 |
|
Haven't read all your comments, I am sure someone has pointed out that part of the reason the Japanese elements disappear is that the Japanese elements are seen, by a lot of those consuming the animan(ga/hwa/hua) as fantasy elements already; due to them seeing the characters as white.
So of course it's noteworthy when someone brings (back) the Japanese culture to fanworks. And of course they feel perfectly validated transferring the stories of the, in their minds, white characters to a (white) setting that is more comfortable and pleasing for them.
I just flat out do not read fanfic anymore, have cut it out of how I fan, because it tends to immediately drop the characters of colour into background flavour and/or erase the non white history of the piece completely.
Having intentionally thrown myself into anime this time around (as opposed to a more passive interaction as a child) I'm even more aware of how intentional the ignoring of the Japanese(and other Asian) cultures is; The Tale Of Gengii comes up as legend being quoted in other works via style or plot (sometimes even in the author notes). The various periods of Dynasty for each country in that region also come up - at least, in scanlations. I've observed that American English publishing rights via varied publishing houses, come with a white-washing and American culturalizing 'for a broader audience' or 'to make it more relevant' that neatly slots the Japanese culture that cannot be cut and Ameri-culture grafted on, into odd elements, leaving them to become aligned with whatever supernatural or fantastical elements also occur in the genre as a whole, if not in that specific work.
I've had it explained to me, that for the most part, voice work acting for dub is a chicken scratch industry where part of the Americanized voices is failure to act and part of it is bad direction in attempts to convey dialects and locality accents which ends up further giving the impression of whiteness; because of the underlying 'white is the default' alongside familiar Midwestern and East Coast, Surfer Californian & upper crust British accents. (And yes I know that a British accent doesn't automatically mean white. But I also know that Britain has more than one accent in the first place).
For my own part I've observed a difference in translation of intent in dialogue, such that character traits come across as American exceptionalism and NOT as traditional Japanese virtues. But I've done some reading lately that makes me think that while industry neglect or lack of talent and funds may well be a factor, a likelier or heavier factor is, again, intentional (and likely very much taking advantage of any neglect). Because anime and manga are brought to the US to be consumed, and marketers have determined and actually have a stake in perpetuating 'everyone in the world is just like the US, but with a few quirks'; because it makes things simple and the simpler a thing is, the more easily it can be consumed.
Thus essential Asianess, whether it is Japaneseness, Koreaness, Chineseness, and others, etc... is presented as similar to Midwesterness, East Coastness, Southerness etc... a geographic peculiarity with local legends and quirks that is essentially American.
This is not a new tactic. The British Empire thrived on this; women making saris into 'sari cloth' and having their very British dresses made from it. The spices of the region becoming a peculiarity of some British taste, vs it being the cooking hand of a completely different culture, etc. It is Colonialism plain and simple; though instead of the header 'We Will Make Them Just Like Us', it is put across as 'They Are Already Just Like Us'.
A Colonialism of the mind is much more palatable than occupation and enslavement of a native population. Let those thought of as 'Others' be seen to 'freely' give you their resources; via treaties, loan agreements, the building blocks of a global free market etc... Let those who are under your rule think of those resources as their right, thereby creating the market's need and sustaining your current practices.
All that is left, is to marginalize the voices who do not believe the creative endeavours of another culture are theirs to exploit as they will. Have them mocked as taking things too seriously, being too PC, being over sensitive.
---
And now an aside: For those who will want to comment to me that I am being too oversensitive, too PC, taking things way too seriously, it's just anime and wow, look at how I'm claiming some kind of conspiracy - I say this. Capitalism does not need to be a conspiracy as it is already a well established THEORY (of economics), with several schools (and schools of thought), and many published works. It has fermented rebellion and overthrown dynasties. It has condoned slavery. It has started wars and prolonged occupations to. this. day. Why on earth would I claim such a thing was a SECRET?
5 Comments | Post A Comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
 |
|
Likely distractions from pain and emotional drain and energy issues ( I ordered out, did not decide to starve until I could cook tomorrow and feel better now.)
Like I mentioned before, I like small spaces and read Tiny House, Small House blogs. But I've found myself thinking two things a lot in the past few days as I was getting re-caught up in that section of the blogsphere. None of these houses are designed with disabilities in mind. Apparently if you are disabled it is just too bad for you that so many house plans & designs involve loft bedrooms, no wheel chair or even cane manueverability and the thing that bugged me the most - absolutely no disabled access into the damn house in the first place.
All this thought on maximizing space and dual purpose this and how a person lives that, and green living and energy conservation, and tens upon tens of STAIRS.
The second thing I noticed is how very few people of colour I see involved in the small house movement who aren't 'Those poor people in Brownilla Country Where It's Hot'. White people; get back to basics, pare down, have a small house movement and live less cluttered and ostentatious lives. Non white people are just poor, the dear things.
The thought's been floating around and around in my head that you have to be 'white' and 'privileged' and 'well off' to live a simple life that's called a simple life and not the result of lack of effort & ambition. And when someone on a blog challenged the cost of workshops to learn how to build these tiny houses, they got dogpiled on and told that such and such deserves to be able to make enough to mind his family, and it's a service not something free and there's nothing wrong with making money.
Just like I have no doubt they'd stutter and stammer and stare if someone pointed out all the houses being oohed and awwhed over are impractical for those with disabilities
I also discovered this week that the American West had a culture, a sheep rancher culture, that created caravans that were structurally a lot like Rom Caravans of the early 19th century. And considering that the caravans had a European start, it does make sense that the style would go along with European immigrants attempting to 'settle' the West. (One of these days I need to write out my thoughts on confusion on how a land can be settled that already has people on it. Since I was small I've been confused about the Louisiana and Alaskan purchases because how can you sell something you don't own?)
But back to the 'Small House Movement' - where 'Gypsy Caravans' are showed off, with plans and designs, as possible 'Studios' and 'Meditation Rooms' (Isn't that a clash of appropriations) and 'Play Houses'. They're carved and brightly painted and beautiful and stolen.
What's yours is mine and what's mine is mine. The melting pot. Everything must go in to be shared with everyone. Except the things we the powerful keep for ourselves as precious to us.
American the pickpocket, the hug and handshake to welcome you to the fold, that robs you shamelessly at the same time. And isn't it quaint you thought your belongings were only for you and not meant to be picked over like wares at a fleamarket with certain less 'shiny' things insultingly marked down.
They're not fully formed yet, my thoughts on the specific rejections and the specific acceptance that is co-option and dilution and secularism. But I'm beginning to understand some of my exhaustion.
There's only so much 'don't think about it' a person can do, right?
And there's only so much one can take, to see the death of a pregnant mouse get more sympathy than the tasering of a pregnant brown woman.
Hmmm. I think I need richer and more filling than what I currently have, to feed my soul. Actually I think I'm tired of picking glass out of my mental vittles.
4 Comments | Post A Comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
|
| 2009-10-23 19:42 |
| Twilight & Other Creepy Thoughts |
| Public |
 contemplative |
| thinky thoughts |
|
I think I've figured out the appeal of Edward Cullen.
So I'm reading Female Chauvinist Pigs: Women And The Rise Of Raunch Culture and I get to the part about interviews and interactions with teenage girls (yes, white teenage girls, but hear me out - cause I'm also curious if this phenomenon is universal for all girls in the US, or if ethnicity and culture counter-balance)
The author talks about girls conflicting pretty with sexy (I may have mentioned that in an essay somewhere at some point) but the point she raised that I hadn't thought of before, is that between the media crush to be sexy and the abstinence only programs with a 'hush hush, you don't need to know about that' - she thinks girls have no idea of their own sexual desires. They don't know what wanting feels like, they don't know what being sexy FEELS like. They only know sexy as performance with returns of attention.
And suddenly Edward Cullen made so much sense as a heart throb. I don't know if Stephanie Myer knew this when she wrote, or if he and that relationship really was more an unconscious product of her upbringing. But Edward Cullen is a boy who
a) does not require a girl give a performance of / have the persona of sexy
b) in having that requirement, thus allowed Bella to feel want and lust and yearning
c) saw nothing wrong with Bella having those desires, but respected/loved her and so wanted to wait (sex was not the end game)
It's startlingly to me to contemplate that Edward / Bella is the romantic story of the century (at least right now contemporarily) because the heroine is aware of, and is allowed to feel her own desire and have her own sexual wants outside of the social act of the new female/feminine performance of pretty and the hero gives a damn about it.
But that's not the creepy part. The creepy part is that suddenly the Urban Fantasy genre, despite its, to me, soft core presentation, begins to make sense/be feminist/seem political. These characters are women in leather with guns who allow themselves to feel both arousal and power.
Obviously not everyone will do that well. And some (LKH) will in fact lose sight of that in all the combinations of screw partners and unpolished writing. But UF as a social response to the message that girls are sexy and act sexy but never mind their pretty little heads about feeling want, desire, sexual or sexually empowered for themselves - that is, not thinking of themselves as experiencing sexuality the way a man might - makes sense, even as I sigh and scowl and pout at realizing it is actually serving a social purpose.
UF, showing women they don't have to give up being sexual beings to have power, and that being a sexual being is about a woman's own desires, not her potential attractiveness to a man.
Who'd a thunk it? (I'm betting at least 20% of my flist actually. 'Cause sometimes I'm behind the curve)
ETA: 10/27/2009 - Anonymous people showing up in my journal talking about how 'safe' the male of colour character was in the Twilight series and how they'd never before encountered the noble savage buck who protects (or tries to) the white woman, even from herself - your comments will be deleted. Get the hell out of my journal space and go read an educational book on race and colonial theory.
ETA 3: Twilight fans also need not reply here talking about hateful single feminists (I'm not a white, middleclass cis het woman, so how the fuck could I be a feminist) and who knows what other hogwash. ETA 2 is a comment down below about ignoramuses being deleted immediately.
_____________
And two comments from 24.228.89.97?
The first one telling me to chill on race, and then when I don't, I get a second full of vitriol and inability to rationalize?
39 Comments | Post A Comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
 |
| 2009-10-11 08:50 |
| Approval Ratings & Upholding The Bush Administration |
| Public |
| thinky thoughts |
|
Last night talked to my mother about Obama's Nobel. She pointed out all the trips he'd taken across the world and speeches he'd given in 2008. She also pointed out that his racism speech is historic (so despite me not thinking he said enough, I'm aware again of other perspectives). The biggest shock for me, however, was how easily 2008 faded from memory. If he'd won at the beginning of the year (2009) I wouldn't have blinked. I'd have thought that his campaign of hope was more international than national - no matter who won he was trying to repair America's flagging prestige.
How quickly his actions in 2009 have dimmed the star he was in 2008 - a star that originally had people around the world cheering.
Post A Comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
 |
|
Socimages has an entry with a series about "The Commercialization of Childhood (direct youtube vids here). I'm watching it now. Yeah, even my mother tells me I should lay off the 'heavy' stuff because I can only influence my personal sphere and yet this is what I find relaxing to watch. No I don't know what's wrong with my brain.
However, I'm watching about how the tv shows I grew up with came into being as part of deregulation and the removal from the FTC of the ability to regulate the children's market/control marketing to children and I'm wondering about myself, my childhood, general American childhood and a few other things. For example, as an adult I am, and I think as a teen at least I was, aware that tv shows were associated with products. I'm pretty certain I was at least peripherally aware of this fact as a teenager. But as a child, outside of desperately wanting a Barbie, I can't really think of any toys I ever really wanted.
I wanted books and music - but mostly books. I adored media especially cartoons. I'm pretty sure I liked the cartoons for themselves as a story telling medium (I say this based on the love I still have with animations). But possibly it's because I didn't have any access in the Caribbean to the toys, things didn't affect me in the same way. Maybe I understood even then that those toys were expensive and came from the States and would require someone going and finding room to bring back stuff. And begging for stuff perhaps seemed selfish given my home training.
Oh. I did want a bicycle. A beautiful purple bicycle; purple sparkly bicycle, hopefully with something cool on it. Though I can't think of what I'd have thought cool, since what I got was a pink bicycle that I cried about for one hour, mostly because it didn't even have 'real brakes', but then I got over myself, because a bike was expensive and my Mom had actually spent the money to get it shipped from the States.
I think the things I wanted most as a child were perfumes - french perfumes - possibly because my mother adored perfumes and my biggest thrill was when she got a set for herself and a matching set for me. That was my little girl wants to be like her mommy moment.
But I'm wondering now about living in America where there would have been ads for toys alongside the cartoons I came to adore and promotions for stuff seen in supermarkets and the toys in stores themselves. I'm wondering at the combination of home training and commercial bombardment and culture. I don't think it's just children, of any colour, who didn't have class privilege who adapted to the concept of toys as expensive and knew better than to attempt to nag parents. I think there must be some function of cultural overtones of respect for elders, especially one's parents. But I'm not sure.
If anyone wants to drop a thought, I'd be very grateful.
Along with that, my experience with items associated with programs somehow, in my memory right now at least, is associated most strongly with Sesame Street. I remember sighing a lot when Sesame Street started selling toys - to get money to continue the Children's Television Workshop my mother said. And I reasoned, well if they're no longer getting grants, then yes, it's better to sell toys. But I remembered when getting something branded by Sesame Street was a big deal and only came up available around pledge time. And it wasn't something every other kid was going to have cause they could get it from a store.
( This is getting long so -CUT TAG )
Post A Comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
So I seem to want the books I read to have something to say, besides just telling me some kind of story involving the fantastic or supernatural. Anyone else also having that happen in their reading habits? You don't just want yet another tale of a woman in leather with a gun or a sword or a mysterious paranormal death or circumstance. You want a story that says something?
Even if it's just as unspecific as "Strength of the human spirit should not be underestimated." ?
I wonder if I've picked this up from fandom. Sometimes fic is just porn or a missing scene or a character study. But there are beautiful fics that say something about what it is to be a man, a woman, a couple, gay, straight, disabled, a champion of justic, or how to trust in a friendship, a family, a team, etc.
Post A Comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
Do you ever start to read books and become disappointed a few chapters in when you realize and then have it confirmed (still early on) that you know the way the characters relationships are going to go and you know the probable plot?
I realize that nothing is ever really new. But shouldn't there, couldn't there be new combinations?
Right now I'm reading 'Clockwork Heart'. Maybe it's not the relationship I find predictable. Maybe it's the whole look at a caste system and the possible problems involved in it. The... very fantasy perspective that right now to me at least, seems to drip with privilege about institutionalized bias.
But truthfully, I think I'm more irritated by female characters who are just horrible people readers.
ETA: Halfway throught the book. The female character is an idiot.
Post A Comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
Looking at the opening theme/credits for Naruto Season 5 and I suddenly realize - I adored what I thought that show was. Adored. And Season 5 (the arc when it's all about trying to hunt down Saske and bring him home) will always be my favourite. But I so loathed how it ended I couldn't even watch the final eps of the arc all the way through. And I lost all interest in the property once I realized that this change was -it- and sticking.
But darn, do I love that last arc so damn much. It's total ensemble porn.
( Somewhat spoilery thoughts about why Naruto failed for me )
5 Comments | Post A Comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
No matter what happens with me and my mom - a whole lot of control issues and other stuff - it's not just because she's my Mom that I feel ties to her despite everything. It's because my mom and I have been that odd couple against the world. Us vs them. And it really is one of those experiences where no one but the person who lived it with you can ever really understand. That's what ties us together more so than the fact that she's my mom and I'm supposed to love her.
I can't help loving the person who held my head above water in some really dire situations, even if in other situations they may have been holding my head down.
Post A Comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
 |
|
I had watermelon this weekend. It was good. I've just finished the last of it. It was actually so cold it made my teeth and gums hurt and I don't care because it was so good. Part of what made it good, though; part of what I enjoyed, was having it all to myself.
As I cut the first piece on Friday, I found myself thinking that it was so amazing that I was not only cutting a watermelon, but I would eat more than the bitter bits near the rind that are white. The thought surprised me because I've been living out of my mother's household for about ten years now and I don't think we never ate watermelon when Zvi and I were roommates. And yet my memories of watermelon all seemed to revolve around being fed the bitterer bits and not getting to enjoy the sweet, cold parts.
And it hit me that I feel that way about several foods. All my memories revolve around my mother very stingily doling stuff out and my needing to sacrifice because she needed x more, or the only reason we were stopping at a Wendy's or a Burger King was because she needed food or the younger kids needed food. There's been a theme of my needing to sacrifice for the sake of others. And I realized that theme stuck.
Here I was, in my own home, growing practically heady giddy at the thought that I could take my time and enjoy this watermelon. That it wouldn't all be gone the next time I opened the fridge because my stepfather's a man who deserves to eat more, or because xyz. And it hit me really hard that a mentality of scarcity can go a long way and warp one's thinking for a long time. Even though it's been years since my mother controlled what I ate, the strings aren't all gone - because there are strings in places I didn't think to look to cut.
I can't help wondering how that mentality might affect other things in my life or how it might affect other people's lives. What are they rebelling against when they grab for something, or over eat or are stubborn and won't let go. What are they relieving?
Post A Comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
|
|
Oh livejournal, you leech you.
At least now I've recognized why it felt like I'd forgotten people lately. I had. I'd removed their feeds from my feedreader because seriously, lj makes my skin crawl. And it seemed like everyone was moving over to DW anyway. But apparently, really, not so much.
And really, truthfully? Life is a lot less fulfilling without knowing what ![[info]](http://www.insanejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif) versaphile is cooking or cleaning or growing. Or what several other folk are doing. Also - they're not suddenly not talking to me, if I find I don't know anything about their recent day to day life. Silly me. *facepalm*.
Seriously, I thought one person must have been sleeping on couches and just barely scraping by. Which doesn't mean it was useless to hold her in my thoughts positively. But it was a touch unnecessarily dramatic of my imagination.
So I find LJ as an entity and service to be abusive, callous, and manipulative as all hell. It raises almost all my internal flags of 'danger - avoid like plague'. And yet, it turns out that avoiding it completely leads to me losing out in life. Weirdly enough it's like dealing with my mother, I could cut all ties, but that would affect my relationship with my siblings and the rest of my maternal side of the family. So I try to find balance.
I hate it. Utterly.
*Sighs*
But many of the people who I'd switched to following on iJay or DW - have been my support network in one form or another, which makes things important in their own unique way. It's odd, isn't it, how reading someone's day to day can become integral to your own day to day; the internet village is my nosy, local, social life.
Speaking of which I have no idea why I keep dyaniera's feed even though yet another year has passed without much of a word, a returned email, or a returned IM from her. Not wanting to throw away friends is understandable to me, but when I've already been cast aside, seriously holding on is like being a packrack, isn't it.
Meanwhile *hugs Chopica & Bellatrys tightly*. I've kept wondering where you guys were.
*hugs the rest of my Amazon village*
*hugs samidw for being so determined in maintaining contact*
*contemplates phrase 'The Masters' Tools'*
2 Comments | Post A Comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
So I'm reading Livapenn journal (yeah, I know she still hasn't come up with that 'solution for future actions to do with warnings and labels' that she claimed had originally been holding her back from an apology. But she's got to the new year in September. After which I'll drop and forget). But anyway she, and several people commenting to her post here are all 'But where has my gritty, hardened criminals and an asshole gone?'.
Which is basically the opposite of my cry (hint: Where has the light hearted impossible world of fun criminals gone? Whyfore the darkity dark and serious?)
( Cut so as not to bore others )
Post A Comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
How is it when I have weeks with nothing but therapy, I end up feeling as if I'm doing nothing. And weeks when I have things to do out of the house, I end up panicked and feeling overwlemed and amazingly tired.
I think the only possible answer is that mental stuff happens, uses energy and brain power and takes away ability to deal with strangers and people. Pain also does the same. Right now - Pain is definitely happening (don't ask about the mental stuff. Just not coping ).
Missed therapy today (well, Tues) cause my insides went on strike and tried to run away. That's about as graphic as I dare get. I've managed a dinner of dry bagel and cereal so I'm hoping Wed is healthier. I'm also extremely sore and currently reminding myself that I can postpone an upcoming medical appointment on Friday if I'm freaking out and in pain.
( And now some therapy/me-y, contemplaty type thoughts )
19 Comments | Post A Comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
Random Thoughts As I Wait For My Grocery Delivery Before Crashing Into Bed For A Period Of At Least 9 Hours
( Cut tag cause m'nice )
1 Comment | Post A Comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
 |
|
A while ago, maybe a month ago, I read a post on someone's journal about how they have no patience for people who can't own their shit, pick up their feet and walk towards helping themselves. And I thought the speaker was kind of harsh - not wrong necessarily, but kind of harsh. I wondered about my own feelings and put the thoughts on the back burner.
Today, for the third time for the year, a loadstone around the neck of one of my best friends, began his 'no one loves me, you're not a real friend, blah blah, my life is so hard, blah blah' lashout.
I snapped and started typing things. And when I looked at it, I realized I'm JUST as hard and harsh as the person I'd read earlier. I have no fucking patience for people playing sob stories. You cannot shock me with tales of your horrific past, because you are not the only one in the world who's been through some terrifying shit. Survivors often get into a minimizing mindset, and I know I definitely do. But nothing pisses me off more than someone going 'there are all these things in my life that prevent me from living decently' as if the sheer horror should cripple their friends into giving them a total free pass to be utter crusty, filthy asswipes. Because OMG their friends should feel guilty for having better lives / having safer lives / having less opportunities for pain.
That might work on individuals in shock that one human being could do something horrible (as described) to another human being - particularly a child. But that shit will not work ON ME. I can match your ass, horror story for fucking horror story. And if we are friends with the same individual, I will note that she doesn't know half as much about my past as she knows about yours, because I have no need for sympathy to develop our friendship. I don't try to jerk and play her emotions like a harpist virtuoso. And I will resent the punkass who tries.
So, apparently, I can handle someone saying - there's only one person I'm able to trust right now. But I cannot handle someone not listening to that trusted person trying to help them, because they want to wrap themselves in a selfish blanket of 'personal pain'. Lashing out does not show me how deeply damaged you are. It only shows me how immature you are and how deeply focused you are on wanking your wounds. And it's not because I never lashed out at anyone in my life. Four legs, to two legs and currently 3 legs (far too soon) is a facet of human life. But I grew up and out of that. Moreover, whatever stage that was, I never thought my own pain was more important than the feelings of other people. (which was actually a bit of a problem boundarywise). But I know people can learn and grow and adjust.
So I've surprised myself to realize I do believe that people need to own their own shit - even when they're not quite sure what's in all the luggage. Own it, admit you need help and go about trying to get some. And do not give me a sob story about how said help violated your trust. If you can realize your trust has been violated, if you can feel unsafe and recognize it, leave that 'help' situation and find something healthier (ask that one trusted person in your life for perspective if you have to).
3 Comments | Post A Comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
 |
|
Do you ever wonder what life would be like without greed? This is just a random thought I'm having, that I have sporadically. Life without greed. I don't want to break it down into corporate greed versus personal, individual greed. Because one person's greed can become a corporation's greed. So I'm not seeing much difference.
But life without greed. I like to think that somewhere out there is a dimension where chattel slavery didn't happen, because there was no greed. I almost can't imagine how much that would change the world. But there are other moments of greed that I think would make that world an amazing place. World War 1 and World War 2 wouldn't have happened. Land grabs happen due to greed. Land grabs lead to politics and politics leads to political winners and political losers. Think about Germany for a moment and all that happened and then subtract greed. Would there have been reparations in the first place? Would there have been round ups if there weren't individuals eager to get their hands on Jewish property?
Jews have been odd man out for ages upon ages and I do not know enough to say absolute what would or wouldn't have happened. But I do wonder about a lack of greed.
The greed that I think of the most though, is modern greed. I think of the Model T vs Electric Cars at the turn of the 20th century. I think of Industrialization. I think of hemp not being outlawed. I think of all the innovations in medicine and industry that could have occurred if greed didn't demand a patent or a trademark, if investors didn't come first and then some.
Race as it currently exists, with white superiority/privilege - I don't think that could have happened without greed. Without the rich wanting to get richer and keep the poor poorer (possibly with as little effort on their parts as possible).
Bodies currently giving out and falling apart; fibromyalgia, chronic fatigue, neurological imbalances for chronic depression, chemical sensitivities, obesity, cancer and more - greed. And then there's insurance companies and HMO's - "It's not a heart attack, it's a heart -episode-".
Greed, I think, is my new perspective of evil.
Post A Comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
 |
|
The place I buy my Indian Take-out/Delivery from has raised prices. Actually checking flyers left in mailboxes recently, everyone has raised prices. Mainly an extra dollar per item. But the Indian place added credit card surcharge. And then a gas surchage last summer and now everything's raised a dollar. Which means in order for them to make ends meet, they're charging me 4 extra dollars, half of which is for stuff that's not food.
And on top of that, my meal came in a smaller container.
And the rice, which used to come with peas and carrots mixed in, or with raisins, is now plain.
And there are maybe five pieces of lamb in my vindaloo. (that's about half as much as there used to be)
( This is not good )
Sitting waiting for the bus yesterday, I got to talking with an older woman there. Possibly in her sixties, though she did not look it. She talked about how within her lifetime, she'd not grown up with things saying 'Made In The USA'. That she knew about Taiwain and China as places that made things to be sold. And more recently Sri Lanka.
She said the first time she saw that on clothing, she went to the library and asked for a map to look up where it was, because she'd never heard of the place before. Though she took a wild guess that it'd probably be in Asia.
She sighed. She said that the US has become a service oriented society and that's not what's going to bump us out of the Recession/Depression. 'We', she said, need to actually make things, that other people want and then sell them.
I found myself thinking of the Caribbean then. And Tourism. And how that is a service oriented industry and how that leaves you incredibly dependent on other people deciding to spend money on a luxury. I can't imagine the US waiting around for other people to decide to spend money on some service the US has to offer (and I can't even think of one right now). I also found myself thinking of Japan and having a refreshed appreciation for how hard that country worked, the people of Japan worked, to make the country an Empire again. And it is an industrial technology Empire. I found myself thinking of Germany and what the phrase 'German Engineering' has come to mean.
And then I ended up thinking of the USA and Capitalism and the Consumer Driven Economy where short usability is built into darn near everything. Engineering and construction has a finite term, and warranties are often useless pieces of paper, and things are often set up to make it easier to buy a new one, than repair an old one.
Gold on the outside, hollow on the inside.
Can't get the phrase out of my head.
Post A Comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
Zvi brings up a link in her journal to someone in the open source community behaving badly. I was intrigued by the comments in the link, which claimed it was 'rude' and close to 'unlawful' etc - for private emails to be posted. These emails by the way were about a speech at a conference and the offensive material within the speech.
C/p of important bits - my comment:
The thing that's intriguing to me is all the people claiming that it's somehow wrong to publish private emails.
Where does this expectation of privacy come from?
One would think primary and secondary school would have drilled it into people's heads that once a note leaves one's hands, anything can happen. Including said note being publicized in some fashion.
Are people not aware of epistolaries?
Discussion between individuals is not like discussion between an individual and an institution like a bank, where the publishing of correspondence could well include identifying information , the dissemination of which could be harmful to the person. It is not like correspondence between an individual and an engaged lawyer, where part of interaction and practice of the hired party is privacy of counsel.
There can be no expectation of privacy between personal parties, including lovers. Privacy there is a grace, a privilege, not a right. Or am I missing some delicate markers of society and if so, who is willing to try and change my mind on this point? Any takers? This reminds me a lot of the 'But my journal is my private space, even though it's unlocked with all comments allowed'. I've been of the opinion for a while that a journal is a personal space, and thus a space where one hosts discussions according to one's chosen/preferred rules of conduct. And where one posts what one wants, and if other parties do not like it, they do not have to read it. But it's hardly private. Even flocked, there's nothing to stop parties from c/ping, or screencaping posts and republishing them. Though there it is rather more obvious that the grace of privacy / private interactions had been extended via filters and the little locking symbol. And the breach of trust is plain. A filter or flock implies trusted interactions. But again, trust isn't privacy. A breach of privacy would be someone breaking into a private-locked journal for the distinct intent and purpose of disseminating the information within. And a more heinous breach of privacy would be someone cracking into another person's computer. That's their personal property with (one would hope) a password needed to gain entry. Breaking in there is a definite invasion. But something one disseminates oneself, or delivers into the hands (virtual or physical) of another individual - how can that be private? It's left you. You no longer have control over it. And it is not a case like a national mail service where there are laws codifying your privacy. So in the above case, while I can concede it may be thought of as 'rude' - particularly since the emails show someone happily displaying their ass and such an embarrassment activates an urge to cover up and hide - rude seems, well, subjective to me. Rude becomes a question of tone. Rude, actually, seems always to be a question of tone. And minding one's tone implies respect for the person to whom you are speaking/interacting. And when one is calling out an individual, who has done something offensive, why is there an expectation of respect? Surely the need for the person to be called out, implies a strong loss of respect. How did loss of respect become entangled with an expected concept of privacy? I am not doubting the two are somehow connected. Respect does mean respecting someone's wishes, or extending them a courtesy. But a courtesy is not an entitlement. Aside:Which triggers thoughts, for me, of the warnings debate, and how many people promptly posted screeds against being demanded to do a thing. Demands may or may not have been made. I cannot be 100% positive. But I do note that 'But it only takes 5 minutes to enact this courtesy' being replied to with 'You don't control me! I refuse to cowtow to your sense of entitlement' makes me think several parties are in need of a dictionary with certain terms highlighted.
5 Comments | Post A Comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
 |
|
The phrase inspired me to write this entry. I was in the middle of a conversation with Zvi about something in my writing brain that I'd been wanting to tussle with before my functional/emotional/mental health needs took over and hogged space. They're still hogging space, by the way, so this entry will be relatively brief.
Include these three words. Write a story associated with this particular title. I remember those kinds of assignments in school. I was brilliant at them, twisting the title around in unusual ways, writing things teachers and my friends didn't expect. I loved those assignments, the blank page never seemed more inviting. The world and more was possible with just a title to guide my way.
Recently I read a bit from a group of Star Wars fans. They were discussing a particular writer and how inspiring his tie-in novels of the Expanded Universe were, how much he got the mythos and the characters and the world. But how his original writing fairly stank up the place. And the main poster in the space said that maybe some creative types just need a box to fight against. The more you box them in, the more they find way to stretch it, and shift it. They need to box in order to write outside the box.
The statement got me thinking about the blank page, and role playing, and alternate universes (and AUs of AUs of AUs) for that matter and my own writing and what possibilities I may have been tossing to the side instead of embracing in order to redefine, or just put my own spin on.
ETA: Thought I forgot. Fanfiction and the amazing things that can be done by writers wanting to explore more of characters (especially supporting characters) and the premise of a universe. Which is why I'd rather read mithen than the paid writers for DC, who seem to have forgotten the freedom and creative wellspring of writing within the box.
Post A Comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
Some weird little thoughts... about sex, manga, fiction, tropes and other stuff.
Note: This entry was attempted for the second time, on June 23rd, 2009, (can't find the info for the first attempt). It was semi inspired by the discussion on warnings and what that did to my brain. And semi inspired by metaphorically tripping over Bara when trying to clean up my feedreader. This rambling of my mind discusses anxiety and triggery concepts to do with abuse.
( --- )
Post A Comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
|
|
When I'm in pain, I don't acknowledge it for hours. Instead, I seem to begin to crave things to raise and boost my serotonin and endorphine levels - in the dark groping to counter-act pain and discomfort without admitting it's there. I've observed this self medicating before - but may have since forgotten the pain component.
I keep buffer money for 'treats' but I've been thinking more of the control issues in my past around food and my life, than realizing that 'treats' are also medicine (self dosing)
And I've begun to wonder if caffeine was also self medicating. And not in a 'duh' way, where most people are using it for a boost. But since I've been controlling my input - not purposely seeking it out. I've noted I get exhausted far more easily and am able to do less. And by trying to close the gap on the less for 'just a little bit more' have ended up basically immobile for several days on end. Which makes me wonder if I actually need caffeine in order to function. Does it factor into the current equation of unacknowledged pain + exertion (which seems simplistic) = crushing exhaustion, often flat on my back body enforced bed rest? Maybe it's just as simple as 'feeling less tired daily makes me less likely to feel as if I put something off it'd never get done so I must do it now'.
5 Comments | Post A Comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
That is, thoughts that weren't cuss words up and down, around and upside down of a titanic load of people.
And of course it happened in a comment, so:
Willow has thoughts about the lack of comprehension, shaming and ablist attitudes on the anti-warning crowd.
2 Comments | Post A Comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
 |
|
I've been more meta than fic writer for a while, and then skimming on the edges of media fandom (having been more involved for a time in comics fandom) and I am someone who can be triggered by certain things. But I have no idea if I've ever warned for stuff myself.
I want to think that my WIP's which were the fics I think dealt the most with dark themes were warned for before I posted them, all the way back, to the yahoo grouplist. But I was a total newbie to fandom then and was following form while not yet understanding function.
I know I was flummoxed about warnings when I transferred my first batch of fic to AO3 (haven't been back since, more's the pity). But even though that was just earlier this year, and only a few months ago, I think I was flummoxed because I had;
a) no idea really that warnings were meant to prevent and protect from triggers
b) had the idea that warnings were about squicks/kinks and character deaths.
Which seems odd when I think about it, because I do rely on friends (one mainly) to recc fic for me that I think I can handle, but I hadn't thought about why I needed that. I didn't think that h/c SGA fic was triggering, I just knew it made me feel irrationally upset, emotionally over-wrought and not worth the effort of reading them given how it affected me for the rest of the day or week.
And this while I'm in and have been in therapy for several years and am aware of triggers. I think of triggers as outside things that screw me up more than I can ground for; of certain noises, certain scenarios I might find myself in.
Focused on being present in my life and living, in the here and now, and functioning, I don't think I've consciously thought about why I avoid some television shows and why some books have become so abhorrent to me.
The more entries pop up on my flist about warnings and what people will and won't warn for; what they think will or won't be upsetting to another person has me thinking and realizing that if I, someone in therapy, aware of other triggers in my life, haven't thought about fic as more than a squick, more than knowing straight up that noncon and twincest/incest upset me - what about people who haven't had the chance to analyze their triggers at all?
And then what about discovering new triggers? Sometimes a smell can be laden with emotion I then have to climb out from under and figure out how to deal with.
Aside: I'm not saying or meaning to imply somehow that romantic relationships in, or sexually explicit, fiction have been unconsciously triggering me given my meta thoughts on General Interest Fic. I don't know. I didn't think to look at it in that context. This is not to say the world should cater to people who're triggered. Because that would be impossible, I believe. The best thing, I've been told, is learning to handle said triggers and sometimes that means minimizing exposure while working on it. Which makes warnings make sense to me. What does confuse me is this sense that somehow a warning for something emotionally frought like death or rape or dysfunctional enough to involve incest is somehow giving away the story. That's what I get from a lot of what I've seen (links, comments etc), that somehow a story is more important than another fan's feelings and emotional history. That a few words to add to what are sometimes very bland summary descriptions, thus giving more context, are ruining the craft / the warp and weave of fannish ficdom; A double odd since the summaries of books are often longer than the summaries of fics three times as long. I'm glad to see notes from some that the feelings and comfort levels of all fans matter and they want to find some system to be put in place that spreads out so that everyone knows; this is the system set up for dealing with the possibility of triggers. I just find myself thinking of the last big "Recc/No Recc Reviews are Mean/Anti Nice" crackmania. Recc/No Recc Reviews have been very helpful to me in the past and don't involve me dealing with an author directly (cold emailing someone to tell them their summary does not suffice and I need more info). Recc/No Recc Reviews feel like a stable system in addition to warnings. Especially since they tend to be done by people who like to read things and then review them for others. But there are members of the fannish community who don't like Recc/No Recc Reviews either because it harshes their squee to know that somewhere, someone didn't like their story, didn't think their writing made it worth the effort to deal with the emotional commess of the plot, etc... So what I gather is that there are a group of people who think warnings ruin the story, and who feel that written recc/no recc reviews ruin fandom and in between are people who find use for both in order to enjoy fandom, who're left to fall through the cracks. That...is dislikeable to me. Definitions: Recc/No Recc, when people recommend a story, or say they don't recommend it when posting reviews. [ Comments Off. Not in the mood/in the space to host fannish discussion right now. Maybe later. Maybe never. ]( ETA: )
Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
|
|
When I was a child and a young woman learning journalism alongside my mother as she went to school, and then did her job as a news journalist and occasional investigative reporter, I learned that the news was the facts. You went as deeply as possible to the start of the chain of events that led to whatever was newsworthy at the moment and you laid it out for the viewer or reader. And one's skill was in laying out this chain of events, this line of breadcrumb facts, so that the public could understand it and judge for themselves.
Now I have people mentioning to me that their perception of news, specifically I'd guess in America but I'm not going to guess just here, has always been about a story; a spin; the talking heads telling the viewers how to think of a thing or how to view a thing. Versus where I'd grown up being told that the moment personal opinion came into a piece it became an editorial and not news (even if it was giving information people might not have heard before).
I'm not talking about a historical perspective where someone looking at news clippings and video files recognizes that the time or era may have a general opinion influencing a certain topic due to whatever stress factors. Decades and other periods of history do tend to have overlying flavours. I'm talking about news presented as facts. 1 2 3. Without someone determining what the reader should be thinking about a thing. News as; this is what can be supported with evidence and facts.
And Editorials, whether local news, international news or features, being information slanted with the opinion of the writer. If you want to write your opinion on a bit of news, you write an editorial. If you want to write the facts about a bit of news, you write the facts; a news article.
The friend going back and forth with me on this, thinks that there's always spin. In how one presents data, in what data one chooses to put forward, in what data one chose to hunt down in the first place. And I'm boggling, because my memories of the concept of journalistic integrity are about putting all possible facts down as all possible facts to be found as of this date, and if data could be interpreted in two ways, putting that down, and of having methods to ascertain whether something was fact proven by other facts, or an opinion (and was the opinion relevant in terms of whose opinion it was, and if so noted but as so and so's opinion - it was a fact that this was so and so's official on the record opinion). And it all being laid out as 'this is what was discovered, this is the history that led to this moment, these are the opinions of the relevant players'.
If all news is spin, somehow, mild or overt, where the hell did I pick up those thoughts on facts, proof, and evidence?
All of this brought on, by the way, by what's been happening in Iran and all the mentions I've seen of US mainstream media being cagey, or had been cagey about any mentions at all. And seeing people discussing the fact that what was happening was too complex for sound bytes or infotainment and happening too fast for talking heads to figure out how to spin it.
I really need to read Chomsky - Manufacturing Consent - The Political Economy of Mass Media. I started after the documentary began to bore me, as I don't give a damn much about his life as much as his thoughts, and ended up returning the book to the library unread because I forgot I had it. Because right now I'm feeling very hit by the realization that yellow journalism under guise of infotainment has likely changed how an entire generation views news sources and I'm filled with WTF and much confusion.
ETA: This is not to say that I'm unaware of 'the suspect is a black male, between 18-30', that's a slant of cultural opinion and spin I have many reasons for loathing. And would undoubtedly be a trend a historian has and will note in the future.
6 Comments | Post A Comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
 |
| 2009-06-09 05:20 |
| Recent Discussions Have Me Thinking |
| Public |
| thinky thoughts |
|
If the current status quo is always seen as normal and therefore the starting point and is never seen as needing redefining, then maybe we'll always have problems in how we describe one another.
If being inclusive is being stressed as 'remember to mention these people as well as the status quo' - it seems hell of easy to end up 'men, women, gayfolk',or 'men, women, blackfolk/asianfolk/latin@folk/firstnations folk' or 'men, women, people with disabilities or even 'men, women, people who like cats'.
Normal + special interest. Status quo + special interest. Isn't that a pathway to fail full of good intentions?
People with cats doesn't seem so out of place when it's an extra attachment to normal; when we are all Mr and Mrs Potatoheads, but with different accessory packaging. And if it's included with things like sexuality, gender and an ethnic, cultural heritage, well it seems silly to get specific like men, women, people who like tortoise shell long hairs. So why get into an ethnic heritage that involves centuries of oppression or gender strongly guarded by medical gatekeepers or sexuality with ties to gender gatekeepers and religious sub attachments and political sub attachments...
I mean, if it's already a special interest, shut the eff up already - unless you're asked. It's too much to remember. It could be easier not to mention the special interest at all. A few short words is all, not a book.
Also the thing about special interests? They come after seeing to the needs of the status quo. Delegation of resources. And all special interests have to share out of the same allocation in the budget, no matter how many they are, no matter if it means their slice is almost meaningless.
Isn't there a better way? Perhaps redefining normal somehow, instead of trying desperately to make those 'special interests' stickier so they don't fall off and get forgotten or trail behind in the dust and gutter. It'd probably help those folks trying to juggle three and four as well - that must get tiring.
8 Comments | Post A Comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
Does Pre-slash have a definition?
I realized sometime yesterday that trying to change my personal word usage was confusing me, and confusing others. I've been mentioning HET, SLASH, ROMANTIC RELATIONSHIPS/PARTNERSHIPS and I realized that I was meaning HET (explicit) and SLASH (explicit) and ROMANTIC RELATIONSHIPS to mean those stories which were not explicit.
( Cue the scroll past as needed )
11 Comments | Post A Comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
C/P-ed comment in another journal:
I think it's good to point out that DW is also not Google. Google still counts itself as being in Beta. There are many products that have beta up in the corner of the Google brand symbol.
Google finagles to be in beta for legal reasons, and as an easy excuse for stuff. We've all had gmail for what - 5 yrs now? And it's still Beta. Even though invite codes aren't needed anymore - people still earn them, they way they would in any other open Beta.
This is not what DW is doing. So it's yet another reason people shouldn't expect Beta to be without any problems what so ever.
Reasons I like DW so far. ( This got unexpectedly long. )
For this pondering crossposting Semagic crossposts. You simply set things to post to the second journal and then when you go to press send - go to 'post to multiple journals' instead. Easier than manual. I'm undecided as yet if I will post over there and crosspost here (while keep my flist page up here) or if there will be different posts in both places. Or if I will post here and crosspost there. I doubt it will be the latter, however, since I have the chance to be more specific in my posting there. And many of the people I read on LJ via feeds who didn't or wouldn't move to iJay are already over on DW. So the want/need to be specific in who reads / who has access is more relevant. Which means I may end up completely flocking this journal for future posts. But... On the Other Hand... (has small Fiddler On The Roof moment) - I've been wanting a journal to post my writing thoughts on yaoi and Scribblit Inksome has a bug error that won't let it archive with LJ-Archive. And that error hasn't been fixed no matter how many times I report it. I have absolutely no sense of community over at Scritt so much so that I'm still referencing it automatically by the old name. So that's not a journal I'll feel a loss of. It's practically lost now, I use it so little. So basically no matter what I decide, my iJay won't turn ghost town. My communities, however, mostly suck. I suck as a mod - trying to promote conversation etc. Anyway, they will not be moving. Cause there's really no point. And now I attempt some sleep - oh wait. ( About why my ankle hurts. )As for the Stupid People R Stupid. I've had some recent examples of just how different it is to occasionally want attention, or feel like you are physical and exist and what it is to be so self focused you can't see anyone's else's forest for your own trees. Vague Willow Is Vague. Now bed.
2 Comments | Post A Comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
|
|
That question is actually facetious, because I know full well I want a landline for emergencies. The recent power-outage left me with a phone my landlady and I could communicate via. But I'm beginning to wish they had basic 20$ service. I don't use my cellphone that much, but I think it's very important and I don't use the landline that much, but I'm paying some change on it for local and long distance. Maybe I need more friends in Canada? I've no idea.
I suppose I could research the various programs that have people pay money for a homeline + cellphone combined. I've no idea if those even work and how many fees etc get tacked on.
My phonebill isn't really onerous. I just forgot to pay it for March. And more than occasionally I look at the cost and consider my relationship with using phones and I just - wonder "Why am I paying this money?" My cellphone accumulates minutes and I carry it with me when I'm out and about and I can use it to make international phonecalls (when it behaves).
Yeah. I think I'm just missing basic-basic phone service. Dialtone and cents per call.
1 Comment | Post A Comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
 |
|
Lately I've been feeling a bit like some kind of freak. I don't feel alone if I've got the internet. IM and email and journals and twitter all make me feel very active. And I have amazing friends *hugs you all* who ensure I feel love and fussed over (should I need the fussing). But there are several people I know online who talk about feeling lonely and not having people around them with whom to do things.
I think I might feel lonely on occasion (I'm not sure) - but there are times I call people and have a conversation on the phone instead of IM.
i don't mind if I'm a freak, btw. I just want to know if this is an uncommon way of interacting with the world. And yes, I'm going to bring it up in therapy. But it's still something I'd enjoy some feedback on from folks I know. Is this possibly an introvert thing? Am I a friendsexual? And this loneliness I'm reading about has more to do with ideas and fantasies of a romantic partner? For the record I'm not an asexual lesbian, nor am I someone who can't handle touch. But I can wait a couple months and get hugs from Zvi via a planned outing. And I have no interest right now in the kind of enmeshed emotions and dual focus that comes with being in a relationship. I'm very much all about me right now as a priority (no matter what comfort I give my friends, said comfort is not expected or demanded, it's understood I have limits etc)
But I keep seeing references to loneliness (no offense to those of you who've mentioned it who might now be reading this) and I understand that people feel the way they feel. I hope I'm not judging it. I just know I'm confused by it and wondering if parts of my brain are numb or something. It took a while for my former therapist to realize that being online is a social activity for me, not an isolating one. It took a while, but once she realized that, the most she did was encourage me to also mix things up as much as I was able to with occasional physical social activities. And by as much as I was able to, means she went from advocating I try hard once a month, to realizing that 3-4 times a year would be enough for me. Perhaps for other people being online is isolating. The theory had to come from somewhere, right?
I think I'd be lonely if I didn't have so many methods of communication - if there weren't people I spoke to every day, who make up my virtual village. I know I start to get phobic and agitated when I lose computer access - it's like a door's been shut. It's almost claustrophobic, like I sudden have no air vents.
If that's anything like the loneliness being described, then ouch. I loathe that feeling. It makes me want to jump out of my skin and often I cry. But so far I've been interpreting it as a need for a physical hug and that kind of company. And maybe I don't get it because physical company exhausts me so much and I treat hugs from trusted individuals as treats. And strangers touching me - well, I've mentioned my wtf about some of that before and have plans to swipe about with my cane in future.
I'm not sure what else to say, except that maybe I'm not as attached to my physical body as others cause I don't think it has to be involved in order for me to be social. Which isn't to say I'm not grateful for what level of ability and mobility I do have- I am. I just don't think I have to go somewhere and do something in order to be social and get social...(interaction? energy?) stuff.
Last thought: Despite how I handle social activity (various levels, etc), is it just that I'm comfortable being alone with myself? (Or me and the furbutt). And I mean alone as a concept that goes beyond the introvert vs extrovert dichotomy. Is this the difference between hermits (who're alone by themselves) and monks (who're alone with other people)?
14 Comments | Post A Comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
|
|
|
|
|
indescribable
whoa-ed
hungry
thoughtful