#when i was talking with that possible education thing they explicitly mentioned the issues that i could run into being female in a | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

tl-notes · 3 years

Text

Kobayashi’s Maid Dragon S2 Episode 3 Notes

Sparrows! Specifically the Eurasian tree sparrow, known in Japan as the suzume. You can just about see them all over Japan, all year long—but that doesn’t mean they aren’t a season word!

Depending on their depiction, they can be used as a season word for most times of the year, but a major one is “late spring,” as that’s when they’re out and about finding food for their baby birds. You can also see in the art they look a little floofy, indicative of the winter coat they haven’t fully shed yet; suzume in summer have a more sleek look. Here’s a shot of them from late summer last season:

And from closer to winter here↓. Quite fluffy.

As a quick refresher, 季語 kigo, or season words, are words/phrases/concepts used to give a sense of season to a haiku (or other poem/work of art), which is what part of what differentiates them from a senryuu. They were used pretty frequently in a lot of episodes last season, but a bit less so this time so far.

Where Lucoa and Ilulu are talking about a “right” here, the Japanese word is 資格 shikaku. While this usage is similar to “right” in English, the connotation is a little different as the word actually means more “qualification.”

Whereas a “right” is generally something you have innately in some sense (e.g. if you make art you automatically have copyright over it, you have human rights just for being human, etc.), a shikaku is something you earn (e.g. if you study and take a test for certification program and pass, you’re rewarded with a shikaku.)

Ilulu’s response to the question here is

そういうのは違う。小林がくれたあの言葉はなかったことにはできないから。

One way in which this differs from the English is that she’s not saying it would be right or wrong, but rather not the solution she’s looking for—because it would also mean undoing the words Kobayashi gave her, and that is something she doesn’t want to do, no matter what.

In contrast the English feels more like she thinks it would be wrong to do that, and even if she did it wouldn’t let her escape what Kobayashi said to her. (That would make more sense if Kobayashi had called her out on being evil, but that’s not really what went down.) An alternative wording might be something like:

“That wouldn’t solve anything. Besides, I don’t want to erase what Kobayashi gave me.”

This line is: 小林さんのようにはいかないなー

This is perhaps just my interpretation, but the English here sounds like Lucoa once convinced/helped Kobayashi in some fashion previously, is trying it again with Ilulu, but failing this time. (I don’t that’s ever happened though.)

In contrast, I think the Japanese is saying that Lucoa is trying to be like Kobayashi (e.g. when helping alleviate/solve Tohru’s various worries), and it’s not really working for her. I.e. “It’s not working like when Miss Kobayashi does it.”

Ilulu’s line about “I don’t want to ask Kobayashi about it because she’d probably solve it too easily" seems to support that reading; the dragons know Kobayashi as worries-solver.

The English here has Lucoa saying she’ll go talk to Kanna/Saikawa, and casually telling Ilulu to wait in the bathroom. But Lucoa doesn’t actually talk to the kids, and even if she was planning to, why would Ilulu waiting in the toilet do anything?

The answer is that Lucoa is actually telling Ilulu to talk (to an unspecified subject, assumed to be Saikawa, since she’s a human and thus someone Ilulu feels guilty about interacting with; Kanna she’s more fine with, as a dragon). And instead of “Go ahead and wait in the bathroom,” it’s more of a “Go wait in the bathroom and see what happens,” with the implication Lucoa is going to set something up.

And she does!

“I won’t lie about X, but Y is a different story.” This seems to imply she will still lie about Y? That seems a bit odd to me, especially when she just lied about X (those feelings) to Kanna/Saikawa minutes ago.

The Japanese says something a bit different though.

The core of the middle line here is 気持ちに嘘をつかない kimochi ni uso wo tsukanai. Because the に, the particle indicating “direction,” is attached unadorned to "feelings,” it is saying not “lying about X” but “lying to X.” This construction, to say one is lying to a feeling, is fairly common in Japanese media. It’s basically equivalent in English to lying to yourself about those feelings.

(for “lying about X” you’d change the に into a について or similar)

So basically she’s saying she won’t pretend, to herself at least, that she doesn’t want to play. But that’s a separate issue to whether she has, as she said before, the “right” to play after what she did.

You could maybe put it sort of like this:

“I won’t lie to myself about my feelings anymore. But that doesn’t mean I can act on them after what I did.”

I feel extremely silly even pointing this out, but the beam here is 尿意 nyoui, which is the urge to pee, not necessarily actually needing to pee. Hence why she seems to stop needing to as soon as she gets to the bathroom and walks straight back to the living room with Ilulu after they talk.

“Be deceived” here is not 騙される damasareru, lit. “be deceived,” but 騙し討ちにあう damashi-uchi ni au, which is like being hit by a sneak attack, being stabbed in the back, etc. In a fairly literal sense in this case too, as they’re talking about actual combat.

I mostly bring it up because it feels like there is not much difference between “being deceived” and “being tricked,” despite those being portrayed as polar opposites (deceived by hostile dragons, tricked by kind Kobayashi), so it might have been wise to differentiate them more in the translation.

E.g. perhaps “She had to change to avoid a knife in the back.” (though dragons don’t use knives, so maybe a claw?)

Another pretty minor point, but the “doesn’t know right from wrong” is 分別のない funbetsu no nai, where funbetsu means not so much “knowing right from wrong,” but a more encompassing sense of discretion and maturity.

I mostly bring this one up because it struck as me awkward to say Ilulu explicitly shouldn’t know right from wrong, since that would be going backward to her be okay destroying the city again. Instead it’s more that she shouldn’t need to feel weighed down by what’s “correct” or what she “should” do. One possible alt example:

“So go back to being a kid, and worry more about what you want to do than ought to do.”

(Lucoa also changes from a narrative tone to a more conversational tone at the end, in conjunction with the visual shift away from the flashback, so swapping the “she” to “you” might be appropriate.)

Note how Kanna shuffles the cards here. Depending on where you’re from, this may seem like an odd way of doing it (unless you watched Yugioh maybe). A lot of places with majority English speakers tend to use the overhand shuffle or riffle shuffle, but in Japan (and many other Asian countries) the most common shuffle is the one on display here, known as the Hindu shuffle.

~The More You Know~

The act of handing over a piece of candy like this has been used as imagery in other places in the show as well, though I’ll leave thinking about what it represents to you.

“Blanket” is futon, which is used to refer to both the “mattress” part and “blanket” part of a full futon, the traditional Japanese bedding (not the same thing as the sofa/couch mattress you might hear called a futon in some places).

I mostly mention because just “a blanket” kind of sounds like they’re going to leave them on the floor, but they’re actually going to get the equivalent of a guest mattress (+blanket) to put them to sleep in, as it’s late enough for this to turn into a sleepover.

Just as a bit of trivia, the word she uses for “onlooker” here is the same term as the “spectator faction.” In the manga Tohru interjects with “Aww, come on, why not Chaos faction instead?”

Also as a side note to this whole bit about Kobayashi wearing a maid outfit; recall this scene from early in season one, where Tohru found an outfit Kobayashi had bought and stuffed deep in a closet:

Relevant! Anyway, back to the actual episode now:

If you felt like this exchange felt a little disjointed, especially given Tohru’s tone of voice: the idea is that Lucoa is saying Tohru really goes to extremes when it comes to matters relating to Kobayashi, which is implying that it seems excessive to call so many people over for a relatively mild issue (not that she necessarily minds though). Tohru’s response is a slightly defensive “yeah I know, but thanks for coming over anyway.”

(They’re saying it in ways such that you have to read between the lines a bit though, so it may not come across as easily in a translation.)

The word for “cold” here is 水くさい mizu-kusai, basically meaning “watered down” (like beer etc.), and used frequently to refer to a person/actions/words that the speaker considers too reserved for the relationship they have with the other person.

So it’s similar to cold, but cold in the context of already warm relationship. If talking about a stranger or someone you don’t get along with normally, you shouldn’t use 水くさい; you can just say 冷たい tsumetai (lit. “cold”) or similar.

In this context you could probably have her say “No need to apologize, Kobayashi-san.”

Also I like how they swap around the honorifics (Miss, Lady, -san, -sama, etc.) based on the speaker (I think differentiating between dragons and native-Japanese-speaking humans?). I would say it works given the setting, but that’s just me.

The text there says “Money Street.” It’s probably obvious, but it’s based primarily on Monopoly, which is semi-popular in Japan (though not to the extent as say in the US).

Just some trivia, but the “sales pitch” for the game in the Japanese market is more that it’s an educational game that teaches investing and negotiation skills. (The origin of the game in general being an educational tool about exploitation of tenants by landlords, so not quite the same thing.)

Japan also has Momotarou Dentetsu (”Momotetsu”), which is a video game series that’s been around since the NES and is broadly similar to Monopoly rules-wise.

I just want to point out, amid all the riches, the bag of potato chips and other junk food in the back there.

Mini-trivia: the cardboard boxes in the background there seem to be a mix of the Amazon logo and the Seino Transportation logo, a Japanese shipping company with a kangaroo logo.

You probably noticed it without me pointing it out, but I enjoyed the fact Elma got corn starch* all around her mouth from the daifuku and then immediately got told to go play with the kids while the adults are talking.

*It may seem like powdered sugar if you’re used to donut holes, but daifuku, like most Japanese sweets (wagashi) generally, is not heavily sugared and not even particularly sweet by the standard of most “sweets” (which is part of the appeal for many). The skin of the daifuku is powdered with corn starch or similar simply to make it less sticky.

Kobayashi’s “do that” here is やろー yarou, which can mean “let’s do X” (which is a construction often used to tell/suggest someone to do something, without really including yourself in the “us”).

However in this case—especially given Kobayashi’s pronunciation and tone of voice—I think it’s actually a homophone of that, a form of 野郎 yarou, a word for “guy” with often negative connotations, like saying “son of a” or “asshole” etc.

The idea, I think, being that his immediate agreement of “Oooh, right I didn’t think about you wearing it,” comes with a heavy implication of “yeah you’re right, you couldn’t pull off something cute like that,” so she’s replying with a (mostly good-natured) “oh you fucker.”

This giant 完 kan means “the end,” used like “fin” at the end of a story or game etc. It’s also frequently used in “fake end” jokes. E.g. a show about a sentient zombie might start with the main character getting hit by a truck and dying immediately. The end! ...Except not, and they wake up as a zombie.

So here, the original goal was “make a maid outfit for Kobayashi to wear.” Then Georgie convinces Kobayashi that anything is a maid outfit as long as you are a maid at heart, so really, she’s already wearing one! The end! ...Except not.

Here’s some extra, probably needless, context on this “annoying”: it uses the word 面倒くさい mendokusai, which is basically used to describe something as annoying, a pain, etc. When used to describe a person like this, one of the ways it can be taken is specifically that the person is really fussy about details that others wouldn’t really care about—which describes Kobayashi about maids pretty well.

So just for clarity, it’s not necessarily “I became an annoying person who is a maid otaku,” and can be more of a “within the context of my maid otaku-ness I became annoying.” Just to kind of shed some light on the extent of her self-deprecation here.

The word Kobayashi uses for “helping with the housework” is 家事手伝い kaji-tetsudai, which is a noun* that means “a housework helper”... here, basically a more bland way for a native Japanese speaker to say maid.

Hence why Tohru reacts with “Oh, don’t call me that, call me a maid!”; Kobayashi went as far as to acknowledge her clothes as a maid outfit, but not quite as far as calling her maid outright. That’s our “annoying maid otaku” doing her thing.

*It can also be verbed.

These neighborhood notices, 回覧板 kairan-ban, ~lit. circular notice, are a method used by local governing organizations to distribute information or forms etc. For example, about an upcoming neighborhood event to pick up litter.

The general idea is that one person gets the notice, reads it, signs it, then goes and passes it to the next household in line. It saves paper versus sending everyone a thing in the mail, encourages interaction between neighbors, and is more likely to be read than a flyer/email, though some people consider them a pain and they generally feel a little dated.

The phrase for “piercing noise” is 劈く金切り音, tsunzaku kanakiri-on, ~lit. “ear-piercing sound of tearing metal.”*

“Was it that loud?” in the Japanese is a little different, そんな音してた?, meaning “was it making a sound like that?”

I’m mostly just bringing it up to say that the “Sasakibe’s cooking isn’t just loud, the sounds don’t even make sense” gag is alive and well this season.

*The “sound of tearing metal” phrase can also used idiomatically for some types of high pitched sounds, but I imagine it was chosen very deliberately here.

It’s probably obvious, but this is a reference to the music video of the OP for season one. You can see it on the official channel for the band, fhána, here.

The season two music video is here, and it seems to have decent English subtitles for the lyrics if you’re curious what they are.

The adjective here is ニヒル nihiru, an abbreviation of nihilistic. It can be used as actually “nihilistic” like in English, but it can also be used more colloquially to describe a person with dark vibes. It can almost be a compliment!

“Sleeping” here is 惰眠をむさぼる damin wo musaboru. Damin is not just sleep, but “worthless” sleep—not like a nap because you’re tired. Musaboru is a verb for ~gorging upon on something (often metaphorically, not just food).

The two words are somewhat frequently used together for, basically, lying around the house doing nothing all day. And not in a particularly flattering way, so it’s pretty funny for her to just be like “yeah I do that as a hobby I guess.”

It doesn’t mean the same thing, but it’d be like saying your hobby is loitering. Maybe could have translated as like “Hobbies? Vegetating.” or “Procrastinating?” or something, though I don’t know if those would have the right impact...

Kanna’s word for “idol” here is アイドル aidoru, i.e. idol in the pop culture sense.

Tohru’s word is 偶像 guuzou, or idol in the religious sense.

(Tohru swaps to the pop culture “idol” when she starts talking about Kobayashi though.)

Kanna’s “lost it” it here is 大変 taihen, a pretty common, almost generic word used as an intensifier (greatly, immensely, seriously, terribly, really, etc.) in both positive and negative ways. E.g. “thanks, you really saved me!” or “that was extremely rude.”

When used alone, like here, it usually implies something bad has happened, like something has befallen Tohru and/or she’s in some sort of trouble. Hence why Kobayashi immediately rushes home worried and bursts through the door like this—and loses her tension when she sees Tohru is fine, just... extreme(ly annoying to Kanna and Ilulu).

You could maybe say e.g. “Something’s wrong with Tohru!” to keep that double meaning open.

(”Lost it!” also makes sense for Kobayashi to be worried about, but the type of worry is somewhat different in that case; “oh god what is she going to do” vs. “oh god what happened to her.”)

The “lick” here is べろ bero, an onomatopoeia for licking that’s also used as slang for "tongue” (noun).

A bero chuu, as in the chorus here, is slang for a French kiss/deep kiss/tongue kiss.

~The More You Know~

The text here says “If your total assets are above one billion, proceed towards goal.”

Only billionaires can win...

Here is 私のものはカンナのもの, lit. “What’s mine is Kanna’s!”

This line is a reference to a catchphrase of the bully/antagonist in Doraemon, Gian: “What’s yours is mine, and what’s mine is mine.”

His line, and character, is so well known it’s spawned the term “Gianism” to represent that sort of self-centered philosophy: everything is rightfully mine to take, even if you think you lay some claim over it.

It’s interesting that the inversion of Gianism, i.e. “what’s mine is yours,” is the only way Kanna and Saikawa are able to overcome the rules, beat the billionaire, and win the game.

Solidarity forever.

#maidragon #Miss Kobayashi's Dragon Maid #kobayashi-san chi no maid dragon #translation notes #anime

41 notes · View notes

mariaiscrafting · 3 years

Note

Dream said he never voted for Trump and isn't republican, but didn't that reddit account in question say they didn't register to vote because they didn't want to get doxxed? Also, betting on Trump's tweets doesn't prove his stance on real issues either? It actually makes light of what trump was doing. It feels idk that his statements do not prove much of anything. Has anything new come out? The accounts I was looking at either stopped talking about it or went private

Oh, so we’re discussing whether or not we think he’s lying, now? Frankly, the main reason I am inclined not to believe him is the fact that he’s using the same strategy he did during the cheating scandal - first, putting out vague tweets that outright deny any involvement or truth to the accusations on his private; second, putting out a more thought-out thread soon thereafter that appeals to his audience and the victimhood argument; and third, putting out a longer response that comes up with a seemingly plausible explanation for everything, without actually, explicitly deny the accusations.

First, he outright denied the accusations at first. He said it wasn’t him, he denied that the Reddit account was even in his ownership, and then flipped the narrative when evidence came up that makes it seem like yes, it was his, or at least partially his. That is just... very untrustworthy, imo.

Second, and I know this is circumstantial and disputable, but the Redditor’s writing style screams Dream. He writes like that in his many Twitter threads, twitlongers; he even speaks like that in his serious streams and videos. I’m sure someone on Reddit or kiwifarms or the like will come up with a better analysis of the parallels in writing style, but anyone who was a fan of his - as I was - cannot deny the similarities, right?

Third, he immediately started deleting posts from the Discord he was in that was mentioned in the slideshow. Please tell me how an innocent person’s immediate reaction, before even posting a reply on your private, is to start deleting all your publicly available posts from the same time frame as the accused Reddit posts? What? He did this immediately after- like, within half an hour of the slideshow being posted to Reddit, for fuck’s sake.

Fourth, and most importantly, let’s dissect the absurdity of what exactly he is claiming. He is saying that he shared a Reddit account in 2017 with an irl work friend, and that none of the political posts besides perhaps the kneeling for the anthem one were his, and that even if they were posted by his friend, they were likely troll posts. I just... what? How in the world does anyone believe this? That is the furthest reach I have ever seen someone claim in a public “apology.” First, who shares Reddit accounts when they post personal things, like pictures of your cat and political ramblings? What in the world? Would you really share that kind of account just to play in a fake football league? Why wouldn’t his friend create his own, separate account, for his political ramblings? Second, the post to r/politics describes Dream’s biographical information perfectly. So tell me, why post just that one post to r/politics, but then supposedly not post other posts to other, relevant political subreddits? Third, he lies about the Kaepernick timeline in the damn pastebin “apology,” making it so suspicious as to why he would try to distance himself as much as possible, timewise, to the rest of the posts that were made within the same time period.

These are just the reasons I see for why I distrust Dream on this. And for people to claim that he has changed for the better and that his political views have become more progressive seems disingenous when we’re talking about someone who cannot admit the truth, and reconcile with his past political beliefs. Like, how can we believe that he changed, if he can’t even fess up to the past? I don’t know about y’all, but every single person I know who has been able to change their political views, through education and empathy - including myself - acknowledges and constantly brings up their past, because of the shame and disgust they feel for that past. The few people I know who do not acknowledge that they used to be bigoted or lean right or support Republican policies are the people who, to this day, simply convince themselves of their left-leaningness, while still peddling in whatever backwards beliefs they claim to have learned from and moved past.

Here are more compelling reasons and evidence as to why he is likely lying about sharing the account: https://twitter.com/jessislive_/status/1379958002501963778

Trigger warning for the above thread’s posts for typical right-leaning views that deal with racism and sexual assault victims (dismissing them).

#dream critical #dream slideshow #discourse #/neg #asks #Anonymous

21 notes · View notes

whitehotharlots · 3 years

Text

CRT and the sad state of educational politics

If our culture is studied 100 years from now, the predominant theme of the research will be a sense of perplexed revulsion toward how we did nothing to address the climate crisis in spite of having decades of forewarning. If there is a second theme, it will be a profound confusion regarding our immense and unearned sense of self-certainty. A retrospective of the early twenty first century would be titled something like Who the Fuck Did These People Think They Were?

The latter theme is illustrated in the debacle surrounding a recent slew of municipal and statewide bills that seek to ban the teaching of Critical Race Theory (CRT) in public schools. For the record, I am strongly against these bans. But I’m also self-aware enough to know my opinion matters very little, and therefore realize that an analysis of the discussion surrounding the bills will yield much more worthwhile observations than a simple delimitation of their pros and cons. Regardless of your personal opinion, I hope you’ll humor me.

I am, in some regards, a moral absolutist. But I also realize that abstract morality has very little bearing on material and political realities. In my ideal world, classrooms are free from political meddling. Teachers teach to the best of their ability, presenting students with truths that are confidently unvarnished due to the thorough amount of work that was required to reach them. I don’t cotton any of that socratic bullshit. Students are there to learn, not to engage in weird Gotchas with some perverted elder. The teacher’s job is to teach. The material they teach needs to be subjected to some graspable and standardized mechanism of truth adjudication before it is worthy of being taught. Teaching is not therapy. Teaching is not poetry. Teaching is not love, nor is it religion, nor is it a means of social or political indoctrination. There are plenty of other avenues available to accomplish all of those other things. Teaching is teaching.

That’s the ideal. But ideals are just ideals. They never come true. The art of teaching, regardless of setting--from overpacked classrooms to face-to-face instruction to curricular design to nationwide pedagogical initiatives--boils down to a teacher’s ability to reconcile the need to convey truths with social and political pressures that are heavily invested in the suppression of truth.

I have formally studied and practiced education for nearly two decades. In that time, the prevailing political thrust toward education has been a desire to casualize the practice of teaching, to render educators as cheap and fungible as iphones. The thrust takes different shapes depending on the political affiliation of whomever happens to be in charge of the state and federal governments that fund education, but the ultimate desire is always the same. The goal is always to attempt to make teaching rote and algorithmic, something akin to running a google search for How to do math? or What is morality?. The framing is always just windowdressing, empty culture war bullshit.

Maybe it’s the inescapability of this thrust that’s rendered so many educators so blind to it? We only have nominal political choice, after all. The discourse gets more blinkered and vicious as the stakes decrease. At any rate, this is the undeniable reality, and anyone who doesn’t see that isn’t worth listening to.

Non-administrative per-pupil spending as been on a steady decline since George W. Bush was president. Administrative bloat and meddling are becoming as common in k-12 as they are in higher education. The will of parasitic NGOs are implemented as common sense pedagogy without anyone even bothering to ask for any proof that they work. The so-called Education Reform movement is sputtering out due both to its manifest failures and rare, bipartisan backlash. But it will be replaced with something just as idiotic and pernicious. The thrust of causalization will not abate.

And so what do we decide to do? What’s the next big thing on the education policy horizon? Critical Race Theory.

Okay, this makes sense. In 2021, a local paper can’t run a news story about a lost cat without explicitly mentioning the race of every human involved and possibly also nodding toward the implied cisnormativity of pet ownership. So it makes sense that this broad rhetorical mandate would come to dominate the transitional period between Bush-Obama Education Reform and whatever bleak future awaits us. The controversy is so perfectly inefficacious that its adoption was inevitable. Because, seriously, it doesn’t matter. Regardless of the outcome of this kerfuffle, no problems will be solved. The real shortcomings of public education will not be addressed. Larger social problems that are typically blamed on public education in spite of having little to do with public education will especially not be addressed. Maybe white kids will have to do struggle sessions in lieu of the Pledge of Allegiance. Maybe black kids will get full credit for drawing the Slayer logo in the part of the test where their geometric proof is supposed to go. Or maybe it won’t happen. Maybe instead these practices will be banned, and in turn liberals will begin to embrace homeschooling, the charter movement will be given new life as a refuge against the terrors of white supremacist behaviors such as, uhh, teaching kids to show their work. Whatever.

Within the context of public education, the outcome will not matter. It cannot matter. There will be broader social impacts, sure. It will continue to drive Democrats more rightward, providing their party’s newly woke corporate wing with progressive-sounding rationales for austerity. But so far as teachers and students are concerned, it won’t matter.

Why do I give a shit about this, then? To put it bluntly, I’m struck by the utter fucking inartfulness of CRT’s proponents. At no point has any advocate of CRT presented a case for their approach to education that was at all concerned with persuading people who aren’t already 100% in their camp. There’s been no demonstration of positive impacts, or even an explanation of how the impacts could hypothetically be positive. In fact, so much as asking for such a rationale is considered proof of racism. Advocates posit an image of existing educational policies that is absolutely fantastical, suggesting that kids never learn about slavery or racism or civil rights. But then... then they don’t even stick with the kayfabe. They’ll say “kids never learn about racism.” In response, people--mostly well-meaning--say “wait, umm, I’m pretty sure they do learn about racism.” The response is “we never said they don’t learn about racism.” You’ll see this shift from one paragraph to the next. It’s insane. Absolutely insane.

Or take this talk from a pro-CRT workshop in Oregon. The speaker freely admits that proto-CRT leanings like anti-bias education, multiculturalism, and centering race in historical discussions have been the norm since the late 1980s. The speaker admits that these practices have been commonplace for 30+ years, as anyone my age or younger will attest. Then, seconds later, the speaker discusses the results of this shift: it failed. Unequivocally:

We had this huge, huge, huge focus on culturally relevant teaching and research. [ ... ] So you would think that with 40+ years of research and really focusing and a lot of lip service and a lot of policies and, you know, a lot of rhetoric about cultural relevancy and about equity and about anti-bias that we would see trends that are significantly different, [but] that’s not what we’re finding. What we’re finding that you see [is] that some cases, particularly black and brown [students] the results, the academic achievement has either stayed the same and gotten worse.

Translation: here’s this approach to teaching. It’s new and vital but also we’ve been doing it for 40 years. It doesn’t work. But we need to keep doing it. Anyone who is in any way confused by this is a dangerous racist.

Even in the darkest days of the Bush-era culture war, I never saw such a complete and open disregard for honesty. This isn’t to say that Bush-era conservatives weren’t shit-eating liars. They were. But they had enough savvy to realize that self-righteousness alone is not an effective way of doing politics. You need to at least pretend to be engaging with issues in good faith.

This is what happens when a movement has its head so far up its own ass that it cannot comprehend the notion of good-faith criticism. These people do not believe that there can exist anyone who shares their basic goals but has concerns that their methods might not work. Their self-certainty is so absolute and unshakeable that they can proffer data demonstrating the complete ineffectiveness of their methods as proof of the necessity of their methods.

For decades, the most effective inoculation against pernicious meddling in education has been to lean upon the ideal form of teaching I described earlier in this post. We claimed that teaching is apolitical and that no one is trying to indoctrinate anybody. Regardless of the abstract impossibility of this claim, it has immense and lasting appeal, and it was upheld by a system of pedagogical standards that allowed teachers to evoke a sense of neutrality. The prevailing thrust in liberal education is to explicitly reject any such notions, and no one--not a single goddamn person--has proffered a convincing replacement for it. We still say, laughably, that we’re eschewing indoctrination. But people aren’t that stupid. If you find it beneath yourself to make your lies digestible, people will be able to tell when you’re lying to them.

This, my friends, bodes very poorly for the future of education, regardless of whatever happens in the coming months. A movement that cannot articulate its own worth is not one that is long for this world. Teachers themselves are the only force that can resit the slow press toward the eventual elimination of public education, and they have embraced a worldview and comportment style that renders them absolutely unable to mount any worthwhile resistance.

15 notes · View notes

raavenb2619 · 4 years

Note

I keep having friends say they never want to be in a relationship and/or that they feel like they have to be in one. I’ve tried explaining amanormativity and aro/ace identities but I don’t really know how? Like all the time I get responses about how everyone wants to be in a relationship but have self esteem issues and such. How would you explain aro/ace stuff and amanormativity to people who don’t know anything about it? They’re also mostly involved with lgbt stuff too.

Explaining aspec stuff is definitely a skill, and you’ll get better the more you do it, since you’ll get a sense of where to start explanations, how much detail to include, when to introduce a concept without the word so people don’t get overwhelmed by terminology, and so on. I tend to do this over multiple conversations, so that people can digest the new information bit by bit and get comfortable with new ideas and terminology.

If you’re out as aspec, one thing you could try to do is to appeal to their sense of equality/fair treatment. They don’t have to totally understand aspec theory to be able to respect you. Since they’re generally involved with the community, you can also point out similarities between aspec issues like amatonormativity and normative forces like heteronormativity and talk about how it’s not enough to fight against just one but not the other.

If you’re not out as aspec (or not aspec), you can distance yourself from being aspec a little by mentioning it as something you read about online and found interesting. This strategy also allows you to start discussions about amatonormativity and such because you can talk about the ways it affects your life and how you might break the mold amatonormativity tries to fit you in without explicitly coming out as aspec, something like “but I don’t see why friends have to be less important than romantic partners”.

One more thing, with regards to your friends possibly being aspec or questioning being aspec, this is an area you want to be careful with. It’s totally fine to educate people and answer questions and even gently suggest that they might be aspec, but you want to make sure that you avoid pressuring people into an identity. To paraphrase from The Matrix, you can only show them the door; they have to choose to walk through it.

Hope that helps, as always feel free to ask for clarification/any follow up questions.

#ask #anon #original #aspec #aro #ace #aromantic #asexual #amatonormativity #queer #lgbtq #Anonymous

48 notes · View notes

aromanticgrey · 5 years

Text

An Aroallo Perspective on the Relationship Between the Aro and Ace Communities: Solidarity Not Conflation

The aro and ace communities are closely connected. We have a shared history, many shared community spaces, and many people with both aro and ace identities. We are brought together as communities due to having orientations that revolve around a lack of attraction, but that is where the similarities end. The aro and ace communities are not the same, but they are often treated as such. This is a problem.

Not only are ace and aro identities conflated, arospec identities are treated as a subset of asexuality. This issue ranges from how aros are treated in community discussion, to representation, to education.

The ace community has consistently portrayed aro identities as a part of asexuality, if they bother to mention aros at all. As a young aroallo trying to figure out my identity, this caused me much confusion. When I was discovering aromanticism I could not find aro resources that weren’t primarily ace resources. Aro identities were always only talked about in the context of asexuality. I thought I had to be ace in order to be aro, and I did not know you could be aro and allosexual. I was never led to believe it was possible. If I had not (mistakenly) identified as ace-spec I am not sure I would have found aro info at all, as it was always buried in ace resources, existing as footnotes.

Things have gotten a bit better since then, but mostly because the aro community has built itself up from nothing and has demanded recognition as its own identity and community. These kinds of problems absolutely still exist, however. To this day, I see aro specific content labeled as ace by aces. I see aroace characters labeled as only ace, the aro part of their identity erased and ignored. Educational resources that include aromantic identities are in many cases unbalanced, and focus much more on asexuality, with no acknowledgment that aroallos exist. Ace resources and positivity sometimes even express negative ideas about aros. An example being how many asexual resources are amatonormative and equate romantic attraction with worth and validity as a person (see the common: “don’t worry, aces can still love!”).

As an aro, especially an aroallo, I feel out of place in the asexual community. I do not belong in the ace community as I am not ace, yet many aces seem unaware that aroallos, in general, do not feel included in ace specific communities on the basis that we are not ace. I have seen aroace groups mention only aces and assume that aros will feel welcome and included. This is not the case. Aces, if you want to include aros, mention us explicitly, and not only that, but represent us equally.

Unfortunately mainstream LGBT organizations seem to have picked up on this as well. They mention asexuality, but not aromanticism and believe that this is sufficient inclusion. Those who know of the A in LGBTQIA, and know of it as standing for asexual, oftentimes only know that it stands for asexuality, but not aromanticism as well (and agender!). Some who do know better exclude aros from the A anyway, and this is not acceptable. Aces, if you want to include and support aros, there are many things mentioned above that need to change.

Aces, if you want to include aroallos, take care about how you speak of sexuality, especially sex without romance. I personally feel uncomfortable in many ace dominant spaces due to the many jokes about sex being gross, and ideas that romance is more pure and good than sex. I have no problem with sex repulsed people, or people thinking that sex is gross for them personally. I do however take issue with talk of other people’s sexuality being gross. Such sentiments are quite alienating, especially in the context of a broader culture where my queer sexuality is shamed.

To be honest I feel let down by the broader ace community. I feel pushed to the side and devalued. I know things don't have to be this way though, and I hope my criticisms are not taken as aggressive, but rather as an attempt to address concerns and open positive dialogue. Things can change, and this carnival of aros joint event with the carnival of aces is a great step in the right direction, and a good way to get some discussion going.

For aces who want to show support for aros and aroallos, here is a list of things you can do.

Treat the aro and ace communities as individual, unique, communities. They share similarities and can sometimes overlap but they are not the same.

Listen to aros. Listen to us about our struggles, and about our concerns.

Boost aro voices and support our content. Help us spread our educational materials.

When creating aro and ace resources together, weigh the ace and aro aspects equally.

When creating aro and ace educational materials together, don't forget mention aroallos along with aroaces and alloaces.

Take care to not spread amatonormative or anti-aro ideas.

Don't label ace only content as aro. This doesn't make you more inclusive. It is simply misleading and further conflates ace and aro identities.

If you want to include aros in something, mention us as fully and explicitly as you would asexuality or any other orientation.

Don't mock or wrongly define aro community terminology like aplatonic and qpr. If you aren't sure of the definition or proper usage of an aro community term, look to the aro community for answers.

Don't make fun of or shame others for their sexuality. There is a difference between being sex repulsed and putting others down.

I am all for aro and ace community solidarity. I believe the communities can, and have, done a lot to help and support each other. I also believe that the aro community needs an opportunity to stand on its own. The aro community deserves more than to simply exist in the shadow of the ace community. Aroallo visibility is sorely lacking due to the conflation of the two communities. To push forward aroallo narratives, and to spread aroallo education and resources necessitates a degree of separation between the communities. Solidarity without conflation is possible, and is a worthy goal that I believe we can achieve.

#carnival of aros #aro #aromantic #actually aromantic #asexual #aroallo #ally tips #rey speaks

346 notes · View notes

dweemeister · 4 years

Photo

Crisis: Behind a Presidential Commitment (1963)

Over the last hundred years, the Presidency of the United States has grown in scope and responsibilities. For a newborn nation founded (and yes, I know I’m radically simplifying things) due to the legislative and taxation imposed by a tyrannical sovereign, America’s Founders crafted an executive with limited power. That power, independent from and counterbalanced by the federal government’s legislative and judicial branches, remained limited for most of the nineteenth century. Turn the page to the twentieth and twentieth-first centuries, and the office has become gargantuan. Starting from Herbert Hoover’s single term, fifteen men have presided over the Oval Office, representing the longest uninterrupted run of the Presidency accruing power – despite campaign slogans from mostly conservative presidents promising to rein in an expanding office. Over those fifteen presidential administrations, the American people, once suspicious of being ruled by monarchical fiat, have, through mass media, developed increasing expectations for their head of state and government.

These expectations are oftentimes not explicitly outlined by the U.S. Constitution, and are the constructions of politics or the public. They include, and are not limited to: reinvigorating the national economy by execution of monetary policy, introducing a blueprint for and compromising with Congress over the federal budget, managing the vast bureaucracy existing within the White House, and comforting those who have lost their loved ones after a disaster. Presidential scholars sometimes deem the burgeoning power of the office as the “Imperial Presidency” – a term that may have been first used during John F. Kennedy’s administration. That administration is at the heart of Crisis: Behind a Presidential Commitment, directed by Robert Drew for ABC News, and released a month before Kennedy’s assassination.

In 1954, the Supreme Court of the United States, in their decision for Brown v. Board of Education, ruled that the “separate, but equal” justification for racially segregating black and white children in public schools was unconstitutional. Opposition in the American South meant that enforcement and adherence to the Court’s decision proved elusive. The University of Alabama began accepting applications from black students after Brown v. Board, denying admittance from all except for one exception (the university’s administration found, after some effort and rioting, an excuse to expel the student). But in 1963, three students – Vivian Malone and James Hood for the flagship campus in Tuscaloosa; Dave McGlathery for UA Huntsville – applied for and, by federal court order, were admitted to the University of Alabama system.

Crisis follows the efforts of the Kennedy administration – mostly through Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy (JFK’s brother) – over two days, to ensure that Vivian Malone and James Hood could register for classes. Fears of rioting and violence, though unrealized, hung over the Kennedy administration. The stiffest resistance came from Alabama Governor George Wallace – who advocated for “segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever” – who vowed to physically block the doorway of the university’s Foster Auditorium to prevent Malone and Hood from registering. The President, Attorney General, and Deputy Attorney General Nicholas Katzenbach (who is sent to Alabama) work, with their staffers, to formulate a plan on how to allow Malone and Hood to register for classes as painlessly as possible.

The film, co-produced by Drew’s production company Drew Associates, is shot with minimal voiceover narration by James Lipscomb (a producer for various documentaries for National Geographic); Drew’s team also included Drew Associates regulars like D.A. Pennebaker (1967’s Don’t Look Back, 1993’s The War Room) and Richard Leacock (1966’s Monterey Pop and four episodes of Omnibus). All these filmmakers have been noted for their innovation of cinéma verité – which Crisis is an excellent example of. Cinéma verité, in its most basic form, is documentary filmmaking where the filmmakers allow the audience to observe what is happening. In cinéma verité, insights about people, places, and events are revealed through the images alone – not through interventions by the filmmakers like narration (which in Crisis only serves to identify the key individuals; note the passage of time; and explain the context of a scene after a cut), superimposed text, or talking head interviews. Narration and superimposed text can exist within a cinéma verité documentary, but they can only be factual in nature.

Drew Associates’ access to the White House, Department of Justice, and RFK’s residence was thanks to the company’s work in filming Primary (1960), which followed Kennedy and his Democratic Primary opponent Hubert Humphrey as the contested the Wisconsin Democratic Primary. How they received access to Governor Wallace’s residence and the Alabama Capitol is not clear. Before President Kennedy’s inauguration in 1960, he agreed with Drew that presidential decision making in a crisis would be a fascinating documentary topic: “What if I could see what went on in the White House during the twenty-four hours before FDR declared war on Japan,” JFK mused. Agreeing to give Drew access when such a crisis (not of top-secret military importance) came, President Kennedy believed that the film would hopefully serve for future presidents as an example of how critical presidential decisions are made. To reach the Resolute desk, the issue must be laden with controversy. Indeed, the crisis of Governor Wallace’s refusal to allow black students to register for classes with the University of Alabama generated a lot of discussion in Washington and across the South. Filmed on June 10 and 11, 1963, Crisis captures the mechanics of the tough decisions that President Kennedy and his brother, the Attorney General, make: how to use the National Guard if at all, the optics of escorting the students onto campus, anticipating worst-case scenarios, discussing electoral consequences of enraging the Southern segregationist vote, telephone calls, meeting after meeting.

For Wallace, the narration does not refer to his pro-segregation views, nor his betrayal of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) after garnering their endorsement for his first failed run for the Democratic nomination for governor in 1958 (his opponent then was endorsed by the Ku Klux Klan). If one knew nothing about Wallace prior to Crisis, the opening minutes of the film might make you think he is a dedicated family man and a diligent worker. But his rhetoric during the film makes transparent his racism. Snippets of Wallace walking among the public exemplifies his popularity among Alabaman whites, who extol him for his pro-segregationist broadsides against an overreaching federal government. When cinéma verité is applied with as little authorial editorialization as possible (there will always be some degree of such editorializing, but the aim in cinéma verité is to minimize it), what is murky in days past, over time, rises above the fray, revealing truth. Wallace’s actions are indefensible, and the fact that so many supported his actions reveals the stain of racism that continues to infect American politics for the foreseeable future. And yet, this is as fair a treatment as George Wallace could have hoped for in a documentary film.

One of the unsung individuals in Crisis is Deputy Attorney General Katzenbach, who is the one who briefs the National Guard on what is to be done the day they escort Malone and Hood on campus. His discussions with Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy in person and over telephone calls encapsulate their professionalism and mutual respect for the other. Katzenbach, the first person to confront Governor Wallace in the doorway – with both men reading prepared statements to the other, with Wallace clearly not listening as he interrupts the Deputy Attorney General – outmaneuvers the Governor, a tribute to his strategizing in the lead-up to this confrontation.

An executive order from President Kennedy federalizing the Alabama National Guard is what makes Wallace stand down. Since Theodore Roosevelt’s presidency (1901-1909), the executive order has become a tool for a president to help federal agencies and officers manage operations of the federal government. Though executive orders are not legislation nor specifically mentioned in the Constitution, they do not require Congressional approval (though Congress can pass legislation that makes the executive order difficult to perform). The regulations created through executive orders can have a sweeping effect on life in the United States – most notably Franklin D. Roosevelt’s authorization to force German-Americans, Italian-Americans, and especially Japanese-Americans into concentration camps and Donald Trump’s suspension of the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) and suspension on entries from several Muslim-majority nations in January 2017. Executive orders have played a growing role in the lifespans of American presidential administrations. Most recently, the uptick of executive orders under Barack Obama’s last years in office served as inspiration to his successor in how to handle the tools of the presidency.

The basis of Kennedy’s invocation of executive order is clear-cut, even though Crisis barely mentions it: Brown v. Board of Education. Kennedy’s actions, however, might have been unthinkable earlier in history even with a corresponding Supreme Court decision. The growth of the Imperial Presidency and the public’s desire for stronger central government – in contrast to how Americans perceived their constitutional republic in roughly the first century of its existence – create all the drama in Crisis. The film, curiously, does not seem terribly interested in questioning how the process of this decision – using the Attorney General and federalizing a possibly sympathetic portion of the National Guard – might play to Alabamans after it has happened. Given the changes in how the U.S. Constitution is interpreted, this same dynamic made possible FDR’s New Deal and the internment camps that detained thousands of American citizens and nationals, Barack Obama’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program and Donald Trump’s efforts to decrease immigration and refugee arrivals as much as possible. In addition to providing insight to what is a credible use of executive order, Crisis – if contextualized by noting how the American presidency has and now operates – can illuminate how expansive the American presidency has become.

Debuting on ABC stations nationwide on October 21, 1963*, Crisis prompted viewers to flood ABC and its affiliates with furious calls venting about the fact cameras were given permission to roll in the Oval Office. Americans and, by extension, anyone who interested in what is happening in America, now take for granted how much access they have to their executive, legislative, and judicial branches – even if this comes at the expense of metastasizing confirmation bias in the nation’s politics. Many considered this a debasement of the office, a distraction from the agonizing work they expected their president and his officials to be performing (even though President Kennedy and those officials act as if they barely noticed the cameras). This outrage, however, would not last, due to Kennedy’s assassination in Dallas several weeks later.

Crisis was inducted into the Library of Congress’ National Film Registry in 2011, noting that the film, “has proven to be a uniquely revealing complement to written histories of the period, providing viewers the rare opportunity to witness historical event from an insider’s perspective.” It remains a singular document in which presidential crisis management and deliberation are central. Running under an hour, it is a compelling work of early cinéma verité (which has receded in the new century) that will prove intriguing even outside history and civics classes. More than enough time has passed, with the film’s truths seen in full.

My rating: 8/10

^ Based on my personal imdb rating. Half-points are always rounded down. My interpretation of that ratings system can be found here.

*Despite debuting on television, Crisis: Behind a Presidential Commitment is almost always treated as a cinematic film. It has been considered as such here.

#Crisis: Behind a Presidential Commitment #Robert Drew #JFK #George Wallace #RFK #Vivian Malone #James Hood #Nicholas Katzenbach #Gregory Shuker #ABC News #ABC #TCM #My Movie Odyssey

1 note · View note

beneaththetangles · 5 years

Text

BtT Light Novel Club Chapter 14: Ascendance of a Bookworm, Part 1 Vol. 1

And here we are with our discussion of the first volume of Ascendance of a Bookworm! With the anime having just started, now is the perfect time to dive into this “bibliophile fantasy” and see what lies in store. @jeskaiangel will be joining me this time as we look at what makes this isekai story special.

-----

1. What are your overall impressions of the novel?

Jeskai Angel: The book is an offbeat but solid reincarnation isekai. WHAT happens isn’t anything special (a small child plays with mud and does math!), but the way it’s told makes for an enjoyable tale.

stardf29: The first thing that sticks out to me is how it goes against the usual tropes of isekai web/light novels. The protagonist doesn’t have any special cheat powers; in fact, she’s born into a sick body that has trouble doing anything. On top of that, she’s born into a poor family, and we get to see how hard life is for such a family in general. And there’s no sign of a harem, of course. That said, Myne does still have her knowledge of modern life and still uses it to introduce stuff to this world, so there’s still a bit of isekai familiarity in there. Overall, it feels like an isekai story without the otaku filters, which is definitely nice to see.

2. What is your opinion of Myne as a character and as the protagonist?

Jeskai Angel: Myne works really well as a protagonist. Because she’s been quite literally sheltered, as in bedridden, much of her short life, she knows little about her world, and this makes it possible for us to learn about the world right alongside her. Like with Mile in Abilities Average, her character also seems to combine elements from both her past life and her new one. She has esoteric knowledge no child her age would have, yet she’s also capable of being quite immature in her responses to situations.

stardf29: Myne is definitely an interesting protagonist, in part for the reasons you mentioned. To add to that, it helps that she has a definite goal in this world, so she’s not drifting around aimlessly. The other thing, though, is that she can be quite selfish, since for the most part she only cares about getting books and doesn’t think too much about how she’s making trouble for others. While I’ve seen some complaints about this, I think it provides a nice opportunity for some character development, which does start to show up later in the book.

3. What do you think about the other characters in the story?

Jeskai Angel: In a way, it’s all the other characters that really sold me on the story. Myne’s relationships with her parents, sister, friends, even Mr. Otto, etc., are just incredibly heartwarming. You really get the sense that all these people love Myne. The depth of the relationships takes a story of a little girl failing to make books and lets it be something special.

stardf29: Yeah, I really like how the other characters play into the story. It’s one of the things that I mentioned helps make this feel not as otaku-fied, by having supporting characters that naturally fit in the story and in Myne’s life, instead of filling out a checklist of character tropes.

4. How did the lack of common isekai fantasy elements affect your experience with this story?

Jeskai Angel: I found it interesting how basically nonexistent common fantasy tropes were. Unlike most isekai stories that take place in an openly magical world, this book has almost nothing that is explicitly supernatural. We, along with Myne, do hear about some unusual plants that don’t exist on earth, but it’s not really clear if they are magical or just weird. I felt the apparent lack of magic really gave the setting a different feel compared to other isekai stories. Of course, the very end of this volume does betray a hint that magic will be involved in Myne’s future, but that doesn’t negate the strikingly mundane tone of our introduction to Myne’s world. Her struggles are more relatable, I think, because she’s not (at least as of vol. 1) living in a high fantasy setting.

stardf29: The immediate benefit of the relative lack of magic is that Myne cannot rely on any magic “cheats” to get her books. She has to do it the historical way, which allows the book to be a bit educational on how writing methods used to be made.

That said, as you mentioned, the end does hint that this world does have magic. Moreover, it’s something that seems to be exclusive to nobles, meaning it’s likely largely behind the social stratification of this world. So the relative lack of magic also highlights just how low-class Myne’s current circumstances are. And then, of course, there’s the matter of the “devouring”…

5. We touched on this a bit earlier: how do you think Bookworm‘s portrayal of “older girl in a young girl’s body” compares to how Abilities Average did it?

Jeskai Angel: It was fine, though I think I’d say Abilities Average handled the issue slightly better. I suspect that’s because Mile is a bit older than Myne, meaning there’s less of a gap between her physical age and the age of her past-life-memories. With the larger age gap between Myne and Urano, the blending of the two identities isn’t quite as smooth. But the story actually makes good use of the incongruities — they provide a basis for various other characters to recognize that Myne is strange, behaving oddly for a child her age or knowing things they wouldn’t have expected.

It occurs to me that Mile never really seems conflicted about her identity, easily accepting her reincarnated nature upon regaining her memories. On the other hand, Myne seems noticeably conflicted at times about whether she’s Myne or Urano. I think her behavior ultimately shows that she is truly BOTH, perhaps even more than she wants to admit. As a tangent, it’s interesting to compare these two series with Seirei Gensouki, which has yet another take on the child-awakens-memories-of-past-life plot device.

stardf29: I think the difference is that Mile wanted to leave her previous life’s identity behind, so she embraces her new identity as much as possible. On the other hand, Myne wants to basically continue living her Urano life in the new world, at least as far as reading books goes. So that factors into that greater incongruency between her two identities.

A more amusing difference I noticed was with their interest in boys. Mile had zero interest in any of the boys her age, because her higher mental age made her see them as too young. Myne, on the other hand, did seem to at least be a bit charmed by Lutz early in the book, so in her case her new body is influencing her more? This is definitely something I think about as someone with an interest in psychology, in just how much the body affects the mind, especially with these reincarnation stories.

Jeskai Angel: Myne sometimes talks as if her “original” Myne identity is something separate and gone, overwritten by the memories of her Urano days. But things like the affection she shows her family or her childish meltdowns when something goes wrong both suggest that she is truly both Myne and Urano, even though it seems like Myne herself doesn’t care to admit it.

6. One of the most notable moments in this first volume is when Myne, having experienced one too many setbacks in her book-making, almost loses the will to live, and then the “devouring” nearly actually kills her. What do you make of this moment that is practically a depiction of barely-averted suicide?

Jeskai Angel: The big thing I took away from the incident actually ties into the last question: having a total meltdown when something goes wrong seemed rather immature, childish even. It was one of the developments that helped me see that for all her Urano memories, Myne really is Myne the little girl, not just adult Urano. Another takeaway I got from this event was the degree of Myne’s devotion to books. We’ve already seen her depicted as an extreme bibliophile, but seeing her almost give up on life itself over books drives home that her love of books is actually a bit of a weakness in her character, a trait taken to such an extreme as to become a flaw. I can’t help but think Myne would do well to consider Ecclesiastes 12.12, “Of making many books there is no end, and much study is a weariness of the flesh.” It will be interesting to watch in future volumes to see if she matures in this area and finds more reasons to live. Finally, it’s ironic that Urano died from too many books, while Myne nearly dies from the lack of books.

stardf29: I remember finding that part to be rather jarring upon first reading it, like “I know Urano/Myne really likes books but is she really the sort of person who would basically kill herself if she didn’t have books?” Of course, after reading the side story about her life back on Earth, maybe she is… But as you said, this seems to be a case where Myne’s younger body/brain is influencing her. Of course, she does get over it in the end, thanks to remembering a promise she made with Lutz. Which leads into…

7. What do you make out of the relationship between Myne and Lutz so far?

Jeskai Angel: It’s a great aspect of the book (as are Myne’s other relationships). Lutz really seems to “get” Myne in a way that few others in the story do, and he’s remarkably selfless in the way he helps her. One also suspects there’s a childhood friend romance brewing, but they for now they are still young children and any overt romance seems to be well off into the future.

stardf29: Lutz interests me a lot because, while on first impression he’s the romantic interest, there’s a lot more going on with him than just being “interested” in Myne. We get to see what he wants to do, even if it is not the most practical thing to do. It gave me the feeling that Lutz is being inspired by Myne’s pursuit of her “books” despite her condition.

Meanwhile, on Myne’s side, given that he was the reason she overcame her devouring, even if only to fulfill a promise she made to him, it seems like Lutz is the start of her growing out of her selfishness and really learning to care about others. So I’m definitely interested in seeing how their relationship develops from here on out.

-----

And that… almost wraps up our discussion of the first volume of Ascendance of a Bookworm. We do have one last thing to discuss, though: our impressions of the first episode of the anime adaptation! That will be posted separately later on, so look forward to that.

As for what the Light Novel Club plans to do next: you’ll have to stay tuned next week for that announcement. It’ll be something a bit different from normal, though, so look forward to that!

In the meantime, if you read along with us this time around, go ahead and post your own answers to the above questions, or anything else about the book, in the comments!

#Light Novels #Ascendance of a Bookworm #Honzuki no Gekokujou #Honzuki no Gekokujou ~Shisho ni Naru Tame niwa Shudan o Erandeiramasen~#BtT Light Novel Club #Articles #Author: stardf29 #Author: JeskaiAngel

5 notes · View notes

tessatechaitea · 5 years

Text

Team Titans #23

Redwing must have been furious when she didn't make the Birds of Prey roster.

The good news is that I'm almost done reading all of the Team Titans comic books I own. The gooder news is that I'm almost done reading all of the New Titans comic books I own! The most goodest news of all is that I'm still alive somehow. Although that's only good news in the sense that, by being alive, I can appreciate being alive. The news that I were dead would be just fine with me as well because I wouldn't have to hear it. The good news about the bad news of my death is that none of you would hear of it either! You'd all just believe that I got bored of writing comic book reviews and went off to live on a beautiful tropic island full of kittens. After I finish reading Team Titans and New Titans, I'll have to dig out another old series to reread. I'm excited to find out what it will be! I was on Twitter earlier and was perplexed by this person's response to a Tom King tweet. If a smarter reader than me could explain what he meant, I'd truly appreciate it!

My current theories: 1. He's just a Trumpist and knows Tom King isn't a white supremacist asshole so he simply assumes this tweet is somehow mocking Trump. 2. The Tweet didn't delve inside the mind of the protagonist thus relying too much on the reader using their own mind to form conclusions of the protagonist's intent, making it a 'difficult' read. 3. The person replying probably just responds this way to all of Tom King's tweets because Batman isn't punching enough villains these days.

This issue begins with Jensen practicing some of his beat poetry.

Snap! Snap! Snap!

Audience nods smartly while puffing nonchalantly on long cigarettes.

Redwing has transformed into a woman with the head of a bird and huge talons on her hands. If any of these Team Titans had a romantic interest in her, they'd probably be thinking, "Did her anus, vagina, and urethra just merge into a cloaca?" But apparently none of them do have that kind of interest because none of them are currently throwing up the way I am after having that thought. But now I'm also thinking of Hawkman and Hawkwoman's sex talk. "Let's kiss cloacae, baby!" While everybody tries to pretend Redwing is still the same person she's always been (except grosser), Chimera reminds the Team Titans that other totally-not-monsters-just-because-they-look-like-human/animal-hybrid creatures are trying to kill them. For some reason, Redwing attacks the other Team Titans. Maybe she's just trying to get them to admit that they all think she's a monster now. If that was her plan, it works because Lapidus is all, "If you're intent on proving you're as much a monster inside as well as out, then you'll have to go through me!" Idiot! You're not supposed to say she looks like a monster to her face! You're supposed to act more like her brother Prester Jon and avoid eye contact and tugging at the inside of your shirt collar and mumbling things like, "Yikes!" At least that allows you to deny your true feelings when she confronts you about why you're acting so weird.

Me at prom.

Sometimes I completely understand that I'm reviewing comic books that never wanted me as an audience. I don't care what young person is infatuated with what other young person, or how much bullshit drama one member of the team can create for no reason at all. If I was, I would be a fan of the Legion of Super-heroes. So if I hate this comic book with such passion that I've certainly spontaneously created at least five kidney stones within me, it really shouldn't reflect on the comic book at all. I'm sure somebody cares that Killowat has a crush on Mirage but he's also a racist piece of shit. I'm sure somebody cares that Terra has littered the Troy Family Farm with stone dildos because Changeling won't fuck her. I'm sure somebody cares that Prestor Jon has an issue with his sister because she doesn't look as human as she used to (while it's okay for him to look like Stretch Armstrong). But that someone is not me. I don't think it ever was me. Half the comic books I own were purchased because of simple momentum. I bought the first issue and felt compelled to buy the second issue and, well, fuck it? Why not just keep buying them no matter how terrible they were?! I know that doesn't say anything positive about my decision making but then I've also never claimed to be good at making decisions. The fact that I read every comic book of The New 52 for six or seven years proves that! Prester Jon refers to Qurac as "hell on Earth" which Chimera has opinions on.

"Hell! What a western concept! But, I mean, you're right and I'm going to go along with that characterization so I don't even know why I pointed that out!" I didn't say she had strong opinions on it.

Chimera mentions that she last met the Team Titans in Team Titans Annual #1. Fuck! I didn't review that issue! I'm sure I own it but it might be stored with all of the Bloodlines Annuals. Well, I guess I can review it whenever I find it during my reread of all of my thousands of comic books from the last forty years!

It's true that I never expected Peter David's Aquaman but I certainly wasn't waiting for it.

Prester Jon tries to discover what caused Redwing's transformation (as well as that of the human/animal hybrids outside) while a young Quraci girl looks at Redwing and cries. I think it's supposed to be touching how the little girl can't communicate but she can feel emotions. Although it would be better if she could communicate because, for some reason, she knows the entire backstory as to how and why people became mutant animal monsters. Something about how aliens crashed in the desert and Circe saw they could be used to make human/animal hybrids but some of the aliens died in the desert and when Cheshire nuked Qurac, the aliens were atomized and everybody breathed in cremated alien space DNA. It's totally the kind of thing a little girl would know all about. Chimera shows Killowat and Terra that the Americans have come to Qurac to save the oil and not the people. That sets off Killowat's Angry Right Wing Logic Centers.

Oh? Is criticizing America's foreign policy of protecting investments considered politically correct? Although doesn't this anger and argument seem tame from a 2019 perspective?

Anybody who begins an argument with "I refuse to believe" is a person with whom I immediately stop arguing. It's a great opening tactic because I appreciate your desire to not waste my time by immediately revealing that you won't be listening to facts and evidence. Also, "I refuse to believe America would rape a country of its resources at the expense of saving the people" may as well be a declaration that you spent most of your time in history class yelling, "Nyah nyah nyah nyah! I can't hear you!" Not that America's public educational system was particularly great at exposing America's imperialistic abuse! There's definitely a reason right wing thinkers believe college educations turn people into leftists. Because it does! Leftists are just rational people who aren't viewing the world through the lens of preconceived opinions! College educations are less about broad generalizations and more about trying to put history in as much context as possible. Patriots are often as blind as people of faith. One of the conditions of being faithful is to not question your faith. It's right there in the word! So any examination of your faith is questioning that which you shouldn't question. Being a patriot is the exact same thing. If you question our government, you're against our government. There's no belief in trying to improve our government because it's an acceptance of flaws in the United States. Of course now that's simply become a way to not ever question anything a Republican does because obviously everything any Democrat does is completely wrong. It's believing in tribe over anything else. I am not a Democrat because I believe whatever the fuck every Democrat believes. Hell, I'm not even technically a Democrat! I am liberal, sure. But I don't support any idea or belief from what would be considered my tribe. And neither are a lot of liberals which is why you have trouble with Democratic voter turnout. Every Republican nominee is practically interchangeable. As long as they spout the handful of talking points important to the accepted base (2nd amendment, anti-abortion, Christian values, white supremacy...I mean states rights!), they'll do. But Democrats have the constant fight over whether a candidate will lose voters if they move left away from center while hardly ever acknowledging how many votes they'll gain as they move left. I've always said they should abandon all those assholes at the center. If you're only voting Democrat because you support their social views but don't want higher taxes maybe you're actually a Republican. Because if the Democratic party moves further left and you abandon it because of taxes to side with the gun toting fetuses who support locking up refugees on our southern border, who the fuck wants you at that party anyway?! Back to the comic book, the Team Titans speculate that the cremated alien DNA has combined with the tainted oil in Qurac and the metagenes in certain individuals to transform them into monsters. So now they've got to destroy all of America's profits by making sure the oil isn't sold all over the world. Killowat is all, "I can't believe we're going to save the world at the risk of America's profits!" I mean, he doesn't say that explicitly. But I can read between his racist and xenophobic lines.

Finally an argument that wins him over!

Look, I get being resistant to truth! Whenever I brush my teeth, I can't help thinking about the Barney song where they mime brushing with huge toothbrushes and sing, "While I'm brushing my teeth and having so much fun, I never let the water run!" And then I just let the water run! I know, I know. I'm a fucking monster! Terra and Killowat solve the problem by putting the contaminated oil back into the ground. That seems scientifically sound enough that I won't bother questioning it like a college-educated leftist. But Killowat assures Chimera that she hasn't won the argument even though her argument was simply, "Maybe you should question your government sometimes, idiot." Meanwhile the animal people attack the other Titans upstairs. The Titans can't kill them because they were once people (although I guess if they had always been sentient monster people, it would have been okay to kill them? Sometimes I'm not entirely sure of comic book superhero rules). They solve their problem by sending them into a Fairy Land via one of Chimera's portals. She was hesitant to do it earlier because she didn't know if what transformed them was catching. But now that Prester Jon somehow did science and figured out what happened, everybody agrees it's okay to banish them to a world where they'll never see their loved ones again and nobody will work out how to save them and they'll probably just turn on each other when they get hungry. Superman throwing every villain into the Phantom Zone has left a terrible example for young heroes to follow!

Oh the 90s! When every time anybody said anything, you had to wait a few seconds to see whether or not they really believed what they just said!

Later Killowat acts like a total jerk. But he acts like a different kind of total jerk than he usually acts like. So after he's done, he says, "Whoa! What just happened?! Is that shadowy person on the ground hiding behind the tree controlling me?! And who might it be?! ZERO HOUR!" Team Titans #23 Rating: B-. They sure used to pack a lot of story and words into comic books, didn't they?! And for only $1.95! That's two dollars less than the crappy comics DC puts out today that have four less pages and far less story every month! And it's three dollars less than Marvel books! No wonder Marvel is more popular. People probably look at the price and think, "Whoa! I'm getting a whole dollar more quality out of this comic book than that stupid DC comic book!" It also might help that Marvel doesn't mind having synopses of the story to help new readers or old readers whose memories aren't that great anymore. DC refuses to do the same, instead relying on the writer wasting two or three pages of actual story where characters think about what happened in the previous issue. A lot of DC books suck in collected formats!

#Team Titans #Teen Titans #DC Comics #DC #Comic Book Review

2 notes · View notes

no-longer-an-alley-cat · 5 years

Text

‘“Asexual” Isn’t Who I Am’: The Politics of Asexuality

by Matt Dawson, Susie Scott, and Liz McDonnell

Comedic commentary that might verge on insightful by me.

Join me as I try and fucking deal with this particular hangup I have

Arright, so basically these folks are reacting to other folks who say that asexuality is the fucking cats pajamas and is going to do everything from redefining relationships to destroying neoliberalism.

Basically, they’re saying that this is telling asexual people how they ought to be, and not actually looking at what it is and how asexual people actually are. In fact, they think asexual people are a very diverse bunch and you can’t make general claims about their politicalness. Which is fair.

Anyway, they’re going to look at the politics of asexual people, and they’re doing this in an interesting way where they are committed to studying the world from the participant’s perspective. This is interesting because, generally speaking, it is impossible for a researcher to entirely remove themselves from an interpretation, because they’re human, and that’s not how humans work. It’s particularly interesting if this means they’re just going to take their participant’s word as gospel, because folks have this nasty habit of lying to researchers.

So, working through past literature now.

They got a good handle on the different parts of the spectrum though, nice, nice.

And critique essentialism, all to the good.

Then they’re saying that the establishment of asexuality as legitimate relied vision of an asexual person is the ‘gold star’ asexual (yikes yikes yikes) cause that sectioned off some people who you could still intervene with, so the social dominance of sex in society is unchallenged. This negates the ‘radical potential’ of sexuality which is to suggest the FUCKING WILD NOTION that maybe it’s okay for anyone to not want sex. Like, maybe sex could just be a thing, and not a prerequisite of being normal or intimate???

Anyway, the idea that it could suggest this buck wild idea basically spawned a bunch of articles expecting asexuality to pretty much fix everything wrong with society. We’re questioning mainstream culture, we’re rethinking intimacy, we’re desexualising identity, we’re radical (in the political sense of the word) just by existing. Also just “fundamentally anarchist” because we reclaim agency over our body by not wanting to have sex? Dunno about that one, but I might be down for an A tattoo in ace colours.

But our three musketeers say these are a bunch of claims just pulled out of a collective ass, there’s not data whatsoever. Also, all that stuff talks about ‘asexuality’ like it’s some distinct entity (like how folks talk about capitalism but good) and not a thing that people have. So there’s no discussion of how other aspects of people have (race, gender, class, disability etc) interact with asexuality. And of course they do, people are people.

And they want to see some real resistance, alright? Some proper political action and mobalisation, not just thinking radically. Or, I guess, living in a way that resists norms? Or maybe that counts as taking a political position. I guess we’ll have to wait because now it’s time for METHODOLOGY.

So right off the bat we’re talking qualitative. Interviews and a diary. Data from a study originally looking at asexual identity formation and the construction of intimate relationships, but they figure they had enough to do a little article on the politics of it too. And like they said before, they’re looking at what it is that their participants think they’re doing. They call themselves out a bit, saying that maybe their participants might not know if they’re being political, but I’m gonna add in here that this interview was probably advertised as being about the asexual identity. Folks were asked if they had ‘been an activist in the asexual community or in relation to asexual issues’ sure, but it wasn’t advertised as political so they might not be getting the political peeps!

AND ANOTHER THING (cause we’re into recruitment now), you’re not going to get the people like me. The people who care Very Much about their identity, but are also Very Scared to talk about it with pretty much everyone who hasn’t unlocked like sixth tier trust. And they don’t mention this, even while they’re patting themselves on the back for how many diverse identities they got (never mind that the sample is nearly 74% white, 76% younger than 29, and 54% had a university qualification). People who have the most issues are unlikely to be fitting into those categories, either.

But fuck it, let’s get to the analysis.

How central did the participants consider asexuality to be in their lives? You’ll be fucking astounded to know that it varied!!! Amazing, right? But mainly what they’re looking at is whether folks saw asexuality as a key factor marginalising them. (This is about where I started crying last time, but I’m channeling that into anger to try and keep it together so buckle the fuck up).

Our brave trio admits that they did “””””of course””””” find evidence of discrimination against asexual people, and say that they really don’t want to downplay it, but hey, most of the people they talked to didn’t experience it! They just talked about hearing about it! Like, NO SHIT MOTHERFUCKERS! YOU TALKED TO 50 FUCKING PEOPLE WHO WANTED TO TALK TO YOU! YOU THINK YOU’RE GOING TO FIND A TREND WITH THAT?? And also let’s not downplay what it can do to a person to hear about how others like them are threatened with rape, huh? Let’s maybe think about the effect of that, huh?

Like, yes, the participants who said that it’s not as bad as the history of oppression that homosexuality has are entirely valid. But the researchers who say multiple times that they don’t want to downplay the effect of discrimination and oppression and then ignore the instances they found in favour of talking about ways it could be worse are NOT.

And then they’re saying that it’s not significant to come out, because it’s ‘a lack’ and they cite a couple of participants who say they don’t come out on a regular basis and here is where we get to crux of my problem with their methodology. Because what they’re doing is they’re taking what these participants said and they’re going, ‘oh, yup, that must be why.’ And that’s all well and good, but if some rando I barely knew asked me why I didn’t come out to all an sundry I might also say something along the lines of ‘oh, well, you know, it’s not a huge deal, it’s not something the public needs to know.’ But Reader, it is a huge deal, at least for me. I’m fucking terrified of coming out to people. People LIE. We lie all the time, we tell people what we think they want to hear, and that means that there could very well be a reason I’m reading what these people said and hearing echoes of the tired old aphobic discourse.

Not saying that is what’s going on, just raising the possibility which they have yet to do.

Yeah, yeah, see here, heteroromantic asexual talking about how they realise their privilege and can pass as straight. Sound familiar? Maybe that is their experience. Maybe it’s what they think the interview wants to be their experience. WHO’S TO SAY?

Yeah, so they conclude that maybe asexuality isn’t very central in their participant’s lives, and we get the title quote of “asexual isn’t who I am. This is just what I am, not who I am as a person.” Which is interesting, because I was just reading another article where gay men said the same thing.

But they say this quotation shows that asexual can be a description of actions one doesn’t take rather than an aspect of a person which creates marginalisation and UM WHAT? You could just as easily say that ‘this is just what I am’ shows a deeper claiming of identity, making it a physical aspect of you which could actually lead to marginalisation. Hey, maybe the context of the quote makes it clear. Don’t know, though, BECAUSE THEY DON’T GIVE ANY.

And now we’re moving on to activism, which I don’t expect to make me as angry, but we’ll see. (Editor’s note: It did.)

Yeah, so there’s more of the drawing the line between how people would like recognition of asexuality and the activism necessary for the wider LGBT community, which, again, valid. But they say that this means that the people who say this feel less need to confront forms of discrimination, when the selfsame participant they are discussing explicitly outlined a need for better education.

APPARENTLY there was no suggestion that the educatory action people engaged in linked to a wider question of social change which, I mean, sure, had you not already called yourself out on participants maybe not being politically conscious I might allow. But you did, and what’s more, I bet you didn’t even fucking ask them if they saw it as social change. And since when was education not social change? How are folks supposed to know that it’s okay not to want sex if you don’t TELL THEM THROUGH THE EDUCATION SYSTEM???

And then they have the nerve the fucking audacity to say that while it is “of course” admirable, it doesn’t show a desire to challenge a social system. EDUCATION IS A SOCIAL SYSTEM, YOU ABSOLUTE WALNUTS.

Now, online activity

This is mainly about people’s attitudes to AVEN which I don’t really know anything about, but it’s people talking about how it feels to find a label and answers, which is some much needed wholesomeness. And I feel like people’s opinions on a particular organisation or website to use for community are much more valid to take at face value. Much less interpretation going on.

LGBT groups/politics. Oh dear.

“The relations between our participants and LGBT groups were complex and multifaceted” oh, I bet they were.

Again, they found more people talking about hearing others excluded rather than seeing them excluded themselves. Kinda idea that the political standpoints might be different, but they don’t really dwell on that, they just head on through to really ram home the idea that asexual people are all different and might not hold inherently queer political perspectives.

And finally, finally, the conclusion. People are different, political literature is wrong, asexuality is not a fucking cure all. Now, they outline a couple of responses to their argument that folks might take.

One: the idea that by being asexual, people have the potential to question society. They say this takes people out of their context, and that their way of looking at human action is better.

Two: a radical politics that hopes to transcend sexual society is the best/only way for asexuality to get social acceptance, never mind what the experiences of the participants say. They don’t want to say whether this is true or not, but say that sociologists should distinguish between arguing for the things they like and arguing that those things are what a certain group should do.

And now for my own conclusion. I know I have issues. I am very ‘sensitive’ around this topic. And, just to be clear, I don’t think there’s anything intrinsically radical in being asexual, either. I think it might inspire a person to take a radical bent on life, but that’s up to an individual.

But these folks, these silly sausages, in their eagerness to disagree with everyone fell over themselves to gleefully stab each other in the foot. They took an extremely shallow look at their data, not interrogating why people might be telling them these things at all. Additionally, they clearly didn’t want to find much evidence of social activism, and one can’t help but wonder if that is why their definition was so crushingly tight that it didn’t.

They got to an answer I agree with, but boy howdy did they make a mess doing it.

#i'm gonna have to write a proper review on this #i sunk so much time in

1 note · View note

blacksatpwis · 6 years

Text

How I Decolonized my Own Education

My choice to attend a PWI in the midwest meant that I had to come to terms with the fact that my education would not automatically include the stories of people like me. I found myself learning history and literature that my cultural experience was on the margins of. If we were discussing the African American experience or anything that pertained to it, it was minimal unless the class was EXPLICITLY ABOUT RACE or culture. Whenever an issue of race came up in classes, there was a strained silence. Dozens of eyes darting around the room but somehow failing to make contact with mine. No one wants to be “that guy” who always talks about race. Myself included.

However, when I decided to try to make everything I consumed relevant to my cultural experience, to be “that guy,” I felt myself open up. Not every class I took necessarily lends itself well to bringing in cultural experiences from the margins, but it is possible if you try hard enough. One of my challenges was a British Literature class I took a few semesters ago. While the class piqued the part of my brain that lights up when I get to analyze stories and poetry, the part of my brain that yearned to learn of my people shriveled in the lines of Chaucer and Virginia Woolf. I felt like I was taking that class simply because I had to. I little genuine connection to the content.

The chance to learn more about people who look like me came from an unlikely source. A speech from Queen Elizabeth I, in which she mention the expulsion of Moors from England. I used that speech to learn more about the Black population of England during that time, and what they went through. It was a way to complete an assignment and also feed my hunger for cultural knowledge that was relevant to my own experience.

Using every possible chance to include my own experience is one of the only reasons I can say that I have been successful in my journey through this PWI. Not many professors are intentionally and thoughtfully inclusive of other cultures, so I had to take my education for myself. I encourage any Person of Color attending a PWI, especially Black people, to take your education for yourself. Include yourself in your own quest for knowledge.

CENTER YOURSELF. No one will necessarily be as concerned about your inclusivity as you are. My experience has been so much more fulfilling and rich ever since I started forcing my experience to the center of my own reality. I am not necessarily saying make everything about race, but look at things through your unique lens as a Black person, and see how your class content can relate to your lived experience, and the experiences of your ancestors. Many of our white classmates relate EVERYTHING they learn to some aspect of their life. We should be doing the same, and if the content is not relevant to us, we should push ourselves to the center. While this may be a little easier at my private liberal arts college, I urge those of you who attend other institutions to give it a try.

Center yourself and watch your relationship with your education blossom.

#BlacksatPWIs decolonizeyoureducation PWI education

5 notes · View notes

maswartz · 6 years

Link

“

Last fall, a fellow disability activist and close friend of mine introduced me to Bernie Sanders. From the moment I first heard his platform, I was hooked. After living abroad several years in a country with socialized medicine and heavily subsidized education, I was thrilled an American politician was proposing these policies here. Due to my own disabilities, the cost of healthcare has become exorbitant and becoming chronically ill forced me to leave my career in public service litigation to collect meager social security benefits. So, Bernie’s message resonated strongly with my own personal experience of being in the 99%.

I was so moved by his message that I began volunteering for the campaign, be it through phonebanking, texting or simply bringing his message to everyone I knew. I believed so strongly in the change he could effect that I even donated more money than I could otherwise afford to help his campaign succeed. And I quickly became part of the Bernie or Bust movement, believing his campaign’s message that Clinton didn’t care about anyone other than her special interest donors.

____________________________________________________________

But I often struggled with his rhetoric on and lack of inclusion for people with disabilities in his stump speeches, acceptance speeches, debate performances, advertisements and campaign literature. Despite discussing issues that affect our daily lives like healthcare, income inequality, social security and criminal justice, he almost never mentioned the disabled population, which makes up 20% of the American electorate. He harped daily on how the Donald Trumps of the world try to divide us up based on our minority status but never even included disability as one of those dividing factors.

Meanwhile, I became more frustrated because Hillary Clinton was including us in every speech, ad campaign, debate performance and even intersectionality graphics of disabled people of color in her literature. She issued press releases supporting the Disability Integration Act, which requires Obamacare plans to cover long-term care for people with disabilities, and talked about sub-minimum wage, a construct by which employers can legally pay the disabled less than minimum wage. Bernie either never did this or lagged behind, as if he was only doing it because Hillary was. I sincerely felt as though Hillary was just paying lip service to us and that Bernie was simply uninformed.

So I began contacting the campaign as early as the fall to advise them on their disability outreach failures, as well as to communicate grave concerns the community was having with some on his policies. I tried every possible method of communication from emailing the campaign through the website and contacting them through social media, to direct emails and text messages to top political directors, including Jeff Weaver, BEGGING them to respond. I also discovered that I was not the only disability activist experiencing this very frustration with the campaign.

_____________________________________________________________

After weeks of being ignored, the day after the New York elections, I sent one final message to the campaign saying that I was going to withdraw my support and advise the community to do the same if they didn’t care enough to even respond to our pleas for representation. Finally, his political director, Billy Gendell, a non-disabled male, responded by scheduling a phone call with me. I was finally hopeful once again, but what came next was personally devastating. I began the conversation about the issues the community is having with his lack of rhetoric and lack of inclusion for people with disabilities, as I delineated in my emails. I sincerely wanted to help the campaign improve.

However, he quickly interrupted me from giving them advice, despite knowing my credentials and insisted that I get to my policy questions. But he asked that the answers remain “off-the-record” so that I could not share them with the community that was asking them. His answers provided no new information or specific methods by which to initiate these broad ideas. The only policy answer that wasn’t “off the record” was Bernie’s official statement on the opioid issue, sent to me via email. It said that chronic pain sufferers should seek yoga or guided meditation to ease our suffering.

I was shocked. These recommendations are ones given to chronic pain sufferers by uneducated individuals with zero medical understanding of pain and the neurological system. I immediately responded back to his email that he cannot expect an amputee with phantom pain to do yoga when in such dire pain that it causes his heart rate to soar and his blood pressure to plummet. I told him that it’s insulting to even insinuate such a thing. But, as, unfortunately, I expected, he never even replied, and I simply gave up trying to reach out.

____________________________________________________________

Meanwhile, none of his policies for people with disabilities changed, and he made little to no effort to include us in his speeches, other than to occasionally discuss all disabled people in the context of social security, rather than his typical inclusion of only disabled veterans, as if only they matter because they became disabled at war. (And I gave him credit on facebook for doing this once at the Washington square speech and emailed the campaign to thank them for it, which went unanswered) But he continued to fail to mention or depict us in any of his speeches or ads.

The feeling of devastating disappointment and betrayal sank in. The thought of considering Clinton felt hypocritical of me. I told myself, “How can I support someone who probably cares more about Wall Street than me?” But I certainly couldn’t consider Donald Trump, who mocks disabled people and assumes we’re stupid enough to think that’s not what he was doing. So, begrudgingly, I told a Hillary supporter with a disability that I was now considering supporting Hillary. He immediately introduced me via email to a blind Clinton staffer. Within literally minutes, she emailed me at 9 p.m. saying she would like to speak to me about the campaign. I was so encouraged by how quickly they responded, after the months I was ignored by Bernie.

She didn’t treat me like a nuisance like the Bernie campaign did but rather an asset. She wanted to know my legal and advocacy opinion on disability policy. She explained in detail how Hillary planned to initiate change for us with sophisticated, legal political strategy. And, then she asked me to come on board and help the campaign best meet the needs of the disability community through, inter alia, writing for the campaign after they were able to officially vet my credentials. (Which has not yet occurred, and I, in no way, am writing this on behalf of the campaign) I soon realized that the Clinton campaign didn’t just care about the disability community; they hired us and treated us like the intelligent people we are.

_____________________________________________________________

My conversation with the Clinton campaign regained my hopefulness but also made me incensed that Bernie is maliciously lying to democrats about Clinton’s uncaring regard for the 99%, while destroying the party from within. Bernie is adamant that Hillary only cares about corporate interests and not the typical marginalized American. But, in fact, the opposite is true. If he cared about his supporters’ interests, his campaign would respond to these communities, listen to their issues and modify his platform accordingly.

His speeches never change for a reason. It isn’t because, as his supporters allege, he’s authentic and always on the right side of things. It’s because he doesn’t care to adapt, to research issues other than income inequality and the environment, follow up on his lofty ideas with solid policy initiatives or to make any compromises to achieve his goals. Rather, he just plays the blame game, pointing out everything that’s wrong with this country and proposing no specific plans to achieve his goals. He prides himself on being so honest and trustworthy while lying to the electorate about his concern for our well being and Hillary’s lack thereof. In reality, I see now that he doesn’t care about anyone’s well being but his own ability to rise to power.

What’s worse is that he is riling up his base to believe that the system is rigged, corrupt and rife with election fraud, based on theories grounded in conspiracy rather than fact. He’s excusing their violence and death threats on constituents’ frustration, rather than explicitly denouncing such vile behavior. The superdelegates are voting for Hillary, and some are starting to shift support from Bernie to Hillary, which I suspect will continue to occur, because they are experienced policy makers who recognize that Bernie has proposed no actual comprehensive policies to achieve his goals. They realize that, in the year he’s been running for President, he hasn’t created one single concrete plan. Superdelegates are in place to prevent dangerous politicians, like Trump, from achieving power when they don’t have the capabilities to effectively use that power and, thus, make things much worse in the end.

Coming to terms with these realizations was very difficult for me. I literally grieved and cried when I discovered that I had been so maliciously misled by someone I believed to possess such a high moral compass. I recognize that his supporters are frustrated and angry over income inequality, because I am too. But I plea with his supporters to wake up to HIS fraud and ask yourselves why he answers every question on every topic, from ISIL to our broken public school systems, with concepts of income inequality. It’s not because that issue is the root of all things wrong with our country but because he doesn’t care to research and be advised on any other issues, despite having the time and resources to do so.

Those of you who are Bernie or Bust, like I was, please, I beg of you, consider my personal experience. Google me. Find me on Facebook and Twitter. See for yourselves that I was Bernie or Bust, that I’m not some Wall Street attorney rolling in money. I am a disabled woman, struggling to make ends meet and to pay my medical bills. But I now recognize that Clinton is the only candidate willing to make the effort to effect the change we need. We cannot afford Trump or Bernie in the White House. They will only be given enough power to destroy what fragment of the American Dream we have left.

(For those who seem hell-bent on believing that my having lived in Israel somehow makes me biased: Bernie also lived there, I dislike the right-wing government there, and I continued my support for him after he criticized Israel in NY)

@barker_ariella

Ariella Barker, Esq.

Ariella has a BBA and JD from Emory University. For many years, she represented the City of NY and Mayor Michael Bloomberg in employment discrimination and labor law claims. She currently sits on the Council for Disability Rights for the Mayor’s Office of the City of Mooresville, NC and works as a disability advocate since being crowned Ms. Wheelchair NC 2014.

“

#bernie sanders

4 notes · View notes

markscherz · 7 years

Note

Any tips for anyone who wants to be a herpetologist?

Okay so it turns out I get rather a lot of asks on this particular question, and rather than answer them all individually, I thought it would be sensible to compile numerous ones I have received in the last year or so into a single long post on the basics:

What you need to know if you want to be a herpetologist

Before I get into it, let me explain my credentials for those who are interested. @amandaderrick92 asked specifically where I did my degree: I did my Bachelor’s degree in Zoology (Hons.) at the University of Edinburgh, Scotland, and then my Master’s degree in Ecology, Evolution and Systematics at the Ludwig-Maximilian University of Munich (LMU), Germany. I am now studying for a PhD at the LMU, in partnership with the Zoologische Staatssammlung München and Technische Universität Braunschweig. So I guess I am more or less qualified to talk about this, though I would point out at this early phase in my career that I am by no means the expert standard example person—I encourage you to ask other herpetologists about their background as well. Twitter is fucking full of them, and most will be only too eager to share how they got into it and how you can, too.

Herpetologist is an umbrella term

First off, I want to make it clear that to be a herpetologist, per se, says little of the professional day-to-day career of a person. Herpetologists may be involved in a wide variety of fields, from pure academia (Herpetology sensu stricto), to applied research, to bioengineering, to veterinary work, to zoo-keeping, to animal breeding, to ranger work, to pest control, to conservation work… the list goes on. In this post I will refer mostly to herpetology sensu stricto, that is, the study of reptiles and amphibians, which is largely an academic pursuit. One of the anonymous askers above mentioned a desire to avoid veterinary work—this is almost a guarantee unless you decide to undergo the arduous training to become a vet. Yet, I want to make it clear also that it is possible to be a herpetologist and not necessarily be an academic, as I know that the prospect of academia can be frightening to downright off-putting to some.

How necessary is an MSc or PhD?

This brings us nicely to the issue of whether graduate level education is necessary to be a herpetologist. The answer is mixed, because, as I have just explained, herpetology, in the broad sense, is so varied and diverse. You can consider yourself a herpetologist even if you just do it in your spare time (I know a policeman who describes new species of snakes for fun). But for Herpetology sensu stricto as given above, generally I would say that at the very least an MSc will be required. The reason for this you will find below, but to summarise it, it is because your education by the end of your BSc is unlikely to have had much to do with herpetology, but rather will be general zoology. Focus on herpetological studies will have to come later.

It is important at this point already to note that the term herpetologist is in fact an umbrella term even in the strict sense. Many herpetologists study epidemiology, conservation science, invasive species biology, behavioural ecology, taxonomy, evolutionary biology and speciation, biomechanics, histology, etc. It is a science without an explicit angle of study, similar to ornithology and other organismal -ologies. So if there is a specific thing you are interested in about reptiles and amphibians, you are really most likely going to wind up pursuing that, and not herpetology per se, in your academic pursuits. But more on that below.

I’m in highschool and think I want to be a herpetologist when I’m older… what can I do to make that happen?

I think about this kind of question remarkably often. Well, actually, I think of things that I could have done better in my own childhood that would have made my life easier today. Here are a few pearls of wisdom I have gleaned from this introspection:

• Buy and read a textbook on the topic of herpetology. This is something I never did (I have never owned a herpetology textbook, let alone tried to read one), and I regret it at least once a week. There are huge chunks of knowledge missing from what a herpetologist is expected to know simply because I never took the time when I was younger to sit down and read the book. Sure, I skimmed herpetological books all the time, but I never really internalised them. I cannot identify larval stages of tadpoles. I don’t know the first thing about the actual metabolism of reptiles. I only learned this year how a frog’s vocal apparatus actually makes sounds. Learning all this stuff too late in your career is possible, but a pain in the ass, so try to get it out of the way as soon as possible.

• If you like frogs, buy Duellman & Trueb 1986 Biology of Amphibians. It is unmatched.

• Learn to identify your local herpetofauna. Chances are, some exist. Go find them. And do so with a buddy. Herping is always best done with companionship, especially if you live in an area where dangerous snakes are common (read: most of the world except Europe, New Zealand, and Madagascar).

• Join your local herpetological society. In the United States, the umbrella society are the Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles (SSAR), the Herpetologists League, and the American Society of Ichthyologists and Herpetologists. In the UK it is various branches of the Amphibian and Reptile Group (ARGs). In Germany and Switzerland it is the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Herpetologie und Terrarienkunde (DGHT). These societies are always full of enthusiastic people, many of whom are fully fledged herpetologists, and showing your own interest will most likely be greeted with encouragement.

• Get into the right area of study. Choosing what to study in college is intimidating, especially when you don’t quite know if you want to choose between something about which you are passionate, versus something that will keep bread on the table. It’s romantic to think that everyone can eventually find a way to make money doing the thing they love, but unfortunately, it is not always true. Choose your undergraduate education in a way that you find will suit you and keep you happy in the long run. But now I’ve said my part on that, let me get into the nitty-gritty of what you actually need to study to become a herpetologist:

Where and what to study to become a herpetologist

Globally, there are numerous institutes where you can study to become a herpetologist, even if they do not explicitly say so on their curriculum websites. To accommodate the relatively broad global readership of this tumblr, I will try to keep this as general as possible:

The most important thing to think about is the ‘subject’ of study. To make headway into herpetology, you should direct your studies toward organismal or evolutionary biology. Possible ‘subjects’ as advertised by universities might be ‘Biology,’ ‘Evolutionary Biology,’ ‘Zoology,’ ‘Environmental Sciences,’ and very very rarely ‘Herpetology’. Most programmes will not allow you to specialise explicitly on herpetology until your Master’s degree, and even then not really explicitly. However, you should know that you can and should tailor your Bachelor’s experience to your own interests, regardless of its official title. Though my degree in Edinburgh was in ‘Zoology,’ I was able to focus mostly on reptiles and amphibians and evolutionary biology!

Despite the broad readership cited above, I wanted to draw your attention in particular to just a few universities worldwide that are renowned for their zoological undergraduate programmes, or herpetological research (note that this list only includes institutes that offer tuition in English, hence the rather narrow geographical sampling):

• The University of Edinburgh—I have to list my alma mater here for pride reasons, but I do so also because I think that my zoological education was incredibly rounded as a result of doing my Bachelor’s degree in Edinburgh. They have two appropriate courses, in Zoology and in Evolutionary Biology, and you can choose between them at the end of your second year.

• Kansas University, Lawrence, Kansas USA—Kansas has a famed herpetological history, and currently is home to some great minds in herpetology, including John Wiens and Linda Trueb.

• Villanova University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania USA—I highlight this university solely because of Aaron Bauer’s lab, which focusses on geckos. They do some really great research. This group is particularly good for Master’s work.

• Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts USA—Home of the Losos lab, probably the most famous group working on evolutionary questions with herpetological systems in the world.

• Bangor University, Bangor, Wales—This is one of the only institutes in the world that offers a bachelor’s degree in Herpetology (or ‘Zoology with Herpetology’). I have heard good things about the programme, and know a few graduates of it, but would not consider this a guarantee that it is better than other universities that only offer Zoology courses.

• University of Syndey, Sydney, New South Wales Australia—Home to the Shine lab, Syndey is apparently quite a good place to start off as a herpetologist. Plus, the reptiles in particular of Australia are really incredibly diverse and a great system for evolutionary and ecological studies.

• University of Manchester, Manchester, England—In terms of research and education, Manchester is a great university, ranked among the top in the UK. For herpetological interest, there is connection to The Manchester Museum, where a group works on frogs, focussed mostly on conservation biology.

(Für Deutschsprachige Studenten/-innen, würde ich Humboldt Universität Berlin, Ludwig-Maximilian Universität München, Technische Universität Braunschweig und Universität Trier empfehlen, obwohl viele anderen bestimmt auch super sind!)

So what do I need to get into a relevant course at a university/college?

To quash the questions before they come: prerequisites for the study of the above-mentioned courses in these institutes will almost certainly be advanced high-school level qualifications in biology and chemistry, and I can imagine that many would demand a tolerable mathematics grade as well. English language courses in high-school will not hurt in the least, especially as most work in academia is centred around writing and reading extensively in English.

Tips for non-speaking and non-vet work

As I have mentioned above, avoiding veterinary work is easy as long as you opt not to do it, but avoiding public speaking is actually fairly difficult. You see, although 99.9% of herpetological research is conducted in labs or in the field or whatever, occasionally it will be expected that you attend conferences, and there you will eventually be asked to give a talk, even if you do not volunteer yourself. Far more concerning I imagine is the fact that most academic careers require some degree of teaching. This is indeed something that is difficult to avoid if you do wish to stay in academia, but can be easily avoided with other herpetological career paths.

Also, it should be noted by the American readers that the teaching obligation of graduate students outside the US is considerably lower than in the US, so it becomes practically optional until you are looking for a position as a post-doc or even professor somewhere! Case in point: I am trying my hardest to find an opportunity to teach, but so far it looks like it will still be months before such an opportunity presents itself.

General tips for someone who wants to be a herpetologist

• Networking is your friend. If you can, meet local people who have similar interests. Go to conferences and meet people from across the world who are interested in similar questions or animals to you, and start big conversations with them. Nowadays, it is possible to work on the most incredible collaborative projects, and it is smart to take advantage of those opportunities!

• Shocking though it may seem, there is no minimum age limit on conference attendance! If you find that there is a herpetological conference happening near you, sign up to go! I have been at conferences where there were 14 year-old students present, and they asked some great questions of the speakers! But beware at that age that there may be a lot of topics that the education system is not designed to teach you until college, so a lot may be difficult to comprehend!

• Read as much literature as you can handle. Textbooks are great for basic knowledge, but when you get to a problem or animal you want to understand better, turn to the primary literature! Reading papers is not especially hard once you grasp the jargon, but getting hold of them can be. Join ResearchGate to get access to a lot of literature, and what you cannot get access to, you may find other ways to access…

• Learn to handle reptiles and amphibians. Do so with non-dangerous things, and with care and respect for the animals, ideally with the supervision of a more experienced person. This is really crucial for later work, and I always am exasperated by young students who clearly have never held a snake before but can identify dozens of them.

• Try to keep abreast of at least the major changes in taxonomy and understanding of the origins of reptiles and amphibians.

• Wrap your mind around the fact that birds are reptiles, crocodiles are more closely related to them than they are to squamates, and tuataras are not lizards, but snakes are.

• Learn the word squamate, and try to use it and other technical terms in favour of more layman, less accurate terms.

• Try to get a general impression for the families or at least orders of reptiles and amphibians. Don’t get into the embarrassing situation that you have never heard of gymnophiones or various obscure lizard groups. While depth of knowledge on one or two groups is almost inevitable, do not forget to try to glean holistic insights.

• Realise how often some evolutionary transitions happen, and what that might mean. Frogs repeatedly converging on the same niches. Lizards losing their limbs literally hundreds of times, from cordylids to geckos to anguids to skinks. Geckos re-evolving their adhesive toe pads repeatedly.

• Try to read primary literature as it comes out, but know that at the early stages of your education, an understanding of what has come before is arguably more important than an understanding of what is going on now. Hence, read your textbooks!

And that is all of my advice for now. I am sure there are things I have forgotten, and I would be happy to expand this in the future—please let me know if there are any specific areas in which I can offer further help in urging you toward your herpetological career. And good luck!

91 notes · View notes