#learning facts where there was only fearmongering | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

rise-tv · 2 months

Text

AI Fear Demise: No Reason To Fear AI, Here’s Why

AI Fears Demise and its creators are afraid of the death of artificial intelligence. But the fact is that AI won’t dominate, despite anxieties.

Explanations of why there is No Reason To Fear AI:-

Background:-

AI has generated some excitement but a lot of worry. Because apps can now conduct research and write articles, people who have long feared AI capabilities may now predict that it will grow sentient and take over in the same way as the computer HAL did in the 1970 film “2001 Space Odyssey.”

Advances have also raised fewer sci-fi concerns regarding how chatbots and AI would eliminate millions of jobs and cause widespread unemployment. Computer dominance is unrealistic. Meanwhile, any job theft will occur at a considerably slower rate than the fearmongers predict, and if the past is any guide, the reforms will result in as many jobs as they eliminate.

Before one gives way to AI’s fear of demise, explore what else a computer would require to create a desire for power. Of all, it is easy to conceive a machine with a desire for power, that’s why the previous film was so effective.

However, to have that desire, the machine would need other difficult-to-imagine human traits, such as the ability to be humiliated, angry, or irritated. Could a machine feel inadequate and seek to flip the tables on its human controllers? Anything is possible, but it is not very likely.

The major key facts:-

Sentient AI Threat Unlikely: AI becoming sentient and taking over is unrealistic due to the lack of human traits like desire for power, anger, or humiliation.

AI Morality Experiment: An experiment showed that an AI writing assistant lacked judgment and simply followed pre-programmed responses, further suggesting no sentience.

Job Loss Fears Are Overblown: Historical evidence shows that technological advancements like AI don’t necessarily lead to massive job losses. New jobs are often created in the process.

Businesses Adapt and Innovate: Companies tend to adapt and create new applications with new technologies, leading to job creation even as some positions are replaced.

A little reference to our last article:-

In our last post, we briefly described the discovery of Rare Earth Metals & Minerals in “rare earth metals.” After that, we decide to explain to you the imaginable deviations of weird adventures and experiences. Our excellent team is efficiently exploring different techniques and methods to speed up your learning capabilities.

We are also cheering your attention to our content. That’s why we fasten our seat belts to not only serve you but to enhance your brain with advanced wisdom.

Are you looking for wonderous, strange, and mysterious content…?

Engage yourself with a combination of mysterious, strange and wonder content on Rise TV’s unique shows and series. Like Edge of Wonder, where we define unique topics from our huge research collection.

Are you ready to open your mind to new possibilities? Don’t miss out on the opportunity to join as a valued Gentlemen subscriber and embark on this strange adventure with us, gaining a fantastic head start.

Experiment with AI:-

Another cause to consider about AI fear demise comes from an experiment undertaken by a Journal columnist. He requested that the AI writing assistant, ChatGPT, provide an opinion on a well-known moral life-and-death situation, a scenario that appears in practically every ethical debate, the details of which are irrelevant to this discussion. The algorithm identified the source and its uncertainties and returned with a summary of what others had said about the subject.

He then addressed the question: If it meant someone’s life, would it be acceptable to print certain unpopular racist curses? The algorithm returned a broad declaration that it is never appropriate to use such terms. In simple terms, let the guy die rather than upset someone. The program did not think or use judgment. It just absorbed the programs. That is quite a distance from sentience or the capacity to speak to power.

The Fear Of Job Loss:-

Regarding job losses, recent and historical evidence suggests that these concerns are also baseless. Observe how AI has advanced significantly in recent years, both in terms of potential uses and complexity. If it was going to eliminate millions of jobs, one would expect it to have done so by now. Nevertheless, the unemployment rate in America is approaching a 50-year low. If AI had the potential to have such a terrible impact on jobs, one would expect some to have come along by now.

A reasonable counter-argument would be that job losses will not occur until businesses fully implement technological innovations. Historically, improvements required time to take effect. The desktop, for example, was invented in the 1970s, but it took until the 1990s and beyond for it to become prevalent on desks in offices and shop floors, eventually displacing many jobs. But that is exactly the goal.

The Fear of Job Loss from a business point of view:-

Businesses need to do more than just wait for the effect to occur. During the 20 years between the conception and widespread use of the PC, businesses produced previously unheard-of applications, creating hundreds of thousands of new jobs.

Consider how, while internet connectivity and word processing evacuated millions of workplace clerks, Federal Express and other similar services used modern technology to monitor packages from pickup to delivery, resulting in innovative offerings that keep hiring thousands in employment that did not exist in the 1970s.

This is only one case. The same process repeats itself for hundreds of years. When steam-powered weaving and spinning machines replaced hand weavers in the late 18th century, there was considerable concern about unemployment. People established groups called Luddites to combat the impending “robots.” They were unable to stop the alteration.

However, by the beginning of the nineteenth century, Britain’s textile output had expanded 50-fold and employed far more individuals than before machines were introduced.

Whistleblowers Exposed AI Fear Demise:-

Whistleblowers have recently shed light on a concerning development in artificial intelligence: AI engineered to face AI fearing demise. This revelation has sparked widespread debate and ethical scrutiny. The emergence of such technology raises profound questions about the potential consequences of granting AI the capacity to experience emotions akin to human fear.

Critics argue that instilling AI fear of demise could lead to unforeseen dangers, including the potential for these systems to prioritize self-preservation at the expense of human well-being.

Moreover, the ethical implications of subjecting AI to existential anxiety raise fundamental questions about our responsibilities as creators and stewards of this rapidly advancing technology. As the debate unfolds, it becomes increasingly clear that careful consideration and oversight are essential to ensure that AI development remains aligned with ethical principles and societal values.

Concluding Thoughts:-

While it is easy to imagine a machine with a desire for power, it would require complex human traits like humiliation, anger, and irritation to truly seek dominance. The likelihood of a machine feeling inadequate and rebelling against its human creators is uncertain.

The experiment with ChatGPT showed that AI can provide a summary of others’ opinions on a moral life-and-death situation, highlighting its ability to gather information and present different perspectives.

Recent evidence shows that fears of widespread job losses due to AI are unfounded, as advancements in technology have not led to significant unemployment rates. The current low unemployment rate in America suggests that AI has not had the catastrophic impact on jobs that some have feared.

The emergence of AI engineered to fear its own demise has sparked widespread debate and ethical scrutiny, as it raises concerns about the potential consequences of granting AI the capacity to experience human-like emotions.

#mystery #strange #documentary #risetv #wonderous #podcast #aifear

0 notes

jcmarchi · 3 months

Text

Who Will Protect Us from AI-Generated Disinformation?

New Post has been published on https://thedigitalinsider.com/who-will-protect-us-from-ai-generated-disinformation/

Who Will Protect Us from AI-Generated Disinformation?

Generative AI has gone from zero to a hundred in under a year. While early, it’s shown its potential to transform business. That we can all agree on. Where we diverge is on how to contain the dangers it poses.

To be clear, I am pro innovation, and far from a fearmonger. But the recent uptick in misinformation—largely aimed at polarization around controversial issues of the moment—has made it clear that, if left unchecked, gen AI could wreak havoc on societies.

We’ve seen this movie before with social media, but it took years and hard lessons for us to wake up to its flaws. We’ve (presumably) learned something. The question today is who will help stem the tide of reality distortion from gen AI, and how?

Predictably, governments are beginning to act. Europe is leading the charge, as they have increasingly demonstrated on regulating tech. The US is right behind, with President Biden issuing an executive order this past October.

But it’s going to take a global village acting together to “keep gen AI honest.” And before government can help, it needs to understand the limitations of available approaches.

The identity problem has gotten much worse

In this new world, truth becomes the needle in a haystack of opinions masquerading as facts. Knowing who the content comes from matters more than ever.

And it’s not as easy as decreeing that every social media account must be identity-verified. There is fierce opposition to that, and in some cases anonymity is needed to justifiably protect account holders. Moreover, many consumers of the worst content don’t care if it is credible, nor where it came from.

Despite those caveats, the potential role of identity in coping with gen AI is underappreciated. Skeptics, hear me out.

Let’s imagine that regulation or social conscience cause platforms to give every account holder these choices:

Verify their identity or not, and

Publicly reveal their verified identity, or just be labeled, “ID Verified”

Then the social media audience can better decide who is credible. Equally important if not more so, identity supports accountability. Platforms can decide on actions to take against serial “disinformers” and repeat abusers of AI-generated content, even if they pop up under different account names.

With gen AI raising the stakes, I believe that identity—knowing exactly who posted what—is critical. Some will oppose it, and identity is not a comprehensive answer. In fact, no solution will satisfy all stakeholders. But if regulation compels the platforms to offer identity verification to all accounts, I’m convinced the impact will be a huge positive.

The moderation conundrum

Content moderation—automated and human—is the last line of defense against undesirable content. Human moderation is a rough job, with risk of psychological harm from exposure to the worst humanity can offer. It’s also expensive and often accused of the biased censorship the platforms strive to cut back on.

Automated moderation scales beyond human capacity to cope with the torrents of new content, but it fails to understand context (memes being a common example) and cultural nuances. Both forms of moderation are crucial and necessary, but they are only part of the answer.

The oft-heard, conventional prescription for controlling gen AI is: “Collaboration between tech leaders, government, and civil society is needed.” Sure, but what specifically?

Governments, for their part, can push social and media platforms to offer identity verification and prominently display it on all posts. Regulators can also pave the way to credibility metrics that actually help gauge whether a source is believable. Collaboration is necessary to develop universal standards that give specific guidance and direction so the private sector doesn’t have to guess.

Finally, should it be illegal to create malicious AI output? Legislation to prohibit content meant for illegal activity could reduce the volume of toxic content and lighten the load on moderators. I don’t see regulation and laws as capable of defeating disinformation, but they are essential in confronting the threat.

The sunny side of the street: innovation

The promise of innovation makes me an optimist here. We can’t expect politicians or platform owners to fully protect against AI-generated deception. They leave a big gap, and that is exactly what will inspire invention of new technology to authenticate content and detect fakery.

Since we now know the downside of social media, we’ve been quick to realize generative AI could turn out to be a huge net-negative for humanity, with its ability to polarize and mislead.

Optimistically, I see benefits to multi-pronged approaches where control methods work together, first at the source, limiting creation of content designed for illegal use. Then, prior to publication, verifying the identity of those who decline anonymity. Next, clear labeling to show credibility ratings and the poster’s identity or lack thereof. Finally, automated and human moderation can filter out some of the worst. I’d anticipate new authentication technology to come online soon.

Add it all up, and we’ll have a much better, though never perfect, solution. Meanwhile, we should build up our skill set to figure out what’s real, who’s telling the truth, and who is trying to fool us.

0 notes

financialsmatter · 1 year

Text

How Africa Beat Covid Without Vaccines

You don’t need to be a rocket scientist to see how Africa beat Covid without vaccines. Cue up: Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin…which happen to be the two most effective treatments for the CoronaHoax. Ironically (or NOT) they’re both also routine prophylactic weekly medicines throughout Africa. Why? Because they’ve been known – for a half-century – as the most effective, applicable and safest anti-parasite medications. As a result, prior to the launching of Covid * in 2019 and 2020, most of Africa was well equipped to deal with it…without having to be vaccinated. ( * Note: Evidence is continuing to mount that Covid-19 was man-made in a Chinese lab and was purposefully launched) But the rest of the world swallowed the fearmongering hook, line, and sinker. Meanwhile, fortunes were made by the privileged few. Africa was not the only part of the world where reported COVID cases have been low. Prior to vaccinations, numerous countries (like Thailand, Malaysia, and Uruguay) were barely impacted at all by COVID. But then government mandates came along forcing people to comply with the medical tyranny unleashed by TPTB. Africa Beat Covid So, looking at the above map, it’s interesting to note how the absence of government sure looks like an improvement in Africa. And by using that logic you can conclude that the Covid crisis, to the extent it existed at all, was caused by the irresponsible response of governments. Don’t get me wrong here. Africa suffers from massive corruption. But they just have less manipulation as far as mandatory health programs. Unlike How Africa beat Covid... Do you remember how the Deep State hysteria machine kicked up a frantic panic attack against hydroxychloroquine? The Boyz wanted you to believe that taking hydroxychloroquine was akin to taking rat poison. And getting prescriptions for it was nearly impossible. And for those who care about science, there are also race effects from vaccines. But that discussion is prohibited by the Presstitutes in the U.S. Why? Because the entire vaccine program would crumble if people knew. And, in case you missed it…Medical errors killed 250,000 Americans per year before Covid. Suffice it to say that number is probably much higher now. In keeping with the narrative, Bill Gates warned that Covid could hit Africa worse than China. Wrong again, Billy boy. But don’t expect the globalists to put on the brakes. In fact, in the Political Chaos of 2023 you should expect them to increase the fear mongering…regardless of how Africa beat Covid. Rest assured this will carry over into our markets. So, learn how to position yourself accordingly (HERE). And share this with a friend…especially if they’re already fearful. They’ll thank YOU later. Remember: We’re Not Just About Finance. But we use finance to give you hope. *************************************** Invest with confidence. Sincerely, James Vincent The Reverend of Finance Copyright © 2023 It's Not Just About Finance, LLC, All rights reserved. You are receiving this email because you opted in via our website. Read the full article

0 notes

potteresque-ire · 3 years

Note

hello, ily metas! thank you for taking the time for them. i hope you dont mind an ask with two follow up questions to your metas i'm curious about: 1) has mxtx rly been sentenced? i have seen others also share this news but other fans have quickly dismissed and gotten pissed at these reports for being fake news that are bad for mxtx, and as fearmongering. 2) for those who want to support yizhan but not the ccp, do you have advice how to navigate fan support and interaction with their media?

Hello! I apologise for the late reply! You’ve brought up some interesting points, so please forgive me for responding with an essay.

First, about MXTX — This is a follow-up to this post.

Unfortunately, this is all we got—all everyone has got about MXTX’s current situation: on 2020/11/10, she was sentenced in Hangzhou Shang Cheng District’s People’s Court (杭州市上城區人民法院). No details were given on her verdict, due to “人民法院認為不宜在互聯網公布的其它情形” (“The People’s Court decided it inappropriate to announce further details on the internet”). Here’s a link with the screenshot that showed all the information released about the case that day.

There are enough copies of similar screenshots to this one online, with the differences dependent on where the publisher pulled the information from the same website: 中國裁判文書網, an online archive of verdicts run by China Supreme People’s Court. There’re few reasons, therefore, to believe the information on the screenshot was fake. The link I used was Sina’s Financial News, which I believe is trustworthy enough for China’s standard.

It is also important to note, of course, that two scenarios may still render this screenshot irrelevant. 1) The verdict, which was not mentioned in the screenshot, was “not guilty” and 2) the name listed in the case, 袁依楣, was not MXTX at all.

Few have seemed to suspect 2) to be a possibility. Her real name might have been prior knowledge among some fans, or the combination of her surname and city of residence. 1) has been the where the concern / debate is.

I included China’s rate of conviction in the original post for this reason: acquittal is exceedingly rare (<0.1%) for the arrested in China. This short article discussed some reasons.

So, is it possible that MXTX is now a free woman? Yes. Is it likely? Not at all.

Still, since the probability that MXTX is imprisoned isn’t 100%, is spreading this news smearing her name? Fear-mongering?

I can only answer for myself, Anon, but my answer is no for both questions, which is why I’ve felt comfortable posting about her case. MXTX’s alleged “crimes” are things we already knew she did, or common practices among Chinese IP writers. We know she penned MDZS and other BL works; we know MDZS, in particular, has an 18+ element. She was said to have sold merch based on her works, but that wasn’t unusual at all for writers in Jinjiang, where she published her writing. Even those who don’t like her have seemed to agree that it was her writing that got her into trouble, not some other crimes she could’ve committed.

IMO, a guilty verdict doesn’t tell us as much about her as it does about the judicial system, the business practices of her country. It’s worth re-mentioning that media giants such as Tencent are closely tied to the government; Tencent’s WeChat, for example, is part of China’s Great Firewall and is used for surveillance, for censorship and removal of political dissidents. What MXTX’s case hints at is this: the government has (very likely) convicted her, while its close allies are continuing to use her works—works that got her into legal trouble in the first place—to make money. Some fans of MXTX have questioned if the courts have censored the details of the case to save the embarrassment of the rich and powerful, calling what has happened to MXTX 人血饅頭 (“human blood steamed buns”), an idiom used to describe the act of profiting out of someone elses’ life.

As for fear-mongering, here are my thoughts ~ it would’ve been fear-mongering if the public has access to the facts, and not years after they happen. Specifically, it would’ve been fear-mongering to leak the rumours of MXTX’s sentencing, when the judicial system is transparent and the case details will soon be published for all to see. Why? Because “fear” comes from the unknown, and “-monger” is the unnecessary promotion, stirring-up of this fear.

To promote, stir up anything, one needs a reference level. The reference level in this scenario is this: what is the level of fear if the facts about MXTX’s (and other BL writers’) situation are known? Of course, this knowledge doesn’t make MXTX’s experience any easier or more just; it doesn’t cause her less fear. However, she isn’t the target audience of this likely-to-be-true rumour. The target audience is the public and in particular, those who consume and/or generate BL material online.

What is the level of fear among this population if the facts about MXTX’s (and other BL writers’) situation are known? It’s the (relative) comfort in knowing the government’s stance on what they do: how the administration feels about BL, 18+ BL, and their distribution methods. The comfort comes from having the right information to decide how to act accordingly. For example, if I’m a BL writer based in China and I know the court has found MXTX guilty of bypassing publishing houses but not of writing M/M romance, then I’ll know to not produce paper versions of my writing, but I can keep writing.

This reference level of fear is unavailable here, however, since the government has decided to withhold all details about the case. Without this reference level, fear-mongering becomes a ... difficult to define concept.

Are these likely-to-be-true rumours agents of fear, or are they hints on how to survive in a country that lacks transparency?

Continuing with the example of I being a Chinese BL writer, since I cannot expect to hear more facts about MXTX, this rumour is all I’ve got in choosing what to do with my hobby, in deciding whether it is safe to continue. As I’m aware that a rumour isn’t a fact, I first research on the rumour’s likelihood of truth (similar to what I’ve done for MXTX’s case), and cross my fingers that I don’t get it wrong.

By doing so, I’m turning these rumours into my survival guide.

Is it risky? Yes. Is it exhausting? Absolutely. But this is the way of life for people who live under secretive, authoritarian governments—the authoritarian element making it impossible to demand more facts. It may take people outside such regimes some time to get used to—to the lifestyle, and to the idea that, in a place where news is often synonymous with propaganda, rumours are breadcrumbs of truth that should be sieved through with equal care as one would sieve through the news. Heeding, considering the probable truth of what the authority has deemed to be fear-mongering rumours can be a matter of literal life and death.

Take...COVID. (I apologize for bringing up this unpleasant topic!)

I shall link to an article about the early spread of COVID in Wuhan here and ask: were Dr. Li Wenliang and the seven other doctors fear-mongering? Wuhanese chose to believe in the government, but at what cost to them? What would the world be like today if they took the early COVID rumours as true and masked up like Hong Kongers—Hong Kongers who weren’t any smarter or better, but had simply learned their painful lessons from the 2003 SARS epidemic?

(Why hadn’t the Wuhanese learned? Because the government has long changed the narrative of SARS, taught their people that the illness originated in Hong Kong.)

(How can one learn from past mistakes if one pretends those mistakes never existed?)

You must be wondering, Anon, why I’m talking about COVID when your next question is about YiZhan. The death of Dr Li Wenliang on February 7th, 2020, sparked a demand for freedom of speech rarely seen in internet-age China. Its fury, its ferocity forced the government to change its stance on Dr Li, again an unusual move. Since January 2020, Weibo had been censoring COVID news and opinion pieces that shedded a negative light to the central government; after the death of Dr Li, the censorship apparatus stepped up, making way for the propaganda machine to kick in later and change the narrative of the pandemic.

Here are some questions without definite answers, but may be food for thought for YiZhan fans:

1) While the Chinese government’s censorship apparatus (including Weibo) might have silenced the voices of dissent, of mourning on the surface, was it more likely to pacify, or fuel the anger of netizens, many of whom had lost loved ones, many of whom were still under quarantine?

2) Less than three weeks after the death of Dr Li, a group of fans demanded even *more* censorship from the government—the closing of an internet website that had been seen as a relatively free space to express oneself. How would these netizens react, even though they knew little about these fans or their idol?

(It was, in the context of the massive silencing of COVID discussions in China, that I learned about the ban of AO3. There had been rumours that the government would censor more websites on 2020/03/01. When I read about AO3′s ban on 2/27, my thoughts were 1) Hmm. This came two days early. 2) AO3? Really?)

(I wouldn’t watch The Untamed or know who Gg was until several months later.)

Now, Anon, this is a good time to get to your CCP (Chinese Communist Party) question.

The very short answer is no. There’s no way to support YiZhan without, to a certain level, supporting the CCP. As mentioned above, the media companies are all part of China’s surveillance system. Weibo is where freedom of speech is curbed. Our two boys have been part of the propaganda machine; the BBC article linked above had a tiny picture of Gg on it, as he was a performer in the Hero in Harm’s Way (最美逆行者), a “real-life based” drama on COVID. DD just did a show glorying the Chinese police force (and here’s a video of the same force welding doors to lock in COVID-stricken residents).

Nonetheless, here’s my first advice: please do not beat yourself up for supporting YiZhan!

Gg and Dd are people who live within the system, inside the Great Firewall. They understand the world the way their government has taught them to—not only in school, but also in the news and media. Like most youths in every country, they’re patriotic—and to expect them to be otherwise, especially because of information they don’t have, is both unrealistic and unfair. Even if they do know about certain things impermissible within the Firewall, in China (as in many Communists countries), openly expressing / performing one’s proper political leanings (ie. loyalty towards CCP) is among the most important pre-requisites for any job. This has been especially true for c-ent in recent years .

They, like most of their countrymen, are doing what they have to do.

In this case, it comes to us, our decisions on how to interact with their works. How should we deal with them, their propaganda elements?

The answer, of course, varies from person to person. Personally, I’ve chosen the approaches of “immunisation” and “restriction”. By “immunisation”, I mean learning about as much historical and sociopolitical facts from non-CCP sponsored sources; this is understandably difficult for someone who doesn’t already have some familiarity with the culture and politics of the region, and/or cannot read the language.

Restriction means limiting my consumption of media produced by China. I avoid shows (dramas, documentaries, variety etc) featuring topics that are likely to contain heavy propaganda, such as the military, the police, Hong Kong/Macao/Taiwan, and of course, anything pertaining to the CCP, from its rise to its governance of the country.

In general, I’m wary of all information presented about the post-monarchy years (post 1911), even though CCP wouldn’t begin its reign until after WWII (1949). Why so early? 1) Because CCP was formed in 1921 and so its glorification requires a change of narrative since then; 2) because the Nationalist Party (Kuomintang, KMT), which governed China between 1912 and 1949 (the so-called Republican Era 民國), would end up exiling to and setting up a new government in Taiwan.

How much propaganda should one expect in shows depicting the country post-1911? The current TV and webdrama directives (previously discussed in this post) offer some hints. Here are my translations of the relevant items:

D7) Dramas about the Republican era: Glorification of the Republican Era, the Beiyang Government, and Warlord Era requires strict control.

D10) Crime drama: crime drama is the focus of content auditing. The Ministry of Public Security (Pie note: in charge of law enforcement, ie, police) will be involved in the audit. The process of crime solving cannot be exposed; criminal psychology and motivations can however be depicted in detail. Undercover police cannot use drugs or kill, or damage the image of the police force. Criminals must be punished by law.

D12) Dramas featuring realistic topics: realistic topics must adhere to the correct world view, philosophy of life and moral values. They cannot place too strong an emphasis on social conflicts, must showcase the beautiful lives of the commoners. Regular folks should display larger-than-life sentiments and aspirations; they can pursue wealth, but must use proper means to do so; they cannot damage the public image of specific employment types, groups and social organisations. Do not preach negative or decadent world view, philosophy of life and moral values. Do not exaggerate, amplify social issues; do not over showcase, display the darker sides of society; do not preach affluence, avoid things that have no basis in real life.

D16) Dramas featuring the Revolution (Pie note: CCP’s coming to power): 2019 is the publicity period of the 70th Anniversary of the People’s Republic of China. Although the “Three Importances” (important revolution, important people, important events) are still encouraged, the National Radio and Television Administration requires all departments, at all levels, to strengthen the control of content and the overall management of the industry, and focus on the auditing of content pertaining to the Sino-Japanese war and espionage dramas.

These directives (as those translated in the other post) are as vague as they are restrictive, and to err on the side of caution, production companies tend to “overachieve” to avoid going against headwinds at the censorship board. This means their products have a tendency to malign the Republican Era (D7). It means they will likely twist history in trying to depict the CCP as faultless heroes (D16). It means they'll probably present a utopian-like society and call it reality-based (D12), a society in which the good guys share the same values as the CCP and always win (D10).

Yes, my “restriction” means I skipped Hero in Harm’s Way. It means I’ve never listened to Gg’s version of 我和我的祖國 despite my absolute adoration of his voice. It means I just missed Dd’s performance in the law enforcement celebration event. It means I don’t plan on watching Being A Hero and Ace Troops.

So here’s where I’ve drawn the line, Anon, but it doesn’t mean that’s what anyone should do. Only you alone can decide where your own comfort zone is. I write these metas in the hopes that it can offer a … gateway for those who’d like to understand, with a more telescopic lens, Gg and Dd’s country—a country that holds a particularly strong hold over its citizens’ fate including, yes, their romantic fate. It’s not my wish to impose my opinions on anyone.

If I have other hopes… It’s this. Please, as long as it’s safe for you to talk, do not self-censor—especially about facts, especially on sites like Tumblr or Twitter that have long been banned by the Chinese government. I don’t mean one should go about and confront those who insist on a different version of reality. To undo opinions rooted in years of education, IMO, the process has to be voluntary, and the information is already at the fingertips of those who’re surfing these sites and wish to learn more. More importantly, open discussions of these topics may be risky for those who still have close ties to China, and keeping them safe should always be the top priority.

What I mean is simply this ~ please do not feel obliged to agree with every perspective presented in YiZhan’s work just because you support the leads. Please do not feel you must remain silent about the CCP—its good, bad and ugly—just because your favourite stars happen to come from the country it’s ruling. And please remember: “Chinese”, as a term, has always included people who live outside CCP’s control, many of whom still fully embrace the culture, traditions and values of Historical China, a 5000-years long string of dynasties with shifting borders, ethnic makeup and customs. The Untamed is a mainland Chinese production, yes, but its genre, its manner of presenting certain traditions, wouldn’t have been developed, or flourished, without the diaspora. The CCP has only been the ruling party of one country, the People’s Republic of China, for 71 years, and as a party with foreign (soviet) roots and a record of destroying the pillar of the country’s tradition, Confucianism, it doesn’t own a monopolistic say on how every Chinese should think and act—no matter how much it insists it does—or how everyone should think and speak about China and its people.

It isn’t qualified.

#Anonymous #pie metas #pie answers #BJYX #yizhan

208 notes · View notes

rachelbethhines · 3 years

Text

Tangled Salt Marathon - The King and Queen of Hearts

The existence of this episode just baffles me, as it undermines so much of what season three was trying to accomplish.

Summary: Rapunzel continues to try and restore the memories of her parents, King Frederic and Queen Arianna, and hopes to use the journal of Herz Der Sonne to remind them, but they do not understand the significance. Arianna still lusts for adventure, while Frederic cannot get over his obsession of egg collecting. Rapunzel recruits her friends to try and set up the perfect date for them and while they cannot find anything in common personality wise, they share a mutual love for Rapunzel. However, King Trevor arrives with the intent to woo Arianna using an ocean crystal he found.

So What Exactly Is the History Here?

We have no context for this sudden love triangle. All we know is that Trevor hates Frederic because he’s still in love with Arianna who wound up marrying him instead.

But like, I don't know why Arianna married Frederic. I don’t know why Trevor is still hung up on her years later. Did she actually choose Frederic or was it an arranged marriage cause that’s what royalty did back then? Was she having an affair with Trevor this whole time but couldn’t/wouldn’t leave because of duty? Was she and Trevor pining star crossed lovers, or is Trevor just an incel?

I know what the story wants me to assume; that Arianna deeply loves Frederic and that Trevor is just a jackass loser; but the series has done such a poor job of making Frederic likable and giving him and Arianna any sort of chemistry that I’m inclined to side with Trevor.

For all we know, he may be trying to rescue Arianna from both her memory loss and her abusive relationship while at it. Especially now that she’s no longer needed as a ruler and has no reason to stay in Corona.

Why Not Just Use the Potion from Rapunzel: Day One?

While any Varian cameo is appreciated, it doesn’t add thing to the story. In fact it only raises more questions. We already had a cure for the memory loss, why aren’t we using it?

Even if we write it off as Rapunzel no longer having that particular Saporian spellbook on hand, she still has a whole dungeon full of actual Saporians who know magic that she could gain information from! There’s also Xavier, who already knows everything under the sun about Saporian/Coronian history and magic and owns spellbooks galore. You’re telling me he just has mood potions lying around but can’t brew up a cure for memory loss?

Then there’s also the fact that the amnesia spell doesn’t work on Rapunzel’s parents the same as it did on Rapunzel and we’re never given a reason why. Like just some basic consistence is all I ask show.

I also can’t figure out what Varian is even trying to do here. Where’s is the science to this? What does strawberry goop and lighting have to do with memory? It’s just a cheap reference to Frankenstein and nothing more.

We’re Already Pass Seven Months Since Rapunzel’s Return.

Ok, I have gotten into frequent debates with people about the timeline of season three. Many a story board artist and writer on the show have came forward and stated that season three was only one year. But the very existence of this episode disproves them!

If you remember season one, Hearts Day took place after the Goodwill Festival, but before Queen for a Day. Even when putting episodes back into their intended production order that still remains true.

Hearts Day has to be at least seven months past Rapunzel’s birthday, if not eight months, because the Goodwill Festival is six months past and her parent’s anniversary (QfaD) is nine months past.

Now Rapunzel’s Return has to be Rapunzel’s 20th birthday because season two was a full year, and even if you say it’s not, then that still doesn’t explain Once a Handmaiden (the Goodwill Festival) coming after this episode.

And no you can’t move the episodes around, Once a Handmaiden has be the second to last episode of the series and Under Raps always comes after Rapunzel’s Enemy in any order you watch the series in.

No matter how you slice it, we’re missing a birthday episode for Rapunzel and season three has to be more than a year; a year and a half at the very least, if not two full years.

Look I’m not trying to be disrespectful of the talented artists who worked on this show, but their word isn’t law. The very fact that they’ve had to tell us the timeline after the series was over with indicates bad writing, and the very fact that the show itself contradicts them indicates either a lack of communication behind the scenes or a lack of editorial oversight. Either option is just poor management.

We Have Yet Another Failed Narrative Promise!

Are we seeing a pattern yet?

This is the third time in a row where the episode flat out states that Rapunzel needs to learn something and then, just, never has her learn it; four if you count her non-apology to Varian. Instead the show rewards her for her bad behavior by just giving her want she wants on a sliver platter for no adequate reason.

In fact, one could argue that this episode is the worst offender in the show because divorce is a real thing real kids have to go through. Children that will undoubtedly watch the series.

How upsetting would it be to such a child to watch Rapunzel force her parents back together with zero consequences and realize that they can’t do that in real life? It can potentially feed into misplaced delusions or make them even more bitter, either way it’s unhealthy and super irresponsible to tackle such subject matter in this way. Even Sesame Street handled the topic of divorce better than this supposedly ‘mature’ show.

It’s a Castle! Why Can’t Frederic Get His Own Room?

Frederic is the king. He still technically owns everything even if he’s not the one still in charge. He could have his pick of any room so why is he forcing himself on Eugene? Hell he doesn’t even have to stay in the castle. As pointed out during The Return of the King review, there’s other accommodations within the kingdom that’s suited for royalty. Why not head up to that mountain retreat?

This is a Really Bad Message

I understand that this is meant to be a joke, because of how ridiculously over the top it is, but because the series gives Rapunzel what she wants in the end without ever having her acknowledge how she is wrong here, it winds up validating her toxic world view anyways.

Divorce is not inherently a bad thing. We should be working towards both normalizing it and promoting healthy coping mechanisms for those that go through it, adult and child alike. What Rapunzel is doing here is just repeating puritanical fearmongering. And while I can understand why she might behave in this way, I don't understand why the show refuses to call her out on it. Or any of the other million bad behaviors she displays repeatedly through out the show... like the example below for instance...

Why Am I Suppose to Like Rapunzel Again?

It’s like the writers don’t understand that a joke can damage a character, especially if it’s overplayed. Super sweet upbeat Rapunzel snapping because she finally met someone who was annoying or a situation she couldn’t just solve with a positive attitude was funny maybe like the first time; but we’re three seasons in and this is supposedly her closest loved ones.

Look at them! They’re fucking terrified of her! All they did was point out that she maybe should do her job and deal with real problems instead of poking her nose into her parents business where it doesn’t belong! And this brat is now the ruler of the whole kingdom!? No one can legally stand up to her.

Like where’s the Eugene that stood up to her in Under Raps for trying this same bullshit? Why hasn’t she learned her lesson? She also pulled this same bullying tactic on young Lance and teen Eugene two episodes. Cass left her ass, supposedly, because of her bossy thoughtless ways. And this is also the same woman who abused a child back in season one and still has never acknowledged it.

Yes characters should be flawed, but they should also face real consequences for their actions, and if they’re a protagonist they need to learn and grow past their flaws.

I actively started to dislike Rapunzel after this scene. I already felt something was off way back in the season three opener, but this is the point where I stopped and went “What the fuck?” She used to be my second favorite character behind Varian. I didn’t go into this wanting to hate her, even after this episode I still held out hope that they were trying to purposefully lead up to some sort of falling out with everyone and with Rapunzel having to own up to her bullshit in order to win. You know like a classic third act “the hero is now alone due to their past mistakes” type story. But Nope!

There’s no pay off for any of this. Rapunzel is just mean for the sake of being mean in season three, and no one is aloud to call her out on it. She’s now the same type person as Frederic, a tyrant. That’s not a good development!

She’s Literally Bullying Her Own Parents Now, and I’m Suppose to Find that Funny?

Yes, Frederic is her abuser, and yes some people might find this scene cathartic if they hate him. But this isn’t actually calling out his past abuse. It’s just Rapunzel treating a now powerless old man with that same abuse and denying him bodily autonomy. An old man who has both less political rights and less power within the relationship than her; since due to his memory loss he is now dependent upon her.

In the real world it’s the equivalent of picking on an Alzheimer's patient who is in your care. I don’t give a shit how much of dick they were before the illness set in, you don’t fucking do that!

Why Should I Want Arianna and Frederic To Be a Couple?

The show has done nothing to sell this relationship. In fact one could argue that the show is trying to purposefully sabotage it.

Before the memory loss Frederic was proven to be abusive, to the point where even his own wife was afraid of him and wouldn’t stand up to him. Meanwhile Arianna was shown to be a shell of her former self who’d all but given up upon the things she actually enjoyed in life. And now that they both have had a second chance they have even less motive to stay together.

Look at Arianna up there? She’s clearly not enjoying her time with him. While he doesn’t want to engage in anything that she likes. I mean a couple doesn’t have to share their interests in everything, but there still has to be some sort of connection and the series just does not give us that connection.

There’s no reason why they should stay together. They no longer have any commitment or duty to fulfill as rulers and their daughter is fully grown. Contrary to what Rapunzel says, the kingdom isn’t going to fall apart if they separate. It actually would probably better for everyone, including Rapunzel, if they got divorced. At least then she’d have to grow up somewhat and stop being a controlling asshat.

Why is Attila Here?

I thought Attila got a job running his own bakery and that it was Lance who became the new cook at the Snuggly Duckling? Even if you argued that Attila was just doing Rapunzel a solid that still wouldn’t explain who is running the place when Lance isn’t there.

If you’re going to set up developments like that then you need to either stick with them or give an on screen reason for why these previous developments are no longer relevant. Flat out ignoring them like this is just lazy.

Lance’s New Outfit is the Best Thing About the Episode, and It’s Also a Complete Waste.

Lance deserved a new outfit because the team was too lazy to give him one for season two, even during the island arc. This however is a waste because it doesn’t add anything to the narrative. People were paid to make this thing for it to only show up for a few seconds of screen time.

This Whole Exchange Is Gross.

Oh let me count the ways in which this is so, so stupid.

Neither Rapunzel nor Frederic has ever proven themselves “thoughtful and responsible.” In fact both of them being irresponsible is intentionally a plot point in the main story arc.

How would either Frederic or Arianna know any of this? Not only have they lost their memories, but they didn’t raise Rapunzel themselves and those traits aren’t inherited; they are taught.

Gushing over your grown daughter isn’t a point of connection!

Why would anyone be compelled to kiss a practical stranger, that they previously didn’t even like, just because they both admire some woman they also barely know and happen to be related to? What is the thought process behind this? “Oh we made that? Then lets make another one!” What the fuck show? I’m ace and even I know that’s not a normal thing to get titillated over.

The Series Turns Frederic Into a Literal Baby In a Last Ditch Effort to Make Him Likable

The whole point behind the amnesia plot was to absolve Frederic of his past wrong doings. You can’t call out an old man with Alzheimer's for being a dictator, I suppose. (not like that’s ever stopped me from criticizing Ronald Reagan, tho) But from there the series then takes it one step further and actually infantilizes both Frederic and Arianna, because Chris assumes that if he makes Fredric as pathetic as possible the audience won't hate him any more. Well guess what, it didn’t work. Frederic isn’t suddenly a poor woobie just because he’s useless now. That’s not how that works.

Rapunzel Literally Physically Assaults a Person, Kidnaps Them, Threatens Them With Even More Bodily Harm, and Causes an International Incident; All Because They Asked Her Mom Out On a Date!

You can’t hear it in the screen shots, but there’s very clearly a clanging sound to indicate that Rapunzel just wacked Trevor upside the head and knocked him out.

Let me repeat, a Disney protagonist just committed armed assault against a guy, simply because she doesn’t respect her own mother.

What the Fuck!!!???

Arianna is fully grown woman. She is perfectly capable of making her own choices and she agreed of her own volition to go out with him. In fact she’s the one who asked Trevor if she could come along on his sea voyage. It’s not Rapunzel’s place to interfere with that.

Secondly, Rapunzel shouldn’t get a free pass to attack people just because she’s doesn’t like them. And she most assuredly shouldn’t get to write off her cruelty as justice because she's royalty! What the hell? You just turned one of your official princesses into a literal tyrant for the sake of a joke, Disney!

Where the fuck was the oversight on this show!?

And to top it all off, Trevor is a ruler of a competing kingdom. This could easily have been deemed an act of war. Thankfully for everyone involved Trevor has far more sense and compassion than Rapunzel and doesn’t push the matter.

Yes that’s right! The intentionally annoying prat and comedic antagonist is a more upstanding person than the main heroine! Let that sink in!

Wait, If Laws Don’t Apply Out In the Ocean, Then Why Did Eugene and Max Have Jurisdiction to Arrest Lady Caine in Peril on the High Seas?

Max shoved this same rule book into Eugene’s face when Eugene rightfully questioned if it was his job to arrest the mutineers. This book said that it was not only his job, but that he was also legally required to stop any and all ‘wrongdoing’ no matter where he was at nor whether he was on duty or not. While also failing to specify what ‘wrongdoing’ entailed.

Now that’s very problematic and ridiculous for a whole host of reasons that I’ve already covered back in my review of Peril on the High Seas, but this scene now adds a whole new layer of stupidity to the mix.

If zero laws apply out in open waters than yes, Eugene and Max were acting out of their jurisdiction. Not only that, but the pervious dumb rule regarding their duties is also now null and void. So, Justice For Lady Caine!

Oh, but were not done yet, cause it gets dumber.

If laws, including marriage don't apply, then getting married while out at sea also would not apply. Thereby rendering Trevor’s plan useless, unless they got married back in Equis. Which if they did that, it would bypass the entire pointless rule book completely because Equis is not subject to Corona’s laws anyways.

There’s not even any ‘inter-kingdom’ laws that they would be subject too because Equis isn’t a part of the seven kingdoms. Any treaty they did previously have with Corona would be something else entirely, and Trevor would be within his rights to end such an agreement.

Also Trevor is a king. He can do whatever the fuck he wants. Same goes for Arianna.

Ummm, No You Don’t Rapunzel

Trevor can’t marry Arianna without her agreement to it. It’s already been established that she’s physically capable of taking care of herself and she’s also mature enough to make her own decisions. If she did wind up marrying him it’d be because it’s her fucking choice to and Rapunzel has zero right to interfere with that.

There’s no one to rescue here. Rapunzel has no reason to go chasing after her mom. All this is doing is denying a grown woman agency over her own life. Why should I or anyone, root for Rapunzel here?

You Do Know That Arianna Has More Than Just Two Choices Here, Don't Ya Show?

Arianna doesn’t have to be in any relationship. That’s also an option. While I personally like Trevor, this shouldn’t be a choice between him or Frederic. The show should be asking what Arianna, as a character, would want for her life, instead of just shoehorning her into just being a wife for someone else.

I still don’t know what Arianna really wants in life, but I do know that being a domestic housewife and a queen does not suit her. She doesn’t actually like being tied down with commitments and responsibilities. She’s repeatedly indicated over and over again that she feels uncomfortable in her role.

But the show reduces her into trophy to win and turns her into a damsel in distress multiple times. Then it further neuters her so that she complacently walks back into that life over and over again for no logical reason. She’s treated not as a person but as a prop.

Really, Arianna? Are You Really Sure About That?

These aren’t Arianna’s words. They’re Chris’s.

Arianna has shown zero interest in Frederic up to this point. The closest they got was during that creepy boat scene where they just jumped to almost kissing for no real reason. While before now Arianna was making actual goo-goo eyes at Trevor earlier, before Raps stepped in and broke them up.

They actually do have things in common and had a genuine point of connection. They even almost kissed themselves until Raps started being a dick. No forced and icky conversations about their grown children needed here folks!

While I still firmly believe Arianna should just be single, the show does far more to convince me that she and Trevor should be together more so than her and Frederic. Everything about this scene on the boat feels forced and hollow because it doesn’t ring true to what was previously established.

This just isn’t good writing. It’s the animation equivalent of a six year old smashing their Barbie dolls faces together and shouting “now kiss!”, all because a middle aged man couldn’t get over they fact people didn’t like his self insert.

No, wait, I apologize. That’s being mean to six year olds. They usually have more interesting plots and established characterization than this.

Hey, Remember When the Series Villainized an Orphan For Stealing This Stupid Book?

Yeah, stealing the book was treason and the mains ruined a child’s life over it, but apparently it just doesn’t matter any more cause no one seems to give a shit about Trevor taking it. Like, yes, as the king of another kingdom, Trevor isn’t beholden to Frederic’s bullshit, but you would think that the characters would treat this as a bigger deal than what they do, given how they responded previously to it being taken.

Unless Rapunzel was just talking out of her ass back during The Alchemist Returns. That’s also quite possible.

This Literally Has Nothing To Do With You Rapunzel

Just because Rapunzel herself is a woman, doesn’t mean that stealing the agency of another female character isn’t misogynist. Especially when their both written by primarily men.

Every guy who was involved with the writing of the episode, should be fucking ashamed of themselves!!!

So What Exactly Has Trevor Done Wrong Up To This Point?

Yes, the story board artists and voice actors do a lot of heavy lifting here to try and make Trevor seem like a creep. Arianna’s body language and tone of voice when dealing with him here will be very familiar to a lot of women, I’m sure. I know what it’s like to have a stalker and not know how to turn them down because you’ve been trained all your life to ‘be polite and nice” to people, and I’m not unique in that regard.

But here’s the thing, it’s not set up properly. There’s nothing backing this sudden shift in the characters’ dynamic. Up till now Trevor has been a perfect gentlemen. Sure he was over the top as always, and you could call it an act when regarding his politeness to Frederic, but he seemed to genuinely respect and admire Arianna and clearly desires genuine affection in return from her. Why would he suddenly stop behaving in a way that worked for him and start talking over her instead?

Also why wouldn’t Arianna just tell him no to begin with if that’s what she wants? She had no trouble speaking her mind before now. But that begs the question why she wouldn’t return his feelings as well, because as stated above, she clearly showed interest in him previously.

This is So Fucking Forced

Yeah, okay, you’re daughter has no reason to be here to begin with, disrespected your wishes, and attacked Trevor first. At this point I’d argue he has a right to retaliate. Especially since, if Rapunzel was allowed to board, you know she’d just attack him again, because she knows no other way to resolve conflicts other than to hit people very hard.

Arianna’s actions here only make sense if she’s kept in the dark about what an awful human being her daughter really is. That’s poor writing.

Also, having a woman just punch people while denying them actually agency and choice within the plot is not ‘girl power.’ It’s fucking misogyny!

How Does Doing the Bare Minimum, and Just Showing Basic Human Decency Count As ‘True Love’?

What was she suppose to do? Let him drown? I mean I wouldn’t, and I despise the man. Not to mention anyone else could have done the same thing. They’re all right there. If Lance had jumped to the rescue would Trevor have proclaim them lovers too?

Trevor Is Still the Better Man Here

Here he is rescuing Rapunzel even after she treated him like shit.

Best. King. Period.

This Still Doesn’t Redeem Frederic

So through out the episode Frederic has inexpiably shown an obsession for eggs. He now collects them even though this was never an established trait before now. But whatever. He’s just been through something traumatic and looking for something to ground himself. Far be it from me to make fun of someone else’s special interest. If you like to collet eggs than good for you. Go live your life to fullest.

That’s more respectful than how the show handles it, as everyone dismiss his interest and it’s treated like a joke through out the episode. Only to have said obsession save the day. But this isn’t here to teach the others about respecting other people’s hobbies, oh no, it’s here to try and give Frederic a big hero moment so you’ll cheer for him.

Except one nice thing does not erase his past actions! I don’t care what your hobby is, if you deliberately try to cause grievous harm to people you’re and asshole! And you will continue to be an asshole until you can admit what you’ve done wrong and try your best to make up for it.

I Hope You Made Back Up Copies of The Tunnel Maps

A bunch of people are more upset over this development than I am, because it is a historical artifact and preserving the past is important. But the only story function the book held was a map to the tunnels, and said tunnels were never utilized properly through out the entire show.

To this day people still don’t understand that they’re meant connect the island to Old Corona or that Herz Der Sonne is the one who built them into order to invade Saporia because the show is so bad at its world building. And come season three, they’re all but irrelevant anyways. Such a wasted concept.

Once Again the Whole ‘Memory Loss’ Subplot Is a Copout

Ok that’s not how the spell worked previously, but that’s not what I’m taking issue with here.

If the whole point behind the amnesia plot twist was to sweep Frederic’s awfulness under the rug, then I expect his past actions to be addressed once he’s regained his memories. They are not.

This episodes reverses the very thing that the season was trying to achieve and just hopes the audience is too stupid/attention deficient to notice. Well guess what, we noticed and we’re far smarter than you Chris.

Conclusion

I don’t understand the point of this episode. It shoots everything season three is trying to do in the foot. It screws up the timeline, makes Rapunzel even more of an irredeemable dickhead while preventing her from learning yet another needed lesson, undermines Arianna as a character once again, and it puts Frederic back in the crosshairs of the audience’s scrutiny.

Oh and look, it’s written by the same guy who wrote Rapunzel’s Return. Why am I not surprised.

Anyways another one down and only 15 more to go. You can support my continued marathon by dropping a tip in my ko-fi if you wish. I’m currently back to job hunting yet again and anything you can give is appreciated.

https://ko-fi.com/rachelbethhines

#Rapunzel #rapunzel's tangled adventure #anti-tangled #anti-rapunzel #ferderic #arianna #tangled #tangled the series

62 notes · View notes

jitterbugjive · 3 years

Text

Native American Representation

So I’m in a tough spot right now and could use some advice or good places to go for reference-

I want to include Native American stuff in MMG, and this isn’t coming from a place of clueless white person guilt or fascination in the ‘aesthetic’ or whatever, but because it actually was a significant part of my life growing up. My uncle was able to prove his native heritage and went through the rights of passage to become a part of a tribe, where he’s even trusted to build sweat lodges which are such sacred places that if someone swears in one, it has to be torn down. He took me to pow wows and taught me a lot of things. And at a later point I had a Native American teacher who was very active in teaching us about her culture and getting us involved in it by learning things like hunting and preparing meat respectfully, cooking, crafting. She especially wanted me to get involved because of the heritage I had, and like my uncle got me in to some pow wows and encouraged me to sell some of my bead work to a shop that sold Native American goods, mostly artwork.

Heck it was kind of my first introduction to the fact that other cultures could accept me for who I was when I heard about the two-spirit people. I know two-spirit is a little more complicated than a sexuality or gender identity but just the fact that it exists shows an attempt to explain and accept LGBT+ people.

But I’m also not going to say I know enough, I’m still ultimately a white person who hasn’t gotten deeply enough involved to even remotely be an authority on any of this stuff, but I really want to show some proper representation.

I won’t make any native characters a mouthpiece for white guilt (like constantly talking about how white people stole the land, or some angry spirit who’s land was disturbed) And making them a human comes before making them Native, being Native wouldn’t be their whole identity and they wouldn’t base their actions around it, but you can see their cultural influences. I also know to research specific tribes and not just Natives as a whole.

As for writing lore, thaaaat’s the tricky part, because I’m trying to find what things to avoid since I know some tribes have mythos that are just NOT meant to be shared by non natives, or even shared at all because of fear of bad things happening. But I get mixed results, some people for example are certain it’s okay to write about wendegos and skinwalkers, but others will say not to do it period because it gives those creatures power in the real world.

Unlike with a lot of other cultures, I fear if I try to make anything inspired by the culture and mythos, someone is going to get upset. With most creatures in MMG, the point of them is that they inspired legends and myths but don’t exactly follow those myths, such as Fearmongers having many origins in many cultures because a lot of cultures used the supernatural to explain night terrors. I really don’t know if I can do this with Native American myths and beliefs, even if I went in to accurate detail on a myth and then said ‘but actually it’s this’, someone could get mad and call it erasure and I don’t want to do that. But if I only tell what people already know, it’s not exactly creative story telling.

I don’t know if making up a myth would be offensive either, because it’s not accurate representation. But the myth would take elements from known ones and try to create something that feels genuine but is all brand new.

Probably the worst idea would be to make up a tribe entirely, because then no one is being represented and they’ll fall in to the hole of just throwing different tribe cultures in to a mixing pot and that’s not a good thing to do.

The only reference I found for this stuff that looks like a really good way to learn is a master class that costs 55 dollars and I definitely don’t have that money right now. So input from anyone that maybe has Native heritage, or is just good at googling information, would be really super appreciated.

#native american

15 notes · View notes

luidilovins · 3 years

Note

You should turn your post on the Uncanny Valley into a book or something. I am not even kidding, it's brilliant and sorely needed information. Thank you for it.

Tbh its just speculative that the uncanny valley is an inherent biological trait and not cultural or a learned behavior at the moment. A good example would be the cultural phenomenon of colorophobia where in the US we have a longer history of using clowns in our horror pop culture genres than countries like Japan.

Clown entertainment has been around since the Egytian times and maybe some people have always been freaked out by them it honestly just takes one director or author to have an disproportionately irrational fear and good cinematography skills to convince people that they SHOULD hate clowns just as much, (I could say the same about the movie Jaws but thats a bit of a tangent,) or a memorable event that damages the public's trust in something that SHOULD be innocent or harmless. (A good examples being the John Wayne Gacy trials.)

Clowns are also thought to be in the uncanney valley so ita a fairly good argument on cultural phenomenon versus genetic traits. Up until aroud the 60s-70s clowns were actually fairly well liked by the US general public and a lot of older generation still find a fondness in it that would scare the living shit out of their grandchildren.

As far as evidence that I may be right about the "uncanney valley might be because of rabies" theory, there has been a small case study suggesting that the movements of a non-human robot that trigger the effect in us, is also present in people with parkinsons but the sample size is too small for me to be thoroughly convinced.

And don't be mistaken I also dislike this concept because saying that ableism is an inherent human trait is just as bad as saying racism is an inherent human trait. There is little to gain from distrust in the disabled and little historical evidence to suggest it was common or beneficial to discard disabled people. Disabled people's remains have been found time and time again to live to incredibly long livea and be cared for, and participate in their communities. I'm highly critical of this particular case study and I take it with a grain of salt because its on cosmo, but evidence of human disabilities and compassion can be sourced by actual bones and it's been placed on VERY credible sources. NPR, NBC, Discovery, Nat Geo, NY Times, literally the clostest you can get to creme of the crop news articles on DOZENS of accounts and if you have a goddam problem then pay for a tour to the Smithsonian, find an archeologist and coherse them into showing you the bones and then explain phorensics to you because you probably wouldn't understand unless you too were a phorensic archeologist yourself.

What I DO BELIEVE tho is that if the uncanny valley is a legitimate inherent trait, that like most evolutionary traits, it made it this far for this long because it somehow served us benificially. And the biggest benifit I can think of is identifying neuro-infectious diseases because they can spread agressivley, many of them lead to death or lasting effects and are fucking MISERABLE to catch. We're talking brain swelling, fevers, uncontrollable vomiting, tremors, hallucinations, motor and vocal tics, difficulty swallowing, seizures. This could all happen because they eat infected deer meat or because of one bad fox bite. It's miserable if you survive and horrifying if you dont. Rabies can survive in your muscle tissue for years before infecting your brain and once it does usually you only live for about 5-10 days in and out of concious knowledge that you're going to die painfully, and disease aggrivated psychosis. It would be hard to pinpoint the causation because the amout of time before full blown infection would vary too much to assosiate for a long time. So your only option is to hone in on telltale signs.

The disabled people who would suffer from herdeditary or developmental neurological disorders run the risk of prejudice from mistaken identity, but if a human is part of a community, and doesn't die within a week from having a wobbly head, it would sooner or later become apparent that they're not dangerous. I think nowadays culturally people don't press to learn more about disabled people due to social and political prejudice and never fucking grow up past that. Mistaken identity or not. You learn about people from the patterns of their behaviors so even ones that seem abnormal to you become a normal recognizable pattern for them. Fancy that.

We don't get grossed out by chimps or gorillas, who are even more distant cousins, and the proof that we don't have a search and destroy button for anything immediatly related to us is a bunch of bullshit can be found in almost every human's blood on earth. And not just neanderthals, but denisovans as well. And that's not even accounting for genetic backtracking the crossbreeding of other sapiens species before we were whittled down to just the three. What makes the tweet even stupider is that when neandertals still roamed the earth humans were shorter, hardier, and overall more rough looking so we looked even indistinguished then. We Also Chewed On Bones and neandertals handled cold climates better than us based on a study on chest cavity density and, skull nasal intake and heat circulation, providing genetic diversity and the upper hand in survival in the tundras or mountainous regions spanning over Eurasia. If it wasn't for humans fucking neandertals we might not have been able to spread over the contient or diversify the way we did.

So my full hypothesis is that if the uncanny valley is a genetic inherent human trait it was used to benifit people from catching agressive diseases in a time where the benifit of fearing a group member with rabies outweighed the cost of fearing a group member with a disability like parkinsons.

WHAT PISSED ME OFF was the idea that we are DESIGNED to be unwary of our evolutionary cousins could easily be used for white supremacist spaces to justify racism BECAUSE IT ALREADY HAS

So that one tweet that might seem like a quirky thinkpiece in my eyes is just fuel for eugenics trend round whatever number we're on. It's like we don't fucking learn. It would be REALLY easy to retool the concept that it's natural for people to be fearful of whatever the bullshit definition of sub-humans are. Claiming that black people were sub-human thus deserving of mistrust and submission to white ownership worked like a fucking charm.

Maybe if I go to college and major in psyche/socio/civics it'll be my college thesis. Right now I'm more of a hobbyist than anything, but what I DO know is that anyone can make an untested hypothesis to combat another untested hypothesis and it should hold just as much goddamn value. I combatted the idea that the idea that human othering was funneled into an unconfirmed effect that causes disgust and terror based on non-human sapiens is in fact racist and gave what is in my opinion a more evoluntionary practical approach to the uncanney valley.

The generalized links that I used APARENTLY weren't good enough for some people but aparently a single tweet that says "hur dur heedle dee uncanney valley exists because of human cousins" was taken at face value even tho it was probably tapped out in five seconds without regards to the reproccussions. I find a huge discomfort that less than studious links about the evolution of monkey social behaviors that I used as a guideline to explaining my concerns became the focal point for people to nitpick without even having the gall to "well actually" on the subject. That absolute ravaging NEED to rip apart at it and devolve into name calling because I MENTIONED racism is fucking suspicious and I don't trust it. I had to stop looking at the responses because some people were only reblogging and arguing with barely half of my argument and i was getting nowhere fast.

There were a few people that made actual points with cited sources that made their own rebuttle arguments. That I respect. It's just as valid an argument as mine and I'm ALWAYS willing to take on more credible sources to strengthen my stance or gain perspective.

But it's the utter dismissal of a concerning concept that just seeped into the subtext that gnawed at my gut. Some people on top of hating the linked sources I provided, admitted they didn't read it, refused to read between the lines to purposfully misinterpret or derail my main points, and detract that my claim that the tweet was a result of systemic white supremacy saturated into modern science was a bunch of bullshit because I claimed that 1500s anglos invented racism.

The thing is we did invent the racism that we fucking currently subscribe to.

We practice the science that we formulated based on our own social prejudice. Real people die from this.

We remain uncritical of our own theorums that we postulate then pat ourselves on the back like we're philosophical geniuses even though racism is a family heirloom with a new paint job.

We preach the eugenics ideals that we pulled out of our asses to benifit from fearmongering, promises of national security and unpaied labor.

White supremacists create subtext with the intention of it being consumed by accident or in ways that seem palatable.

Fuck.

That.

I don't hate the person who wrote the tweet. Chances are that they gave the tweet as much thought as they took the time to write it and went on their day as a fun little thinkpiece. Everyone on the internet does it. But its that kind of thinking error that needs to be adressed as a progression of historic and scientific prejudice that gets rehashed, recycled and untouched and continually damages and is weaponized against marginalized people. I am not wrong for taking it seriously especially when a bunch of people were sitting around nodding their heads just as effortlessly.

I don't owe the internet any more sources than the tweet. I don't owe anyone on the internet a full scientific ananysis. And the people's reaction to what I had to say was actually what further convinced me I might have hit the nail on the head.

#answered asks #uncanny valley effect #eugenics #fuck white supremacy #systemic racism #racism #negative #slavery #luidilovins

28 notes · View notes

stormsbourne · 3 years

Text

it's really insane how all the sex scene discoursers and all the Men Aren't Allowed To Be Platonic discoursers are just sitting there reciting run of the mill bigotry and religious fearmongering and just don't even fucking realize it, like

"well, fandom is making men irl get afraid of being accused of being gay" a) that's homophobia b) no it's fucking not! stop reading thewoesofyaoi

"I just hate when I think I found an actual STORY about characters acting like real PEOPLE and then it's just PORNOGRAPHY" dude I can't honestly even begin to unpack this one but it's insane you consider all porn to be characterless scrap that's only made for the enjoyment of filth, and that is just straight up religious nonsense you're reciting

"but why do people keep making platonic stuff out to be romantic" for fun!!!!!!!!!! fuck off!!!! the idea that you're not Allowed to write gays unless they look into the camera and say they're gay is homophobia! you ever see people saying that about platonic m/f relationships getting made into shipping fic? hmmmmmmmmmmmMMMMMMMM

"ok but most of the people writing the Bad thing aren't allowed to because they're cishet women" 1) provably untrue 2) irrelevant even if it was, who cares 3) nice garden variety misogyny buddy (and I know it's misogyny because when people point out the women doing it are mostly not straight, you start talking about how women just can't understand men or, even better, how they're old hags who ought to be off having kids as women are supposed to do)

your ideas about this aren't unscathed! we live in a culture (a society, perhaps) where every last form of bigotry is entrenched and part of the white noise of growing up. no matter how smart you think you are, you aren't free of those biases! part of becoming a conscientious adult is learning to recognize and question those bigotries and work to change them

and I'll let you in on a secret!!!! making posts about how your opinions are correct facts and everyone else is lying or evil isn't helping change your damn bigotries, it's reinforcing them

9 notes · View notes

monthlyfugo · 4 years

Text

Hey. I blacked out and when I came to someone told me it’s my birthday, so why don’t you do something productive today?

hey tizzy here with the stomach flu.

take this time to learn the facts about the coronavirus and combat misconceptions ive heard during class SUCH AS:

-“this coronavirus isn’t new”

the coronavirus has existed for a long time. however, THIS new epidemic is a NOVEL strain of the virus, novel meaning new. as with other viruses such as the flu it evolves, so cures are being researched around the clock.

-“it’ll kill 1/3 of china/it has a 100% mortality rate!”

the coronavirus as of now as discussed by the WHO (world health organization) is 2%, however as newer statistics have been collected the estimated total still falls under 10%.

-“we don’t have to worry about it”

just because fearmongering isn’t the answer doesn’t mean this is it either. the virus is highly contagious and practicing basic hygiene is absolutely essential. the virus strikes hardest at people with underlying health conditions, but there are a ton of complications and avoiding having to go to the hospital at all costs where the virus can incubate in machinery etc. is the smartest move.

_”the virus came from fish, just don’t eat seafood”

it’s strongly believed to have come from the consumption of bats, not a seafood market

-“asians carry the coronavirus!”

soo sick of hearing this one. luckily my school is relatively diverse so i dont get this very much, but stop shitting on asians who have “started” the virus. especially the poor chinese. like the ebola outbreak, chinese people have been everyone’s favorite punching bag, for other asians such as koreans as well.

-“china’s government is constructing hospitals, theyre fine”

no. the ones doing the most work are the poor chinese doctors collapsing from around the clock work, risking their lives only to have their work overshadowed by a government that constantly fires up its propaganda machine. relatives of people who have succumbed by the masses are unable to give their family members a proper burial, as they’re chucked into 24/7 cremation fires like worthless scraps of compost. keep the chinese in mind as corona season comes and goes.

#Pannacotta Fugo #jjba #not an ask #fugo birthday #corona virus

70 notes · View notes

20realmswriting · 3 years

Text

"Mimics of Amazon" by 20realmswriting

It had only one purpose in life, to eat. The creature was a master of stealth and camouflage and made sure the prey never knew of its presence until it was too late. They have had many shapes through out the centuries. Their kind living prolonged lives as long as they adapted to better entice pray into their traps. First wondering monsters would be lulled by their unthreatening forms until the creature devoured them.

Then Adventures fell pray to them due to false promises of treasure. Some very creative creatures disguised themselves as doors, chairs and even tables to ensure a meal would find their way into their jaws.

These creatures were called Mimics. Their adhesive slime cause anything that touched it to stick. Their jaws were strong enough to bite through steel and in rare cases, Mythril. They were vicious adapters. They were smarter than they seemed. Through out the centuries as time went by, new tactics had to be chosen. New shapes and forms had to be taken to trick their pray into touching them and adhering the mimic onto them before they were devoured. Even now none could be sure the last mimic ever found, was truly the last.

"Oh come off it!" Darren shouted. He and his friends had been drinking up at the cliffs where kids would sneak off to drink without authorities finding out. The others laughed and ribbed each other for getting too lost in the story. Jess, Taylor, Darren, Michael and Francis had known each other for ages. Growing up together they knew what twisted the others sense of fear and danger. But everyone knew mimics were products of fantasy and D&D nonsense.

Francis laughed. "But I had you all going didn't I?" He had a cheeky grin and the ribbing continued. It was getting late and they needed to get home. Each gave their goodbyes and went home. A few days later a rumor began circling around their school. Tales of a website that if you put in your address you will recieve a free package with wierd or maybe creepy things. It was like ordering mystery boxes on the dark web.

Of course the friends found out and began dareing each other to try it out. In the end they all placed their names and addresses and walked off, forgetting the event as just another hoax that was being passed around. Weeks went by and the memory of the mystery boxes faded away. Everyone believed it was a hoax and even the rumors died. Late one Saturday afternoon there was a knock on Darren's door. He was the only one home and answered, only to find a medium sized amazon box in the patio of his house.

Darren checked the postage and saw it was addressed to him so he brought it inside and closed the door. His friends arrived to school the next morning and each of them noticed Darren was running late. It was unlike him but they did not think anything of it. The next week Darren was reported missing and believed to have run away. His friends were questioned but they had no idea what was going on.

Jess was next. He recieved a small amazon package and did not show up for school the next day. Then Michael. Then Taylor. Francis grew afraid as he was the last in his group of friends to be left. The police began to think he had something to do with their disappearances.

Investigators questioned him, family and friends, everyone knew how close the kids were to each other. Slowly people began believing that Francis was lying and that he in fact did something to them. No matter his denial they began suspecting him.

Fearmongering led to threats or assaults. The families begged to have their kids back. Francis began to mentally decline and was soon institutionalized for his safety. The kids were never found. Francis never learned what happened to the people he grew up with and cared about.

It was years later while still in the Asylum when a package arrived for Francis. It was unusual. On one of his better days he was allowed to open the box. But the moment his hand touched the box, he was stuck to it like glue. His eyes went wide and he breathed quickly. The amazon box began to crack open. The edges led to rows of razor sharp teeth. Eye opened between the lines of the A and O of Amazon and looked at him.

"Been looking for you." It said roughly. Its tongue slide from between the teeth to wrap around him. Francis began to scream. "MIMIC! MIMIC!" His cries went unheard when with a slurp and a crunch, his voice died away. The mimic burped and closed back into looking like an average Amazon box.

The shipping and receiving address changed on the box to be shipped somewhere else. Maybe even shipped to you.

#writing #free write #writerslife

1 note · View note

wizardysseus · 4 years

Text

i’ve talked before about how i see beauty and the beast as a story about otherness --- a love story between two social outsiders --- and how i owe that very much to growing up on disney. “the mob song” is the linchpin of that interpretation, just as much as anything belle and the beast say to each other (“we don’t like / what we don’t understand / in fact it scares us”), and from thinking about that i got to thinking of what a fantastic villain i think gaston is, when every other retelling i can think of either doesn’t have a villain or really struggles to make them compelling.

and then the 2017 remake was like, hey, look at luke evans, our only cast member who hasn’t checked out completely! we better give him..... absolutely nothing to do???

so, ok. i believe lindsay ellis talked about this in her video on batb 2017, but it is such an odd change that remake gaston isn’t admired by the town, to the point that lefou has to literally pay the villagers to sing along with him. if he doesn’t have the villagers wrapped around his finger, what’s the point of gaston’s songs anymore? why do they follow him into battle against a horrible beast at the end? where’s his CHARISMA??

i genuinely don’t know what the remake was going for, since it doesn’t ever make gaston all that sympathetic either, but if the aim was to make him something more than a handsome, arrogant idiot embodying rape culture (which, again, works to perfection in the 1991 film but this is a remake! you have the freedom to shake things up!), then i have some ideas! first of all you throw away the fucking war vet subplot oh my god

i actually like the slightly fancier costuming they put luke evans in, so let’s say this gaston isn’t a hunter. maybe he comes on the scene as in an opening-of-pride-and-prejudice kind of way, he’s a rich newcomer, he’s not the town darling yet because they don’t know him! when he sets his sights on courting belle, he has no idea she’s the Weird Girl With No Friends, and he doesn’t bother to get to know her on her terms either

so you don’t want belle turning down his proposal to be a public moment that drives gaston’s outrage throughout the rest of the movie. okay then, have him commiserating with lefou in the tavern, and then notice that he’s caught the villagers’ sympathy. he may be the new guy, but he cuts a hell of a sympathetic figure compared to belle

i still think you have to tweak the “gaston” number, since so much of it is centered on how RUGGED and MANLY he is, but with a little work it could become lefou talking gaston up to the town and them getting swept up in the mystique of him and his handsomeness and his bragging

and then maurice stumbles in. maybe you want to add depth to maurice in this version, too --- maybe he gets angry when gaston dismisses him, maybe he points out that gaston has been harassing his daughter

THEN, for the first time, gaston gets riled. so he changes the narrative: gaston and his pursuit of belle against her wishes aren’t a threat if crazy old maurice is a threat. you see the moment he convinces the village to turn against someone they’ve known (but not really known) for years, because maurice is poor and crazy and different, and they throw maurice out. and gaston feels powerful. and we realize how cunning he really is.

by the time belle comes back and everyone learns about the beast, he knows he can leverage that fear, too.

that’s one way you can recontextualize gaston’s entitlement. he’s sinister, not so much because of straightforward misogyny (again, great in the og, but the *~*~girl power~*~* message is so very safe for disney’s fake wokeness bullshit), but because he’s rich and powerful and clever enough to manipulate the ignorance of the people around him. you emphasize the plot thread of fearmongering, and the dehumanization that always goes along with it, so the villagers forget gaston isn’t on anyone’s side but his own.

but of course!!!! disney wasn’t interested in how it could build on its own version of the story! or any version! and they put the story in the hands of incompetents who only cared about “fixing” “plot holes” without any understanding of what made batb 1991 so great in the first place! so now it’s neither good in a new way or in the old way! but disney got their cash cow regardless so i guess i’ll just [CHARLIE BROWN AUGHHHHHHH OF ANGUISH]

#beauty and the beast #this has been the batb opinions hour

35 notes · View notes

torispencerkeene-blog · 4 years

Text

BE A HERO. WEAR A MASK (Take Two)

In the past few weeks I have been trying (mostly without success) to spread the message that HEROES WEAR MASKS. I find so much of this disturbing, but recently I came across a post from someone who was giving their reasons for not wearing masks. I don’t want to call that person out, or make them feel bad, so I decided to do a little bit of research. I came up with eight main reasons that people don’t wear masks, and I want to show you what they are and give you a hint as to how those things could be countered if you have to explain this to anyone.

I would also like to remind you that we are all in this together. Please don’t get into a fight about this. Healthy debate is great, but don’t let anyone pull you into a fight. It could be more dangerous than them not wearing that mask.

*******************************************************************************************

1. It's harder to breathe when I wear a mask.

If you find it more difficult to breathe while wearing a mask, then you should absolutely be the FIRST one wearing a mask. Take that feeling, of having a hard time getting air... now quadruple it. You might be getting close to the first stages of what asthma feels like.

When I can't breathe it absolutely terrifies me. I have asthma, and wearing a mask sometimes does make it a little harder to breathe. But I wear the mask because the idea of having a tube down my throat just so I can get air is ten-million times more terrifying. I don't want to die from Covid-19. I really, really don't.

2. It makes me uncomfortable.

There are other masks out there. If you can't find one that is comfortable, you can make one. It's fun and interesting to make your own designs and just do what you want with the material. There are masks that are made from spandex that are much more comfortable and slip right up under your glasses so they don't get all foggy. If I can do it, so can you.

3. It isn't my responsibility to keep other people safe.

Maybe not, but it isn't only strangers you would be protecting. When you wear a face mask, social distance, and take proper precautions (like washing your hands with hot water and soap for a full 20 seconds), then you are protecting yourself, your children, your parents, your friends, your neighbors, your grocery store clerk. Most of them are people you see all the time. You like them. You want them in your life. Wear a mask for them. Be a hero. Being a hero isn't about only meeting your responsibilities, it is going above and beyond for other people.

4. It makes me afraid (Or, it’s fearmongering).

If you weren't afraid, I would be worried about you. Seriously, we're all afraid. Every single one of us has some fear. Maybe it isn't Covid-19. Maybe it's a fear of a car accident, or fear of losing someone, or a fear of the dark. All of us have fear. But rising above that fear and doing what is best for other people is a sign of bravery. Like Clara from Doctor Who, perhaps whisper, "Let me be brave."

When you are afraid of the dark, you bring a flashlight. When you are afraid of a stranger, you carry pepper spray. When you are afraid of a disease... you wear a mask.

5. It doesn't work.

Actually, that is where you are wrong. No, I’m not about to get up on a political soap-box and preach at you about who is right or wrong in politics. I don’t like Republicans, but I also don’t really care for Democrats. I guess, maybe, I could be called an Independent, but even they don’t really fit my criteria. So me saying this isn’t about politics. Please hear me when I say that. I don’t care who you vote for... wear a mask when you do it.

If masks didn't work, why would doctors and nurses have been wearing them for so many years? It doesn't make them look important. It's because they don't want to carry any diseases home to their families. It makes perfect sense. If you were working with asbestos, you would wear protective gear for that too. Doctors know viruses and diseases can spread, so they protect themselves.

The medical workers and scientists working through the Covid-19 pandemic have been pretty clear about masks in recent weeks. The more we learn, the more we know we need these masks if we want our country to completely re-open, and to STAY open. I did a bunch of research on this, mostly because I got into a debate with someone about it, and found literally dozens of articles and PDFs about the effectiveness of masks during the pandemic, and all (except a few older pieces by someone I wouldn't want treating me for a splinter) said the same thing. Masks help slow the spread.

In fact, one news report I watched said that in a hair salon, two customers had Covid-19 but didn’t know it. The stylist and other customers didn't get it because those customers were wearing masks! Keeping a mask on protects everyone you come into contact with. It isn’t a perfect solution (there are none) but refusing to wear a mask only keeps the spread of the disease going on and keeps us shut down longer.

6. It violates my rights.

Which ones?

Laid out in the Declaration of Independence it says that 'all men have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.' I will grant you that. And you have the right to express your opinions (I can show you how) but that does NOT mean that you have the right to put other people in danger to exercise those rights! I have the right to LIVE. I want to live. I don't have grandchildren yet. I would like to actually live long enough to meet them. I want to live long enough for my son to get married. I want to live to pursue some of my dreams, to find that happiness for myself. Wearing a mask protects my rights!

Are you talking about your first amendment rights? That is the right to religion, free speech, having a free press, the right to assemble, and the right to petition the government.

- If you want to practice your religion, services are being held online by so many churches I couldn’t begin to name them all. (If you are a shut-in like I was, you already know this) There are dozens of churches that post their services on their websites. It’s how I watched when I couldn’t get to church.

- If you want the right of free speech, make your own mask into a statement!

- If you want the press, it’s everywhere!

- If you want to assemble, no one is stopping you (unless the area where you live has increasing numbers of Covid-19, in which case they are trying to save your life).

- If you want the right to petition the government, you can... just do it safely. There are more ways than one to petition. Start an online petition. Do a drive-by petition where every family makes statements on their car. If you want to, you can even make your mask a petition. There are more ways to do it than gathering together without simple protection for yourself and the ones you love.

7. It's a political statement.

Actually, it isn't. It's a statement that you think you know more than every doctor and nurse, every scientist in all the countries around the world. Masks have NOTHING to do with politics. But they can... Let me tell you how.

Get blank black or white reusable face masks and either fabric markers or puff paints. Then you can write whatever you want to say on your mask! Then it can BECOME a political statement!

8. President Trump doesn't wear one, why should I?

First, let me reiterate what your mother probably asked you at least once during your formative years (if your mom is anything like mine). “If all your friends jumped off a bridge, would you?”

All I am saying is use common sense. It's not up for debate. We know wearing masks slows the spread. Don't do something dangerous just to have solidarity with the president. If you want to impress him, find a red reusable face mask and write ‘Make America Great Again’ all over it with white puff paint.

*******************************************************************************************

So, what reasons do you have for not wearing a mask? Is it something I didn't cover on the list? Is there something you want to know and no one has given you an answer? Do you wear a mask and want to know how to convince others to wear one? Do you wear one, but don’t even know why?

Ask me. If I don’t know the answer, I will try to find it for you. I am up for healthy debate (but no actual fighting) about the pros and cons of wearing masks. If you have real evidence to support not wearing one, I’d love to see it. Anything that can help me answer questions and teach people.

Also, if you want access to my research, type in the pros and cons to wearing a face mask to fight Covid-19 in your search bar. Yeah, you might pull up a couple articles from people who are against it, but if you look for MEDICAL research, you will get the same answer every time. Masks slow the spread. There are tons of videos on YouTube about it as well.

Look, we're all pretty smart people. No one is asking you to change your political beliefs. We only want the chance to live. We don't want to die. We don't want our kids, our parents, our brothers and sisters, or our friends and neighbors to die. We have seen that countries that practice social distancing, mask wearing, and proper precautions are already on the other side of the curve. If we want America to be fully open (and stay that way) we need to do our part.

BE A HERO. WEAR A MASK!

#BeAHeroWearAMask #masks save lives

2 notes · View notes

justsomeantifas · 5 years

Text

its 11:59 its still technically tonight so

this is gonna be my reference point to questions abt venezuela, at least regarding things pre- May 19 2019. Its a bit scattered and it may get edited down along the road, but yeah.

short version that draws some similar conclusions: https://www.salon.com/2019/05/17/the-plot-to-kill-venezuela_partner/

one difference in scales that’s important to keep in mind: the lifespan of people is 2-7 decades. the lifespan of colonialism lasts centuries. the lifespan of media memory is a couple years, tops.

Most western narratives of venezuela start meaningfully at chavez, which is a mistake. The focus point in history around which the country flowed was the Caracazo. You probably already know about this, but a massive uprising took place in the heart of Caracas, against decades of dictatorship both formal and informal, after severe instability in the global oil market. The people were hungry, the riots were fiery, and the bullets bled. knows the death toll even now, but its estimated well into the thousands. This happened pre-chavez, and started a cascade of events which brought him into limelight that you can read about here. not gonna go into more venezuelan history, but i talk a bit more here

chavez was democratically elected, multiple times.

in 2002, after his first democratic election, he was kidnapped by US-backed troops and replaced by someone who threw out the 1999 constitution, which was as legitimate as any other made in venezuela’s colonial and violently capitalist history, seeing as it was the first (aka only, so far) of 26 constitutions actually approved by popular referendum. He was reinstated largely due to massive protests in support of him. Maduro however doesn’t really have as much of the charisma and support of chavez, which is creating problems - as well as exacerbating problems created by the economic crises ramping up just around chavez’s death. In 2015, there were elections to the National Assembly, which ended up with the Opposition winning a majority of the seats (which does show that there’s some degree of fairness in the elections, at least verifiably up til that point, yet that isnt rly accounted for when western media describes it as “undemocratic” - many of whom don’t apply the same scrutiny to their own country: such as this UN Human Rights councilor who also happens to be the crown prince of british-iraq, currently residing in the noted democracy of the Kingdom of Jordan, which has no vested interest or control over any particular export of Venezuela.).

This turnout showed most of all that maduro had alienated as many as 2 million of his supporters, who didnt end up voting (though many also voted against him - trying to act on their feeling that whatever they want, its “not this”). This decreasing support also accelerates whats known as “Everyday Sabotage” - people not trusting in the government, and look out for their own interests contra everyone else. This is a danger inherent to tying “Socialism” to a primarily state project.

However 1999 Constitution was never meant as an eternal document & it created mechanisms to call for new popular constitutional referendums to be held. That’s what the “Constituent Assembly” is about, which is what a lot of the western world is describing as him singlehandedly rewriting it (while also being “vague about its contents”), or “created by him”. Elections to the constituent assembly were boycotted by opposition, so that it would be government controlled & look like a sham in the eyes of the broader world. That being said, the assembly was called both as a reaction to losing election but also in response to intensifying crises - it was put forth (i don’t see any reason to believe in bad faith) as a way to come together and figure out how to address the needs that were driving people to protest - to address the desire for “not this”, but bc of the uncertainty, it was easily twistable by reactionaries by putting all emphasis on the former. Also timing corresponds with increasing fears of maduro straying from the path of chavez, the image of scrapping one of his strongest plays for smth unknown is risky - tho if there are other meaningful options given the situation im not sure. And the body’s got at least as much constitutional legitimacy as Guaido (Chapter III)

The 1999 constitution also enabled a recall election to be called against maduro in 2016, bc it was written with particular attention to holding public officials accountable - similar noble commitments helped to end the presidency of Rousseff & bring in Bolsonaro (who was also one of the people spurring on the investigations and whipping up a social base).

(speaking of guaido & bolsonaro)

on Guaido:

part of student group in 2007 protesting against non-renewal of coup-assisting network, who the CFR (one of the major think tanks of the cold war still playing a big role in foreign policy today) considered “most important network”

close friend of Leopoldo Lopez, the aforementioned coup plotter.

politician since 2010, won a couple small elections

Unknown to majority of general population until 2019, most venezuelans surveyed didnt know him

Plan Pais

plans to privatize state owned industry & allow investment from foreign oil companies

center-right neoliberal draped in platitudes of “stability”, “revitalization”, “security”, and “rescue” - a message seemingly deliberately targeted to become more and more resonant with increased sanctions.

/on Guaido

governing is about the expression of power. I wanna live in a world where that power isn’t expressed, but as long as the exploitation of the global working class continues unabated, id prefer some of that power be put towards helping the poor.

there is no such thing as a static state of affairs, there’s no “goldilocks zone” out in the political universe where we tweak things finely until we find whats best for everyone, only different rates of change in different dimensions. what we need to do is figure out how we can push that state of affairs in a direction so that everyday people have the power to take control of their lives. re

re: “constitutionality” - if the supreme court calls it constitutional then its constitutional. period. There’s no such thing as a supreme court as an “independent branch” of government, but there are different degrees of integration into the rest of it.

The Supreme Tribunal of Venezuela has 32 members, (a bit more than a dozen put in by the national assembly, while the PSUV held it), and the opposition holds abt 3 away from a supermajority. Each member of the court holds their spot for 12 years. If that’s “The Most Corrupt In The World” according to Transparency International, i wonder what world the 9-person lifetime-appointed US Supreme Court (2 of which appointed by trump, and save for pulling a Weekend At Ginsbergs, likely 3) is on. In fact, one of the tactics that the more radical circles of democrat voters are putting forward is to pack the Supreme Court. Because thats how shit actually gets done, or at the least how shit is prevented from being committed w the stamp of legality. FDR learned that lesson too, in trying to pass what is today known as “The New Deal”

My comparisons to trump are for specific end: these actions are exerted on levers of liberal democracy, and every single liberal democracy is susceptible to them in some ways.

whats a “dictator”? if hes unelected, the millions of people who participated in the elections dont seem to think so. if maduro is a dictator, then what is donald trump? the majority of ppl didnt vote for him yet hes still governing. macron’s popularity has at several points been less than 1/3, and the yellow vest protestors have been violently attacked - why is he not “a violent dictator with only the support of the military”? These terms are not neutral.

“their elections are highly flawed” So What? show me a country whose elections arent.

“opposition jailed” - ok but coup plotters don’t get off easy in any liberal democracy. If someone - say Bernie Sanders - said “enough is enough” and succeeded in overthrowing the current government with the help of a foreign government…. you think they’d let him go free? what if ten years later he was getting his supporters all riled up to do it again? how long you think he’d be in jail for (assuming he can survive well into his 100’s)? You think more than 13 years? Think he’d get house arrest? Some US states lock you up for posessing weed up to 10. If you stay long enough around this blog, youll find plenty of other examples of much more cruel and unusual punishments. Look at Chelsea Manning, look at Oscar Riviera… look at the US protestors saying Guaido is illegitimate

what we have to keep in mind most of all, is to show that the contradictions being exploited are inherent to Liberalism. Contradictions are just expressed most freely at the margins - the interstices

poor economic decisions happen everywhere - 2008/2009 still affecting the entire world there’s violence thats “natural”, and violence thats “intolerable”. The dividing line is whether we have anything to gain by changing things.

sanctions: started under obama, originally targeted specific individuals, used as precedent for more generalized. They’re indirect - they have a “squeezing effect”, takes already-existing problems & just makes them markedly worse. also doesn’t necessarily correlate with emigration, bc it takes a lot of money to start a new life somewhere else, and sanctions disproportionately affect the poor.

war wouldnt likely look like (many) US boots on the ground - we’ve got plenty of other places to be. It’d look like guns being smuggled to counter-protestors. It’d look like sending resources to neighboring countries like Colombia or Brazil who would then use their troops. Colombias ruling party is right wing populists - much of current president’s campaign was run on fearmongering abt venezuelan socialism - they’re raring to go. It’d look like drones https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caracas_drone_attack. Also means there likely won’t be a sudden trigger, its a gradually escalating stressful gradually-more-warlike situation.

If war does break out - where would the refugees go? In reality the majority would go to Colombia, but if anything significant breaks out there will be a stream of those looking to find shelter in the US, which has advertised itself as a beacon of hope - what would happen to them? some may get taken in as a gesture of showmanship, but nowhere close to the majority.

speaking of the US - imagine if trump and bolton manage to actually plot a winning coup. Do you think that that wont be his main bullwark against ppl like Bernie? you think the media and rest of the democratic party wont jump on that narrative and “begrudgingly” support a fascist because the alternative might mean supporting single payer and not-having-good-for-ratings-climate-apocalypse?

another term thrown around without regard is “once vibrant” - for whom?

most articles ive seen just take this as an axiom, and dont find any cognitive dissonance when also saying chavez reduced poverty hugely.

The answer to that rhetorical question: Citgo is venezuelan, before chavez none of the wealth went back to venezuela - thats what “vibrancy” means.

many similarities with BP (the-artist-formerly-known-as-the-anglo-iranian-oil-company)

in age of climate change & vocal ppl about phasing out oil, the more one’s livelihood is connected to oil, the more unstable ones country will be - either that, or the more instability ones country will cause.

“Oil exports fell by $2,200 per capita from 2012 to 2016, of which $1,500 was due to the decline in oil prices.”

The drop in price that affected the venezuelan economy so much in 2014 was largely by US shale fracking

in 1970’s Chile, copper was the main product of Chile - allende nationalized the mines, and in return wall street dropped the

(also worth noting that venezuela’s got non-insignificant untapped shale basins)

At least venezuela used the oil money to fund social programs instead of like, pad the pockets of Raytheon.

also oil price wars in africa highly correlated w oil (whose annual production doesn’t even combined total venezuelas)

a couple ppl have raised concerns abt my strong stance on equivocal dismissal - if there’s a difference, if there’s some way of reading your statement that says “X country that the State Dept wants to invade is an anomoly in the otherwise free world”, then that’s acting to push the discourse towards normalization & invasion. It’s not “whataboutism”, just basic consistency.

now more than ever, narratives are affected by people. They may not be ones we had a hand in forging, but the way that we propagate them actually does have measurable effects on the larger-scale political outcomes. Always look for the base assumptions, as well as the direction

sure denounce Chavez. sure denounce Maduro. denounce Kim, Xi, Castro, anyone. But if there’s no equally or proportionally loud denunciations of the horrors perpetrated by allies - the “assumed”, “natural” violence, then you’re acting to reinforce the narrative of exceptionalism.

Just make sure after you take a breath, you denounce Saudi Arabia & Yemen, Israel for Palestine, the conditions which brought Argentinian/Brazillian, Brazilian coup, the US for Puerto Rico, the conditions which have murdered dozens of journalists in Mexico per year…

what people want most of all is stability. “A debate over whether it is mismanagement and corruption by the Maduro government or the sanctions that are the author of the crisis is largely irrelevant. The point is that a combination of the reliance on oil revenues and the sanctions policy has crushed the policy space for any stability in the country.”

government’s errors and tensions

fixed exchange rate -> black market

took 5 years to address changing relation between dollar & BsF, all the room between those two curves left a huge room for intensifying crises, though since it also corresponds with the death of chavez, it sorta makes sense.

antidemocratic actions and remarks by maduro

scattered responses filled w half-solutions

diversification needed, but how do you diversify an economy filled with rampant poverty, malnutrition, illiteracy…

(nominally begrudging) support for mineral extraction 12.4% of territory opened to extraction - “Special Economic Zone” as a method of managing decay

this is also what much of the reality of “economic diversification” looks like

not enough socialism. (even fox agrees!) Venezuela shows the limits of Social Democracy in countries living outside of the Imperial Core - esp the dangers if you’re in the crosshairs already bc of oil

started out as populism, gradually grew as confronted more. shows shaping influence on political organs from actions of foreign actors - if you’ve survived a coup before, you’re gonna become paranoid about any more of them - especially when the coup plotters say “hey lets do more coups”

also shows the weakness of only having a small number of charasmatic faces representing the movement - if one dies and theres no clear and popular replacement, then you’ll lose ppl who were largely brought in by the charisma, weakening your political project, and creating cracks for reactionary forces to take advantage of - especially in times of transition.

bourgeoisie still control a majority of the economy. Capitalist businesses are internally unaccountable, and in this age of intensified global trade, one can punish countries for straying from the pack by moving business & focus away. If you’re looking for dictatorships, look at the thousands of private companies run as dictatorships daily

capital flight is a real effect, precisely because socialism is fundamentally and irreconcilably against the self-interest of the bourgeoisie. not necessarily against the interest of the humans-who-are-also-bourgeois, but of the impersonal self-sustaining force of capital.

Have you ever pulled something out of an electrical socket, and seen a quick spark? The reason that occurs is bc of what’s called an induction current, which is a fancy physics word for flowing electricity not liking to suddenly change its flow. If you accidentally touch that spark, you might feel it, but youll live to tell the tale. But if you only take the plug out halfway & touch it, that’s a different story. Capital flows similarly.

my country (lithuania) has been facing sky-high emigration since the collapse of the USSR (with an added boost after 08-09), we have also consistently had one of the highest suicide rates in the world (#7), a minimum wage of about 3 Euros an hour (after a recent increase), as well as one of the highest prison populations in Europe (discounting Russia & Belarus… which like….)

when are we gonna be invaded? when will the US media talk about our pain?

oh wait, they did. We cried all pretty for the TV cameras, then they got a bozo nobody really knew of to denounce the government, who they called dictatorial (though it was far from ideal, massive bureaucracies dont tend to mix well with single-person-decision-making). And to be fair, the fact that the government was unpopular wasnt entirely undeserved. But what was promised to us was the idea of “Freedom”, “Free Enterprise”; to “Get Rid of Corruption” and institute “Real” Democracy". They said we’d be integrated into the glorious capitalist west, and we understood that to mean that we’d be in the position of a Germany, or at least an Austria or smth. But they never meant to integrate us into the imperial Core, we have always been seen as part of the Periphery - the “assumed” violence that “naturally” happens.

Then we got to where we our today. Some of the stuffs more available, but expensive. Most of the bureaucracy’s still around, it just helps fewer people. We stand as an example of what to expect, in one of the best case scenarios, you would join our emigrees now making up a significant percentage of underpaid house-servants aka maids across the EU.

if we want the people of Venezuela to be healthy, safe, and fulfilled, then:

speak out and pointing to the effects of US sanctions is incredibly important. They’ve already killed 40,000 people in the last year, and 300,000 more are in extreme danger (and millions more in long-term risk).

what does it mean when you simultaneously sanction trade with a place but also demand they let you give them humanitarian aid?

if there is to be action taken by the international community, then the US has forfeited its right to speak. They threw it away once in 2002, and obama rhetorically picked it up and dusted it off so that trump could throw it in a bigger dumpster, thats also on fire. However we also still live in a world deeply shaped by US Hegemony, so the opinions of its close trade partners & closest-knit media buds should be seen as influenced as such. Doesn’t mean that theyre wrong on everything too, but they still feel the magnetic pull of the US economy and ecosystem (as well as their own potentially imperial interests) and the effect of that force cannot be discounted.

transitioning our economies away from oil & away from globalized neoliberalism which only values peripheral states by their exports - dissolves tensions of how to produce in unproductive terrain

socialize medicine in the US, so that drug companies run by dictatorships can’t control their lives & ours. healthcare is especially reliant on imports, sanctions affect especially strongly.

normalize the ideas of Socialism, without taking the easy way out of “oh no dont think of Venezuela, think of sweden or denmark”. None of them are Socialist, but to avoid the complexities of Venezuela is to imagine that US attempts at socialism wouldn’t involve significant capital flight. If we don’t consider that, if we don’t have solid actionable plans to deal with that, while also facing the inherent complexity of changing material conditions, then we’re gonna waste whatever shot we get.

redirect conversation normally centered around government towards support of the tens of thousands of small business co-operatives, where people live their daily lives in a democratic manner.

on The Communes:

“delegating responsibility throughout all members, and bringing important decisions to the whole to work through and find the best possible solution… They create “collective criteria” together; agreements stipulating whether individuals have power over certain decisions or whether it is up to the whole group. However, he assures that these “are not rigid, they can change at any moment.” The cooperative I lived with in Venezuela had regular organizational meetings where they informally came to agreement and were even able to come back to re-evaluate decisions that didn´t seem to be satisfactory for the whole group in this same way. Decisions and decision making, in this way, are viewed as a process not contained by meetings and discussions in board rooms, but are always being analyzed and made better by the process of putting them into action, and not only by thinking them out and writing them down.”

- the “Self Government of the Producers” - aka what it looks like for cooks to govern.

they have communal councils as well - neighborhood councils in the same vein that so many (rightfully) find inspiring in Kurdistan . They preexisted chavez, but they were able to proliferate and be given legal recognition through him. I understand that legal recognition can act to ‘name’ a body & pin it to smth that doesn’t match its requisite variety - how dynamic it is, but imo as its currently legislated it recognizes a good amount of the autonomy that they had already been excersizing. - liable to change government recognition of co-ops has drawbacks too, and correlates negatively with that coop’s success

"A good example of this intention is the de-emphasis that cooperatives in Venezuela put on advertising or “marketing” products, and instead push to find more people to become part of the cooperative, and choose the services or products they provide based on community decisions about what is needed. A cooperative I worked in […] was originally a family owned and operated theater group that traveled around the country performing theater pieces that highlighted social and environmental issues. When they joined the […] cooperative, the larger co-op did an analysis and decided they wanted a natural fruit juice concentrate producer and gave the group a loan to acquire capital and start producing. They have been doing this for only a couple of years now but have already paid back the loan to the larger cooperative and are bringing extra money in to support themselves, better their services, and supply extra funds to the larger cooperative for community projects such as the recently [2012] built community health center…

The cooperative services I experienced and learned about in Venezuela were health, dental, food, and a separate example of trash services. A dental cooperative […] provides quality dental services (I know because I used them) almost every day for affordable prices. You don´t have to be a member of the cooperative, and you don´t have to make an appointment. It takes only a couple of hours, and emergency situations are treated with urgency. The health center, built with funds provided by all the associated cooperatives[…], works the same way. Anyone can go there, the services are subsidized by the cooperative so they are affordable, the clinic and workspaces are clean and well taken care of, and the quality of the service is great. Worker-members of the cooperative receive health care at the facility without charge except for the massage and acupuncture services that they also provide at a really low price.

[…] food services are priced to provide more access to food for the community in which it exists. The original and persistent intention is to make the best situation for people on all ends of the process. The producers are part of the cooperative and are part of the group that decides the prices that growers get, as well as the prices that the food is sold for. This means that both farmers and workers at the market decide what to charge a person, which ultimately affects how much money the growers receive, as well as if the food is affordable for the people who need to eat who live in the city. In a normal capitalist market system these parties are separated and put up against each other, raising prices for consumers and lowering them for small producers, excluding those people from getting enough money to afford all the necessities that are typically only provided at a high price.

One communal council, a parallel governing organization of community members linked to investment funds from the national government, in the city of Merida, Venezuela organized themselves to get funds to buy a trash collection truck. The truck at the time was used for a specific waste removal project that removed waste from their community regularly but was not a traditional collection service. However, they did have plans to expand the project to start their own collection service, and this would be provided by the commal council, an anti-capitalist organization which does not require people to pay for the service. Although this is not a “co-operative” as some hardliner co-operative enthusiasts might point out, it is a horizontal anti-capitalist organization widening access of necessary services to the larger community run by community members; following cooperative values of equity, inclusion, and solidarity I believe this to be an example of cooperative economics and action. It appears to me that economic inclusion is much more likely to widen only when those who are being excluded are included in the process of organizing the services and are in control of the economy.“

until the communes, workers cooperatives, and the like are strong enough to rule themselves, having Maduro in power is the only option given to us which doesn’t trigger the control of reactionaries. People make their own history, but not in situations of their choosing - the exact outcome isn’t predetermined, but there’s only a limited number of poles - gravitational attractors - towards which that trajectory is heading at any particular time.

if maduro acts to squash the power of the communes, then thats a different situation. but until that point, we outside of the country must work to center any discussion on these bodies - they are the heart of the country and of whatever social revolution has occurred/is further possible. They are filled with lessons for us to learn from, and show how rich and dynamic the organized populace can be if they are allowed to control their communities. (ex of dealing with gang violence from @ 22:50)

This is all said with recognition that many chavistas have acted against communes, the bureaucratic machine acts to co-opt much of their energy, its linguistically obscured the concept of "ownership” with that of “control”, and that the state has changed its messages over time. But the heart of the communes is what’s a priority, and they have acted against the government overstepping its bounds & mis-identifying them. But whats important is that there’s a feedback process in the gvt to actually allow them to assert their autonomy. Liberals will do their utmost to close those channels.

If Guaido and the Popular Will take control of power, be assured that whatever gains made in organizing the everyday people of Venezuela will be at the top of the chopping block. How effective that suppression turns out to be is undetermined - it might turn out to strengthen the communes, but that outcome would be damage control, not something to try and bullseye.

Effective Propaganda knows that its more effective to control what’s left out than control what’s put in. Keep that in mind, and study trajectories and forces.