DTulpa
1yr ago
The Pandora Radio option is there mostly for car trips with other people. I'm not really a George Michael or Prince fan and wouldn't acquire their albums. But 80s pop hits are the best pop hits, and they're definitely more palatable to others than, say, Autechre. I don't mind firing and forgetting a playlist there as long as we're having a good time.
I think what made me pull the trigger years ago on setting up my own media server and foregoing streaming was deciding one Thursday that I was going to watch David Lynch's 'The Elephant Man' that coming weekend. I saw it on Prime, noted its availability, played a little bit just to have it at the top of the queue, and made the plan. Friday night rolls around and it's gone; 'Unavailable in your region'.
15 minutes may seem like a lot to some folks these days. But that's all the time it took to download a blu-ray rip, fire it away, and put this nonsense behind me.
DTulpa
1yr ago
I remember reading that Hemsworth was tapped for a US adaptation of The Raid films. I didn't think it would work because American fight choreography wouldn't capture the appeal of silat.
Suddenly I'm watching a prison fight in Extraction 2 that feels very similar to Raid 2's. And it works! Sure, the protagonist has merc gear and guns, and it dodges direct comparisons to the Indonesian films since it's not an adaptation. But without knowing anything about Extraction's production history, it feels like vestiges of the old pitch made their way in.
DTulpa
2yr ago
I have no idea who Pence or Biden may have exposed their documents to while they were sitting in their garages. So maybe indict them any way well after the fact.
Force should be applied along a continuum until compliance (or 'persuasion' if you prefer!) is achieved. We can start with explicit Dead 45 comments made after July 13th. If nobody's feeling interested in setting down bipartisan protections after that, then the ratcheting should continue until it is desirable. And if that day never comes, then seeking complete dominance gets put on the table. Everybody here is familiar with the "your rules/my rules/fairly" orders of preference, and I'm trying to be clear about mine. Concerns regarding how successful this can be are valid, but don't dissuade me from thinking its worth attempting. "You can't make an omelet without breaking some eggs" is also a villain line in movies, but it has been more true through history than not if we're honest.
Previous intra-left cancelations have had more to do with failing to meet purity standards or not being up to speed with the most current lingo of the day. I think what's different after the Trump shooting is that they are now being visited by something outside of their wheelhouse, and it is making some of them crap themselves. Nobody in Dem-ville had to worry about lazily wishing for Trump to be assassinated (couched in cutesy Harry Potter metaphors, or trans-themed guillotine memes from the 'Love is Love' Facebook group) up until last week. My read isn't that Gass and HD lady are being punished because their peers or employers are truly offended by them, but because they are are afraid of what may be coming if they don't start heading this off now - especially since it looks like we will be getting an energized Trump admin with a popular mandate pretty soon. That fear should be exploited to get concessions or at least a table-meet.
You're right that some of this has already been churning in social media, but I think it's really only been on Twitter, and that is a direct result of one man being in the right place at the right time. Reddit got worse with each passing year, and only now may be internally wondering what their path beyond 2024 should be. It's incumbent upon conservatives to start flooding this space with their own heuristics and impacting the Overton window now, and that unfortunately is going to involve street scraps and some old ladies getting knocked over. I guess we could hold fire and wait on some high-minded technocratic solutions from Musk and his peers to shake out from top-down. Or he could be bankrupted or assasinated by next week, get replaced by somebody who's happy to revert to status quo circa 2020, and the opportunity to build some momentum on a grass-roots level will have been completely whiffed on.
I'm not sure it's insufficient. Rolling over and playing nice certainly would be. Time will tell.
I stated my justifications and where I hope they end up, and you seem to think I actually don't believe them. Despite me having just written them out for you. Fine.
Sure. I guess. In the same way that a schizo may 'support' stabbing his roommate because they're trying to steal his precious bodily fluids or put chips in his brain. Makes sense from his individual perspective. Of course, this perspective has consequences meted out by other parties (disconnection, imprisonment, execution).
They should support his murder based on their premises. I have my own premises as well, and some disorganized thoughts on what should be done to them in turn.
DTulpa
1yr ago
Understandable, and a fair enough play. Despite my last post, I'd probably do the same.
One does lament, though.
DTulpa
1yr ago
Yeah, this all intuitively rolled into my mind after the incident. Not shocking in any revelatory sense; more a "this how things really be" reminder/wake-up from the artificial, socialized script everybody's trained to have - particularly in a corporate environment.
DTulpa
9d ago
I definitely know a few hard leftists/socialists who were quick to go cold on him as well. But in general Dem normie-sphere, he was a gold standard POTUS who reigned without controversy, and his photos were posted wistfully in the Age of Trump.
I sense that too has been fading, though. Although I think that's more due to aging out of relevancy than a reappraisal of the man and his admin.
You could say they're not the real Left, but they're the one that matters.
And as a big Obama supporter for both his terms... yeah, there was a 'culty' (generously described as enamored) vibe going on. Even the Daily Show poked fun at this, with John Oliver even going to the DNC in 08 and getting little more than 'Obama will fix everything' from the crowd attendees.
Two straight men can play 'gay chicken', even while being fully aware of each others hetero credentials. It's still called 'gay chicken' for a reason.
That's the lab environment. Most straight men have little patience for 'gay behavior' sprung on them in the wild, even from a friend. I feel quite sure this is something innate albeit socially mediated depending on culture and/or subculture.
DTulpa
10mo ago
It was just too fucking perfect that it was preceded by another kind of Real ID controversy. Gaming is nothing if not ahead of the curve!
DTulpa
1yr ago
I had a hazy memory of the beginning of that film for decades since watching it with my dad in the early 90s. Stuck with me for years, and only recently was I able to find out the name of it.
Remember absolutely nothing else, so you're probably that right that the rest was meh.
If Justin is Castro's son, and he with the Canadian government vociferously deny it, then who is sewing seeds of low trust.
DTulpa
1yr ago
Then I think your nose will serve you right here. I know here in TheMotte we've had people praising the writing and also those unimpressed by it, and the latter consistently brings up zaniness and the 'it's a fun romp' vibe as criticisms. And regardless of writing quality, everybody pretty much agrees this is a Larian game with a BG skin, not a proper continuation. The horniness of the companions alone makes it feel juvenile to me.
Outside of a dabble or two, I don't table-top. But my understanding is that Critical Role played a big part in reviving DnD in the age of streaming and Let's Plays. I went to a DnD birthday party years ago for a girl who had no awareness of any of the rules or anything, but wanted a game held because the show looked so fun. She was very confused when we explained to her that she had already wasted all her spells in the first combat encounter, when all she really wanted to do was girlboss a mage.
That night was fun, don't get me wrong. But I felt like I got a decent insight into the kind of person CR was appealing to: people who like the drama, the self-expression, and the costumes of table-top, but are quickly in over their heads when they have to roll for crit or w/e. So they just watch others do it.
I'll admit to not seeing it outside the occasional clip, so maybe you'd like to put an asterisk there! But it's not my cup of tea from the outset. I liked it at the time, but I'm over Rick & Morty zaniness and yelling and have been for a while. I've also become very picky about animation in general, and the 'popular default' look of the show kills my interest.
I think there was also a cartoon/live-action crossover with SNW? Ehh... It has this obsession with winking self-reference that undercuts the whole thing for me.
I think a lot of these attempts to course-correct after DIS and PIC are just doing the obvious "make it more positive and fun!" pivot, but still not understanding that the appeal is more than that? That's all well and good, but what I miss the most is the professionalism and maturity. This is one of my favorite scenes from TNG, because I think it encapsulates the thoughtfulness and quiet dignity that Trek embodies to me when at its best. Two fully grown adults have a legitimate disagreement, they talk through it diplomatically, when it's resolved you know they're both fully back on the same team, and it's over within 3 minutes instead of dragged out for the whole episode (or a season, god forbid). I try to think how a modern writer would play this out and all the excessive drama or sentimentality they'd load it with.
I was in that trench, too. I don't share your view of that period. Plenty of Christians condemned WBC, and this was casually disregarded as inauthentic or meaningless because we perceived very little daylight between WBC's stance on homosexuality versus Christianity on the whole. "WBC is disgusting, but at least they're honest" was the kind of thing you'd read (or write yourself) in a lot of those spaces.
Worth remembering that WBC was paid attention to primarily for its protesting of soldiers' funerals - an act that I'm sure you can easily imagine pisses off people of with all sorts of different politics and faiths, including Christians who were against gay marriage! The image of some Jesus-loving Good Ol' Boy passively accepting Phelps and co picketing his dead son's funeral is a bit hard to swallow.
And since we're comparing notes on history - I don't know why anybody should go hunting for the unicorns of consensus-bucking trans spaces when a lot of us here have spent the last 10 years watching their political movement steamroll nearly every forum and platform we used to be part of, and got to see first-hand how these spaces got captured, converted, and degraded. I am not lacking examples of what I see as the default MO of trans and trans-supportive spaces. If somebody wants to show me a trans space that goes against a lot of the current progressive orthodoxies, I'll happily peek at it. But then we will be clear that the thing making their lives harder isn't right-wing bigotry, but a prog-aligned media that doesn't consider them worthy of attention. I think you have a good point that perhaps they are reluctant to criticize their messengers out of fear that it may result in wave of Red Traditionalism crashing over them after tampering with the barricades. But I think if you're already subscribing to that dynamic on anything, it's too late. You're practically a foot soldier, whether you're enthusiastic about it or not.
DTulpa
1yr ago
And most people would probably be with you in punishing J6ers if the previous consensus on violence hadn't been utterly thrashed by progressives and fellow sympathizers. So yeah, they're not judged as harshly because the standards changed. We weren't aware they had changed, but media consensus dictatated otherwise. And this is somehow incomprehensibly alien to you? Come now. That's a pose.
So you would be willing to throw the book at J6ers because you feel they objectively warranted it. Congratulations; now what? I am more interested in fair treatment than I am justice as a terminal goal, because I think that's the superior algorithm for a host of reasons. So what if I think J6 qualified as violent by some technical metrics? So does play-shoving a friend, and I'm not going to entertain anybody calling that violent just because Webster says so.
So if BLM wasn't violent, then neither was J6. As I said before, this is indeed partly cynical. But is also deadly serious. I refuse to call J6 violent because of the valence of that word, much in the same way I don't consider assimilation to be cultural erasure, that taxation is theft, or that the Israeli treatment of Palestinians is ethnic cleansing, even though any of those could be considered technically true. This isnt being cryptic, or hiding behind a mask. Why do you assume this some deliberate, self-inflicted partisan error?
No impugnation intended on my end either. I don't blame any of them for ditching cubicle life, and I have moments of almost immaturely wishing I could get pregnant, if only to have a readily-accepted excuse to escape its doldrums. The women who left are displaying perfect sanity, and I don't think it reflects badly on any of their work ethics for the reason you point out.
My last paragraph was mostly included as an interesting anecdote because of how much it struck me coming from a woman's mouth. It's the kind of comment that is typically pattern matched to a certain male 'MRA' type that certainly exists online, but I've never heard uttered in the real world. I'm sure some men think it but have the sense to never vocalize it. But when I do hear something that cutting and uninhibited, it is nearly always from women directed at other women. An interesting dynamic with probably other observable parallels, but another topic.
On your 2nd point - did they really?
If the marine restraining Neely was in the wrong and jumped the gun, intervening on Neely's behalf would have made it less likely that he dies. Instead, they enabled the marine.
I'm very much on the side of the marine and the men who assisted, but you cannot so neatly excuse the 'extras' from culpability if you see Neely's death as a grave injustice. If you're going to be pissed at the marine, you should be pissed at the others.
Saying "Actually, the other two men could have potentially saved Neely's life by helping restraining him" is a disingenuous redirection from the obvious racial dynamics at play. That may have pull with you, but I'm betting most people who are even aware of the incident don't even know there were others involved.
We could investigate the reasons behind that state of affairs as well, but the answers will also lie in that general direction.
DTulpa
2yr ago
That certainly seems to be the takeaway I'm left with, given how progs have boxed in these arguments. And I don't think they appreciate how psychically destructive it is. Like everything you were taught from your childhood upbringing to adulthood was actually just total bullshit, and we all decided this last year.
This is the kind of thing that annihilates any and all integrity of your political project, AFAIC. gj
Both of those bullet points are completely compatible with reducing cop presence. Or if not presence, cop interactions - to diminish the overall surface area where police and black Americans interface with each other. The second point in particular gestures towards this.
More options
Context Copy link