#obviously there's issues within this trend that need to be addressed but you are all reducing it to your narrow | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

thevalleyisjolly · 3 years

Text

Ok, I’ve rewritten this post several times because I really want this to be a productive and respectful discussion, but this is a conversation that does need to be started. I’ve been thinking about the whole cultural appropriation story line in this season of The Unsleeping City so far, and of course I think it’s great that Cody is starting to realize why that’s wrong and that Murph is making it explicitly clear that it is wrong, but I want to reorient the conversation away from Cody now and talk about Ricky as a Japanese-American character.

Because when Zac went “Just to paint a picture for you...” during the museum fight episode, there was quite a bit of surprise from non-Asian people in the fandom that this was really a serious issue, and one that Ricky would be bothered by or speak up about. But why wouldn’t he? I mean, the character is Japanese-American, and so is the player. Doesn’t it make perfect sense that he would at least be a little bothered by a white person appropriating Japanese culture? Asian fans certainly noticed and pointed it out before that episode aired. Ricky/Zac certainly noticed - go back through the episodes and observe how every time Cody pulled out a kunai or threw a shuriken, Ricky was cringing or facepalming with an uncomfortable laugh. Even with seven different camera perspectives to watch at the same time, it should have been pretty clear in the fandom that this was an ongoing issue that would bother and was bothering Ricky.

And I think there are several different facets to this, but the one I want to address is how there’s a tendency in fandom to ignore or erase Ricky’s Japanese heritage. Not literally (although there is a particular sting every time I see another Ricky fancast where the actor is of another Asian heritage than Japanese - Asian people are not interchangeable). But especially prior to Season 2, there was a general trend in the fandom that liked to simplify Ricky’s character and overlook him as a complex player character because of traits that are very common in East Asian immigrant cultures.

Perhaps it’s because my heritage is East Asian and I’ve had more exposure to general cultural customs and behaviours among East Asian immigrants, but Zac’s portrayal of Ricky has always read as a very obvious Asian-American child of immigrants to me (and, y’know, Zac and Ricky are actually Asian-American children of immigrants). Not expressing negative emotions out loud, not verbally articulating thoughts and feelings but expressing them through actions, deferring to other peoples’ needs first instead of expressing his own wants because it’s not about him. With the caveat that I’m Chinese and not Japanese, these are common practices that I’ve observed in my own family, among friends and acquaintances (of various Asian heritages including but not limited to Chinese), in broader experiences with other East Asian immigrants.

(Asia is not a monolith and I’m not familiar with the immigrant cultures and experiences of people from other Asian heritages. I specify East Asian here because that is broadly what I can speak on and because Ricky is Japanese, but other Asian people please feel free to discuss your experiences as well)

And obviously, these are not monolith traits observed at all times, I’ve definitely met plenty of East Asian immigrants who did express their emotions loudly, who used their words, who were assertive about their own needs and wants (this is not the post to be getting into different generations of immigration and the culture differences between those generations). And it also depends on the context - from my own experience, in private within families, both emotions and words can get extremely loud (if you dare to risk the wrath of your elders by arguing with them!) But my point is that the habits I pointed out above are still relatively common in East Asian immigrant cultures, even if not all individuals follow them at all times.

Particularly prior to Season 2, there was a common perspective in the fandom, usually couched in “uwu, I love that Zac is playing a hot dummy!!” that would go along the lines of “Ricky doesn’t have a character arc, he doesn’t get into conflicts with other people, he doesn’t say anything and is just happy to be there, he’s a shallow character who’s just a himbo.” All of which I’d dispute, (*insert post here about Ricky as a character reclaiming Asian masculinity*), but I want to focus on how the main traits -refraining from overt emotions, remaining reserved in speech, not bringing up his own needs and wants- that were brought up and used to simplify and dismiss Ricky’s character were traits which are commonly found in East Asian immigrant communities. The whole “remaining reserved/trying to avoid conflict” is something a lot of East Asian-American kids pick up at home because what you say or don’t say isn’t as important as what you do or don’t do.

And I mean, so much of Ricky is about doing things for people, showing his feelings through his actions, not his words. Just because he wasn’t getting into PC conflict in Season 1, or expressing his emotions in the same ways as other PCs, doesn’t mean he was just a silent, cheerful himbo. Which there’s nothing wrong with being a himbo, and it can be particularly empowering in Ricky’s case as an Asian man (see above linked post about Asian masculinity), but that’s not all there is to Ricky’s character! And don’t get me wrong, I personally love that part of his ongoing character arc in Season 2 is speaking up about his feelings and expressing to other people what he wants (because there’s the “American” part of the Asian-American experience that’s not just about having Asian heritage but is also about negotiating that relationship in a place with different norms and customs). But it doesn’t negate the “Asian” part of “Asian-American” either, which does impact and shape the way Ricky interacts with people and the world.

In hindsight, I don’t think it’s a coincidence that interest and meta in Ricky skyrocketed once he did start being more vocal and assertive in Season 2, which are common traits in many Western cultures. And it’s not the only reason that there’s a deeper interest in Ricky now (shout out to all the Asian fans and allies who’ve been really diving into Ricky’s character this season!) and I choose to believe in good faith that it isn’t intentional or malicious (audiences do tend to gravitate more towards tangible moments of conversation and conflict rather than background acting). But I think we as fans need to start questioning why as a whole, we really didn’t start giving deeper thought to Ricky until he began displaying more typically Western traits, because I think it’s emblematic of how, very subtly and unconsciously, we are used to privileging white “American” behaviour and ignoring or glossing over Asian (immigrant) traits.

In many ways, Ricky prior to Season 2 (and very arguably up until the museum fight), has been perceived in the general fandom as a sort of post-racial American-melting-pot character. Fans don’t wholly ignore that he’s Japanese-American, you can’t really do that when his family name is “Matsui” and when the Season 1 finale showed that his interactions with the American Dream pretty strongly involved his parents’ immigrant experience. But knowing intellectually that Ricky is Asian doesn’t always translate to actually perceiving him as an Asian person with all the implications and racial dynamics that entails.

An example of how this manifests: Ricky and Esther become a canon couple. Numerous posts begin to appear (and periodically still do) that express opinions along the lines of Ricky/Esther being the only tolerable “het” couple. Ignoring the fact that we don’t know Esther’s sexuality and we only have an offhand Ztream comment for Ricky, Ricky/Esther is a canonical interracial relationship between two non-white people, a Japanese man and a black woman. Interracial relationships are already extremely poorly represented in media, to say nothing of interracial relationships between non-white people. Yet we overlook the racial dynamics and only focus on the perceived queerness (or not) of the ship.

Or, for another example, taking the discussion on cultural appropriation and making it all about Cody’s flaws and character development, rather than considering how it affects Ricky as a Japanese man to see a white man disrespecting a part of his cultural heritage.

Anyways, I really urge D20 fans, especially if you’re not Asian, to start questioning and challenging how you really perceive characters, what kind of characteristics you tend to privilege and be drawn to and why, and what kind of fandom environment you shape in your interactions with the show and with other fans. This is not to say that Ricky should be everyone’s favourite character or that you can’t dislike him, but it is important to think about why we have the preferences that we do. I especially urge you to remember that Ricky Matsui is a Japanese-American character, that this was a deliberate choice which has been repeatedly brought up by Zac (who is a Japanese-American actor), and that you cannot and should not ignore Ricky’s heritage when you think and talk about him.

(And if you think Ricky is being an “asshole” to Cody just for being, frankly, mildly perturbed in his direction because Cody spent most of the season so far being very offensive to Ricky’s cultural heritage, I really encourage you to think critically about your opinions and why you hold them. And if, after thinking critically, you still don’t see why they’re wrong, please don’t let the door hit you on the way out. Your conscious racism is not something that is welcome in this fandom, and Asian fans are not here to teach you better)

((White and non-Asian people can and should reblog this, but don’t clown around. Productive, respectful discussion is welcome. Asian fans are more than welcome to add their perspectives/agree/disagree, especially people with Japanese heritage))

#dimension 20 #the unsleeping city #d20 spoilers #tuc ii spoilers #ricky matsui #diversity in fan spaces #asian rep #white people can and should reblog this but don't clown around #non-asian people can and should reblog this but also don't clown around #productive discussion is absolutely welcome but please be respectful #asian fans are more than welcome to add their perspectives/agree/disagree; especially fans with japanese heritage #i really love tuc but being an asian fan in the fandom is just like *avoids twitter* *avoids discord* *curated list of blogs to follow*

374 notes · View notes

whitehotharlots · 3 years

Text

The triumph of lunacy

There’s a trend in the social justice sphere that encapsulates the self-defeating idiocy of our present moment. During official meetings meant to address or raise awareness of issues of racial justice, all the white people present are expected to call themselves racist, provide examples of their racism, and explain what they’re doing to avoid being racist in the future.

I am not exaggerating, and this is as cult-like as it sounds: to enter into the discussion, you must start by saying “My name is Mark, and I’m a racist.”

This is not a fringe activity. It’s a completely mainstream part of racial justice programming. A student in Nevada is suing his school after administrators threatened to deny him graduation because he refused to call himself racist. A quick twitter search reveals dozens of examples (which I am omitting to avoid accusations of “generating death threats” or whatever), and this has been covered extensively in right wing media. This is mainstream, even if we want to pretend that it’s not.

Now, looking at this just in the abstract, a few seconds of scrutiny shows us how idiotic and self-defeating this practice is. I accept the notion that everyone is prejudiced to some degree and that most white Americans receive some structural advantages in some spaces. In this very obscure sense, you can argue that all white people are racist. Fine. But if a term is applied to literally everyone and everything, it loses its utility. If everyone is racist, then “racist” is a meaningless designation.

In practice, however, this is even more insane than it sounds. Because of course the purveyors and participants in these ritualistic humiliation sessions don’t really think that everyone is racist. If they did, they wouldn’t go through the ritual. Obviously, the people calling themselves racist are being coerced into doing so. Every person who says “My name is Mary, and I’m a racist” is thinking in the back of their head that they’re not really racist, that this confession serves as an act of ablution. And, in a truly lunatic twist of irony, the people who are regarded as racist after these sessions are the ones who did not call themselves racist.

Madness. Absolute madness.

This is precipitated, of course, by guilt. White liberals realize, correctly, the the world is fucked. The politicians and organizations that putatively represent their views have done the opposite and accelerated widespread brutality. The man who invented mass incarceration was sold as the only way to avoid “fascism.” There’s no hope of a more decent future. They feel like shit and will do anything, even self-flagellation, to glimpse the feeling that maybe they’re kind of sort of partway making the world less horrible. They’re not--objectively, this type of gross bullshit is alienating, makes non-insane people disengage with the movement, and has been empirically proven to reduce empathy and make people more hateful. But they feel a little better for doing it.

Beyond guilt, however, lies coercion. I’ll bet the vast, vast majority of people who have subjected themselves to these struggle sessions didn’t believe a word they were saying but were just going along to avoid getting in trouble. Personally, I’m not going to lose my job and my healthcare just to avoid a few moments of cynical embarrassment. Very few people would.

It was just today that I realized how commonplace this type of dishonesty has become. If you live or work in a liberal space, ask yourself this question: how many times in the last few years have you professed a belief in something you knew was crazy? How many times have you been made to signal approval for ideas that you knew to be harmful, impossible, or reactionary in order to avoid being branded an Enemy of Social Justice? How many times have you stayed silent and let yourself be bullied into feigning support for policies and procedures that contradict your beliefs?

More than a few, I’ll bet. Now ask yourself: what has been gained from this? Is the world more just or safe or equal than it was before this type of shit was made commonplace? Do you have more hope for the future, or less?

The only political effect of this normalization of dishonesty has been the ascendance of the most reactionary faction of the Democrat party. A left that had not been trained to hate itself would not have voted for Joe Biden.

This is what happens when a movement places zero value upon honesty and decency. When all conflict becomes understood as abuse, when all criticism is regarded as violence, the most sociopathic and violent members of a community are the ones who get to set the agenda. No one can push back. No one can dissent. The demand for absolute uniformity cripples the movement’s ability to accomplish anything beyond enriching a handful of the very worst people on earth.

We did this to ourselves, and I worry we might be past the point of no return. Just a few months ago I still held some hope that we might see a turn around, that saner and more decent voices might take control and actualize our widespread disgust and discontent toward policies that would actually help people. That’s not going to happen. The sociopaths have won. Their candidate is president, their ideology is mandatory, and their ability to hurt anyone who crosses them is stronger than ever.

Joe Biden will be the most austerity-minded president since Herbert Hoover. His reign is going to be disastrous for everyone, especially those who are already vulnerable. His supporters, secure in their positions within media and NGOs and academe, will need to fabricate more scapegoats to explain away the failures and brutalities of their leader--to convince everyone that they deserve the punishment they are receiving. They’re going to demand and receive more intrusive means of ensuring ideological uniformity. And there’s nothing we can do to stop them.

27 notes · View notes

sanstropfremir · 3 years

Text

kingdom episode 3 baby!!!!

listen. i’m not gonna lie i was nervous as hell for this episode. i saw that preview like everyone else and unfortunately i have ears so i was convinced the ateez stage was going to be a trainwreck. i was absolutely banking on sf9 and skz to do something even mildy interesting to save me from the ear damage and having to talk to extensively about why that disaster happened. but somehow i woke up in an alternate universe and you know what? with the exception of that high note the ateez stage fucked. i know. i don’t believe it either. i think i’m still in shock.

i’ll do individual breakdowns in order of favourites within the episode and then at the end i’ll put my personal ranking of all six. thank god i don’t have to do a stage breakdown again; if they change it again for next week i will scream.

ateez

a miracle happened. i don’t have to fight any of the staff at kq. i don’t understand either. jongho is so fucking lucky that the rest of the group pulled all that energy out of their asses because if they had been even a single iota less serious about it that stage would have flopped worse than a dead fish. i can’t believe we got this level of camp b movie schlock in the first full stage, and they stuck the landing. incredible.

fine i’ll address the elephant in the room. personally, i don’t think jongho is that good of a vocalist. he’s not bad, and he does have the potential to be a good vocalist, he just doesn’t have the training, and this is the issue with all of ateez. hanya talked about this before and i’ll say it again: he can’t switch to his head voice and he’s destroying his vocal cords by attempting to hit notes in his mid range that he should just jump to head voice for. frankly i’m surprised he got anywhere close to that note in his mid, but his technique is just not there and he’s gonna do some real damage to his voice if he doesn’t take a break and also get a good vocal coach. you can already hear the degradation in sound from their debut stage to now, and that’s in less than three years. ok i’m done talking about vocals that’s hanya’s turf, i’m pretending that that high note doesn’t exist and we’re moving on. also im in love with btob’s reaction it was fucking priceless.

costume

look, i have a one track brain and that brain can only think about seonghwa corset. seonghwa corset? seonghwa corset.

i know it’s not a real corset nor is it properly laced and i know this would never happen in a million years but a kpop mr pearl trend? i would die. just fully expire. there’s no coming back from that for me

yes i have laced boys into proper corsets before and yes it is as hot as you think it is (when it’s not work related, obviously)

ok now that i’ve got that out of my system for the moment, the costumes are actually pretty good. i’m a little obsessed with hongjoong’s coat although I know it’s stupid. fur? always, I love it, you’ll never change my mind it makes everything better. i own a lot of it and i wear it all the time. this is also a pretty good example of how to do a more modern styling within a very specific and recognizable genre.

i don’t hate the backup dancers’ costumes either, even though they would look a lot better in a not-pirate themed hiphop stage. because there is already a modern tint with the boys’ costumes, it’s not that much of a leap to the dancers, and they actually use the dancers and the camera really strategically to not put much focus on them.

the only real standout issue is the blacklight/contortionist moment, which is too gimmicky for me and doesn’t fit the rest of the theme. i do understand the purpose of them: you need a transition point from the upper deck to the more fantastical inner ship area, and blacklight paint is a really easy, cheap, and fast way to get four new costumes instantly. do i think they could have done something better though? yes.

set

this was actually a smart reuse of that pirate ship set. i know i clowned on them in the first stage that they could move on from the pirate gimmick but honestly? i’m glad they didn’t. this was fun as fuck. but also two stages was enough you can move on now.

i love how they actually used the weird double stage function that the false prosc creates for an actual architectural and narrative effect, instead of just sort of operating as though it’s just another place to travel just because you can. we are on the deck of the ship, and then we go inside the ship. it’s simple and effective. you don’t need to do a crazy amount of crossover to establish a dynamic sense of place.

i hate the ateez kingdom logo. i hate the ateez logo in general. get it out of there, at least you could have made something more fun and pirate themed.

would have loved to have seen them return to the hourglass at the end, especially if they got one that was specifically set for 4 minutes. would have been a nice bit of symmetry but i suspect it was struck before the kraken bit.

the kraken bit??? i was not at all expecting that and honestly? dope as hell. that big tentacle is just a custom inflatable santa claus that you see around christmastime and what a brilliant use of such a simple mechanic, especially to have it come through that weird little triangle arch they have upstage. smart way to use the existing architecture.

yes it is a gimmick but here’s why it works rather than just looks tacky like every other gimmick we’ve seen so far: it had a function within the narrative. this is so important. show us there’s a reason it’s there!

lighting

i didn’t love it but they did actually make some smart choices. the outer deck is warmer toned and has some good atmospheric effects, and the inner deck is cold tone and specifically lit with pin lights to imitate the light coming through portholes in an actual ship, which is so smart thank you lighting designer

also a very clear arc with the lighting, blue -> orange -> blue/red -> orange/multiple -> blue

sound

i actually kinda liked this remix? it fit theme and had a very clear dramatic arc. also i like wonderland, so sue me.

staging

WE DID IT, WE FINALLY GOT A CLEAR NARRATIVE FROM AT LEAST ONE GROUP! wonderland was actually a great choice for them because it’s a really good indicator of exactly how hungry they are. i was a bit worried that it would fall flat because it kinda rides on mingi but they actually pulled it off. i have literally no idea where they pulled all that energy from but holy shit you can practically lick the attitude off the screen. i’m also very impressed by the amount of information they managed to fit into that four minute narrative. we had a full conflict/climax/resolution, as well as a really clear understanding of the tenacity and drive of the group, as well as the desire to support one another in achieving their goals. bravo.

ok so like i said in the set section, they used that pirate ship bridge really effectively to create two different but connected spaces. this is a really smart way to make it seem like you have two spaces while having to only build one set. it was also one of the best ways to utilize this dumbass stage so it doesn’t just look like you’re running arbitrarily from area to area because you can.

also levels! levels are so important for staging but also hard to do in this context because you have to be able to move really quickly in and out of full group formation, but I think they did a really good job here.

continued point: the kraken arm worked because it was the conflict they needed to overcome in the narrative, so it had a function within the performance. also related: all the tricking and jumping also served a purpose within the narrative too. it was either used for fighting (yeosang kicking all those dancers on beat) or a demonstration of teamwork (jongho flinging yunho around on the floor). also frankly excellent use of choreographic formation with the backup dancers, each formation had a specific function and was meant to highlight ateez without being overbearing.

not a whole lot of camera choreo, but a fairly good long take at the beginning and the editing wasn’t too obnoxious which I think was more chance than intent, but i’m not gonna look a gift kraken in the beak.

sf9

i actually really liked this stage, and i really like that sf9 has established their colour as effortlessly elegant, which does set them apart from the rest of the groups. this stage was really choreographically complex and they made it seem so easy, so real props to them. however, like with ikon’s stage, there were a lot of good ideas that just weren’t followed through enough for me.

like ateez, song choice and theme were very well intertwined with this one, there was a lot of thought put into this stage. the pun with ‘jealous’ and ‘jilleosseo’ and having a fairytale/magic mirror narrative? fuckin GALAXY BRAINED. incredible. the implication that not only taeyang but the entire group is the evil queen from snow white? chef’s kiss. should have committed harder and put one of them in massive cloak à la king taemin mama 2020. instead it was subtle enough to not try to step on ateez’s schlocky camp toes but still just as serious and i love that. do i wish they pushed it farther though? also yes.

costume

not gonna lie, i had my reservations on the costumes when we saw the previews of them in the waiting room, but the thing about stage costumes is that they always look bad when not on stage. if they look good in the waiting room you’ve done something wrong. and i loved them on stage. big fan of that quilted vest/pseudo stomacher. please can we have a corset trend? y’all already adopted bondage harnesses, c’mon a little corset won’t hurt. also a good example of a modern spin on a recognizable genre.

i wish the backup dancers weren’t in all black but i am fighting single person battle against the entire entertainment industry on that one.

set

extremely simple with a few smart utilizations. had a feeling this might have been a budget thing, as it had a similar kind of vibe with ikon’s stage, but the use of the mirrors was smart and a fun device that served the purpose of the narrative.

working with mirrors on stage is really fucking hard, so kudos to them for giving it a go. for the most part it was pretty effective. especially with the combo of moving mirrors and moving lights AND moving camera, you’re kind of asking to either blind your audience or at least give them a headache. i once saw a production of the magic flute that had a rotating mirror setpiece and i swear i nearly went blind due to the constantly flashing reflections. you have to really be careful with directionality and reflection, especially with the added element of a camera. also you never use real glass mirrors on stage, it is unbelievably bad luck and theatre people are the most superstitious demographic on the fucking planet.

i kinda loved the draped gold dais. i have nothing else to say about it other than fun!

lighting

a lot of this was very weirdly lit and i’m not sure why. the quality on youtube is terrible and cameras already have trouble picking up detail in low light, and throwing a whole bunch of primary red over that (the colour with the longest wavelength and therefore disappears the easiest in the dark. also human eyes are not very good at distinguishing variations in the red spectrum) and the red costumes made it extremely difficult to tell what was happening.

i will give them props for dramatic lighting usage, especially for the two way mirror trick and for using the floor as a primary lighting source at the end, which i think groups should be using more of. how often do you have a lighting source in your floor!!! almost never!! use that opportunity!!

sound

i actually enjoyed this remix too. it was well suited to the dramatic nature of the stage. i think the sound byte at the beginning is ‘mirror mirror on the wall who’s the worthiest of them all’ but it also could be ‘who’s the worst of them all’ and that would be also fitting and kinda funny.

staging

again, not a lot of consideration for camera choreo in a meaningful way, and like the tbz stage I think the clarity in the actual choreo got hampered by the editing. because there was a lot of choreographic precision that went into making this work and it wasn’t totally obvious from the way mnet edited it.

a lot of them are actors so it works that they’re leaning more towards dramatic stages rather than the sort of performance type stages we’ve seen so far. i like this choice for them as it gives them a very obvious colour but they’re almost on the verge of making it look too easy, which does them some injustice.

next to ateez, using that long uninterrupted traverse was my favourite use of this stage. doubles as an easy way to build the atmosphere of a palace corridor/throne room with the rug, and to feed the drama of the piece.

skz

ok i have some…..things to say about this stage. so far i have not been kind to skz which makes me look like i hate them and i don’t, i promise. there were a lot of really interesting things happening in this stage and there some really successful ones, and i liked this a whole lot better than their intro stage, but their overall choreo and thematic dedication is really killing me. i’ll explain.

costume

I don’t hate them but also…….why? I got the good self vs evil self/internal struggle theme but the costumes don’t really have anything interesting to say about that. as far as modern style costuming goes i think they’re on the more interesting end, but they don’t push it far enough. there’s a few western art history visual motifs and honestly? they should have gone whole hog and whited out their faces/hair and made them look like classical sculptures. that would have been hella fun, especially with that little statue and marionette sequence, plus the shadow/leash manipulation.

this time it was actually intentional that the backup dancers were in blacks and i appreciate that.

why on EARTH did they have that ridiculous makeup that didn’t read on stage? theatre makeup and tv makeup are different, you can’t just do a light purple eyeshadow and expect to read under blue and red light. someone needs to bring an actual theatre makeup artist in and get these boys in some real crazy looks. see previous point about full-face white pancake. more extreme makeup please and thank you!

set

i liked the use of internal architecture within this massive weird stage space and they used the corridors quite well. i didn’t really like the mix of baroque scrolling and also graffiti, it wasn’t quite connected for me. this has been a common theme among this round and i think it comes from budget/props pulls rather than anything else.

also there was a distinct feeling of trying to fill the main stage space with bodies as opposed to atmosphere. this can work in some specific cases but the intent wasn’t strong enough for me. it just felt like a lot of people on stage, especially in the end choreo.

lighting

the general lighting was fine but not particularly inspired. the low light in the beginning was actually quite well done, especially combined with the fog, but in my opinion was not dramatic enough. you have a pseudo art history theme happening, pump that contrast and push the chiaroscuro!

ok stay with me, i’m gonna say something extremely controversial that might actually get me cancelled. s*per j*unior’s burn the floor did everything this stage was trying to do on a smaller scale and better. look i know ok, this is a like, a double atom bomb hot take. just forget everything you know about them and watch the performance video. tell me that’s not some of the most interesting choreo you’ve seen in kpop. if you’re going to work with practical light you need to COMMIT. not just steal the solar lanterns out of my mom’s back garden.

i have a lot of opinions on using practical light and alternate light sources in performance because it’s a huge part of my practice and this just....wasn’t interesting enough for me. push it further!

(I will wait for the subs on the full episode because there has to be a reason they chose that specific shape of lamp. if not i gotta ask jyp why he’s raiding my mom’s garden)

sound

god’s menu has such specific imagery associated within the lyrics and choreography that this stage was a bit dissonant for me. especially when seen in conjunction with two stages where the narrative was tied explicitly to the lyrics of the songs. i think maybe if it hadn’t been grouped with these other two stages i would have felt differently. the other groups chose to do songs were a little more abstract and allowed for more visual experimentation, but to go so blatantly against the food metaphor didn’t really work for me and i had a tough time divorcing the association. I found the arrangement to be a little lacking in energy for me towards the end but otherwise it was pretty interesting.

staging

Definitely a better performance overall that the intro stage. almost all of the gimmicks this time had relevance to the theme which i appreciated. the marionette bit and the shadow/mirror were probably the most interesting but i wish they were better lit.

there was a lot of back and forth in the blocking that made the stage feel repetitive and also aimless? like there wasn’t a very clearly established directionality within the internal space, so it felt like treading over the same ground for no purposeful reason. and again, not a lot of intentional camerawork.

i really liked having the dancers under the big sheet, it fit well enough within the ‘war between internal selves’ theme, but also had a loose tie to the art imagery. again, i really wish they had stuck to a clearer visual theme. it makes them stick out especially in this grouping of stages, but also across all the groups as whole because almost everyone had a clear(ish) visual idea.

holy shit that’s a lot of backup dancers. i don’t really feel like that many were necessary and the sheer number of them took away from the emphasis of the group. with all of the other stages (except for tbz) it was very clear who the centre of attention and emphasis was, and with both skz and tbz they got swallowed by the sheer scale they were trying to operate at. bigger is not always better.

---

this is a tough round to rank because none of these stages are bad, there’s just some that are, in my opinion, more successful than others. all of these stages do very well in specific elements but fall short in others which also makes this ranking difficult. i’m evaluating these based on whether they were successful to me, as i’m pretty sure this ranking will probably not all be popular opinion, but whatever i like to live on the edge.

btob – visuals, vocals, narrative, swords? what more do you want me to say? also i watched the full episode and minhyuk did rehearsal with a real bokken and i think i am in love with him now.

ateez – honestly not sure if i would have ranked this first if that high note hadn’t been a mess. i love camp nonsense and i genuinely think this was a well designed stage. i can’t believe i keep saying that but it’s true.

sf9 – this stage was really solid, just could have been pushed farther. i think it has a really good sense of drama and it’s a pity that sf9’s colour is more subdued, because i think they’re going to be stuck around the 3rd/4th position for the rest of the show.

ikon – ikon is only ranking this high because although i am disappointed in the wasted potential of this stage, they NAILED the camerawork and actually brought in someone to block the steadicam into the choreo. also they’re incredible performers. i say this every time, but their stage presence, although maybe lower energy that they normally would be, is still not to be fucked with.

skz – i think this one is the most ‘meh’ for me. while i liked a lot of the elements here they just didn’t push it far enough and the lack of narrative and general aimless choreo led to me not having any strong feelings yea or nay.

tbz – to be quite honest the lack of costume unity is a big hit for me. all elements of design are equally as important but because of my personal practice and experience i tend to put a lot of weight on good costume and spatial design. i don’t actually like game of thrones also, so I feel mildly offended on behalf of michele clapton, who had did a fucking incredible job and doesn’t deserve to be slandered like this. also the lack of cohesive choreography and the overblown lighting made this difficult to watch, no matter how good i thought the rear projection/stretch fabric dance was.

any questions or opinions you wanna share hit me up! see you next week!

#im ready for the angry asks about that s*ju opinion because that is a spicy one #kingdom #kingdom review #kpop analysis #im so surprised by these stages i cant believe ateez stuck the landing #i saw the preview for next week also and the new round looks wild so im ready #text

11 notes · View notes

moondrop04 · 3 years

Text

RWBY VOLUME 8 FINALE AFTERMATH!!!

SPOILERS!!!

WOW.......What A F***** Finale To End A Volume!!!! I was left surprised, shocked, sad, disappointed and ecstatic with the events that unfolded and also for the future of the RWBY series!!! I have so many theories and headcanons racking in my brain that I’m acting like a Giddy Little Troll 😆. So let’s jump right into the FINAL aftermath of Volume 8....

-(Tick-Tock Took Out The Vine) Before starting into this I want to give a shout out to CRWBY for starting out the episode with the “Warning” for the deaths that we were about to witness. I’m glad they were thoughtful for their fanbase’s wellbeing after watching this finale and hope they continue this trend of “warnings” in the future.

Now onto the first major character death of the episode......Vine 👀. I was fully expecting to see at least one of the Ace-Op members to die in the finale and I was actually quite surprised to see it only be Vine. Given the circumstances that Qrow, Vine, Elm, Marrow and Robyn were put into because of Harriet’s blind loyalty, it wouldn’t be too hard to have expected more characters to die in that situation.

Vine has always been the calm one within the team, so to see him willing to sacrifice himself to save his friends from death was a very touching moment. I was also honestly quite surprised he could used his semblance like that as well 😳. I kinda wished we had seen some more aspects of him extending his aura like that in previous episodes, but that’s just a bit of a small nit-pick of mine.

It’s also going to be interesting how this will impact the rest of the Ace-Op members going forward, especially Harriet. This will no doubt cause some inner turmoil for her character and only time will tell what type of effect it will hold in future dire situations .

-(Fighting For Your Beliefs) Hmmm......I’ll be honest......I was a bit disappointed with Winter and Ironwood’s fight 😓. Now I have a few reasons why I feel like this so let me explain....

1:I think the decision to make Ironwood fight with a “BFG” against Winter was a poor one. As we have seen in Volume 7 episode 11 we know that Ironwood can fight much better with his duel hand cannons. Watching him fight with a bigger weapon against a much more agile opponent didn’t feel right to me lol.

2: Having Winter win the fight using the maiden powers. Now I have no issue with Penny giving the powers to Winter, but I would have preferred if she could have found a way to defeat Ironwood without having the convenient power up. Winter is a very good fighter in her own right and I think having her defeat Ironwood with her abilities alone would mean much more before she was given the maiden powers by Penny.

3: Now I have said this before in previous posts but I would have liked it if Qrow was the one to fight Ironwood. There was indeed a bit of a build up for Qrow to fight Ironwood this volume so I do feel we were a bit blue-balled for that confrontation. Then after some time to think about it I feel the decision to make Winter be the one face Ironwood was the right one. Considering that this was the end of Atlas and that these two characters are the most associated with Atlas, made their fight against each other more fitting then leaving it up to Qrow.

The only positives I can give this fight is that it showcased more of Winter’s fighting potential and I was pleased how the animators made her fight with both Ironwood and later with Cinder. 😊

-(For Her Friends) Now onto definitely the most important part of this episode......Penny’s death. Now I’m really gonna be honest with all of you......I was not at all surprised that Penny died in the finale 😔. Ever since she gained the maiden powers she was always gonna have the “Red Flag” known as Cinder be connected to her. I more or less imagined that Penny’s powers would be taken by Cinder at some point and Penny would make some sacrificial play to save her friends while she still had her robot body. So when I witnessed her second death, as a REAL GIRL, I was shouting out “How could I be so RIGHT and so WRONG all at the same time!?” 😫

Now what has me intrigued about this second death is the part about Jaune’s involvement. I’m gonna keep my opinion about this choice from the writers neutral for now because I feel this is deeply connected to what they have already written for Volume 9. There’s is something they are planning for Jaune in the future and I want to see the whole picture of what they are drawing out before giving this either a thumbs up or a thumbs down. 😤

I have one more thing I want to bring up about this, and this is my opinion so if anyone wants to skip over this part I totally understand......so here it is. I truly believe Penny will be brought back to life in the future 🙂. When she first “died” back in volume 3 I fully believed she would be back eventually, so even if the circumstances are different this time around I am still having that same feeling that she will come back. I understand everyone else has their own feelings about what happen to Penny so I will not disapprove how everyone feels about it. It’s just how I feel about it is all 😊.....

-(The Captain Goes Down With His Ship) So.........this is the end of James Ironwood. As Atlas inevitably falls, so to does the man that represented as its symbol throughout the series and it’s aspects of strength, elitism and control.....

.......yeah I’m not buying it 😒

Something feels off if this is how he “permanently” dies..... I understand the symbolism of his “fall” parallels that of Atlas crashing down and being destroyed, but him dying doesn’t feel complete to me....

Not to mention this man has survived with half his body being destroyed in the past with what I believe to be nothing but his sheer will. So if I had to bet on anything I think he would have found a way to have survived Atlas’s crash and the flood that came afterwards....but I think he would be terribly wounded in the process....

There are also a few characters that I feel he hasn’t had a satisfying conclusion with that still needs to be addressed......Qrow, Oz and Glynda.

Also forgot to mention that apparently Arther Watts is dead too.....yeah I believe he’s not dead either 🤨. In fact I’m fully expecting Watts will survive but will be horribly burned and scarred the next time we see him. He will vow vengeance against Cinder and will stop at nothing to obtain his revenge on her. So it would be really lucky of him to find an unconscious and badly wounded general nearby that he could kidnap and experiment on to be his personal attack dog later to kill Cinder 🤔......wouldn’t that be a something to see lol

I’ll gladly wear some clown shoes and makeup in believing that we will be seeing both Ironwood and Watts again in the future, and if I’m wrong then I’ll gladly accept that L from everybody.....till then see you again next time general Ironwood and Arther Watts 🤗

-(Volume 9 and The Future Of RWBY) Alright! There is a couple of reasons why this post has taken me three weeks for me to write 😓.

First reason obviously is because of my job 😭. Some things have been happening at my work that has been stressing me out for weeks and honestly it’s been exhausting to even write anything....

Second reason is that over the course of the past few weeks after the finale aired I have been non-stop thinking of several headcannons, theories and speculations on what may happen in volume 9 and future volumes of RWBY 😆!! Don’t believe me? Here is some of the crazy s*** that came out of my head lol

-Team RWBY, Jaune and Neo meet the God Of Darkness

-The God Of Darkness gives Team RWBY power ups and new outfits to fight against Salem. Also gives Neo the ability to speak.

-Oscar vs Raven

-Salem sends Cinder to Vale to search for the Crown of Choice......but not alone. She gives Cinder 4 more experimental S.E.W Grimm to aid her and one of them happens to be Summer Rose.

-Horribly burned and scarred Watts kidnaps a wounded Ironwood and experiments on his body to change him into a complete cyborg with one objective......kill Cinder.

Believe me I have more context for each of those that I just addressed but that’s for separate posts that I hope to make in the future lol 🤗

Well that’s about all I got for that finale review and I literally cannot wait to see what happens next 😤 lol. I hope to engage with some of you in the fandom in the future and hope we get along 😎

Till next time........BUH-BYE!!!!

#rwby #rwby volume 8 #rwby volume 8 spoilers #rwby ruby rose #weiss schnee #blake bellodona #yang xiao long #rwby salem #cinder fall #oscar pine #jaune arc #nora valkyrie #lie ren #penny polendina #winter schnee #emerald sustrai #neopolitan #qrow branwen #raven branwen

8 notes · View notes

frankrich08 · 3 years

Text

Gratis Pornofilms: Toegankelijk, gratis en biedt een verscheidenheid aan opties

The free adult porn market is virtually successful today and more and more websites pop-up in that industry every day. The vids that they number are essentially mind-blowing and persons like them. On each free porn page are available a certain number of categories that will allow you to try to find the vids you want the most. The bunch that in some manner appears to show me on is the Amateur. Amateur 100% free porn vids are merely astounding - you will find number phrases and terms in any way to describe a property produced movie with you and your girlfriend making love in the craziest way possible. I definitely am in to these videos and i admit that I check out them once in a while. From their store fresh methods may be mastered for desirable your fan better. Most of these 20min videos can be looked at to be instructional vids from where you stand in a position to learn how to take action definitely better, how to guard your self and what points you mustn't do during intercourse. Nearly all free porn amateur vids get a little something distinctive that makes them one of the very wished-for. Looking at how unprofessional individuals start getting, pressing, undressing, considering them how they're creating real enjoy - that stuff can not be within perhaps not an added free porn type and i also consider that amateur vids are worth the first invest any cost-free adult porn type countdown. What I like the absolute most about free porn inexperienced vids would be the strategy they are done: through the help of a cellphone or even a digicam or even utilizing the webcam of the Personal computer or laptop computer. What I enjoy far more is the truth that those individuals who have intercourse on the camera post their video on the net, on specialized free porn websites which variety this type of films and may generate some money from it... really cool! Try out such a vid all on your own and hit me up - inform me what you think of it and from a range from 1 to 10, precisely how good the amateur type is. Queer but correct, you will find a lot more persons than you are able to ever envision who're addicted with seeing porn. Truth to be told, it has been noted lately that almost 50% of all men are in reality having this addiction and they might not really understand about it. Anyhow, if you are one of them, be assured that you're certainly not unique. In order to support offer with this specific addiction, listed here are 3 killer truths that you definitely should know. To start with, you'll need to realize that the complete pornography business is full of lies. In order for it to be attractive to the visitors, porn makers do not only operate, but additionally abuse in addition to deceive models to get them to pose. You will likely then be victimized as a viewer since you obtain dependent with moments which can be really unreal and fictitious. Besides, the demand for pornography has directly led to an business that will be packed with crazy sex slave and sins. Secondly, when you receive dependent with pornography, chances have you been will become increasingly entrenched inside around time. Obviously, you'd often be in the search for the new works which offer greater excitement in your search for the illusory pleasure. In significant instances, such a trend could lead to the scenario wherever one would have absolutely no regards for ethical obligations as well as claims with their loved ones. Besides, according to medical specialists, dependency in pornography may be explained as an ailment that greatly influences the brain. The pleasure this one gets through it is similar to that during actual sexual intercourse, but the outcomes of both processes are completely different. The reason being the former has anything related to images and videos while the specific sexual intercourse is an affiliation with a human that you love. In regards to free porn preventing application, sometimes you do get everything you spend for. But if you pay nothing for it, sometimes that's precisely what you should get. NOTHING! Several of those businesses may bait you with the notion of "free", only to have onto your computer. Afterward you find yourself buying the "defense" that you required in the first place! You can find 3 issues that free porn blockers will NOT do for you personally, and I am planning to name all of them! Why? Since the porn industry is a BILLION buck company! They've found all kinds of ingenious methods to cover their sites behind clever and sometimes relatively "simple" domain names that the free blockers cannot even begin to filter. Oh, they can filter out "Playboy.com", but can they filter "Whitehouse.com"?(Not to be puzzled with Whitehouse.gov. The actual white house's genuine website.) Why might a blocker want to filter out a record sharing website? What's a file sharing site? Well, file discussing websites are the key places to visit get illegally saved audio from the internet. As well as music, these sites also have software and movies that you could download. That's right, PORN! You key in the title of a song. In these benefits you will see small porn movies which can be downloaded. When the internet was however getting a foothold, whenever you might mention that title, first thing to come in to many people's minds was porn. However, as time as gone by, this concept has changed as people have discovered useful ways of online and how they are able to construct their organization applying it. Nonetheless, porn is still really significant on the internet. Actually, with the large speeds of connection to the web, getting porn videos, videos and shows happens in a subject of minutes and somebody can easily get a regular amount of the same. So as the topic of this short article suggests: can it be practical to rid the net of porn? The answer is just a large NO! Using such a cause would be a large waste of time. One of the issues that will make this trigger difficult is the total amount of income that is created in the porn industry. This is why you may find hundreds upon tens and thousands of porn websites, whose clients are mainly males, who invest plenty of their income trying to find intercourse on the internet. Some sites present free movies to attract their clients. The others allow'do-it-yourself'films to be uploaded. Whatever the case, you'll still discover people spending their income for intercourse on the internet. The living of pornography on the internet is not merely established by money but in addition by the flexibility of expression and freedom of speech. In the early stages of the net, the online earth seemed to be'fairly natural'with people applying phrases with constraint and being cautious not to offend others. But as time has gone by and the letting of people to talk what they think, pornography has wound up rising and enlarging its on line territory. Nonetheless, porn has been, is still and can be there in spite of the forms it could come in. What the net has been doing is to make the entry of porn rapidly and easy; it has decrease the embarrassment that certain may have if they've to purchase a porn film from an adult store. The drawback of that is that really young kids can obtain access to this pornographic material. But thank heavens for the web and their power to place safeguards in position and ensure parents can get a handle on the kind of sites their children can access. Which means parents have the best obligation of ensuring that their young ones do not have usage of adult material on websites. The net isn't accountable for this. To find new details on gratis seksvideo's please visit source. Among the major problems of pornography is addiction. You will see so many individuals dependent on porn which they will always be trying to find any possibility to go online and download either pornographic video clips or photographs in a bid satisfy a craving that is hard to satisfy. Alcohol has always been there and so have alcoholics. The answer has never been to eradicate the alcohol but for the alcoholics to admit their problems. In the same way, eliminating pornography is not the solution; the porn addicts seeking help is preferred solution. One issue that will have to be addressed is that of child pornography. This matter has had the oppertunity to slip into the internet even though you can find law agencies that enforce regulations against such practices. The web cannot be regulated or legislated by laws of a specific nation. This is because each country has their own group of laws that they run with. Like, in China, the us government has been able to close some websites they have deemed unsuitable. What really makes something pornographic? What are the acceptable and non acceptable kinds of pornography? These are some questions which are very difficult to answer as regarding what might be pornographic material and what's normal. Where in actuality the line is drawn is as yet not known because people have their own various notions on pornography.'Violent and extreme pornography'is known as a crime in line with the British government. The issue is that what might seem extreme to someone might not be extreme to another. Freedom of speech and expression should be allowed as long as it doesn't incite violence or conflict between parties. The internet seems to be the only real place where this freedom may be maximized on. The web shouldn't certainly be a threat in a bead to rid it of pornography. Trying to do this will be a service in futility. What needs to be done is to place controls and measures. All of us know that pornography is all online; it's difficult to trust there are those who actually don't view or watch porn online. But there are always circumstances where porn must be used out of the computer, either to help keep the kids from snooping around private directories or to help keep it far from people who want to access your files through file sharing. If you've got a porn collection growing in your computer but are now actually worried that other people will have the ability to see your files without your knowledge, then this is actually the article for you. That is especially useful for people who wish to help keep their porn collection a secret from prying eyes, snoopy hackers, and needless to say those who share computers and laptops for different reasons. You will find basically two surefire ways on how to Remove Porn From Computer quickly. The foremost is removing your files and folders from your computer and moving it to another location that's far more secured and protected from other people. This is a good option if you do not desire to erase all of your porn files and if you've spent days and nights just downloading bulks of porn from the internet. But obviously, you've to consider that people are coping with big bulks of porn here and the full time it requires to maneuver each video and every album is going to be dragging and long. Here are some of the most useful options to use: You can begin by searching for each file and folder, including ZIP and RAR files, and putting them all under one directory. You need to use certain programs that will even retrieve and recover a few of the files which were long forgotten and left in other folders. Then you're able to organize your collection by segregating them in accordance with file type. Since JPGs and GIFs are smaller in dimensions, you are able to move these first prior to starting moving the videos. You are able to either move it to a new partition in your computer or an additional hard drive for safekeeping. Another way to save your collection is to burn them in a CD or DVD, but this is still accessible to anyone who lives with you and who are able to rummage through your stuff without you knowing it. Now if you're girlfriend or sibling has problems with pornography like, you may want to consider learning how to Remove Porn From Computer completely, leaving no trace whatsoever in your hard disk for them to see. You can use the exact same programs to retrieve and recover your files and eventually delete everything including the ones that are automatically encrypted. You can find articles in websites all over the World Wide Web that provide detailed instructions on how to Remove Porn From Computer to help you take some time to consider those in case something goes wrong or you are still unsure if your personal computer is free from porn or not.

#Gratis Porno

1 note · View note

thefudge · 4 years

Note

Just out of curiosity, did you read JK's essay? I don't support everything in it but many parts resonated with me. Not to mention the horrific online abuse hurled at her, especially the countless, countless "choke on my dick" phrases thrown at her which are so violently misogynistic, it left me with a deep seated feeling of not only discomfort but fear as well. Idk I guess I just felt safe sending this because your blog seems more open to discussion from the other side instead of instant cancel.

i’m glad you think so about this blog and i hope that remains the case.

i didn’t have a chance to read JK’s essay until today (my previous ask about her was written before that) but here are some very, very imperfect thoughts on it:

the essay confirmed my previous take that she has inoculated herself against certain outside arguments but it’s also made me wonder about JK’s understanding of gender and sex. She is very attached to “natal women” and calling all people who menstruate “women” because of “common experiences”, despite the fact that her beloved de Beauvoir, whom she quotes in the essay extensively, acknowledged that “woman” is a social construct. JK herself at one point complains about having to comply with the rules of femininity while growing up and how it made her want to stop being female, so what is the truth? She argues that young girls shouldn’t be thinking about transitioning just because they are made to hate their femaleness but that’s!!! exactly what!!! pushing the term “woman” as sacrosanct does to girls!!! most of what JK felt in her childhood was the kind of misogyny which connects women strictly to their uterus. it made being male a better alternative precisely because of the gate-keeping of penis/vagina. a young girl who acted like a tomboy, for instance, would be criticized for trying to deny her sex, because deep down her biology still made her a “woman”. both sex and gender cannot be divorced from socio-cultural realities, because we act with our bodies and embody what we act. so, if we expand what it means to be a “man” and a “woman”, we liberate, not confine. JK wants young people to feel free to be whoever they want to be, but they must be called “women” when discussing menstruation or else (i won’t even go into the obvious addition that many cis and trans women exist who cannot or no longer menstruate).

Now, she does bring up some fair points about cancel culture and freedom of expression that I will level with, but the problem is that the nuancing she is trying to achieve also serves as weirdly specific dog-whistling. So let me address that:

(warning: spoilers for the Cormoran Strike series)

Right off the bat, we have this explanation added in her intro:

“On one level, my interest in this issue has been professional, because I’m writing a crime series, set in the present day, and my fictional female detective is of an age to be interested in, and affected by, these issues herself (...)”

and already, i’m asking questions. how is Robin Ellacott, one of the protagonists of the Strike series, “affected" by these issues, personally? she’s “of an age” to...what? be gender critical? there’s not a lot of that in the novels (unless you count Robin being tall and knowing how to drive well being framed as anti-girly...). How does crime relate to it? How is she connected to this really?

the real connection JK wants us to see because she’ll reveal it later in the essay is that Robin was r*ped in college. she’s a sexual assault survivor, which must make her critically engaged with the fate of trans women because....because underneath JK’s empty statement about her female detective....is the correlation that men “disguised” as trans women can perpetrate the same sort of horrific abuse. she keeps making this correlation throughout the essay.

Here she talks about various people who’ve reached out to her:

They’re worried about the dangers to young people, gay people and about the erosion of women’s and girl’s rights. Above all, they’re worried about a climate of fear that serves nobody – least of all trans youth – well.

And again here:

“So I want trans women to be safe. At the same time, I do not want to make natal girls and women less safe. When you throw open the doors of bathrooms and changing rooms to any man who believes or feels he’s a woman – and, as I’ve said, gender confirmation certificates may now be granted without any need for surgery or hormones – then you open the door to any and all men who wish to come inside. That is the simple truth.”

This one is my favorite because it’s so twisted (here she’s listing her charity work):

“The second reason is that I’m an ex-teacher and the founder of a children’s charity, which gives me an interest in both education and safeguarding. Like many others, I have deep concerns about the effect the trans rights movement is having on both.”

“safeguarding”

hmmmm

What JK wants to spell out with these “common sense” arguments is that she fears that trans women are predatory, and the most convincing argument she can bring, ultimately, is that she herself has been the victim of sexual abuse and therefore, that potential fear never goes away. That’s a very dangerous leap to make. The climate of “fear” she mentions is also connected to cancel culture, of course. She fears women won’t be able to express their opinions online without receiving various amounts of vitriol. But you see how she has merged all three issues together? So that if you agree with one, you must agree with the others. Because yes, cancel culture often goes too far, and yes it is a real issue, but to say that the trans community shutting her down foments the same atmosphere of “fear” as boogie trans women hurting children in bathrooms and her being abused by her cis husband… that’s a veeery slippery slope. Instead of sticking to “freedom of speech” and whatnot, she keeps correlating these issues that should not be correlated (some of them being false issues, as well).

Is there too much opprobrium around discussions of trans identity? Yes. Are there worthy discussions to be had about young women, homophobia and gender dysphoria? Absolutely. Can being trans become a fashionable trend/identity among kids, like the bygone goth and emo labels? Sure, but these discussions shouldn’t be had at the expense of trans people who have to constantly prove that they “mean” it. Because by stringing up all these issues together, JK is saying “the kids don’t know any better, and the adults are faking it”. Yes, cancel culture is impeding dialogue, yes, we shouldn’t shy away from discussing young teens’ identity problems, but if you pile up all of these things in a giant “trans women are the problem and they might be predatory too” milkshake, you won’t get anywhere.

I want to come back to this quote:

The second reason is that I’m an ex-teacher and the founder of a children’s charity, which gives me an interest in both education and safeguarding. Like many others, I have deep concerns about the effect the trans rights movement is having on both.

Beyond the (in my opinion) not very tasteful enumeration of things she’s done to help, JK’s mention of “education” there is veeery interesting. On the one hand, she probably feels that schools will try to censor “free speech”, but on the other hand, I bet she’s also concerned schools will not do enough censoring, so that impressionable kids become pressured into adopting a trans identity. You see how it flips on a dime? What does she ultimately want children to learn about this? Does she want them to be kept in the dark completely? Does she want them to be allowed to critique or invalidate trans identities without being censored? On this second point, things get complicated. Schools and institutions will naturally censor free speech. Kids are there to learn how to express that free speech; they will be told “hey, don’t say that to your colleague, it’s not very kind” or “you need to structure your argument appropriately instead of just saying “I don’t like it””. Is there room for criticism in how schools operate that benevolent censorship? Obviously. Hell, Foucault & co. have been talking about this for decades. So what does this argument about education ultimately mean? What are we protecting the kids from? Imo, it goes back to that covert argument about sexual violence.

Since I’m a teacher too, I’ll talk about my own experience: I brought some texts to my undergrad class about the trans experience with the goal of 1) building empathy, because literature is the grand unifier of experience and 2) showing different literary perspectives which i also included within literary theory. ultimately, the trans experience is about being human. we were learning about being human, nothing more, nothing less. if younger kids end up treating it as a fad it means that a) they need more, not less education, b) parents and schools should work together to make them understand that being trans is not the same as being “emo”, for instance. this partially resembles the trend of white kids adopting black culture just because it’s cool, but not actually engaging with the black experience. who do you sanction for this? black people? because in this analogy, the trans community should be responsible for children not benefiting from education and parental support.

oh, I know what JK is saying. the trans community is responsible for shutting down conversations about this. it’s part of the general climate of tiptoeing around trans issues. yes, here I can agree with her that Twitter discourse either helps build sympathy or loathing for the “cancelled” person instead of seriously grappling with what that person has done. it’s the nature of Twitter and I hate it, but to go from that to saying women and young girls are in danger from other “fake” women really undermines her own argument. There are normal pitfalls as we try to incrementally do some good in this world. Cancel culture and the deplatforming and ruining of lives of certain individuals will not promote the cause and is certainly to be frowned upon, but JK will be absolutely fine. there are hashtags right now like “istandwithJK” and there’s a slew of people who support her. the misogyny she faces is deplorable, but we shouldn’t conflate valid criticism with trollish vulgarities. I don’t want to minimize the dangers of online culture; I know people have lost jobs and livelihood, but that is a discussion to be had under different parameters, admitting the responsibility of both parties (for example, maya forstater realizing that maybe saying some hurtful things about public figures and proudly talking about the “delusion” of transwomen will come back to bite her in the ass) and the fact that under capitalism, your job is always at the whim of appearances and simulacrums. essentially, you are the job. this is a state of things that deserves a larger discussion not on the back of the trans community. should we live in a world where you are allowed to say anything, free of consequences? some of us do, because we can say whatever we want in our head, in our room, in our house (other ppl aren’t so lucky), but the trouble starts in the public sphere. even if we wanted to build a public sphere where everything goes, we’d be at each other’s throats in five seconds anyway because we’re human. the most we can do is educate and correct where we can. “facts don’t care about your feelings” discourse is often not informed by facts at all and forgets the vital importance of feelings.

anyway, that’s my incomplete take. still lots to think about and debate. ultimately, i think any fair points JK brought up were tainted by other bad-faith arguments and i wish she’d use this time to self-reflect because this isn’t a topic that should be breezed past in 3k words. nor should young trans ppl be called “adorable” (facepalm). i myself have many questions and constantly grapple with all of this, but since she’s a writer (and for better or worse, i still like her books), she is in a perfect position to investigate the matter with kindness and stop giving ultimatums. and i hope this post fosters discussion and doesn’t shut anyone down.

( forgot to mention that other nifty subplot in the Strike series about these really unlikable kids who are transabled and experience BID ( Body integrity dysphoria) and want to have a disability. Strike is super-offended by them since he’s genuinely disabled and we as readers are meant to think they’re real pieces of shit, and while transableism is suuuuper complicated and my thoughts on it vary wildly, i do think those BID kids also stand in for other folks in her mind..again, food for thought.)

#jk rowling #j.k. rowling #tw transphobia #replies #tw r*pe

31 notes · View notes

hellzyeahthewebwieldingavenger · 4 years

Text

This is the most offensivly ignorant comment I’ve ever had the misfortunte of reading

Unsurprisingly it comes from the King of ‘What you just said is so aggressively idiotic I feel like you just insulted everyone’: RDMacQ.

For context you need to read this statement from someone else. Whilst I do not agree with this statement I’m not addressing it’s merits or demerits.

“Let me say that I don't like Evil Superman as a concept, but when written well, like Tom Taylor's Injustice comics, where the guy who wrote it clearly has love for the traditional version of Superman and tries to humanize him even at his worst so you can relate and feel for the guy, I accept it, I enjoy it. By that same token, I was always open to Peter/MJ not working out if it was done well, and not done as in the case of OMD/OMIT with the demonstrable intent of slandering MJ's character and making Peter young hip and open to dating younger girls without him coming off as a creep and sleazebag. I am not okay with it happening to preserving Peter's sainthood. I mean the reason I accepted Peter B. in ITSV is that it did that take on the direction the character went into very well. In the case of Life Story #3, you are meant to agree with MJ and she's shown as a moral force, someone who condemns Venom Peter when he is about to kill Kraven-in-Cloth Suit. And of course people need to keep in mind that in Life Story, Reed and Sue didn't work out either, Vision suffers more guilt than even Peter can fathom, Captain America made a bigger and more difficult choice and faces more consequences for his actions than Peter does. So I feel that whatever Zdarsky is doing he's playing fair in the way that other writers don't when they do the story this way. And also tonally, the story is set in the '80s, the age of Watchmen. I think in terms of decade-specific mood and trend, having a story where Spider-man becomes a deadbeat dad worried about not being in prime physical shape and so on...is quite apposite.”

Then we get to RDMacQ’s bullshit

“Yeah, I find it weird that the main complaint is "This isn't what happened in the original comics" and I'm like "Yeah.... kind of the point!"”

Here is the problem.

Life Story is intended and promoted as a WHAT IF.

The way a WHAT IF works is that it takes what DID happen and changes variables to explore how that’d impact the outcome.

With Variables A+B you get outcome 1 (the main universe).

But what if you had Variables C+D? You would get outcome 2.

Gwen Stacy died so Spider-Man tried (and ultimately refrained) from murdering the Green Goblin.

But what If Spider-Man saved Gwen Stacy? Then she’d accept him, he’d stop the Goblin, but the Goblin would expose his identity in the interim and thus ruin Peter’s life.

Kingpin’s assassin injured Aunt May so Peter beat him up.

But what If the Kingpin’s assassin didn’t injure Aunt May but simply outright killed Mary Jane? Then Peter would directly murder the Kingpin.

Life Story doesn’t play fair as a What if in the slightest.

A what if done properly is confined by the parameters of the original story. Everyone still needs to act in character within the context of the new situation as defined by the older stories.

That isn’t he case in Life Story

To begin with it isn’t changing just one variable it’s changing multiple. Spider-Man is aging in real time. The events of his life are happening in roughly the same time period they would’ve been published, but not in the same order. The level of realism is drastically higher since Marvel heroes are going to the Vietnam War.

Characters act arbitrarily differently in ways they wouldn’t do in the context of the new variables. Case in point, why exactly would Norman Osborn pull the scheme he di in issue #2 just because he’s in prison? His plan never made sense. And in issue #4 his plan was even more asinine. He wanted to destroy Spider-Man and due to being too old to do it himself he pulled the Clone Saga and got Doc Ock to attack Spidey on his behalf. But he knew who Peter was, why not just reveal the truth. Doing so couldn’t harm him as he’d already paid for his crimes as the Goblin and his identity was public knowledge.

That doesn’t make sense. That’s not an opinion that’s just self-evident by the story. The cause and effect of it doesn’t add up.

But RDMacQ doesn’t believe in that. According to him Norman’s actions are justified because ‘ a crazy person did something that didn’t make sense’. That’s the laziest most pathetic attempt at analysis. And yet this cum bubble of a human being has the audiactity to claim I don’t analyse.

To him authorial intent is everything unless he doesn’t like it.

Because the point is that it’s supposed to be different from canon that means that characters can act in ANY way that’s different. ANY thing that is different is a viable option. Which obviously defeats the entire object of the project. If you are going to do that what is the point of rooting it in 616 canon in the first place? Why rely upon familiarity with the canon universe if you are going to randomly change anything on a whim as opposed to in logical response to a changed variable?

In doing that all you have accomplished is a weird and unfocussed Ultimate Universe, not a What if.

But then ol’ Big Mac starts to step up the game.

“I think probably my issue arises due to certain recent fan outrages, and a lot of the rationalizations and justifications that came from them. The latest episode of Game of Thrones, for example, had a lot of people- and I mean a LOT of people- decrying a character's "Heel" turn and their "Out of character" moments- while at the same time showing a bit of a misreading of the material or the subject matter.”

Bear in mind when he wrote this the latest episode of HBO’s Game of Thrones was the penultimate episode of it’s eighth and final season. In it, key protagonist, Daenerys slaughtered a whole city full of civilians with a fire breathing dragon and her army. Throughout the show she’d previously been defined as being unwilling to kill innocents on principle, once claiming that each enslaved person in a city was a reason to conquer the city and liberate it’s people. She was so horrified that one of her dragons inadvertently killed a child that she locked them up. She once affirmed that she did not want to be ‘Queen of the Ashes’ amidst her campaign to retake her homeland.

It’s fair to say the overwhelming majority of viewers AND professional critics took major issue with this and declared it a travesty and out of character.

Behind-the-scenes stories also heavily point to Emilia Clarke (the actress portraying the character) being upset and disenchanted with her character’s direction.

youtube

For my money these two videos are the best examinations of the disaster that was Daenerys heel turn in this episode of Game of Thrones.*

youtube

Also please bear in mind the ‘man’ saying people are misreading things is the same man who has continually insisted that Norman Osborn merely wants to kill Spider-Man in spite of me citing examples to the contrary, including this page.

So you know, not exactly demonstrating great analytical skills there.

“I think it's far too easy to cry "Out of character" when a character does something different, or simply questionable, because it's an easy catch all phrase that sounds like you know something, but in reality it's just a cover for a lack of understanding of things like characterization or plot development.”

Says the ‘man’ who genuinely once said Norman Osborn doing something nonsensical is justified because ‘he’s crazy’.

Says the ‘man’ who leaned incredibly hard on the idea that Miles Warren in Life Story would not have intervened in Gwen’s marriage to Peter Parker even though his entire character revolves around his jealous obsession over her.

Says the guy who once said a writer can randomly decide all of Mary Jane’s character development since the 1980s didn’t matter.

Says the ‘man’ who once claimed Doc Ock at the end of Gage’s Superior run was he real Doc Ock even though he was literally a clone of his mind in a clone of his body…and then he refused to listen to me when I repeatedly spelled that fact out for him. His rationale was ‘Marvel are treating him as the real guy so he is’.

Says the ‘man’ that in his ‘interpretation’ Spider-Man regarded Ned Leeds as a ‘viper’ after he was revealed as the Hobgoblin, in spite of literally no evidence supporting that interpretation and you know Spider-Man literally saying otherwise multiple times; including in the issue he learned Ned was a villain. In fact when I pointed this out to ol’ big Mac he referred to such things as ‘arbitrary’.

Says the guy who once said it’s better for stories to be in multi-parters because before the rise of decompression al stories had rushed endings. Remember how Amazing Fantasy #15, The Kid Who Collects Spider-Man, Sensational Annual 2007, The Conversation and When Commeth the Commuter all had ‘rushed’ endings?

Says the poor excuse for a ‘man’ who once claimed there was nothing wrong with the JMS run having magic but who also lambasted Peter David’s Spider-Man work for involving magic and time travel, even though JMS wrote ASM #500 which is literally about magic time travel.

What I am trying to say is this ‘man’ has systemically demonstrated immense hypocrisy and stupidity but a staggering deficiency when it comes to literary analytical skills.

“The movie reviewer Bob Chipman mentioned this in one of his videos where he talked about the problems that a lot of "Modern" viewers have is that they believe because they watch a lot of movies in a year, that somehow makes them film buffs or gives them insight into the storytelling process, when in reality what they are doing is watching all the Marvel movies or all the big releases, and assuming that gives them the same sort of insight that people who go to school to learn this sort of thing do. And I kind of think that's also true of comics as well.”

Oh boy, is there a lot to unpack here.

Keeper of the Gate

For starters let’s call this out for what it is. As much as he might be softening the statement by saying ‘kind of’, what he is actually doing right here is GATEKEEPING.**

He is saying unless you have ‘gone to school to learn this sort of thing’ you don’t COUNT as a critic.***

Okay let’s dive into that one.

Schooling ain’t everything

Gone to school to do what exactly? How to make movies? That’s what film school is for right? So you can learn how to write, produce, direct, etc movies. Correct me if I am wrong but film school does not teach you how to CRITIQUE movies.

So by this logic going to film school wouldn’t qualify you to critique a movie, just how to make them. Except no one argues that. Bob Chipman himself studied film at school and it is from that point of view that his analyses come from.

So by RDMacQ’s own logic Bob himself isn’t qualified for his own job, let alone RD himself. At which point why does Bob’s words carry any weight at all?

But wait, we can go yet deeper.

What if we aren’t talking about film school specifically? What if someone just studied film as their major in college but not strictly film school? Is that good enough to be a film critic or not? If it is are you a lower echelon of film critic?

What if you minored in film/media studies instead of majored in it? Are you yet lower on the totem pole?

What if you went to film school but dropped out?

What if you studied from home and didn’t actually GO to the school itself?

What if you studied it at A school but pre-college?

What if you studied it privately outside of an educational institution? In other words a self-taught film student?

Shit, what about the first ever film critics or the first ever film makers who pioneered techniques and the art form? If they were going through the trial and error of formulating the art form and medium there obviously couldn’t have BEEN film schools back then?

Do they not count?

Not to mention the cultural implications of this. If you are an American who attended a French film school are you unqualified to critique American films and only French ones, even if you grew up predominantly with American cinema?

Let’s change things up a little and look to TV in Britain. One of the most acclaimed British TV writers of all time was a man named John Sullivan. Sullivan created multiple beloved and acclaimed sitcoms, the most famous of which is called Only Fools and Horses. So successful was this show that it was the most viewed TV show in Britain in both the 90s and the 2000s. The latte in particular is an achievement since the show existed purely as reruns in the 2000s sans literally 3 episodes.

The show had a total of 64 episodes and ran between 1981-2003. Do you know how many of those 64 episodes Sullivan wrote?

ALL of them.

And do you know how many of them have predominantly negative reviews? Arguably just four.

Not only has the show been positively received it’s been regarded as the singular greatest British comedy of all time, a title it still holds to this day.

Amidst the praise that the show has received is it’s great characterization, it’s emotional moments and in particular it’s utter command of narrative structure. Not only do the jokes land they land with grace and make the feat seem easy when it’s all over. The cherry on his record was his OBE, an official government recognition of his positive contributions to the arts.

So you know, this guy clearly knew how to tell a good story. He did like 60 times in a row single handily.

So when and where did he study film? The answer is, he didn’t.

He never studied film. His formal education stopped at age 15 when he dropped out of school with no qualifications. Even if he had completed his secondary high school education he’d have not studied film. Film was not on the British curriculum at the time and to my knowledge still isn’t. At best you can study ‘media studies’ starting at age 16-18 before you go on to university. But up until age 16 it’s just not an available option.

He did go to evening classes for English and read teach yourself books but that was it.

By Big Mac’s standards this writer who’s been recognized by the government themselves wasn’t qualified to write anything, let alone critique it.

Additionally let’s consider one teeny weeny little fact. If you’ve lived through the formal education system in pretty much any Western country you have almost certainly been educated on how to gain an insight into the storytelling process. Because that’s a big part of what fucking ENGLISH class is for!****

MovieBob

I’d say I’m shocked and appalled at RD’s audacity and lack of self-awareness in citing MovieBob Chipman. But I’m not. It actually makes far too much sense.

MovieBob is a broken clock that’s often not even right twice a day. His credibility as a critic and as a human being is also woefully lacking.

For starters RD is a big Spider-Marriage proponent (though he’s recently turned traitor and says he doesn’t really mid if it doesn’t come back). To his credit he has often called out and deconstructed unfair and disingenuous arguments against the Spider-Marriage.

Bob however is staunchly on the other side of that debate.

He’s even said the marriage was never good, came from an illegitimate place, that Spider-Mans imply should never be married and in fact argued that a late Slott era Spider-Man and MJ were more interesting than they were before.

Thus I find RD’s citing of Bob to back up his claims about who is ‘qualified’ to be a critic the height of irony.

But you know, that doesn’t necessarily hurt RD’s argument. Hell, Bob un-ironically believing in eugenics or intelligence testing for voters doesn’t necessarily hurt RD’s argument.

Nor does MovieBob’s weird, weird views on how society apparently punishes the Big Brains like himself of course. Although it’s so telling that an arrogant prick like RD would invoke the words of a ‘brother-in-arms’ like Bob.

No, what hurts RD’s argument is where Bob was probably coming from with his initial statement.

See I heavily suspect that RD’s claims about Bob are kind of stem from his interpretations of this video Bob made called ‘BIG PICTURE: PLOTHOLE SURFERS’. Noticeably that video cites this video by another Youtube film critic named Patrick Willems. Called ‘SHUT UP ABOUT PLOT HOLES’.

The sentiments of both videos explicitly or implicitly echo Big MacQuack’s. Everyone is wrong in how they are critiquing movies except them and people like them because they are ‘professionals’ because they went to school.

None of these arguments hold up to scrutiny both due to stuff I have mentioned above but also for various other reasons I’m not going to bother unpacking here. If you want a detailed look at why Chipman and Willems (and by extension RD) are full of shit there are several Youtube videos dissecting their points, particularly Willems’.

However, I’ve found the most detailed to be this video.

youtube

There is also this video where they more directly address Bob’s video.

Fair warning they are long and get less than PC, and yet they do address why the videos don’t hold up to scrutiny.

Self-taught critic

Here is a crazy thought, if you’ve watched all the Marvel movies and big releases every year, why SHOULDN’T that give you a potential insight when critiquing OTHER Marvel movies or big releases? Those things are competing against one another, they are broadly going for the same audience. If you familiarise yourself with them then it is not beyond impossibility that you could mentally play spot the difference in the storytelling and critically evaluate them. It’s almost like in consuming that media you have formulated a CRITERIA which you are then CRITICALLY judging similar such media against.

Hypocrisy

The best part about RD’s statements? He himself has never gone to film school. Nor has he gone to a school specifically teaching him how to analyse comic books nor write them.

By his own logic he has disqualified himself from partaking in critiquing any story, as he did with Life Story or Game of Thrones earlier on.

But the best part?

If you check out the thread this is from and observe the poster called Chase the Blues Away they often disagree. CTBA points out holes in RD’s arguments and subtly questions his reading comprehension. Entirely separately they also implied they felt GoT’s writing was illogical towards the end of season 8 as well.

Why is CTBA relevant.

Because they actually HAVE gone to film school!

Furthermore, on both Life Story and most other matters related to Spider-Man CTBA and myself have been on the same page, whether this entails agreeing with one another’s statements or by coincidence having similar positions.

Now me?

I NEVER went to film school nor did I study English literature formally beyond age 18. Oh, I’ve read bits and bobs about writing (my favourite being Russell T Davies’ book ‘A Writer’s Tale’). But I have no college level formal education on the craft of writing. My analytical skills were cultivated from my school experiences and a whole load of osmosis and practice.

I have also found myself often on the same page as another person who at least studied English at a college level. They are another poster on the same forum called MacGoblin, perhaps better known as the creator of the (now defunct) SpideyKicksButt website. For many people the site was THE best source of Spider-Man analysis on the web for over a decade.

MadGoblin still participates regularly on a podcast covering new Spider-Man issues and whether or not I agree with all his assessments the manner in which he analyses (with an eye upon continuity) is similar to myself and indeed all the other panellists on the podcast.

One of the former panellists on the podcast (who I have also been on the same page with more often than not) was called Donomark and he too studied English at a college level.

So that’s three people who meet RD’s arbitrary rules for who is a ‘real’ critic. And yet I (someone who doesn’t meet RD’s criteria) have come to mostly the exact same conclusions as they have through entirely independent analysis.

As have other people I know who didn’t study film or English Lit in college.

So, either I’m just an absolute prodigy, or RDMacQ, Willems and MovieBob’s criteria for who can and can’t grasp plot and characters is full of shit.

“A lot of the complaints I've seen is that Peter wouldn't or didn't do this in the original comics. But arguing "Peter wouldn't do this because in ASM #225, on page 11..." isn't pointing out the flaw in the story.”

As always RD is devoid of nuance or appreciating the complexities of things.

If in Life Story or any Spider-Man story in canon Peter acts in a way at odds with his established characterization which is DEFINED by ASM #225 then absolutely that’s pointing out a flaw in a story.

Case in point, here is this poorly drawn satire of Superior Spider-Man RDMacQ himself made:

Most of the gags at the expense of Superior Spider-Man in this page was made through the lens of knowing the characters’ past, of knowing what they did and how they acted in older stories.

The confusion over Crazy Town Banana Pants derives from Superior claiming Peter routinely said this when he in fact never did.

Carlie’s suspicions over Superior’s behaviour stems from he fact that the older stories have established how Peter acts and established that Carlie knows how he acts. Therefore Carlie not realizing the truth when she’s been told is illogical. That’s the gag from someone who’s stamped his foot on the ground and angrily refuted that human beings are capable of being logical.

The same is true of this next page too.

Captain America refers to ‘usual’ people involved with the Avengers (super scientists, etc.). Usual means there is a precedent and a precedent can only be defined via a pattern. A pattern of what? A pattern of older stories!

The second panel is bringing up the OLDER STORY ‘Ends of the Earth’ to prove the hypocrisy of Doc Ock

The final panel references SEVERAL past events. The Clone Saga. The Alien Costume Saga. Every time the Chameleon or another shape shifter has impersonated him. Kraven’s Last Hunt.

It’s also referencing the fact that MJ would KNOW about them and even goes really specific by referencing the events of a few pages of one specific issue of Kraven’s Last Hunt. Not the gist of the story, not the climax or the most famous moments. This one scene in the middle of everything else.

RD is using that very specific moment to draw a comparison between it and the events of Superior in order to point out how MJ is not acting consistently.

Almost like she’s, I dunno, OUT OF CHARACTER or something?

Oh, and or the record declaring Peter would or wouldn’t act this way because of ASm #225 p11 is bullshit because Peter isn’t even on that page.

“That's just spouting comic book trivia, which isn't the same thing.”

But referencing events in the middle of KLH which are hardly iconic and immediately memorable and pointing out how MJ didn’t act consistently with them in Superior Spider-Man?

Oh no, that’s NOT ‘spouting comic book trivia’.

Can you see the hypocrisy of this creature now?

Can you see how BROKEN it is to argue a character being established as acting a certain way by an older story DOESN’T mean it matters thereafter?

And he says I am bad at analysis, Jesus Christ.

“Knowledge of trivia isn't the same as understanding plot structure, foreshadowing, character development, or knowing or accepting that just because something happens in issue 1 doesn't mean it will stay that way throughout the entire book.”

First of all the sheer audacity of someone with such non-existent analytical skills to DARE fucking throw shade like this is astounding. That’s like Michael Bay trying to explain how you make a movie with substance.

Second of all he’s right and wrong here.

Knowing the history of the characters is not the same as knowing those things.

But that doesn’t render it trivia because it’s the fucking histories of the characters that define who they goddam are!

Everyone agrees Spider-Man would not have acted the way he did in One More Day right? And that MJ wouldn’t have acted the way she did in OMIT right?

Why? Why do people feel the characters would not behave that way?

Because they read older stories that depicted them acting in certain ways in certain situations that were then contradicted by OMD and OMIT.

You know like MJ not realising Superior Spidey wasn’t really Peter even though the situation was incredibly similar to Kraven’s Last Hunt and both entailed imposters pretending to be Spider-Man.

No, knowing the history isn’t the same as knowing all that other stuff.

But it is undeniably an integral PART of being able to analyse something because if the prior events don’t matter, if they are merely trivia (or worse trivia when he wants it to be but not when he doesn’t) then NOTHING matters.

Why the fuck should issue #1 matter when reading issue #2? Or issue #3 when reading issue #5?

What does it matter if chapter 1 established our protagonist as an adult black man with a wife but by chapter 10, with no explanation they are a teenaged white woman claiming they’ve never been married?

Hey, chapter 1 is just trivia right. Why should that matter?

By the way, go ask Harry Potter fans if those little details are irrelevant and see how that goes.

He’s also (unsurprisingly) disgustingly disingenuous in his final point. Yes, things between issue #1 and issue #25 will change. But there is a world of difference between something changing via development vs. lazy contradictive writing.

Case in point, in ASM #1 Peter Parker doesn’t have a job, is a pariah at school and runs away crying from a failed adventure. In issue #25 he has a freelance job, isn’t running away crying and 2 ladies are interested in him.

WHAT? Isn’t this a contradiction? Doesn’t accepting this change mean you accept that issue #1 was mere trivia?

No, because between issue #1 and #25 we saw how and when Peter got a job, those two ladies became interested in him and we saw his skills, experience and confidence grow. The end result is that issue #25 was different to issue #1 because we’d been on a JOURNEY to get us there.

In contrast in ASM #700 Doc Ock is seemingly turned into a good guy because all of Spider-Man’s memories were beamed into his head, teaching him Uncle Ben’s famous mantra. But in Superior Spider-Man #1 he’s randomly reverted to what he was doing back in ASM #698.

So that stuff was just trivia? But that stuff was the resolution of ASM #700 and therefore the set up for Superior #1. The latter couldn’t exist without the former and yet it doesn’t make sense.

And you see that? You see how that cause and effect problem exists? Yeah, that’s PART of critiquing plot structure and foreshadowing. It’s ALMOST like the older stories aren’t merely trivia but actually very important and play a factor in the other forms of analysis RD listed off.

Not to mention, the idiocy of saying knowing the trivia doesn’t mean you understand foreshadowing. Motherfucker, the entire concept of foreshadowing is that you establish details in the present because you want to hint at readers about where the story is going to go later. It practically HINGES upon readers remembering that ‘trivia’.

If ASM #225 p11 had Spider-Man pass by a black cat and say ‘Boy that reminds me of Felicia Hardy.’ THAT would be foreshadowing for the next issue, but you couldn’t appreciate that UNLESS you remembered what happened in ASM #225 p11.

And the imbecility of bringing this shit up whilst referencing Game of Thrones too? As if Daenerys heel turn was actually foreshadowed and not just created from splicing old voice overs together in the previously segment of the show.

The next bit is in reference to Life Story again by the way.

“I mean, one of the best bits of subtle foreshadowing here is what happens with Peter and Reed's relationship. In issue 2, Peter reflects on how Reed pushed Sue away with his actions, and how he doesn't want to end up like that. But come issue 3, Peter ends up doing just that, despite his best efforts to the contrary and knowing what happened to Reed beforehand. That shows smart plot structure, which doesn't come out and yell at you "THIS IS IMPORTANT!" or hold your hand in any way. That shows that this story is pretty smart with the narrative choices that are being made.”

No it doesn’t.

Because the way in which Peter pushed MJ away contradicted his character and made no fucking sense. He had a mid-life crisis in spite of being well under 40 years old.

Also, you can have, by skill or by fluke, a dash of GOOD writing amidst your shitty writing.

A LOT of people would argue the podrace or Duel of the Fates fight in Phantom Menace were legitimately good sequences in an otherwise bad movie.

People broadbrush 90s Marvel as wall to wall trash but equally everyone praises Spider-Man 2099, Joe Kelly’s Deadpool run, Ron Marz’s Green Lantern run, etc.

Goddammit, 99% of all Doctor Who is fans celebrating the bits that were great amidst the bits that were bad. There are no end of Dr. Who stories were fans will praise the set design or costumes whilst shitting on the over all writing.

Shockingly a piece of media can have good AND bad elements!

Whenever someone says a story is good or bad they are almost always speaking OVERALL. A New Hope is OVERALL good. It’s not claiming there aren’t flaws to it.

Dan Slott’s Spider-Man run was OVERALL bad. Even I have said there are good elements to it.

But the mere existence of good elements doesn’t prove that something is overall one thing or another.

In Life Story’s case, let’s pretend RD is right. Then Zdarsky executed a good bit of foreshadowing.

Key word there: ‘bit’.

It doesn’t PROVE the over all story is smart with its narrative choices.

That’s such an utterly childish manner of analysis. ‘Well this bit is good that means everything else has to be good’.

Like how the fuck does doing a good bit of foreshadowing prove that Life Story wasn’t mischaracterizing anyone or knew how to tell a good alternate history story?

Shit, DAN SLOTT had foreshadowing, sometimes it was even competently executed. Didn’t mean it wasn’t happening within the context of mischaracterization.

Trust Bobby Mac to have no grasp of nuance.

“But rather than acknowledging that, instead we get stuff like being concerned with that because Gwen finds out Peter's secret identity at the end of issue 1, that therefore means that Peter is going to be hooking up with Gwen throughout the rest of the story, that this is going to be one big Peter/ Gwen book, that Chip Zdarsky is somehow a Gwen shipper because he wanted to just have her as a best friend in Spectacular, that MJ only having two lines in the first issue means her importance will be diminished overall, and that the whole series is going to try and be a rewrite to push that ship.”

None of the allegedly great foreshadowing RD spoke of above was in issue #1

Even if it was nobody could possibly have talked about that as a point of praise because the nature of foreshadowing is we wouldn’t have realised it was goddam foreshadowing until we finally GOT to the bit it was setting up in later issues

RD has been one of the most involved people in discussions about the Spider-Marriage, frequently clashing with a fell named Mister Mets on CBR and on the linked message board. He knows that Marvel from OMD onwards used to spite fans over OMD and the Spider-Marriage and that circa 2019 when Life Story was being released the latest of such instances had occurred maybe just 1 year earlier in Slott’s Red Goblin storyline. He also knows Zdarsky pissed in the well of the Spider-Marriage fans with his FCBD 2017 Spidey story which involved Mary Jane. So for a heavily burned and abused fanbase to suddenly be concerned that Zdarksy would be pushing an agenda was a totally natural and justified reaction to have at the time even if it was proven incorrect in the long run.

RD is being a shithead again. ‘Ugh, look at these overwrought FaNz. wHy CaNt dey celebrate the GUD stuff and not focus on the WRONG stuff’.The wrong stuff being Zdarsky shitting on the Spider-Man marriage, which he clearly did by breaking up Peter and Mj in the 80s when they didn’t break up then but he needed to ship Peter with Jessica Jones I guess

“Yet here we, two issues later, and Gwen is dead, Peter married MJ and now they have kids.”

And in LF #3 their marriage was in a toxic place and they split up. In issue #4 they get back together but only by Peter giving up being Spider-Man. Almost like the story was saying having a family and being Spidey are incompatible or something.

Shit issue #3 BEGINS with MJ griping about Peter.

“All the reactionary nonsense turned out to be for naught, since the story was going in a different direction, and just because Gwen was prominent early on didn't mean MJ wasn't going to play an important role later.”

It wasn’t reactionary nonsense it was entirely justified reactionary concern. People weren’t concerned that MJ wouldn’t be important but that Zdarsky would be pushing a pro-Gwen/anti-Mj agenda which he at least debatably did and certainly seemed to be doing in the first 3 issues.

“And yet we still continue to see that reactionary nonsense continue with decrying because Peter and MJ leave off on a bad note here, it therefore means the rest of the series will be an unending slide into misery.”

Which was proven partially true.

Issue #4 Harry dies, Peter quits like a coward.

Issue #5 Peter’s child is crippled, his identity is outted, ben Reilly dies and he becomes a fugitive as a super human civil war breaks out.

Issue #6 the world has turned to shit because of that civil war and the only way to fix it is for Spider-Man to die.

But again, he’s missing the point like the fool that he is.

People were concerned and upset BECAUSE the series split Peter and MJ up in the first place. Both because that defied the mission statement of the series but also because they know Peter and MJ WOULDN’T split up and the circumstances engineering it were fucking contrived shit.

“Which then unfortunately leads into bashing the creator himself, which I find incredibly unreasonable given the tremendous job Zdarsky is doing.”

He didn’t do a tremendous job.

Chase the Blues Away, the film school student, had been saying so and continued to say so after RD made this comment. So I guess by his own metric he was full of shit.

This is one of RD’s fundamental and fatal flaws. He’s a hypocrite. Everything is subjective unless it’s the shit HE likes or hates. Then it’s objectively good or bad.

Not to mention no one had been bashing the creator personally. He can’t grasp this either. He doesn’t grasp the distinction between bashing the work of a writer vs. bashing the writer personally.

E.g. he falsely claims I’ve sworn at him. I have sworn at him…here. On my own blog here I don’t feel the need to play nice.

On a public forum? Never. I’ve sworn in the course of conversations with him. I’ve sworn in regards to his argument but never sworn to attack him personally.

“Decrying Zdarsky as some form of hack because halfway through a six part story he's had the protagonist go through a rough time and that he is just putting out "Fan fiction," or- as I saw someone else argue- that the reason Zdarsky did this was because he himself went through marital troubles at one time in his life is just silly.”

It’s really not. He admitted that he wrote MJ in FCBD 2017 as his ex wife.

Fanfiction is exactly what LF was. Peter hooks up with Jessica Jones because…no given reason. It’d make infinitely more sense for that to have been Felicia but it was Jessica Jones. Zdarsky invents his own personal new spin on the Goblin who’s wearing kewl black because why not. He has characters randomly act in any way he wants for the story to happen regardless of how little sense it makes. That’s bad fanfiction 101. He has logic holes you can drive a truck through. FFS Russia launched nukes on America in issue #3 and this DIDN”T result in all out nuclear Armageddon. That’s amateuris

“Just like it's silly to say that D&B from GoT are purposefully destroying the show because they hate it and they hate women and they just want to move onto Star Wars,”

This is at worst a strawman.

At best an utterly myopic oversimplification.

The MAJORITY of people crying out against GoT season 8 weren’t claiming D&B were engaging in deliberate sabotage but rather they were ruining the series via their incompetence and RUSHING to get to the end.

Additionally the idea that they are misogynists is REALLY not a ‘silly’ argument. MANY people throughout the show’s history have made that argument, long before the popular opinion was that the show was bad,

A season 4 subplot that was heavily embellished (to the point of being called practically original) from the books entailed rogue Night’s Watchmen raping a household of women beyond the Wall. The most infamous line from the subplot was ‘Fuck them all to death.’

In that same season Jamie Lannister makes sexual advances on his sister Cersei even though she was saying no.

Sansa Stark, in a scene not in the books, was raped by Ramsey Bolton with the focus being upon Theon Greyjoy’s horror at the situation.

And of course there is ever so slightly a dash of gratuitous nudity involving women in the show.

Look, I’m not even saying for sure that D&B hate women or that that was at the root of how they fucked up Daenerys’ character in season 8.

But it’s idiotic to just dismiss the idea as wholesale silly as Smac a Mac is doing above.

“when in reality D&B were the reason the show got made in the first place and all those great female characters were brought to television for a wider audience to experience.”

Hollywood had been wanting to adapt George R. R. Martin’s books for years before he let D&B do it

Their first pilot was so bad they had to reshoot it.

They weren’t the reason we got those great female characters. Martin’s writing was why we got those characters and those good stories and why anyone wanted to make his books into a live action property at all.

Again, RD FAILING at nuance. A female character can have good writing AND bad writing. They can be good over all but drop the ball in certain moments. They can be great for 7 seasons but then fumble disastrously at the finish line. An opinion shared by all those critics that went to film school

Writers can be capable of doing good female characters even if they are misogynists. Writers who are not misogynists are capable of still being sexist at times. Friggin Stan Lee had sexist female characters in spite of also inventing Mary Jane who is lauded as a great female character even in the 1960s. Again, nuance. Mac Attac ain’t good at it.

“We can dislike or criticize a work without having to demonize the creators,”

It’s not demonizing D&B or Zdarsky to call them incompetent writers.

“and I think it's just become far too easy nowadays for people to rationalize their statements by making the creators themselves into remorseless villains, since that justifies them acting however they please in response.”

And it’s become far too difficult for me to stomach any more of this piece of shit.

*For what it is worth, these events are also listed on TV Tropes under the Face Heel Turn page:

Daenerys herself falls victim to this in the final seasons. Her actions in Essos had the purest of intentions: fighting against the Dothraki's misogyny and ending slavery in western Essos. Even her morally questionable acts still had these goals in mind. But when she set her sights on conquering Westeros, which is more or less a standard medieval European setting, her only goal was conquest. Even her claim that the Iron Throne is her birthright falls short since her father was killed due to his madness and love of burning things. Dany really doesn't help her case by burning alive any captive soldiers who don't side with her. This culminates with her slaughtering most of King's Landing's civilian population in the penultimate episode. Had the show started with the sixth season, there'd be no question that she is Daddy's Little Villain, her tragic backstory and past heroic deeds being a footnote at best.

**This is especially ironic as he’s accused me of doing the same.

Me, I’ve called people out or corrected them when they have gotten facts wrong. I’ve even said they don’t know what they are talking about. The difference is I’m not doing it just on principal as he is here.

I’ve never said someone doesn’t belong in the fandom or is not a real fan. Yet here RDMacQ is outright disqualifying people from having the legitimacy to critique comic books unless they’ve gone through what he deems the ‘appropriate steps’.

If I have told someone they are wrong or don’t know what they are talking about or don’t understand the material I have corroborative EVIDENCE to back it up. Their own statements prove that point.

E.g. RDMacQ doesn’t understand Norman Osborn’s character. Why? Because his statements contradicts the clear cut TEXT (not the subtext) of the source material. See? The source material is the EVIDENCE that supports my accusation. But RDMacQ doesn’t believe in analysis that way and has told me so himself.

***This laughable in he modern day and age where film criticism is so transparently ideologically driven as opposed to sincerely critiquing the merits of a film.

Hence why Bob Chipman and most other professional critics laud works like the Last Jedi which a fifth grader can see has little internal consistency.

#RDMacQ #Catharsis #Spider-Man #Game of Thrones #Dan Slott #Mary Jane Watson #Superior Spider-Man #MovieBob #Bob Chipman #daenerys targeryan

14 notes · View notes

binaryfolks · 4 years

Text

Enterprise Application Integration (EAI) - The Nucleus To Your Enterprise Application Universe !

Experts are NOT expecting the Enterprise Application Integration market to grow at a CAGR of 16.32% between 2020 and 2024 just based on mere intuition - well, the proof is in the pudding err.. potential itself !

If you find yourself hanging somewhere around the midpoint of the household question of every other contemporary business - “Why to buy..” or even, “Should I make room for EAI solutions for my business ?”, then this blog is your go-to guide with all the nitty-gritties that you need to know !

Enterprise Application Integration, in a nutshell, can be viewed as an integration framework built using a combination of technologies and services forming a middleware to allow the systems and applications interact with each other across an enterprise. As a result, among an array of other benefits, the information used within the enterprise -

is kept consistent i.e. when core business data is modified by one application, the modifications are instantly reflected in others,

is available for concurrent usage in the latest updated form, avoiding any kind of data silos.

We could caption this section as ‘Features’ , but, WAIT !

Knowing flowery features of EAI is of no good unless you know how your business can benefit from them !

I’ll tell you why.

Suppose, you are hungry and find a dragon fruit lying in front, would you not want someone to tell you how to break it open and eat it at that instant, instead of hour long lectures on what vitamins-minerals-blah blah blah it has ?

Same thing, different context.

Well, we value your time and so, instead of combining paragraphs from thick hardcovers, bombarding you with pages long information carefully bypassing the answer you seek, here’s what you are looking for - a list of ways in which your business can reap benefits galore, with a comprehensive enterprise data integration solution :

[1] Ease your management & data-sharing activities!

How much time do your employees spend switching from one system to another to get hold of essential data?

If that sums up to some considerable hours, ‘sigh of relief’ alert ahead!

EAI enables ‘single access point’ , that means it helps you consolidate all the data scattered across individual systems, converging to a single access point. As a result , your accounts guy doesn’t need to rush to your HR department every other month for the updated list of employees covering those who have joined or put their papers down - Just a very basic benefit example, the real life examples we have seen are much more sophisticated depending on your business type. Basically, implementation of a single access point ensures different departments can access centrally updated data as and when they need it.

Hands up if you are struggling over collaboration, too?

EAI takes the famous saying, “Every problem has a solution” on a whole new level, being the solution for so many enterprise issues at once!

In essence, you can use EAI to make collaboration between associates, managers and all other individuals across multiple departments a breeze, too. Wonder how the data integration solutions do so?

Simply by bringing in seamless interoperability !

In case you are not sure if interoperability can add any significant value to the bottomline of your enterprise , here’s what you probably didn’t know!

A report says that for the US automotive industry, interoperability faults may lead up to USD 1 Billion losses. Let that sink in !

[2] Automate the workflow you have been draining manual effort for!

Think of a solution that does even the most critical yet monotonous task with utmost attention?

That's enterprise application integration for you.

It goes so well with workflow, that a study quite appropriately calls workflow and EAI a perfect marriage !

The question is, how does EAI automate the workflow?

Technically, a custom developed EAI platform integrates all the applications in action and the information within your enterprise. On the other hand, workflow automation refers to managing the passage of data in the correct sequence, under the system’s surveillance. Together, data integration solutions and workflow automation contribute to centralised workflows which in turn saves manual effort, while drastically speeding up the business processes and improving transparency. Synonymous to simplification, right?

[3] Add flexibility to your IT infrastructure!

Are all your applications being used to their full potential ?

When it comes to communication amidst enterprise application, challenges are many - be it ‘lack of in-house tech skills leading to mismanagement of IT infrastructure’ or, ‘information silos causing severe harm to crucial decisions’ , be it ‘difficulty to revert back to customers with latest updated data’ or, ‘manual effort restricting you from attending flooding-in customer enquiries’. But, as you opt for integration of your enterprise softwares(read EAI), your enterprise is empowered to make the most of existing IT facilities. So most obviously, meeting the ever increasing customer expectations in today's competitive market becomes easier than ever.

Let’s look at a quick example here. What if the executives designated to take care of the IT infrastructure are not on top of innovation ? That will only hold your enterprise back from utilizing cutting-edge technologies optimally. Whereas, EAI helps your enterprise put the best tech foot forward, applying a more informed integration approach to connect the dots among almost all applications into a single and easy-to-use interface. The result?

There’s hardly any potential of any of your applications that remains unexplored!

[4] Address multiple opportunities under one roof!

How about addressing every opportunity at one place?

No, we are not slipping into any unicorn story here, EAI literally unveils all the opportunities you would be interested to address, making them available at your fingertips over a single interface. Starting from ‘emerging market trends which can transform your enterprise activities’, ‘issues in reputation management demanding your attention’ to ‘disruption in supply chain management’ - the list of opportunities are many!

Here’s a quick overview of the lucrative results :

EAI Implementation - What You Should Know & What You Should Avoid ?

Most of the enterprises operate with a number of applications which can be categorized as -

A segment of a legacy system

Custom-developed for specific enterprise requirements

Acquired from a third party service provider (also known as Off-the-shelf or, OTS)

In order to enable effective as well as efficient interaction & data exchange between such distinct enterprise applications while supporting existing workflow, enterprise application integration came into the picture.

Like fingerprints, the way each enterprise practises their individual workflow is unique, even though their core goal might be pretty much similar. So clearly, the comprehensive data integration solutions can not be built around the ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach.

Let’s get familiar with the popular approaches embraced for EAI :

[1] Service Oriented Architecture (SOA)

What is SOA?

In the Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA), the application components provide services to other components via a communication protocol over a network. Its principles are not dependent on vendors or any other technologies. In SOA, there are broadly two ways in which the services communicate with each other -

By passing on data

Through two or more services coordinating to perform a common activity.

Characteristics of SOA

In business what matters more than the ‘how’s while considering a new software or digital arrangement is ‘why’ do you need it? Jumping straight to that, while ‘many men, many minds’ truly fits when it comes to defining SOA, what makes all those definitions boil down to the same bottom-line is five major traits :

Shared Services

Architectural Flexibility

Strategic Goals

Uninterrupted Interoperability

Self-Contained

Why Consider SOA for EAI?

The benefits of SOA match with your expectations out of an EAI, just like a jigsaw puzzle! Here’s how :

Build An Independent Reliable Service - SOA enables you to build independent reliable services providing you :

Better flow of information among interacting applications

Improved ability to expose internal functionality

Maximized security & higher availability across applications universe

Make Convenient Reusable Service : SOA is a concept which is easy to understand and easier to implement across not one, but multiple components, making it easier to curb overhead costs.

Easily Configurable : SOA does not restrict you to a set rule for configuration and so, you can configure it the way you envision to reap its benefits (thanks to its flexibility & agility!)

Equivalent Directory Structure For Easy Access : Think of an equivalent directory structure that allows your customers to access service information centrally, even when the service location has been modified? Yes, that’s what SOA ensures.

Types of SOA

[a] Point-to-Point Integration

What It Does?

A point-to-point integration architecture helps two applications communicate with each other. A connection is set up between them using a connector enabling application A to speak to application B by exchanging messages or executing a complete procedure. The connector here acts as a bridge permitting access to data or application functionalities in a structured way. Connectors take over the task of handling complexities of translating messages, integrating and operations alike, to access the application features. In case of any change either in application A or B, the interface requires updation in both. Also, after adding one more application C, six connectors need to be deployed, updated & maintained to fully integrate the applications ecosystem.

Suitable For..

Scenarios when the use cases are small, i.e. the universe of applications contains very less number of applications, since the point-to-point architecture generates instant connectivity and also makes for the fastest alternative !

Not Suitable For :

Growing businesses, as the complexity goes up once the business starts to expand, requiring increased number of applications. For each new application, more and more connectors need to be incorporated to sustain overall integrity & that’s exactly what leads to ‘spaghetti’ integration. As a result, the cost skyrockets and the entire application ecosystem is slowed down.

[b] Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)

What It Does?

Basically, an enterprise service bus (ESB) is a middleware tool which distributes tasks among the components connected with an application, to establish communication between the applications requiring mutual interaction. In a simpler way, ESB can also be viewed as a specialized version of traditional hub-and-spoke (also known as client-server) architecture, where a predefined set of standards are applied to govern data flow among the participating applications.

“To get ESB or not to get ESB” - If that’s the question in your head now, here’s your answer-

Suitable For..

Complex IT landscapes with more than two applications and services

When multiple protocols like FTP, Web Service, HTTP, and JMS etc. are implemented.

In case of conditional message routing i.e. message content and parameters alike

Not Suitable For..

In Spite of the benefits that ESB has in store, implementing it in a wrong place can do more harm by unnecessarily complicating the process, leave alone serving the purpose! So, the trick is NOT to even think about enterprise service bus if you have two applications altogether or, just two protocols (e.g. - HTTP, Web Services) in place.

[2] Robotic Process Automation (RPA)

What Is RPA?

Robotic Process Automation is the technology which enables the users to configure a computer software (referred to as a “robot” in its name) and NOT a robot software, to emulate and integrate human interactions within digital systems to run business processes. Technically, RPA robots capture data and manipulate applications the same as humans, using the user interface. They :

Interpret a problem using AI

Trigger responses by passing the problem through decision system with respect to the collected inputs and determines next course of action based on that

Communicate with other applications & services to execute an array of repetitive tasks through screen scraping or API integrations

Guess the difference RPA makes?

Unlike us, human beings, an RPA software bot never sleeps and makes absolutely zero mistakes (Oh, and did I mention it takes way less time?), all under a low-investment.

Characteristics of RPA

RPA is a pretty broad field and there are a good number of RPA tools making rounds in the market. With so many tools available, most obviously their functionalities considerably vary from one another. However, in spite of their diverse offerings across their pros and cons, they have the following characteristics that make them belong to the parent category - RPA :

The rich-analytical suite of RPA discovers the performance of the virtual workforce, and can be managed from an easily accessible console.

RPA tools have built-in role-based security capability to enforce action-specific permissions

Creating bots is a quick and effortless process with RPA tools that captures mouse click with default screen recording components

RPA makes room for secure storage of each version of an ongoing or completed process to ensure easy recovery if deleted.

Rule-based exception handling is another characteristic feature of RPA for pro-active exception handling

Why Consider RPA For EAI?

Who has not heard those stories about the power of robotic process automation (RPA), yet?

To be honest, unlike a lot of trends that pop up one morning only to vanish by the other, RPA is a clear exception as it walks the talk by augmenting repetitive, error prone, mundane tasks to perfection.

Thus, RPA is worth all the hype and you are about to know how harnessing the power of RPA can change your current business scenario for good!

Save time (and remember, Time is Money!)

RPA resolves real-world problems and so, concentrates on real life business struggle areas - time & cost. Thus, RPA reduces operational costs and executes the tasks in unbelievably lesser time.

Modify Processes Just When You Need To

In today’s fast moving business scenario, exception is the only regular! Amidst the ever-changing factors, what keeps a business on the frontiers is how efficiently it adapts to the changes. On that note, RPA makes adding/ removing an ongoing business process just in time to ensure your business doesn’t have to come to a standstill at any point, in the name of adaptability.

Redeploy Resources Priority-wise

Engaging the deciding brains to onerous jobs is the last way you would ever want to deprive your core business tasks off the resources they deserve! RPA comes to your rescue with a better option, as it allows your workmen to offload tasks from the latter part of the priority list to the software robots, so the human resources can be deployed to the higher priority tasks at hand which require higher cognitive skills.

Pull up productivity

Expanding virtual workforce with RPA is far easier than recruiting more manual workers onboard to perform the same tasks for two reasons -

You don’t have to keep a constant eye to ensure they are doing their job sincerely (because system would not want frequent coffee breaks or doze off to a power nap anytime in between work)

There would be no chance of human-error!

The result is clear - greater productivity!

Make way for better compliances

RPA being an industry-agnostic, non-invasive alternative to traditional IT integration, can be used across any industry, be it real estate, financial services, retail, energy, transportation, telecoms, media and what not.

In every industry, there is some compliance to abide by and that happens to be a sensitive factor which, in a lot of cases, goes unnoticed.

Since machine’s memory >> Human Beings’ , with RPA it becomes a cakewalk to be compliant to the rules, regardless what the numbers are!

[3] Microservices

What Is Microservices?

Microservice architecture for enterprise software integration is a comparatively newer approach, where there are a number of independently deployable, small sized, modular services running a unique process each, and interacting through a structured, lightweight mechanism to contribute to a business goal.

Characteristics of Microservices

Multiple packaged, independently deployable components which are easy to be modified in need

In microservices, services are based on business-function based expertise.

Microservices embrace decentralized data management.

Each microservice contains its own technology stack. They interact with other services via standard channels without any dependency

Every individual microservice comes off as a black-box i.e. their complexities are hidden from other services.

Why Consider Microservices for EAI?

Microservices have started to become a household name in the leading businesses (take a cue from Netflix, Uber & Spotify!) across almost all the industries and it’s clearly because of the striking benefits it offers! Here are the top ones :

If one service stops, the rest doesn’t!

This is the benefit Spotify didn’t want to be late to embrace ! The loosely coupled parts are independent in nature, so even when some services fail or need to go off for some modifications, the 75m + users don’t even get to know, as the other services still continue absolutely uninterrupted!

Scalability is a breeze with Microservices

Microservices architecture is characterized by its modular components which make it easier to upsize or downsize particular services. Thus, making microservices a perfect choice for businesses operating across several platforms & devices.

Enhance productivity

Microservice architecture has the ability of easily understanding a task and that’s what reflects in its productivity. So, you get more work, in less time!

Take flexibility as the middle-name of Microservices

From responsiveness to scalability to maintainability, microservices provide high flexibility in every aspect.

Speed Up Time to Market!

Change a function without rewriting the whole codebase - that’s microservices for you. So, you can test and deploy individual services and market your applications and services faster.

Combination Approach Suiting Custom Business Requirements

It’s one of the rarest cases where a single integration architecture integrates the entire application universe across a complex enterprise scenario. So, to execute integration among all the enterprise applications and services most efficiently, a combination of different integration techniques work best.

Coming to a real-time example here : For real estate businesses, efficiently managing brokerage deals has been a constant concern and that obviously increases as a business starts to grow with expansion in categories like economic, deluxe, premium & quantitative increase of properties.

However, with digitization setting its feet in almost every industry, the real estate industry has explored ways to ease the brokerage agents’ lives among a plethora of other aspects, too. Thus, integrating the discrete application modules of the business in a centralized system has become a breeze - let’s look at an example to see how!

A brokerage firm primarily runs on modules like - property search, listing, buying/ selling request process & management, accounts, customer service module etc. & they require to be integrated in a way, that only the necessary modules talk to each other and that implies, wrong integration can further complicate the entire system introducing significant delay and inefficiency in operations.

Here’s a quick look at a smart way to integrate the above modules, serving the prime objective of speeding up the system, eliminating silos and minimizing manual error, all while improving efficiency & effectiveness.

How To Choose The Right EAI For Your Business?

Your enterprise has unique needs and so, opting for integration the same way that some other enterprise does, may do zero justice to yours ! However, settling for the right level of EAI for your enterprise can be tricky, but not when you ask yourself the right questions. We have saved your time curating a list of the potential questions that will help you determine the level of integration without getting lost in an ocean of EAI models aiming to attain integration at different levels. Here’s the list :

Does multiple applications in your enterprise require access to a set of consistent data for functioning?

If YES, models like point-to-point integration will only end up complicating your process furthermore, instead of simplifying it (you already know how! )! So, the bottomline is you need to deploy EAI in a higher level (e.g. - having ESB in place), that helps your applications use consistent data instead of depending on individual app stores which doesn’t reflect data modifications performed by other business applications in action.

Do you think certain functional components need to be reused across different levels of your enterprise?

The answer is YES for almost every smart enterprise, even though the extent might vary and that’s exactly what makes the difference. In case of a shared business function, a number of elementary functions (e.g. - hiring, payment confirmation, etc.) can be reused across multiple enterprise applications to skip functionality duplication, simplify data updates and reduce development cost for new applications. With the increase in the number of such functions, the enterprise application integration needs to support functioning of reusable components with higher efficiency - microservices can get you covered this way.

Do you ideate to run a new business process reusing the existing logic?

Once you execute a distributed business process, there is ample scope to leverage the existing code of your applications in newer ways. A dedicated component for integration can synchronize the entire execution of a composite workflow. For example, establishing links between data related to listed properties, developers, buyers, sellers, landlords, tenants, property facilities etc., a real estate business can get advanced reports on property purchase & leasing trends, and present property purchase / rental status to its customers. This type of integration ensures you reap the highest benefits out of your previous investments and cuts the cost for developing and maintaining another app.

Are you stuck in a mess of API integrations & wish it could be simplified?

If you have chosen several OTS applications from different vendors to get things done within your enterprise, chances are they will be too stubborn to interact among themselves. To make them interact without curbing their individual efficiency, you need a process in place that acts like a wrapper to your enterprise applications mostly without involving the API complexity. RPA (Robotic Process Automation can be your friend in such need, and surprisingly with minimal development effort.

In case you want to have a fresh look at the ABCs of Enterprise Software Development or, looking for a reliable development partner !

Conclusion

So the bottom line is, integration comes handy for handling the inconvenience in-terms of communication among standalone applications of various natures. Integration implies eliminating the data silos of those independent applications and services, and leveraging information to maintain consistency in business processes.

The points to remember while considering enterprise application integration (EAI) for your business are:

A crisp definition of your specific integration intent

Listing applications you want to integrate

Knowing popular integration concepts and architectures to choose the best one for your organisation

Estimating the security and performance risks

Assuring data quality across the enterprise

Keeping a strict eye at QA activities throughout the integration process.

OR,

Get in touch with an experienced software development team who have known the EAI nitty-gritties like the back of their hands & have a portfolio supporting the same, and outsource your integration requirements to those experts!

Choice is yours!

Post originally published on : https://www.binaryfolks.com/blog/enterprise-application-integration

#enterprise #integration

1 note · View note

imadethisblogfor1post · 4 years

Text

What is gender? Please send help

Content warning: ignorance about transgender issues, discussion of sexism, well-meaning-ally-who-doesn’t-quite-get-it-ism. Callouts welcome and encouraged.

I want to start by saying that despite my profound lack of understanding about what gender is, I don’t want to invalidate anyone. I want so badly to be a supportive ally to trans and nonbinary folks, and at first I did a lot of reading to try to understand, but no matter how much I read, I stayed confused. So eventually, I gave up. After all, I don’t have to have a deep understanding of an identity to know that people are deserving of respect. If calling someone a particular name or using a particular set of pronouns will help them know that I love and respect them, then of course, of course, I will do that. Nothing I am about to say changes that.

The only problem is, not understanding makes it really hard to call out bigotry, because I don’t always see it. This post was triggered by a recent transphobic tweetstorm by JK Rowling, and I think I get why most of those were bad, but with some I’m still more sympathetic than I’m comfortable with. This continues a trend I’ve seen for a while: some of the most helpful pieces of reading material have been posts from radical feminists that I found myself nodding along to, only to find that the point of the post my friend was sharing was the attached comment and call-out. These served as huge wake-up calls, but it still wasn’t enough to explain to me what I wasn’t getting. More than that, even after the call outs, even after knowing that some of the points of the original post were transphobic, I sometimes can’t help feeling that some part of it rang true. Therefore, my problems as an ally come in two parts. One, I deeply lack the understanding to call out bigotry in others and myself, and two, there are some real conflicts between the feminism I subscribe to and certain aspects of trans ideology (ideology is not a good word to use here, but I’m at a loss for what else to call it)(sorry).

I’ll start with the second— it’s the worse one anyhow. The crux of the problem is this: there are distinct consequences to being assigned female at birth. We are treated differently, we are socialized differently, and no matter how progressive your parents are, it’s impossible to completely escape. Put simply, cis women and trans women do not experience 100% the same types of oppression. This is not to say either experiences more or less pain, this is not to say either is more or less deserving of support, this is not to say that we as feminists should not strive to be intersectional (we should). All I am saying is that inclusion cannot come at the expense of erasing or silencing the experiences of people who were assigned female at birth.

I have a few specific concerns on this matter - these are the points that make me sympathetic to radical feminism (even when I see them called terfs, as ashamed as I am to admit it).

One, we need to be allowed to use words about female anatomy without being called terfs. It’s not okay to exclude people and imply that all women have uteri and all people with uteri are women, but it needs to be okay to talk about uteri.This one comes up less often, but when it does come up I find myself extremely indignant. I am sincerely sorry that talking about anatomy triggers dysphoria, but in a world where female anatomy is treated as inherently explicit, and people have been silenced in legislative settings simply for using those anatomical terms, we can’t afford to be silenced within our own communities.

Two, it’s not okay to shout people down for how they experience attraction. I really shouldn’t have to say this, but too often I’ve seen lesbians pressured or called transphobic for not being interested in being with someone with a penis. It’s not uncommon for lesbians to experience compulsory attraction to men before recognizing their sexuality. That, combined with the prevalence of sexual violence against women and people who are assigned female at birth, makes me extremely skeptical of anyone whose response to rejection is to attempt to shame them into changing their mind. Again, I’m sorry, and it sucks that it causes dysphoria, but no one is entitled to anyone else’s attraction. It is not okay to pressure anyone else into a relationship or sex, regardless of the circumstances. I myself am gray-ace and panromantic - suffice to say I don’t really get how being attracted to genitals works, but if that’s how it works for them, then that’s how it works for them. If we need different words for “hi I’m attracted to the gender of woman” and “hi I’m attracted to female anatomy” then so be it, but honestly people probably shouldn’t have to disclose that much information right out the gates, and both should be allowed to call themselves lesbians. There’s a balance to be struck here, but I’m sick of seeing lesbians alienated for this, and it needs to be addressed.

Three, there need to be spaces for people who were assigned female at birth, without people who were assigned male at birth (unless they are invited as a guest). As mentioned above, sexual and gender based violence against AFAB people is incredibly common. A lot of us have trauma around it. We need spaces where we can talk about those experiences without being shouted down, the same way trans people need spaces to talk about their experiences. This is a bit of a slippery slope - obviously there need to be intersectional spaces as well, and it’s not okay to exclude people, as long as everyone is being respectful. But it’s important to make space for all of us, and understand that our experiences are not uniformly the same.

I’m not sure why this has been such an issue. Some part of me that I hate to acknowledge suggests that part of the problem is that people who are assigned male at birth tend to be more entitled than people who are assigned female at birth, simply because that’s how they were taught and socialized when they were younger, but that brings up a whole slew of other issues, and I’d hate to paint with too broad a brush. Perhaps it’s just that the fight for inclusion needs to be fierce and thorough, and any space where one isn’t included is treated as an attack, even if that isn’t the intent. No matter the reason, we need to understand that we are not all the same, and that’s not a bad thing.

In a roundabout way, this brings me to my other barrier to being a good ally: I just don’t *get* gender. It’s not that I haven’t tried. As I mentioned early on in this post, when I first realized how much I didn’t understand about gender I did so much reading. I watched videos. I listened to podcasts. I went to a workshop (though truth be told the workshop did more harm than good). And what I got is this: it sounds like there’s a common experience, some strong internal certainty that composes gender identity, that says “I am a woman”, or “I am a man”, or “I am neither”, as the case may be. I have never felt this certainty. There is no emotion that tells me I am a woman, there is no internal compass, there is no sense of “no, that’s not right” when I imagine myself as a man, except a sense of unfamiliarity with the idea. As far as I’m concerned, I’m a woman because that’s what I’ve always been, and that’s how I’ve always been treated. It would be odd to use he/him pronouns for me because no one’s ever done that, and it would cause confusion, but that’s about the end of my issue with it.

This is, of course, directly in conflict with much of the narrative around gender these days. There must be something I’m missing, but I can never seem to pin down what gender actually *is* and every analogy and metaphor seems to confuse me even more.

Gender must not be biological sex, because trans people exist. Nonbinary people exist. Both are valid, and for all that I’m not a very good ally, I know that much.

Gender must not be personality traits, because, that’s personality. There are people on all areas of the gender spectrum with all types of personality traits. Don’t tell me that women can’t be brash, that men can’t be sweet.They are.

Gender must not be how you dress, because hey, we should all be able to dress however we want! How you dress doesn’t change your identity. (This part is gender expression though I think, if I’ve followed the articles correctly) Butch women exist, feminine men exist, androgynous people exist, all are valid.

Gender must not be gender roles, because honestly, fuck that. Gender roles are a tool of patriarchal oppression, and I’m not about to sit here and that be all there is to gender identity. If it helps you feel more at home in your skin then more power to ya, but that can’t be all there is.

So then, what is it? What is left? This isn’t a rhetorical question. I have genuinely tried to find answers to this and I have never been more lost. When I went to the trans allyship workshop mentioned above, I was told by the others at my table that to them being a woman was being nurturing, valuing family, being empathetic, being a caretaker. I was so relieved that we ran out of time before it was my turn. I don’t know what being a woman is to me, it’s just what I’ve always been. The only thing it has ever meant was shame about my body, shame about my period, enduring r*pe jokes and kitchen jokes from my guy friends, always having to be the one to “seduce the guard” when we played d&d, and other, darker things I don’t want to mention. It’s only ever been painful, and fearful, and ashamed. On the one hand, it means I’m inclined to believe trans women when they say that gender isn’t a choice— after all, who would choose this? But on the other, I know there must be more to this, something that I’m missing because my identity is too deeply rooted in oppression. I am ripping those roots out one by one, but they go deep, and I’m scared that without them I won’t have any point of reference left.

I want to understand gender, but even if I never do, I will always respect the identity and pronouns that people claim as their own. It is never my intent to dehumanize, or exclude. I want to be able to call out bigotry, I want to be able to stand up for my trans and nonbinary friends, I want to be sure that I don’t say something to them that causes them harm.

But at its core: I don’t get it. What is gender? What makes a gender what it is?

Again, this is non-rhetorical. If you have the time and energy, I welcome any information, any resources, any anecdotes, anything at all to help me understand. I’ve looked, hard, but I won’t pretend to have read anywhere near the full lexicon of literature on this subject. If I’ve said something that upset or angered you, please don’t hesitate to call me out. Yell at me, if that’s what this post inspires, and I’ll do my best to learn from it, or at the very least maybe it will serve as a wake-up call for someone else. Or, if you agree, I’d be grateful to know that too. It can get pretty lonely feeling like there’s some manual to gender that everyone else has that somehow I never got.

TL;DR: What is gender? I want to learn but I’m hella lost and struggling to be both a trans ally and a radical feminist, and I was so afraid of offending anyone that I literally made a blog just for this post, which is silly because I don’t even really use my main blog. I just know that if you’re looking for callouts, this is where you go.

3 notes · View notes

canadianabroadvery · 4 years

Link

What will the upcoming year bring in world affairs? A presidential election looms in America; the wave of leaderless protests from Chile to Lebanon is rolling on; China’s rising belligerence is being felt on the streets of Hong Kong and in the expanses of cyberspace; regional tensions in the Middle East, the Indian subcontinent and in east Asia all threaten to escalate into wars; Europe’s future remains uncertain. Will 2020 be known for an explosion of conflict and instability, for a reassertion of norms and order, or for some as-yet unanticipated historical shift?

These matters too are uncertain to make firm forecasts possible, but you can try to identity the critical factor in each case. The below is my stab at doing so: a (non-exhaustive) list of big questions about the year ahead with the factors that will decide them and a prediction of how those crucial factors will turn out. I will return to these predictions at the end of the year to see how well I did.

1. Will there be war with Iran?

The issue: At the time of writing America has just killed Qassem Suleimani, leader of Iran’s proxy forces across the Middle East, in a drone strike in Baghdad. Tehran has vowed “severe revenge”. This could accelerate the existing spiral of escalation, pulling in players like Saudi Arabia and Israel, and possibly lead to American air strikes on Iran and outright war.

The decisive factor: The Iranian leadership knows war with America would be catastrophic but believes (seemingly correctly, at least until now) that Donald Trump does not want direct conflict. The question is whether the president might blunder into a different position in the heat of the moment. An election is looming and voters do not want war, but Trump is also thin-skinned, volatile and will be desperate to save face if Iran retaliates spectacularly.

My prediction: Iran will most likely calibrate its response to avoid pushing Trump and American public opinion on to a full war-footing; by targeting American allies and interests rather than directly attacking Americans and by using proxies like Shia militias in Iraq and Hezbollah. More likely than outright American-Iranian war is a proxy war played out the Levant, the Persian Gulf and especially Iraq.

2. Will Donald Trump be reelected?

The issue: On 3 November Donald Trump will go up against a Democrat challenger in America’s presidential election. His approval ratings are below those of previously reelected presidents like Barack Obama, George W Bush and Bill Clinton, but as in 2016 he does not necessarily need to win the popular vote to secure victory under the electoral college system.

The decisive factor: Trump’s victory relied on a coalition spanning hardline Republicans, moderate Republicans who accepted his theatrics as the price of tax cuts and white working-class voters who defected from the Democrats over cultural issues. That coalition is fairly robust, so the Democrat candidate’s chance of overturning it relies on his or her ability to build a culturally and, crucially, geographically broader coalition taking in states like Wisconsin and Arizona.

My prediction: With the Trump coalition more consolidated than the fragmented Democrat one, the fundamentals point to reelection for the president.

3. Will global carbon emissions peak?

The issue: Under the Paris Agreement to limit global temperature rises above pre-industrial levels to the 1.5 to 2.0 degree range (within which the future impacts of climate change rise from moderate to very high), global greenhouse gas emissions need to plateau this year and start falling next year. That requires a step-change in global efforts, as 2019 saw carbon dioxide levels rise to record levels and at almost the same rate as in the previous year.

The decisive factor: This will largely be decided by policy in three places: China, the United States and the EU. Together these three largest emitters generate about half of the world’s greenhouse gases. The good news: the “Green New Deal” - the notion of a radical ecological re-wiring of the economy - will be a major feature of US and European politics this year and China is sticking to its Paris targets. The bad news: America’s withdrawal from the Paris Agreement will take place over 2020 and, having stabilised for several years, China’s emissions are growing again.

My prediction: With most countries failing to meet their Paris targets and none of the big three (particularly America and China) decarbonising their economies fast enough, emissions will continue to rise in 2020.

4. Will Boris Johnson get an EU trade deal?

The issue: The newly elected prime minister has until the end of June to decide whether to extend the transition period beyond the current deadline of the end of the year. He has pledged not to prolong this “vassalage” but will struggle to negotiate more than a basic trade deal - one most disadvantageous to Britain rather than the EU - with Brussels in that time.

The decisive factor: Any fast deal will probably cover goods (where the EU has a surplus) but not services (where Britain has a surplus). Nor will it cover many matters relating to data, science or security. The question is whether Boris Johnson believes that his 80-seat majority in the Commons is big enough to absorb rebellions when it comes before parliament, whether he believes voters will tolerate the costs of such a deal and whether, on the first of these at least, he is right.

My prediction: Johnson’s self-confidence and the momentum of his electoral win will allow him to push through a bare-bones deal, sowing the seeds of political crisis in 2021.

5. Will China march into Hong Kong?

The issue: Last year’s Hong Kong protests, sparked by plans to allow extradition to the Chinese mainland, have carried on into 2020 with violent clashes on New Year’s Day. With no resolution in sight and Chinese troops massing at the border, the threat of a military intervention to crush the protests, a second Tiananmen, continues to loom.

The decisive factor: The protesters, boosted by supportive results in district council elections in November, are standing by their demands of universal suffrage, an amnesty for arrested protesters and an independent inquiry into police brutality. So the endgame depends on whether the Chinese leadership’s highest priority is to maintain political, economic and diplomatic stability or to make a example of Hong Kongers to discourage anti-Beijing rebellions elsewhere in its neighbourhood or within mainland China. The former militates for patience, the latter for violent intervention.

My prediction: With Hong Kong due to lapse to full Chinese control in 2047 anyway, Beijing can afford to play the long game, continuing to squeeze Hong Kong and vilify the protesters without a full intervention. With its domestic economy slowing, it needs stability. Only if the unrest in Hong Kong threatens to spill over onto the mainland, which currently looks unlikely, will the Chinese army march in.

6. Will the wave of global protests continue?

The issue: Hong Kong was just one of many places struck by last year’s wave of street protests. Others included Lebanon, Iraq, Sudan, Russia, France, Spain, Chile and Bolivia. The motives were various but many concerned autocratic or corrupt governments, low living standards or climate change, and most were leaderless movements organised online. Were they a one-off, or part of a longer trend?

The decisive factor: Protests tend to subside when one or more of four conditions are met: grievances are addressed, governments crack down successfully, the means of organisation are curtailed or protest-fatigue sets in. Whether 2019 will be seen as an exception depends on the presence of these factors in the main arenas of protest in 2020.

My prediction: In some cases, like Chile and Lebanon, governments are changing tone or policies in light of protesters’ demands. But even there, protest movements are merely developing into broader more long-term movements. Grievances linger on, most obviously the international intransigence on climate change motivating the Fridays for Future protests. And the opportunities for mobilisation afforded by social media are only growing. Do not expect the protests to go away; instead expect them to evolve.

7. Will the EU become a more serious player?

The issue: Ursula von der Leyen’s presidency of the European Commission gets under way as member states squabble over the next seven-year budget, big challenges like euro-zone reform and migration policy remain parked and relations between Paris and Berlin continue to be at a low ebb. Emmanuel Macron wants to reinvigorate the EU alongside von der Leyen but his proposals, including greater “strategic autonomy” from America and NATO, are divisive.

The decisive factor: Essentially there are two countervailing forces at work. On the one hand Trump, Brexit, the crisis years and shifting geopolitical circumstances are pushing the EU to become a more serious, hard-nosed actor; Angela Merkel’s big EU-China summit in September will be a case in point. On the other this process is exposing new divisions on things like common defence, emissions reductions, the future shape of the union and the relationship with outside powers. The question is whether the centripetal forces (events, threats and other shifts pushing the union together and forward) exceed the centrifugal ones (differences of outlook and interest pulling it apart and holding it back).

My prediction: On balance the EU is more resilient than it looks. But while it may muddle its way forward in 2020, major advances will only take place in the heat of the next crisis.

8. Will there be conflict between India and Pakistan?

The issue: Tensions between India and Pakistan grew in 2019, with tit-for-tat air strikes and diplomatic sanctions. India has revoked the autonomy of Jammu and Kashmir, its only Muslim-majority state, and further inflamed tensions last month by introducing an anti-Muslim citizenship rule, the latest in Narendra Modi’s increasingly blatant flirtation with Hindu nationalism. Further attacks on Indian forces in Kashmir by Pakistani-linked Jihadis, or another terror attack in India like that in Mumbai in 2008, could easily escalate.

The decisive factor: The region is a tinderbox. Modi and Pakistan’s Imran Khan have ramped up their rhetoric, mass media outlets in both countries are talking up confrontation and both countries face economic problems fuelling political grievances. So the question is whether the mechanisms for deescalation still work. An attempted Modi-Khan reset in 2018 came to little and neither America (distracted) nor China (considered partisan by India) make ideal mediators.

My prediction: Though neither Modi nor Khan want war, the possibility of a runaway escalation between the two nuclear powers is one of the most underpriced global risks of 2020.

9. Where will the unexpected bad news occur?

The issue: Lawless and rogue states, inadequate global governance and climate change are three defining features of our age. With them come risks of state collapse and war, cyber-attacks and terrorism, uncontrollable epidemics and refugee crises and environmental catastrophe. 2020 will doubtless see various as-yet-unpredictable instances of many or all of these.

The decisive factor: Most of the world’s states, especially in the complacent West, are less truly sovereign and more interdependent than they believe themselves to be. It is this delusion that causes them to be caught by surprise when an unexpected crisis occurs, as chaos or risk from one part of the world ripples through the global system. The question is not whether this will occur but how resilient states and international organisations are when it does.

My prediction: Given the risks I expect at least one of each of the following categories of cataclysm. First, an extreme climate event hitting part of the West not used to the levels of climate chaos already felt in the global south (the fires raging in Australia are but a foretaste). Second, an instance of violence or other instability in one of the world’s rogue or war-torn zones (most probably North Korea, Yemen, Syria, Libya, Burkina Faso, Venezuela or eastern Ukraine) causing a crisis in a country far from its own borders. Third, a crisis or calamity specifically caused by a failure of international governance and democracy; that is, by insufficient coordination, information sharing or collective action at the supra-regional or global level.

10. Where will the unexpected good news occur?

The issue: It is customary, in these end-of-year or start-of-year round ups, to nod to how many good things have happened beyond the headlines: poverty rates and infant mortality falling, literacy and immunisation rates rising. But each year also throws up specific causes to rejoice. In September for example Tunisia held what were widely deemed the Arab world’s first TV debates, during its second free election since the Arab Spring. There will be such happy moments in 2020 too.

The decisive factor: China, Latin America and Africa have thrown up plenty of good rising-living-standards stories in recent years. But with authoritarianism on the march in China and Brazil, and Africa’s rise more halting and troubled than some sunny predictions of the past decades suggested, the picture there is more mixed.

My prediction: There will nonetheless be specific and epochally good news from Africa in 2020. It is possible that the Ebola epidemic will be finally vanquished during the year. And Ethiopia goes to the polls in May, with good prospects of victory for the reformist prime minister Abiy Ahmed (winner of 2019’s Nobel Peace Prize). That would put Africa’s second most populous country, its future in the balance, on a positive course. Elsewhere this could be a further year of growth for progressive mobilisations, from the Fridays for Future marches to anti-nationalist movements like Italy’s “Sardines” and emerging digital rights campaigns; I predict that these will trigger at least one major, positive change of national government or international policy during 2020.

4 notes · View notes

loubuggins · 5 years

Text

Titans S2 - E1 Review

Spoilers below the cut!

So Season 2 picked up with where S1 left off, as was expected. I have to say, I would have much preferred everything that happened in the first two-thirds of the episode to have been in its own season finale for S1. I think most of the problems I had could have been solved with the extra time they would have had if they had made the end of the first season actually happen in the first season. It's more evident than ever that the crew were blind-sided by having a renewal of their show and their lack of confidence there is concerning. Though probably valid given how many kinks season one had. I do have to applaud the writer for listening to feedback given by the majority of fans and making the show more lighthearted and wholesome. I can only hope the cinematographers will follow suit next season, given as they obviously ignored the outcry against the de-saturating filters.

I know many people were hoping for a new title sequence, as was I, but at this point that detail is something I hardly care about and really should not be a deal breaker for people. It's just a title.

The beginning of the episode I thought started off strong. Right away, I could see the improvement in the script. There was loads of solid dialogue, some funny, some heartwarming, some heartbreaking. There were a few scenes that lacked that luster for me, but I’ll get into those later. For now, let's focus on some of the positives.

I knew from the synopsis of the episode that there would be some great moments between Gar and Rachel, and boy was I pleased with what I got! Gar immediately jumps into action and tries to get Rachel to safety. As a longtime BBRae shipper, I definitely appreciated seeing more of Gar’s protective nature. The haunted factor of the house and Dick chasing them was actually more amusing than anything else and Gar shouting “Real life horror movie” as he’s running down the stairs did not help make this part any more suspenseful. However, Kory, Donna, and Jason’s nightmares brought out the sense of doom and thrill.

I loved the angst of this episode! Kory being tested once again with the choice to kill, Donna getting some backstory (and a tragic one at that), and the foreshadowing of Jason’s transformation into the Redhood where all great ways to push these characters into the darkness. Donna’s was a little rushed, but I do like that they were brief and I wish Dick’s nightmare (that took up the entire last episode of season one) had been the same way.

The biggest punch to the gut in this episode was when Gar was beaten to a pulp. First Young Justice and now Titans? Can DC please stop making “beating up Gar” a trend? But in all seriousness, it was actually for the best. Gar being hurt or dying as always been Raven’s breaking point and it was refreshing to see this dynamic played out in the show. Gar is Rachel’s light, her path out of the darkness. Having that light go out is exactly what would drive her to the evil within her. So bravo Titans writers!

I also want to praise how Gar was treated as someone more than simple comedic relief. I know that was a common complaint amongst fans last season, so it was a true pleasure to see him play a significant role in the story. Gar was the hero! If he hadn’t rose from the dead, Rachel would never have snapped out of it long enough to stop her father. So it was really Gar who saved the day and that’s huge for such an underappreciated character! I’m so glad my favorite character finally had his chance in the spotlight.

The BBRae montage was also a very BIG deal for me. Gar was finally able to shift into a new animal (a snake, how biblical) and slithered his way up to a demon-possessed Rachel. He was able to turn back and take her hand, triggering a series of moments the two of them shared throughout the first season. Ryan’s acting once again blew me out of the water and his “Come back to me” to Rachel had me in tears. It was a beautiful scene and one that is now on the top of my favorite scenes list. The only shortcoming in this scene was after he snapped Rachel out of her trace, she hardly blinked an eye at him. Here’s her best friend, bleeding and bruised, back from the dead, and she couldn’t take a second to give him a hug? She caused the end of the world when he died, so her lack of emotion at seeing his return was unconvincing and I’m not sure you to blame for it - the actress, the writers, or the producers? Maybe a combination of the three. Even if she didn’t react in that very moment, she had plenty of time afterwards to say something. Even subtle things, like rubbing his back, holding his hand, asking him how he’s feeling. Any or all of these would have been appropriate. Gar has went through A LOT for Rachel, so I really hope she shows her appreciation sooner rather than later this season.

Moving on from that, the defeat of Trigon was anticlimactic and could have been much more dramatic if it had been done differently. I would say rushing through the Terror of Trigon arc in the first season was a bad move. The first season is about build-up and they had very little of that, which affected the outcome of the final battle. I’ve been told that Trigon will be back and I’m sure he will be, but I hope next time the show takes the time to build up to the final battle.

Going into the last third of the show, I was pleased and entertained. Already, Deathstroke seems like a more intriguing villain than Trigon. Again, I wish this part of the episode was the beginning of season two. If this were its own episode, we could have had more set up for the season. I was disappointed that we didn’t get to see Dick travel across the country with the kids. That would have been adorable and I hope for it in bonus footage later on. Iain Glen’s protral of the Dark Knight was boring to be honest. Not at all how I would imagine Batman. I’m counting on him not being around much this season.

I’m super hyped to see where Kory and Donna end up going. I have a feeling there mini adventure will be very entertaining. Hawk and Dove were once again pointless in this episode and I hope they stay out of the way this season. Jason was actually interesting and fun, so I hope to see good things from him. Now that Dick has most of his Daddy-issues past him, I’ll be most interested to see how he transitions into Nightwing and to see what role Kory plays in that, since she was vital to this in the comics. Then lastly, I hope to see Gar and Rachel’s relationship deepened and fleshed out more. As I said before, I need Gar’s sacrifices and pains to be addressed and for Rachel to show some more empathy to her best friend.

Overall, I feel good about this episode and I have high hopes for the rest of the season. The improvements they made were substantial and worth wild. Gar’s face as he is looking at where the previous Titans once hung their uniforms is priceless and if I get more scenes like that, I will be one happy camper. There are still some hiccups, but I’m really looking forward to seeing the show progress. My rating for this episode is 8/10.

#teen titans #titans #dcutitans #titans live #titans s2 #titans spoilers #titans review

19 notes · View notes

anniekoh · 4 years

Text

elsewhere on the internet: talking about racism

This set of articles has been languishing at the back of the queue for three years!

Political Correctness Wanted Dead or Alive: A Rhetorical Witch-Hunt in the US, Russia, and Europe

Anna Szilagyi (2016, Talk Decoded)

Possibly the most common way of attacking political correctness, is to label it “tyrannical”. Covert speech strategies may also support this construction. For instance, anti-PC politicians often utilize adjectives for fear (including “afraid”, “frightened”, “scared”, “terrified”) to describe how PC affects the behavior and feelings of people. The former leader of the UK Independence Party, Nigel Farage claimed: “I think actually what’s been happening with this whole politically correct agenda is lots of decent ordinary people are losing their jobs and paying the price for us being terrified of causing offence.” Suggesting that the British are “terrified” because of political correctness, Farage urged his listeners to think of PC in terms of intimidation.

At the same time, the fearsome vocabulary provides a background for anti-PC populists to present themselves as “brave” and “courageous” “saviors” of their “victimized” societies. The next quote by Nigel Farage exemplifies this trend: “I think the people see us as actually standing up and saying what we think, not being constrained or scared by political correctness.” In a similar fashion, Geert Wilders declared: “I will not allow anyone to shut me up.”

Why White People Freak Out When They’re Called Out About Race

Sam Adler-Bell (2015, Alternet) @SamAdlerBell

Sam Adler-Bell: How did you come to write about "white fragility"?

Robin DiAngelo: To be honest, I wanted to take it on because it’s a frustrating dynamic that I encounter a lot. I don’t have a lot of patience for it. And I wanted to put a mirror to it.

I do atypical work for a white person, which is that I lead primarily white audiences in discussions on race every day, in workshops all over the country. That has allowed me to observe very predictable patterns. And one of those patterns is this inability to tolerate any kind of challenge to our racial reality. We shut down or lash out or in whatever way possible block any reflection from taking place.

Of course, it functions as means of resistance, but I think it’s also useful to think about it as fragility, as inability to handle the stress of conversations about race and racism

Sometimes it’s strategic, a very intentional push back and rebuttal. But a lot of the time, the person simply cannot function. They regress into an emotional state that prevents anybody from moving forward.

...

RD: I think we get tired of certain terms. What I do used to be called "diversity training," then "cultural competency" and now, "anti-racism." These terms are really useful for periods of time, but then they get coopted, and people build all this baggage around them, and you have to come up with new terms or else people won’t engage.

And I think "white privilege" has reached that point. It rocked my world when I first really got it, when I came across Peggy McIntosh. It’s a really powerful start for people. But unfortunately it's been played so much now that it turns people off.

The Language of “Privilege” Doesn’t Work

Stephen Aguilar (2016, Inside Higher Ed) @stephenaguilar

I believe that “privilege” is a sterile word that does not grapple with the core of the problem. If you are white, you do not have “white” privilege. If you are male, you do not have “male” privilege. If you are straight, you do not have “straight” privilege. What you have is advantage. The language of advantage, I propose, is a much cleaner and more precise way to frame discussions about racism (or sexism, or most systems of oppression).

... does giving up a “privilege” seem incoherent? It might, because generally privileges are given and taken by someone else. They are earned, and are seldom bad things to have.

Now try shifting your language to that of advantages. Ask yourself, “What advantages do I have over that person over there?” That question is much easier to answer and yields more nuanced responses.

Kimberlé Crenshaw on intersectionality

Bim Adewunmi (2014, New Statesman) @bimadewunmi

“I wanted to come up with an everyday metaphor that anyone could use��

“Class is not new and race is not new. And we still continue to contest and talk about it, so what’s so unusual about intersectionality not being new and therefore that’s not a reason to talk about it? Intersectionality draws attention to invisibilities that exist in feminism, in anti-racism, in class politics, so obviously it takes a lot of work to consistently challenge ourselves to be attentive to aspects of power that we don’t ourselves experience.”

...

“Sometimes it feels like those in power frame themselves as being tremendously disempowered by critique. A critique of one’s voice isn’t taking it away. If the underlying assumption behind the category ‘women’ or ‘feminist’ is that we are a coalition then there have to be coalitional practices and some form of accountability.”

The Persecution of Amy Schumer: Political Correctness and Comedy

Teo Bugbee (2015, Daily Beast)

We have developed highly advanced ways of recognizing and articulating when we feel offended, but very few ways of making something productive out of our own hurt feelings.

I’ve questioned if my choice to overlook what’s hurtful in Schumer’s comedy for the sake of what’s insightful is a sign that I’m complicit in the faults of white feminism, not valuing the importance of others’ feelings on this matter enough. This argument of apathy gets used often on social media to raise awareness around issues of race, sex, gender, and other topics surrounding justice and a need for change, and it is often useful, but it can also be a blunt instrument. Where I’ve landed for the moment is that not all marginalized people feel the same way about every issue—even on social media, but especially outside it—and asking everyone to respond in the same way to the same joke takes a simplistic view that flattens the complexity of marginalized communities just as much as it does the white, cisgender mainstream.

However, if we’re going to ask audiences to keep in mind the multiplicity of responses that a person might have to a work of art before they attempt to control someone else’s opinion, then it’s only fair that comedians follow the same rule.

What’s Wrong (and Right) in Jonathan Chait’s Anti-P.C. Screed

J. Bryan Lowder (2015, Slate)

One of the main problems with the constellation of leftist ideas he bemoans is that many of the people who use them most loudly do so out of context. Concepts like “microaggressions,” “trigger warnings,” and “mansplaining” originally had specific meanings and limited uses, often within the academy. They described or were meant to address specific situations or phenomena, and more important, they were intended to function as diagnostic tools of analysis, not be used as blunt, conversation-ending instruments. Believe it or not, most of these “PC buzzwords” are actually useful from time to time: “Straightsplaining” is a real (and very annoying) thing, and it’s often a productive way of thinking about an interaction. But it’s also not always a useful or fair way to characterize a disagreement between a queer person and a straight interlocutor. Precision is what’s needed.

Additionally, though it is impossible to say this without sounding condescending myself, a lot of the abuse of PC rhetoric comes from young college students who have not yet grasped the difference between a measuring tape and a sledgehammer. Of course, given that contemporary mainstream politics offers little for those hopeful souls who want to make truly radical change in the world, you can’t really blame them for gravitating toward a mode of critique that at least feels somewhat empowering. Here, first-year, is a framework by which you can reveal the (screwed-up) hidden structures of the world and use your newly honed textual close-reading skills to mount offenses against those structures—go for it. What works on a novel doesn’t necessary translate to a complicated, changeable human being, though, so it’s no surprise that the deployment of microaggression and cissexism and other social justice lingo can sometimes come off as strident and simplistic. It often is.

But then, so is crying that only Reason can save us from the illiberal wolves waiting in the wings of our great system, which has a “glorious” history on social justice, by the way.

Want To Help End Systemic Racism? First Step: Drop the White Guilt

Sincere Kirabo (2015, thehumanist)

The point of identifying and exposing inconsistencies within the social systems and cultural norms of the United States isn’t to make whites feel guilty, but to garner greater empathy that will inspire change. The main problem with white guilt is that it attempts to diminish the spotlight aimed at issues germane to marginalized groups and redirects the focus to a wasteful plane of apologetics and ineffective assessment.

This is why some don’t like discussing racism, as those more sensitive to these matters sometimes allow guilt to creep into their thought processes, effectively evoking pangs of discomfort. This can lead to avoidance of the primary issues altogether, as well as the manifestation of defense mechanisms, including denial, projection, intellectualization, and rationalization.

Many are acquainted with the concept of Catholic guilt. Catholic doctrine emphasizes the inherent sinfulness of all people. These accentuated notions of fault lead to varied degrees of enhanced self-loathing. I liken white guilt to Catholic guilt: both relate to a sense of inadequacy emanating from misguided notions. Though the latter is anchored in an imagined source, they both speak to feelings of remorse and internal conflict that does the individual having them no good.

Keep in mind that the call to “recognize your privilege” does not translate to “bear the blame.”

#racism #intersectionality #political correctness #social justice #linguistics

3 notes · View notes