#juliabohemian rant

[juliabohemian]

Just stop being disabled and poor

So, I came across this image in my FB feed. The person who shared it is someone I have known for many years, is over the age of 70 and fairly conservative. I didn’t bother commenting on the original post because the page it came from appeared to be aimed at conservatives. I scrolled through the comments, hoping to find some indication that people realized how problematic this is. The only negative comment accused the post of being pretentious, which it is.

As an Education Specialist who also has ADHD and Autism, I find the sentiment expressed here to be ableist. The use of the word “reward” implies that those who are unable to sustain their intention are doing so intentionally, that it is something that they can control at will.  Is the sunset a reward for being able to see?  Are stairs a reward for being able to walk? Is music a reward for being able to hear? If only the disabled would stop being so stubborn. Are they even trying???

I don’t think the person who created this was trying to be offensive. But I’m fairly certain that they’ve never cried over a textbook, while scanning the same page over and over, desperately hoping to retain something. They’ve never suffered the wrath of the teacher who had no qualms about venting their frustrations in plain view of the other students. They’ve never endured the social isolation of being the kid who is always in trouble, while not fully understanding why. The list goes on and on.

And that’s not even addressing the fact that this image is also classist because it implies that everyone has access to books. Do you know how many of my students don’t have any books? Some of them don’t even have a table to do their homework on. Some of them don’t get enough sleep because they share a bed with all of their siblings.

#uh no #juliabohemian rant #ableism #special education #adults with adhd #adults with autism #the privilege it burns #fuck you very much #adhd #neurodivergence #juliabohemian #classism #socioeconomic

[juliabohemian]

So Marvel changed their own wiki page to make sure it said that Loki was brainwashed by the Other in Avengers 1. Then they release these deleted scenes from Ragnarok that show Loki in a more sympathetic light. There's a show coming out in which Loki is the title character, and there are people who still see him as no more than a one dimensional villain.

I was watching this documentary show about people who committed murder and were doing time for it. The show spends a lot of time explaining the histories of these people, how they grew up and what sort of trauma they endured. Included, however, are interviews from law enforcement, prosecution and judges. And there was a consistent message from these people, that the backstory doesn't matter. 

One episode involved a woman who was systematically beaten and raped by her spouse over and over again. She was sent to prison back in 1984. What did the prosecutor say when he finally heard audio from the woman’s interview, in which she described the sort of abuse she suffered? Well, she should have said something at the time, because this is the first he’s hearing of it. 

I was alive in 1984. If you think we are unsympathetic to women now, imagine it being 100 times worse than that. A woman claiming that her spouse was abusive better have concrete evidence and even then, there were no guarantees that it would matter. I remember watching The Accused with Jodie Foster in 1988 and it being a groundbreaking concept that a woman didn’t deserve to be raped for wearing a short skirt. Let that sink in for a moment.

We live in a world where people need to believe that someone is either evil or good. Lawmakers and law enforcement need to believe that they are the good guys and anyone who is suspected of or convicted of a crime is surely the bad guy. Until we fully embrace the fact that people are a sum of their experiences, which have a profound effect on their thought process and behavior, we cannot truly call ourselves civilized.

#loki is not evil and never was #Loki Love #loki odinson #disney loki #the loki show #loki deserves better #loki meta #juliabohemian #juliabohemian rant #op #lokimeta

[juliabohemian]

I'd like to say something controversial...

I am a creator of content.

What does that mean?

It means that I create original art, original meta, original memes, original photographs etc. Not just on this site, but on many sites. For as long as the internet has been available to me.

In other words, the things I post are almost entirely made by me. I share them with you because, as an educator and a neurodivergent, it is my preferred way of connecting with other human beings.

The majority of Tumblr users have blogs that consist entirely of other people's creative content. They are basically consumers. And there's NOTHING wrong with that at all. We are all consumers in one way or another.

But sometimes I feel like people forget that I am a person. I am a human being with feelings. I don't exist just to create art and memes and ideas for other people to consume.

The next time you are getting ready to reblog someone else's original, creative content simply for the purposes of adding criticism, stop and ask yourself "could I have made this?" And if the answer is yes, go and make it. Go and make that art, that meme. Write that meta or fanfiction. Post an original post with your own ideas, and when someone else reblogs them with THEIR criticisms, and you find yourself wondering why they felt the need to do that, may you whisper to yourself "oh...I get it now."

#juliabohemian rant #juliabohemianrant

[juliabohemian]

I’m going to say something that is likely to irritate people. Which is nothing new, really. I’ve been irritating people my entire life. 

Here it goes:

I devote a ridiculous amount of time and energy to my fanfiction. Probably as much, if not more, than I devote to my academic writing. Because that’s who I am. I devote a ridiculous amount of time and energy to everything. Whether it is drawing or painting, meticulously photographing native plants so I can identify them by their scientific name, or creating academic material to meet the obscure needs of one specific student with a learning disability. That’s just who I am. I am someone for whom things matter.

That being said, I really thought that this whole quarantine thing would mean a renewed appreciation for people who provide free art and entertainment. More importantly, I thought it would mean more people commenting on stories. Commenting. Not giving kudos. Not adding them to a list of favorites. Not bookmarking them. Commenting.

I don’t need attention. If I want attention, there are faster and more efficient ways to get it. I don’t need validation. I don’t need people to say good job. I know I’m doing a good job. I am very confident about my writing abilities. I know my characters are in character and you can bet that whatever I wrote about was thoroughly researched in advance. And I’m definitely not looking for constructive criticism. 

I do, however, crave discussion.  I am, in case it wasn’t apparent, neurodivergent. And like many other neurodivergent people, I don’t crave social interaction. I don’t crave romantic involvement. All I want to do is discuss things. THAT is my social interaction. Writing stories and sharing them online is something I have always done to stay connected to the world. But it doesn’t feel like a connection anymore. It feels more like I’m screaming into a void. 

#fanfiction woes #hfa woes #my lifestyle has not changed much since covid-19 #I was already social distancing #can we please continue social distancing even after this is over? #writing fanfiction is like screaming into a void #juliabohemian #juliabohemian rant #juliabohemianfanfiction #juliabohemianrant

[juliabohemian]

Nostalgia Bias

I recently came across a meme on Facebook, posted by a friend. The meme consisted of a reactionary joke about how Millennials don't know how to drive stick shifts or read in cursive, and that if we want to keep them quarantined, we should put them in cars with manual transmissions and give them the directions in cursive.

Ordinarily, I would keep scrolling past something as inane as this. Actually, that's not true. Ordinarily, there wouldn't be anyone on my friend's list, on any social media platform, who would post reactionary humor. I was truly surprised to see it at all, especially coming from this person, who has always seemed reasonably intelligent.

The first thing wrong with that joke is that it suggests that the generation struggling the most with staying quarantined are the Millennials. Which we know is not true. It is the Baby Boomers. Though Gen-X appears to be adapting best to the whole mess. Go team.

The second thing wrong with that joke is that we still teach children to write in cursive, in elementary school, as of 2020. The third thing wrong with that joke is that there are plenty of Millennials who know how to drive a stick shift.

One could just as easily say the best way to keep Boomers quarantined would be to lock them inside and hook up everything in their homes to smart devices. Ha ha. Isn’t that hilarious? Because old people can’t use technology, right. Yeah, except for all the ones who do. Betty White and Patrick Stewart, for instance.

I couldn't help myself, of course. I had to make a comment. Why? Because I genuinely thought that the person who posted the meme would realize that it was bullshit and be willing to acknowledge that. Needless to say, that's not how it went. I got the answer that I have gotten so many times in the past "yeah, I mean, that's TRUE I guess...but that doesn’t matter because it was rude of you to point it out.”

Was it, though? Ruder than the joke itself? Is politeness to a single individual more important than the feelings of an entire generation of people being maligned by a bad joke? I believe it was Dr. House who posed the question:

"What would you prefer, a doctor who holds your hand while you die or one who ignores you while you get better? I suppose it would particularly suck to have a doctor who ignores you while you die."

Now, I would like to point out that, as someone on the autism spectrum, I don’t socialize in the traditional sense. I relate to people by exchanging information. For me, that takes the place of socializing. That's probably why I am an educator. I like to teach people things. When I see something that I know is absolute bullshit, and I think there's a chance that it can turn into a valuable teaching moment, I cannot resist. Because it isn't just the person who posted it that is going to see my comment, but many other people as well.

Social media is wrought with misinformation. It’s pretty hard to avoid it. I cringe whenever I hear people using words like autistic or schizophrenic to describe the behavior of an ordinary, neurotypical person. Those are conditions for which there are specific diagnostic criteria. The same goes for diabetes, which you definitely cannot get from eating a bag of candy. 

So, what is it that makes people behave this way? Why would perfectly NICE, well meaning people willfully and knowingly spread misinformation? The simple answer is, they don't know it's misinformation. Which is the result of something called bias. 

Bias affects our critical thinking skills. It allows us to hold views that are completely incorrect and even harmful to others. And as we share misinformation that is based upon our bias, even via a format as harmless as a meme, it spreads. And it affects other people's views and behavior. 

The primary source of reactionary humor, such as that which I referenced above, is something called nostalgia bias.

Nostalgia is basically the belief that things from a previous era are superior to their modern counterparts, without the benefit of any objective analysis. Why are they better? Because they're old, obviously. No further analysis is required.

There are two types of nostalgia, historical and personal. The simplest way to differentiate between the two would be to consider historical nostalgia to be the product of anything that happens outside of yourself and to the larger group, such as your community, state or country. Personal nostalgia refers to that which affects you personally, your immediate family, your extended family unit, your school or workplace.

Psychologists have found that personal nostalgia (as opposed to historical nostalgia) can be a stabilizing force that anchors people emotionally and helps them to overcome trauma and loss. But on the flip side, historical nostalgia is likely to prevent people from being open to change by making them dependent on the memories of an idealized past.

I can't even count the number of times I have found myself on YouTube, watching a music video for a song that is (at least) 20 years old or more, and I made the mistake of scrolling down to read the comments. Because, inevitably, there will always be someone in there saying something to the effect of "they don't make music like THIS anymore" and/or "the music they make these days is crap!" And I roll my eyes because such a declaration is purely nostalgic and pretty much the antithesis of critical thinking. 

I am 42 years old. I remember hearing people say that “new music sucks” in 1984. Which is a relatively long time ago for me. But comparatively speaking, a mere hiccup for mankind. I suspect that people have been making such sweeping statements since long before I came into existence. They were bullshit then and they’re bullshit now.

There has always been bad music. Always. Just as there has always been good music. But what does it mean for music to be good or bad? Well, unless you’ve been academically trained in music theory or have acquired decades of performance experience, not a whole lot. For the average person it means that you either like it or you don’t. If you like it, it’s good. If you don’t, it’s bad. Really it’s only a valid measurement for the individual in question. Even if you manage to find 500 people who agree with your opinion, it's still not an objective measurement. Because art cannot be objectively measured.

It's important to consider the fact that genuinely bad music rarely survives to be appreciated by future generations. Meaning that the music that does survive represents the most popular, most commercially successful, most critically acclaimed work of that era. There's a reason why you aren't hearing Milli Vanilli on the oldie's station. Although, I suspect that is more likely related to the whole lip syncing scandal, but I digress.

It's also important to consider why people like or dislike things. Is it actually because they’re good or bad? Unfortunately, no. It's entirely a matter of personal taste. There are things that I like that I know are probably bad. Low budget, found footage horror films, for instance. No award winners among them. Some of them are comprised of video taken with a cell phone. But I love them all the same.

Like all art, music is very personal. We can hear a song and are immediately transported back to a specific time or place. For many of us, music is an escape from reality, or a window to another world. Thus, music is very much connected to our memory of events and the feelings that we attach to those memories. This is what contributes to our skewed perception that something is better because it is old. In actuality, it is better for us, personally, because it represents memories and feelings that we enjoyed or that we still enjoy. As more and more time passes, those memories become increasingly idealized in our minds. So much so that nothing new could possibly compare.

The arts are important to society. It is not logical to suggest that newer generations are producing inferior art, simply because their art does not appeal to older people. New art doesn’t need to appeal to older people, because it’s not really FOR them. They aren’t the intended audience. It’s not a reflection of their generation's interests, values or struggles. 

For some older people, new art is a reminder of mortality. It is a reminder that they are aging, or that they are no longer as relevant to society as they once were. And they deal with the discomfort of that by rejecting or invalidating new things. Which is a miserable way to live.

So, think critically, my friends. Even when you’re assessing something as harmless as a meme. Look for bias and when you see it, don’t be afraid to call it out. And as you get older, try to stay as open minded as possible. Or else, someday, someone might lock you inside a car with a manual transmission and give you an instruction manual written only in cursive.

#nostalgia #nostalgia bias #reactionary bias #rosy retrospection #cognitive bias #willful ignorance #self deception #juliabohemian #I hate everyone #yeah I have autism #juliabohemian rant #juliabohemianrant

[juliabohemian]

Can We Take a Joke?

Recently I have been thinking a lot about what it means for something to be offensive. A few years back, a favorite comedian of mine lost his prestigious job, working alongside a duck, as a spokesperson for a large healthcare corporation because he tweeted a joke that some people (or perhaps an entire nation of people) found offensive. 

This particular comedian is notorious for joking about topics that are really touchy. I have been a fan of his comedy since the 80s, probably since before I was even old enough to be watching his shows. I have never been offended by anything he's said. The reason being that there is not an ounce of maliciousness to be found there. He doesn't come across as hateful. Just tactless. Almost to the point where it's so ridiculous, that you know he isn't serious.

Gilbert Gottfried is notorious for joking about topics that are really touchy. I have been a fan of his comedy since the 80s, probably since before I was even old enough to be watching his shows. I have never been offended by anything he's said. The reason being that there is not an ounce of maliciousness to be found there. He doesn't come across as hateful. Just tactless. Almost to the point where it's so ridiculous, that you know he isn't serious. 

Gilbert Gottfried has always appealed to me because of how bravely and stubbornly he refuses to yield to social conventions, which I personally find exhausting. Growing up as a neurodivergent (I have both autism and ADHD) I would often say things that offended other people and could never seem to understand where I’d gone wrong. I felt like I was running some kind of obstacle course, in which the rules were constantly changing. I was fascinated by watching Gilbert on stage, being true to himself despite whatever heckling he might endure. It took me years of navigating around other people's feelings to figure out how I could still be me, without causing others distress. I am still working on it. 

Which brings me to my first point, which is what does it actually mean to be offended? We’ve all been offended at some point, whether we like it or not. Basically it means that something another person said or did triggered an emotional reaction in us that we did not enjoy, and after some analysis (or no analysis) we came to the conclusion that the source of our emotion lay entirely outside of ourselves, rather than consider the possibility that some portion of our reaction was the result of our own trauma or emotional baggage.

So, what is it that makes people feel the need to censor other people? It comes down to control. Just so you know, we don’t have any. The sooner you embrace that, the happier you will be. The problem is that, for the most part, we tend to feel helpless unless we take some sort of action. It gives us the illusion of control. When, in fact, we cannot control what other people say or do. Not really. If you don’t believe me, have some children and you should be thoroughly convinced. At the end of the day, we can only control ourselves. And most of us can’t even do that.

That being said, censorship actually began with conservatives and evangelicals. That’s not too hard to dissect. A major component of their ideology involves monopolizing the moral high ground. They devoted a great deal of energy to protecting humanity from such dangers as homosexuality and promiscuity and women wearing pants and having jobs. Things like that. And they had that gig for a few thousand years until, sometime during the last 4 decades or so, there was a paradigm shift. The right passed the censorship torch to the liberals. Or the right accidentally dropped it while they were looking for Obama’s birth certificate. Either way, it now seems that the left is attempting to do what the right could not, which is to police the world and rid it of its ills.

Bearing in mind, of course, that I consider myself as liberal as a person can possibly be. I find that while I often share the views of other liberals about what is and isn’t offensive, I don’t always agree with them about what, if anything, we should do about it.

Which begs the question, when should a reasonably intelligent, emotionally mature person be offended? And I think it really does come down to a few factors, primarily intent and context. These things are really important. Who told the joke and why were they telling it? Who is the target of the joke? Are we laughing AT them or WITH them?

A Jew telling a joke about jews is not offensive. And if you’re not Jewish, you don’t get to have a say about it. A black man joking about what it’s like to drive around a strange neighborhood, while black, is also not offensive. Neither is a white person joking about it, frankly, so long as the point of the joke is how ridiculous it is that a black person even has to deal with that shit in the first place. 

When the target of the joke is a member of a marginalized group and the purpose of the joke is to commiserate with that person, then it’s not offensive. It only has the potential to be offensive when the person telling the joke is a member of a privileged group (male, Caucasian, Christian) and the target of the joke is not. Note, I said POTENTIAL. Because sometimes jokes that fit that definition aren’t offensive. They’re just not funny. In which case, that situation usually takes care of itself.

I have found that almost all comedy can be divided into two categories: drawing attention to that which is obvious or doing the exact opposite of what people are expecting. Most stand-up comedy falls into the first category. Which is why stand up comedians talk about things like relationship woes, airplane food, having kids etc. Because poking fun at experiences that large groups of people can relate to is a practical choice when you are dealing with an audience of total strangers. Especially when those strangers are your primary source of income.

The thing about comedians is that most of them don't genuinely believe what they are saying. The audience knows this. Or at least, they should. Comedians often adopt a persona when they take the stage, which differs drastically from their real life selves. Do I think Gilbert Gottfried is happy that Japanese people lost their lives to a horrible tsunami? Not for one second. Do I think that he was amused by the events of 9-11? As a lifelong resident of Brooklyn, I seriously doubt it. I think he was doing what he's always done, what we ALL do, which is to make jokes about things that are uncomfortable, in order to alleviate the discomfort. That’s what comedians do. In fact, we RELY upon them to do it. We RELY upon humor to help us cope with tragedy and trauma.

Which I can relate to on a very deep level because I have been through some pretty horrific shit in my life and I have always been the first person to make a  joke about it. There have been times in my life where I have been telling a story about something terrible I went through and the other person was clearly uncomfortable with my making a joke about it. I could tell, just by looking at them, that they wanted to be offended. They wanted to claim that moral high ground and let me know that I was being inappropriate. But they couldn’t because it’s MY LIFE AND I WILL JOKE ABOUT IT IF I WANT TO.

Getting back to how to know whether something is offensive...I was watching a documentary called Can We Take a Joke? which was specifically addressing the topic of people being offended by comedy. Within the documentary there was some footage of a young man at a college doing some (and I use this term generously) stand-up comedy in which he was disparaging women's studies as a major, after which a woman in the audience (who he called a loud mouthed cunt) ran on stage and told him to shut up. 

This is a perfect example of when intent matters. How is this young man different than a comedian who is simply joking about something uncomfortable in order to alleviate discomfort? Simply put, he believes what he is saying. Not only does he dislike women’s studies, he dislikes women in general. He is drawn to the stage out of a desire to have a platform for expressing that disdain. And that came across in his act because, well, he didn’t try very hard to hide it. 

Can the concept of women's studies be funny? Absolutely. There are many jokes we could make about women's studies and gender studies and other similar academic majors. I could probably do an entire 30 minute routine just on social sciences in general. But this young man wasn't drawing attention to the obvious, which is that often these majors don't lead to any specific career path. He was simply expressing disdain for women. 

Is that offensive? Well, yes. Disdain can be funny, so long as it isn’t the product of bias towards an entire group of people. Disdain for having a cold, for instance. Disdain for being stuck in traffic. Disdain for women, however, isn’t worthy of laughter.

But is the appropriate response to run on stage and demand that he be quiet? No. The level of anger expressed by the woman in the audience was, shall we say, disproportionate. She seemed a little unhinged. Although, it’s possible that she already knew the young man or that they had some sort of personal history. Either way, the solution, if there even is one, is to ignore him and stop giving him attention. Is it fair to be offended by someone who seems genuinely hateful? Absolutely. But it isn’t always appropriate, productive, or even possible to take any sort of counteraction. 

Not only that but I think there is no real danger that this kid will ever break into the comedy business for real. So, he will likely have to look to some MRA themed subreddit for further validation of his misogyny. Unless the next loudmouthed cunt that storms on stage kills him, of course.

When Mr. Gottfried made that unfortunate tweet about the tsunami in Japan the internet crucified him. People actually said he should die. Which, to me, is a far worse statement than any jokes the comedian has ever made. I was furious, not only with the general public, but with other show business personalities who refused to speak up on Mr. Gottfried’s behalf. In hindsight, I realize that they were probably terrified that they would be next on the chopping block. Which says a lot about us as a society, I think. 

But I don’t think the problem is that people are too easily offended. The problem is that too many people lack critical thinking skills. We need to be willing to ask ourselves whether something is genuinely offensive, or if the topic of it simply evokes negative feelings for us because of our own individual experiences. We need to be willing to step away and resist the urge to take everyone else with us. We also need to accept that sometimes there are genuinely hateful assholes in the world and that silencing them is not always an option. 

If something genuinely is offensive, what should you do about it? 99% of the time, the correct answer is nothing. Now, I'm not talking about hate speech. I'm not talking about propaganda. I'm talking about some comedian, shock jock, TV personality making a joke that you found offensive. You can certainly blog about it, if it makes you feel better. But after that you should avoid that person, their material, their show etc. Because, clearly it is not the right entertainment for you.

I feel that way about King of the Hill and Family Guy. But since I am capable of acknowledging that those things are amusing to other people, I am able to refrain from launching a campaign against their creators under the guise of making the world a better place for everyone.

TL;DR Gilbert Gottfried is a national treasure and should be protected, like the Grand Canyon. AFLAC knew exactly what they were getting when they hired him and merely fired him due to the pressures put in place by late stage capitalism, which dictate that anyone working for a profit seeking entity is at the mercy of public opinion. Shine on, you crazy diamond.  

#gilbert gottfried #aflac #aflac fired gilbert gottfried when they realized they'd hired gilbert gottfried #stand up comedy #people who are offended #what does it mean to be offended #offensive comedy #the difference between comedy and hate speech #free speech #leave gilbert alone and let him enjoy his life #op #juliabohemian rant #juliabohemianrant

[juliabohemian]

The Ephemerality of Media Consumption

Something lovely about movies and television is that they can be enjoyed over and over again. I love that I was able to share with my children the films and TV shows that I enjoyed as a child, in the hope that they would develop a similar appreciation for them. And they very often did.

My children have probably watched Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan almost as many times as I have. They can quote just about every line. But neither of them will ever know what it was like to sit in the theater in 1982, and to stare up at the screen with wonder while viewing what was, at the time, absolutely breathtaking special effects (effects that still hold up when placed beside the computer based images of contemporary blockbusters), or the awe of being surrounded by speakers that were blasting what was, in my opinion, one of James Horner's best scores of all time. More importantly, they will never know the anguish of truly believing that Spock was gone forever, without the benefit of knowing that he would simply reappear in the next movie. 

Experiencing media in real time has a profound effect on our perception of it, our appreciation of it, our interpretation of its significance and relevance to the society in which it exists.

I recall watching the series House MD (2004-2012) in real time, waiting for each new episode to air, speculating about every single teaser and cast member interview. I was so caught up in the experience that it motivated me to write what equated to volumes of emotionally inspired fan-fiction over about a 5 year period, with the express intention of repairing the mistakes I’d felt had been made by the creators of the show.

Several years after the series had come to a close, I re-watched it all in its entirety, one episode immediately after the other. And I found that while I was immensely entertained, it did not spawn the same depth of sadness, nor frustration as it had during my initial viewing. I was able to laugh more freely at the dialogue and feel less bothered by the title character’s lack of growth or self-awareness.

I cannot decide, however, which experience I prefer. 

I have invested myself in countless fictional characters during my lifetime. Most recently, MCU Loki. I have tracked Loki’s story from his first appearance in Thor (2011) up to his most recent appearance in Avengers: Endgame (2019). And what I have learned is that while the real time experience is certainly more potent and more rich, it can also be substantially more upsetting. 

I was among the many Harry Potter fans who experienced post-Deathly Hallows depression. I was among the Fringe fans who spent a year after the end of the series mourning the fact that Walter Bishop and his son would never be reunited onscreen.

Which begs the question...is it all worth it? Is all that suffering worth it? 

This tendency to cleave to that which we cannot have, to invest ourselves in the fantastic, with absolutely no guarantee of reciprocation or reward...it is in our very nature. As we are enticed by the beauty and excitement of fire, we willingly go dancing into it, all the while knowing that we will get burned. Would we be less human, were we not to allow ourselves to experience that pain? Perhaps. Perhaps, given the choice, we will always reach for anguish, all the while knowing it is necessary that we suffer loss, however abstract, because without it we would never experience joy.

#movie meta #loki meta #house md meta #fringe meta #harry potter meta #star trek ii: the wrath of khan #star trek #juliabohemian #james horner #spock #spock's death #the search for spock #juliabohemian rant #op #lokimeta