@Tanista's banner p

Tanista


				

				

				
4 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 05 11:38:24 UTC

				

User ID: 537

Tanista


				
				
				

				
4 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 05 11:38:24 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 537

Not a bad idea...under a Trump presidency. It looks like Biden might lose but it actually hasn't happened yet and he's clearly feeling pressure.

It is not a coincidence that the Jewish foundational myth entails their presence as a fifth column in a host civilization, within which an influential and trusted political figure spread plagues throughout the land- including the ritualistic murder of the firstborn sons of the gentiles by the Jewish tribal god Yahweh, culminating in a slave revolt followed by their ultimate expulsion from their host nation.

Leaving out a lot of context why the Golden Age of Egyptian Jews fell apart here.

The problem for the Tates is the set of scams they were running before they hit the jackpot. All of this is blowback from their alleged pimping days that their newfound fame as the internet's red pill gurus cast a light on.

I think Dr. K will be fine.

It’s clear that wokeness isn’t the cause of bad game writing. The very suggestion is ridiculous.

Obviously. This still doesn't really say anything.

I agree that Dragon Ball Z is badly written in many ways. The bloat is infamous, the way it handles succession to new characters (it doesn't) is bad, the plot is built on a loop of new transformations that boil down to differently colored hair and so on. These are all recognized flaws. So recognized that they literally invented their own Abridged series to handle the bloat. They charged people twice to get a passable viewing experience! And the fans bought in anyway. They know what they're getting.

Handing it over to woke American show runners would lead to a very different sort of bad.

Which is what fans care about.

Andrew Tate isn't that.

Of course not. Thing is that they (and OP) accept that he is a role model, but even his non-exaggerated history isn't something most men are actually going to replicate. Most guys aren't becoming even passable kickboxers, though they might let one sell them NFTs. So why do their rival idols need to be "relatable"?

It reminds me of the complaints that skinny stars reinforce "unrealistic beauty standards" . There were local role models in my life who were reachable I suppose. I don't recall any kid being turned off from their favorite celebrity because they were on a totally different plane. That's kind of the point?

Leftists want to change society and select for people interested in that. It's thus harder to depend on existing role models.

Feminism's defenders will counter that there are many existing role models available for men, often listing real or fictional people like Ryan Gosling, Marcus Rashford or Ted Lasso. These men are either fake orliteral one percenters whose lifestyle an average young man has no hope of to attaining.

"Unrealistic standards" is a feminist complaint. Most men will never be like Tate either. Every kid on the football pitch wanted to be Ronaldo, down to the overpriced boots and free-kick pose, even though it was obvious that he was a 99 percenter in looks, before we even get into athletic talent.

Don't disagree with the general point that (progressive) women seem to be the target for a lot of this, which is what stops many of these efforts from being effective, though. EDIT: Norms are also enforced bottom-up, regardless of your idol, but that's harder when no one can agree what they are.

I strongly suspect that what's happened here is some claim about time preference ( you ask prodigal poor people "what would happen if you saved X% of your paycheck?" and they might give the correct answer but then never do it in practice or constantly have excuses) has become garbled in transmission until we get the idea that people literally cannot respond to hypotheticals.

It's all part of the game at this point. The recent "leak" of the "Royal racist" in Dutch translations right when Omid Scobie's book was coming out was basically PR while maintaining the illusion of respecting the rules.

I go the opposite way: the Oscars should get more snobby and up their own ass and should frankly demoralize the people on Twitter and op-ed pages who want their latest topical message movie (Black Panther being nominated was ludicrous - thanks Dark Knight!) to win. Those films already make money, but people are now convinced the Oscars should be "relevant" by validating their taste.

Nope, the Oscars should act as a billboard for pretentious movies that'd otherwise not come to the attention of the general public. That's the main way I see some of this shit.

By that logic, BIPOCs also get less say in running society.

By this logic even BIPOCs should also support much lower migration to maintain a favorable balance of tolerant white paypigs to keep the system going

Nobody acts like this though (blacks are only just starting to turn on the pro-migrant party, when they see costs imposed directly on them) so Jayman is likely just an outlier and most people don't take this sort of thinking to that conclusion.

Which, in the Kendi framework, makes you a racist.

As OP says, the eyes of fat acceptance activists, taking ozempic makes you fatphobic. My thing is: I don't think anyone cares now that there is a viable intervention. Even they don't care, when they can make money.

This article is a potential clue to how it'd go:

So when patients ask for it, I usually prescribe it. Part of practicing weight-neutral medicine, I've realized, is supporting my patients' own sense of what their bodies need.

...

Being a body-positive doctor in the age of Ozempic has made me realize, sadly, that I alone can't stop the fatphobia that permeates our culture. As long as it exists, we'll have a market for medicines that make people thin.

What I can do is try, with each patient I see, to make them feel comfortable and safe, and help them realize that being healthy may have little to do with how much they weigh.

If this is the sort of thing former-Kendi disciples have to tell themselves before helping along their black patients, so what? Their cope is their business. But, at a certain point, the public will want what it wants and someone will cater. The people with nothing to gain (or lose) can write NYT op-eds but everyone else will profit.

Also, we give him too much credit. Kendi may be the most popular purveyor of a certain view, he/it thrives in a bubble and with the forbearance of the people within (he almost never does hostile media for a reason). He's a product of George Floyd and white benefactors like Jack Dorsey who want to Do Something. Who said they'll stick around once they hear X treatment will raise Africa's IQ (this could be the thin end of the wedge because even the anti-HBDers think there's room for enhancement there)? Who said black people will?

EDIT: There's also another world where white people get the treatment first and then there's talk of closing the gap, for equity.

Then I guess the segment of the poor population that favors the lottery has to be relatively high IQ, or I have even more questions.

This is one I hear a lot and, coming from a low IQ part of the world myself, I've never understood. It never occurred to me that people literally couldn't hold hypotheticals in their head.

There are many bits of conventional "wisdom" I see in DR circles that I can at least relate to some experience IRL, even if they're unflattering or exaggerated. This one is just totally baffling.

Maybe it's hard to tell when you're in the boiling pot because you're all low IQ and within the same range. But I've lived in the West for about an equal amount of time now and, while many other things pop out, this was not one of those things.

You can slide Zendaya into the Taylor Swift bucket of "let's have meaningless barbershop conversations about how hot/overrated she really is" if you'd like. We can do the same for her talent. I love those discussions as much as anyone.

She's undoubtedly "hot" in the sense of being a prominent, respected young actress.

Clout-wise she fits with the rest of the cast. (Except maybe Chalamet who's pulling away from the pack. Pugh is very talented but she hasn't anchored a big one and, well, the current state of Marvel doesn't augur well for her first go)

Point taken. But, in our defense, iirc part of it was the worry that the writers would feel that way.

and demonstrating superhuman qualities.

This is the problem with cutting down on the BG ninja shit and having Paul's killing of Jamis happen in the last film and be relatively understated. When Stilgar seems to flip early on in Part Two, it's a bit less impactful.

In the books, Paul's defeat (and perceived humiliation) of Jamis alone was shocking to the Fremen. Jessica's POV hammers just how fucking strange (and terrifying) a creature trained like Paul appears, even when he's reluctant to kill.

My memory from the books is that Feyd-Rautha was, while certainly Harkonnen, actually both competent and powerful, in contrast to Rabban. It was his reliance on underhanded fighting tactics that made him an otherwise-comparable foil to Paul (who decides to not use the Voice during their battle, though he could easily have done so). I don't mind his portrayal overmuch, but portraying him as a skilled and even potentially noble fighter ("you fought well") is a definite and unnecessary departure from the text.

I just reread the book fight scene: underhanded Feyd and Paul are at such a level,with so many plans within plans, that it'd honestly be hard to show visually. Making Feyd honorable and having a more straightforward fight seems like an easy fix.

Since they cut out Hawat and a lot of the Feyd and Duke maneuvering around each other (here I simply give them a pass due to time), it's easy to also just "fix" the Coliseum scene by having Feyd show he's formidable but capable of being honorable. Otherwise you have to get into BG control words and Paul's inner struggle to try to play into the finale and...

I feel like most of the "Other Memory"-related plot points are included grudgingly, like Villeneuve knows he can't just abandon those entirely but kind of wishes he could. There are throwaway lines about knowing the past and predicting the future but unless you've read the books, I can't imagine getting much out of those. And if you haven't read the books, I can imagine being really confused about everything touching on the Water of Life. And they never address the "sandtrout" at all.

This is kind of my problem: it's hard to tell how all of this comes across to a totally virgin audience since I've known about some of the plot points so long. It seems that Vileneuve gave people enough to essentially grok what was going on (even putting aside Jamis' words and Jessica's own initiation, the Harkonnen reveal shows there's some ancestral memory shit going on - and how else could Alia be sentient?). But it feels a bit hollow from my perspective.

I don't think Pugh could have played the seduction as well as Seydoux did.

But then, I think she was fine as Irulan and generally good in everything I see her in (even in her sellout Marvel role)

I occasionally see this self-deprecating tendency among fans of sci-fi and other types of genre fiction, where they assume that there must clearly be some inherent property of classical literature, unbeknownst to the plebians, that sets it apart - that the English majors are hoarding the secret sauce for what makes a work "actually good"

If you want to be classy you don't write sff, you write "speculative fiction"

When the clueless blame Hip-Hop for hood culture, they are blaming rock for the decline in lasting relationships and the rise in casual sex and they are blaming GTA and Call of Duty and 2A for Sandy Hook. In Hip-Hop it is that most classic mistaking of cause for effect: Hip-Hop didn't cause hood culture, hood culture caused Hip-Hop.

Except soft power matters. Hip hop may not have created gangs but it provided prestige to, for example, California gang culture which everyone around the world knows of for a reason.

Not only do we see this mystique ruin rappers who are from the hood but refuse to stay out of it once they make it, we see people who are not (Chris Brown) get entangled with gangsters because of the cultural cachet it possesses (Tupac is probably the ur-example of this, and should be in Wikipedia under "when keeping it real goes wrong").

If rich people who have every incentive to avoid this are falling victim to the allure of this stuff, I don't think marginal youths in weak communities are going to be less susceptible. That, imo, is the difference between rap and CoD: neurotic suburban mothers who don't have real problems and so have to manufacture a panic are not in the same boat as people whose children actually are at huge risk. They don't need additional cultural pressure pushing in the direction of hedonism and violence.

If that slice of ability in the community suddenly lost or never had that outlet, do you think those communities would be better or worse? Worse, obviously. Some of those artists, the few who did grow up in the shit, who do have a real brilliance, they'd have fallen into crime and not gotten out. They would have done very well. More crime, more violence, more kids, more deaths.

What about all the cases where hip hop money was essentially used to fuel gang beefs? The whole Tupac/Biggie beef was made infinitely worse by drawing in gang members who were looking for money. Both died (it almost sparked a war between gangs), the artform was weaker for it and the community hardly benefited when Death Row folded and even the hyenas soon went hungry again

In places like Chicago drill only seemed to feed the cycle of violence. It was bad enough, people making songs insulting dead enemies didn't help. Lots of people - including rappers - died as a result.

And, of course, Young Thug who was apparently using his money and cachet to get involved in all sorts of organized crime in Atlanta - beware any man who can maintain street cred after dressing like a woman in the most homophobic genre ever - allegedly almost leading to the death of Lil Wayne, another rap potentate.

Chani isn't the consistently loyal, supportive wife in all but name from the books. Zendaya (playing the same role she plays in every other performance) is defiant and is by the end of it the only Fremen who openly disapproves of Paul's actions. The final shot is her frowning into the camera waiting to ride a sandworm away from Arrakeen. Contrast that with the book's iconic "history will call us wives". This dynamic could have been much worse in today's climate, there's no girlboss moment where the competent, self-assured woman teaches the incompetent, overconfident man a lesson, but I still get the sense, like with the Wheel of Time show, that Hollywood just can't commit to a hero's journey story truly centered around a male protagonist.

If any story should have the hero's journey problematized, it's Dune. In the books Herbert could both show Paul's internal monologue and just straight up write a sequel novella to hammer it home, Vileneuve wasn't going to go the way of Lynch though so someone had to fill in that role instead.

Not accurate to the books but it actually makes sense with the condensed timeline. Paul rode up saying he didn't want to be the leader and wasn't the Mahdi and in the span of something like 9 months totally made the Fremen his creatures. It'd make sense for someone, especially someone close like Chani, to get whiplash

My real concern is what this does to any adaptation of Messiah.

I think this is just proving Matty Yglesias' point that a lot of these tactics are a product of cargo cult thinking., based on glamorous past wins.

There's a massive difference between a repressive dictatorship with a deep well of discontentment that needs a spark and a faraway democracy where many people don't care, and many only give a shit in terms of how it plays into their existing (narcissistic) culture war.

Imagine roasting yourself because of a basic category error.

One stop shopping for solace in one's current position, moral and political beliefs, community, learning (though the state has basically taken that one in a lot of the world) and all the other good shit mentioned below.

If you are discerning enough or have enough time you can find each of these things on your own and put together a bespoke bundle . But it's a lot of hassle. So some of us buy prebuilt.

Obviously, there is always some cases where it seems to be just dumb; Buying an expensive IP and then ruining it with a bad new cast & creative team. But I think it has become an almost industry-standard because of the former. And in some cases, such as Star Wars, they arguably did put in a lot of work; They got decent parts of the original cast, J.J. Abrams, whatever your opinion of him, is a sucessful movie director and they clearly tried to replicate the structure of the old movies (and too much so, in my opinion).

I think the problems with the Star Wars sequel trilogy can mainly be blamed on Iger rushing it to theaters.