site banner

Wellness Wednesday for February 22, 2023

The Wednesday Wellness threads are meant to encourage users to ask for and provide advice and motivation to improve their lives. It isn't intended as a 'containment thread' and any content which could go here could instead be posted in its own thread. You could post:

  • Requests for advice and / or encouragement. On basically any topic and for any scale of problem.

  • Updates to let us know how you are doing. This provides valuable feedback on past advice / encouragement and will hopefully make people feel a little more motivated to follow through. If you want to be reminded to post your update, see the post titled 'update reminders', below.

  • Advice. This can be in response to a request for advice or just something that you think could be generally useful for many people here.

  • Encouragement. Probably best directed at specific users, but if you feel like just encouraging people in general I don't think anyone is going to object. I don't think I really need to say this, but just to be clear; encouragement should have a generally positive tone and not shame people (if people feel that shame might be an effective tool for motivating people, please discuss this so we can form a group consensus on how to use it rather than just trying it).

5
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Yeah, 100%, but the asymmetry in the provided examples is the entire issue. If we lived in the world where your analogy was more representative of right-wing complaints, we could find a compromise "I won't talk about X, if you won't talk about Y", or "how about we cut all the talk around sex, whether it's straight or queer, and just focus on our love for the hobby we've gathered around", but if one side gets to demand offensive content be taken down, while actively plotting to offend others, there's not going to be a way forward.

I think we're getting a little bit off-track here, I am sympathetic to the idea that demanding to take down objectionable content only leads to taking down other less-objectionable content in the long-run. For the sake of argument let's say my trans friends aren't planning on harassing anyone (I believe this to be true, but could be wrong).

Imagine you had a friend who was upset about getting served Harry Potter content and one of their favorite streamers had streamed the new game despite it being clear that some of the trans folks in her community were against it. What would you say to them? Would you avoid the subject?

Keep in mind that my issue isn't with potential future censorship of less objectionable content, it's with selective empathy. Your question sets the situation up so that it's expected for me to show some kind of empathy for the friend who's upset, because isn't that what friends do? The issue is that I haven't seen they slightest semblance of reciprocation from progressive groups when I get upset at something. Alex Kurtzman shits all over Star Trek? Get over yourself you racist nerd! And so on.

The issue with the question of what I'd do, is that it implicitly conflates what would happen in my perfect world, with what I'd do in the world I actually have to live in.

  • In my perfect world: I call my friend and idiot for fretting over the HP game, and streamers streaming it. My friend calls me a retard for being upset at the new Star Trek. None of that has any negative impact on our friendship, and we even actually enjoy these heated exchanges.

  • In my second-best world: I do some active listening routine for my friend, trying to get to what upsets them, and conclude with "yeah that sucks". They do the same for me, re: Star Trek.

  • In the demonic hellscape we are forced to live in: I keep my mouth shut. Change the subject. Start avoiding my friend if they keep pushing.

Your question sets the situation up so that it's expected for me to show some kind of empathy for the friend who's upset, because isn't that what friends do?

Sure, it may require some empathy for my friends, probably more for me though. Maybe it's quibbling but I am sympathetic to both the viewpoint that harry potter content is objectionable and the viewpoint that harry potter content is fine. Sympathetic to streamers that stream the game, but understanding of why that's potentially an issue.

The issue is that I haven't seen they slightest semblance of reciprocation from progressive groups when I get upset at something. Alex Kurtzman shits all over Star Trek? Get over yourself you racist nerd! And so on.

Well that doesn't seem very charitable of the progressive groups-- I have had mixed experiences with the new star trek stuff. I'd be curious if you have a link or a quick summary of the criticism of Kurtzman's take on Star Trek.

  • In my perfect world: I call my friend and idiot for fretting over the HP game, and streamers streaming it. My friend calls me a retard for being upset at the new Star Trek. None of that has any negative impact on our friendship, and we even actually enjoy these heated exchanges.
  • In my second-best world: I do some active listening routine for my friend, trying to get to what upsets them, and conclude with "yeah that sucks". They do the same for me, re: Star Trek.
  • In the demonic hellscape we are forced to live in: I keep my mouth shut. Change the subject. Start avoiding my friend if they keep pushing.

This is great advice, and exactly why I'm glad I posted. I went with option number 3, but I really want to be able to have some level of option number 1-- maybe not calling them an idiot, but being able to discuss it like we are now.

Well that doesn't seem very charitable of the progressive groups

You're entitled to your opinion, of course, but I've seen what I've seen. Star Trek isn't even the first or only thing that caused this kind of reaction, you can see it with everything from Ghostbusters 2016 to Rings Of Power.

We even had a comment back on Reddit where someone described how his friend went ballistic during an IRL social gathering over Star Trek Discovery, and how it's "fighting fascism", but sadly they nuked the comment, and I can't seem to retrieve it even with various tools designed for that. This is all that remains of that subthread. Oh well...

I have had mixed experiences with the new star trek stuff. I'd be curious if you have a link or a quick summary of the criticism of Kurtzman's take on Star Trek.

I don't have anything quick. You can try Red Letter Media's reviews. The short version is: Star Trek is supposed to be an optimistic vision of the future, where humanity got it's shit together, where contemporary politics is discussed through mildly clever allegories. New Trek is grim and pessimistic, rams politics down your throat, and treats some of the old beloved characters as doormats. Aside from that, even if you accept the new thing for what it is, the writing is often bad on it's own terms.

My main complaint about Picard (aside from the departures from tradition, which aren’t a dealbreaker for me) was that it turned into bland, mediocre sci-fi TV. Not high-effort enough for me, so I petered out after a couple episodes (maybe a season?).

Star Trek Discovery was pretty good (if you lower your expectations appropriately and ignore/skip most of the main character’s monologues and emotionally-focused dialogues).

The Halo adaptation sets me off though, I was upset about it for a while. I’ve cooled off now though, and have found equilibrium around the position “many people who didn’t have any attachment to the franchise beforehand probably enjoy the nice, mass-market TV show that doesn’t really capture the best parts of Halo except for a few fight scenes.”

Needless to say I haven’t watched past the first 3-5 episodes of Halo, and that includes skipping scenes from the non-master chief plot lines entirely.