#(my stance is it depends on where in the state you are and don’t necessarily believe the locals if they SAY they’re southern)

[ribbonmiku]

i was born and raised in kentucky, all my family is from here, i really love my state and i dont know if i could ever leave, i snap up stickers and little objects shaped like kentucky…..AND i have decent political opinions. a rare but increasingly necessary combination.

#ik kentucky’s status as a southern state is a debated topic #(my stance is it depends on where in the state you are and don’t necessarily believe the locals if they SAY they’re southern) #but i really believe in people from the south being defiant about loving their homes and not wanting to leave WHILE being leftist #the age of southern leftist shame must come to an end #the people here matter. we can make it better. here. where we grew up. this can still be our home. #take my hand and say it with me now #BLUEGRASS MUSIC FUCKS HARD

[maaruin]

The Institutional Problems of the Jedi Order

Preface

I think it is time to finally write this post. These ideas have been going through my head for some time after reading some Jedi discourse. But I should preface this with: even though the Jedi made mistakes, this does not mean Palpatine’s genocide of them was justified. It only means that he saw certain flaws in the Order that he could exploit. I suspect that without these flaws, he probably still would have managed to take over and persecute the Jedi, but much more of the Order would have survived.

For this post, I am mostly using the prequel movies with a bit of lore added from the old Expanded Universe. I’m not using The Clone Wars, because its depiction of Anakin’s fall to the dark side is different from the movies. And I’m not using the new Disney Canon, because I don’t know what has been retconned so far and what hasn’t.

Depending on how we count, I think there were either two or four major flaws. I’ll number them as four, but the first three could be grouped together.

1. The Jedi Order is a religion but isn’t organized like one

The Jedi are a religion. They are a group that believes certain things about the universe and practices a way of life that fits with these beliefs. But they are also entirely organized as “Jedi Knights” who are “guardians of peace and justice in the [old] republic”. This is… odd. The entire religion is basically made up of full-time professionals. Or rather, monastics.

If you want to study the Force and use it, you have to become a monk, basically. And more than that, to be accepted you need to already have a special talent in using the Force. Actually, you can’t even do that, they only take toddlers, so your parents have to decide if you should join this religion and become a monk. (Or maybe the Jedi Order just takes all Force sensitive children no matter what the parents think, it’s not entirely clear.)

A normal religion isn’t organized like that. Normally most members of a religion are normal people with normal jobs with varying levels of devotion. They participate in the practices of the religion in a way that fits into their daily life. Then there are religious professionals like priests who work to make it possible for the normal followers to practice this religion. And then, in some religions, there are monastics who dedicate their life to practicing the religion, generally apart from the normal believers. The Jedi only have the last group.

That alone would make them much easier to target and wipe out. But it is even more like that. The entire Jedi Order is integrated into the institutional framework of the Republic. All of the higher ranked Jedi (we will talk about the lower ranked later) basically work as special police and special diplomats for the Republic. “and” not “or”, all of them must fulfill both roles. And, when the Clone Wars start, they all become officers in the Republic military.

Now, in principle I don’t think religious institutions working closely with the state and fulfilling important roles for it is necessarily a problem. But if this is the only way this religion can be practiced, the practice of this religion will become poor in variety and closed off to most people who would be interested in participating.

2. Slavery in the Galaxy

There is slavery in the Galaxy Far Far Away. It is illegal in the Galactic Republic, but it is widely practiced in the planets of the Outer Rim, which might or might not be members of the Republic. The Jedi know that slavery is bad. What should they do?

Well, as much as a like the image of a hundred Jedi waltzing into the Hutt Cartel and killing/arresting them all, that probably wouldn’t be the best idea and cause much more chaos and harm than it solves, at least in the short run. But there are alternatives besides doing that and mostly ignoring it. For a start, here are two:

Establish underground railroads to smuggle slaves to freedom or assist on already established ones. Jedi mind-reading and precognition abilities will be very helpful in such endeavors.

Assist in organizing and fighting in slave revolts. One Jedi can turn the tide on the battlefield and if they are respected diplomats, the can help the slaves in finding supporters.

But this isn’t what the Jedi do because they are preoccupied with their role in the Republic. Qui-Gon says to Anakin that he didn’t come to Tatooine to free slaves. Which is true, he was sent to assist the government of Naboo against the Trade Federation, not the slaves on Tatooine against the Hutts. And why was he sent to Naboo and not Tatooine? Because Chancellor Valorum decided that resisting the Trade Federation was in the interest of the Republic, but freeing slaves wasn’t.

As mentioned in part 1 the number of members of the Jedi religion is smaller than it should be and integrated into the Republic in a way that leaves little room for it to act independently.

3. The Clone Army

Suddenly, an army for the Republic conveniently appears in time when the Republic is about to go to war after centuries of peace. This army is made up of, for all intents and purposes, slaves. Slaves that have been bred to be especially obedient. The Republic is expecting the Jedi to serve as officers in this army. What should the Jedi do?

Serve as officers, because the clones would suffer more without them?

Refuse to serve because that would mean supporting the introduction of slavery into the Republic?

Throw their political weight around and demand the clone troopers be freed and given Republic citizenship and in addition demand an end of the clone production in return for serving in the war?

Serve on both sides of the clone wars because the Republic obviously doesn’t have the moral high ground anymore and if their service in the Republic army leads to less suffering, their service in the Separatist army will do so as well?

There are probably more options. The Jedi decided to pick the one that reduced the suffering of the clones in the short term, but by doing that squandered the opportunity to take a stance against the creation of the clone army. And we don’t even see meaningful discussion within the order about this choice. This is, I suspect, because the Jedi are so used to their role as enforcers in the Galactic Republic that the alternatives weren’t really on the table.

(Palpatine’s plan was counting on the Jedi to behave this way when he planned Order 66.)

4. Dealing with emotions (the problem with Anakin)

While the Jedi Order may not demand it’s members to be emotionless, it does demand that they keep their emotions under very strict control. Nonetheless, almost all the Jedi we see do seem to be emotionally well adjusted. Obi-Wan, Yoda, Qui-Gon, Mace Windu, all of them seem to have little trouble with this demand.

Anakin, on the other hand, has a lot of trouble with it. He often has emotional outbursts through Episode II and III, then shortly afterwards walks back and apologizes. Curiously, this isn’t the case in Episode I. There he is actually quite good in dealing with his emotions. In other words, his time in the Jedi Order made his ability to handle his own emotions worse. Much worse, actually.

I think the reason for this is that whenever he feels something, other Jedi tell him that this is not right. It starts with Yoda in Episode I. “Afraid are you? […] Fear is the path to the dark side... fear leads to anger... anger leads to hate.. hate leads to suffering.” Criticisms like this no doubt continued all the way through his training until, by the time of Episode II, every time he feels an emotion he is angry at himself for feeling that emotion, which leads to more emotional instability, not less.

But why is this a problem Anakin has and not for the other Jedi we see. Maybe it is because he started his training later than is normal for a Jedi. But I suspect it is something slightly different: The Jedi who go through their training either find a way to handle their emotions in a way the order approves of, or they are sorted out. In the Expanded Universe there is a so called Jedi Service Corps where Jedi who fail their training go to work as farmers, explorers, educators or medical assistants. These jobs are, however, seen as lesser and going there is considered a failure. This is unfortunate, I think the Jedi could do much more good in the galaxy if the best of them were able to work in different fields instead of all being stuck with warrior-diplomat. Nonetheless, the Service Corps actually mitigates one of the flaws the Order has to some extend, if it works like I suspect. If the Jedi don’t have a way of dealing with emotions that works for everyone, the next best thing is to only pick the ones that can handle it and put the rest somewhere where they are useful and can’t do damage. Certainly not ideal, but an understandable adjustment.

But anyways, Anakin wasn’t sorted out. It is never confirmed in the movies, but I would suspect they made an exception for him. Yoda already made an exception for him when they decided to train him at all. And because he was the chosen one, I think they thought that his potential would be wasted if he only got to be in the Service Corps. If we ignore the Service Corps and only go off the movies, my criticism still stands: Yoda recognized that Anakin might not handle Jedi training well and he should have stuck to his guns and refuse Anakin to be trained within the Jedi Order.

Why are the Jedi like this?

Personally, I like to explain these flaws of the Jedi Order historically. Now, the EU doesn’t really fit with the theory I have. Because in games like KotOR and SWtOR the Order seems very similar to the Order in the Prequels. On the other hand, other sources say that this structure of the Jedi Order is a product of the Ruusan Reformation which happened after the end of the last Sith War a thousand years before Episode I.

To defeat the Sith at the end of that war, all Jedi were brought together as one army, no matter what they had done before. They didn’t really defeat the Sith (the Sith were deceived by Darth Bane to destroy themselves), but they thought they did. They thought they almost single-handedly saved the Republic from destruction.

Because of this, they rebuilt the Jedi Order in a way that was explicitly integrated into the institutions of the Republic. They built it in a way that made the fighting Jedi the core of the Order, other forms of being a Jedi were downgraded to the Service Corps. Because many Jedi had fallen to the dark side in that war, they taught a very strict form of emotional control and only trained force-sensitives from birth. And because they were so linked to their role as enforcers for the Republic, the neglected many other things Jedi should do, like helping slaves free themselves.

A better Jedi Order

No matter if this is how it happened, I do think the Jedi Order could be different (better). Here is how I would change it:

A Jedi Laity: Every living being is connected to the Force, so let them participate in practices that serve this connection like Jedi meditation. They may never be able to move things with their mind, but that’s not the point.

Jedi who serve the people should live among them: Jedi priests, Jedi healers, and yes, even Jedi knights should not form their own community but instead be in the same community as the Jedi laity.

Monasteries for the monks: Jedi who fully want to focus on their connection with the Force could still live in monastic communities.

Don’t completely integrate into the state: Working with the Galactic Republic could still be a thing, but the Republic should never depend on the Jedi and only a minority of Jedi should serve the Republic directly.

Help people everywhere: Because they are not completely bound to the Republic, many Jedi can decide how they will serve the people in the galaxy. Some might decide to help the slaves in the Outer Rim.

A Variety of Emotion: Not every Jedi will be as capable of controlling their emotions as the others. If there is a large variety of ways to be a Jedi, I suspect that most of them could still find their place to fit into the Order.

Allow adults to join: With adults it is much easier to determine if they would make a good Jedi and what way of being a Jedi would suit them. If there is a Jedi laity, they can be trained as children to some degree before they decide if they want to join.

Would this Jedi Order have fallen to Palpatine’s manipulation? I don’t know. But I think it would have been harder for him. If most Jedi didn’t serve in the Republic military and weren’t in a small number of Jedi temples, Order 66 would have claimed much less of the Order. (Probably 10%-20% instead of >90%.) Jedi would find it much more easy to hide in the population and the laity could help carry on the Jedi traditions in secret. Anakin might have been more emotionally well adjusted and not fall for Palpatine’s manipulations. (On the other hand, in a more open Jedi Order like this, there might be more people who could be turned, so who knows.)

Well, this is my contribution the Jedi discourse. The Jedi aren’t evil, and they certainly didn’t deserve genocide because of this. But as the Prequels depict them, they have certain tragic flaws in the way they are organized that Palpatine could exploit.

(Maybe I’ll make a shorter Part 2 about how Luke deals with this.)

#star wars #prequel trilogy #jedi #jedi order #order 66 #there is no emotion #jedi service corps #fictional slavery #jedi critical #galactic republic #anakin skywalker #palpatine

[sprawa-przybyszewskiej]

I would like to present (extremely briefly; it's more of an invitation to their thoughts rather than anything else) two approaches that touch on a creative technique used by Przybyszewska, which has been spotted by some of her scholars, albeit each in its own way. Ewa Graczyk maintains that Przybyszewska did not write a historical drama in any way, but rather described a completely different reality, an universum in which the same events happen, but which doesn't take place on Earth, with us in it. She describes, then, something which I call The French Revolution', taking after mathematics' nomenclature. Kazimiera Ingdahl, on the other hand, spots traces of gnostic and manichean ideologies in Przybyszewska's writing, which, as we all know, are based solidly on the contrast between Heaven and Hell, knowledge and numbness, soul and mind. I mention them here solely to point out there is a dualism in her works, it is important and easily recognizable.

I have nowhere near the amount of erudition these scholars do, so I will constrict myself to some more visible matters. In my previous post about Antoine, I've made a remark that stuck with me for far longer than I had expected, and so I decided to elaborate on it.

The passage I'm talking about is this: because it could potentially reveal Saint-Just as another Danton-like minded individual, looking for power for himself through sacrifices of others. I want to explore whether Przybyszewska really did construct both of them alike?

To me it appears very probable, as crazy as it sounds. First of all, ALL of the personages are created in some reference to Robespierre. He is the only singular, original mind amongst them all, not to mentoin an axis around which other revolve, and so all of them, whether we like it or not, are somewhat similar to each other. Second of all, she clearly went in the direction of mirroring certain scenes, ideas, expressions (which I personally love to track down and compare them later), and it's exactly the same when talking about certain individuals. The two pairs (Robespierre – Saint-Just and Danton – Desmoulins) come to mind right away. They are constructed as parallels at least in some aspects and at least to some extent.

Wouldn't that, however, put Saint-Just and Desmoulins on the same/similar level, aren't they the ones who creat a parallel pair? Well, yes and no. I think they are a unit when it comes to personal matters, for rather obvious reasons. But I also think they are both put in similar situations, and yet their thinking is polar opposite of each other. They are both allowed to Robespierre's most personal sphere, and yet their reactions are completely different, which is one among the reasons as to why one of them meets a sad end by all accounts, and the other can die somewhat happy (as I will always mantain: if Przybyszewska managed to finish Thermidor, I am one hundred percent sure she would depict Antoine as one dying boldly and proudly, if only beause he died for a great cause and alongside Robespierre). On the other hand, spiritually and mentally, Camille resembles Maxime way, way more than Danton. They are both... maybe not exactly soft, but emotional. The main difference between them is Maxime is able to rein his feelings in when necessary (again, not always, not completely; vide his late night visit at Desmoulins', vide his attempt and saving him from the Luxembourg Palace), but as far as differences go, this one is actually minor. They are put in different positions, but their reactions are similar.

I would also wager to say Saint-Just and Robespierre don't have that much in common with each other in the plays, leaving out their political stances and their relationship. They are very different in terms of character traits: Maxime is more forgiving, calmer, quieter in all aspects. Antoine is more of a quicksilver, and also is regarded more as a tool in Maxime's hands, which I mean in the best way possible. While he has his own opinions, sometimes quite different to that of Robespierre's, he only entertains them in Maxime's presence, so that no one can put a splinter between them and turn them against each other. When they are turned against each other (during their quarrels, yes, but also during Thermidor, which is a beautiful study of such a case), he defers to Maximilien humbly and holds no grudges against him. This is pretty much the only soft side he ever presents to the audience, for when facing any other characters, he is sarcastic  if not downright hostile, the only exception I can think of being Eleonore. He's not gentle, not even with Robespierre whom he respects so much.  (I cannot get over how badly Wajda interpreted this in his movie, where in his very first scene Antoine brings Maxime an apple-tree branch in full blossom; while a sweet gesture, it made little sense, for the director not only didn't establish their special bond in any way, cutting their very important scene in Act II and a lot of their exchange of words in Act V out, but completely ignored the fact that in the play they did talk about trees blossming, but it was Maxime who pointed this out to Antoine. Honestly, it would make much more sense if in the movie he was the one giving Antoine flowers; altough I don't trust it would be executed well, so perhaps the best scenario would be to drop it altogether.)

This leaves Antoine and Danton as the unlikely pair. Here I wouldn't necessarily say they are put in different positions (following my train of comparison), because – depending on if you believe the confrontation between Danton and Robespierre to be honest or not – there is enough evidence in the play to mantain both of them want to  establish power over nation through Robespierre. Danton is the villain of the play, but he isn't blind, he too wants to use Maximilien as a face of the dictature, as a tool to obtain more "normal" power for himself (normal power here would equal to money, respect, high office; the "abnormal" power is what Robespierre sort-of-dreams-of, an influence over people to direct them into doing what is necessary for the good of the whole of the nation, or better yet, the world). And Antoine wants more or less the same thing, the exception being he doesn't care at all for personal gains. He doesn't necessarily believe in Robespierre's visions of the future, one could even argue he doesn't understand them (this is clearly shown in Thermidor, where he reacts with a headache once Robespierre unfolds his plan in front of him: Stop it, Maxime. I can't keep up with you anymore.); he does, however, see the neccesity of establishing the dictature or some other extraordinary mean to obtain the total power over the state. Both he and Danton are blessed with a far-fetching political vision, the only thing differentiating them from Robespierre is that he's a much more brilliant chess player than any of them, when they can see few moves forward, he's already seen all the possible outcomes of the match. And all of these outcomes are bad, for Maxime is characterised as a pessimist, while Antoine and Danton are, generally speaking, optimistically inclined. Youthful foolishness indeed, except Antoine is not foolish! He's just optimistic. In Danton, the optimism takes a form of boldness and bravado, in Saint-Just it manifests as an unwavering faith in the one he considers to be so much more superior to himself, and also a certain amount of contempt for the ones he considers to be inferior. This is another trait he shares with Danton, and we have to admit, Przybyszewska did a really good job at presenting the same trait in them both in such different ways, that we like one, hate the other.

There is also the matter of how they treat Camille and what they think of him. Here, both are jealous, I think. Jealous of the special place Camille has in Robespierre's heart, scornful of his abilities as a politician and a journalist, disinclined to him as a person. Danton cares for him as far as his utility in being a leverage on Robespierre goes, but I don't think he hoards any warm feelings for him personally, and I don't say it only because he was willing to sacrifice Camille purely out of spite. A much better example to show what I mean is that Danton seems to have a much better functioning, more honest and professional relationship with Delacroix than with Camille, whom he keeps in the dark about absolutely everything from start to finish. I don't know if it was meant to be a symbol or not, but in their very last scene in the jail cell, Camille has to beg Danton not to snuff out the candle, which Danton does, albeit very reluctantly. In turn, Saint-Just talks about Camille in language dripping with contempt and jealousy of purely personal kind, offending him left and right, right to Robespierre's face – not to hurt Maxime, but to "open his eyes", so to speak. In one particularly harsh sentence he compares Camille to a dog, a child and a prostitue all in one breath. He not only doesn't regard him as an opponent, but barely recognizes him as a human being worth respect, in which he is sadly very similar to Danton.

Weirdly enough, they both regard Maximilien as human, which I think is interesting to notice. It would be really easy to write them in such a style that leaves way for them to see Robespierre as something more, something almost extraterrestrial, somebody who posseses abilites greater than normal humans do. And yet:

The first image is from The Last Nights of Ventose, my own translation, and it's directly from Antoine's compassionate speech. I didn't include Robespierre's response, because he just deflected, but deflection does mean he doesn't fully agree, so it's yet another similarity.

One more thing that comes to mind in a comparison like this is that Danton threatens Robespierre with the ultimate power. He doesn't think that Maxime will be able to live with it, with himself, if he ever decides to go this one step futher and become a dictator. Is this is because he wouldn't be able to live with himself, or does he truly underestimate Maxime, or he simply wants to make sure Maxime would not go in this direction precisley because he knows he would then be ustoppable? How very telling then, that in Antoine's mouth the very same thing is not a threat, but a promise! This ultimate power is born out of necessity, and it's a grace for the whole nation, because no other person could bear the weight of this "crown", but Maxime.

The main difference between Saint-Just and Danton, I think, is something which we have to believe, it's not written clearly anywhere, and this is also the thing I briefly touched uppon in the aforementioned post: we have to believe that Antoine has pure intentions, because we sure know Danton does not. These were the embers fueling the suspiscion in Maxime when he couldn't understand why Antoine would possibly push for the dictature so much – is his heart pure? This sounds overly dramatic, perhaps, but I think this dramaticism aligns perfectly with Maxime's overall characterisation. I think all readers believe in his good intentions, and the parallels constructing the characters help immensely in this judgement, for if Danton is rotten to the core, Antoine is as steady and pure as a marble column. Robespierre even calls one a pig, while the other deserves to be named an Apostle of liberty.

There is, however, another similarity between them, too. Both Antoine and Danton are willing to be dishonest in order to achieve their goals. This is this one thing that's hard for Robespierre to swallow, for he – like Camille – values honesty really highly and if he could, he'd always act honestly. Saint-Just, not to mention Danton, has no such scrupules. He sees the greater necessity as something erasing all other circumstances, and for this greater picture he is willing to sacrifice some of his integrity as a human being. With Danton, the situation is even less complex, for I don't believe he would be sacrificing his integrity in any way – this dishonesty lays at his very core and comes natural to him.

The arguments Saint-Just presents, and which differs from Robespierre's point of view, are also different from that of Danton's. Danton's vision of the present is filled with contempt for the people, for the masses who are less brilliant than him and few others are. It is worth noting that Przybyszewska really did think like this, this is something she believed in and while reading Danton's speeches in Act II Scene 3, what we actually hear is her own train of thoughts. The only difference is that she didn't disdain the people they way he did. She thought that being a mass, an unnamed pulp of flesh is not a bad thing (it was perhaps unfortunate, and I am sure thinking she was a genius like Robespierre helped her in maintainign this view). Base material is a nourishment for those who will lead these masses. We – the lesser people – are absolutely necessary for them – the greater ones – so that they can lead us out of the night and into the new epoch of enlightement, and there is nothing humiliating in being this nourishment/tool/base. Danton understood it only partially, for he wasn't ready for the greatest sacrifice of all: to be a genius, one has to get rid of everything personal, all needs and desires must be kept aside, and never again spoken of. Robespierre understood it, and I think Antoine did too. I think the best evidence for it is that he said, that he doesn't consider himself to be Robespierre's equal. Recently I hoped to prove it was a silent declaration of love; now I want to point out it is one because it showed Robespierre that Antoine understood this great sacrifice one has to make in order to be a leader, and in his own way, he has already done this. He has brushed aside personal vain and glory, his amour-propre, he degraded himself in order to magnify Maxime's importance. Danton may say: It's you whom I adore, but it is Antoine who shows it through his actions as well as his words.  

#do you think they are constructed as parallels or am i delirious? #sprawa dantona #the danton case #L'Affaire Danton #Stanisława Przybyszewska #stanislawa przybyszewska #Maximilien Robespierre #maksymilian robespierre #antoine saint just #Antoni saint just #georges danton #jerzy danton #frev #french revolution #literary analysis

[slugtranslation-hypmic]

important question that's been bugging me for a while. since hypmic plays in a female powered society.. does that make everything like..our world but reverse? so that guys are more often oppressed and girls are more likely to be predators, taking what happened to hifumi (like men are more likely to us) and stuff like that? (or like if we imagine everything genderbent and apply our society to that) sorry I hope this is not too triggering. love your work!

This is a delicate question. I am going to put my answer below a cut. Topics included: sexual predators, misogyny, assault, kidnapping, the mistreatment of male sexual assault victims

I don’t think that I’m necessarily the best person to answer this or examine this. I’m not educated enough in this particular topic. However, I have tried to give it as much thought and respect as I can.

The Question of Female Predators

This is a very complex topic. Female predators are already not uncommon in the world we live in, so I guess the question of whether there would be more or less female predators depends on what factors contribute to people becoming a predator.

I could be entirely wrong about this, but I think one factor that causes a lot of fear of being preyed upon is the size difference between most AMAB people and AFAB people. Obviously, there are millions of exceptions to this rule, but AMAB people generally tend to be taller, more muscular, and broader than AFAB people. The majority of AMAB people are also men (whereas the majority of AFAB people are women), so on average, an altercation between an untrained man and an untrained woman is not likely to end in the woman’s favor. This isn’t going to change in the world of Hypnosis Mic.

It’s the societal factors that would change. The Center for Hope and Safety says, “A sexual offender generally believes he is better than other people and so does not have to follow the rules that ordinary people do.” This is a stance the Party of Words elevates. The Party constantly practices “othering” and promotes themselves as an elite group. Only they are allowed to enter a certain area. Only they are allowed to write the name of their ward in kanji, whereas every other location must use the foreign-looking katakana. ARB events frequently feature Party members shoving characters around from place to place with no explanation, as questions are not allowed. Only the Party can know what’s going on. Using this as a guideline, I think it’s very possible for predators already within the Party to use this as an excuse for being a predator. “Men are worthless, so I can abuse them.”

You could argue that the Party is founded on the principles of safety for women and non-violence, but the Party is also very hypocritical. Its promises of safety are only for the party itself; it puts on painful gladiator battles to turn a profit and purposefully cause infighting to keep the Party safe. Ramuda even suggests (and I have no reason to disbelieve him) in TDD 12 that they have a stockpile of weapons as well. The Party doesn’t care for anything but itself and staying in power.

So yes, predators within the Party are probably more likely to abuse their power, but would the shift towards a female-dominated society create more female predators? That’s a much harder question to answer. I am not remotely equipped to speak on what causes someone to become a predator. I do, however, think that societal norms can enable predators or foster mindsets of fright against certain groups.

In the world that we live in, it is very possible for men in certain areas to sexually assault or otherwise mistreat a woman and be applauded by their communities. Think of online communities such as “The Red Pill” or “Men Going Their Own Way”. Such communities believe that women deserve this mistreatment, and while these are very extreme examples, this same mindset permeates a lot of global societies. Even on a small scale, a lot of men tend to make casual sexist comments because we were raised with the notion of this being socially appropriate. And there’s the issue - it’s inappropriate, but it’ll continue to be socially appropriate as long as we don’t continue to challenge ourselves, challenge our friends, and raise our children with better standards of accountability and respect. These social changes do not happen in the blink of an eye, and I highly doubt that a single three years with the Party of Words in power would change that.

Similarly, a lot of girls in our societies are taught (both consciously and subconsciously) to defer to their male peers or even to fear men in positions of power. Once again, unlearning this and teaching future generations more positive standards does not happen overnight. I doubt that most women in the Hypmic universe are able to make radical shifts of thinking and acting over the course of three years. Furthermore, I doubt that many men are really taking the Party’s misandristic words to heart. None of the main characters seem particularly bothered by Ichijiku calling them barbarous fools on the regular; it’s an annoyance, sure, but that’s it. We’d have to see the Party in power for a much longer time to witness any large societal changes.

Additionally, the world inside Chuuouku and the world without are quite different. While Chuuouku boasts state-of-the-art architecture and technology, the rest of Japan gets by like normal, if perhaps in a bit shabbier fashion than to be expected for this futuristic world. Men and women seem to still fit into stereotypical gender roles in much the same way that they do today. Doppo’s bosses are all men; the majority of doctors we see are men, and the nurses tend to be women. While some of Jirou’s female classmates seem to be especially assertive, male and female students get along in the same way as we would expect to see in our world. Women are still kidnapped and trafficked by primarily male yakuza. The former military looks to be exclusively made up of men. Progress moves slowly, so I think we can assume that the Japan outside of Chuuouku is approximately our modern Japan.

One of the major issues in examining this topic is that we see so little female-male interaction in regards to sex or romance. Ramuda and Hifumi are the only characters (that I can think of off the top of my head) who have any on-screen sexually/romantically charged interactions with women, but probably because this is a series largely marketed towards women, these interactions never go beyond light, impersonal flirting. To really take a look at how predators and assault may be featured in the Hypmic universe, we would need a much larger sample size. That being said, I’d still like to examine two case studies: Nemu and Hifumi.

Nemu

The two driving forces of Nemu’s character are her rejection of violence and her desire to have personal strength. The first of these is probably rooted in her childhood, from living with an abusive father, witnessing his violent murder, and witnessing the subsequent suicide of her mother. Samatoki doesn’t appear to have any resources for dealing with his own processing of these events, and he turns to violence and emotional outbursts as a way to channel his feelings. This violence continues to wear on Nemu, but she can still withstand it under normal circumstances up until the moment she is kidnapped.

Nemu cites her kidnapping as an example of her weakness, when in reality, it is an exhibition of anything but weakness. She remains calm throughout the entire ordeal, comforts Jirou and Saburou and keeps them hopeful, throws her shoe at Genchou, and offers him to cut her fingers off if that means the others will be spared. Nemu isn’t weak – she is a hero. She is a seventeen year old girl who lost both parents at a young age and has witnessed horrifically traumatic situations, yet she keeps her head during a hostage situation and acts with courage in order to keep everyone else safe.

Nemu calls herself weak not because she thinks she’s weak for anything she did during the situation, but because the situation happened to her in the first place. She is victim blaming herself for violent assault. This isn’t a logical position, but it’s a very understandable position for someone with her background. Unfortunately, Samatoki doesn’t have the knowledge or resources in order to help her process her trauma safely, and his own coping mechanisms only set her off further.

Nemu isn’t mentally weak, but she is very emotionally vulnerable. Even without the Party’s hypnosis, an offer from the Party would be too tantalizing to ignore. They can promise her a world in which suddenly she has the power over everyone else and where violence is not practiced. An offer like this is impossible for her to ignore. Even though the Party are the ones putting her in jeopardy again, they implicitly promise her that she can never be hurt again. For a young, brave, powerful girl holding in so much pain, that promise is everything she’s ever wanted.

As mentioned before, the Party doesn’t care about stopping violence. In fact, it encourages infighting among its civilians. If Nemu were not in an emotionally vulnerable position, she could see that and reject the Party’s offer, but that’s exactly why the Party targets her and not any of her peers. Imagine how many other young girls in similar situations fall prey to the same trap. These girls need healing and positive environments, but they are fed propaganda instead.

Hifumi

I don’t talk about this much because it’s a very uncomfortable subject for me, but the way Hifumi is depicted is a real tragedy.

We don’t know the details of what this particular girl did to Hifumi, but we do know that it continues to impact him over ten years later. We know that Hifumi developed his coping strategy on his own, seemingly without professional help, and that without it, he can’t begin to live even an approximation of a normal life. The illustrations of him encountering a woman show him hiding, cowering with his neck covered, or crying. He looks to be in genuine fear of losing his life. Consider being this afraid of half of the population and how frequently he must encounter women in his daily life: on the street, in the grocery store, on public transportation. Without the jacket, Hifumi’s life is a nightmare.

And yet the canon source material frames it as a joke. The humurous background music in ARB and Hifumi’s exaggerated gestures in the manga show that his fear and discomfort is a punchline. This would definitely not be a funny gag with the genders reversed (a woman sobbing in fear and running away every time she sees a man), so it is a travesty that this is the stance the authors continue to take.

The world we live in is, generally speaking, not kind to its male assault victims. Misogynistic attitudes create an environment in which it is shameful for men to admit that they were assaulted, especially by women. It should not be a punchline when one human being hurts another, and it is wrong and sexist beyond all belief to perpetuate the idea that women can’t be cruel, violent, and manipulative just as much as anyone else can.

I would like to hope that Hifumi’s case isn’t indicative of all Hypmic universe male assault victims, but I don’t think that’s the case. Hifumi definitely has access to mental health resources, considering that his roommate does, but there is no evidence that Hifumi has ever come forward to ask for help about this issue. This is probably a combination of Hifumi’s internal shame and an unsupportive environment. While Doppo does help Hifumi navigate daily life around women, Doppo’s facial expressions suggest he considers the matter a nuisance. He threatens to take away or withhold the suit when Hifumi’s coping method annoys him, and otherwise doesn’t seem to take Hifumi’s distress seriously. Jakurai appears to be more supportive, but he doesn’t ever offer additional help or resources to Hifumi beyond what Hifumi already has. In fact, the majority of Jakurai’s interest in the subject seems to be around examining Hifumi like a case rather than as a person needing assistance.

It’s also probably a result of the faux macho attitudes that are rampant within the Hypmic universe. Hypmic men are bound by a multitude of ridiculous expectations that I always feel like an idiot translating. “Men don’t cry.” “Men don’t get stuck feeling disappointed.” Absolute nonsense. Men can and will do anything, just like any other group of people. It’s far more productive to encourage men to be their best selves, respectful and helpful to themselves and everyone else, than to feed into this sort of behavior which implies the hideously false “men can’t be assaulted”.

This all results in Hifumi living a double life and only being able to remove his façade in the safety of his own apartment or with his two friends. That’s a miserable existence, and while Hifumi appears to be cheerful enough, it’s sickening to see that this is supposed to be comedic.

The Question of Male Oppression

The Party of Words does institute laws to oppress men, but this oppression is fairly ridiculous. Yotsutsuji says that men are taxed at a higher rate than women and that men aren’t allowed into certain areas (such as Chuuouku, I presume). Despite these challenges, the majority of Hypmic universe men seem to lead pretty normal lives. As mentioned above, the professional fields still appear to be dominated by men, and male-on-female violence doesn’t seem much different from how it is in our contemporary world. These laws aren’t making a significant change in male lives, so they must be made to impact women. Yet these are token impacts only, as they don’t in any way actually make the lives for non-Chuuouku women any better. By making this an “us against them” deal, the Party is able to make more women sympathetic to their cause and cause more infighting (thus distracting people from “us against the Party”) without actually having to make positive changes for anyone.

These laws also aren’t the reason why rebel groups exist. Consider the motivations each character gives in TDD 11. Ichirou mentions a lack of central law and regulations making it difficult to keep loved ones safe. The infighting that the Party promotes via its rap battles allows for power-hungry individuals like Mozuku to take over whole areas and instate whatever rules they want, no matter the cost to the citizens. Samatoki is frustrated by being directed to fight when he can’t see a good cause; similarly, Ramuda is concerned about the effects of the fighting on the neighborhoods they pass through. Even with non-lethal weapons, a country in constant conflict is not one in which its citizens can prosper. Jakurai is concerned about inequalities between Chuuouku and the rest of the country. He mentions in FP/M 15 (which we’ll have up in a few days for you to see for yourself) that he’ll use the prize money from winning the DRB to provide medical care for locations that the Party can’t or won’t supply with aid. Later in the chapter, he drives away from the spectacular, futuristic city of Chuuouku back into a Tokyo marked with graffiti and squalor. Even the male citizens don’t care about how they’re treated as compared to their female counterparts; they care that everyone is suffering together under the Party’s poor governing.

The Party has never sought to oppress men and elevate women. The Party’s goal is to elevate itself and oppress everyone else. The gender inequality is as much of a diversionary tactic as the Division Rap Battle.

#not a translation #asks

[alovevigilante]

Life is really amazing if you stop to think about it. We have a myriad of energies and experiences to choose from. I’ve spent most of my life, in one to three energies at best: Meh, eh, and feh with variations of intensity. Now, I want to choose more, and better.

Love enables all kinds of experiences: people, who are all innately love, don’t always choose the love experience in their lives due to the 3D reality they perceive, making it their reality in most cases.

This is subject to a case by case basis. But most of us, even in the most dire of circumstances, can escape them with our thoughts. History has shown that time and time again with the heroes that have changed the course of the collective social consciousness’s momentum.

For example, mlk jr., Harriet Tubman, and others. They were so resolute in their thoughts and loving beliefs that their experience changed the course of history for the better just by their mere focus and fearless dedication to it. I want to be just like them. But I do it the way I know how, and can. And I contribute my love and sensibility through laughter, and writing my truth. That is my love, so that’s how I share it. We all have different ways of sharing our love. I admire the people who do share it from that place within themselves. And spread it all around to affect the planet. You can feel it, even if you’re not directly involved in real time. I still feel MLK jr. and Harriet Tubman’s love. Love is a never ending energy that we can tap into anytime we’d like. Just by the thinking about it, we can experience it. So I’m deciding right now, and right now and right now, to experience love.

I have to disagree with Julius Robert Mayer’s first law of thermodynamics, also known as Law of Conservation of Energy, that states that “energy can neither be created nor destroyed; energy can only be transferred or changed from one form to another.” *(1) I believe that we can and do create energy in a 5D sense, with our thoughts. (5th dimension being our thoughts within our mind that create the perceived world we see.) in the 5th dimensional realm we create thoughts and scenarios constantly that formulate feelings that turn into energy that can be measured (in waves), thereby making it its own legitimate dimension. When we act upon said thoughts that have been created by our minds, we are sharing that very created energy for a mutually shared experience. But not everyone experiences in the same way due to their individual filters and past experiences. So individual results will vary.

We can also dispel or eradicate energy, with our focus on the specific energy we choose to experience. Energy can be dispelled within our own perceptions in the 5D, and eradicated once it’s realized in the 3D. You can refocus on a better, more positive thought within your mood reach. Like right now, for example. One could be reading this, and calling me a lunatic for my theories. But in my chosen energy, mostly positive, I have decided to eliminate any negative backlash and pushback to one’s thoughts about my beliefs, therefore having it not affect my behavior in the slightest, unless I choose to allow it. It can happen if I’m not completely conscious of my thoughts.

But I do believe Julius Robert Mayer is correct when he states his law in a 3D sense (3D meaning the 3 dimensional world of form we have mutually created and share in the physical realm), that energy can neither be created or destroyed, because it has to go somewhere. So when someone creates the energy in their 5D thoughts, and gives it to another with their 3D actions (words or physical actions), and it’s not accepted by another, it has to remain with the creator until they can get rid of it themselves with their personal focus on a more positive thought, or pass the energy they created, either positive or negative, to someone else. That’s why it’s important to create only good energy with your thoughts, so that if another person doesn’t accept the energy you are offering, regardless of the emotional charge, you aren’t left with a negative feeling.

The fifth dimensional theory is palpable to all thinking humans, because the whole of us shares that very same thinking capability, therefore that dimension must exist and be shared. If we are capable of communicating thoughts, the thoughts must come from somewhere, and we all think in a similar biological fashion (in a literal sense, not figurative) therefore we are all experiencing that dimensional plane in the same way; perceiving life through our individual filters, and with our focus to specific things, and acting accordingly. We do not necessarily share the same thoughts, but we do share the same process of biologically creating the thoughts. The process of thought itself, is its own energetic entity, therefore contains an energy source, which is created by us. Thoughts formulate the potential energy to create the things into 3 dimensional form which is the kinetic energy, in action. That is how things are realized into the 3D. It goes from consciousness, measured in waves, to us being the catalysts for creation. But first the thoughts need to be created within consciousness to bring the concepts into being. I read a wonderful bbc article about consciousness and quantum physics. Feel free to check it out. It touches base on the study and the proposed link of the two: http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20170215-the-strange-link-between-the-human-mind-and-quantum-physics

I only mention this because if we can create thoughts that create the life and interactions that we perceive, we have the ability to do better with our creations. The 5th dimension is shared, so it’s a common bond of humanity as a whole. There is no I, there is only we. We are all connected, and our thoughts affect and effect the whole, and do indeed matter to the betterment of all people. Cleaning up our thoughts, is what will change everyone and everything. It will effect how we interact with the world, and how we feel about ourselves and one another. Love does that. It’s the most powerful energy there is. Nothing can compare, or override it if coming from a genuine thought.

So, all that said, I want to focus solely on people who choose to experience love, and what they create: ie. music, dance, art, design, writing, sports, theater, movies, and building stuff, and all kinds of things that people who are inspired by love, do. It feels better.

And there’s more! There’s love in other ways too. For example, in service to humanity by helping, investing time, money and effort in kids, the elderly, animals, and in the environment we all share, even if it’s halfway around the world. It’s also investing in those in need, and those who have things to share too. Love affects, and effects all of us, and the lack of it does as well. Investment, if done properly, makes for a completely fulfilling life.

So, from now on I’m going to deliberately try to choose loving energies. Here are a few I’m trying out: kindness, caring, laughter, social involvement, and celebration of people. Cause I want to feel good, so that I can share it with others, and they can feel good too. It’s a way of life I hope catches on, and everyone becomes addicted to.

Everyone has their own definition of love. Choose yours, and test it out. Life is about experimentation. You are your own constant, even though as you evolve, your variables may change. And not everyone shares the same definition of love that you do. So seek and find your like-minded energies through the love that you are attracted to. See how it suits you. You can always switch it up.

People may judge you as crazy, or a joke. That is an indication that those people do not share your definition of love, or are not willing to share the same energy that you are choosing. That’s ok too. Depending on what you want to experience, you have a choice whether to accept their rejection, or move forward toward where there is love for you.

(Please note: this is not a personal rejection of you, because all people are love, so there’s nothing to reject. It is only a rejection of their perceived energy, and that only they can control, so it’s different.) So you do not have to take it personally if they don’t treat you with the respect you deserve, although it may feel badly at first. Sometimes people aren’t in a place to recognize or accept love. And that’s ok as well. You will learn eventually, that the love is where it feels good. So move toward that, and allow them to experience the energy that they have created, without issue.

It is essentially their choice, to accept or reject themselves, by entertaining the loveless energy that they themselves have created. Also important to note, that loveless energy is both perceived and felt, so it’s good if you care about the relationships you foster to continue frequent communication and definition without defensiveness. Intention, is important to people as well. All of these things, are best done in person, because the added element of technology creates a barrier to humanity that makes it difficult in deciphering true intention. So put down the phones and computers, and talk. You can tell by looking in one another’s eyes. Cause the eyes don’t lie.

This post isn’t meant to incite anger or hostility. And however you choose to define yourself, love and your life is your personal choice. You will get no argument from me in that regard anymore. I have learned my lesson trying to argue my theory of love with a person that didn’t agree with my stance. And arguing, isn’t love, or a loving energy, therefore making it a mute point on both ends. I didn’t like how that experience left me feeling, so I won’t do it again... I’m just pointing out an alternate way to happiness if you’d like to try it out. That’s it. No judgement of your personal life choices or definitions unless they are affecting people directly, which they do. They affect you.

I believe that life should be easy, and fun. Define it your way, and design it to your liking! Here’s to the love. ❤️😎💪

*(1.) My affiliation is being an observing and active member (simultaneously) of the human race for 46 plus years. My accreditation is the fact that I’m a thinking human being with thoughts, feelings, and beliefs. I’m a work in progress, still in the graduate school of life. I use myself as an energy experiment, majoring in my personal love to suit the whole of us, with a minor in ways to achieve our collective happiness, and I usually document my experiences according to my filter. I use my energetic experiences to support my theories. (No snark intended.)

I just found this great article on this very subject: https://www.authenticityassociates.com/the-quantum-mechanics-of-changing-thoughts/

#energy #energy theory #energy report #choose love #love matters #love manifestation #self reflection #self love #self care #self esteem #selfworth #self development #self improvement #science #thermodynamics #theoretical #love yourself #love you first #change your world #change your mind

[yaz-the-spaz]

Gigi has a Muslim father just like Zayn does, so it's her celebration too.

It may be her father’s celebration, I will give you that (if he even still considers himself a practicing Muslim), but it is definitely not hers. Even Bella I will allow because she has publicly claimed that she is a Muslim (as did Zayn formerly). But please point me to where G has ever talked herself about being Muslim. Because everything I’ve ever heard or seen from her suggests otherwise. Just because ONE of your parents is Muslim (or may have been raised Muslim/considered themselves Muslim once), does not automatically make all the children (or any of the children for that matter) Muslim.

And as for G the claims of her being a Muslim only ever arose after she started dating Zayn, when it was most advantageous to her, and even then it was just article writers making assumptions because of the Eid pics posted of her with Zayn’s family. She has never herself stated publicly out of her own mouth that she is a Muslim. She posts pics of Christmas all over the fucking place, but never talks about celebrating or observing Muslim holidays herself and has only ever shown herself doing it when it’s with Zayn’s family. Where’s the pics of her and her dad and siblings going to the mosque to celebrate Eid? Where’s her talking about observing Ramadan (or even mentioning / acknowledging Ramadan or Eid ever at all) before she started dating Zayn? We get 99 pics and vids of her and her family celebrating Christmas every single damn year. Tons of pics and vids of them making gingerbread houses and decorating the tree, etc., but not ONE of her family together celebrating Eid? And the only pic we’ve EVER gotten of her at all on Eid was once and even then only to promo z*gi and some random fashion brand? Tell me that’s not fucking suspicious as hell.

To put this all in the form of an example that may help you understand better, say you had a friend where one parent of theirs was Christian and the other parent was Hindu. But as far as you knew that friend didn’t attend any church, never personally observed any Christian holidays and/or never talked about attending church or Jesus or reading the Bible, etc., never mentioned to adhering to anything in the Christian faith. Would you still consider them Christian? Or maybe it was the opposite and as far as you knew they never went to any temple to pray to Hindu gods, never gave offerings or observed any Hindu holidays and/or talked about Hindu gods, attending temples, reading the Vedas, etc., never mentioned to adhering to anything in the Hindu faith. Would you still consider them Hindu? Obviously the child may be influenced by both (or neither) religions depending on how they’re raised. But there is a big difference between being influenced by (and/or aware of) a religion via your parents vs considering/declaring yourself a part in that faith. Maybe once that kid grows up they don’t eat beef cause the one Hindu parent influenced them in such a way that they grew up not eating it and not wanting to eat it. But that doesn’t make them a practicer of the Hindu faith. In the same way that someone who observes Christmas because they maybe grew up doing it, but has never doing anything else to engage in Christian religious practices or beliefs (praying, going to church, reading the Bible, declaring themselves a follower/member of that faith), wouldn’t necessarily be considered a Christian. All that said, however, please don’t misunderstand me. I am not saying that someone necessarily has to do all of those things, or even any of those things, to be considered as a follower/member of a faith (I certainly don’t for my own). But it’s the combination of those things with the declaration, or lack thereof. What I mean by that is you can choose not to do any of those things but still consider yourself/choose to declare yourself a member of a specific faith. For example, if that hypothetical person I described earlier were to declare themselves a Christian or a Hindu even despite not actively and/or publicly participating in either religion, then great! It is up to them how they choose to practice and their right to practice and to declare themselves in whichever way they chose and everyone around them should respect that (which is why I regard Bella’s pronouncement the way I do). BUT. When that person has never publicly demonstrated any of those things AND never publicly claimed to be apart of said faith that is where the issue lies, specifically in reference to G in this case. Because again if that same hypothetical person was raised with two parents of those two different faiths, but you only ever saw them celebrating let’s say Hindu holidays and not Christian ones, and they never spoke a word about celebrating Christian holidays or going to church, etc. What would you assume their religion/religious allegiance was? Probably not Christianity (again unless they overtly stated that they still considered themselves Christian, but again that is a different case). What about vice versa? If you only ever saw them celebrating Christian holidays and not Hindu ones, and they never spoke a word about celebrating Hindu holidays or going to temple, etc. What would you assume their religion/religious allegiance was? Probably not Hinduism. This is pretty much the case that G is in. She has never spoken publicly herself about being a Muslim, and only ever shown like ONE picture of herself celebrating a Muslim holiday. That does not make her Muslim, and in my opinion all evidence points to her actually identifying otherwise and just letting people make the assumption purely for the clout it gives her.

Now if G ever decides to publicly claim it out of her own mouth I may change my stance/view on this (though again I would still consider it HIGHLY suspicious that she only addressed it/publicly claimed it so long after the fact, and especially after years of showing clear favoritism for another religion and ignoring any public mention or show of celebration for her actual “purported” religion) but as of right now that is where I stand on the matter, so no I do not consider it “her celebration too.” Mohamed’s and Bella’s maybe. But not G’s.

#asks #anons #g*gi #islam #my thoughts #this got way longer than i intended #but i have a lot of feelings on it so

[mcrane21ahsgov]

Political Party Action

Blog post 3: 

Criminal Law Reform: Mass Incarceration: Drug Law, Bail, Sentencing, and Parole Reform

 Republican:

PLATFORM: The Republican party believes in “law and order”. They do not believe in the decriminalization of marijuana, and they promote states following the feudal law. They believe in capital punishment in prisons, including the death penalty. They call on the rest of the country to make feudal courts a model for Americans, protecting victims and their families.  

AGREE/DISAGREE: I do not agree with the republican party's stance on criminal law reform. I do not believe in capital punishment and I believe states should be able to make laws for each state and do not necessarily need to follow federal laws. 

Democrat: 

PLATFORM: Democrats believe that police brutality is a very pressing issue in America and that the high incarceration rate, specifically among BIPOC, is something that we as a country need to address. Democrats also believe that defunding the police and allocating funds to places like mental health professionals and rehab facilities will decrease the deaths and incarceration rates among BIPOC. Something the Democrats are very much for is the decriminalization of marijuana and eliminating the use of cash bail as it is very unfair to people in a hard financial situation. Overall the Democrats would like to lower the incarceration rates for everyone and help people stay out of jail. 

QUOTES: “America is the land of the free, and yet more of our people are behind bars, per capita, than anywhere else in the world”

“It is past time to end the failed “War on Drugs,” which has imprisoned millions of Americans—disproportionately Black people and Latinos—and hasn’t been effective in reducing drug use. Democrats support policies that will reorient our public safety approach toward prevention, and away from over-policing—including by making evidence-based investments in jobs, housing, education, and the arts that will make our nation fairer, freer, and more prosperous.”

AGREE/DISAGREE: I very much agree with democrats on this topic. I believe being addicted to drugs or being poor is not a reason for you to be in jail. While this issue of mass incarceration has been growing for many many years and is not one person's fault, I believe that if Joe Biden is elected he and his team will do something about this and aid to help those in need in our criminal justice system. 

Green: 

PLATFORM: The green party wants to reduce the prison population, invest in rehabilitation, and end the failed war on drugs. Their priorities include efforts to prevent violent crime and address the legitimate needs of victims while addressing the socio-economic root causes of crime and practicing policies that prevent recidivism. Their solutions include treating substance abuse as a medical problem, not a criminal problem, free all non-violent incarcerated prisoners of the drug war, increase funding for rape and domestic violence prevention and education programs, and never house juvenile offenders with adults. Their stance on parolees involves, providing incarcerated individuals the right to vote by absentee ballot in the district of their domicile, and the right to vote during parole. 

QUOTES: “The negative effects of imprisonment are far-reaching. Prisoners are isolated from their communities and often denied contact with the free world and the media. Access to educational and legal materials is in decline. Prison administrators wield total authority over their environments, diminishing procedural input from experts, and censoring employee complaints.”

“Greens also call attention to the fact that more than forty percent of those 2.3 million locked down come from America's black one-eighth.”

AGREE/DISAGREE: I mostly agree with the green party's stance on criminal justice. I agree that we should allow no violent criminals to vote, and the right to vote during parole. I also agree with releasing anyone in prison there for marijuana or nonviolent drug charges. I do not entirely know where I stand on a few issues they stand for like never housing juvenile offenders with adults. 

 Libertarian:

PLATFORM: The Libertarian party believes that the government is creating laws that only pertain to “life liberty and property”. They are not in favor of punitive damages, designed to punish the wrongdoer. They oppose the prosecutorial practice of “overcharging” in criminal prosecutions to avoid jury trials by intimidating defendants into accepting plea bargains.

QUOTE: “Therefore, we favor the repeal of all laws creating “crimes” without victims, such as gambling, the use of drugs for medicinal or recreational purposes, and consensual transactions involving sexual services.”

AGREE/DISAGREE: I do not agree with most of the libertarian party's views, as I believe they do not better our criminal justice system. I believe most of their “rules' ' are one-sided and don't take into account others. I do agree with how they want to make marijuana legal and decriminalize sex workers. 

Peace and Freedom:

PLATFORM: The peace and freedom party or otherwise known as the “feminist socialist party”, wants to repeal the Patriot Act, abolish the Department of Homeland Security, stop state-sponsored spying on and violence against progressive organizations, democratically-controlled police review boards with powers of subpoena and discipline, abolish the death penalty, repeal the Three Strikes law, stop trials and imprisonment of juveniles as adults, decriminalize victimless activities including drug use and consensual sex, legalize marijuana, end the "war on drugs," which is primarily directed against poor and working-class people, abolish all torture in prisons, uphold prisoner rights, among other things. 

QUOTE: “The bosses use laws against victimless activities, "legal" and illegal expansion of police powers, military and paramilitary occupation of poor and minority communities, and diversion of resources to police and jails, to keep workers intimidated and dependent.”

AGREE/DISAGREE: I agree with some of their positions like the legalization of marijuana, the abolishment of torture in prisons, and abolish the death penalty. I do not agree with abolishing the Department of Homeland Security or stopping trials and imprisonment of juveniles as adults in certain cases. 

REFLECT:

I agree with the democrat party the most, which is not surprising as i identify as a democrat. I believe the Democrat party will do the cost to reform prisons and they have a solid plan to deal with mass incarceration in America. If i was 18 I would vote for Joe Biden. 

PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE: 

My issues were somewhat addressed. They address the looting and rioting going on in cities and how police officers are not held to the same standards as citizens in terms of the law. During the debate it seemed like Biden carried a lot more about these issues, than Trump. As Biden does not condemn the violence going on in our cities he does not believe that we should send in the national guard like Trump does. Biden believes in de escalating the situation, not making it worse. 

[buddaimond]

Kristen Stewart is due at the Venice Film Festival tomorrow for the world premiere of “Seberg”, a political thriller inspired by true events and a movie that represents one of the boldest choices the erstwhile Bella Swan has increasingly made since she burst to worldwide stardom in the Twilight saga. Stewart has demonstrated an arthouse sensibility — even becoming the first American actress to win a César Award, France’s equivalent to the Oscar — showing range in a diverse array of films while not shying away from big studio fare either, with “Charlie’s Angels” coming in November. She is passionate about her work, gender equality and telling “confronting” stories. Stewart is also conscious of the reach and influence she has as a celebrity, particularly one who broke out in a global franchise. “Everything that I do, every conversation that I have, the way that I vote, the projects that I’m drawn to creatively… It would be impossible to go to bed without being really clear and open and honest in these times,” she tells me below. Seberg (which previously went by the title Against All Enemies and is directed by Benedict Andrews) plays into that. The film is centered on Jean Seberg, the titular Breathless pixie, an American actress who spent half her life in France. In the late 1960s, she was targeted by Hoover’s illegal FBI surveillance program COINTELPRO. Because of her political and romantic involvement with civil rights activist Hakim Jamal (played by Anthony Mackie in the film), she was also a target of the FBI’s attempts to disrupt, discredit and expose the Black Power movement. Seberg died at the age of 40 in what was deemed a probable suicide. That was 40 years ago tomorrow. Of the film’s resonance to today, Stewart says, “I mean, this is America and a bunch of dudes in power are never going to be cool with you taking it away.” Bearing a striking physical resemblance to Seberg in the Amazon Studios presentation, Stewart has more in common with the actress than a great haircut. DEADLINE: In some of the acting choices you’ve made in the past few years, there seems to be more of a European sensibility than where you started out. Was it a deliberate choice to go in that direction?

KRISTEN STEWART: Well I started acting when I was really young and I definitely never got any commercial jobs (laughs). As a little kid, the first few things you audition for are commercial work or TV work or parts for children which tend to obviously be a little less complex. I was seriously, like, thrown out of every “cute girl” audition that I ever went to. At that time, there was no way for me to be aware of my sort of ultimate trajectory. But it makes total sense. I was always a very sort of over-serious thoughtful kid. I was definitely not afraid to tell confronting stories and was much more interested in that.

DEADLINE: You worked with Jodie Foster early in your career, how influential has that meeting been later on?

STEWART: I think I grew up with this default admiration because of her, because I always felt a kinship with her. I sort of consistently used her as an example of something to strive for, so that detail was always very attractive. You know, there’s just something classically more existential and realistic in terms of what it feels like to actually live a life and have a brain and live amongst people that might have different ones rather than telling these compact perfect stories. I was always into that. But (working with Foster) was like the coincidence that luckily put me in a few correct places. I definitely kind of aggrandized that whole world before I even knew about it.

DEADLINE: When I first moved to France 26 years ago, I worked at the International Herald Tribune and that famous photo of Jean Seberg from Breathless was a source of pride for us. But I was surprised how little I knew about her life and the circumstances this film reveals. What did you learn about her?

STEWART: I really only knew her as the Herald Tribune girl as well. I hadn’t seen anything other than Breathless. I knew the dégueulasse moment (at the end of that film). I always found her to be iconically cool. I thought it was rad that this actress had been ingratiated into this culture that I also am really interested in, but I really never went into it any further than that. I read the script and was really shocked, I had no idea about the story about her sort of tragic end. I was interested in the complexity of her life, but I only knew her as an image before.

DEADLINE: Beyond being an American actress who has found success in France, were there any other aspects of Jean that you identify with?

STEWART: I think Jean was really committed to telling not the most commercial stories, it was why she was attracted to the people she was attracted to creatively. It was why she was drawn to the causes that she was as well — they weren’t digestible in the country that she was living in, they weren’t something that people wanted to hear both creatively and politically. So I think it makes total sense that she found a more sort of welcome home in France.

DEADLINE: Jean was also a very strong woman, but one who had a tragic end. How would she fare in today’s Hollywood?

STEWART: We’re living in such a polarized time I think, that luckily there are fewer — I mean I can’t justify this because there are some people functioning in order to preserve their careers and not necessarily reflective of how they feel as a human in a compassionate sense or in a political sense — but I do think that people are less afraid in a way because it’s just so pertinent right now. Not that it wasn’t then. We were just out of the 50s; there was more of a cookie-cutter conformist mentality especially in the States and especially for someone who wants to maintain their success. But I think now, I don’t know, Jean currently would probably have more of a crew to substantiate these ideas. I think that now the political climate doesn’t leave much room for middle ground, so I’d like to say she would fare better. I would like to think there wouldn’t be a f***ing oppressive conglomerate out there to destroy her life. But at the same time, that’s absolutely the world that we’re living in. I think it would depend on what she was getting mixed in with. Cautiously optimistically, I would like to say it would be better. But at the same time, the reason it would be is really jarring right now because I think we all feel like there is probably someone over our shoulders ready to take us down if we say the wrong thing.

DEADLINE: There are indeed parallels to today. Sort of a meet the new boss, same as the old boss?

STEWART: I think this oppressive energy is so ironically the foundation of our politics now. I mean, what was happening then is happening now and it’s gonna continue to happen. I mean, this is America and a bunch of dudes in power are never going to be cool with you taking it away — I don’t think they really care who they bowl over to maintain that.

DEADLINE: How important do you think it is today, and in a position like the one you occupy, to take a stance and speak out and use that celebrity to get a message across?

STEWART: I feel quite strongly. Everything that I do, every conversation that I have, the way that I vote, the projects that I’m drawn to creatively — I think that I wear my feelings and my stance and my politics. I think that some people are really inclined to stand on soap boxes and I think that they should, and some people are more inclined to do it quietly, but with intention and wield your power in different ways. But, yeah, I think it’s absolutely essential that you represent yourself, knowing your influence and the reach that you have. I think that it would be impossible to go to bed without being really clear and open and honest in these times.

DEADLINE: There was a perception about Jean that audiences wanted “the girl in the t-shirt.” As someone who was so closely identified with a role early in your career, do you feel like you’ve shed that connection? Would you want to?

STEWART: I don’t think it’s going anywhere. I think every step I’ve taken to this spot on the now I can say I feel lucky that some of the footprints are gouged out, I’m proud of that. I’m cool with that. I think the whole Twilight thing is pretty entrenched, which is funny and kind of crazy for me to think about now because it has been a really long time. I remember it like it was yesterday and at the same time it was another life. So it’s funny to have it consistently be the foundation of who I am in a cultural sense. But in a literal one, I couldn’t be further from it. But I’m down with it. It’s so trippy. I’m so proud to be part of it, I like the crew. I look at it really fondly and endearingly and silly, sort of like opening a sophomore yearbook, like, “OMG! Wow!”

DEADLINE: You were on the jury in Cannes in 2018, which was a pivotal year there in the fight for gender parity. What that was like?

STEWART: It was such a good year for me to be there. I’ve attended the festival a couple times with films and, oh man, I don’t know, it digs up feelings that I hold in such reverence and ones that not everybody does, quite rightfully, because that would be strange — the world is a lot more than just movies. But being there the year that it became really undeniable and really buzzy and fervently activated in terms of being a woman, I’m so lucky to have been there in that energy. Cate (Blanchett) was the president of the jury, and honestly I think that if we had to represent the earth and send one of ours out to an alien race and be like “Hey, this is us,” I think it would be Cate. So I was just so completely activated that whole time, I went home so inspired and turned on. My on switch was just slammed, so it was wonderful.

DEADLINE: Venice is getting some heat for a lack of female directors in competition. Would you sit on a jury here?

STEWART: Obviously I am a huge proponent of having more women and making films that are accepted… I guess if they asked me to be on the jury in Venice, it would be a step in the right direction. Sometimes if you act selfishly, your intentions and your politics sort of are in tow, so selfishly I would want to do that because I have everything to learn from that experience — and I think it makes a really solid statement.

Source

#kristen stewart #Deadline #Seberg #Jean Seberg #Venice Film Festival

[calorieworkouts]

30 Tips to Lose Weight and Burn Fat

1. Write down your goal

You need to have a goal to ensure that you recognize what you desire as well as what you are functioning towards, it will likewise keep you motivated. Specify with your objective as well as make certain it is measurable jot down specifically what you desire to accomplish and when you desire it by. You might desire to begin preparing for putting on a bikini, service increasing muscle tone or flattening your tummy, lose the mufifn top etc - if you need to shed fat or perhaps you wish to go down a couple of pounds, specify with the quantity put a number to the pounds you intend to lose as well as take your body dimensions so you can see your development as considering yourself doesn't constantly show your result, especially if you are acquiring muscle as well as toning up.

2. Reduce Stress

Stress boosts cortisol in your body as well as this can bring about weight gain, anxiety can additionally trigger you to really feel tired which might well quit you from functioning out, as well as it has likewise been recognized to cause some emotional eating. Exercise is a terrific way of minimizing stress and anxiety, it helps you clear your mind and also makes you really feel fantastic afterwards as when you exercise your body releases endorphins which are the body's all-natural feeling great chemicals as well as along with the release of serotonin, adrenaline as well as dopamine all these chemicals work with each other to make you feel excellent. You can likewise take a yoga class, meditate, check out a publication, anything that si going to aid you de stress as well as relax.

3. Cardio

The fastest way to burn that fat is by doing cardio exercise, anything that is mosting likely to elevate your heart beat as well as obtain you functioning your cardiovascular system will have you burning that fat extra rapidly. Go for a run, biking, a swim, grab a skipping rope and also miss in the yard or outside, or perhaps in your residence if you have adequate space. Sign up with a spinning course you will have that really felt melting away. You need to do some cardio 5 days a week to see the most effective results.

4. Strength Training

Grab those weights and start exercising those muscular tissues. Once you lose that fat you want to be toned as well as prepared to display all that effort. Exercising with weights and tightening those muscle mass will actually raise your metabolism which means you will certainly be burning off that fat even when you are unwinding and even sleeping.

5. Drink Water

Dehydration decreases the weight loss procedure. Your body requires water to work properly, you require to consume alcohol approx 2 litres daily however this can differ depending upon your weight, degree of activity, temperature as well as humidity. Consume alcohol routinely throughout the day. You can get your 2 litres by consuming alcohol various other liquids such as juice however keep in mind that juices can be high in calories. If you do not like water by itself try adding a lemon or lime slice.

6. Eat Healthy

This is mosting likely to be the major means of losing the fat. Your diet plan is one of the most vital bit. A healthy balanced diet plan is something that will keep your body functioning with all the nutrients it needs as well as you will find it will have favorable effect on the problem of your skin. The approximated ordinary everyday calorie requirement is 2000 for females as well as 2500 for men, this is simply a price quote and will rely on your age, weight, height, body composition as well as degrees of activity. Do not just decrease your calories as a means to drop weight as you will be reducing your metabolic process and encouraging your body to save even more of what you consume as it will certainly go into hunger mode.

7. Drink Green Tea

Green Tea consists of antioxidants called catechins that will assist your body burn fat according to the American Journal of Medical Nutrition.

8. Smaller sized dishes yet more of them

As long as you consume on a regular basis as well as have the amount of calories you require after that your body wont intend to save fat. If you skip meals or consume irregularly that's when you will discover your body's metabolism will certainly reduce down as well as start to keep extra as it wont know when it's following meal is mosting likely to be. As well as on the other hand if you consume a lot of calories than you burn your body will save the additional as fat. I locate it easier to consume 5 times a day and also have smaller sections for my primary meals as well as healthy treats in between. In this manner I don't locate myself with that said feeling throughout the mid morning or mid mid-day where I need something to maintain me going up until lunch break or supper and it would typically lead me to grabbing a chocolate bar or a few biscuits. 3 meals a day 5? It depends on you. Try it out and discover which functions finest for you.

9. Low GI foods

If you intend to snack then select foods with a low glycemic index as these will leave you feeling fuller for longer. They will assist avoid you grabbing a biscuit or chocolate bar throughout the day for that added increase of energy.

10. Stop the fizzy drinks

Fizzy drinks are extremely high in sugar and also I make sure you have checked out the amount of teaspoons of sugar there remain in each canister. Too much sugar will trigger your body to start keeping fat. When you take in sugar your body responds by raising it's blood glucose levels (sugar) this subsequently triggers the launch of insulin that's major purpose is to maintain your blood sugar at a consistent and also safe degree. If you are not burning that added glucose (which is what the body makes use of for power) and also your cells that use it are currently full then the body will certainly keep it elsewhere - in fat cells!

11. Decrease high sugar as well as fat material foods

There is no demand to eliminate whatever that you like, just remember to keep things in small amounts. A dessert after a dish or a delicious chocolate bar must be taken into consideration a reward. Remember your goal as well as assume about exactly how much added workout you will certainly need to do that day to burn the added calories included in that delicious chocolate bar or pack of chips. Be cautious of foods with trans fats which are not excellent for your body they can bring about weight gain and also have actually been linked to different health risks.

12. Eat Slowly

Your body takes time before it understands it is complete, if you are starving then do not consume your meal truly fast as you will certainly greater than likely over eat and also once you have ended up as well as waited 10 minutes you will certainly feel over full. Reduce down take your time and chew.

13. Drink when hungry

Sometimes we error our body's signals, dehydration can typically be misunderstood as cravings signals. Next time you are really feeling starving have a glass of water very first and see if that does the trick. Do not change food with water, you still require to consume a healthy and balanced and also balanced diet, however in some cases if you have eaten after that a little bit later you are hungry again maybe that you are dried out. Consume a glass of water before you eat.

14. Reduce Alcohol

Alcohol can be preventing you from burning off those extra lbs as it lowers your body's capacity to melt fat. When you drink alcohol your body will certainly utilize that initially as gas to burn. So whilst you are burning that alcohol you are not burning the fat.

15. Posture

By sitting and also standing with excellent pose you will be engaging your core muscle mass, these are right around your middle so your lower back, abdominals as well as obliques. Structure muscle raises your metabolic rate which indicates more calories being melted. Plus an added advantage by sitting as well as standing with good stance you will look slimmer than you would if you just slouched.

16. Pay attention to songs whilst functioning out

Listening to songs assists break the dullness of the exercise as well as maintains you motivated. It additionally lowers your regarded rate of fatigue and also improves your capacity to exercise for longer meaning you will certainly be burning that fat in no time.

17. Read food labels

You might be surprised at the number of calories some foods include. Simply because they state minimized fat, lowered sugar does not necessarily mean they are the most affordable in fat or sugar or healthiest choice. It's not just food labels you should check out either, make sure you examine the labels on what you drink.

18. Core Exercises

The Plank - this is a wonderful workout for your core and abdominals. As soon as you have disappeared that fat you intend to have actually a toned belly and this is one of my much-loved exercises that I have actually located works the most effective to attain that excellent looking stomach. There are various variations of the Plank so if essential you can begin at a simpler level and work your means approximately the more challenging levels.

19. Motivation

The finest method for you to burn off that fat is to adhere to your exercise as well as healthy consuming. Inspiration is what will certainly maintain you going, compensate yourself when you reach your goals. Maintain a record of your results (the quantity of inches or centimeters you are shedding) compose them down. Go attempt on some brand-new clothes and see just how much better they fit. Take a photo of on your own when you begin and also then every 4 weeks so you can compare the difference. When you begin to see outcomes that's what will keep you going.

20. Exercise Buddy

Sticking to a workout program can be much easier if you have somebody to do it with, it is harder to miss out on an exercise session if there is another person relying upon you to join them. Plus it can make it a lot more fun, if you don't have a person to comply with a program with then you could join a course. Circuit training is a great way to combine resistance training and cardio to get a great fat loss exercise. There are many other courses available that will certainly aid you reach your objectives find ones that you will certainly enjoy which obtain you a cardio or resistance exercise or both a these are the workouts that will have you dissolving the fat as well as burning off that weight.

21. Take the staircases, get off a quit early, park the automobile better away

You can burn added calories throughout the day than you usually would as well as in addition to your regular exercise program. When going anywhere take the stairways as opposed to the escalator or elevator. If you take public transport to function or when you head out purchasing then leave a quit previously and walk the remainder of the way, perhaps you might even cycle to work as opposed to taking a bus. If you do have to drive anywhere how about car park better far from the structure than you would typically to make sure that you need to stroll that little further. You will certainly be stunned how much all of it includes up and you will be burning that weight in no time.

22. Sleep

Get in your full 7-8 hours sleep per night to see to it you have enough power to make it through your day and keep your metabolic process from slowing down. A slow metabolism implies less calories being burned.

23. Reduce the Salt

Too much salt can cause water retention so be careful just how much salt you have. You might be consuming even more salt than you assume, check the tags on your foods. Do not add too much salt to your food preparation or on your food at a dining establishment as you may not understand how much the cook already added.

24. High Strength Period Training

Increase the strength your exercise at during your cardio session, if you are running then alternate between jogging as well as running. Do a 1 minutes jog, 1 minutes run, 1 minutes jog, 1 min run and so on. If you exercise in this manner you can lower the amount of time you do your cardio and also you will burn off even more calories than addressing a steady speed. You can do this for any of your cardio exercises.

25. Do Compound Exercises

A compound exercise that makes use of greater than one joint and muscular tissue team and means a lot more calories shed throughout exercise. Squats, lunges and deadlifts use your hamstrings, quadriceps, glutes (the most effective means to a company and also perky butt), reduced back and also core. Raise and also upper body press utilizes your chest as well as triceps. Rows (seated, curved over row, one arm row) use your back as well as biceps. Shoulder press uses your shoulders and triceps.

26. Portion Control

Portion dimensions have actually enhanced over the past decade, beware you don't inadvertently overindulge by filling your plate with food, restaurants frequently dish out larger sections so just consume what you need. Dropping weight is concerning eating healthy as well as exercising. If you absorb a lot of calories than you shed off in a day these added calories will certainly be kept as fat.

27. Inspiration

For you to lose weight and melt the fat off fast you require to be committed to your goal. Everyone experiences days where they do not want to exercise or they fancy a pizza or just shed their energy to keep working at losing the weight. Well just how about providing yourself some motivation. Find picture of bodies that you would like to have, there are numerous out there on the net, interest, tumblr they are all terrific areas for inspiration. Locate a few picture, publish them out put them somewhere you can see them. It is not impossible to get healthy and fit and lose the muffin top or that extra weight it just takes dedication as well as effort. You will be rewarded for your effort.

28. Take your measurements

I stated this under establishing on your own an objective. There is nothing even more motivating for losing weight than seeing results and also the very best way to see exactly how your body is transforming is by seeing the inches leave. Procedure your hips, midsection as well as breast at the start and after that every 4 weeks. This is far better than weighing on your own as once you lose fat and also begin to gain muscular tissue the scales might disappoint much of a difference, this is due to you firming up those muscle mass as well as the old claiming goes that muscular tissue weighs more than fat. Although most of us recognize that weight is weight so if you have a 1ln of muscular tissue then a 1lb of fat is exactly the same, yes but the density of muscular tissue as well as fat are different so you can shed a 1lb of fat as well as place on a 1lb of muscular tissue however you will still be smaller sized in dimension as muscle mass is a lot a lot more dense than fat so takes up much less room.

29. Dance

Dancing is a fantastic type of cardio, you can either join a dancing class such as Zumba or simply dancing in your very own residence. You will certainly enjoy as well as that fat will certainly be burning off in no time.

30. Don't Give Up

If you miss out on a day of exercise don't quit, you have not stopped working, simply get back available and also begin once again the following day. It will be less complicated to return into it the quicker you start once again. Remember why you are doing it, remember your goal, look at the development you are making as well as maintain going.

#cardio exercises #exercise #gym #health #weight #workout #workout program #workouts

[scripttorture]

I have a character who works in a team where streght (Both physical and emotional) is considered very important. So, after my character gets tortured, she attempts to hide any physiological effects because she wants to look "tough". How much time do you think she would last doing this? Are there certain things she wouldn't be able to hide? (She doesn't have lasting physical damage save from a broken arm and various bruises from getting beaten)

Ithink a lot of this depends on what symptoms you decide to give thecharacter and what her culture sees as signs of mental healthproblems.

BeforeI start there’s an important point to make here: symptomsdo not make survivors weak.

Iunderstand that you’re coming at this writing a groupthat probably holds victim blaming ideas about torture survivors.There’s nothing wrong with writing characters or indeed fictionalcultures, that hold those beliefs. Butthenarrativeshould not support them.

Torturesurvivors get a lotof awful responses to their symptoms in real life. They are oftenlabelled weak, immoral, degenerate or dangerous because of mentalhealth problems that are beyond there control.

Critiquethese tendencies in your characters. Use the plot to showthat they are wrong.

Ifyou want to deal with common apologist ideas in your story then donot let them go unchallenged, do not let the reader leave thinkingthat these lies could be correct.

Survivorsdon’t all respond to torture the same way. We know the symptomsthat are possiblebut survivors don’t generally get every possible symptom. There’sno way to predict the symptoms someone will get. And we honestlydon’t yet know why particular individuals get particular symptoms.It doesn’tseem to be linked to the type of torture though.

Hidingthe symptoms of severe mental health problems is certainly possible.It’s also very unhealthy.

It’s-well bluntly it’s the way a lot of completed suicides seem to go.

Youcan find the common symptoms here.

Someof these are harder to hide but a lot depends on the individualexpression of a mental health problem.

Forinstance, my Grandmother had pretty severe depression for most of herlife. One of the primary ways this would manifest was that she’d beunable to get out of bed. She withdrew and many of her responses wereincoherent. When I was younger I thought this was what depressionalways looked like.

Butthat’s not necessarily true.

Depressioncan look like sleeping too much, or not sleeping at all. It can looklike eating too much or not being able to eat.

Somepeople who are in just as bad a state as my Grandmother was can go towork and carry on a ‘normal’ looking day. That doesn’t meanthey’re better or stronger then she was. It just means thatdepression looks different on them.

WhatI’m driving at here is that there are two separate sets of choicesyou need to make for the character here: what you want her symptomsto be and what you want those symptoms to look like for herparticularly.

Boundup in that are a lot of different narrative choices. One of thosechoices is whether you wantthe character to still appear ‘strong’ to the rest of the group.Another is what ‘strength’ means culturally to these characters.

Strengthmeans different things to different people and that’s- particularlyobvious to me because it’s one of the terms that I findparticularly difficult during cross-cultural communication.

Ihave been called ‘strong’ after talking about being queer in acountry that executes queer people and after talking about carryingon with everyday life after bombings. When this is everyday realityfor a significant period of your life it does not feel like‘strength’. It feels like something you just knuckle down and geton with. But to people in another culture, another context, every daylife can look like ‘strength’.

Youdon’t need to define what strength is in this culture to me and youdon’t necessarily need to define it to your readers. But youneed to have a firm grasp of what it is and what it looks like.

Insome cultural contexts severe mental illness can be reinterpreted as‘strength’. A suicidal person physically placing themselvesbetween another person and danger is oftenread by society as an act of strength. The gory, public, painfulsuicides that triggered the Arab Spring were read culturally asstrong acts as well as desperate ones.

Howdoes your fictional culture view martyrdom? Because there are awealth of opportunities to talk about mental health problems in thatcontext while a character still looks ‘strong’.

Therearecommon symptoms that are harder to hide, but I can’t decide for youwhether those symptoms should be classed as ‘weak’ in yourfictional culture.

Hypervigilance,memory problems, learning difficulties, PTSD and panic attacks areharder to hide.

Hypervigilancecanbe reinterpreted as ‘strong’, as learning from mistakes and being‘reasonable’. As taking an ‘uncompromising’ stance. It’sstrength as being extreme and uncompromising. Personally I think thisis idiocy not strength, but it can be interpreted in this way.

Peoplecan cover for memory problems and learning difficulties.

Addictioncan be easily discoveredbut that doesn’t mean it can’t be hidden for a long time. Addictsoften hide their addiction for an extremely long time.

Suicidalthoughts and self harm can be hidden for an extremely long time. Itcan often take a crisis or even a death for people to be aware thatsomeone is suffering.

Chronicpain and insomnia can be hidden to an extent, but both cause longterm physical problems that impact on daily life and job performance.

Hidingmental health problems makes them worse.

I’mnot an expert in mental health and I’d suggest looking at @scriptshrink’s blog for an idea of why that’s the case. I canonly anecdotally report that people who bottle up like this and haveno support or outlet- tend to end up in hospital. Higher rates ofsevere, hospital-emergency types of self harm, higher levels ofsuicide attempts, higher levels of complete mental breakdownsrequiring long hospital stays.

Thisis a guess and a broad guess but I think a reasonable time frame for‘hiding’ things would be between 6 months and three years.Depending on the situation and the symptoms you choose.

Forthe lowest time period I’m thinking of symptoms like chronic pain,insomnia, PTSD, panic attacks and memory problems that involve memoryloss.

Forthe longest time period I’m thinking of symptoms like depression(depending on the expression), addiction, social isolation and memoryproblems involving forgetfulness or false memories.

Forhypervigilance it depends on the culture and similar arguments applyto suicidal thoughts and anxiety.

Obviouslya lot of things also depend on the individual expression of thesesymptoms. A character who overdoses in the first month because ofaddiction coupled with suicidal thoughts is going to have a hardertime hiding symptoms. A character who is good at lying to covermemory problems will be able to hide them for longer. A character whocan argue their anxiety symptoms are in fact reasonableand nota mental illness might be able to carry on for a long time withoutother characters’ realising they’re mentally ill.

Alot also depends on the character’s limits. Sooner or later shewould reach crisis point. When that point is- isn’t reallysomething we can accurately predict. I think it’s best to try tyingit to the character and the plot.

Thinkof the moment when she’s under greatest pressure and think aboutwhat kinds of pressure are intolerable to her. She might be ablehandle work but breakdown over the slightest problem in familyrelationships. She might seem cool in a crisis but then go to piecesover a broken plate.

Decidewhich symptoms you want to use and take a look at what ScriptShrinkhas to say about each of them. You should be able to build up a timeframe from there.

Ihope that helps. :)

Availableon Wordpress.

Disclaimer

#tw torture #tw self harm #tw suicide #tw addiction #mental health #writing victims #cultural differences #Anonymous

[theliberaltony]

via Politics – FiveThirtyEight

Welcome to FiveThirtyEight’s weekly politics chat. The transcript below has been lightly edited.

sarahf (Sarah Frostenson, politics editor): Last Thursday, the 2020 Democratic candidates covered a wide range of topics during the three-hour debate, including health care, race and criminal justice, immigration, gun control and climate change.

But what issues do voters care most about? In our FiveThirtyEight/Ipsos poll, conducted using Ipsos’s KnowledgePanel, we surveyed the same set of respondents both before and after the debate to find out what issue was most important in determining their vote in the primary. And what we learned was Democrats are most concerned about defeating President Trump — nearly 40 percent of respondents said this was their top issue. For reference, the next-most-common top issue — health care — was picked by just 10 percent voters before the debate and 11 percent after.

So what issues should the candidates be talking more about? Less about? And if Democrats care more about winning this year, what’s the best way to talk about beating Trump?

A lot of Democrats really want to beat Trump

Share of respondents to the FiveThirtyEight/Ipsos poll who said that each issue is the most important to them, before and after the debate

Share for whom issue is most important issue Pre-debate Post-debate Ability to beat Donald Trump 39.6%

–

39.6%

–

Health care 9.9

–

11.0

–

The economy 8.0

–

8.7

–

Wealth and income inequality 7.9

–

8.4

–

Climate change 7.4

–

6.5

–

Gun policy 4.2

–

4.8

–

Immigration 3.3

–

3.7

–

Something else 3.3

–

3.5

–

Social Security 3.4

–

3.2

–

Education 2.5

–

2.4

–

Racism 3.0

–

2.4

–

The makeup of the Supreme Court 1.7

–

1.7

–

Taxes 1.3

–

1.3

–

Jobs 1.9

–

1.1

–

Foreign affairs 1.3

–

0.7

–

Crime 0.7

–

0.4

–

The military 0.3

–

0.4

–

Sexism 0.1

–

0.2

–

From a survey of 4,320 likely Democratic primary voters who were surveyed between Sept. 5 and Sept. 11. The same people were surveyed again from Sept. 12 to Sept. 16; 3,473 responded to the second wave.

nrakich (Nathaniel Rakich, elections analyst): Well, to state the obvious, the candidates should be talking about their ability to beat Trump.

It’s important to a ton of Democratic voters.

And the more it goes untalked-about, the more other candidates are ceding that ground to Joe Biden, IMO.

Electability is a very fuzzy concept without a ton of data behind it, so pretty much any candidate can make a plausible argument for their “electability.”

sarahf: What are some ways candidates can do that, though?

I know Biden has leaned into his performance in head-to-head polls against Trump, but as we know … general election polls don’t really tell us that much about the strength of candidates in the primary.

natesilver (Nate Silver, editor in chief): I mean, it’s a little tricky. If you talk too much about electability, you raise the salience of the issue, which might work to Biden’s benefit.

ameliatd (Amelia Thomson-DeVeaux, senior writer): On the other hand, the fact that electability is a fuzzy concept can also be difficult for the candidates to address directly — for example, the female candidates.

nrakich: Amelia, if you ask me, the female candidates should be trotting out the studies that show women do just as well as men when they run for office!

ameliatd: Well, but those studies aren’t about presidential candidates! Most political scientists agree that people don’t cross the aisle to vote against a woman (or for that matter, to vote for a woman) — party loyalties are stronger than gender bias. But that’s not an easy sound bite, and it also may not be especially reassuring to voters who think sexism was a factor in Hillary Clinton’s loss in 2016.

natesilver: In particular, I think it’s risky (by which I mean dumb) for any candidate other than Biden to talk much about his or her head-to-head polls against Trump, because Biden still does better than any other Democrat in those polls by some margin.

sarahf: But is that what will convince voters someone is electable?

nrakich: Amy Klobuchar is pointing to her past election results, where she really ran up the score in the swing state of Minnesota, as evidence that she’s electable. The problem is that she just hasn’t gotten a lot of attention for it (although voters in our poll thought she was slightly more likely to beat Trump after the debate).

sarahf: How else can candidates talk about their ability to defeat Trump without getting into their performance in head-to-head polls?

natesilver: I thought Warren’s response to Delaney in the second debate was good. Basically, like, if you’re not running on ideas, then why are you even running?

nrakich: If you’re Klobuchar, you can also argue that a moderate candidate is better positioned to win over swing voters. Or if you’re Kamala Harris or Cory Booker, you can argue that a black candidate will have the most success increasing black turnout (which could help Democrats win back Midwestern states like Michigan and Pennsylvania and might put new states, like Georgia, in play).

natesilver: I’m not sure that the candidates themselves do a lot of good by litigating more complex points about electability with the public. Their campaigns might do it on background with journalists, but it’s probably best left there.

ameliatd: I agree with that, Nate. One recent study did show that people were more likely to rate female candidates as electable when they were first reminded about how many women won in 2018 — but I don’t think having the candidates make that pitch will necessarily work.

sarahf: But if the best way for a candidate to run is on their ability to beat Trump, how can their stances on other issues help them accomplish that? Or make them seem more electable?

Let’s start with an issue that a lot of voters also care about (it was the second most popular pick for top issue in our Ipsos poll) — health care.

Should Democrats being talk about health care more?

Less?

nrakich: Exit polls showed that health care was the most important issue to voters in the 2018 midterm elections, which obviously worked out well for Democrats. So I think that’s good ground for the candidates to focus on for the general election.

For the primary, maybe less so — it depends on their position on health care!

natesilver: I remain convinced that health care is the best issue that Sanders has going for him.

Although, according to our poll, Biden actually gained ground with voters who prioritized the issue. Warren and Harris have been somewhat stuck in the middle on health care, though, and I think it’s a real problem for them.

nrakich: But Nate, what about those polls that show that a single-payer health care system is less popular, even among Democrats, than building on Obamacare (with, say, a public option)?

natesilver: At least Sanders has leadership on the issue. True, Biden has the most popular position. But Harris and Warren got nothing.

sarahf:

Who voters think is best on health care

Among the 435 respondents who said health care was the most important issue to them in an Ipsos/FiveThirtyEight poll

candidate share of respondents Bernie Sanders 32.9%

–

–

Joe Biden 28.8

–

–

Elizabeth Warren 16.5

–

–

Someone else 6.4

–

–

Pete Buttigieg 3.3

–

–

Kamala Harris 2.8

–

–

Amy Klobuchar 2.2

–

–

Julián Castro 1.5

–

–

Beto O’Rourke 1.3

–

–

Andrew Yang 1.3

–

–

Cory Booker 0.9

–

–

Poll was conducted from Sept. 5 to Sept. 11 among a general population sample of adults, with 4,320 respondents who say they are likely to vote in their state’s Democratic primary or caucus

Yeah, going into the debate, Sanders had the lead among voters in our poll who prioritized health care. (But Sanders wasn’t the only candidate to gain potential supporters among voters who prioritized health care after the debate — Biden, Yang, Warren and Buttigieg all made bigger gains.)

ameliatd: Part of the challenge, too, is that people still don’t understand the details of all of these plans — for example, Medicare for All, as Sanders and Warren talk about it, involves getting rid of private insurance. That could be more and more of an issue for the candidates on the left. Warren and Sanders keep saying people don’t like their insurance — but that’s not really true.

The health care debate is hard because people want something better, but they’re also afraid of losing what they have.

sarahf: Yeah, the branding of “Medicare for All who want it” that Buttigeig and others are pushing is pretty ingenious, even if it’s just as difficult or costly to pull off as the version of Medicare for All that Sanders and Warren are pitching.

ameliatd: It is weirdly off-brand for Warren to not have a detailed plan on health care. But maybe she’s trying not to get beaten up in the fight over Medicare for All.

natesilver: It’s very off-brand. And, sure, there might be tactical reasons for it. All of which goes to my theory that Warren is more of a politician than she’s assumed to be, which you’d think is a pretty normal thing to say about someone who’s a professional politician but will probably come across as something of a hot take.

I dunno, sometimes Warren’s strategy seems predicated on the idea that she doesn’t need to throw a lot of elbows or make a lot of tight pivots to beat Sanders.

sarahf: Well, if part of the primary is to pitch voters on big ideas, it makes sense to me that Warren isn’t curtailing her vision for Medicare for All just yet.

ameliatd: I wonder also if she thinks there’s too much competition on health care. It can be pretty difficult to follow which candidate is proposing what and what the actual differences are. It’s simpler to just say she’s with Sanders.

nrakich: I do find it interesting that Warren is doing so well in the polls despite not really emphasizing the top two priorities that Democratic voters cited in our poll (electability and health care).

sarahf: In its analysis of swing voters in 2020, the Kaiser Family Foundation found that in addition to issues like health care, where Democrats have a big advantage among voters (18 percentage points), Democrats also have a whopping 38 percentage point advantage on climate change.

So … should the candidates be talking about climate change more?

(According to an analysis by Bloomberg, only 6 percent of the third debate was devoted to it.)

nrakich: I think you have to draw a line between the primary and general election for a lot of these.

As you alluded to with that poll, Sarah, I think the eventual Democratic nominee could have success by talking a lot about climate change next year.

But the differences between the primary candidates on climate change are pretty in the weeds, so I’m not sure whom it would help to talk about it more.

I also think the failure of Jay Inslee’s campaign to win on climate change showed that the issue just wasn’t a big differentiator either (although IMO he had other problems too, like not being very inspiring on the stump).

sarahf: That’s interesting, Nathaniel. So unlike health care, where there’s an incentive for the candidates to hash out their differences, maybe something like climate change should be saved for the general?

Do others agree?

nrakich: Yeah, I think there are pretty major differences between the candidates on health care. And having a nominee run on single-payer vs. a public option could be important to swing voters in the general. But I don’t think Republicans will attack a nominee any harder if he or she is trying to get the U.S. to net-zero carbon emissions by 2040 instead of 2050.

ameliatd: Well, another difference between health care and climate is that they’re both fairly technical, complicated issues, but one has a direct and personal impact on people’s health and bank accounts, while the other is more diffuse. It’s harder to get concrete on climate change, too. Which is sometimes why you end up with candidates talking about banning plastic straws.

natesilver: Also on climate — the political willpower to get things done when Joe Manchin is the median vote in the Senate is far less than any of the Democrats’ plans would like.

In some ways, I’m surprised Democrats haven’t spent more time talking about structural issues, like gerrymandering, adding new states (Puerto Rico, D.C.) and things of that nature.

sarahf: I mean, they did wade into blowing up the filibuster in the last debate.

Do you really think that’s good politics for the candidates, though?

natesilver: Oh yeah, sure. I think it’s a good way for Warren to differentiate herself from Sanders, for instance.

ameliatd: Blowing up the filibuster seems like it’s become a way for candidates to say they’re serious about passing their agenda. So it’s kind of a proxy for how far the candidates are willing to go, and how much they care about compromise.

nrakich: I think it has the potential to be good politics, Sarah. People don’t like it when they perceive the system to be unfair, and Democrats can pretty easily make the argument that the system is currently biased against urban dwellers, people of color, and others.

Gerrymandering is a good example of something that few people defend. But no Democrat is out there shouting about it from the rooftops.

Voting rights also don’t register very high on the priority list when voters are asked what issues they care about, but there is a lot of political science research that says that politicians can influence what voters care about. And I bet the issue would become more salient if a top-tier candidate talked about it more.

ameliatd: I have also wondered why the Supreme Court hasn’t been a bigger issue so far — it is more unpopular with Democrats than it has been in 20 years, and progressive activists are advocating for some pretty big court reforms, like increasing the number of justices on the bench. And if you’re talking about roadblocks for your progressive agenda — a Supreme Court with a conservative majority is certainly at the top of that list.

nrakich: Maybe it hasn’t been very salient in the primary because it’s assumed that every possible nominee would appoint pro-choice, pro-voting-rights, generally liberal justices?

ameliatd: But there are differences between the candidates on how to approach the Supreme Court — big ones! At least seven candidates still in the race are open to the idea of adding justices to the court, according to The Washington Post. And some have talked about changing its structure in other ways (adding term limits, for example) which would also be quite dramatic.

nrakich: Good point. Maybe Democrats aren’t bringing it up, then, because the issue risks activating Republican voters in the general election?

ameliatd: It is definitely true that the courts historically have been a motivating issue for Republican voters and not really for Democrats. But I think there’s potential for the Democrats to make the Supreme Court into an issue that their voters care about.

natesilver: And I think after Kavanaugh’s nomination last year, there’s still an open question about whether which party gets most motivated by the Supreme Court has shifted. In a Gallup poll just before the midterms, roughly as many Democrats as Republicans called Kavanaugh an important issue in deciding their vote.

That said, I don’t think calling for Kavanaugh’s impeachment is a very wise general election position.

ameliatd: No, I agree — a focus on impeaching Kavanaugh seems tailor-made to rile up Republicans. I think part of the issue is that there just isn’t a clear message among Democrats about the Supreme Court or the judiciary in general. Some people want term limits. Others want court-packing, or they want more talk about the type of judicial nominees the candidates would nominate.

sarahf: But what about an issue where Democrats don’t have an advantage (like the economy) and are in a weaker position among voters than Trump? In that same poll on swing voters, KFF gave Trump a 12-point advantage for his handling of economy. And in our Ipsos poll, we found that economy-focused Democrats gave candidates worse marks across the board than voters focused on four other top issues, suggesting that economy voters were maybe unsatisfied by what they heard in the debate.

nrakich: Yeah, I think Democrats could stand to talk more in the primary about the economy in the traditional sense, like jobs.

For the general election, though, that does seem to be a good issue for Republicans (for now).

natesilver: Isn’t the obvious way for Democrats to talk about the economy to talk about inequality and how the economy ain’t workin’ for some people?

Unless the economy actually goes way south, in which case you have a lot more things you can say.

nrakich: Yes, but we did offer “wealth and income inequality” as an issue in our poll, and those voters seemed to have different perspectives than the “economy” voters.

If we’re talking about the primary, I think Warren and Sanders have gotten pretty far by talking about inequality, but our poll does suggest there’s a subset of voters for whom that isn’t what they want to hear about the economy.

sarahf: And while trying to motivate voters around economic inequality sounds good in theory, in practice, I don’t think it actually moves the dial much. Although, there is evidence that voters are keen on a tax on the uber-wealthy, so maybe that’s a good tack for Democrats to take in talking about the economy more?

ameliatd: Right, talking about making the wealthy pay their fair share seems like a smart way for Democrats to approach this.

But what do you think voters want to be hearing on the economy front, Nathaniel? In our poll, “jobs” was listed as a separate option and not that many people seemed interested in hearing about that.

nrakich: Yeah, Amelia, I’m not quite sure. Given their candidate preferences (i.e., voters who prioritized the economy also liked Biden and were much less likely to be considering a vote for Warren or Sanders), maybe those are the fiscally minded voters who oppose Warren and Sanders’s efforts to redistribute wealth.

In other words, business-friendly Democrats?

natesilver: I do think Democrats need to be careful on this issue.

Socialism is still not a popular concept with swing voters. Maybe it will be once the millennials and zoomers take over. But for now, it’s a big general-election vulnerability for Sanders, for instance.

nrakich: Wait, this is the first time I’ve heard zoomers as a nickname for Generation Z and I love it.

natesilver: “Let’s get the economy workin’ for workin’ people and make the rich pay their fair share” is probably fine for a general election message. “Let’s topple the entire system” maybe isn’t.

sarahf: But as Nathaniel said earlier … this is the primary. And isn’t socialism more popular than capitalism among Democrats?

So, similar to some of the candidates being more radical on health care, isn’t there an argument to be made they should dream bigger on the economy, too?

natesilver: Well, yeah, but part of what smart candidates do is avoid driving wedges on issues where it might give you a slight advantage in the primary but a big disadvantage in the general election.

nrakich: And while it’s true, Sarah, that Democrats think more highly of socialism than of capitalism, their views of capitalism are still mostly favorable, according to the Pew Research Center. We’re also forgetting that 40 percent of Democrats think the most important thing is to beat Trump! I can imagine plenty of pro-socialism Democrats being persuaded to tone down the rhetoric (but maybe not the policies — Warren is basically doing this) in order to avoid being general-election poison.

ameliatd: Also, isn’t Warren’s wealth tax, which would be applied to rich people’s accumulated fortunes rather than just their income, be an example of Democrats dreaming big? She seems to be doing a good job of selling it as “just making the rich pay their fair share,” but it’s still a pretty radical change from the status quo.

sarahf: That’s fair, Amelia.

And to wrap, if candidates could only run on one issue — and it isn’t beating Trump, because let’s treat that as the overarching argument of everyone’s campaign — what would it be?

nrakich: I think it’s got to be health care, especially if you’re not a single-payer Democrat. Follow the playbook that worked in 2018.

natesilver: It depends on the candidate. For Biden, it’s electability. For Sanders, it’s health care. For Warren, it’s … I’m not sure, exactly? But I think probably inequality.

nrakich: Breakin’ Sarah’s rules (“and it isn’t beating Trump”), Nate …

Intriguing side question: Is it a problem for Biden if he runs on an electability argument during the primary and then doesn’t have a clear rationale for running come the general?

sarahf: What other issue does Biden have to lean into? Health care, maybe?

natesilver: Maybe Biden could adopt a signature issue — or two.

I’m not sure what it would be, though. Guns, maybe?

ameliatd: We didn’t talk about gun policy, but I’ll be interested to see if that has sticking power as the primary moves forward. That’s a big priority for voters right now, but maybe it’s also an issue like climate change where the candidates struggle to differentiate themselves.

Also, I am shamelessly dodging the question, but personal characteristics are also important to voters. A Pew survey from last month asked Democrats to name the most important factor for deciding which candidate to support, and 28 percent named something like honesty or competence. About the same share pointed to a policy. So … maybe policy just matters less than we assume?

nrakich: Great point, Amelia. We basically just did a whole chat on issues while ignoring the fact that people mostly don’t vote on issues!

ameliatd: Shut it down, guys.

natesilver: But you can still vote on the aesthetics of a candidate’s policy positions even if you don’t care about policy per se.

Like, people can like the idea that Warren has a plan for things, even if they don’t know what those plans are, exactly.

nrakich: Right, but to the original chat prompt, does it matter, then, what issues are and aren’t being discussed?

As you pointed out, Warren doesn’t have a meaty health care plan but still gets credit for being issue-driven.

ameliatd: I wonder if Warren’s focus on an overarching theme like corruption can also help with the perception that she’s honest, or something like that.

But then it does make you wonder how much the details matter, as opposed to how the issues fit into a candidate’s overall brand.

#IFTTT #Politics – FiveThirtyEight #politics #538 #A FiveThirtyEight Chat

[marinsawakening]

I criticize the ‘vengeance = bad’/’constructive justice is more important than retributive justice’ theme in fma a lot, and I just want to state, for the record, that I’m not necessarily saying that it’s a writing flaw. I just fundamentally disagree with the message. 

While I certainly think that there are flaws with the way it was written (particularly in Scar’s arc), at the end of the day, within the narrative, the theme is mostly solid and I do think there’s some very real merits to it. I like how Arakawa elevates ‘constructive’ justice (for lack of a better word; rebuilding the thing that was lost and moving forward by living your best life) over retributive justice (aka ‘revenge’; punishing those who have wronged you). However, I think she takes it a bit too far, which is where she ultimately loses me with the message. In addition, I disagree with her assessment on what ‘vengeance’ actually is, and by extension, I disagree with her stance on it, which is what makes the theme fall apart for me.

Arakawa seems to think (from what I can tell from the way FMA is written, at least) that ‘vengeance’ is defined more by emotion than by action. Time and time again, we see that the way ‘vengeance’ is portrayed is more about losing yourself than the actual act of punishing those who’ve done wrong; we see this most prominently when Roy is held back from killing Envy despite the fact that Envy is a war criminal who’d deserve it; the problem wasn’t killing Envy in and of itself, it was killing Envy in a mindless rage that threatened to consume him. If Roy had captured Envy, and then calmly assessed the situation and decided that his death would be for the overall good, I don’t think Arakawa would have presented that as a problem. After all, Roy is praised for his plan to become Fuhrer in order to eventually put war criminals to death. With all this, in addition to several elements in Scar’s arc (that I won’t get into because that’s a whole different beast), I think we can safely assume Arakawa defines vengeance as a primarily emotional act, one that you will always lose yourself in, while justice would be a primarily rational one, focused on the betterment of yourself and those around you. 

And I just plain disagree with that. I think that vengeance means ‘punishing someone who has wronged you’, regardless of whether that punishment is dealt with a rational mind or an emotional one, and regardless of whether or not the punishment is actually deserved. I don’t think that all forms of vengeance are on the same level as ‘always bad’; I think that vengeance can sometimes be good, and sometimes bad, and sometimes somewhere in between. As an extension of that, I don’t think that wanting revenge is inherently wrong and I don’t think that it’s something you will always lose yourself to. While it’s often not productive, and I therefore tend to lean towards ‘constructive’ justice as a solution on a society-wide scale rather than ‘retributive’ justice, I do think that some level of retributive justice/revenge is often warranted (the level depends on the situation); aka, I do think that, depending on the situation, vengeance could be an appropriate reaction to the wrongs done to you, and that it can be a form of justice in and off itself. And those appropriate situations DEFINITELY include ‘having your entire culture and people slaughtered by order of the government’.

While Arakawa definitely knows that the war criminals from the Ishvalan Genocide should be punished (she states this explicitly, and it’s Roy and Riza’s primary motivation), she never quite seems to deliver on that front. Part of that is the universe where FMA takes place in, true, but by the end of the story, there really is no reason to hold off on it anymore. Grumman is now the Fuhrer, and since he seems to (at the very least) have a decent sense of morality, he really ought to be working towards prosecution of the Ishvalan war criminals. However, when we see him as Fuhrer, there is no talk of it, and Arakawa has confirmed by Word of God that Mustang takes over the presidency, showing that the Ishvalan war criminals probably weren’t prosecuted under Grumman’s rule. While Mustang will probably go through with his original plans, the fact that Grumman seemingly makes no move towards punishing the Ishvalan war criminals is still an oversight at best, and an unwillingness to actually hold any of Ishval’s war criminals (those who weren’t antagonists, anyway) accountable at worst. 

Instead, the matter of the Ishvalan Genocide is ‘solved’ (as much as genocide can be solved, anyway) almost completely by means of constructive justice, by allowing the Ishvalans to return to their homeland and rebuild their society from the ground up. While that’s definitely a good ending, the fact that this is shown as the only form of justice the Ishvalans receive leaves a bad taste in my mouth. They deserve to rebuild their society and to flourish once again, sure, but they also deserve to see those who burned their society to the ground in the first place held accountable for that. I do not believe that the rebuilding of Ishval alone, without holding any war criminals (that weren’t already antagonists in the narrative timeline) accountable is not an adequate resolution to this storyline.

I would argue that, by refusing to show any real push towards punishment for the Ishvalan war criminals within the timeline of the narrative (aside from Roy and Riza’s motivation, which holds no substance as long as neither of them are Fuhrer), FMA displays a disproportionate preference for constructive justice over retributive justice that I just plain don’t agree with. In addition, I do not agree with its definition of ‘vengeance’, which makes a lot of Scar’s arc very hard to swallow. Those two things combined make the ‘vengeance = bad’ theme, as presented in FMA (mangahood at least) probably one of my least favourite parts of the story.

[Note: I do not actually know what Arakawa’s views on vengeance are. I’m extrapolating from how I interpret FMA’s themes, and as the author, I’m assuming Arakawa’s opinions are in line with them. I could be wrong; I obviously have never met her, let alone had an in-depth conversation about the morality of revenge with her.]

#aka i do not think that there really is such a thing as a 'cycle of vengeance' because sometimes a bitch really deserves to get punished #and putting the burden of forgiveness (or at least inaction) on the victim of a crime out of a sense of morality is wrong #and that by saying that there is such a thing as a 'cycle of vengeance' arakawa implies that all vengeance is on equal footing #which it isn't imo #someone who kills a partner for cheating is in the wrong #but a case where someone kills a partner for abusing them for decades should be looked at with much more nuance #and someone killing the perpetrator of a genocide they themselves were a victim of is just plain in the right honestly #so yeah i don't like fma's take on vengeance much and that's why i'm perpetually pissed off by it #i get what arakawa was going for i just don't like it #fma #my posts #fullmetal saltchemist #also it's possible i misinterpreted some things and/or forgot crucial parts so feel free to call foul if someone's blatantly off here

[gg-astrology]

Heey again;) i was wondering if you knew anything about man's pluto quincunx woman's mars, i read that quincunxs are usually non important, also what do you think about man's saturn squares woman's mars? If it's okay with you, since i have these aspects with my entire generation and thank you again

Hey there again!! 💕I saw your little comment on the last ask I’m glad I wasn’t so late answering it I had no idea when it was sent in skdjfns But yeah! sure! I’ll do what I can to answer this one too?? 💕

[Below Cut:  Beginner Friendly Guide on How To Interpret Major/Minor Aspects together (+ Saturn-Square-Mars | Pluto-Quincunx-Mars) ] 

Quincunx is a minor aspect, I usually find that it adds a layer to the reading but it’s not necessarily informing on the overall potential (you read that from Major Aspect perspective: see later). If you think about it, major aspects are like the ‘what’ and minor aspects are like the ‘how’. 

Usually the subject matter is important, like if you have a Mars making a major aspect to another planet, and then a minor aspect to another. The Mars is the subject matter.

Think of it as a war, with Mars as the fort. Minor aspect is like a small trope battling on one side of the Mars fort. It’s a little local army, around 1000 people. Mars has around 10,000 people, it can hold it’s fort against Minor Aspects but that doesn’t mean they haven’t lost troops/people during the battle. 

Major Aspect has around 5,000 people, coming in to lay siege to Mars fort a little after Minor Aspect is still fighting their battle on the other side. Even if Mars lost around 100~200 people during the Minor Aspect battle, it’s troop would’ve decreased to be around 8,000~9,000 by now. Mars was affected by Minor Aspects (especially disharmonious ones) thus it’s susceptible to being attacked when it’s numbers decreased.

Even if Minor Aspects aren’t as ‘important’ as the Major Aspects, it’ll still affect the Mar’s statue/reputation.

If you have a Saturn square Mars and then a Mars quincunx Pluto, the Saturn-square-Mars aspect (major) comes first and then you see how Mars-quincunx-Pluto is influencing the Mars on it’s side. 

Just think of yourself as Major Aspect, with no knowledge of the Minor Aspect. Coming in to lay siege. Only after you’ve set camp, you do your research and figure out that Mars is being attacked on the side by the Minor Aspect as well. Thus you can gain more information on the state of Mars right now and strategize what you’re going to do about it (see the overall picture).

Thus, Major Aspects shows you the larger picture on what’s happening but Minor Aspects can influence the gravity of the situation. If you have a hard time reading both at the same time/putting them together, I’d recommend putting yourself in Major Aspects shoes first (getting a good grasps of reading the overall picture) before you learn how to read the Minor Aspect’s details.

So now onto what you asked about:

Pluto - Quincunx- Mars 

Quincunx is aspects that’s around 150′ degrees apart, it usually talks about an imbalance on levels/power relating to control/wavelengths. Imagine an opposition (180′) but instead of being on the same level it’s tilted. With Pluto and Mars, there’s a level of frustration/control-issues regarding the ego (mars) and shift of power/control (pluto). 

Mars embodying loosely the natural instinct or driving force behind a person (mars person) unknowingly undermines the Pluto person’s ego/natural self sometimes. And the Pluto person wanting to change/shift that power control over to their side but meeting frustration/misunderstanding from the Mars perspective.

Both sides are valid and capable of having control, it’s just that the natural level of control/wavelengths is often misaligned with each other. Sometimes it’s just miscommunication or sometimes it’s just not necessarily prioritizing what the other’s concerned about as much as their own. 

Pluto-quincunx-Mars often points to wanting to collaborate/make the relationship better through criticism/bringing topics up to the table to confront. But not necessarily getting the result they want to achieve (being heard) and meeting at an impass that only lead to frustration for both parties instead.

*This doesn’t make or break any relationship, a relationship can have a plethora of quincunx and still make it past marriage. 

A way of remedying the situation/solution depends on what’s being domineering and working to make it ‘whole’, without leading to aggravated/defensive stance towards each other. 

Understanding that a particular trait/ideology/behaviour can be incomplete even if it seems ‘whole’ before, and working to expand/make it grow into a more wholesome/accepting and flexible environment without compromising/cutting back on the self. Is what would probably help best.

**also: use your own discretion as always, astrology doesn’t tell you whether or not you should date someone. Astrology just helps guide and sooth, points out solution/remedies. It never makes or break a relationship. That’s on the person themselves and it’s a responsibility they have to take/lie in it themselves.  

Saturn - Square- Mars 

Again, Mars signifying the natural instinct/ego/driving nature while Saturn is about structure, challenges and discipline (loosely). With Saturn aspecting Mars, the Mars person (as a inner/personal planet) may often find that the way they naturally express themselves (things they can’t help with, like joy, laughter, anger, ego) will slowly be shaped/shifted and disciplined through Saturn’s nature.

Depending on what signs they’re in, the Saturn person would find themselves focusing on overcoming those particular trait and utilizing them in the best way they can (because they know they’re lacking – think Capricorn/Aquarius) – there are insecurities associated with Saturn, where one might find themselves questioning, criticizing or undermining others who possess these sign’s trait/‘full’ behaviour in order to understand, learn/grow and develop them themselves (think of an inquisitive learner questioning their teacher about stuff)

Mars who talks about ego/drive and natural instinct that they possess/utilize naturally. Often doesn’t bode well when Saturn questions them or try to control/subjugate their behaviour. It’s because Mars does it naturally, often without thinking or needing to explain (if you like it you like it, if you don’t then you don’t) that when Saturn starts to question/criticize or put them into a ‘box’ to study, Mars feels powerless or often subjected to being shamed by their behaviour even if they cannot help it. 

Watch for influences of Jupiter/Neptune in regards to this, the Mars can often try to quell or encourage Saturn’s critical nature/insecurities by thinking that the Saturn person is an authority they should learn from – or that this influence/boxing in situation is going to be alright/good for them later.

It’s not. And depending on the Saturn person’s own handling of the situation it can be hard for both of them to move forward if they don’t work on their own growth/progress individually as well. 

A way to work past this is to see it for what it is, individual problems/situation that are adversaries to their partnership/teamwork. There’s no ‘oh this can be good’ or ‘oh it’ll get better’ – no sugar coating it. Acknowledge that this is a bad thing for both of them individually as a person, and together as a team. Then working towards individually improving themselves (Mars- being considerate but fair, Saturn - overcoming their own adversaries and not running away from their problems/situations/learning how to deal with their placement)

Only through facing it as it is can Saturn learn how to concentrate on itself (and improve/self-improvement). As for Mars, they have to learn how to have a modicum of control for Compassion and Fairness (to themselves/to others) .

*Again, this doesn’t make or break any relationship. Astrology soothes, guides and points out solution/remedies for situation that have yet to happen sometimes. Square aspects aren’t bad aspects, it’s a truth aspect. And it requires certain discipline and motivation in order to accomplish/work through kinks inside ourselves. These things can be done individually on our own, or within a relationship depending on how we guide/see it.

I hope this answers your question! 💕I recommend getting further reading/study on this since there’s good things to come from squares as well (most of all it’s attraction/dynamic/motivation) I hope you have a good day! 💕

#lunapixie290 #asks #astrology asks #minor aspects #minor aspects asks #major aspects #major aspects asks #quincunx #quincunx asks #square #square asks #saturn-mars asks #pluto-mars asks #synastry asks #compatibility asks

[momo-de-avis]

Do you have a tips on how to write lust? Like, the yearning/craving part before things are heated and not necessarily the sexual act itself. I do think there's emotion or at least the "dang this person is attractive" element but at the same time with the latter it can just be the 'it' moment where the character realizes they start falling, you see my pain? ;-;

Completely understand what you mean. And to be honest, I prefer writing that moment than the sexual act itself. Idk, it’s so much fun to play around with it!

It always depends on the kind of character you’re writing. I always lean towards the shy stance—you get that feeling, and immediately the minds goes ‘oh shit, I wanna bang’ but the body tells a different story.

One thing that happens when we get the hots for someone else, it’s naturally a rapid beating heart. When the heart beats rapidly, it pumps more blood to the veins. This is something that happens in, overall, any moment of anxiety, so it can be used rather widely. But if you point the reader at the specifics, it paints a clear picture: a rapid beating heart causes for a rush of sweat, and there’s always the age-old cliché (which I LOVE) of sweaty palms. It’s that rush of blood that also causes for you to blush—a burning sensation at the neck, your body heat growing slowly, like you’re catching fire, and because of that your breath grows short. 

Pay attention to those tiny details to paint a picture—whether your characters are close to one another or not—like how there’s that heat growing inside themselves, how does the body feel then. A certain weakness to the legs too, but be careful with this one because unfortunately, a hundred 19th century french dudes have transformed this into a ‘AND SHE FAINTED WEAKILY ONTO HIS ARMS, HER MARBLE-WHITE SKIN BLUSHING AT THE CHEEKS IN A CHERRY-PINK TONE’ and unless that’s exactly the time period you’re writing it’s.. outdated, to say the least. But not a bad thing, just pay attention to the wording—instead of fainting, they might walk around to sort of relax their muscles, shake their hands, take deep breaths.

I think it’s important to note on body reactions before the body language. How do you physically react, as I stated above. The wording used, though, it’s something to pay attention to: if you’re writing erotica, you have a wider range of words to use, and by all means, go for the vagina—I’m serious. The tingling sensation that crawls up your legs, bruh, that’s your ovaries sending a Kill Bill Sirens warning up your body, and in erotica you have a bigger freedom to make these sort of references (just don’t use me for an example here on this one because I don’t write erotica and am terrible at it). If you’re writing YA or something aimed at teenagers, you should also pay attention to the explicit terms, but that’s something we’re all aware of. I myself lean towards the sensation of the thing—how the body feels versus the thoughts, and how that all ties together: conflicting thoughts, for example—I want them, I can’t have them—or just plain ‘damn that ASS boy I wanna grab it so bad’. The possibilities are really endless: so try to understand what your character is like, how they would act, how would they react (always feel free to message me if you need help, I don’t mind at all!)

As for the body language, I’m going to leave you these two images I’ve kept for months because they’re super useful. They’re not super complete, but I think they’re a perfect starting point to explore your possibilities:

(Check desire and passion)

One thing for me that works wonders is the eyes: how the character sees the object of their lust can convey just how bad they want them. A woman might look at a man and make a mental note of his physical traits as overall attractive—he has, idk, black hairs, a chiselled long face, bright eyes of whatever colour, and expressive eyebrows, for example. But when the hearts beats fast, she will see the details: she can see the outlines of his muscles under his shirt, or the way his slender fingers touch something (I’m a hands kind of person so I adore describing hands and fingers), or maybe a tick they hide—like twirling their hair, biting their tongue when they concentrate. It’s a small detail of who they are, but that comes off super clear all of a sudden, and the way they see it, it’s demonstrative of their attraction: it’s cute, it’s beautiful, it’s just so damn specific to themselves they can’t let go of those details.

And, of course, there’s the mental side of it all—no matter how hard you try, you can’t stop thinking about them! This is the part that varies a lot depending on the character, of course. They could sit at their desk writing hearts on a notebook; they could just lie down in bed, staring at the ceiling, taking deep breaths—maybe concerned for the way they’re feeling—wondering how the hell did that happen?!, or how did they come to fall in love—and want them, even! They could avoid that at all costs, pushing down their feelings as best as they could. They could be imagining them naked—who hasn’t? They might even run to someone to confess their crush—if they’re the sort of character to overshare (like ME).

I’ll show you an example of something I wrote. In this case, the female character reencounters an old love she never thought she’d see again, under the attentive eyes of a powerful clan, and they have to live together in the same residence for a month—but because her husband is a goddamn whoremonger, she avoids it all costs (and fails):

It truly felt as if temptation shared the corridors of the ó Móráin with her—living in the same quarters, dining with her at the table, provoking her in the cordial gestures of a man before the young daughter of the ó Móráin. Whenever the memory returned, her stomach warmed and twisted venomously at the same time; whenever her thoughts wandered into the most dangerous corners of her mind, she could feel a shudder in her legs. Brigid help me, she thought. She could not succumb to her desires; she could not equate herself to her husband.

There is jealousy here involved—which the character acknowledges and scolds herself for. Take jealousy as something natural, I hate to see it approached as a plot device for two women to hate each other, when it doesn’t have to be. Selena here is jealous with good reason, but like, she’s perfectly aware of why and how silly it is.

He smiled rather confidently, too; he seemed toprovoke her, in a way, by presenting himself as a bold man who did not hesitatein showing his desire for her—while at the same time exposing his inner charmto lady Ariene. Oh, for Brigid, she thought to herself; don’t be stupid.

This is the moment (LONG before) Selena realizes she is in love with him:

Selenahelped him take his shirt off and put on a new, clean one; in silence, sheavoided his eyes, even though she could feel them glued to hers, piercingthrough her skin. She could see lines of a past traced along the skin of historso—scars of perhaps past battles he had fought in, signs of a life she didnot know entirely. Gulping, she helped him tie the laces of his jerkin andwrapped him around a thick mantle, at last taking the pendant out.

“I’msorry I took this from you,” she said, gently kneeling before him. Her heartraced, beating so abruptly against her chest it made her feel dizzy. She placedit around his neck and stood still—unable to move. Her hands were slowed down,hovering above his lap—and his fingers gently curled around hers. Looking down,Selena watched his thumbs move tenderly, fondling her hands so softly his touchfelt like a soft breeze, a caress shared not just secretly, but a touch almostillegal in itself. I was a child of crime, Selena thought clearing her throatand pulling her hands back, staring into his hazel eyes at last; they werehumid and honest. A child of crime, she thought again—a crime perhaps deemed torepeat itself—and the words whipped her chest like a tornado, burning her face.Selena rested her hands on her knees, feeling her palms sweaty, heart stillracing, her body shuddering before something she didn’t want to uncover.

Here’s an example of a male character realizing he’s fallen in love with the female character—and trying to kiss her (though I left that part out):

When he drew near, it was an instinct he couldn’t holdback, an act perhaps premeditated since long ago, maybe even on the very momenthe had first smiled at her heroic stance at the bar, waving a bat at thebullies who threatened to make the lives of migrants miserable. But it was onlyclear then. Every feeling nurtured in the past appeared with clarity, and heknew he was very willingly and almost unapologetically falling for her – evenif there was no sign he could tell that it was mutual.

I HOPE this big ass message (oh my god I need to control myself) helps, anon!

#Anonymous #my writing

[dragonologist-phd]

Breathe So Deep

For the @pillarspromptsweekly topic “Versatility”- or, what happened when my Ranger decided to learn how to punch people. Also posted on AO3.

Rudi was pretty sure she was dying.

“You’re not dying,” Eder said, exasperated. “You just spent an hour getting the stuffing beat out of you because you’re wearing the wrong armor. I warned you this would happen.”

Moving was excruciating, but Rudi garnered all of her remaining energy to raise a middle finger in Eder’s direction. He just laughed.

“Dick.”

To Eder’s credit, he took the insult in stride. “How about we call it good for today? We can try again another time. Maybe when you’re wearing some real armor.”

Rudi groaned, pulling herself off of the floor. She was exaggerating a little- this certainly wasn’t the worst she had ever felt. But it was a helluva lot worse than she was expecting this training to be.

“You know I can’t move around in that clunky stuff.”

Eder shrugged. “Well, you either gotta wear the armor or take the hits.”

“Isn’t whole point of fighting not getting hit?”

“No, that’s why they invented shields. Which you also refuse to use.” Eder’s amusement was evident in his voice. “I don’t really know what you were expecting to happen here.”

“Oh, go bench-press a boulder or something.” In her tired state, Rudi’s insults lacked her usual bite. She did, however, earn a chuckle from Eder.

“You don’t have to put yourself through this, you know. Why are you aching to brawl all of a sudden?”

Rudi shrugged and looked away. “You know me. I’m an asshole who wants to hit things.”

“Sure.” Eder didn’t sound totally convinced, but he let it slide. “Same time next week?”

Rudi’s muscles screamed in protest at the mere thought of more of this torture, but she was far too stubborn to turn him down. “You bet. Once I get the hang of this, I’ll wipe that smug look off your face.”

Truthfully, the whole stupid idea had started when Sol got his foot stuck in a clamp trap during a fight in the Russetwood. Rudi was more than confident in her ability to defend herself- and she had a reputation throughout the Dyrwood to back that up- but she hadn’t quite realized just how much that ability depended on a lion standing between her and her enemies. As deadly as Rudi’s bow and arrows were, they weren’t much use against a foe standing only a foot away and swinging a sword.

Rudi had hit the ground, bleeding and uselessly trying to string her bow before another strike could fall. Sol had still tried to protect her, of course. He’d ripped himself free of the trap and thrown himself back in the fight as soon as he saw his master fall, despite his injured paw. If Pallegina hadn’t been watching their backs… well, it had been far too close a call for Rudi’s liking.

As soon as they returned to Caed Nua, Rudi had enlisted Eder’s help in training.

As time passed and no noticeable improvement was made, Rudi’s patience began to thin.

Eder was a good teacher, but his method relied on armor and heavy weapons and a shield fashioned from a reinforced door, for crying out loud. Rudi couldn’t lug around a shield in addition to her bow and quiver of arrows. She couldn’t scout or stealth in stiff, heavy armor.

But she also couldn’t sit with the knowledge that she was helpless without her bow, so she kept returning to the training grounds to get her ass kicked.

Rudi ducked as Eder’s wooden training sword whistled over head, barely missing her. She took advantage of the situation to charge him, but he thrust his shield forward to block her. Unable to halt herself, Rudi smacked into the large shield. Her own training sword crashed to the ground, leaving her hand ringing from the impact.

Shit!

She lost her footing for a moment, and before she knew it Eder’s wooden sword had swing back around and caught her in the stomach, sending her sprawling to the floor.

Again.

Rudi groaned as she sat up, wincing at new bruise in her side. Eder leaned over, holding out a hand. “You alright? Maybe we should finish up for today…”

Rudi swatted the offered hand away in irritation. She grabbed her sword and heaved herself up, getting back into sparring position. “One more time. I need to get this right!”

Eder sighed and shook his head. “We keep trying this, but I just don’t think it’s gonna work.”

“Why not? I’m following your instructions.”

“No, you’re not. You won’t use the right equipment, and it’s messing you up. You get distracted, then angry, and then you fall apart.”

Rudi bit down on her lip to keep from yelling something she would later regret. She knew she shouldn’t lose her temper over this- especially on Eder, who was remarkably patient.

But she needed to learn this, and she couldn’t, and that was seriously pissing her off.

Taking in her frustrated expression, Eder sighed. “I wish I could tell you something different but…the truth is, I don’t really see you becoming a fighter anytime soon. Sorry.”

After that disaster of a training session, Rudi found herself making her way to the stone amphitheater. Sol liked to nap in the sun there- she would sit with him for a while, and hopefully that would calm her down.

She did find Sol there, but to her surprise he wasn’t alone- Zahua was sitting beside him, staring unblinking into the sun as he slowly stroked Sol’s mane. He didn’t acknowledge Rudi until Sol jumped up and padded over to her. That must have broken his concentration- he blinked slowly and turned to smile at her.

“Ah, the young Watcher. How goes your training?”

“It doesn’t,” Rudi replied flatly. She scratched Sol’s ears, earning a low, approving rumble from the lion.

“You’re quitting?”

“No,” Rudi snapped automatically. She hesitated, gnawing on her lip. “Well, yeah. Maybe. I’m not getting any better. I think I’m actually getting worse.”

Zahua regarded her for a moment. “Perhaps you should join me tomorrow in my meditations. I would be willing to share my knowledge and skills.”

Surprise kept Rudi from answering for a few moments. Zahua’s style was…intense, to say the least. If she couldn’t handle Eder’s training, she didn’t even want to think about Zahua’s.

But right now, it seemed her only other option was quitting, and Rudi hated quitting.

“First tell me- is this ‘meditation’ one of those freaky torture things you enjoy so much?”

The nice thing about Zahua was that Rudi never had to worry about offending him. His smile only widened. “My particular practices, valuable as they are, are perhaps not suited for one not of the clan. Tomorrow will be a simple meditation, to clear the mind as dawn clears the night.”

“And is that just code for ‘doing whiteleaf while everyone else is asleep’?”

Zahua considered that for a while. His brow was furrowed in concentration, and at last he said, “Not necessarily.”

Not exactly promising, but at this point, Rudi was willing to try anything.

Despite what Zahua had told her, Rudi was still surprised to find that his meditation was actual meditation.

She met him as instructed in the Caed Nua gardens just before dawn, sleepy-eyed but determined. Zahua was already sitting contentedly when she arrived. His legs were crossed and his eyes were closed, and Rudi honestly wasn’t sure if he was meditating or sleeping.

“Sit with me,” he said as she approached, not opening his eyes. Huh. He actually was meditating.

Rudi obliged, copying his stance and closing her eyes. She didn’t feel nearly as confident as Zahua looked. “Um… what do I…?”

“Your goal is to detach yourself from this world. Clear your mind and forget your body. The rest will follow with time.”

“Just this once, could you actually explain what you mean?” Rudi pleaded. “It’s a little too early for me to follow this cryptic stuff.”

“Either you will understand or you will not. More talking will make no difference. Our breath is better served breathing.”

Rudi huffed but closed her eyes and did her best to clear her mind. It was difficult- trying to deliberately not notice things went against her nature. The nearby sounds of nature, the feel of the wind, the urge to open her eyes and check her surroundings- rather than fade with meditation, it all seemed to amplify.

Focus, she snapped at herself, but it was hopeless. She couldn’t clear her mind, and frankly, she didn’t see the point of it. This wasn’t going to help her defend herself any better. And next time she was caught unprepared in close combat, someone was going to get hurt. Probably her, but possibly one of her friends, or- Gods forbid- Sol. All because she couldn’t-

“You are not following instructions.”

“Dammit,” Rudi muttered. She opened her eyes and leaned back on the grass, glaring at the sky. She felt like she’d been sitting here for hours, but the sun still wasn’t up. She could feel Zahua watching her. “I really am trying. But I don’t know how to clear my mind.”

“Of course you know how,” Zahua said. “Everyone knows how. You only need to discover where that knowledge lies within you.”

“Zahua, I don’t know what the fuck that means.”

“Do you not harness your focus as you fight?”

“Sure, but my mind’s not clear when I’m firing arrows,” Rudi said with a frown. “I notice everything. That’s what long-range attackers are supposed to do.”

“Exactly,” Zahua said unfazed. “When you fight with your arrows, do you put all of your focus onto one single target? Or do you take in every target, every threat, every change in your environment? This is the difference between a distracted mind and a clear one.”

“Shouldn’t that be opposite?”

Zahua shook his head. “When I clear my mind, I am not devoid of thought. I am simply able to process my thoughts without the haze of emotion.” He smiled at Rudi, as if he was making perfect sense. “This is why I thought this style would suit you. These Dyrwoodans are effective, but preoccupied with what is in front of them. You and I, we approach the battle from a distance.”

“Do we?” Rudi asked, skeptical. “You fight by punching, Zahua. You’re about as much in the thick of things as you can get.”

“My body is.” Zahua agreed. “But is my mind?”

He paused, and Rudi wasn’t sure if he wanted an answer or not. The silence continued to stretch out, and she finally said, uncertainly, “…no?”

Rather than respond to her answer, Zahua closed his eyes. “Let us continue our meditation. Copy my breathing, and trust yourself.”

Rudi was lost as ever, but she acquiesced. She copied Zahua’s posture once more, and tried to remember his advice. This time, instead of fighting against the noises and feelings of everything around her, Rudi followed her instincts. She listened to world around her, and as the minutes passed she grew used to the rhythms of her surroundings.

And in a strange way, Zahua’s words began to make sense. The meditation was reminiscent of the long hunting trips she took back home- the endless hours of moving through the wilderness, taking in the prey and predators around her, at one with the hunt.

When Rudi opened her eyes again, she was surprised by how high the sun had risen.

Of course, it couldn’t all be meditations and sunrises. The time came when once again, Rudi had to endure sparring sessions.

Zahua, however, eschewed the training swords in favor of simple hand-to-hand. As always, he wore little in the way of armor. This was a small comfort to Rudi- at least there would be no concern over heavy metal weighing her down.

And yet the training was more ruthless than anything Eder had put Rudi through.

“Fuck!” Rudi yelped, cradling her bruised arm. “That’s gonna hurt for weeks!”

“Of course it will hurt.” Zahua’s eyes seemed to burn as he stared Rudi down.  His fists were raised, ready to lash out again at any moment. They had barely started the session and he’d landed countless blows against her, while Rudi was barely able to stay on her feet as he danced around her.

“Our way is not comfortable. Nothing worthwhile in this world is comfortable. We do not do this because it is easy. We do this because we must.” He lunged forward, but Rudi managed to dodge out of the way. She swung out, managing to graze him with her fist. He took her strike with a grin. He lunged again, this time managing to grapple Rudi and trap her in a hold.

Rudi threw her weight forward to try and break the hold, but Zahua held fast. “You will not succeed in these methods until you embrace what must be endured. I know why I must do this. Do you?”

Rudi struggled to free herself, but Zahua’s grip was iron. She was left to consider his questions. She still didn’t understand Zahua’s philosophy- his journey for perfection had never made sense to her. But she did understand the need to hold on to something important, the last thing he had of his home.

“I’m doing this because there are things I need to protect,” she said, breathing heavy. “And I can’t do that if I can’t protect myself.”

“And this is something you will suffer for?”

Rudi was almost afraid to answer, but she took a deep breath and steeled herself. “Yes.”

“Then do not focus on the pain. You have already decided you can accept the pain. Clear your mind. Forget your body. See the battlefield from afar. See how everything is connected. See how you can use the pain.”

That’s not helpful! Rudi thought, but she bit back a barbed retort and tried to go back to that space she was in during meditation. She tried to step out of her body, take in the sensations, and trust herself. And to her own immense shock, a sudden flash of clarity came. Rudi sensed the weakness in Zahua’s hold, and could see in her mind how she could twist and break his grasp. It would mean straining-possibly dislocating- her already aching shoulder, but it was the only way.

So Rudi gritted her teeth and shoved herself to the side.

It worked- Zahua’s hold broke, and although Rudi’s shoulder was screaming in protest she was able to whip around and kick his feet out from under him. Despite the pain, Rudi barked out a laugh. This was the first time she’d held the advantage over somebody in close combat. It wasn’t much, but it was something.

Zahua leapt back to his feet, grinning maniacally. “Now we’re having some fun!”

Afterwards, they did smoke some whiteleaf.

Sol was curled up at Rudi’s feet. She wondered how much the lion truly understood about their lives. Did he realize how far they were from their home back on the Plains? Did he wonder what happened to the village they left behind? Did he keep count of how many times they’d both nearly died this past year?

Sol yawned, looking for all the world like a careless, sleepy cat. Rudi wondered just how fast-acting this stuff was.

“It relaxes the muscles,” Zahua claimed. “Very important after a sparring session. It is also good for meditation.”

Rudi wasn’t sure how seriously to take him, but for once, she decided not to question his methods. Despite her tired, aching muscles, Rudi thought her journey to monkhood might not be all that bad.

#pillars prompts weekly #pillars of eternity #due to internet problems and my inability to stick to a minimum length #this came out a tad late #poe fanfic #watcher rudi #rudi #this is my first fic for rudi she turned out to be a lot of fun to write #and weirdly enough so did zahua #warning for drug use i guess #its fantasy pot but still #drug use #zahua #poe fic #fanfic #fic: rudi #ch: rudi

[sophialesseos]

Are Media Outlets Biased?

When we think of cable channels such as Fox News or MSNBC we expect a particular slant on what stories are chosen and how they are framed depending on our politics. We may praise these decisions as affirming of use or criticize them as biased. Matthew Gentzkow, Richard O. Ryan Professor of Economics and Neubauer Family Faculty Fellow did an interview with the Chicago Booth talking about media biases. “ What drives a choice of slant by media outlets? so you could think of two very different narratives one is that the slant is driven by the political preferences of the owners of news outlets or maybe by the editors or reporters. the other is slant is chosen just maximize to profits and ultimately therefore is driven by whatever the readers of the newspaper want to hear.” This is very interesting to hear because to me that is not journalism it is more PR. To hear that some media outlets would lean their stories left or right based on the amount of viewers that came to their page because of politics is unbelievable to me. I had no idea that this was an agenda from some of the media outlets in our country just to gain a profit rather than trying to be unbiased with stories. Apparently there is certain phrases and slants that media outlets tend to use in order to show they are leaning towards one side or another. There was a study done showing the different media outlets throughout the world and how each one of them are catering to the different political stances based on their readers perspective. They found that the media outlets don’t necessarily have a biased because of their owners, it is based on the fact that newspapers or media outlets are trying to sell there content so they base it off of who will buy the content more. That doesn’t preclude a situation where the conservative newspapers are in fact run by conservative people and the liberal newspapers are in fact run by liberals. For example, it’s like you know that the newspaper down in Texas is going to be conservative because that’s what’s going to maximize profit. 

While doing my research I came across Vanessa Otero‘s Ad Fontes media biased chart, which rates media sources in terms of political biases and reliability. She said in 2016 she noticed that a lot of media outlets had biases and were very clear that they had biases. She wanted to show her friends what media outlets had biases and started to create the chart. “I thought it might be helpful to just kind of map it like better worse, left and right I just started piecing it together on my own. I just explained to my friends that the abundance of proliferation of online news sources is in most of it is in the area of analysis and opinion.” to me if people understood that some of the news sources they are consuming are purposely leaning towards one side or trying to make one side angry they might stop consuming that media. The chart categorized the media landscape using two different ways: facts versus editorializing and left versus right leaning views. She says The best quality stuff is at the top and the lower quality stuff is at the bottom. I think this chart is very useful not just for journalists but for the public to use as well. 

In the article “How Rush Limbaugh’s rise after the gutting of the fairness doctrine led to today’s highly partisan media” Poynter claims that Rush Limbaugh changed the way the media shows their bias. “In some ways, he invented the format in which hosts talks nonstop for hours. They pick fights with listeners and stake out political positions.” I thought that it was really interesting that one single individual took over the media and completely flipped the ball game. 

I was surprised by the rise in different media outlets taking sides because people usually turn to news as an unbiased source but now most are not. To me, It is almost deceiving to not know that each outlet I am viewing might be leaning left and right. I feel like they should blatantly put on their website stating if they lean left or right for their viewers.