#not at all an uncritical one though | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

headfullofdolls · 2 years

Text

The Monster High movie was so fun and cute and funny, like I legitimately laughed out loud at some of the jokes.

The story was a bit weak around the climax, but given (a) it’s a tv movie for kids, and (b) how much background they had to set up before it, it was fine. A bit underwhelming, but serviceable. Reminded me of Halloweentown in that regard (as well as in more positive ways!). But honestly, the characters, world building, and set design far made up for it to me. Like the climax was quick, but given how much I liked the rest of the movie, I’m glad it didn’t overstay its welcome and just did what it needed to do.

Wish we could’ve gotten more time with all the characters though. Not just side characters (there was so little Lagoona 😭), but even the main trio, just getting to explore the school. Generally think the movie could’ve benefited from even 15 minutes more, but then it’d be too long for a kids tv movie so 🤷🏽 Would’ve alsooo wanted like one more music number, because the songs were great. The big dance numbers were so fun and camp, very High School Musical.

That’s basically the whole movie. It’s fun, it’s camp, it’s wholesome. It’s not perfect, but it’s a good time. I liked being in the world the movie made and wanted more time with it. And fortunately, the new animated series is just around the corner and looks even better.

#doll-adjacent thoughts #monster high #monster high thoughts #monster high the movie #monster high g3 #people keep thinking about it like a feature film #but it's really more of a dcom #and it was always going to be one from the start #like of course it looks like descendants that's literally the same level it's on lol #i've seen all the g1 (and g2) movies #and i also liked this one!#i get people have a lot of nostalgia about this franchise #but man all the negativity has been exhausting #it's like pokemon genwunners all over again #or old mlp fans who didn't like friendship is magic #i'm no uncritical consumer #and am generally wary of reboots (though they're not inherently bad)#but i think this stuck the landing #just wish it was easier to enjoy it in my little corner orz #but nooo #i just had to like ''sharing experiences with others'' and ''hearing what other people think'' and ''finding a sense of connection'' smh 🙄

21 notes · View notes

starbuck · 1 year

Note

I honestly love that you talk about Tuco and Salamancas so much. it's partly the show's fault but they are such a fucked up chain of harm family, and nobody really talks about it much aside from memes

I really appreciate you saying this!

I remember specifically after my initial whirlwind six-day Breaking Bad bingewatch, i was doing a puzzle and listening to some music and I suddenly realized that, out of everything in the show, their collective tragedy had really affected me and stuck with me and thinking “hmm, well surely watching Better Call Saul will cure me of this…” and then I felt this absolute JOLT of delight upon unexpectedly seeing Tuco at the end of the BCS pilot and I was like “ah, okay, so I’m stuck like this!”

But seriously though, it’s been rewarding! I like puzzles! I like characters who the canon does dirty or who were clearly not the writers’ primary concern! I like to think critically about the media I consume and the way I interact with it! And I also ADORE inescapable cycles of tragedy! … So this whole thing was actually fairly predictable, in hindsight, haha…

And yeah, I’d LOVE to talk more about it… I’ve got another fic that’s fully done besides a final polish edit (which is gonna take awhile and I’ve been super busy with my new job, hence no progress in the past month or so!) - so I’m excited to get that out eventually as I prefer to share my more inference-heavy meta in fic form.

#and yeah the memes are… frustrating. often.#not all of them - obviously - but a good amount of them are just uncritically rehashing the racism of the show #and that sucks #not like i’m expecting deep analysis from memes or even deep analysis for minor characters at all #but think about what you’re posting at least - y’know?#preaching to the choir here though…#i really appreciate you saying this - like i said #most of the reason i haven’t been posting about them much lately is real life busyness #but I was also definitely a BIT afraid of annoying people #so hearing you say this means a lot to me!#and definitely gives me motivation to work more on my fic and get it out for people to see!#it’s longer than the other one and i’ve worked really hard on it so it’s a long time coming!#brba #bcs #not really trying to get this into the tags but for organizational and friend blacklist reasons 😂😂#additionally: anyone who can guess the exact song that caused me to have this realization gets uhhhhhhh… idk. a gold star.#i think it’s doable #i’m not a subtle man

10 notes · View notes

fiapple · 1 year

Text

also if you hate kennedy get off my blog <3 you can acknowledge that she is underwritten without being gross about the only sapphic character of colour on btvs, and the only sapphic character to be played by an actual sapphic woman.

#too much crticism of kennedy on a watsonian level not enough doylist crticism of how fucking gross it was of the writers to not only make #one of few woc & the only canon sapphic woc on the show a military brat along with (likely somewhat consciously) putting her in a position #to get unwarranted fan-hate by not only underwriting her but developing her relationship with willow at such a quick pace & with much less #emotional development between the two in comparison to willow & tara. like they were all relatively intelligent adults & with how often #they framed kennedy as outright antagonistic when she had points that were deserving of actual nuance it’s hard to believe they didn’t know #what they were doing tbh #like the writers at least somewhat knowingly put kennedy & by extension iyari limon in a really bad position as far as i’m concerned #& the fans just disgustingly went along with it uncritically #also if people can endlessly discuss spikes potential in spite of seeing red you should be able to read into kennedy’s like for fucking real #same with reading into kendra & jenny & though she plays a much smaller role even olivia with more humanity though this post isn’t abt them #kennedy #btvs

2 notes · View notes

daydreamerdrew · 1 year

Text

The Hulk! (1978) #14

#this whole story really emphasized Bruce as a scientist and as that being a position of superiority #not even necessarily just superiority over the Hulk but as a position in society #there’s even a scene where police try to restrain him and he yells at them ‘you can’t do this to me- I’m a scientist!’#of course the concept of Bruce’s life being more valuable because of what he can contribute as a scientist is nothing new #which I’ve been thinking about a bit lately #like that trial the Hulk had way back where it was argued that it would be wrong to kill the Hulk because that would also mean killing Bruce #and that would be such a loss to science #implying that it would be ok to kill Bruce for the Hulk’s crimes if he was someone that could contribute less?#and- for that matter- that the Hulk’s life is worth less than Bruce’s because he’s not as ‘intelligent’?#I think that these ideas are interesting within the story #I like the idea of Bruce as something with a sense of superiority #of Bruce as someone who thinks of himself as that he ‘exalts mankind’s conquest of savagery’#and- amidst all his other issues with the Hulk- as insecure over part of him being a ‘dumb beast’#but it can sometimes be frustrating to see those ideas presented uncritically within narration #(though I have already formed the habit of sometimes rejecting the framing the narration presents in Hulk comics- haha)#and then reproduced by fans #particularly the weird insecurity some Hulk fans have over the Savage Hulk alter being the most well-known one #and the emphasis they’ll give on how the Hulk is actually an interesting character capable of depth!#… because there are other alters with less limited vocabularies #like c’mon now #marvel #bruce banner #my posts #comic panels

1 note · View note

fozmeadows · 1 year

Text

tools not rules: the importance of critical thinking

More than once, I’ve talked about the negative implications of Evangelical/purity culture logic being uncritically replicated in fandom spaces and left-wing discourse, and have also referenced specific examples of logical overlap this produces re, in particular, the policing of sexuality. What I don’t think I’ve done before is explain how this happens: how even a well-intentioned person who’s trying to unlearn the toxic systems they grew up with can end up replicating those systems. Even if you didn’t grow up specifically in an Evangelical/purity context, if your home, school, work and/or other social environments have never encouraged or taught you to think critically, then it’s easy to fall into similar traps - so here, hopefully, is a quick explainer on how that works, and (hopefully) how to avoid it in the future.

Put simply: within Evangelism, purity culture and other strict, hierarchical social contexts, an enormous value is placed on rules, and specifically hard rules. There might be a little wiggle-room in some instances, but overwhelmingly, the rules are fixed: once you get taught that something is bad, you’re expected never to question it. Understanding the rules is secondary to obeying them, and oftentimes, asking for a more thorough explanation - no matter how innocently, even if all you’re trying to do is learn - is framed as challenging those rules, and therefore cast as disobedience. And where obedience is a virtue, disobedience is a sin. If someone breaks the rules, it doesn’t matter why they did it, only that they did. Their explanations or justifications don’t matter, and nor does the context: a rule is a rule, and rulebreakers are Bad.

In this kind of environment, therefore, you absorb three main lessons: one, to obey a rule from the moment you learn it; two, that it’s more important to follow the rules than to understand them; and three, that enforcing the rules means castigating anyone who breaks them. And these lessons go deep: they’re hard to unlearn, especially when you grow up with them through your formative years, because the consequences of breaking them - or even being seen to break them - can be socially catastrophic.

But outside these sorts of strict environments - and, honestly, even within them - that much rigidity isn’t healthy. Life is frequently far more complex and nuanced than hard rules really allow for, particularly when it comes to human psychology and behaviour - and this is where critical thinking comes in. Critical thinking allows us to evaluate the world around us on an ongoing basis: to weigh the merits of different positions; to challenge established rules if we feel they no longer serve us; to decide which new ones to institute in their place; to acknowledge that sometimes, there are no easy answers; to show the working behind our positions, and to assess the logic with which other arguments are presented to us. Critical thinking is how we graduate from a simplistic, black-and-white view of morality to a more nuanced perception of the world - but this is a very hard lesson to learn if, instead of critical thinking, we’re taught instead to put our faith in rules alone.

So: what does it actually look like, when rule-based logic is applied in left-wing spaces? I’ll give you an example:

Sally is new to both social justice and fandom. She grew up in a household that punished her for asking questions, and where she was expected to unquestioningly follow specific hard rules. Now, though, Sally has started to learn a bit more about the world outside her immediate bubble, and is realising not only that the rules she grew up with were toxic, but that she’s absorbed a lot of biases she doesn’t want to have. Sally is keen to improve herself. She wants to be a good person! So Sally joins some internet communities and starts to read up on things. Sally is well-intentioned, but she’s also never learned how to evaluate information before, and she’s certainly never had to consider that two contrasting opinions could be equally valid - how could she have, when she wasn’t allowed to ask questions, and when she was always told there was a singular Right Answer to everything? Her whole framework for learning is to Look For The Rules And Follow Them, and now that she’s learned the old rules were Bad, that means she has to figure out what the Good Rules are.

Sally isn’t aware she’s thinking of it in these terms, but subconsciously, this is how she’s learned to think. So when Sally reads a post explaining how sex work and pornography are inherently misogynistic and demeaning to women, Sally doesn’t consider this as one side of an ongoing argument, but uncritically absorbs this information as a new Rule. She reads about how it’s always bad and appropriative for someone from one culture to wear clothes from another culture, and even though she’s not quite sure of all the ways in which it applies, this becomes a Rule, too. Whatever argument she encounters first that seems reasonable becomes a Rule, and once she has the Rules, there’s no need to challenge them or research them or flesh out her understanding, because that’s never been how Rules work - and because she’s grown up in a context where the foremost way to show that you’re aware of and obeying the Rules is to shame people for breaking them, even though she’s not well-versed in these subjects, Sally begins to weigh in on debates by harshly disagreeing with anyone who offers up counter-opinions. Sometimes her disagreements are couched in borrowed terms, parroting back the logic of the Rules she’s learned, but other times, they’re simply ad hominem attacks, because at home, breaking a Rule makes you a bad person, and as such, Sally has never learned to differentiate between attacking the idea and attacking the person.

And of course, because Sally doesn’t understand the Rules in-depth, it’s harder to explain them to or debate with rulebreakers who’ve come armed with arguments she hasn’t heard before, which makes it easier and less frustrating to just insult them and point out that they ARE rulebreakers - especially if she doesn’t want to admit her confusion or the limitations of her knowledge. Most crucially of all, Sally doesn’t have a viable framework for admitting to fault or ignorance beyond a total groveling apology that doubles as a concession to having been Morally Bad, because that’s what it’s always meant to her to admit you broke a Rule. She has no template for saying, “huh, I hadn’t considered that,” or “I don’t know enough to contribute here,” or even “I was wrong; thanks for explaining!”

So instead, when challenged, Sally remains defensive: she feels guilty about the prospect of being Bad, because she absolutely doesn’t want to be a Bad Person, but she also doesn’t know how to conceptualise goodness outside of obedience. It makes her nervous and unsettled to think that strangers could think of her as a Bad Person when she’s following the Rules, and so she becomes even more aggressive when challenged to compensate, clinging all the more tightly to anyone who agrees with her, yet inevitably ending up hurt when it turns out this person or that who she thought agreed on What The Rules Were suddenly develops a different opinion, or asks a question, or does something else unsettling.

Pushed to this sort of breaking point, some people in Sally’s position go back to the fundamentalism they were raised with, not because they still agree with it, but because the lack of uniform agreement about What The Rules Are makes them feel constantly anxious and attacked, and at least before, they knew how to behave to ensure that everyone around them knew they were Good. Others turn to increasingly niche communities and social groups, constantly on paranoid alert for Deviance From The Rules. But other people eventually have the freeing realisation that the fixation on Rules and Goodness is what’s hurting them, not strangers with different opinions, and they steadily start to do what they wanted to do all along: become happier, kinder and better-informed people who can admit to human failings - including their own - without melting down about it.

THIS is what we mean when we talk about puritan logic being present in fandom and left-wing spaces: the refusal to engage with critical thinking while sticking doggedly to a single, fixed interpretation of How To Be Good. It’s not always about sexuality; it’s just that sexuality, and especially queerness, are topics we’re used to seeing conservatives talk about a certain way, and when those same rhetorical tricks show up in our fandom spaces, we know why they look familiar.

So: how do you break out of rule-based thinking? By being aware of it as a behavioural pattern. By making a conscious effort to accept that differing perspectives can sometimes have equal value, or that, even if a given argument isn’t completely sound, it might still contain a nugget of truth. By trying to be less reactive and more reflective when encountering positions different to your own. By accepting that not every argument is automatically tied to or indicative of a higher moral position: sometimes, we’re just talking about stuff! By remembering that you’re allowed to change your position, or challenge someone else’s, or ask for clarification. By understanding that having a moral code and personal principles isn’t at odds with asking questions, and that it’s possible - even desirable - to update your beliefs when you come to learn more than you did before.

This can be a scary and disquieting process to engage in, and it’s important to be aware of that, because one of the main appeals of rule-based thinking - if not the key appeal - is the comfort of moral certainty it engenders. If the rules are simple and clear, and following them is what makes you a good person, then it’s easy to know if you’re doing the right thing according to that system. It’s much, much harder and frequently more uncomfortable to be uncertain about things: to doubt, not only yourself, but the way you’ve been taught to think. And especially online, where we encounter so many more opinions and people than we might elsewhere, and where we can get dogpiled on by strangers or go viral without meaning to despite our best intentions? The prospect of being deemed Bad is genuinely terrifying. Of course we want to follow the Rules. But that’s the point of critical thinking: to try and understand that rules exist in the first place, not to be immutable and unchanging, but as tools to help us be better - and if a tool becomes defunct or broken, it only makes sense to repair it.

Rigid thinking teaches us to view the world through the lens of rules: to obey first and understand later. Critical thinking teaches us to use ideas, questions, contexts and other bits of information as analytic tools: to put understanding ahead of obedience. So if you want to break out of puritan thinking, whenever you encounter a new piece of information, ask yourself: are you absorbing it as a rule, or as a tool?

#critical thinking #logic #rhetoric #purity culture #fandom #evangelism #hierarchy #thinking

10K notes · View notes

metanarrates · 3 months

Text

there are a LOT of things you can speculate about regarding what twsa was actually like as a novel but what's most interesting to me is that you can make the argument that twsa was an "unpolished" version of what orv is. it's a version of a similar novel that likely dealt with a lot of similar themes but was seemingly bogged down by poor structure, pacing, expository handling, and focus. (all of which are things that orv is shockingly excellent at.)

and of course, han sooyoung's novel, sssss-grade infinite regressor, is the "polished" version of the idea. it's well-written, probably well-plotted, and was successful enough to make han sooyoung rich and famous. we don't know what sssss-grade infinite regressor is like as a novel either, but we sort of get the impression that it's not very emotionally rich even if it is good on a technical level. han sooyoung herself doesn't seem intensely attached to it despite being proud of her work, and kim dokja of course doesn't hold it in high regard. (though of course he's a gigantic unreliable narrator and also a hater.)

what's interesting is that despite orv very strongly emphasizing the ways these works are flawed from the outset, orv itself functions as an argument in these works' favor. both twsa and infinite regressor are stand-ins for the "mass-produced" genre of webnovels. they are popular fiction, relying on a very familiar pool of tropes and clichés in order to deliver on a relatively predictable story to appeal to a wide audience. it's not a coincidence that they are so similar - both literally and in a meta sense, they are drawing on the same exact story-building and genre material. twsa is just the unsuccessful version, and infinite regressor is the successful one.

orv is what I would consider the most "impressive" version of the genre. it's well-structured, thrillingly plotted, interestingly written, has fascinating ideas and characters, and is even "literary" - that is, it has deeply considered themes and is often drawing from the realm of literary, postmodern fiction in order to express its ideas. a less sincere story would disavow itself from its pop-fiction origins and claim to be the best version of its genre. nothing else could be like it, so the worst versions of its genre wouldn't be worth considering.

but orv, while technically functioning as an argument that the genre can be "good" simply because it's a great novel that is deeply rooted in its genre, goes much further. it argues in-text that any sort of story, even those that are bad on a technical level or those that were somewhat cynically produced for a mass audience, are worth finding value in, simply because stories have meaning to their readers. the most uncritical reproduction of a genre's conventions can still mean something to someone who likes it. twsa, if it existed in our reality, would still probably be considered a very bad novel, but it wouldn't need to be polished up and turned into infinite regressor or orv in order to have value. orv itself is telling you that you should find value in twsa as it is, and by extension, every badly-done work of fiction that twsa could be a stand-in for!

#narrates #orv #all of this is Fascinating for in-universe texts to have as relationships to the actual text btw #scratching at the walls like I KNOW ITS THE POINT THAT WE CANT READ THEM... BUT I WANNA READ TWSA AND INFINITE REGRESSOR...

734 notes · View notes

anamericangirl · 22 days

Text

Up until the late 1980’s it was a commonly held belief in the medical community that babies could not feel pain. It was standard practice to perform procedures on infants without using anesthesia.

This was essentially because the professionals in the field and the studies done failed to understand pain responses in infants. But they weren’t aware they didn’t understand. They believed they were correct. Which is why several babies underwent surgical procedures with only muscle relaxants.

Some places had started using anesthesia on infants in the 70s but it was still standard practice not to use anesthesia on babies under 15 months old until 1987.

It was only recently discovered that babies can feel pain even though they were able to all along. Think of how many children were hurt because of that kind of ignorance.

So when people, even medical studies and doctors, say that babies in the womb don’t feel pain just know they don’t actually know that. They are basing that assumption on the currently held ideas about the sensation of pain. They aren’t basing it on actual knowledge on what children in the womb can perceive. There is still a lot we don’t know regarding consciousness and sensory perception in the womb.

And they could be wrong. 36 years ago they thought babies couldn’t feel pain even after being born and they were wrong. But they were convinced they were right. They didn’t know everything then and they don’t know everything now. Some recent research has even suggested that babies in the womb might be able to feel pain as early as the first trimester.

This is just to caution people against accepting and repeating claims like “fetuses can’t feel pain” uncritically when we don’t actually know that for a fact. Our understanding of pain and fetal development is something we are continuing to learn about so if you’re among the people who go around claiming babies in the womb can’t feel pain you need to stop because you don’t actually know that. No one knows that. It’s the current assumption but that assumption could very easily be wrong.

Abortion, however, is wrong regardless of whether the baby can feel pain or not. I just think it’s important to remind people that doctors are not infallible. They make mistakes all the time. Big ones. They are wrong about a lot. Medical history is filled with standard medical practices that were absolutely insane and incredibly harmful to people. So just because we know more now doesn’t mean we know everything. And the medical field is still prone to error. No one actually knows what a child in the womb can feel so if you make a definitive statement about it you’re operating from blind faith in an assumption that may very well be 100% wrong. Just like it was up until 36 years ago.

#pro life #abortion #fetal pain

298 notes · View notes

matan4il · 3 months

Text

Daily update post:

A 47 years old mother and her 15 years old son were seriously injured in a Hezbollah rocket attack today, aimed at the northern city of Kiryat Shmona. I'll just point out that even though the Iran-funded terrorism group always claims their attacks on Israelis are a retaliation for this or for that, they chose to open fire at Israel on Oct 7 (when this country was busy with Hamas terrorists still infiltrating it in the south), and they haven't stopped since.

I just wanted to show you what it looks like when Israel's border is being fired at, but please keep in mind that Iron Dome was only implemented in 2011, but we have been fired at by one hostile entity or another (often more than one) for a very long time. I can't remember a time when we weren't afraid of rockets being fired at us. And Iron Dome, as demonstrated again today, with all due respect to it, is like every other defence system: it's not foolproof. Any person who wouldn't accept being at the receiving end of these rocket barrages, has no right to demand that Israel continues to accept this distorted reality.

(audio: Golda Meir)

So this is a reminder that this is what Israel has been dealing with almost non-stop since Oct 7 from several fronts.

Here in Israel, we continue to follow with alarm the rise of antisemitic incidents around the globe. This time, I have to share with you this horrifying bit of news, about a Jewish student, Lahav Shapira, being beaten so badly, that he had to be hospitalized and undergo surgery for the facial injuries that he endured at the hands of an Arab (so called "pro-Palestinian") student. Police says this was following an argument over the war in Gaza, Lahav's family says he and his gf were stalked, then he was jumped, while the attacker shouted, "Why are you posting pictures of kidnapped people?" To make matters worse, this happened in Berlin, and Lahav is the grandson of an Israeli athelete who was murdered by Palestinian terrorists in Germany, while he was participating in the 1972 Olympic Games. Berlin's Free University's response was weak, focused on explaining that the law prevents them from expelling the attacking student.

While ignorant social media users insist that what's happening to the Palestinians is a genocide, the niece of Qatar-based Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh gave birth in an Israeli hospital. Her baby was born prematurely, and is taken care of in the NICU. Haniyeh has 3 sisters who married Israeli Bedouin Arabs, got Israeli citizenship through that, and live in Israel with full citizen rights. I've worked with so many victims of actual cases of genocide, and NONE went to get medical treatment from the people who were massacring them.

I've now seen Tumblr posts accusing Israel of bombing over one million people in Rafah. These are posts referring to the rescue raid, where Israeli soldiers raided one apartment, SAVED two hostages, and then left. If you're trying to save two hostages from terrorists who would kill their prisoners and themselves first, you wanna sneak in there as discreetly as possible. You wouldn't bomb an entire city. Even Hamas' false spin, blaming Israel of a massacre (and don't forget that Hamas is the organization telling the world how many died during this operation), didn't try to claim that the IDF attacked the whole population of the city. There's something insanely wrong in a reality where people on social media uncritically pass along lies that not even a terrorist organization dares to tell.

The graduating student in the cap is Matan Levi.

He studied law, and was about to have his graduation ceremony when Hamas' massacre took place. He left everything, and went south to fight as a reservist that verey day. On Oct 14, he was hit by a mortar, and when he woke up in the hospital, he discovered that he had lost his eyesight. According to his own account, that was very hard to hear, but his first thought was regarding how this won't break him, how he can move on from this. Since then, he's been accompanied by a former soldier named Amit Barel:

Amit fought and was injured in the Second Lebanon War, back in 2006. He lost his sight, too. He has since developed a career, married, and had kids. He's a part of a program where wounded former soldiers are helping those who have been recently injured to cope with their new challenges. He said that simply seeing that life is possible even with serious injuries is very helpful to a lot of the newly wounded soldiers. I thought it's inspirational, how people can put their misfortune to good use, to help others, how these new bonds and friendships get formed, so I wanted to share the story of this touching project.

But I also wanted to reflect on how Israel is a society of wounded people. Not just physically. We have the collective trauma caused by thousands of years of antisemitic persecution, including the Holocaust and the expulsion of Mizrachi Jews from Arab and Muslim countries, and we have the on going trauma caused by the continued use of violence against us in a war that was started against us in 1947, and has never really ended, whatever form it has taken at different points in time. No one has a right to speak about this conflict, unless they're willing to acknowledge this hurt, too.

(for all of my updates and ask replies regarding Israel, click here)

#israel #antisemitism #israeli #israel news #israel under attack #israel under fire #terrorism #anti terrorism #hamas #antisemitic #antisemites #jews #jew #judaism #jumblr #frumblr #jewish #israelunderattack

167 notes · View notes

ao3commentoftheday · 2 years

Text

competence and cringe

Have you ever heard of the 4 stages (or quadrants) of competence? They're a useful way of looking at your skills on a spectrum.

unconscious incompetence - you don't know what you don't know. You lack a skill, but you also lack any information about what that skill requires and so you don't know that you're bad at it because you don't know what good looks like. Ignorance is bliss.

conscious incompetence - you know what you don't know. You've learned enough about the skill now to be able to identify all of the pieces you lack. You can see all of the places were you need to work and improve. Knowledge is pain.

conscious competence - you know, but you need to think. You have the skill now, but you still need to think about it in order to do it well. You've improved to the point where all of the pieces work well together, but you still need to concentrace to make it all smooth. Mindfulness is key.

unconscious competence - you forget how much you know. The skill is so solid and practiced that it feels natural to you now. You don't even notice anymore all of the different pieces that make up the skill because they all work together so well that it feels like one action. There is no thought, only do.

I was thinking of this model today with respect to cringe and I think a lot of the same concepts apply.

unconscious enjoyment - You like a thing wholeheartedly and uncritically. It is wonderful and you love it and you can't get enough of it.

conscious dissatisfaction- You've been introduced to concepts of critically engaging with media. You've learned harmful tropes and stereotypes. You see the kinds of media that get praised by your peer group or by others you look up to. You want to "enjoy better" and like things that others find valuable. You are ashamed of your earlier, uncritical self. You cringe looking back at them or others who are like them.

conscious satisfaction - You feel that you still like something even though other people say it's problematic, and you still give yourself permission to enjoy it as long as you acknowledge all of its faults while you do. You miss the days of being able to like things without thinking about them so much or feeling guilty. You cringe now at how black and white you thought things were during your conscious dissatisfaction stage.

conscious enjoyment - You realize that interest and enjoyment are not moral compasses. You know that all media has its faults, that no creators are without their issues. You learn more about your own tastes and what you actually like, as opposted to what you think you should like. Looking back at yourself, the cringe is fainter. You have sympathy for past-you and maybe even a fondness. You don't enjoy unconsciously anymore, but you don't always feel the need to analyze every aspect anymore.

As always, I'm working my way through these concepts as I type them out into a tumblr post. I'd love to hear your thoughts on them!

#thinky thoughts #why is my brain like this?#who knows lol

2K notes · View notes

saintsenara · 3 months

Note

Thoughts on remadora?

thank you very much for the asks, anons!

while they are by no means my otp, i really enjoy remadora as pairing - and i think they’re fully up there among the canon couples in terms of being an amazing vehicle through which to explore all sorts of questions about life and love - which i am aware is a sufficiently controversial statement that it involves an immediate engagement with some discourse…

because remadora girlies [gender neutral] get an enormous amount of shit within the fandom, particularly from fans who consider wolfstar to be a more plausible pairing for lupin than tonks. i have seen remadora shippers called homophobes for simply enjoying the couple, justified with the bizarre idea that it disrespects remus' relationship with sirius [so... the non-canon one?] to put them together. i have seen tonks turned into a pathetic shrew who is trying to keep remus from the real love of his life by trapping him with an unwanted baby. i have seen remadora shippers get a lot of the usual stuff that people who prefer the canon-endgame couples do [that to ship a canon pair is boring, that it is indicative of a lack of talent, that it indicates an uncritical support for jkr] magnified to eleven because tonks has the temerity to be a barrier to remus’ relationship with the fandom’s favourite hot and brooding man.

obviously, this is bullshit - primarily because its unreasonable and cruel to invest so much time and energy being mean to people because of their harry potter shipping preferences [fandom should never be that deep].

but it’s also a disappointment to me personally because it means that it can be very hard to find the sort of remadora i like without looking like i’m coming to contribute to the pile-on. because where many remadora fans and i don’t see eye-to-eye is that i have absolutely no interest in thinking about them as a relationship which is actually functional. and, all too often, i find myself sifting through fics which do prefer to interpret them like this - as romantic and passionate and stable - largely, i think it’s fair to say, as a defensive move against the tide of “urgh, imagine shipping that” nonsense - even though all the evidence of canon is that they are… very much not.

i am aware of the pottermore article which smoothes the edges of lupin’s canonical reaction to tonks’ feelings for him in half-blood prince - but, while i read this as something of a retcon to make the relationship more palatable, i also don’t think that assuming that both tonks and lupin’s attraction to each other was sincere precludes them being as dysfunctional as they canonically are. i don’t go in for the common anti-remadora argument that tonks “forces” him into a relationship with her - it’s clear in half-blood prince that it’s not only her who has discussed her feelings with molly and arthur weasley, lupin is definitely flirting with her when they pick harry up in order of the phoenix, lupin is an adult man [no matter other power imbalances between him and tonks - such as the fact that she is an agent of the state which oppresses him] who possesses the capacity to refuse her advances, and - since teddy’s conception is not immaculate - he has no issue with enjoying a sexual relationship with her even if he then wants to run away from the product of that.

instead, what i like with remadora is that they reveal something which goes against the grain of the rest of the series: that love is not always enough. throughout the seven-book canon, we see time and time again the idea that love - and, crucially, love-as-noble-suffering and love-as-sacrifice - is enough to overcome any problem. entire civil service collaborating with a terrorist regime? don’t trouble yourself, love has won. your mother dying in childbirth leaving you to be neglected in a state institution? your own fault you’re not interested in love.

i understand the genre reasons for this, but i also love the way in which lupin especially exists on the margins of these genre conventions [just as he exists on the margins of wizarding society!]. i’m always struck in deathly hallows that he’s the only person who’s actually realistic about the demands of war - particularly when he tells harry that it is breathtakingly naive for him to think he can get through the fighting without having to shoot to kill - and that part of him having to be shuffled out of the way when harry tells him to return to the pregnant tonks is because, were the story focused on realism, the idea that a wanted man who is considered an unhuman by the state fleeing in order to guarantee the safety of his wife and unborn child becomes eminently reasonable and harry's defense of the nuclear family embarrassingly unradical.

and so i like the idea of lupin seeing tonks - and tonks seeing lupin - initially as just a bit of fun, as the two of them being just two chill single people who think the other is hot and interesting and want to bang because of it.

[which is something fandoms in general really struggle with as a concept. we like epic love stories - and you won't find me objecting to that! - but we're less good at thinking about casual sexual attraction or transient friendships, and how these can be transformative and meaningful without having to end up going any sort of distance.]

and i then like the idea of the relationship being forced into a profundity it doesn’t really have the juice to sustain by the sheer avalanche of grief which besets the two of them - sirius, dumbledore, mad-eye, ted - and by the pressure of the war and the fact that the order is scrambling and the hangover of remus' self-destruction in half-blood prince which makes each cling to the other as a life-raft. i like remadora as something codependent and messy and strange and sad, and i don’t think this prevents it being sincere and fun and based in mutual attraction, but instead that these positive qualities can exist in conjunction with the fact that, without the war, it would have been a summer of fucking and that was probably it.

on tonks herself, i don’t think i can say it better than @evesaintyves in this meta on her character. i’ve been really uncomfortable with quite a lot of stuff i’ve seen recently which has taken against the idea that tonks can be meaningfully read as queer on the basis of what we find in the text, above all because it so often comes with the implication that one cannot imagine her in her canon endgame pairing and presume that she’s something other than straight or cisgender. eve sets out an excellent case for tonks as bolshy and liberated and in tune with herself and fun and confused and in flux and still figuring stuff out about who she is and where she’s going - and this translates, may i say, to an astonishingly beautiful way of writing her, lupin, and the dysfunction inherent between them which i highly recommend you read.

#asks answered #asenora's opinions on ships #remadora #remus lupin #nymphadora tonks

124 notes · View notes

gothhabiba · 1 year

Text

On the one hand, people who take a hardline stance on “AI art is not art” are clearly saying something naïve and indefensible (as though any process cannot be used to make art? as though artistry cannot still be involved in the set-up of the parameters and the choice of data set and the framing of the result? as though “AI” means any one thing? you’re going to have a real hard time with process music, poetry cut-up methods, &c.).

But all of this (as well as takes that what's really needed is a crackdown on IP) are a distraction from a vital issue—namely that this is technology used to create and sort enormous databases of images, and the uses to which this technology is put in a police state are obvious: it's used in service of surveillance, incarceration, criminalisation, and the furthering of violence against criminalised people.

Of course we've long known that datasets are not "neutral" and that racist data will provide racist outcomes, and we've long known that the problem goes beyond the datasets (even carefully vetting datasets does not necessarily control for social factors). With regards to "predictive policing," this suggests that criminalisation of supposed leftist "radicals" and racialised people (and the concepts creating these two groups overlap significantly; [link 1], [link 2]) is not a problem, but intentional—a process is built so that it always finds people "suspicious" or "guilty," but because it is based on an "algorithm" or "machine learning" or so-called "AI" (processes that people tend to understand murkily, if at all), they can be presented as innocent and neutral. These are things that have been brought up repeatedly with regards to "automatic" processes and things that trawl the web to produce large datasets in the recent past (e.g. facial recognition technology), so their almost complete absence from the discourse wrt "AI art" confuses me.

Abeba Birhane's thread here, summarizing this paper (h/t @thingsthatmakeyouacey) explains how the LAION-400M dataset was sourced/created, how it is filtered, and how images are retrieved from it (for this reason it's a good beginner explanation of what large-scale datasets and large neural networks are 'doing'). She goes into how racist, misogynistic, and sexually violent content is returned (and racist mis-categorisations are made) as a result of every one of those processes. She also brings up issues of privacy, how individuals' data is stored in datasets (even after the individual deletes it from where it was originally posted), and how it may be stored associated with metadata which the poster did not intend to make public. This paper (h/t thingsthatmakeyouacey [link]) looks at the ImageNet-ILSVRC-2012 dataset to discuss "the landscape of harm and threats both the society at large and individuals face due to uncritical and ill-considered dataset curation practices" including the inclusion of non-consensual pornography in the dataset.

Of course (again) this is nothing that hasn't already been happening with large social media websites or with "big data" (Birhane notes that "On the one hand LAION-400M has opened a door that allows us to get a glimpse into the world of large scale datasets; these kinds of datasets remain hidden inside BigTech corps"). And there's no un-creating the technology behind this—resistance will have to be directed towards demolishing the police / carceral / imperial state as a whole. But all criticism of "AI" art can't be dismissed as always revolving around an anti-intellectual lack of knowledge of art history or else a reactionary desire to strengthen IP law (as though that would ever benefit small creators at the expense of large corporations...).

#ai art #ip law #neural networks #machine learning #ai #technology #readings #art tag

835 notes · View notes

librarycards · 2 months

Note

I’ve seen a lot of discourse about Aaron Bushnell and madness, with reactionary genocidaires saying it is madness, and leftists saying it is not madness but principled protest. In my mind I am thinking about madness and sanity under empire, thinking I am surely mad and wondering why anyone is trying to be sane. If you have the capacity, can you share your thoughts on the madness of this moment, or point to others who have shared those thoughts?

you have very much captured the spirit of what i think! there's that common aphorism that goes something like, 'if this world is sane, then of course i'm mad' etc. etc., while i think this doesn't fully capture the specific genealogy and politic of Madness as contemporary scholar-activists understand it, it does provide a quick & effective explanation of Aaron's (z"l) decision to make the ultimate sacrifice in support of Palestinian liberation.

it isn't useful to understand his choices as solely Mad (in terms of an embrace of opacity and nonsensicality/illegibility - in fact, quite the opposite, he took pains to be explicit and serious as to his reasoning and methodology so that u.s. media discourse would struggle to obfuscate it [even though they still are]).

however, it *is* useful to use a Mad conceptual framework for some elements of Aaron's choice, and as a means of understanding pathologized forms of protest –– not only suicide, but med strike, hunger strike, etc. these forms of protest, as many have said, are designed to distress onlookers. they are designed to push against the bounds of the common[/]sensical, to gift us with possible alternatives to, you know, getting a police permit and marching in circles, AND, to the complacent, grease the stopped-up gears of their own imaginations. because Aaron did what is, in many ways (even to those of us who have attempted suicide before) unimaginable: he died. we have not yet died. he died yelling "Free Palestine." he died, and lived his last moments with a degree of moral turpitude, courage, and singleminded commitment to a cause that few will ever achieve, and yet one that –– as Aaron himself acknowledged Palestinians must muster every day.

here is where Madness comes in: Aaron acted as a linker of worlds: between that which many usamericans, and many others who have never undergone military siege/genocide, find exists outside the realm of the imaginable. a world that many would prefer to pretend does not, can not, could not exist. a world from which hegemonic media would have "us" (white americans/others in the ~western world~) believe could never exist, not least because our own military hegemons (with Aaron, until the other day, as one of their sentient weapons) protect "democracy" –– that is, the supposed exceptionality/exemption of the "(white) u.s. citizen" from terror, from sociopolitical Madness, from the absolute violence of settler colonialism. Aaron, in short, brought that unimaginable violence home. he forced us to reckon with the brutal truth of martyrdom, here. as someone on here mentioned, he used his status as an airman in what is perhaps the most effective weaponization of privilege i have ever seen. he killed a soldier, and that soldier was himself.

of course media is leaping and will continue to leap on this as evidence of extremism, of dangerous insanity, etc. etc. in radical movements. always has been. read The Protest Psychosis. the idea of insanity has been used by basically every state power to justify disposal, because it's convenient: by claiming one is insane, you also claim all of their appeals to reason are the result of their insanity. this is called anasognosia. it's a cute little trick. it isn't new. the best way to approach this is to maintain two things: one, that Aaron's choice was rational given a clearsighted understanding of the scale of genocide that's currently taking place. AND, to question those –– leftists included! pro-pal folks included! –– who uncritically cite 'mental illness' as the reason for Aaron's suicide.

this is not because Aaron wasn't what some would call "mentally ill" –– i don't know him, i do not live in his head. the point is, it does not matter if he was diagnosed with anything or not. it does not matter if he was already suicidal or not. it does not matter if he had tried to kill himself before. none of it fucking matters, and attempts to reduce this act to the result of a mad(dened) mind is to distract from the political project he pursued. he performed a politically Mad act, to which his imagined internal pathology was irrelevant. he broke consensus reality, even if only for a moment. he linked worlds. Palestinians felt it. that is what matters.

so, how did he connect worlds? he did something Mad. it is useful to understand suicide as a Mad act, so long as we are careful not to fall into the pathologizing traps that exclude suicidal people as interlocutors outright. he showed many of us, activists included, what we could be doing - the lengths to which it is possible to go in support of liberation. he did not, and i am not, encourage/ing everyone else to kill themselves. self-immolation is effective, in many ways, because so few people do it. we need to stay alive to continue the fight. however, Aaron tore the fabric of the reasonable, the possible, and the legal (consider the pigs who approached his burning body with guns) to disrupt a collective consciousness that would rather move on, equivocate, forget, tune-out. that is Mad. Madness is necessary in our movements, all of them.

#ask #anonymous #palestine #madness #settler colonialism #colonialism

109 notes · View notes

transienturl · 8 months

Text

there is a sizable subset of the ultra-enthusiast tumblr community who (reasonably, in cases, given the circumstances) have been convinced by the sheer volume of tumblr-related discourse that is driven away from factual considerations by the victim complex, the need to have an enemy, and an external imagination of how websites work that doesn't hold up to scrutiny. I don't think that's debatable. I see the volume as a tragedy and a bit of a disappointment (it will always happen but I do think we can do better) and am sympathetic to the people who accept it uncritically, if somewhat concerned (I imagine this kind of thing extends into the non-internet world).

but yeah, like. I enjoy working on the XKit projects, and that's why I do it. I enjoy doing support for them, too—I don't have a way of counting it, but gosh, I must send 50-100 messages a month responding to inquiries, giving tutorials, etc. okay I actually have no idea what the number is. but anyway.

admission: it's not nearly as fun when some huge percentage of the posts you're responding to are just laced with this stuff. "1-starring the app will make tumblr better!" "staff broke xkit on purpose!" "I know the reason behind changes I don't like and they are malicious/ignorant!" "it would be easy to fix [x thing] and it is not fixed so someone is out for me!" (there are more nuanced ones too but those are all pretty unambiguously false examples.) again, I see why people repeat these things because they are so darn prevalent, often from people you trust.

this is a site about sharing things that resonate with you. feeling like you're mostly helpless against a big power without your best interests at heart is deeply relatable. I get that. it's still annoying though.

I don't know to what degree I have the power to change any of this? maybe to some degree I can pull the "I'm half or more of the XKit development for at least the past year" card and maybe that has some weight re: making people see my perspective as coming from "being on the side of the users," blaze some posts maybe, but I dunno, man.

Feels like a weird thing to really lean into, on the one hand. And public comms stuff is a ton of work. On the other hand, I guess it would be silly if I didn't ever pull that card and eventually just quit if it didn't seem worth dealing with. I don't think that would kill the XKit projects, but... okay yeah I'm just saying that because it's nice to be optimistic. I have zero idea if it would or not.

#tumblr meta #for future reference

178 notes · View notes