all the devices and nothing in the guidance, therefore which you can develop the farm of the hopes without any instruction regarding what we ought to be there performing towards. I feel the three types provide a good variety in terms of the level of autonomy fond of the player, with would appeal greatly to another tastes (e.g., a tinkerer may act free manner also effort different points, while a goal-oriented person may control throughout the movement or scenarios).

After playing through Farm Manager 18's work (which led me about 22 times) I sense well-equipped to fight the other parts of the sport tasks. It does a great work of adding the sport mechanics such as cropping (on tiny with larger scales), orchards, greenhouses, the various forms of physical then the requirements, also the multiple types of processing/manufacturing buildings. That slowly adds the ability to build different types of buildings and purchase machinery, facilitating the participant in understanding how all the aspects of their farm work together. This was a great way to understand many of the game's structure, like there are several complex menus and statistical pages that might be not easy to understand without the explanation that's given. There are some products that would benefit from a deeper beginning, then I do think the builders would do well to add in the "help" menu where the person can choose a revision on some of the very hard items, as if they accidentally secure the display describing how to perform one thing before read a certain menu, there isn't any way to get to those elements.

At times the fight did go somewhat slowly, putting us feeling as even if I need to have a velocity even faster than the "3X" option., which I left the time placed at for the majority in the fight. Normally, the "1X" (real-time) speed option felt painfully brake, also I usually ditch the fly at the max adjusting for prolonged periods – that becomes fewer of a problem because the farm grows, however, since other problems pop up and more tasks have to remain assigned. Because I reached the side in the battle, I found myself thinking overwhelmed (in a great sense) at times with the number of things that required my mind, with conducting on most speed was absolutely no longer a sensible alternative. Ultimately this allow us thinking as still the time range was rather well-balanced, since with like games, earlier steps are frequently relatively simplistic/slow-moving with factors happen to increasingly hectic so your farm/city/colony grow.

I admire the game for developing a full-year period of some seasons, however winter could pull in, especially if you get built any greenhouses or take numerous animals to take care of. At times I hoped the game would let me fast forward during winter for the launch of movement, when fieldwork acquired then here become a large quantity of tasks to complete once over. That living told, I think that seasons could be reduced a little, while I often found myself having all the subject preparation completed quite young with into spring, with the crops being willing to gather into early summer. In fact, depending on the crop being produced, you can actually grow with harvest a crop twice in one growing season, which is quite unrealistic. This reinforced my notion that the game's seasons are in requirement of nearly (albeit relatively minor) adjustment.

Not only did my ask to hurry through parts of the battle almost get myself in thought at many sites (by nearly pass on the skylight to grow a certain crop in a given growing season, for example), it also led everyone to recognize that the approach seems to have a little of an identification crisis. Farm Manager 18's campaign struggles sometimes with determining whether it wants to become a full-fledged course, or as a goal-oriented work which enables you obtain the aims as you see right, but shows you the basics along the way. At one moment, I'd already collected a handle of wheat into first summer, and when I touch the next act with the war a minor later on, it put me to help harvest to ground with a newly-purchased combine harvester. Had I not gotten to put in a store from most an hour before, I would have had to wait another full in-game year to complete the work next go ahead from the campaign. I continued in new issues further decrease the lineage, like the power to seal our generation I did expanded the dairy operations, but the war put everyone to construct even more cowsheds, put me without choice yet to remove the little ones I had made to make bedroom for a few of their choice sized counterparts.

These numbers keep us feeling so though I did very little sovereignty in increasing on the components that was created to me, with essentially punishing us instead of receiving my own ideas about how to go around building the farm (even though the entire moment I happened aware of the objectives determined with the war). I understand that the game wanted to slowly create their various mechanics, but when those are exposed it should be approximately the gambler to use them because they see fit. Many of the aims of the campaign were somewhat too restrictive for our love, and movement already gotten when a goal appeared wasn't taken into consideration (e.g., if the game plan us toward breed 30 cows, it had to be 30 new cows, despite the fact that I'd likely bred 50 by that point from the operation).

While this might seem like while I have many issues, Farm Manager 18 does manage to get quite a number of points best. The natural issue of farming, with better workloads during the growing period with calmer winters, is very evident and demands the participant to think ahead to ensure their moment is used successfully and they have the appropriate total and mix of workers (long term and seasonal) to really direct workflow. That makes you to create fashion to help earn some income in the off season, and also ensure that you're prepared to endure a period of schedule without any incoming crops – for example, without the ability to pick any grass or straw, it might become trying to keep a steady supply mine for cows (without having to buy grass or silage). Permanent employees also have various skillsets (e.g., proficient on using machinery, returning from orchards, caring for being, and more), that can offer a recognizable impact on things like how rapidly the problem of gear deteriorates before the mass of plants harvested from the field, so the player must carefully think about the farm's needs when use new workers.

There is also important level to the number of choices presented on the player in choosing how to develop their farm. Need to remain fairly minor extent with put up little fields, care for a few cows, then several rabbits? Go ahead. Want to develop a series of humongous dairy barns also certain equally massive takes to stock feed for your cows? Or maybe diversify your operations and retail fruit drink and sheep's wool? You can do to in addition. Farm Manager 18 offers a large amount of building styles and meeting. While all the animal building types essentially do the same sense (get many animals, over time you can breed them to create your herd) they generate different products, and may even give into production plants such as slaughterhouses for a greater investment (but too a heightened return). These types of choices live where I am how the game really stands out, so frequently you are pushed to contemplate multiple variables in deciding how to produce (and ultimately manage) your farm. Costs/cash on hand, available area (or the price of another terrain to increase the farm), workforce, long term goals…these all come into play. Not to mention that the format in the farm and show a heavy purpose within how efficiently it works also just how quickly processes are finished. You can see your hands cause and conducting their assigned duties with real time – and also hip huge detail if you move with further enough – and they have to receive via the assigned family on the mission (or equipment if it's needed) in order to get the job figured out. That live told, the game suffers from the lack of any ability to queue up tasks for your workers and/or systems, which leads to some frustration when you look at a employee move with a tractor, get the expected implement (e.g, a manure spreader), stop this ahead (if needed), power on the discipline, complete the task, fall off the implement, park the tractor, then move time for their property – and only then can you assign them toward fertilize the next handle. This might only use an extra 10 seconds on any base with the job (as work the game in maximum rate) but without the decision to assign multiple tasks to a hand, I often found myself expecting them to return on their home now i really might assign them a good equivalent job around the next take over.

Visually, Farm Manager 2018 looks excellent. As mentioned, there is a surprising amount of detail in the "ground-level", and when moved out (which is located how I played 95% of the time) the visual quality remains excellent and ideas change visually depending on what's taking place by your own farm into really point when things create and movement – there is too a unique visual discrepancy between years, even dependent on temperature at times (e.g., snow can melt in winter if the temperature goes above freezing, it doesn't just stop white through the whole year).

Farm Manager 18's user software is workable, but would benefit from some enhancements. It does an excellent task at providing basic facts in a constructive and quite visually-appealing manner, but I am that it could be further expanded. The staff to sits along the top of the screen (that enables one to track the amount of eight products of your own pick that's presently in your storage) would benefit from including in the ability to track expiry dates and/or cost in the products, so which an individual happen forced to consult with a menu to note that information for the items you produce/sell the most. The buy/sell menu for solution is a bit clunky, as it often presents items some moments (e.g., should they take special expiry time or are in different storage facilities) but there is no option to sell only to "collection" of merchandise – this presents this very hard to offer the invention that will expire primary, with I typically found myself just going the entire amount of invention I had to preclude the inconvenience. The displays to show up when you press in anything (e.g., a shape, field, worker, etc.) appears directly from the centre from the panel, and often blocks a person through glancing at the feature in which an individual clicked. While this isn't a serious issue, having the window open from the place in the show would allow you to retain a visual connection to the thing that you are managing and not have a major part of the monitor consumed by the facts. To living said, objects to require close attention pop up as notifications then avoid an star from the highest right angle on the display until dealt with, allowing you to triage things that are questioning the awareness with ensure that key difficulties are managed in a reasonable fashion.

The game and suffers from a few bugs, such as tractors or workers getting stuck while performing tasks, however Cleversan Software have been really open to player responses in addressing subjects and releasing updates in the age since release. Some points I encountered something that forced myself to exit on the chief menus and pack back to our saved game, but generally the event remained quite efficient and also the hiccups were small. It could perhaps become far better optimized, what I discovered that in spite of the full settings I wished, the game ran fit from the early shows of stem the farm, but suffered so although it was chugging as the farm became huge and the number of processes on the go increased (even even though our CPU/GPU usage remained relatively small). Despite the occasional lag in opening a selection, that took a negligible impact on the gameplay, yet I stay slightly worried this matter would turn into much more prominent with larger farms (I never catch the perfect maximum possible farm size).

I completed finger in some other additional (albeit minor) stories from the game such as the ability to repair equipment, but do this to say that I believe the game presents a quantity of realism that's believable without becoming overbearing or detracting from the gameplay. Overall, I had a great stage with Farm Manager 2018. This low enough without considering overwhelming, but permits the person to work out the way "straight into the buds" (pun meant) they step with respect to reading database and following commodity prices. That gives an excellent variety in terms of body and scalp types to allow for substantial player select and self-direction – regardless of form – while the several specific game modes provide for a nice variety in the level of prescription with respect to overall goals. The resolutions people cook when performing experience what although they have consequence, that is essential in this kind of activity. Despite several minor infection with certain equally minor pacing problems with the war, I would certainly recommend this contest to stir up of city-builders, simulators, and/or farming games.

Farm Manager 18 nails the feeling of surviving a farm. That puts a lot of data in a person also involves you to manage tons of variables – all while being it fun. Some bug places and tweaks are important, although if you're seeking a building/management game and have an interest in farming (or even if you don't), this contest will certainly protect people thought about.

[ichijikanme]

Enneagram Type 7: The Enthusiast

The Spontaneous, Versatile, Acquisitive, Scattered Person 

Healthy. Highly responsive, free-spirited, and enthusiastic about their experiences, healthy Sevens are powerfully oriented to the real world of things and sensations. They are spontaneous, adventurous, and exhilarated by every experience. Every stimulus brings an immediate response, and they find everything exciting and invigorating. Happy, vivacious, stimulating people: resilient and lively. They are curious about the world and often possess quick, agile minds. Become accomplished achievers and generalists who do many different things well: multitalented, Renaissance people, frequently gifted with virtuosic talents and prodigious skills. Healthy Sevens are practical, productive, and prolific — people of action and energy. Their active minds also lead them to explore many different areas of life: they become versatile, cross-fertilizing their many areas of interest. At their best: They assimilate experiences in depth, becoming appreciative and grateful, enthralled (awed) by the wonders of life. Life-affirming, joyful, and ecstatic. Begin to have intimations of a spiritual reality, and a deep sense of the boundless goodness of life. At the same time, Sevens are aware that physical reality is spiritual, and they take great delight in even common day-to-day experiences. 

Average. As restlessness increases, average Sevens want to have more options and choices available to them. They become adventurous and “worldly wise,” but grow less focused, constantly seeking a variety of new things and experiences, becoming avid consumers, sophisticates, connoisseurs, trend-setters, and sensation seekers. They are good at initiating projects, but begin to have trouble following through with them. Become hesitant to commit to a specific course of action because of fear of missing out on better options. 

Average Sevens are increasingly unable to prioritize or to deny themselves anything: they grow hyperactive, throwing themselves into constant activity, doing and saying whatever comes to mind. They become scattered and distracted: their minds move so quickly that they have difficulty staying focused. Anxieties escalate, and because they fear boredom, they try to heighten their stimulation and excitement — and defend against painful feelings — by staying in perpetual motion, distracting themselves with whatever promises to be “fun” at the time. 

Schedules, previous plans, and appointments may get discarded as more interesting options present themselves. Indiscriminate activities can lead them to becoming superficial, glib dilettantes merely dabbling around: they seem unable to discriminate what is really good for them. Uninhibited, flamboyant, outspoken, and attention-grabbing — constantly talking, exaggerating, wisecracking, joking, and “performing” to stay in high spirits. Begin to easily feel trapped or deprived, so they become more flighty and unreliable, as well as excessive and extravagant, engaging in conspicuous consumption to compensate for repressed emotional problems. Having even more variety and money to afford new amusements becomes important. Sevens do not intentionally cause others pain, but they also do not want to see their harmful effects on others: can be self-centered, insensitive, demanding, and impatient, while being unwilling to do much to support others reciprocally. Deny guilt or responsibility for problems they create. 

Unhealthy. Desperate to quell their anxieties, unhealthy Sevens are very easily and quickly frustrated, becoming rude and abusive as they demand whatever it is they believe they need to keep their growing panic under control. Become infantile escapists, impulsively discharging their anxieties in manic talking or activity: they do not know when to stop. Unhealthy Sevens can become jaded and callous toward others, insulting, flying into rages and tantrums; have extreme difficulty controlling themselves. Danger of addictions to alcohol, drugs, or of reckless overspending or gambling: a profligate lifestyle takes its toll as they become dissipated, dissolute, debauched, and depraved. Increasingly hardened by their lavishness and excesses, yet unsatisfied, Sevens begin to lose the capacity for pleasure, or to feel anything. Terrified by their growing inner chaos, they act out impulses rather than dealing with anxiety, going out of control, prey to wildly erratic, volatile mood swings and compulsive, manic actions (the “manic-depressive” defense). They engage in wild sprees of various sorts, grandiose and delusionally unrealistic, as if there could be no limits on them. Eventually Sevens’ defenses collapse and their energy and health are poor, leaving them in severe depressions with bouts of hysteria and feelings of physical and emotional paralysis. Physical disabilities from excessive lifestyle are also common. They often give up on themselves and life: deep despair, self-destructive overdoses, impulsive suicide. 

Triad Issues. The Thinking Center is identified with, but instinctive impulses (doing) are used to stimulate the mind and keep their thinking processes active. Because they are out of touch with Inner Guidance, Sevens do not know what will fulfill them, so they tend to try everything — going in too many directions and scattering their energy. In type Seven, we also see themes of anxiety (which is suppressed) and concerns about security. Their flight from their inner world to the external world leads to a search for exciting and pleasurable experiences, possessions, and gratifications. 

Direction of Disintegration. Average Sevens value being spontaneous — they like to go with whatever strikes them as the most interesting or potentially fulfilling option at the time. When this goes too far, however, Sevens begin to feel uneasy about their lack of focus and structure. As real obligations and growing backlogs of problems pile up, the increased stress causes Sevens to take on some of the average behaviors of type One. They try to order their affairs, but can become rigid and compulsive about doing so. At such times, they can become self-critical and impatient with themselves and their accomplishments, while being curt and impersonal with others. Because these efforts stem from a punitive superego and not from real inner guidance, Sevens usually balk at Staying with their discipline or plan, and soon resume their impulsive escape from anxiety, albeit with greater guilt to suppress.

Unhealthy Sevens can become highly impulsive and out of control (manic). They know, that they are losing the possibility of finding any real fulfillment and that they need to put brakes on many of their activities. When they take on unhealthy One behaviors, they try to impose a strict, arbitrary order, becoming obsessive, punitive, and vindictive toward themselves or toward anyone who threatens the fragile structure they have created Like unhealthy Ones, they can also become obsessively fixated with someone or something that seems to them to be the solution to their unhappiness.

Direction of Integration. When healthy Sevens go to Five, they become more involved with their experiences in depth, learning to concentrate, and to stay focused such that they are contributing to the environment rather than merely consuming it. Integrating Sevens no longer fear that they will be deprived of happiness unless they are constantly seeking positive experiences for themselves. They delve into their experiences more profoundly, getting to the heart of things, comprehending more, and therefore enjoying reality on a deeper level than ever before. Further, they are able to do this because they no longer avoid the darker side of life or of their own psyches. They realize that any happiness in life is fleeting and ultimately meaningless if it does not take life’s difficulties into account. Sevens can take in the totality of experience without denying any of it. This allows their minds to become more open and quiet such that the guidance and deeper satisfaction they have been seeking rise into awareness.

Security Point. Average Sevens can also “act out” the average behaviors of type Five, but most often with trusted friends and intimates. Sevens become accustomed to being the entertainers and energizers in their social circles and often in their workplaces, enjoying contact, conversation, and good times. But with intimates or close friends, they can become strangely detached and preoccupied — in effect, demanding space and independence from those closest to them. They may withdraw from contact with intimates, become secretive and compartmentalize relationships, or lose themselves in work projects as a way of defending their autonomy like average Fives.

Childhood Pattern. Type Seven is disconnected from the nurturing figure, which is often the mother or a mother figure. The key element in Sevens’ early development revolves around their fear of being deprived by their nurturers, leading to chronic feelings of frustration. The deprivation may have been material or emotional, and it could have been caused in any number of ways, but it left the Seven feeling that his or her needs would not be adequately met. Sevens then make it their business to nurture themselves, and to ensure that their needs will always be met. The deprivation may have been more feared than actual, and yet the determination never to feel insecure or in need became a major force in their development.

Basic Fear. Of being trapped in pain and deprivation.

Basic Desire. To be satisfied and content, to have their needs fulfilled.

Secondary Motivations. Sevens want to maintain their freedom and happiness, to enjoy themselves, to avoid missing out on worthwhile experiences, to keep themselves excited and occupied, to be amused and to have fun, to get whatever they want, to stay “up” and in motion regardless of the consequences, to flee from or discharge anxiety and pain.

In Search of: Satisfaction and fulfillment. Sevens are searching for the thing that will make them happy and satisfied. In the absence of feeling nurtured and supported by their own Essence, Sevens look to the world of experience to feel safe and secure. They are also searching for their life’s purpose, for the one thing that they believe will completely fulfill them. They search for their Grail by acquiring the experiences that will make them happy, while suppressing fear, anxiety, self-doubt, and awareness of “the dark side” of life.

Healthy Sense of Self. “I am a happy, enthusiastic person.”

Hidden Complaint. “I am happy, although I would be a lot happier if I got everything I wanted.”

Key Defense Mechanisms. Repression, externalization, acting out.

Characteristic Temptation. To think that fulfillment is somewhere else. Sevens are tempted to think that while what they are doing is good, something just around the corner might be better. This can lead to the belief that more of a good thing is better. However, as they attempt to pursue options and acquire more experiences or possessions, they only increase the strength of their appetites without really satisfying them. To be satisfied requires that we be present to the experience we are having. But the restless search for variety, and for bigger, better, and more leads Sevens away from presence, literally guaranteeing that they will remain unsatisfied.

Saving Grace. Despite their increasing distractions and excesses, average Sevens may still have enough genuine enthusiasm for things that their very love of the world will prevent them from deteriorating further into mere escapism or manic hyperactivity. Their healthy capacity to appreciate life and the beauty of the world may act as a brake on their desire for mere stimulation, helping them to return to healthier levels of functioning.

Structural Patterns. The keynote is responsiveness. The Seven’s psyche is extraordinarily externalized since most of its energies are invested in being stimulated by the external world. Sevens move outward toward ever-new, different, and more exciting experiences. They are energized by interacting powerfully with people and with the real world of material objects. As Sevens deteriorate, they get caught in a flight from self, anxiety, unconscious impulses, aloneness, and insecurities while demanding that the material world (including other people) fulfill their every need. The overall pattern, therefore, is of a buzzing, humming vibrancy, full of energy and vitality, but in danger of becoming shallow and impulsive. When that energy is in service of avoiding pain and anxiety, average to unhealthy Sevens consume their experiences with little or no personal internalization of them, feeling continually frustrated and sometimes lashing out at the very hand that feeds them.

Cognitive Error. To think that they will achieve satisfaction and happiness by anticipating the future rather than maintaining contact with themselves and with what is happening in the moment. Anticipation of the future takes Sevens out of the immediacy of their own experiences, thereby undermining the possibility of being satisfied by them.

Inevitable Consequences. If Sevens continue to jump impulsively from one activity to another, trying to avoid pain and anxiety, they increasingly bring about their Basic Fear (of being trapped in pain and deprivation), while undermining their Basic Desire (satisfaction and fulfillment). Yet, who will have denied them happiness? The truth is that average to unhealthy Sevens bring much of their unhappiness on themselves by allowing their whims and misplaced sense of freedom to run away with them. Once they become unwilling to say no to their whims and impulses — to stay with a course of action or a commitment to themselves or others — they cross a boundary that can have serious consequences. The way for Sevens to become healthier is to become still enough inside to grieve their losses and to recognize that inner quiet where true fulfillment can be found. The answer to that question is always here and now.

#enneagram #type 7 #7

[davidfostercomedyblog]

The Time I Bombed Trying to Open for Peter Frampton

“What happens if nobody laughs?” people ask.

“Nothing,” I tell them. “Literally, nothing happens.” No one is laughing or doing much of anything. Maybe self-loathing personified decides to occasionally kick the weak when he’s down in the form of a heckle or boo, but other than that nothing happens.

Internally, everything is happening. Thoughts race, feelings emerge, issues of anger and/or insecurity come to the forefront or recede deeper into our subconscious, per our choice of response to each varying degree of disappointment. Our feelings likely run the same gamut as those of all human beings off stage in any realization of failure on display. It’s the worst.

Call it what you will: Sucking, tanking, going down in flames, it all means the same thing. Eating my dick, seems to be the latest contemporary slang for a failed set, which I can only speculate refers to its being an awfully pathetic act of self-abuse that each of us least wants to do. Most universally it is known as bombing, another etymology I can only speculate as suggestive of the unanimous death in the room resembling that of a small village after being hit with a bomb. The crowd is “dead” - not in the good way; but devoid of energy, and their lack of joy has returned the favor to the comedian, his ego and confidence. Everyone is checked out and gone, said void filled either with judgment, sympathy or disgust.

Everyone bombs. Every comic you’ve ever seen, as well as just about every bit you’ve ever busted a gut laughing at, has bombed at some point en route to the marriage of its perfection meeting the crowd primed to appreciate it. The construction of a bit, whether long and ranty or a short one liner, is like the evolution of a barber’s haircut drawn out over weeks, months or years in a barber’s chair set on a city sidewalk for people from all walks of life and mentalities to walk by at all different times throughout its development to voice their opinion, as if it were finished. Of course, we’ve all had our hair cut hundreds of times, and thus all are aware that if we see the man with the clippers still looming over a funny looking “do,” there is still work to be done; whereas comics don’t get such a pass. Every audience assumes and expects, understandably, that they are receiving a finished product. I paid to see a show.Give me “your show.” Unfortunately it doesn’t work like that. Wedo not work like that. It’d be nice if we could – trust that we wish as much as you do for our bits to be completed fresh off the notebook. But a bit is not a bit until it’s been worked out many times in experimentation of how it impacts others. Like skateboarders have to try new and increasingly difficult tricks to become great, we must constantly work out new material, often crashing and burning, breaking our pride, dislocating our energies, getting bruised in the process. So while all art forms are attempting to connect and create a dynamic with its recipients, ours is one where immediate connection wholly defines it. We have to see and feel how it is received, and then based on the quantity and quality of the people in that room we can begin to determine how we can improve. It is a long term, polygamous relationship in which you probably only get to fuck us once. Sorry. We’re whores; whores who are required to be always adding to our repertoire if we wish to grow.  

For all intents and purposes, each crowd as they exist takes on the mindset of one individual. A blind date, if you will. Some start awkwardly, but turn great once the ice is broken. Others start wonderfully but hit a mutual wall of disappointment that leaves both parties considering removing their online dating profiles as soon as they get home. Some dates are downright awful the whole time, some are so good they lead to the bedroom that night, and/or to the altar eventually.

For a new/young comic, bombs feel pretty similar to what laypeople might imagine them to (this is logical, as the brand new comic is still very much a layperson). It’s humiliating, with every joke being thrown out more desperately from their heels like Apollo Creed going inevitably down in flames against the Russian. Like a rookie baseball player in the first week of the season who is so far 1/10, his sample size is still minute. He boasts an embarrassing .100 average, which over a full year would get anyone sent down to the minors. What’s important to keep in mind is there are still 25 weeks left in the season.

The veteran comic, by contrast, has had between 5-10,000 at bats. Sure, he’s struck out, popped out, and hit into double plays nearly 2,000 times, but he’s batting .800 career, for Christ’s sake. He’s good. He knows he’s good, and everyone in “the league” who’s been around for any respectable amount of time knows he is never in danger of being sent down to the minors. He is mostly unfazed by your silence, comfortable in taking his time to think how best to respond to your heckles. Laughter need not come tonight, as it has already come countless times before, and is sure to come again tomorrow or the next night. So, although bad sets still exist as disappointing missed opportunities to connect and enjoy, they eventually taste, digest, and come out the other side much differently through a vessel of greater information, confidence and awareness. Blame, if it exists at all, turns more outward than inward, and the significance of each set diminishes as it becomes a smaller mathematical part of his lifetime batting average.

We never saw Jerry have a great set on Seinfeld. We heard about great sets and could assume they made up the majority of his track record, as his character was a professional comedian who’d appeared on The Tonight Show. Surely this was no amateur; but he and Larry David both knew that if a live set was to appear in an episode it had to go poorly, because failure is funny.

Watch any sitcom, movie, or any comic on stage. Misfortune and disappointment are the integral themes of every joke, as everyone knows there is no humor in great wealth, good looks, a level-headed peace of mind, or getting the girl, performing immaculately in bed and manifesting the perfect marriage. The only thing funny about that is how apparently unrealistic it is for most. This calls back to the reality that there is nothing at all ironic about comedians’ ultimate embrace of misery or symptoms of depression. Spare us the praise for “finding the humor in bad situations,” as bad situations are the actually the only places to find humor, and there is also a part of us that loves to laugh at the suffering of others.

Unfortunately, my mother and cousin were present for one of the most explosive bombs of my career. I’d gotten booked for a $500 feature spot at a theater in Englewood, Jersey, an unheard of gig for such a young comic. What was the catch?

“The catch,” which was not intentional, was that I was opening for a nationally famous musician who I was apparently a jerk for having never heard of: Peter Frampton, a legend in many circles, one of which would surely fill the theater, a demographic of mostly blue-collared, middle-aged, white biker types from middle and southern New Jersey. Guys whose middle school manifestations hated mine for being an honors class pussy with parents who loved him. Guys whose adult manifestations hated mine for being a hip hop, wanna-be, dumb “wigger.” It was quite possible I was not the right man for this job.

I researched Frampton before the show and became acutely aware that I couldn’t do the same jokes I’d been doing in the Bronx. Still in only my embryonic stage of development, I felt a bit dishonest telling the booker that 20 minutes would be “no problem.” I figured it might be a stretch and/or problem, but my 26-year old brain existed mostly between an admirable confidence and delusional arrogance that I could do anything, at least on one given night. Any given Sunday, as they say,not to mention that no comedian is ever going to turn down a challenge or money, let alone a coincidence of the two. And it wasa Sunday! As Mom and cousin were coming from opposite directions than I from the city, the plan was to meet after my set and go out for dinner to celebrate (mourn).

I waited alone backstage, Frampton nowhere in sight. I wore the only outfit I owned that didn’t obviously scream Hip Hop. A removal of my crooked baseball cap, slightly less baggy jeans, and a sweater instead of a hoody, although it was still Polo, with sleeves longer than my arms, much baggier than anything anyone in the building had ever owned in their life, truly a pathetic attempt. I looked like a white guy trying to look black trying to look white.

A disturbing calm came over me just before preparing to go on stage. While excessive nerves should be tamed with positive thought, breathing or whatever works for you, a complete absence of nerves is never a good sign either. A healthy amount of adrenaline beforehand is more than just normal, but almost necessary to do well. Personally, I’ve never had a good set drunk, as alcohol induces a very organic physiological apathy, which in spite of wanting to care very much, makes it impossible to connect with one’s listeners. On the other hand, the experience of nerves mean you care enough to calculate, think on your toes, and ironically, that you believe you can do it. In hindsight of my Frampton experience, I may have been intuitively precognitive that this was all wrong, and beyond some unforeseeable miracle there was no way it could go well.

The external situation was poorly set to boot. The crowd filling the venue was not made aware of any opening comedian. Stand-up is a relationship, and like any good relationship requires active listening, a different frequency and demand than music, which can be more passive and discontinuous. Inexperienced show producers classically make this mistake. They want to mesh two of their favorite things, comedy and music, in hopes of the result being greater than the sum of its parts. Sadly, this usually works about as well as George Costanza’s attempt to combine sex with watching sports and eating his favorite sandwich. Add to that the fact that the crowd was geared up for one of their very faves of all time, and Unknown Joke-teller is given a steep hill to climb.

As I stood behind the curtains with the stage director dividing his time and manic energy between whoever was giving direction into his headphones and tending to me, coordination seemed disheveled. I knew I’d be going on soon, but figured it would be after some kind of introduction to a dark room of seated people.

The house lights were still on. People were filing into their seats and there was no host or announcement over any speaker, when suddenly the stage director nudged my shoulder: “Go, go, you gotta go!”

“Right now? Just go and… What?”

“Yes!” he panicked. “We gotta get you off by 8:20, go!”

Little did he know this set wouldn’t make it anywhere close to 8:20.

I felt as naked and alone on the stage as laypeople imagine we feel.

“Hey, hey,” I weakly greeted them with the assertiveness of the guy who knows he has no chance with the girl.

“Take your seats, everyone.” I felt compelled to instruct them to where I desperately wished they already were.

God, the room was bright, and I could see them all. As nobody knew as much, and I didn’t know any better creatively, I dutifully informed them: “I am… a comedian – just here to tell you some… jokes, before the great, Peter Frampton comes out.”

A lone cheer in the distance for Frampton… people were still filing in. It’s never a good sign when you feel the need to practically apologize for your presence on stage or explain what you’ll be doing.“

“Take your seats, take your seats,”I continued.

I had nothing. No segue, no idea of where to begin, not an ounce of confidence in my pubescent well of material or the experience to improvise through such unexplored terrain. It was unlike any setting I’d yet been thrust into, and as feared, I was unqualified for the job.

I tried a since retired mediocre joke and got nothing. I tried two or three more of the same and got even less. Most of my stronger bits were geared more to the Bronx and urban crowds, and I hadn’t yet really learned how to write more universal material. As the lights finally went out in the house, the proverbial lights were going out on my set. Three strikes on stage are usually enough to acknowledge that you’re out.

“Alright,” I acknowledged the elephant in the room: “you guys obviously weren’t feeling those jokes…”

It was awful. I was rapidly dying, and like that quick realization of being physically overmatched in a fight, I had no idea how to get out of the stranglehold. I’ve got nothing for these people.

Disdain is as contagious as laughter, and the sentiment in the room became quickly unanimous. I can’t recall whether the first boo or heckle came first, but one surely immediately followed the other. It is rare for most humans to mature much past mob mentality, so once the green light is given for any animalistic behavior, it tends to snowball. It couldn’t have been much past 8:10 when the theater-filled boo’s looked and sounded no different than the notoriously disapproving Apollo Theater. They grew louder and more expansive. Finally someone started the perfectly two-syllabled “Frampton” chant, and although I had not yet been given the official signal to exit, this Monty Python-esq tirade was clearly demanding my time was up.

I thought of the show bookers sitting in the crowd. I thought again of my mom and cousin, and wondered where in the crowd they were sitting. Might they have been seated next to one of the loudest, most vicious hecklers in the room? Might they have beenthe loudest, most vicious hecklers in the room?  

“Frampton” chants poured down like rotten tomatoes, and finally I couldn’t help but laugh at the scenario (at least one of us could amuse the other). Although I don’t remember myself ever booing someone off stage, I surely have silently done so in my mind, and been “that guy” in the stadium at sports events and had a blast every time. I knew the show was a bad situation to begin with, and the blame wasn’t entirely mine. I felt okay. However, as soon as I decided to hopelessly join in the “Frampton” chant into the mic, I knew my time was up.  

I exited just before 8:15. The stage manager offered me a pat on the shoulder and an apology, handing me the least deserved $500 I’ve ever been given in my life. In fairness, there would be literally thousands more instances I’d earn $20 or even $0 in exchange for performances worth at least $500. Like accidental squibbed base hits in baseball, the good luck balances out with how often we get shafted.

I went backstage and quickly grabbed my things. Frampton wasn’t there, thank God. I’ve never so badly wanted to avoid meeting a celebrity. Is he even here yet? Who cares…

I snuck out the backdoor, praying not to see anyone who’d been in the theater. I wished I could change back into Clark Kent (or backinto Superman). Suddenly, I was 17-years old again, attempting to dart stealthily away from a wall I’d just covered in graffiti. My walk transformed into a scamper to go meet my mommy.

I heard a voice in the quiet suburban distance, a man outside the theater on his cell phone: “No, yeah, he still hasn’t gone on yet. Some comedian...” A pause, then a chuckle: “Poor. Very, very poor.” Of course I believed him, and felt bad about myself.

I called Mom and told her to leave – that I would not meet them in the lobby per the original plan. She understood. We sat down in the restaurant and Mom looked at me: “Those people were horrible! So rude! I’ve never seen anything like that!”Moms are the best.

I never heard from the booking company again. I think they shortly thereafter folded tent on the showbiz pursuit, returning back to the more stable world of high finance, their original trade. Is it possible my brightly lit expiration drained all of their hopes for success or belief in ability to spot talent, and I’d single-handedly shut down an entire company in just 15 minutes of bad jokes?

Although I’d been “wrongly cast” and the situation was poor, it left an awfully sour taste in my mouth. In typical human fashion, I chose to transform my inner sadness around it into outward anger and labeled the experience as (all) white people prejudging me, which caused me to hate them in return. I made the decision that my humor was not for white crowds, as they could not appreciate or understand me, in spite of the fact that this was a very specific kind of white crowd and I’d still only boasted a microscopic sample size. Apparently I learned how easily one can become racist: No more than a pinch of experience and a dash of maturity with a huge helping of rejection, and the broad strokes flow in excess. The fact is I’d just been a newbie in way over my head, still without the tools or experience to handle the curve balls, obstacles, and bullshit that come to comedians on a regular basis. As we finished our Chinese food and drove from the suburbs of Englewood, New Jersey over the bridge into Washington Heights where I lived, I thought it to be symbolic. I was back home, back amongst “my people,” ironically I suppose. I was done with suburban, white shows. I just didn’t want to feel that way anymore.

Sorry, Pete. 

#peter frampton #comedy bomb #stand up comedy

[anghraine]

I will never get over the "i don't believe in love at first sight / but godamn" gifset for jyn/cassian, it's perfect. also, your tags on the partisan jyn rec have me imagining a persuasion au, this time with cassian as anne and jyn as wentworth (draven as lady russell, I guess??) I love Persuasion AUs and that fic is so good :)

Heeeh, I love it!

I hadn’t really thought of the details of an alternate AU, beyond thinking that captaincy and gender aside, Wentworth (careless, impulsive, generous, spirited) is the most like Jyn, and Anne (obedient, withdrawn, intense, faithful) the most like Cassian. But I think it could work. 

(Completely scattered thoughts on the ‘how,’ but I definitely think it would be fun and interesting!)

Draven is definitely the obvious Lady Russell candidate (he could even be ambiguously positive in the way Ly R is, which would be an interesting take on him). Mon Mothma would be very interesting, too—I think she’s more of a Lady Russell-type personality (which would leave Draven as Sir Walter, omfg). And I think it would allow for some exploration of what’s the most interesting part of Persuasion for me.

The thing is, Persuasion never really answers the question of whether Anne was morally wrong or right to break off her relationship with Wentworth under Lady Russell’s influence. It feels wrong. It turned out badly. But morality is not determined by consequences alone, and here, there’s a complex system of obligations and risks at play. Anne felt an obligation to listen to Lady Russell’s advice—not to obey unthinkingly, but to strongly factor it into her decision-making process, given her own youth, Lady Russell’s role as her surrogate mother, and her deep respect for her. 

And Lady Russell was right in believing there were real risks to Anne marrying Wentworth so young, risks to any children they might have, etc. His ‘I don’t need to save anything, I’ve always been lucky, I’ll always be lucky’ shtick did him zero favours—Mr Price probably thought so, too, and the fact that Wentworth’s luck did hold is … well, lucky. “I’m going to go fight Napoleon and make a bunch of money, everything’s going to be fine” is not a compelling argument! 

On top of that, the winning point in Lady Russell’s argument—the thing that finally swayed Anne—was that the marriage would be bad for Wentworth. A young, delicate wife with no dowry and a collection of snobbish, expensive, totally douchey relatives would be a genuine disadvantage to a young sailor with no connections and no money. And that is also, in fact, perfectly reasonable.

So it’s not simply a snobbish woman dissuading a weak-willed girl who then develops a stronger sense of self through suffering and maturity. Snobbery absolutely played a part in Lady Russell’s motives—all of this would have been much less pressing if Wentworth were someone more like Colonel Fitzwilliam, who would double as a Worthy Alliance and bring powerful, wealthy relations into the picture. Anne may very well have been less swayed by Lady Russell’s arguments if she hadn’t faced uniform opposition from her family, hadn’t been so young and uncertain. But nevertheless, those arguments were largely reasonable, and in the end, Anne’s view is that she wishes she hadn’t taken Lady Russell’s advice, that she would never give the same advice, but that morally she was right to take it. 

I mean, there’s a lot going on there, ethically, and the book doesn’t offer clear conclusions. (UNCLEAR ETHICAL DILEMMAS

ANYWAY, MULTIPLE PARAGRAPHS LATER, that’s not something I often see confronted, even in full-on adaptations. (Particularly, one might say. >_>) And I think it would be interesting to play with it—something where Draven/Mothma/whomever have entirely valid reasons (but also dodgy ones) for their interference, and where Cassian has a real obligation to consider their opinions, and where the killing blow (as it were) would be that he is bad for Jyn (only too easy to believe he’d find convincing!). 

It’s even … like. I can definitely see Draven being profoundly unenthusiastic about his 23-y-o prodigy spy suddenly getting entangled with a 19-y-o Partisan who is also the daughter of an Imperial collaborator. But I think it’s very possible that the likes of Mothma and Draven would probably not care that much about the flings of teens and 20-somethings. The kind of concerted, intense effort leveled against Anne in Persuasion might need something more.

But Cassian, despite his sidelines in assassination and field command, is primarily a recruiter. So. Suppose that his ostensible mission is rebuilding ties with the Partisans and working out some mutual support arrangement. But in reality, the judgment of Intelligence is that the Partisans are doomed by their extreme insularity, drastic collateral damage, unclear objectives, and attraction of Imperial attention. Coordination with the Partisans is an acceptable start, but the actual goal is to draw as many of Saw’s highly-skilled fighters into the Alliance as possible before the whole organization self-destructs or gets obliterated, but without turning Saw actively against them. 

Of course, it’s not a secret that the Alliance is generally out to peel off as many recruits as they can get, and ofc the Rebel agent is going to be trying to draw people into the Rebellion. But what they don’t know is that this is why Cassian is there. 

Okay, anyway, this is what 23-y-o Cassian is up to. It’s a task of extraordinary trust, and he’s on guard against almost everything. But falling madly in love with Saw’s foster daughter was not one of those things. And it’d be one thing if he was just pining (it would be awful, but—), but no, this ferocious, shining supersoldier is (for some reason) also in love with him. 

On top of that, they’re both very much older than their ages, but in some ways younger—they were never able to be kids, to have silly crushes, anything like that. So they’re dorky and overwhelmed and unrealistic, just swept off their feet. They hold hands and talk about … running off together? But they can’t stop fighting the Empire. Cassian would never make a Partisan, but Jyn could join the Rebellion. And then they could be together!!!

(I suspect that at heart, Jyn wants out; large-scale collateral damage is not her gig.)

Anyway, Cassian would get a very sharp reality check, because the point was to draw away as many useful soldiers as he could without completely antagonizing Saw, and wow is “seducing away his best soldier and, oh yeah, DAUGHTER” not included in that description. Of course, he’s horrified because It’s Not Like That, but also … well. Yeah. 

And while Jyn is brashly sure that of course she’ll succeed at whatever she does, she always has, he’s increasingly doubtful that she’d be at all happy in the Rebellion. The Partisans are her family, the only life she knows; she doesn’t know anyone else in the Rebellion at all, she’d chafe under the command structure, she’d lose everything, and have nothing to counterbalance it all but one tormented spy. 

They’re not going to demand that a talented soldier not join the Rebellion, of course, or involve themselves in the obvious affair. But they don’t have to; once persuaded, Cassian does the dirty work himself. He persuades Jyn to stay with the Partisans after all, breaks things off, and leaves, having carefully arranged for a good number of Partisans to defect to the Rebellion over the next several months. Jyn, naturally, feels furious and betrayed (all the more after some of her friends leave). 

And that’s where it starts, lol. Now I’m thinking—like, taking ‘little sister’ and running with it, Sophy would be Baze and Admiral Croft would be Chirrut (AMAZE). While I don’t see Cassian getting winded by a long walk à la Anne, he could be hiding an injury or something that Jyn notices (and hates that she notices, and hates more that nobody else does). 

I don’t know at all who would play the Louisa Musgrove role (it’s not my favourite element of the plot tbh, but kind of necessary). And I don’t know how the scene with Wentworth helping Anne with her nephews would play out but it needs to happen, it’s my favourite. And of course the gender politics wouldn’t really work. (Though Wentworth/Jyn coming to their senses via competence kink would, lol.) And we’d need some terribad teammates or something to serve the role of the Elliots.

(Draven would really be the best bet, if not already taken as the Lady Russell. That really works best as someone that Cassian is actually close to, though, which is… like, nobody. And honestly, Lady Russell is the only person Anne is close to, but—OMG, KAY. IF KAY IS LADY RUSSELL … JESUS. HAHAHA WOW. That’d even work with Kay and Jyn being super chilly at each other, and Cassian could overhear Jyn talking ~idly~ with some of the rest of the team about a mission that went hilariously-in-retrospect wrong thanks to Rebel!Mary Musgrove this shitty commander. They’d have much rather had Andor, since SpecOps do serve under Intelligence now and then, but couldn’t get him. The rumour was that [x] talked him out of it. And Jyn’s like, huh, he’s very easily persuaded, isn’t he? And they’re … not really? That damn droid and direct commands are pretty much the only thing that stops him.)

((For bonus awful: during their brief honeymoon phase, the idea had been that Jyn would join up with SpecOps and once he made captain, they could build a joint Intel/SpecOps team.))

Oh, and Benwick is a former Partisan who was in love with a civilian in Jedha who died before they could settle down. I think the Harvilles joined the Rebellion (probably Cassian’s not!recruits, in fact). Also, there definitely needs to be a way of working in the ‘even when hope is gone’ speech (though as above, the gender politics don’t work at all). 

Ha, even the ‘I should not have known her’ slam could work? I mean, it’s absurd to talk about Cassian as ~faded~, but he is definitely prematurely aged, and Jyn could easily make a snide remark about hardly recognizing him. 

I can’t see Jyn writing anything so melodramatic as Wentworth’s letter, but it’d be sort of hilarious if she types up her vision into a datapad and then is trying to figure out a way to casually leave it lying around, but not so casually that Cassian doesn’t notice. (As if, but Emotions.)

#ishipallthings #respuestas #plotbunnies! #/ #// #/// #//// #star wars #persuasion #otp: welcome home #it'd be really involved if you want to match persuasion at all closely (which i would) #(i'm still trying to think of something for the musgrove children bc i'd really want that #only it couldn't be actual children #but something cassian could reasonably be responsible for and handles well which is in fact someone else's job #and jyn running interference is the first point where things warm up again) #(honestly it could probably be wiring a ship or repairing droids or something—something relatively urgent) #(heh it honestly works best if he's actually not the ranking member and has to answer to. like. a major? that's the mary) #(he's technically on leave. aka sent along to make sure the major doesn't fuck anything up) #(bonus if the shitty major is actually really good at something and genuinely respects cassian #he's just an awful commander and a frequent asshole #and lazy af #when it comes to anything outside his own specializations #though he enjoys the partisan raids to a disturbing extent and is all THIS is what we should be doing!!! #i think he (the major) has some little troll of an astromech that he cares about but is unintentionally awful to #or... whatever kind of droid would be appropriate- but cassian has to keep restoring data etc and the droid is a /pain/) #(jyn comes in just to see it zap him and she's like... seriously? the fuck is this little monster) #(there we go. musgroves!) #inverted persuasion au #jyn erso #cassian andor

[scripturehomosexuality]

Editorial: The Role Education Plays In The Same-Sex Debate

This blog is based in the United States. As such, this post remarks on events transpiring within the United States, which may not be happening in other countries. However, even if you don’t live in this country, feel free to read on. You might find the following very enlightening.

As I’ve been writing on modern U.S. sexual philosophy, it has become evident that such thinking is entirely flimsy. That’s not entirely unexpected, because nothing based on falsehood can stand up on its own. This is particularly so with the “Straight”-”Gay” dichotomy, which is founded on a boatload of misconceptions and outright lies about human sexuality.

It’s led me to wonder how such an inherently flawed system can exert so much power. At this point, I can say there is one major factor that sustains it: wholesale lack of education about history, and ignorance throughout the U.S. populace about what came before them. This is especially so in Millennials and younger generations, who have lived their entire lives under this modern sexual philosophy.

It’s well known that modern U.S. education is abysmal, and only seems to be getting worse with time. However, at this point, I believe that is by design, and is not an accident. This is because so much of modern U.S. society - not only in the sexual realm, but in the political, economic, and other realms - owes its existence to the ignorance of U.S. citizens, and is sustained by that ignorance. As such, it’s especially dependent on ignorance of history, which quite tellingly, is the subject U.S. students perform worst in.

For example, a few months ago, this blog posted an article on the Ancient Greek gymnasium. In that article, it discussed the inherent bisexuality of Ancient Greek society, and how the gymnasiums supported that bisexuality. It mentioned that the gymnasiums were male-only establishments that had strictly enforced nudity, and how that made those places extremely homoerotic environments by design.

These are all facts that the majority of U.S. citizens know nothing about. This is because modern history courses leave all of that out. While they might mention that the gymnasium started in Ancient Greece, they leave out anything about their operation. I myself never knew these facts until I started writing this blog.

I guarantee that if those facts became general knowledge, the “Straight”-”Gay” dichotomy (and the modern sexual philosophy it supports) would wither and die. This is because it exposes this philosophy as a historical anomaly. Given that Ancient Greece is a direct ancestor of the United States, the current revulsion toward general same-sex activity would make no historical sense. Furthermore, homoerotic elements still exist in the modern gymnasium, though somewhat suppressed. If the above facts were known, that homoeroticism would be unchained, and would become integral to the modern gym experience.

As it turns out, both the Religious Right and the LGBT leadership would strongly resist a deeper study of Ancient Greek sexuality, even though it was what made its culture tick. This is because of the following:

The Religious Right would scream that the education system is inculcating “immorality” into its students, even though a few decades ago, Christendom was quite lax on general same-sex activity.

If history classes openly say that the Ancient Greeks abhorred male-male anal sex, the LGBT movement would scream that such classes are “homophobic”. If that seems confusing, you might not realize how much the LGBT leadership venerates anal play, and how ballistic they will get if one dares to question its supremacy.  At this point, I’m entirely convinced that if laws banning all same-sex activity except anal play were passed, the LGBT leadership would be completely fine with it.

Similar dynamics exist with the contents of this blog’s Basic Conclusion on the Scriptures, that the Bible only condemns anal sex. At this point, I think that both the Religious Right and the LGBT movement are fully aware of this interpretation’s existence, and have been for years. However, both sides have effectively agreed to not even acknowledge its existence. This is because such an interpretation affects them both: it undermines the sweeping condemnation of modern Christianity, and threatens the supremacy of the anal play venerated by the LGBT movement. Thus, the circular debate on Christianity and homosexuality goes on, because it allows them to remain entrenched in their own ideologies.

As such, if a person were to know even snippets of this interpretation - for example, “unnatural sex” was an ancient synonym for anal sex, or that only anal sex was “sex” between men - the modern Christian doctrine on homosexuality would already be destabilized. Thus, even those facts are left unmentioned by the education system and other parties.

This relates to an associated trend that depends on ignorance of history: instilling false stability into modern sexual philosophy and the “Straight”-”Gay” dichotomy. This means giving the false impression that our modern ideas of sex have always existed in some form, and have only gotten more sophisticated with time. This involves giving messages like

Male-male anal sex has always been common, and has always been considered the highest fulfillment of same-sex love

Same-sex activity has always been the domain of a minority, and has always been considered a gender-atypical condition

The “Straight”-”Gay” dichotomy has always existed, even if older people didn’t use those terms, and is based on hard facts of human nature

However, there are many parts of history that deflate those perceptions, and show that past times were very different. This is why U.S. education entirely omits or severely limits discussion on the following:

That up until three decades ago, and in a Christian nation, same-sex nudity was a huge part of life, and often fostered homoerotic environments.

That as a consequence of the first bullet point, it seems swimsuits have only been in heavy use for the past thirty or forty years.

That by far, the U.S. is currently unmatched in its prudery about nudity.

That briefs, a perceivably homoerotic clothing item, were once an increasingly popular underwear choice,

That until recently, same-sex activity wasn’t an exclusively “gay” phenomenon, though it also often wasn’t anal.

As it turns out, giving this system false stability also requires selectively listening to figures in academia. For years, a significant number of academic figures have proclaimed that the “Straight”-”Gay” dichotomy is socially constructed, including LGBT-identified ones. These figures include Ned Katz, Michael Foucault, Eric Anderson, and Joan Roughgarden. Yet, while other statements by them are given attention, these particular statements are all out ignored, including in education. That’s because they are (as Al Gore would put it) “inconvenient truths”, truths that jeopardize an important but fraudulent system.

Indeed, if any of this became general knowledge, what once seemed set in stone suddenly appears wobbly. If education on such caused people to ask more questions, that wobbly structure would then completely collapse.

If you’re beginning to think that our modern sexual thinking needs a lot of support, you’re absolutely right. As much as that philosophy rules people’s lives, it’s also a very high-maintenance system that needs constant and forceful reinforcement. Without that maintenance, it would collapse under its own weight.

South African writer Siya Khumalo has realized that, in his analysis of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy in the U.S. armed forces. Please note that for him, the words “gay”, “straight” and other terms are only useless labels, which is why he doesn’t identify as “gay”. That will explain why this author adds certain notes in the following excerpt (taken from this essay):

“I’d always assumed that the cat being ‘out of the bag’ regarding straight-identified men’s homoerotic tendencies was something that would only occur at the climatic exposure of The System [his “Matrix”-derived term for the modern sexual culture] within which we live.  It was my ultimate Apocalypse fantasy.  I’d been writing towards this end, hoping to contribute.  Imagine the shock of realizing that the gay [as in “gay”-identified] people you’d subtly elevated yourself above were actually cut of the same cloth that you were, right down to suppressed homoerotic desires.  Oh, what I wouldn’t give to see that day!

Then this anticlimax: people have always known.  The cat was out of the bag from the word go; even with the formulation of the Don’t Ask – Don’t Tell policy in the US military, Congress knew – the bastards KNEW – that heterosexuality is a high-maintenance state of being that society must work overtime to keep just so; they knew that gay [as in “gay”-identified] people weren’t freaks but they were willing to make them out to be freaks in order to push their imperialistic agenda forward; they were willing to feed the consciences of people to a System that would eventually be internalized by gay men and cause them immense shame.  They were willing to let some be consumed by guilt.  Contrary to Jesus’ prayer of forgiveness at crucifixion, they knew what they were doing and they deliberately did it anyway.  They were preserving a system that worked for their own benefit, at a high ethical cost.

‘Well, why do gays insist on letting the world know about their sexuality?’ some people demand.  Because the world insists on telling them a contrary, idealized and unrealistic version of what sexuality ought to be – a version that benefits only those that can live comfortably within in it, a version that is so delicate it has to be treated with kid gloves lest it collapse.  Don’t ask don’t tell was implemented because of the ‘special needs’ of straight [as in “straight”-identified] men – namely, the need for great help in just remaining straight in the midst of homoerotic temptation that is more than just situational homosexuality as is pointed out in grero.com.  The bastards knew.  ‘One Nation, Under God’ more accurately reads as, ‘One Nation, Playing God’ where the dignities, consciences and souls of men and women are concerned.”

There is one note I will make: while his analysis is brilliant, Mr. Khumalo may not fully realize that the LGBT leadership is entirely complicit in sustaining “The System”. This is not meant to take anything away from his commentary. To the contrary, such a realization makes his statements more urgent and important, since it allows us to say the following about modern Christianity, modern U.S. society, and the LGBT leadership:

They KNOW that the modern sexual culture (both “gay” and “straight”) is fragile, and needs constant reinforcement.

They KNOW that our modern sexual philosophy is a historical anomaly, and isn’t based on any hard facts of human nature.

They KNOW that its continued existence largely depends on the ignorance of those who submit to it.

They KNOW that if people learned the abovementioned history - even a taste of it - it would immediately put this philosophy and the “Straight”-”Gay” dichotomy at risk.

As it turns out, these are systems and philosophies that entire salaries and careers depend on. Thus, I don’t believe the dumbing down of U.S. education happened by accident. It is by design, since its manipulation sustains the existence of “The System”. It deprives people of the tools they need to dismantle it.

Of course, such ignorance allows the existence of other systems, such as the continued dominance of the two-party system in U.S. politics, or the economic philosophies that fueled the financial collapse of 2007-2008. Indeed, our modern sexual philosophy is very much intertwined with those in U.S. politics and economics, since all are informed by the same dominant paradigm of neoliberalism. As such, all these systems complement each other, and thus support and sustain each other.

However, such a connection is obscured, because same-sex activity is thought to only concern a minority. If same-sex activity was treated like phenomena in politics and economics - as things that affect the entire populace - that’s another way modern sexual philosophies could be demolished.

Yet despite all this, you still might be skeptical that an entire education system can be influenced to protect lies. To the contrary, that has happened several times, and over less controversial topics. For example, in 2016, a New York City teacher was fired for teaching her students about the “Central Park Five”, an explosive case of racial profiling that inflamed tensions in 1990’s New York. This case exposed the ugly racial dynamics acting within the city and the larger United States, and those same dynamics exist today. Despite growing calls from administrators to sanitize her material, she refused to do so, which led to her firing.

So what great sin did this teacher commit in conveying unvarnished fact about U.S. society? The administrators were afraid that such material would unnecessarily “rile up” minority students, especially those who were black. Yet, as writer Jake Offenhartz explains, “the messy and upsetting facts of this case and how they relate to broader social failure are precisely what students ought to be learning.”

Let’s review what we’ve just covered. In teaching an extremely relevant case, without trying to sanitize the inherently filthy and thus compromise the truth of her material, this unselfish teacher was sacked for doing her job. This took place in the largest school system in the United States, and in a city that wields international influence. Yet, this isn’t isolated to one teacher in one city. There are probably many more interactions like this behind closed doors, which results in entire “inconvenient” subjects being left out entirely.

At the surface, it shows that certain parties are totally invested in maintaining a “grande illusion”, even if that means compromising the integrity of its education system. No person, city, or country can begin solving a problem without first acknowledging a problem exists. That includes openly acknowledging history, completely and honestly. By trying to censor the past, even in the education of children, it allows certain people to control the present. It allows harmful systems and mindsets continued existence. While certain parties benefit from this, they do so at the expense of many others.

On an even deeper level, this shows that in maintaining this illusion, these parties don’t care who or what they hurt in the process. No institution, no individual, no career is sacred. All of these must be sacrificed to maintain false pretenses, because the benefits of these pretenses are more precious than truth itself.

However, let’s go even deeper. You’ve just seen how powerful interests can be so driven to maintain a “grande illusion” on race and ethnicity. What makes you think that they wouldn’t do much more concerning sex, which is a much more controversial topic? What makes you think that, when so much more depends on how people perceive sex, even more effort wouldn’t be expended on maintaining systems of falsehood? Does this not suggest that the omission of entire topics in education, no matter how relevant they might be, results from some level of conscious thought?

With all that considered, isn’t it reasonable to conclude that in sexual matters, U.S. society will use even education to ensure that people view sex through a certain prism? Indeed, this society will devote every resource to convince people that the sky is purple with polka dots. It will use all tools necessary to make people think that up is down, war is peace, freedom is slavery, and most of all, ignorance is strength.

Thus, while we can see just the fragility of our modern sexual ideas, we can also see why rebellion against them can appear so challenging. Rebellion against those ideas would really mean rebellion against an entire infrastructure meant to support them. It would mean rebelling against the entire thrust of U.S. society, which is aimed at keeping sexual, political, economic and other matters within certain bounds.

Yet, for their own sake, people must rebel. These sexual philosophies are based on falsehood, and is wreaking all sorts of havoc. These would kill society faster than any weapon can.

Thus, you have a responsibility here. As much as our modern sexual culture needs general ignorance to exist, it also needs your silence. The silence of people who know better allows ignorance and falsehoods to flourish, and indicates complacency with the status quo. This is why journalism is so valuable: it calls people and institutions to account, and makes it harder for misconduct to happen. Hampered journalism is a mischief maker’s best friend, since they can do their shenanigans under cover of darkness.

The question is, are you willing to give these ideas the benefit of your silence?

Don’t keep silent. If you’ve been reading this blog, you know that the “Straight”-”Gay” dichotomy (and all it represents) is total nonsense. Your silence will give support for its existence, while your outspokenness will require these ideas to prove themselves (which they cannot). Therefore, it is your responsibility to educate your peers on the above topics, because they never learned them in school or most other places.

This includes any older generations who might read this blog, and who experienced the aforementioned happenings firsthand. By your silence, you are effectively allowing certain parties to whitewash history to their advantage. You know that older times were much different from how they are presented today. Your age and firsthand experience of those topics - same-sex activity wasn’t exclusively “gay”, nude swimming was once common, etc - would make you a valuable primary source.

Even the Bible acknowledges the value of speaking about what one knows. When talking about God’s Kingdom, Romans 10:14 says the following: “But how can they [common people] call on him to save them unless they believe in him? And how can they believe in him if they have never heard about him? And how can they hear about him unless someone tells them? [emphasis mine]” (New Living Translation).

When speaking about the Civil Rights Movement, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. said the following: “History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people.” In context, he was speaking about a specific 1960s movement on race and ethnicity, but the principle therein applies here. That is, the silence of people who know better - in this case, about the modern sexual philosophies that dominate - only helps those who want to deceive. A price will be paid by all for that silence.

In saying all this, I’m not trying to guilt trip or castigate anyone, and I commend any who are speaking out. I’m merely trying to impress how important it is to bear witness to what one knows, and how urgently that must happen. In these first few months of 2017, I’m seeing a country that is steadily spiraling out of control, and is holding ever tighter to sexual philosophies that are false. No good can come of that.

To disturb our current trajectory, those who know better must speak, and do so loudly and forcefully. American historian Henry Steele Commager once said the following: “Education is essential for change, for education creates both new wants and the ability to satisfy them”. As you educate your peers on things they won’t know otherwise, the rewards will be much greater than continuing to hide within silence.

#editorial #homosexuality #homosexual #gay #lgbt #Gay Christian #gay christianity #lgbt christian #lgbt christianity

[theliterateape]

Squaring the Circle: Tips on Managing the Chaos

by Don Hall

“Goddamnit. How do you manage to cope with all of this...chaos in the world and still stay optimistic? I don’t think you’re stupid but maybe you’re just too stupid to see how bad things are getting.”

It’s true. Maybe I am stupid. I’ve certainly been called worse by both political extremes since...well...as long as I can remember. If I am stupid, I’m definitely too dense to recognize it. Managing chaos, living in uncertain times, is just that. Managing and living.

Back in 2015, Alice Kim and I were a dysfunctional couple. That relationship was a constant source of tension and did some damage to both of us. I did, however, learn many things from it and from her. One gift she gave me was the idea of reframing things to see a different angle. I have always been on the outside of things and perpetually looking for that contrarian point of view but that was as much about fueling conflict as it was about the frame.

As a theater artist, my work was inspired by DADAists and the legend of Andy Kaufman. Framing society as a series of ongoing behavioral experiments. Pushing buttons on people to see how they would react. Not so much instigating mean-spirited pranks but close enough to bear that definition.

Alice’s view was that one could gently shift the frame on a given situation. Reframe reality because, for most of us, reality is cemented in our perception of it.

2020 seems to be a real shitshow. Trump is still in office. A pandemic rages throughout the globe. Massive unemployment and the coming of our second Great Depression. A video of George Floyd being murdered by a police officer has been seen 800 million times by one million people. Protests for civil rights. Alt Right terrorists joining the protests to foment the idea that these protests are really riots. While in the back of the queue, we still contend with pending climate disaster, crumbling credibility on the World Stage, an almost maniacally conservative federal court system, and an increasingly powerful and poisonous cancel culture that now seems more like a raging wildfire consuming every and anyone who bothers to even question the orthodoxy of the Extreme Zealots of both White Supremacy and Critical Race Theory.

We’re fucked.

Reframe.

There is actually little evil in the world (if you choose to see things in the binary Good & Evil mode) but metric tons of stupidity and selfish interests. While brutal cops are a problem and the mostly accidental murders of citizens by police are motivated by incompetence driven by lived experience bias, the vast majority of people are merely focused on themselves without much thought put into how their actions affect others. Not evil but certainly fucking annoying.

That guy who parked in two spots isn’t evil, he’s a selfish asshat. The guy who makes a racist joke to make his Black co-workers laugh isn’t evil, he’s just a bigot but one trying to find a way into his 1970’s version of race relations in an increasingly fed up world.

Most people are motivated by what they perceive as good intentions despite their born-in tendency of stupidity and selfishness.

Further, simply looking at the history and progress the world has made gives us a macro-view of things. That more objective scene demonstrates that in the past fifty years we are living longer, healthier lives, literacy is at an all-time high, being gay is no longer stigmatizing in many cases, Black incarceration has declined dramatically, police killing people has declined dramatically, women are more empowered, run more businesses, and are increasingly being elected to public office.

Is there still suffering? Of course. Everyone (even the white people) suffers. The question to ask is not Who suffers more? which invites nothing more than an Olympiad of Victim Status but For what reason are people suffering? Nobody should be insulted, attacked, threatened, etc. but we live in a country of 330 million people and that Shangrala is not realistic in any meaningful way. If we (as in society of free thinking but incredibly stupid and selfish people united by the Grand Experiment in Diverse Democracy) hope to stand up against hateful ideas, we have to be willing to sacrifice a bit.

Uncertainty and chaos are no more bad than good. They simply are.

Most aspects of our lives are completely beyond our control and the attempt to control them is like lighting the candle scented “Frustration” while sipping the “Disappointment” cup of tea. 

Living for thirty years in Chicago was instructive to this point. The weather in Chicago is the perfect incarnation of Chaos at Play. On any given day during any given month there could be thick humidity and stifling heat, pouring rain, sleet, or thirty below zero skin-cracking freeze. If control is your bag, living in Chicago could likely drive you insane just trying to be fully prepared for going outside.

How does one handle it?

The cliché is to Expect the Unexpected which is some fucking feel-good bullshit as it is easy to attribute to wisdom and completely unhelpful. The more substantial answer comes in three parts:

Always have the worst case scenario in mind while simultaneously understanding that the Vegas odds of that same scenario are heavily favored against it.

Actively lower your expectations in keeping with how unrealistic your wants actually are.

Realize that no one owes you anything — not respect, not deference, not politeness — nothing. The world owes no one anything because the world is designed in every way to make it difficult to survive.

Number one is pretty easy. Over the years of reframing, I’ve trained myself to ask that question: What is the absolute worst case possible? 

Take the civil unrest at play right now. The worst case scenario is a full-out war between those protesting for substantial police reform and the police. The police have all the military-grade weapons which would be Kent State meets every school shooting plus some The Purge impunity. That is highly unlikely to happen because while we are stupid and selfish, for the most part, no one really wants to be in a firefight if it can be avoided.

Number two is probably the most taxing. In an age of instant satisfaction — fast food, same day delivery, instant messaging — dialing down our expectations is a pain in the ass. Our emotions dictate so much of how we behave and our emotions are an erratic, messy, impulsive roommate in our head. There’s no shame in feeling the Big Feels but acting upon those feelings is like taking advice from a dude masturbating into his hat while singing nonsense songs about BitCoin conspiracies. Not a great road map to solid decision making.

Number three is kind of an extension of number two. In a democracy, we believe we have rights. Our rights are guaranteed. We feel like we can demand fealty to these rights from everyone around us but the fault in that logic hits the record scratch when we are confronted with everyone demanding their rights at the same time. Adding to that the simple truth that things like pandemics and earthquakes give no fucks whatsoever about your unalienable rights and it just works out better to assume you deserve nothing, are owed nothing, that your rights are as fragile as your credit score.

If there is a fourth reframe to consider it is limit the things you take personally. Most people don’t have much concern for you or your existence as most people in a planet of billions are abstract rather than concrete. George Floyd is concrete because we saw him die on video. Black Lives are abstract because the concept lacks specificity.

Like it or not (and in direct conflict with the notion that there are enemies at every gate) most people are not so much against you as they are for themselves.

Finally, do your level best to explore perspective. Reframing requires looking outside of your lived experience and looking at things from another’s.

Donald Trump is a horror on a daily basis. Stream The Madness of King George and realize that other people have had it worse and survived.

COVID-19 is a scourge that is upending the carefully laid table of society. Go read up on plagues throughout history to gain understanding that these things are simply not the end of all things but the beginning of new things.

Abolishing the Police is a great idea until, like the small neighborhood of well intentioned white liberals in Minneapolis who decided to no longer allow police on their blocks only to suddenly have their public park filled with occupying drug addicts and carjackers, you kind of need someone to call when the shit hits the fan.

Reframe. Relax. Go to sleep and wake up. Eat something. Do something nice for someone without hopes for reward or social media kudos. Drink some water. Make a few bucks. Do it again tomorrow.

#Reframe #Managing Chaos #Pandemic Behavior

[geeksperhour]

Why is a learning culture important at work?

“Employees need to learn one new skill every day to stay competent.”

 Yet no one talks about how finding time to learn is not always easy. It is unrealistic to expect overworked employees with busy schedules to live up to that ideal. The only solution is to integrate learning as a part of their work-life, not as an extra task on top of their endless to-do lists. The question is how? Rolling out a few training procedures is not sufficient. The organization’s culture needs to shift to incorporate daily learning.

Make sure you loosen up your employees’ schedules a little. Install a platform at your company that makes learning accessible and enjoyable. Let your workforce have some leisure time to learn and acquire skills. Reward and recognize them when they do. I promise you will never regret the changes it makes to your workplace.

Here are a few benefits of creating a learning culture in your organization.

 Manage skill gaps

 We wish there was a magic wand that could help you close skill gaps. The demand for skills is changing at an increasingly fast pace. There is no promise that one particular skill wanted this year is also going to be wanted in the same way or quantity next year. In a study conducted by SHRM, 75% of HR professionals say that they find recruitment difficult due to a skill shortage. Furthermore, 52% say that this shortage has been getting worse in the past two years.

 In order to address these missing skills, we need to identify them. Conducting a skill analysis can help. The skill gap is nothing but a difference between the skills your workforce has and the skills that your organization needs. You can begin by sorting out the skills that are needed most to meet the requirements of your company. The next step should be assessing your employees’ skill sets with competency tests, ability surveys, skill scoring, performance reviews, and feedback. Finally, you can go about hosting regular learning courses and seminars to increase the supply of valuable, sought-after skills in your company.

 Make continuous learning possible

 Buckminster Fuller created the “Knowledge Doubling Curve.” He noticed that human knowledge is doubling every 13 months on average. The workplace is where your employee spends most of their time in a day. You want your workers to feel like the knowledge they are gaining in your organization is keeping up with this curve. Incorporating perks that help them gain tangible and marketable skills is paramount for employee satisfaction.

 Learning programs can help your employees adapt to changes in the job market and their work profile. Build a dedicated network to learn and a place where employees can contribute their expertise. In a study conducted by Udemy, 70% of employees agree that training can help people block out distractions and focus. Dedicate a weekday to learning, and host competitive events, hackathons, or bug bounty programs so employees can practice the skills they have attained.

 Retain and develop your workforce

 The cost of losing an employee in the first year can cost upwards of 50% of that person’s salary. The key to employee retention is a learning culture. According to LinkedIn’s 2019 Workforce Learning Report, 94% of employees say that they would stay longer at a company that invested in helping them learn. Spending the time and resources to teach your workforce can substantially decrease employee turnover rate.

 Employees should never be seen as just a means to get the work done. They are a crucial part of your business. Focusing on your employees’ career development is as important as them completing their work. Allow a web developer to learn Adobe Photoshop tools. Help a visual designer learn a coding language. Never restrain your employees from learning or trying something new. This room for them to think outside the box will help boost creativity and innovation at your organization.

 Bring in younger talent

 Baby boomers and Gen X children are almost out of today’s workforce. Millennials and Gen Z have now become the majority. It is important to consider that children of these generations grew up with the internet. Their familiarity with technology, social media, and internet trends makes them vital for your business. According to an article released by Linkedin, 62% of Gen Z employees are keen to learn and improve at their job. Moreover, 91% of L&D leaders agree that the skills necessary for today’s workforce have changed.

 For Gen Z workers, in particular, the potential for career advancement is the most attractive during the job hunt. Gen Z appears to prefer self-learning more than instructor-led development. Gift them with the learning tools necessary to move them up your company’s corporate ladder. Ensure these tools are entertaining so these young employees remain engaged, satisfied, and free from boredom.

 Make learning more interactive

 We cannot expect our employees to be supercomputers. They may have many questions or comments during the learning process. No matter how simple a question might be, they should never feel afraid to ask it. When you host training sessions for your employees, do not omit the interactive part. Allowing for information to flow between everyone will optimize learning and create an open, communicative atmosphere for growth.

 A successful learning culture will encourage employees to share opinions and ask questions. Allow employees to suggest courses to each other. Conduct discussions and feedback sessions to encourage the learners to address differences in opinions. It is impossible to know where your employees’ shortcomings lie without getting their input. Interactive learning lets employees request their desired courses so they get the most out of the training opportunities they have.

Introducing LMS in Zoho People

We are happy to announce the upcoming LMS module in Zoho People. It is designed to help build a learning culture in all organizations. Some of the highlights of the module include:

Support for both self and trainer-led learning

Interactive learning with feedback, notes, and discussions

Reports on your organization’s learning progress

We are still fine-tuning the module, but we are pleased to give you a 90-day free trial to the beta version. Our help guide can give you an in-depth clarity on how our LMS works. Check it out, and let us know your valuable feedback and suggestions!

from Zoho Blog https://ift.tt/34sqsrB via IFTTT

#IFTTT #Zoho Blog GPH #Geeksperhour

[juniperpublishersjojdc]

Beauty, A Social Construct: The Curious Case of Cosmetic Surgeries-Juniper Publishers Authored by Vandana Roy

Abstract

In this article we deconstruct the social norm of beauty and cosmetic beauty treatment, an issue that is seldom discussed in medical circles and is often lost to popular rhetoric. In doing so, we also reflect on the institutionalized system of social conditioning.

    A Historical Perspective

Cosmetic surgery, as with reconstructive surgery, has its roots in plastic surgery (emerging from the Greek word ‘plastikos’, meaning to mold or form). The practice of surgically enhancing or restoring parts of the body goes back more than 4000 years. The oldest accounts of rudimentary surgical procedures is found in Egypt in the third millennia BCE. Ancient Indian texts of 500 BCE outline procedures for amputation and reconstruction. The rise of the Greek city-states and spread of the Roman Empire is also believed to have led to increasingly sophisticated surgical practices. Throughout the early Middle Ages as well, the practice of facial reconstruction continued. The fifth century witnessed a rise of barbarian tribes and Christianity and the fall of Rome. This prevented further developments in surgical techniques. However, medicine benefited from scientific advancement during the Renaissance, resulting in a higher success rate for surgeries. Reconstructive surgery experienced another period of decline during the 17th century but was soon revived in the 18th century. Nineteenth century provided impetus to medical progress and a wider variety of complex procedures. This included the first recorded instances of aesthetic nose reconstruction and breast augmentation. Advancements continued in the 20th century and poured into present developments of the 21st century.

    Desires and Demands in Contemporary Times

In recent years, the volume of individuals seeking cosmetic procedures has increased tremendously. In 2015, 21 million surgical and nonsurgical cosmetic procedures were performed worldwide. In the United Kingdom specifically, there has been a 300% rise in cosmetic procedures since 2002. The year 2016 witnessed a surge in the number of such treatments with the United States crossing four million operations. Presently, the top five countries in which the most surgical and nonsurgical procedures are performed are the United States, Brazil, South Korea, India, and Mexico. Such demand can be viewed from different perspectives. At one end it is a product of scientific progress, growing awareness, economic capacities and easier access and on the other, something on the lines of a self-inflicted pathology. This article dwells on the latter and attempts to address a deep-rooted problem of the social mind.

    Lessons from History

History is witness to a number of unhealthy fashion trends, many of which today appear extremely irrational and even cruel. Interestingly, the common thread connecting all of them is the reinforcement of social norms and stereotypes. Forms of socialization which lie at the intersection of race, class and gender-based prejudices. To elaborate, hobble skirts and chopines restricted women’s movement and increased their dependence on others. Corsets deformed body structures, damaged organs and led to breathing problems. The Chinese practice of binding women’s feet to limit physical labor was regarded as a sign of wealthiness. Dyed crinolines and 17th century hairstyles made people vulnerable to poisoning and fire related injuries. Usage of makeup made of lead and arsenic, eating chalk and ‘blot letting’, reflected a blatantly racist obsession with white and pale skin. Lower classes faked gingivitis to ape tooth decays of the more privileged who had access to sugar. Furthermore, other practices like tooth lacquering, radium hair colors, mercury ridden hats, usage of belladonna to dilate pupils and even men wearing stiff high collars, all furthered societal expectations and notions of class superiority. Till the 1920’s, there was rampant usage of side lacers to compress women’s curves. Even today many ethnic tribes continue with practices which inflict bodily deformations. In the urban context as well, trends like high heels, skinny jeans and using excessive makeup dominate the fashion discourse. Cosmetic procedures are the latest addition to the kitty.

    The Social Dilemma

What is it that leads the ‘intelligent human’ of today to succumb to archaic and regressive notions of beauty? What motivates them to risk aspects of their lives to cater to selflimiting rules of ‘acceptance’? The surprising part is that this anomaly is often placed in the illusory realm of ‘informed consent’. In common parlance, ‘to consent’ implies voluntary agreement to another’s proposal. The word ‘voluntary’ implies ‘doing, giving, or acting of one’s own free will.’ However, when the entire socio-cultural set up and individual attitudes validate certain behaviors, there is very less space left for an alternate narrative. Let alone free will.

Pierre Bourdieu once argued that nearly all aspects of taste reflect social class. Since time immemorial, societal standards of beauty have provided stepping stones to social ascent and class mobility. Better ‘looking’ individuals are considered to be healthier, skillfully intellectual and economically accomplished in their lives. Such an understanding stems from well entrenched stereotypes in complete disregard of individual merit and fundamental freedoms. An inferiority complex coupled with external pressures and self imposed demands, subconsciously coerce individuals into a vicious cycle of desire or rejection. Active and aggressive media has played a key role in forming societal perceptions of what is attractive and desirable. In addition, lifestyle changes reflect an image obsessed culture, reeking of deep-rooted insecurities. At the root of a submissive and conformist attitude lies a subconscious mind lacking selfesteem and self-worth. People continue to look for remedies in the wrong places. The only difference is that corsets and blot letting have given way to surgeries and cosmetic products. The biggest question is, how have ideas otherwise seen as deviant, problematic and inadequate retained control over minds of millions of individuals?

    A Gendered Culture

‘Beauty’ is understood as a process of ongoing work and maintenance, its ‘need’ unfairly tilted towards the fairer sex. History has demonstrated the impact of dangerous beautification practices on women. Contemporary ideals aren’t far from reaching similar outcomes. Today, there is a powerful drive to conform to the pornographic ideal of what women should look like. There has been a growth in the number of adolescents who take to cosmetic surgeries to become more ‘perfect’. In many countries, the growth of the “mommy job” has provoked medical and cultural controversies. Presumably there is an underlying dissatisfaction which surgery does not solve. Furthermore, where does the disability dimension fit in here? What happens to the ‘abnormal’ when the new ‘normal’ itself is skewed? For those with dwarfism and related disorders, new norms become even more burdensome.

The massive pressure to live up to some ideal standard of beauty, particularly for women, reeks of patriarchal remnants of a male dominated society. This kind of conformity further nurtures objectification and sexualization, reducing women to the level of ‘chattel’ to feed the male gaze. There is a also a power struggle at play where biased standards help maintain the unequal status quo. Today, there is idolization of celebrities, beauty pageants and advertisements by cosmetic companies over sane medical advice. They set parameters of size, color and texture to be followed by the world at large. Moreover, people who deviate from such norms are made to feel stigmatized or ostracized from social spheres. The existence of male-supremacist, ageist, hetero sexist, racist, class-biased and to some extent, eugenicist standards reflect a failure of society as a whole. It is thus high time that we revisit and deconstruct skewed standards of beauty.

    Mind Over Matter: Psychological Dimensions

Culturally imposed ideals create immense pressure of conformity. Consequently, they have been successful in engendering insecurities via their influence on perception of self and body image. Such perceptions often become distorted and discordant with reality, leading to serious psychological disorders. One such disorder is the body dysmorphic disorder (BDD). This is a psychiatric disorder characterized by preoccupation with an imagined defect in physical appearance or a distorted perception of one’s body image. It also has aspects of obsessive-compulsiveness including repetitive behaviors and referential thinking. Such preoccupation with self-image may lead to clinically significant distress or impairment in social and occupational functioning. With reference to cosmetic surgeries, patients with BDD often possess unrealistic expectations about the aesthetic outcomes of these surgeries and expect them to be a solution to their low self-confidence. Many medical practitioners who perform cosmetic surgery believe themselves to be contributing towards construction of individual identity as well. The notion that beauty treatments can act in much the same way as psychoanalysis has led countries like Brazil to open its gate of cosmetic procedures to lower income groups. This happens while the country continues its battles with diseases like tuberculosis and dengue. The philosophy behind such ‘philanthropy’ is that ‘beauty is a right’ and thus should be accessible to all social groups. While on one hand we may applaud such efforts of creating a more ‘egalitarian’ social order, on the other hand it is hard to overlook the self-evident undercurrents of social prejudice and capitalistic propaganda.

    Medicalization of Beauty

Traditional notions of beauty embody a kind of hierarchy and repression which alienate individual agency and renders them as powerless victims. Such is the societal pressure which normalizes cosmetic procedures and subverts serious health effects. These include adverse effects due to cosmetic fillers like skin necrosis, ecchymosis, granuloma formation, irreversible blindness, anaphylaxis among others. Other dangers like heightened susceptibility to cancer and increased suicide rates. However, patients are often unaware of the risks which are hidden behind a veil of expectations and reassurances. Furthermore, quackery and inadequate standards such as lack of infection control also compound the problems of this under regulated field.

    Role of Stakeholders

At the heart of any successful social transformation lies the power of united will and collective action. Thus, the consolidated and sustained effort by all stakeholders is the key to realizing an ecosystem conducive to tackle negative social norms. At the outset, government regulation is needed with respect to cosmetic procedures and the cosmetics industry. These regulations should encompass all private and public avenues and should also work against misleading advertising. Spreading awareness is the key to a better informed society. The state should fund and run specialized awareness sessions pertaining to psychological problems and aid mechanisms, gender sensitization as well as those aiming at spiritual and introspective personal development of individuals. NGO’s, medical professionals, academicians and members of the civil society, must come together to eradicate forms of social discrimination which undermine social institutions and individual agency around the world. This would help facilitate discussion, data collection, coalition building, and action that may eventually lead to behavioral changes.

Aesthetic surgery today seems to be passing through an ethical dilemma and an identity crisis. And rightly so for it strives to profit from an ideology that serves only vanity, bereft of real values. Nevertheless, there are exceptional cases where medical-aesthetic inputs have been vital in restoring morale by subverting stigmatization.

    The Way Ahead

Beauty is unfair. The ‘attractive’ enjoy powers gained without merit. The perfectionist in humans seeks outward validation of external beauty over inner virtues. Scientific progress and an increase in human expertise to manipulate natural phenomena has paved the way for these desires to become a reality. There is no denying that advances in plastic and reconstructive surgery have revolutionized the treatment of patients suffering from disfiguring congenital abnormalities, burns and skin cancers. However, the increased demand for aesthetic surgery falls short of a collective psychopathology obsessed with appearance. This article expresses trepidation about such forms of social consciousness that first generates dissatisfaction and anxiety and then provides surgery as the solution to a cultural problem.

We have to work towards a social order which embraces people as they are and facilitates free choice, individual liberty and informed decision making. This is particularly pertinent when these decisions work towards framing cultural perceptions and expectations for millions around the world. We should open our hearts to diversification of beauty and aesthetic. Let our entertainment, fashion, capital and media revolve around heterogeneity of ideologies and cultures. In the words of Eleanor Roosevelt, “No one can make you feel inferior without your consent”. So, let us all come together and create a better society. 

For more Open Access Journals in Juniper Publishers please click on: https://juniperpublishers.com

For more details JOJ Dermatology & Cosmetics (JOJDC)  please click on: https://juniperpublishers.com/jojdc/classification.php

To read more…Full Text in Juniper Publishers click on https://juniperpublishers.com/jojdc/JOJDC.MS.ID.555556.php

#Juniper publishers #Juniper publishers online #Nanotubes #Nanotechnology #Medicine