Does terconazole treat bv
The Red Pill Magazine
2015.02.25 10:25 sirboozebum The Red Pill Magazine
The headquarters of the Red Pill Magazine on Reddit.
2023.06.10 13:47 Erwinblackthorn The 4 Types of Writers: A Followup to the "Woke Test"
A while ago, I posted a test that was to determine what kind of writer someone is, based on what part of the “modernist” spectrum they fall into. Part of the reason why I did this was to see how much I understand about the subject matter, since I will always have a postmodernist tell me that I am clueless as to what any of these are. Another reason is to have writers start realizing why they think the way they do, and possibly start questioning why they write how they do. I found out that, from the dozen or so people who took the test and posted their results to me, that most people I encounter and get along with online are modernist. A lot of these people reject mainstream media and they are secluded in alternative media sites because they don’t get along with the current overton window that’s among popular sites. I think it’s safe to say a lot, if not all, of these people are anti-woke, and they received 1 or 0 answers on the woke aspect of the test.
If I can pat myself on the back for anything, at least I can say I got the woke part correct.
Although the buzzwords I used for woke might be cheating since we all know I’m referring to something woke when I say something like “inclusivity” or “intersectionality” or “oppression”, because anyone who listens to even something like Joe Rogan will know these terms and treat them like they’re dripping with vomit and diarrhea. A lot of us, especially the classical liberal, center to center-right types, and even the center-left types, are tired of this woke nonsense. Even some guy who drinks beer while watching football and shopping at a basic store like Target is tired of this tomfoolery.
So this followup is to address a lot of the complaints I received and also to bring in some insight into how I wanted to conceptualize the test and how it turned out. I will also explain the relevancy of this type of test since some are wondering why something like scoring modernist means anything.
In philosophy, you are to hit 5 branches in order for your philosophy to be considered “full” or at least “full enough” to be granted a name. These 5 are:
Or maybe to question what they read so that we can see what a writer finds interest in, so that it correlates with what they would write.
That was not critiqued by others, but I know I messed up on that. I was listening to a Jordan Peterson video where he said that a good survey questionnaire takes months of planning to get the wording right for the questions and the answers, and I looked at my test and saw I did it in a day, and went “well, I think I messed up, yeah.” My own critique will be taken into consideration so that I can remake the test and make it better. To repeat what I said in the test: I wish to use this to determine who to avoid when hiring and working with people, because anyone scoring even something like 2 answers on the woke mentality is something to be concerned about.
Other critique involves question 1 where the phrase “copy it” should be changed to “emulate it”. Yeah, I agree, that makes more sense, since copy makes it sound like someone is not putting their own spin on it or putting it in their own words. Imitate, match, resemble, something that intends to retain the purpose but including your own position on the matter. Question 17, how we get our knowledge, is a very open question about epistemology, and that one seems to have given a few people the woke answer by accident, even if they aren’t woke in the way they answer. The problem with the term “lived experience” is that people think it’s a normal term and it is one of the few woke terms that go over some people’s heads. The term is used commonly in correspondence with articles that feature globohomo artwork and they talk about how it’s important to have a person in your corporation or non-profit organization who holds “lived experience” and they are referring to living as a black person to know what a black person feels.
I find this incredibly woke because, as I’ll explain further later on, the woke are saying that the only way to know something is to be that thing, thus forcing writers to be, say, autistic in order to write an autistic character. Or they must be a woman to write a woman. Or they must be a black to write a black. This enforcement is what causes the demand for diversity hires, because somehow these diversity hires hold mystical magical knowledge that nobody else in the company would even dare to understand or comprehend unless they checked off some boxes first. On top of that, the term “pragmatic action” was poor wording and that’s my bad. I was trying to say something like “scientific realization” in order to attach the modernist to science. Something that is both pragmatic(able to be done practically) and part of some kind of education/training. You’ve done it, you’ve learned about it, you see others do it, that can be the modernist idea of knowledge.
Other than those two, I think every other question went over rather well, but I will still enhance them to be worded better as time goes on and as I revisit it with more of an organized “5 sets of 4 and the 2 big ‘uns” in mind. But then there comes the elephant in the room. The scoundrel who dared to question my authority and make a critique about the test. How dare they and stuff.
Jokes aside, I really like this kind of critique and it’s great that she put it into clear questions that I can firmly address. I like it when people are clear. It’s much better than that obfuscation thing the postmodernists always do when they complain about me without really having a reason other than something where they don’t like labels or they were offended that I dared to mention any category of anything. Page Zaplendam, a fellow writer, brought up 3 important questions which you can see for yourself here:
To begin the explanation, we’re going to need to establish what modernism is so that the others can be explained. It’s the word that created the reason we see a difference in aesthetics like this because this was the moment we engaged in what’s called the enlightenment. During the early 17th century and around that time, people started to remove their dependency on kingdoms and instead create nations and industry. Religion was also being questioned because scientific advancements through record keeping allows people to give better assessments on what causes something to happen in the world. The view of the world started to become more natural and so naturalism was common, as well as rationalism and empiricism. People were using logic to make their decisions and data to come to conclusions, rather than faith or scripture from prior.
During this time, the modern age, traditions were tarnished and deemed as unnecessary. Medicine allowed people to praise science instead of pray for a mystical cure. Predictions of weather with meteorology allowed people to reduce famines and starvation. Printing presses allowed books to become more common, machinery allowed more production of goods, and life went from depending on neighbors to depending on communities and global trade. This dramatic change in both lifestyle and mentality allowed art to enter the modernist art era, which is determined as art that experiments to search for new meaning and objectivity without the necessity of a deity, tradition, or the supernatural.
Mythology became psychology, alchemy became academia, and religion became fandom. Everything mentally changed under modernism to create an environment of experimentation, the romances took over, which led to the pulp adventures and existentialist works of things like noir. Weird tales brought us ideas of cosmicism, thanks to the lack of god or at least the lack of a god who cares about humanity. With this freedom from religion, the mostly liberal environment of modernism allowed people to make up their own rules, their own ideas of what’s real, and thus we were able to focus more on the individual, rather than the collective. Stephen Hicks has a great video where he lectures about how modernism came to be and what it is, but I can simplify it into the 5 categories he has on his chart.
Metaphysics: naturalism
Epistemology: empiricism and reason
Human Nature: Tabula Rasa(everything mental is gained from experience)
Ethics: individualism
politics/economics: liberal capitalism
As you can see, modernism caused this reliance on the self, but also reliance on science as a replacement for religion. It caused the worship of money, while also opening people up to other ideas thanks to the liberal mindset. The liberty to engage with other things allowed people to mingle with both good and bad ideas. This is actually why people, like James Lindsay, say that liberals caused things like Nazism and Communism to come into fruition, because the liberal is so open and accepting that they allow terrible ideas to take over the top of the social structure and they think it won’t touch them if they are on the bottom. This is also how dictators were able to trick people into treating them like a God, because the dictator convinced people that they were able to answer prayers and did this during their campaigns to get elected or during the revolution while they’re beheading their opponents in the streets.
In other words, the uprising of democracy had people rely on voting in the same way as people relied on prayers, but here it’s where we pray to a natural government and hope they do something we want.
One thing that we don’t like to realize is that colonization occurred because of a scientific superiority among the Europeans, and this scientific advancement was caused by years of wars and immense dedication to their royalty. Then there were areas they colonized that had a crazy amount of gold, such as Australia and the Aztec empire, and this abundance of gold allowed trade to skyrocket, while Indian trade and the silk road allowed wealth to spread across the globe. Diamonds and gold found in Africa, like a sick joke from God to force white people to go to such a hellhole to get the diamonds in the rough. It’s not that white people wanted to go around and rule the world. It’s that enlightened explorers and merchants wanted to make a crazy amount of money and these environments were inhabited by people who left these literal gold mines untapped, and these explorers used technology to take over.
No wonder modernism was full of that toga wearing utopia sci-fi stuff!
It’s not hard to realize why the Europeans took over entire empires with small groups of conquistadors. They had armor, guns, ships with cannons. Those Chinese must have their face red realizing they are the ones who sold them black powder. Every alchemist should feel bad and stuff that they are the reason guns were used versus the people who didn’t have guns. It was such a destructive force to use guns against savage tribes and kingdoms because it was both physical and psychological. It was like dealing with metallic robots who fired lightning from their arms and filled the area with a concealing smoke. That’s like showing a caveman a cellphone, their brains instantly melt trying to comprehend what’s going on.
So people are angry at the modernists for being… rational and empirical, and I guess being urbanized or industrialized. People are mad at capitalism for being effective and a good way to globally get along. They’re mad at liberals for being okay with race mixing. The utter nerve of such horrid actions. How dare people mix. I’ll make sure to tell my own future mixed kids that they should be ashamed of themselves for having parents who came from different parts of the Earth and that’s about it.
So modernism, do I like it?
Well, it’s not bad. A lot of my favorite stuff is modernist and usually when people say they want to go back to the old days, they point at modernism as the example. Hell, a lot of postmodernists now are saying they want to go back to modernism, and then they say they don’t, because they feel like it's superior, but they hate the idea of accepting that it’s modernist. I mean, that’s why it’s called postmodernism, it’s the thing after modernism is gone, it’s the rejection of modernism and also pre-modernism. But more on that one later.
I noticed a lot of people got mostly modernist as their answers on the test and it makes sense. Many people online, especially on alternative social media, will be actual liberals who are open to different ideas, which allows them to engage with things that both offend them and possibly something they see as evil. They’re open to having their minds changed and they are always willing to learn more because there’s a big idea on learning more and experimenting, which is something I can relate to because I’m always trying out new restaurants in my area and I don’t mind trying a genre that I’m not familiar with. For me, I have a bit of that liberal mindset because I try out a lot of things I’m not familiar with and I end up liking some stuff, but I usually stick to what I established as my firm ideas from prior.
For example, when I was a kid I hated eating beans and I refused to eat fish that wasn’t canned tuna. Now, after being more open, I love salmon and I love eating beans, which dramatically helped my nutritional intake. There is a healthiness involved with experimenting and there is also a risk factor. But if you know how to avoid dangers, I don’t see a problem with trying out something like a new genre you’re not used to, just to see if you can get into it.
I mention this because the modernist writer will experiment, but will also claim a truth that comes from rationalism, which assumes the world we live in is logical. Even if it’s chaotic and absurd, they’ll say it’s logical, because it’s predictable and we can interact with it. This allows their writing to hold to formulas through things like pulp, while also experimenting through things like weird fiction. There is repetition that happens, and this is why genres became a big thing, so the reader can tell what form of repetition they want to deal with through what they are familiar with. This caused what’s called a comfort zone, which is the state of mind where a person feels at ease because there is an abundance of familiarity and a lack of unwanted challenges. Genres create these comfort zones, and this is then where we have to talk about individualism.
Liberalism has the problem of causing individualism to slowly become sophistry and egotism. The person declaring they are the one who is to be relied on and they are the ones who make up their own rules becomes a person who can’t tell who they’re obeying. Especially if that person puts something above themselves, like race, or science, or nation, or the opinions of others through democracy. Thanks to romanticism during this modernist time, we were able to feel like we had an abundance of freedom and capability, but then barely a century later the rise of Naizsm and Communism caused people to realize that this capability is in relation to what the shadow is capable of. The darkest, most disturbing and destructive actions a person is capable of, beyond their imagination and beyond what we’d consider a “human act”.
This quick change into the most dangerous entity nearby is why I don’t trust anarchists when they say their utopia would be functional. When it comes to real life, that doesn’t work, we need a more powerful overarching thing to keep that shadow in check, and we need that entity above the human to be in check of its own shadow on top of that. And this shadow is also what causes the modernist to engage with things like dada and a hatred of art to the point where they can say the work is for them and them alone, or that all art is equal, down to where a turd on a pedestal is the same as the Mona Lisa.
The pro of modernism is a focus on the individual, which promotes movements like poetic realism and neorealism, which grants a look into everyday lives. The mundane can be put into the forefront and average people can feel like they relate, which allows the average person to buy the work. That is a great plus, and it’s why the most popular shows out there are stuff that involves soap opera style drama and an environment that is simple, like a hospital or a police station. The sitcom is a result of modernism, because only a modernist would find value in seeing a family hang around their house while you’re sitting in your house with your family watching someone else in their house with their family.
Now let’s get on with pre-modernism, after all of that introduction is said and done. Pre-modernism is everything that came before this enlightenment and this separation from God. Atheists like to say how atheism has been popular forever and they have simply been suppressed, but something crazy that they ignore is that every civilization, without ever talking to each other, before any contact with anyone else, became a religious, spiritual, civilization. We even have a name for this basic religion, called animism. This natural desire to be religious in humans comes from how we think when we are young, as well as how we think when we are not relying on science or even words.
I know this sounds strange but we think more in pictures and visions than we do with words when we don’t know how to read. Reading unlocks a vast amount of knowledge that can be gained practically instantly, but a lack of language in our ability to think causes an abundance of symbolism in our head to fill in the gaps, meaning the ability to read locks away this visual aspect. When we’re babies, we view everything as giant, threatening, and frightening. And why not? We’re this tiny soft thing that has a skull that can easily be dented and we’re unable to feed ourselves. We need someone to throw food into our mouths like bananas into the mouth of a hippo at a zoo. We have our parents doing stuff for us, and so our brain right away connects the two.
Stuff happening around us is caused by something like a parent, like an authority, like a sky father and earth mother. The father gives me brain stuff and the mother gives me food stuff. But then we’ll grow up and realize that something like the wind moves on its own, the moon comes up to replace the sun on its own, and the seasons change on their own. There’s something we can’t see that’s doing this, something beyond the sky and under the ground, and everywhere we can’t see, especially behind our eyeballs. There’s this strange image that appears behind my vision that is not of the world but of my mind, and I conjured it.
And if I didn’t conjure it, I had someone else put it in my head through a spell, in the form of words, which cast the symbol to occur in my mind. Writers in the pre-modernist age are spellcasters, wizards, that make sure something is explained about the mysterious and supernatural world that is beyond the stuff we see around us. This “rejection of the average” causes the pre-modernist writer to talk about stuff that are not only real, but hyper-real. It doesn’t speak about an individual and it’s not for an individual, because it’s attaching everyone under the same umbrella and form. This is why I find poor interpretations of mythology humorous but also rather useless.
People will look at something like Greek mythology where a god has a child with their sister and go “well, isn’t incest a bad thing?” Not only do they miss the point, but they forget that it's a god we’re talking about and it’s not a human. It’s not some biological thing standing in front of you. It’s the supernatural, it’s beyond something like biology. Or better yet when someone reads the bible and goes “why did Adam take a rib out to get a woman? Couldn’t God just make a woman without taking his rib?”
It’s like, you missed the point and you’re ignoring the importance of symbolism, and this symbolism grants all of the meaning that you’re missing from the bible. Yes, Eve is made from Adam, and yes, it takes a rib, because rib is a bone and bone is structure. A rib is near a heart, a protector of heart. Heart is courage, love, emotions, stuff that makes our blood pump. Blood is a humor based on air, and air is one of the 4 elements. The connection goes on and on and on, because this mythology is all connected together into one giant story that goes beyond the words stated in the story. Each tiny noun or verb means way more than it lets up to mean. I’ve been studying mythology for a while, and really trying to look into them before I say anything about them, and there is so much inner history with mythology that’s both present and reachable, but it’s practically endless with how everything connects.
And at the same time, all of this is essential, of a form, symbolic, and objective.
This relation to religion in pre-modernism causes the definition to be something like “the art form that depicts hyper-reality in an objective truth that involves the supernatural as a source of the natural and as the source of truth.
Stephen Hicks puts the politics of the pre-modernist as feudalism, but it’s more like monarchy, where you believe that there should be a king, because someone has a family line that was sacred enough to treat like one. In pre-modernism, we had ancestor worship in every culture, because your family line was important to keeping your existence relevant. This is because everything in the pre-modern age involved titles, which were granted by an authority, and many times this authority is a god or an ancestor.
Your title within your family is in relation to your family members and your last name determines your family’s title for others to recognize. If someone was a smith, they would get the last name smith, like say John the smith just becomes John Smith, and they will endow their established trade to their next of kin. So if the son of John Smith wants to make a living, he’s going to be a smith as well. There is this lineage and family business that is treated seriously, because if you step out of this title, you’ll have to create your own. People could do that by entering a trade or a guild, by learning from others, from gaining a title after being born a bastard, or whatever they could to get a title.
But the key factor is that title is important to the pre-modernist. What’s even more important is form, because this religious mentality creates the environment that perfection is possible. A metaphysical manifestation separate from the material world that is able to be aimed towards and sought after, even if unable to be reached. This was well portrayed in characters like Jesus, which Christianity dedicated itself to fulfill the traits of Jesus, due to Christianity being a religion where people follow the teachings of Jesus.
I would say that every religion had their own type of Jesus, the perfect form that someone or something has to uphold and look up to as inspiration.
Later on, alchemy came out of the prototype phase and started to connect all of these religions and symbols with each other to create more overarching symbolism that went for more core ideas. At this point, people could only argue against combinations and where something is in a hierarchy, rather than the validity of the claim of something like a single god or a creator. Sects of religions were made in order to determine different end goals, or different ideas in how a ritual should be done, or whether something like a church is important for worship, and these were the biggest sources of dispute possible.
You either followed God's will or you didn’t, and if you didn’t, you were a heathen. Heathens are sent to the bad place, believers go to the good place. We have a supernatural aspect of our body, beyond our body, beside our body, that went there for us, usually in the sense of a soul or spirit. The mind is an intermediary between the body and spirit that allows communication between the two at all times. This was usually depicted with gods like Psyche or Hermes or any other messenger god.
The gods would speak to us with omens and with us using clairvoyance. Any pattern in front of us or up in the stars could be used as a means to decipher a supernatural message. This message was easily able to repeat itself because there was an objective meaning to everything, which is why something like Zodiacs are constantly watched even to this day. Pre-modernist art retains this tradition of using mythology and symbolism to depict truths about the world. Romanticism was an attempt to return to this truth telling style during the modernist era, but Romanticism was absent of the religious aspect and was more of something like a neo-alchemical way of handing stories, where symbols were kept basic and for individual progress instead of a collective one.
A big part of pre-modernism is collectivism, especially the collective unconscious, which Jung coined later on when referring to his more pre-modernist analysis of psychology that heavily relied on alchemy and mythology. We used mythology to say something of value, with a universal or at least human level of objectivity, and the only way to miss the message is to deny that symbolism exists for them. Or at least, your level of symbolism in your interpretation would have to be so low resolution that it misses every point entirely and has zero context as to why mythology is important in the first place.
Mythology grants the idea that our world holds order, while the modernist idea is more about how the world is chaotic and we hold order to shape the world better. Fables grant the idea that particular personalities do particular things, while modernism declares that things change or can be grey and shows how. The black and white morality of the pre-modernist merged into grey once modernism kicked in, because there is the lack of theism under modernism.
We’re half way through the explanation and now we come to postmodernism.
Pre-modernism establishes that the supernatural causes order to cause truth, modernism changed that to say a secular natural world causes chaos to have us find truth. So what does postmodernist do to change all of that?
It rejects both and says both pre-modernism and modernism are wrong, and instead says everything that can be perceived is subjective and the objective is unknown to us. Stephen Hicks says in his video that postmodernists are really intelligent and well read into an abundance of stuff, and he’s impressed by that. I would have to disagree with him because it’s not like they read everything they did in order to understand it. They read everything and continue searching because they intend on claiming it’s not true, and use their personal interpretation to claim such. It’s very much like when a person studies mythology to then say “you know, the gods committing incest and magically transforming is really weird.”
Before I get deep into postmodernism, I would like to explain the concept of realism. Realism, in both philosophy and art, is to depict a thing as how it truthfully is. There is accuracy, there is something there that really exists, and it has attributes that causes it to really exist. Both modernism and pre-modernism have this as an axiom. Postmodernism on the other hand is ANTI-realism.
You cannot believe in something being “real” as a postmodernist because to claim something is real is to claim an objective truth, which a postmodernist is allergic to doing. They are unable to claim anything as true, because there is no proof for them to use, thus any statements they make must be an opinion and any statement they see must be perceived as an opinion as well. In all honesty, I have trouble finding postmodernists who go this far down the rabbit hole. All of them focus on subjectivity, but they’ll still try to tell others that things can be real in a colloquial way that lets them blend in with modernists. It’s hard to get people to follow you when you claim things aren’t real, so there is a form of deception and contradiction that occurs, but it’s also acceptable to the postmodernist.
This is because postmodernists don’t care about logic, and anything they want to claim as “true” is based on a social subjectivism that can also be considered an overton window that shows them what is acceptable to say and what isn’t. A lot of them try to push it, others try to blend in with it, with the intensity depending on how far they want to push their deconstructionism and reductionism. For example, phrases like “we’re all just stardust floating around” is a way for the postmodernist to seem deep with their reductionism, but it’s actually their way of saying they are nihilistic while trying to sound deep and poetic.
Stephen Hicks does have an amazing point in his presentation where he says truth no longer matters to the postmodernist and what does matter is power. That kind of concept comes from Nietzsche’s will to power (which is why Nietzsche is considered a proto-postmodernist, one who helped birth it into existence) and Marx’s historical materialism. The thought that human labor forms the material basis of society, and this idea being spread out into every 3rd world country(aka communist country during the cold war) means that a big chunk of the world is convinced of this concept of power through labor and power through capital that’s seen as “stolen labor” when it’s a bourgeoisie.
This leaning into Marxist terminology, thanks to communists and hippies, causes postmodernist politics to be considered leftist, and exclusively leftist. There is no way for a right wing postmodernist to even occur because the right winger believes in a truth through natural rights and there is no way to remove that aspect. This is why Stephen Hicks calls the postmodernist political and economic idea socialist, which what he really means is leftist. Although, socialist works a bit more for the political aspect since socialism is a wonky word that means whatever the socialist wants it to mean.
They think the worker owns the means of production and that some form of social relevancy should happen and the rest is dependent on what they want to advocate for. Not surprisingly, this socialist aspect quickly turned into syndicalism and later corporatism when relying on the government to enforce this social power upon the masses, also known as a cult of personality. The cult leader, or leaders, tell everyone that they have power, they tell everyone that they’re special, the people don’t question it because they think it’s a common opinion, and so the cult grows unrestrained. We see this at all times when people will both hold water for a politician for any little thing and also attack their opposition for any little thing, no matter how much of a double standard or fallacy they apply to their advocacy.
To the postmodernist, advocacy is labor geared towards power, with advocacy being the only thing you can do to socially stay relevant.
When it comes to postmodernist media, the key idea is exploitation, because the goal is to get as many views as possible and break as many boundaries as possible. Modernist rating systems are pushed and pushed constantly into exploitation to the point where new ratings are made and R rated material becomes the new norm. The grindhouse is a common place and is normalized, even though before these would be considered taboo, because the way the overton window moved more towards the left through their advocacy. The leftist postmodernist demands power as the social structure and so they demand power and are slowly granted it over time. But there is a bit of a weird thing that happens between how Hicks and I see postmodernism.
In his chart, he labels postmodernism as collectivist and egalitarian. I see this as a bit misleading since the leftist is not really for collectivism in the same way as a pre-modernist would claim we’re all connected. The postmodernist believes that we’re all connected in how we’re all trapped in our own subjective constructions, as if we’re all islands in this massive chain of islands and the water between us is the subjective separation.
For example, let’s say I look at a dog and another person looks at a dog. We both see the dog but the dog is one dog for me and another dog for them and there is this supposed infinite number of dogs who make up this single entity that takes up the space where the perceived dog resides. And not just an infinite number of dogs, but infinite number of things between what the dog is made of, with an infinite number of those for each smaller thing. I guess, to him, that’s collectivism, and the egalitarian thing comes from how leftist demand that people are to be treated equal, as well as all art to be treated equal.
Just like dada, which was a proto-postmodernist art movement, the postmodernist thinks that all art is equal, with the Mona Lisa holding the same aesthetic value as a turd on a pedestal. This allows the postmodernist to use juxtaposition to combine something of high regard with something of low regard, like say having classical music play during a moment where someone is being tortured in a grindhouse way. Or maybe another example is like how Tarantino combines low quality exploitation movies with high quality dialogue that people praise for its realism and tension. This is why surrealism became popular under postmodernism, because surrealism juxtaposes a high concept symbol with nonsensical low concept literal images or events.
Another aspect of postmodernism is the idea that art and real life has merged into a type of hyperreality that blurs the line where life and art meet. People record their lives online and turn that into media, thus turning even things like talking about people who are in media into a form of media itself(aka Hollywood gossip stuff and youtube drama).
Without much of a message or objective symbolism, a lot of postmodernist media focuses on playfulness, because messing with things is all that there’s left as a means of entertainment and media making. Personal interpretation as the only means of experiencing causes the postmodernist to aim for open interpretation work, using vague wording and dog whistles to hide intents that they believe a common audience wouldn’t like, but select circles would catch. And with this demand for social power came the rise of corporate media, where corporations crank out stuff with self made trends and control groups who guide the corporation towards more money, thus more power.
There is also a combination of media, usually in the form of merchandising, so that a form of media will still be advertised and thought about, even when not engaged with the media directly. For example, GI Joe started out as a toy for kids. Then it became a comic and a show for kids. Now it’s a movie series for kids. Transformers, He-Man, I think even Gundam. These things aim for sales first and then plan the story after, because it’s all one big marketing campaign. There’s nothing in these that try to say what is true, they simply try to say things that will have people think they agree with it, or at least can’t argue against it to where they disengage with the product that’s being sold.
This has caused postmodernist media to become both highly marketable but also highly forgettable. Things easily get outdated even if the tech level stays consistent because of intertextuality, which is the relationship one media has with another to grant the user of intertextuality with relevancy that can have the audience understand the reference. This is a fancy way of saying something like an inside joke or a typical reference like a meme that we see online. If you ever want to understand this one, just think of any Channel Awesome reviewer. They will try to make jokes that reference something in media, probably something they reviewed prior, in order to keep the dedicated fans in the circle of attention and make the new fans try to keep up with this intensifying requirement of knowing jargon.
Intertextuality can also be seen as a sort of specialized culture within a franchise or company or genre or just stuff that is similar, so that the people who are of the fandom can all enjoy speaking some special language with each other and keep out the people who don’t know about their niche idioms and references.
This combination of reality and media, along with removing objectivity from the equation, with high and low arts being combined through playfulness and for marketing, is why our media is the way it is today. It’s made like fast food, doesn’t offer anything for the brain to work with, and is actually more for our brains to turn off if anything. People like Ray Bradburry saw this issue with TV and determined it was going to turn us into Idiocracy, which he explored in his book Fahrenheit 451. People are indulged and distracted by the idiot tube, they stop questioning things, books start being called evil, the government enacts a war against books, all people have left are things that keep them dumb, and then they can’t even see a war that’s happening all around them and in their own backyard.
The benefit of postmodernism is that it can appear more creative and people get entertained. That’s about it. No more feeling like you need to tell the truth, now you can make a story about whatever. The only benefit quickly becomes the main problem with it: it’s a bad influence. Postmodernists can only deconstruct and so they’re never pleased.
We see this all the time with Channel Awesome reviewers where they will miss the point of everything in a movie, like say Last Action Hero, and even though Last Action Hero is a postmodernist deconstruction of action movies, the reviewer will scream and holler about how the movie can’t be taken seriously. Then when they are challenged on the integrity of their review, they will spin it around and say they were just being meta and knew it was satire all along, that nobody should take any review of theirs seriously or as their actual opinion.
Or better yet, a postmodernist fan will chime in and speak for the reviewer, like when I said Spoony’s review of Final Fantasy 8, yet another deconstruction work that people were conflicted on, was misguided and wrong. A bunch of fans came in and said “Well, that’s not his REAL opinion. He didn’t REALLY say what he wanted to during the months he spent working on that review.”
I guess the point of postmodernism is to NOT say what you mean. Because how can they? That would address there is an objective idea in their head of what they mean, and that can’t happen under postmodernism. So you’re left with this endless chain of people trying to make a satire or make fun of something that is already making fun of something and that thing is already not to be taken seriously, and… you get the picture.
But then, recently, a sort of organized idea sprouted out from postmodernism. This idea that everything is both power and subjective, while also being a social construct, coagulated into a unification of something under what is called intersectionality. In 1989, Kimberly Chrenshaw coined the term, which already was working off of ideas during postmodernism such as second wave feminism and critical race theory. Through the idea that extreme egalitarianism is the way, in a subjective way, these defenders of the marginalized demanded that media should cater to whoever they deem as marginalized.
This branch of postmodernism is known as woke.
For wokeness, there isn’t much of a history or even aesthetic choice to shift through, but there is an awful lot of jargon to explain so that people know what I’m talking about. So for the majority of the woke explanation, I will be explaining the special words used that the woke will both claim are super important to know, but will also refrain from defining because they want to keep it on the down low. They mostly want to do that because they know their reasoning doesn’t make any sense and because it’s self contradictory, but that’s okay for them because they are, by their own admittance, anti-logic and “there is no real wokeness”.
Actually, before I explain the jargon, I want to get into that “there is no such thing as woke” talking point they always do. This is the same thing as saying “I want everyone to do x and there is no x”. Or when they are less radical, they will say something like “Everyone should do x, but nobody has done x yet.” But recently it’s been more like “This thing in the media has always been x, which is why we need it to be more x”.
As you can see, the narrative is always changing and they are always telling people to do something. This is the opposite of postmodernism in how it’s authoritarian, but is part of postmodernism because of the subjective aspect, as well as the neo-dada form of anti-art. The “art” of woke art is meant to express representation, and this representation is supposed to be of a group, and this group is supposed to look a particular way, absent of any stereotypes, negative or positive, and absent of any grand narratives, pre-modernist or modernist.
Therefore, all we’re left with is… appropriation and exploitation of marginalized groups.
Something tells me they didn’t think this through. It’s almost as if their goal is to be the thing they claim to fight against, but they don’t want to be called racist or sexist or whatever phobic because they don’t want to lose social power. This enforcement of an ideology, an ideology that tries to equally exploit for money, is put under the acronym DEI: Diversity, equity, and inclusion. This is a profitable business to get into, because DEI is estimated to have corporations annually spend $17 billion on DEI programs and organizations by the year 2027. In 2003, it was estimated that corporations spent $8 billion. In 2022, that number was recorded at $9 billion.
What do these numbers mean? It means companies are wasting money on this and they’re losing money after enacting woke policies.
When we combine wokeness with the socialist/Marxist mentality of the postmodernist, we end up with a constant drain of capital on the end of the media maker. The one making the art LOSES MONEY when they go woke, which is why we say “go woke, go broke.” There is no intention on making money with wokeness. This is why governments added wokeness to what is called the ESG score, which is a score that governments use to subsidize companies that follow things like climate change advocacy, DEI, and following whatever regulations a country puts in like mask regulations.
Follow these things, get closer to the “leader” score, and you get more money from the government. This is why companies don’t care when they lose customers, because at the end of the day, they are kept afloat by tax dollars. Then the people in charge of these companies buy the lowered stock that was hit by a controversy, and they have it go back up between woke projects. This is why the CEO of a corporation loves woke backlash, as long as they can pretend they had nothing to do with the woke decision. This is why, for example, Budlight decided they had nothing to do with hiring Dylan Mulvaney AFTER the boycotts worked, instead of, you know, while hiring him to be a spokesperson for the beer on April Fools day of all days.
So the go broke part is for the company itself, while the people using wokeness for their benefit are grifting and taking short term gains. Same thing was for something like BLM, which is an organization that revealed the money donated for the purpose of helping black communities was instead used to buy the founders mansions. The idea that wokeness brings in the cash and it can be called “woke capitalism” is absurd due to the lack of longevity the concept has. This is like calling a stolen item that gets sold at a pawn shop “illegal capitalism”. It doesn’t mean much, and it’s just trying to tie capitalism in with something negative, which is hilarious since wokeness is meant for the left.
With that out of the way, I’m going to get into the jargon, which will allow us to see some of the “philosophy” behind woke. The first one is “critical theory” which is what everything under wokeness is based on to enact a policy. This is how they choose who is marginalized and who isn’t. The term critical race theory originated in the 1980s through discussions about laws because some people decided that equality was not enough. It’s not enough that you can treat a person as an equal, like how a liberal does, because somehow a person born in 1980 is influenced by their ancestry from 1480. Judith Butler helped popularize critical queer theory, which lost the critical part once that aspect was seen as bad, thanks to critical race theory.
They kept all of the critical theory roots, but they removed the word critical because they don’t want to appear… critical. This also happened when Lisa Tuttle popularized the current form of feminist theory, where they remove the critical part because of the stigma they know the word has. No matter what, deception and omission must be used to get their agenda through, because that’s all they know how to do. They cannot get power unless they deceive people into giving them their power. And I find that a little odd since critical theory is a Marxist theory that came from the Frankfurt School from a man named Max Horkheimer, way back in 1937.
Max’s idea was that the enlightenment was a mistake, making him anti-modernist, but the postmodernists of this school of thought will still insist that there is something modernist about critical theory. They claim it’s because Marx was objective because Marx thought something objective is whatever is practiced, yet nothing he claims that is practiced was ever true, so it’s sort of a strange way to misdirect people into thinking that his appeal to his own version of rationalism was somehow actual rationalism. In other words, it’s wordplay. But, we can still say something like his attachment to science being a key element of his ideology, with science trying to be used to determine the natural world, is sort of modernist.
And this is the first step into getting confused as to what anything is, which is why people need a clear explanation as to what something like a modernist is. A good way to explain if something is actually modernist is if you can ask a writer if they believe in marxism and objectivity. If they say no, then we can see that Marxism appeals to the postmodernist in a way that is by design, not by accident. This is why Jordan Peterson is forced to call actual Marxists “neo-Marxists” and “cultural marxists”, because of the constant wordplay that is used by the very same Marxists.
Now, I want to harp on Marxism due to the fact that every single critical theory that the woke adopted is a Marxist theory. Critical theory was based on Marxism and critical theory declared that cultural equality was required in order to prevent fascism. It determined that individuals are not the ones behind social problems, but instead these problems were caused by social structures and cultural bias. What are these problems and what are the solutions, you may ask?
Well, critical theory doesn’t have any of that covered. In fact, the goal was to NOT cover any of those and to just say “social problems are at the social level” and that’s it. Congratulations, theory complete. The social thing is about society and society is how individuals interact. So it’s not the individual’s fault, it’s how they act with each other that’s the problem. So the theory is saying we need to change our act in order to solve the problems, and this was followed by the feminists who say we need to help the women get up in life. This was followed by the CRTists who said we need to help certain races get up in life. This was followed by the Queer Theorists who said we need to help the LGBT get up in life. There is the body positivity, the handicapped, the “don’t slut shame me" movement, and the list goes on and on.
Now we’re in a world where all of these things are in our media and forced into our media because somehow critical theory is the new normal, but you’re not allowed to say it’s forced. If you say it’s forced, some people might reject it and then the enforcers lose power, so they will always say “this is how media always was”. This is how we now have people claiming that ancient civilizations were pro-trans and pro-gay, even though they weren’t and I thought the entire point in CHANGING society is because these social problems are ingrained into society?
This is how the woke say one thing and then mean another. They want the power, but claim the power is given to someone else, while they take the power for themselves. Something like gender is told to be super important and something even worth committing suicide over, but then the lady who made up queer theory says that gender is performative, meaning that it doesn’t matter. Feminism is told to be super important because this is how we can help women become equal, and then we’re told by the person who made current feminist theory that “you’re not born a woman, you become one, even if you were born a male.”
This “equality of power” that the critical theorists said they wanted quickly turned into an “equality of babbling”. Nothing under wokeness makes any sense, and neither does the origin of the term woke. It is meant to mean a person is awake, that they were sleepwalking through life and now they are aware that bad things are happening in society. What are these bad things? Well, whatever you can make up and convince others is bad, since it’s all subjective. If someone steals a VCR and they are black, you can say the police who arrested the thief are evil because they are oppressing a desperate black man who “wouldn’t have stolen if society just treated him better.”
Of course, this implies that rapists only rape because they weren’t treated well enough by society, but only of that rapist is a particular skin color. The woke quickly tie the “need to rape” with skin color, and then call others racists. Actually, now that I’m on the race topic, let’s lay out CRT and how they view race from their supposed “law related origins”.
CRT determines that race doesn’t actually exist, that white people created race to then create racism. I’ll say that again to make sure if you caught that. CRT, a belief about how race works, claims that race doesn’t exist. But then it blames a particular race because… it’s not racist. Did I mention that this belief is anti-evidence and anti-reason? Yes, they do not want reason or evidence to be used for laws, because these things are biased. Instead they want storytelling from the marginalized person, who is called black, even though they don’t believe black as a race exists. This storytelling can be something like “I was walking down the street and I saw a police officer and I felt fear. I should not feel fear. That means the police officer is racist because I’m black and they made me fear.”
To make it even worse, they determine that color blindness from laws causes racist laws to form, because discrimination can occur from certain laws like murder rates, drug use, and theft. Something like being on time to work is considered racist, because a clock is a construction by white people to keep black people down. There’s always something designed by the white man to “keep black people down” because they believe white people only have power because they can keep others down. This is why they advocate to pull all of the non-whites up by forcing white people to hire non-white people into roles in movies or something like a job or using affirmative action to force black people into college classes by reducing their requirements.
Apparently, when you go to the military, the goal is not to have a good soldier but to allow more women to get in by reducing the standard for them. The goal of getting black people into college is to reduce the requirements for them so that they can get in, while increasing the requirements for Asians because there are too many Asians in college. But if we look at media, and only the US media, we can see there is a lack of Asians, so Asians are forced into film sets. Yes, there are plenty of Asians in, you know, Asian countries, soaking up all of the film time, but they don’t count.
In fact, they don’t count because white people don’t watch them as much, so now we have to have an enforcement of Asians being translated into English for western audiences to indulge in Asian culture, which is why Netflix transfers money from the west to the east and tries to get a bunch of Korean, Chinese, Japanese, and Thai content out. A lot of this Asian content is also LGBT, because even though these Asian countries don’t care for such content, the west must believe that the east is super open about it. There will be something like a comedy about a pregnant male that comes from Korea, and the west will take that and say it’s empowering because it fights against gender norms.
Meanwhile, the story is just a postmodernist joke about how it would be funny if men felt pregnancy pain. And it’s because there was a postmodernist comedy called Junior which had the joke “wouldn’t it be funny if a big buff Austrian dude was pregnant?”
My point is that wokeness is just appropriation, through and through. If it’s ancient bigotry, they will say it’s woke. If it’s modernist liberalism, they’ll say it’s woke. If it’s postmodernism making fun of wokeness, they’ll say it’s woke. No matter what, they will spin something to call it woke, just so that they can say liberalism is evil and equality is evil. Their goal is to have an equal outcome, which is their excuse to give certain groups more money and fame, all while ignoring merit. The very idea of rejecting merit as a qualifier is the reason woke media is designed to lose money, and is also a way to tie woke to postmodernism.
I think this is enough explanation of the jargon for now. Not sure if I missed anything, but I think enough of a point is made on that part to have anyone understand how wokeness works. The metaphysics is the same as postmodernist, it’s all subjective. The epistemology is through lived experience because of the storytelling that’s deemed as superior to reason. The ethics is social justice, because they demand equity, aka equal outcome. The politics are marxist, meaning their goal is to remove capitalism because capitalism is an evil product of liberalism. And finally the aesthetic is what I would call anti-art.
I guess I might be able to explain the aesthetics, but it’s rather loose. The problem is that art to the woke is just propaganda. The don’t really give a story or plot with woke media, instead they just take something generic and roll with it, assuming they even give it a plot. For example, there is a woke comic from Marvel(since every comic from them is woke now) where a superhero gets stopped by a cop for being native american. This female, possibly lesbian, native american uses her powers to have the cop realize he’s racist by mind controlling him into thinking he’s racist.
Work with me here…
So the cop is at his house later and decides that he can’t live with himself as a racist person, so he shoots himself in the head. The native american woman watches him from afar and goes “my work here is done” and considers herself a hero for the day. Comic book issue over. So the plot of that story was “super hero uses powers to make a random cop kill himself because racism.”
There is nothing in the story we can call true, nothing we can call interesting, nothing can be called entertaining, nothing can be called useful, nothing can be called anything other than utterly pointless. But the point was to say “racism exists. Stay woke.” That’s the message. That’s the reason an artist spent a month working on a comic and that’s why a company invested money into it to sell it to people who decided to pay money for it and read it. I have no idea who paid money to read that, but I can safely say it wasn’t that many people.
The goal is not to have people buy the product, it’s to simply say the product exists and point to it and go “see, a company put money into that group.” This is kind of like an updated version of “everyone gets a trophy” but instead of everyone, it’s the non-whites, non-cis, non-straights, and non-males. And instead of a trophy you get a product people don’t want to buy.
This is why I consider any answer as woke in my test as an indication of a person being woke. You really do need to jump through a bunch of hurdles to get stuck into this kind of mentality and the only question that people got woke was the one where lived experience is the answer. I think a better term might be anecdotal evidence, because like I said, the woke will reject reason and evidence and instead focus on storytelling, with storytelling here meaning you’re saying what you thought happened through your subjective opinion, and this can be anything you want it to be.
Hell, I can say something like “I felt like a unicorn” and that is considered a lived experience, because somehow I know what a unicorn feels like and somehow you now need to believe I did. So maybe anecdotal is the proper term to use, but then the woke will avoid that one since they know it looks like a fallacy and they can’t socially bring themselves to be stigmatized like that when they think it’s not acceptable. So it’s one of those things where I can either have one wording that causes a false positive or the other wording that will cause a false negative. But, then again, if someone is woke already, they would fail other questions anyway, so maybe I can put that one as not really important to worry about.
So there you have it, definitions and grave detail into all 4 types. I’m sure someone will conjure up more questions and I’m sure a postmodernist will say I’m wrong about everything, but at that point, I did my part so it’s not my problem.
Onto the next section that follows the next question: How do you justify reducing things to something like woke?
Reductionism is when you take something that is complex, like a story, and reduce it to particular fundamentals to provide a sufficient explanation. This is something like when a story gets reduced to a genre when you label it with a genre, because the genre is fundamental. This can also be something like calling yourself a Christian when you believe in the teachings of Christ. Sure, you have other qualities about yourself, but this can be an explanation into something that explains very quickly because it broadens the scope. But the question is HOW do I do this with something like woke, or modernism.
Simple: you look at the definition and go “ah, I see, that’s what it’s doing.”
Pre-modernism and modernism are objective, postmodernism and woke are subjective. Already these two groups are split by a single key factor. I can instantly say woke is a terrible storytelling way of thinking because the goal is to treat merit and superior quality as oppressive, so there is no possible way of making a good story that’s woke. It’s, by design, unable to be good. If we take postmodernism, we can say that it instantly rejects telling the truth, so it must make something up with exploitation and it’s going to be like fast food for the brain. It is, by design, unable to stand the test of time.
But then if we take something like modernism, we can see a truth is there, even if it tries to be individual, because then a guide based on personalities can be seen, and a way might be unlocked. This is why a modernist story is considered classic, and we look up to it as inspiration. Pre-modernism is as primitive and societally significant as you can get, to the point where it’s part of history books as a mythology. We base entire cultures around this type of media and we follow through with our daily life by using this type of media as a guide. In fact, pre-modernism is found IN postmodernism by accident when a postmodernist tries to appropriate, which is why we can find something like alchemy and Gnosticism in a postmodernist movie like The Matrix. There are modernist concepts like The Rabbit Hole in The Matrix, despite The Matrix trying to subvert it and reject it.
So like a genre, the direction of your modernist variant is reliant on both intention and focus, rather than if something is there. I can have a cockroach crawl into my cake when I’m baking it, that doesn’t mean cockroach is part of the recipe. So the goal of the test is to see what kind of recipe people are following and we can determine what kind of cook they are in how they view recipes. There is no danger of reductionism because reductionism is used to prevent dangers. In fact, in the most ironic way possible, to claim reductionism is dangerous here is to use dangerous reductionism to make such a claim, because it reduces the entire process to the idea of dangerous.
Now for the last question: How do you prevent people from rejecting pre-modernism?
Page has determined that if you claim form = function = truth, then you have caused pre-modernism to be the same as woke. As I’ve explained, they aren’t the same thing. Yes both are based on religions, with wokeness being based on Gnosticism, which is to self worship and deem yourself as the true god that is imprisoned in your body by the demiurge, but that isn’t the same thing as “telling an actual truth”.
Gnosticism is sophistry mixed with satanism. I always forget the term and can never find it, but it’s the belief that you’re alone and you’re talking to yourself even when you talk to others. This is how people get trapped in an echo chamber, because all the can do is hear themselves talk and tackle their own ideas of what could be wrong, which requires them accepting they could be wrong, and if they don’t accept that possibility, then everything goes in one ear and out the other. They start to follow a script, become an NPC, and all they can do is become violent once the script runs dry.
Can the pre-modernist become the same thing? Absolutely not. The benefit of a pre-modernist is that we don’t believe we rule the world. We understand that the world is in control, the supernatural controls the world, and we are below all of that as measly humans. We are the cameraman, not the director. Better yet, we are the audience watching a live feed with a cameraman controlling what we get to see, and we’re not involved in any of the production. This acceptance of humility allows the pre-modernist to seek truth, which is how a mythology is born in the first place. The only valid criticism is that the subjects become so grand and universal that they are basic and unable to really tackle the more personal and social issues that modernism tackles.
This basic and broadness is what Page considered “unentertaining”. But during a later exchange, during the making of this response, I found something fascinating. Page’s definition of entertaining is contradictory, because she believes it is objective in the fact that entertainment exists, but WHAT WE SEE as entertaining is subjective. So the complaint that something could be unentertaining isn’t valid, because it doesn’t mean anything if it’s subjective. It’s like saying a traditional dish doesn’t taste good and that’s why that traditional dish is bad to limit people to it.
Well, what if every good dish becomes traditional because people see it as tasty? I am not limited to my own personal tradition, I can enjoy another person’s tradition. I can eat sushi as a German who loves bratwurst and sauerkraut. I can eat pad thai and I can eat sweet and sour pork. I can eat baba ghanoush and shepherd’s pie.
Do you know why I can eat these? Because they are all food that is made of nutrients that people ate since the dawn of time. My human body needs stuff that humans eat for nutrients and there is a select number of nutrients that I need per day because it’s the stuff my body uses. Same goes for storytelling and the specific things my brain will use to gain wisdom and intelligence. The pre-modernist believes that there are these end points that we can address and say “this is the form, this is the end point, can’t go past that.”
The modernist claims “this is scientifically why we can’t go past a certain point, but we might get more information later that will allow us to pass that point.”
Then the postmodernist says “that point is a made up line, the limitation is made up, and the idea you’re in a particular position is also made up, so just mess with things and call them different things.”
Then the woke say “That point doesn’t exist but it’s oppressing me.”
As you can see, the pre-modernist is the most coherent because it’s the most accepting of how things are. I think what Page misunderstood is that some people think a form is what humans determine the form to be, and the form is left as that. Wrong. Form is to reach an endpoint and we cannot physically reach this endpoint, meaning the form will only be in our mental state through symbolism when we’re trying to think of such. Thus, symbolism is the key factor, and all you have to do is make the symbol more clear.
What really struck me as odd is that Page also declared the Bible as entertaining, meaning a pre-modernist work is the prime example of entertaining while her rejection of pre-modernism is because it is not entertaining. I cannot make any sense of that contradiction other than maybe Page believing that media being full of lies is entertainment and that’s not allowed under pre-modernism, which doesn’t mean anything to me.
That’s like going “well, your philosophy doesn’t allow contradictions and uses only logic, so it’s not a good philosophy.”
At that point, we simply have to call such a person postmodernist, because only a postmodernist would demand such a thing.
What am I going to do now that the test was tested? Well, I am sure I am going to make 5 sets of 4 questions for sure, with the 2 overarching questions added in the beginning and end. I will also try to use that google forms thing so that it can be a real test. When I get a website up for my company, I will have the test as part of the entrance exam to join the club. Pre-modernists are preferred, modernists are welcomed, postmodernists are tolerated, and woke are excluded. Sorry, we don’t allow such hateful people into the club. We like to work with normal functional people, and the woke do not meet either requirement.
And I know it doesn’t seem like it, but I am working on the test to have writers see what they KNOW about writing. That one is going to be a bit harder to put together, since I was thinking of getting written answers rather than multiple choice. I think the hardest part with that one will be figuring out how to work in creativity, since that one is tricky to sense if it’s intentional or accidental. But, like always, if I need help, I’ll ask.
Till next time.
submitted by Erwinblackthorn to TDLH [link] [comments]
If I can pat myself on the back for anything, at least I can say I got the woke part correct.
Although the buzzwords I used for woke might be cheating since we all know I’m referring to something woke when I say something like “inclusivity” or “intersectionality” or “oppression”, because anyone who listens to even something like Joe Rogan will know these terms and treat them like they’re dripping with vomit and diarrhea. A lot of us, especially the classical liberal, center to center-right types, and even the center-left types, are tired of this woke nonsense. Even some guy who drinks beer while watching football and shopping at a basic store like Target is tired of this tomfoolery.
So this followup is to address a lot of the complaints I received and also to bring in some insight into how I wanted to conceptualize the test and how it turned out. I will also explain the relevancy of this type of test since some are wondering why something like scoring modernist means anything.
In philosophy, you are to hit 5 branches in order for your philosophy to be considered “full” or at least “full enough” to be granted a name. These 5 are:
- Metaphysics (study of existence)
- Epistemology (study of knowledge)
- Ethics (study of action)
- Politics (study of force)
- Aesthetics (study of art)
Or maybe to question what they read so that we can see what a writer finds interest in, so that it correlates with what they would write.
That was not critiqued by others, but I know I messed up on that. I was listening to a Jordan Peterson video where he said that a good survey questionnaire takes months of planning to get the wording right for the questions and the answers, and I looked at my test and saw I did it in a day, and went “well, I think I messed up, yeah.” My own critique will be taken into consideration so that I can remake the test and make it better. To repeat what I said in the test: I wish to use this to determine who to avoid when hiring and working with people, because anyone scoring even something like 2 answers on the woke mentality is something to be concerned about.
Other critique involves question 1 where the phrase “copy it” should be changed to “emulate it”. Yeah, I agree, that makes more sense, since copy makes it sound like someone is not putting their own spin on it or putting it in their own words. Imitate, match, resemble, something that intends to retain the purpose but including your own position on the matter. Question 17, how we get our knowledge, is a very open question about epistemology, and that one seems to have given a few people the woke answer by accident, even if they aren’t woke in the way they answer. The problem with the term “lived experience” is that people think it’s a normal term and it is one of the few woke terms that go over some people’s heads. The term is used commonly in correspondence with articles that feature globohomo artwork and they talk about how it’s important to have a person in your corporation or non-profit organization who holds “lived experience” and they are referring to living as a black person to know what a black person feels.
I find this incredibly woke because, as I’ll explain further later on, the woke are saying that the only way to know something is to be that thing, thus forcing writers to be, say, autistic in order to write an autistic character. Or they must be a woman to write a woman. Or they must be a black to write a black. This enforcement is what causes the demand for diversity hires, because somehow these diversity hires hold mystical magical knowledge that nobody else in the company would even dare to understand or comprehend unless they checked off some boxes first. On top of that, the term “pragmatic action” was poor wording and that’s my bad. I was trying to say something like “scientific realization” in order to attach the modernist to science. Something that is both pragmatic(able to be done practically) and part of some kind of education/training. You’ve done it, you’ve learned about it, you see others do it, that can be the modernist idea of knowledge.
Other than those two, I think every other question went over rather well, but I will still enhance them to be worded better as time goes on and as I revisit it with more of an organized “5 sets of 4 and the 2 big ‘uns” in mind. But then there comes the elephant in the room. The scoundrel who dared to question my authority and make a critique about the test. How dare they and stuff.
Jokes aside, I really like this kind of critique and it’s great that she put it into clear questions that I can firmly address. I like it when people are clear. It’s much better than that obfuscation thing the postmodernists always do when they complain about me without really having a reason other than something where they don’t like labels or they were offended that I dared to mention any category of anything. Page Zaplendam, a fellow writer, brought up 3 important questions which you can see for yourself here:
- Where are the definitions of the terms?
- How do you justify reducing things to something like woke?
- How do you prevent people from rejecting pre-modernism?
To begin the explanation, we’re going to need to establish what modernism is so that the others can be explained. It’s the word that created the reason we see a difference in aesthetics like this because this was the moment we engaged in what’s called the enlightenment. During the early 17th century and around that time, people started to remove their dependency on kingdoms and instead create nations and industry. Religion was also being questioned because scientific advancements through record keeping allows people to give better assessments on what causes something to happen in the world. The view of the world started to become more natural and so naturalism was common, as well as rationalism and empiricism. People were using logic to make their decisions and data to come to conclusions, rather than faith or scripture from prior.
During this time, the modern age, traditions were tarnished and deemed as unnecessary. Medicine allowed people to praise science instead of pray for a mystical cure. Predictions of weather with meteorology allowed people to reduce famines and starvation. Printing presses allowed books to become more common, machinery allowed more production of goods, and life went from depending on neighbors to depending on communities and global trade. This dramatic change in both lifestyle and mentality allowed art to enter the modernist art era, which is determined as art that experiments to search for new meaning and objectivity without the necessity of a deity, tradition, or the supernatural.
Mythology became psychology, alchemy became academia, and religion became fandom. Everything mentally changed under modernism to create an environment of experimentation, the romances took over, which led to the pulp adventures and existentialist works of things like noir. Weird tales brought us ideas of cosmicism, thanks to the lack of god or at least the lack of a god who cares about humanity. With this freedom from religion, the mostly liberal environment of modernism allowed people to make up their own rules, their own ideas of what’s real, and thus we were able to focus more on the individual, rather than the collective. Stephen Hicks has a great video where he lectures about how modernism came to be and what it is, but I can simplify it into the 5 categories he has on his chart.
Metaphysics: naturalism
Epistemology: empiricism and reason
Human Nature: Tabula Rasa(everything mental is gained from experience)
Ethics: individualism
politics/economics: liberal capitalism
As you can see, modernism caused this reliance on the self, but also reliance on science as a replacement for religion. It caused the worship of money, while also opening people up to other ideas thanks to the liberal mindset. The liberty to engage with other things allowed people to mingle with both good and bad ideas. This is actually why people, like James Lindsay, say that liberals caused things like Nazism and Communism to come into fruition, because the liberal is so open and accepting that they allow terrible ideas to take over the top of the social structure and they think it won’t touch them if they are on the bottom. This is also how dictators were able to trick people into treating them like a God, because the dictator convinced people that they were able to answer prayers and did this during their campaigns to get elected or during the revolution while they’re beheading their opponents in the streets.
In other words, the uprising of democracy had people rely on voting in the same way as people relied on prayers, but here it’s where we pray to a natural government and hope they do something we want.
One thing that we don’t like to realize is that colonization occurred because of a scientific superiority among the Europeans, and this scientific advancement was caused by years of wars and immense dedication to their royalty. Then there were areas they colonized that had a crazy amount of gold, such as Australia and the Aztec empire, and this abundance of gold allowed trade to skyrocket, while Indian trade and the silk road allowed wealth to spread across the globe. Diamonds and gold found in Africa, like a sick joke from God to force white people to go to such a hellhole to get the diamonds in the rough. It’s not that white people wanted to go around and rule the world. It’s that enlightened explorers and merchants wanted to make a crazy amount of money and these environments were inhabited by people who left these literal gold mines untapped, and these explorers used technology to take over.
No wonder modernism was full of that toga wearing utopia sci-fi stuff!
It’s not hard to realize why the Europeans took over entire empires with small groups of conquistadors. They had armor, guns, ships with cannons. Those Chinese must have their face red realizing they are the ones who sold them black powder. Every alchemist should feel bad and stuff that they are the reason guns were used versus the people who didn’t have guns. It was such a destructive force to use guns against savage tribes and kingdoms because it was both physical and psychological. It was like dealing with metallic robots who fired lightning from their arms and filled the area with a concealing smoke. That’s like showing a caveman a cellphone, their brains instantly melt trying to comprehend what’s going on.
So people are angry at the modernists for being… rational and empirical, and I guess being urbanized or industrialized. People are mad at capitalism for being effective and a good way to globally get along. They’re mad at liberals for being okay with race mixing. The utter nerve of such horrid actions. How dare people mix. I’ll make sure to tell my own future mixed kids that they should be ashamed of themselves for having parents who came from different parts of the Earth and that’s about it.
So modernism, do I like it?
Well, it’s not bad. A lot of my favorite stuff is modernist and usually when people say they want to go back to the old days, they point at modernism as the example. Hell, a lot of postmodernists now are saying they want to go back to modernism, and then they say they don’t, because they feel like it's superior, but they hate the idea of accepting that it’s modernist. I mean, that’s why it’s called postmodernism, it’s the thing after modernism is gone, it’s the rejection of modernism and also pre-modernism. But more on that one later.
I noticed a lot of people got mostly modernist as their answers on the test and it makes sense. Many people online, especially on alternative social media, will be actual liberals who are open to different ideas, which allows them to engage with things that both offend them and possibly something they see as evil. They’re open to having their minds changed and they are always willing to learn more because there’s a big idea on learning more and experimenting, which is something I can relate to because I’m always trying out new restaurants in my area and I don’t mind trying a genre that I’m not familiar with. For me, I have a bit of that liberal mindset because I try out a lot of things I’m not familiar with and I end up liking some stuff, but I usually stick to what I established as my firm ideas from prior.
For example, when I was a kid I hated eating beans and I refused to eat fish that wasn’t canned tuna. Now, after being more open, I love salmon and I love eating beans, which dramatically helped my nutritional intake. There is a healthiness involved with experimenting and there is also a risk factor. But if you know how to avoid dangers, I don’t see a problem with trying out something like a new genre you’re not used to, just to see if you can get into it.
I mention this because the modernist writer will experiment, but will also claim a truth that comes from rationalism, which assumes the world we live in is logical. Even if it’s chaotic and absurd, they’ll say it’s logical, because it’s predictable and we can interact with it. This allows their writing to hold to formulas through things like pulp, while also experimenting through things like weird fiction. There is repetition that happens, and this is why genres became a big thing, so the reader can tell what form of repetition they want to deal with through what they are familiar with. This caused what’s called a comfort zone, which is the state of mind where a person feels at ease because there is an abundance of familiarity and a lack of unwanted challenges. Genres create these comfort zones, and this is then where we have to talk about individualism.
Liberalism has the problem of causing individualism to slowly become sophistry and egotism. The person declaring they are the one who is to be relied on and they are the ones who make up their own rules becomes a person who can’t tell who they’re obeying. Especially if that person puts something above themselves, like race, or science, or nation, or the opinions of others through democracy. Thanks to romanticism during this modernist time, we were able to feel like we had an abundance of freedom and capability, but then barely a century later the rise of Naizsm and Communism caused people to realize that this capability is in relation to what the shadow is capable of. The darkest, most disturbing and destructive actions a person is capable of, beyond their imagination and beyond what we’d consider a “human act”.
This quick change into the most dangerous entity nearby is why I don’t trust anarchists when they say their utopia would be functional. When it comes to real life, that doesn’t work, we need a more powerful overarching thing to keep that shadow in check, and we need that entity above the human to be in check of its own shadow on top of that. And this shadow is also what causes the modernist to engage with things like dada and a hatred of art to the point where they can say the work is for them and them alone, or that all art is equal, down to where a turd on a pedestal is the same as the Mona Lisa.
The pro of modernism is a focus on the individual, which promotes movements like poetic realism and neorealism, which grants a look into everyday lives. The mundane can be put into the forefront and average people can feel like they relate, which allows the average person to buy the work. That is a great plus, and it’s why the most popular shows out there are stuff that involves soap opera style drama and an environment that is simple, like a hospital or a police station. The sitcom is a result of modernism, because only a modernist would find value in seeing a family hang around their house while you’re sitting in your house with your family watching someone else in their house with their family.
Now let’s get on with pre-modernism, after all of that introduction is said and done. Pre-modernism is everything that came before this enlightenment and this separation from God. Atheists like to say how atheism has been popular forever and they have simply been suppressed, but something crazy that they ignore is that every civilization, without ever talking to each other, before any contact with anyone else, became a religious, spiritual, civilization. We even have a name for this basic religion, called animism. This natural desire to be religious in humans comes from how we think when we are young, as well as how we think when we are not relying on science or even words.
I know this sounds strange but we think more in pictures and visions than we do with words when we don’t know how to read. Reading unlocks a vast amount of knowledge that can be gained practically instantly, but a lack of language in our ability to think causes an abundance of symbolism in our head to fill in the gaps, meaning the ability to read locks away this visual aspect. When we’re babies, we view everything as giant, threatening, and frightening. And why not? We’re this tiny soft thing that has a skull that can easily be dented and we’re unable to feed ourselves. We need someone to throw food into our mouths like bananas into the mouth of a hippo at a zoo. We have our parents doing stuff for us, and so our brain right away connects the two.
Stuff happening around us is caused by something like a parent, like an authority, like a sky father and earth mother. The father gives me brain stuff and the mother gives me food stuff. But then we’ll grow up and realize that something like the wind moves on its own, the moon comes up to replace the sun on its own, and the seasons change on their own. There’s something we can’t see that’s doing this, something beyond the sky and under the ground, and everywhere we can’t see, especially behind our eyeballs. There’s this strange image that appears behind my vision that is not of the world but of my mind, and I conjured it.
And if I didn’t conjure it, I had someone else put it in my head through a spell, in the form of words, which cast the symbol to occur in my mind. Writers in the pre-modernist age are spellcasters, wizards, that make sure something is explained about the mysterious and supernatural world that is beyond the stuff we see around us. This “rejection of the average” causes the pre-modernist writer to talk about stuff that are not only real, but hyper-real. It doesn’t speak about an individual and it’s not for an individual, because it’s attaching everyone under the same umbrella and form. This is why I find poor interpretations of mythology humorous but also rather useless.
People will look at something like Greek mythology where a god has a child with their sister and go “well, isn’t incest a bad thing?” Not only do they miss the point, but they forget that it's a god we’re talking about and it’s not a human. It’s not some biological thing standing in front of you. It’s the supernatural, it’s beyond something like biology. Or better yet when someone reads the bible and goes “why did Adam take a rib out to get a woman? Couldn’t God just make a woman without taking his rib?”
It’s like, you missed the point and you’re ignoring the importance of symbolism, and this symbolism grants all of the meaning that you’re missing from the bible. Yes, Eve is made from Adam, and yes, it takes a rib, because rib is a bone and bone is structure. A rib is near a heart, a protector of heart. Heart is courage, love, emotions, stuff that makes our blood pump. Blood is a humor based on air, and air is one of the 4 elements. The connection goes on and on and on, because this mythology is all connected together into one giant story that goes beyond the words stated in the story. Each tiny noun or verb means way more than it lets up to mean. I’ve been studying mythology for a while, and really trying to look into them before I say anything about them, and there is so much inner history with mythology that’s both present and reachable, but it’s practically endless with how everything connects.
And at the same time, all of this is essential, of a form, symbolic, and objective.
This relation to religion in pre-modernism causes the definition to be something like “the art form that depicts hyper-reality in an objective truth that involves the supernatural as a source of the natural and as the source of truth.
Stephen Hicks puts the politics of the pre-modernist as feudalism, but it’s more like monarchy, where you believe that there should be a king, because someone has a family line that was sacred enough to treat like one. In pre-modernism, we had ancestor worship in every culture, because your family line was important to keeping your existence relevant. This is because everything in the pre-modern age involved titles, which were granted by an authority, and many times this authority is a god or an ancestor.
Your title within your family is in relation to your family members and your last name determines your family’s title for others to recognize. If someone was a smith, they would get the last name smith, like say John the smith just becomes John Smith, and they will endow their established trade to their next of kin. So if the son of John Smith wants to make a living, he’s going to be a smith as well. There is this lineage and family business that is treated seriously, because if you step out of this title, you’ll have to create your own. People could do that by entering a trade or a guild, by learning from others, from gaining a title after being born a bastard, or whatever they could to get a title.
But the key factor is that title is important to the pre-modernist. What’s even more important is form, because this religious mentality creates the environment that perfection is possible. A metaphysical manifestation separate from the material world that is able to be aimed towards and sought after, even if unable to be reached. This was well portrayed in characters like Jesus, which Christianity dedicated itself to fulfill the traits of Jesus, due to Christianity being a religion where people follow the teachings of Jesus.
I would say that every religion had their own type of Jesus, the perfect form that someone or something has to uphold and look up to as inspiration.
Later on, alchemy came out of the prototype phase and started to connect all of these religions and symbols with each other to create more overarching symbolism that went for more core ideas. At this point, people could only argue against combinations and where something is in a hierarchy, rather than the validity of the claim of something like a single god or a creator. Sects of religions were made in order to determine different end goals, or different ideas in how a ritual should be done, or whether something like a church is important for worship, and these were the biggest sources of dispute possible.
You either followed God's will or you didn’t, and if you didn’t, you were a heathen. Heathens are sent to the bad place, believers go to the good place. We have a supernatural aspect of our body, beyond our body, beside our body, that went there for us, usually in the sense of a soul or spirit. The mind is an intermediary between the body and spirit that allows communication between the two at all times. This was usually depicted with gods like Psyche or Hermes or any other messenger god.
The gods would speak to us with omens and with us using clairvoyance. Any pattern in front of us or up in the stars could be used as a means to decipher a supernatural message. This message was easily able to repeat itself because there was an objective meaning to everything, which is why something like Zodiacs are constantly watched even to this day. Pre-modernist art retains this tradition of using mythology and symbolism to depict truths about the world. Romanticism was an attempt to return to this truth telling style during the modernist era, but Romanticism was absent of the religious aspect and was more of something like a neo-alchemical way of handing stories, where symbols were kept basic and for individual progress instead of a collective one.
A big part of pre-modernism is collectivism, especially the collective unconscious, which Jung coined later on when referring to his more pre-modernist analysis of psychology that heavily relied on alchemy and mythology. We used mythology to say something of value, with a universal or at least human level of objectivity, and the only way to miss the message is to deny that symbolism exists for them. Or at least, your level of symbolism in your interpretation would have to be so low resolution that it misses every point entirely and has zero context as to why mythology is important in the first place.
Mythology grants the idea that our world holds order, while the modernist idea is more about how the world is chaotic and we hold order to shape the world better. Fables grant the idea that particular personalities do particular things, while modernism declares that things change or can be grey and shows how. The black and white morality of the pre-modernist merged into grey once modernism kicked in, because there is the lack of theism under modernism.
We’re half way through the explanation and now we come to postmodernism.
Pre-modernism establishes that the supernatural causes order to cause truth, modernism changed that to say a secular natural world causes chaos to have us find truth. So what does postmodernist do to change all of that?
It rejects both and says both pre-modernism and modernism are wrong, and instead says everything that can be perceived is subjective and the objective is unknown to us. Stephen Hicks says in his video that postmodernists are really intelligent and well read into an abundance of stuff, and he’s impressed by that. I would have to disagree with him because it’s not like they read everything they did in order to understand it. They read everything and continue searching because they intend on claiming it’s not true, and use their personal interpretation to claim such. It’s very much like when a person studies mythology to then say “you know, the gods committing incest and magically transforming is really weird.”
Before I get deep into postmodernism, I would like to explain the concept of realism. Realism, in both philosophy and art, is to depict a thing as how it truthfully is. There is accuracy, there is something there that really exists, and it has attributes that causes it to really exist. Both modernism and pre-modernism have this as an axiom. Postmodernism on the other hand is ANTI-realism.
You cannot believe in something being “real” as a postmodernist because to claim something is real is to claim an objective truth, which a postmodernist is allergic to doing. They are unable to claim anything as true, because there is no proof for them to use, thus any statements they make must be an opinion and any statement they see must be perceived as an opinion as well. In all honesty, I have trouble finding postmodernists who go this far down the rabbit hole. All of them focus on subjectivity, but they’ll still try to tell others that things can be real in a colloquial way that lets them blend in with modernists. It’s hard to get people to follow you when you claim things aren’t real, so there is a form of deception and contradiction that occurs, but it’s also acceptable to the postmodernist.
This is because postmodernists don’t care about logic, and anything they want to claim as “true” is based on a social subjectivism that can also be considered an overton window that shows them what is acceptable to say and what isn’t. A lot of them try to push it, others try to blend in with it, with the intensity depending on how far they want to push their deconstructionism and reductionism. For example, phrases like “we’re all just stardust floating around” is a way for the postmodernist to seem deep with their reductionism, but it’s actually their way of saying they are nihilistic while trying to sound deep and poetic.
Stephen Hicks does have an amazing point in his presentation where he says truth no longer matters to the postmodernist and what does matter is power. That kind of concept comes from Nietzsche’s will to power (which is why Nietzsche is considered a proto-postmodernist, one who helped birth it into existence) and Marx’s historical materialism. The thought that human labor forms the material basis of society, and this idea being spread out into every 3rd world country(aka communist country during the cold war) means that a big chunk of the world is convinced of this concept of power through labor and power through capital that’s seen as “stolen labor” when it’s a bourgeoisie.
This leaning into Marxist terminology, thanks to communists and hippies, causes postmodernist politics to be considered leftist, and exclusively leftist. There is no way for a right wing postmodernist to even occur because the right winger believes in a truth through natural rights and there is no way to remove that aspect. This is why Stephen Hicks calls the postmodernist political and economic idea socialist, which what he really means is leftist. Although, socialist works a bit more for the political aspect since socialism is a wonky word that means whatever the socialist wants it to mean.
They think the worker owns the means of production and that some form of social relevancy should happen and the rest is dependent on what they want to advocate for. Not surprisingly, this socialist aspect quickly turned into syndicalism and later corporatism when relying on the government to enforce this social power upon the masses, also known as a cult of personality. The cult leader, or leaders, tell everyone that they have power, they tell everyone that they’re special, the people don’t question it because they think it’s a common opinion, and so the cult grows unrestrained. We see this at all times when people will both hold water for a politician for any little thing and also attack their opposition for any little thing, no matter how much of a double standard or fallacy they apply to their advocacy.
To the postmodernist, advocacy is labor geared towards power, with advocacy being the only thing you can do to socially stay relevant.
When it comes to postmodernist media, the key idea is exploitation, because the goal is to get as many views as possible and break as many boundaries as possible. Modernist rating systems are pushed and pushed constantly into exploitation to the point where new ratings are made and R rated material becomes the new norm. The grindhouse is a common place and is normalized, even though before these would be considered taboo, because the way the overton window moved more towards the left through their advocacy. The leftist postmodernist demands power as the social structure and so they demand power and are slowly granted it over time. But there is a bit of a weird thing that happens between how Hicks and I see postmodernism.
In his chart, he labels postmodernism as collectivist and egalitarian. I see this as a bit misleading since the leftist is not really for collectivism in the same way as a pre-modernist would claim we’re all connected. The postmodernist believes that we’re all connected in how we’re all trapped in our own subjective constructions, as if we’re all islands in this massive chain of islands and the water between us is the subjective separation.
For example, let’s say I look at a dog and another person looks at a dog. We both see the dog but the dog is one dog for me and another dog for them and there is this supposed infinite number of dogs who make up this single entity that takes up the space where the perceived dog resides. And not just an infinite number of dogs, but infinite number of things between what the dog is made of, with an infinite number of those for each smaller thing. I guess, to him, that’s collectivism, and the egalitarian thing comes from how leftist demand that people are to be treated equal, as well as all art to be treated equal.
Just like dada, which was a proto-postmodernist art movement, the postmodernist thinks that all art is equal, with the Mona Lisa holding the same aesthetic value as a turd on a pedestal. This allows the postmodernist to use juxtaposition to combine something of high regard with something of low regard, like say having classical music play during a moment where someone is being tortured in a grindhouse way. Or maybe another example is like how Tarantino combines low quality exploitation movies with high quality dialogue that people praise for its realism and tension. This is why surrealism became popular under postmodernism, because surrealism juxtaposes a high concept symbol with nonsensical low concept literal images or events.
Another aspect of postmodernism is the idea that art and real life has merged into a type of hyperreality that blurs the line where life and art meet. People record their lives online and turn that into media, thus turning even things like talking about people who are in media into a form of media itself(aka Hollywood gossip stuff and youtube drama).
Without much of a message or objective symbolism, a lot of postmodernist media focuses on playfulness, because messing with things is all that there’s left as a means of entertainment and media making. Personal interpretation as the only means of experiencing causes the postmodernist to aim for open interpretation work, using vague wording and dog whistles to hide intents that they believe a common audience wouldn’t like, but select circles would catch. And with this demand for social power came the rise of corporate media, where corporations crank out stuff with self made trends and control groups who guide the corporation towards more money, thus more power.
There is also a combination of media, usually in the form of merchandising, so that a form of media will still be advertised and thought about, even when not engaged with the media directly. For example, GI Joe started out as a toy for kids. Then it became a comic and a show for kids. Now it’s a movie series for kids. Transformers, He-Man, I think even Gundam. These things aim for sales first and then plan the story after, because it’s all one big marketing campaign. There’s nothing in these that try to say what is true, they simply try to say things that will have people think they agree with it, or at least can’t argue against it to where they disengage with the product that’s being sold.
This has caused postmodernist media to become both highly marketable but also highly forgettable. Things easily get outdated even if the tech level stays consistent because of intertextuality, which is the relationship one media has with another to grant the user of intertextuality with relevancy that can have the audience understand the reference. This is a fancy way of saying something like an inside joke or a typical reference like a meme that we see online. If you ever want to understand this one, just think of any Channel Awesome reviewer. They will try to make jokes that reference something in media, probably something they reviewed prior, in order to keep the dedicated fans in the circle of attention and make the new fans try to keep up with this intensifying requirement of knowing jargon.
Intertextuality can also be seen as a sort of specialized culture within a franchise or company or genre or just stuff that is similar, so that the people who are of the fandom can all enjoy speaking some special language with each other and keep out the people who don’t know about their niche idioms and references.
This combination of reality and media, along with removing objectivity from the equation, with high and low arts being combined through playfulness and for marketing, is why our media is the way it is today. It’s made like fast food, doesn’t offer anything for the brain to work with, and is actually more for our brains to turn off if anything. People like Ray Bradburry saw this issue with TV and determined it was going to turn us into Idiocracy, which he explored in his book Fahrenheit 451. People are indulged and distracted by the idiot tube, they stop questioning things, books start being called evil, the government enacts a war against books, all people have left are things that keep them dumb, and then they can’t even see a war that’s happening all around them and in their own backyard.
The benefit of postmodernism is that it can appear more creative and people get entertained. That’s about it. No more feeling like you need to tell the truth, now you can make a story about whatever. The only benefit quickly becomes the main problem with it: it’s a bad influence. Postmodernists can only deconstruct and so they’re never pleased.
We see this all the time with Channel Awesome reviewers where they will miss the point of everything in a movie, like say Last Action Hero, and even though Last Action Hero is a postmodernist deconstruction of action movies, the reviewer will scream and holler about how the movie can’t be taken seriously. Then when they are challenged on the integrity of their review, they will spin it around and say they were just being meta and knew it was satire all along, that nobody should take any review of theirs seriously or as their actual opinion.
Or better yet, a postmodernist fan will chime in and speak for the reviewer, like when I said Spoony’s review of Final Fantasy 8, yet another deconstruction work that people were conflicted on, was misguided and wrong. A bunch of fans came in and said “Well, that’s not his REAL opinion. He didn’t REALLY say what he wanted to during the months he spent working on that review.”
I guess the point of postmodernism is to NOT say what you mean. Because how can they? That would address there is an objective idea in their head of what they mean, and that can’t happen under postmodernism. So you’re left with this endless chain of people trying to make a satire or make fun of something that is already making fun of something and that thing is already not to be taken seriously, and… you get the picture.
But then, recently, a sort of organized idea sprouted out from postmodernism. This idea that everything is both power and subjective, while also being a social construct, coagulated into a unification of something under what is called intersectionality. In 1989, Kimberly Chrenshaw coined the term, which already was working off of ideas during postmodernism such as second wave feminism and critical race theory. Through the idea that extreme egalitarianism is the way, in a subjective way, these defenders of the marginalized demanded that media should cater to whoever they deem as marginalized.
This branch of postmodernism is known as woke.
For wokeness, there isn’t much of a history or even aesthetic choice to shift through, but there is an awful lot of jargon to explain so that people know what I’m talking about. So for the majority of the woke explanation, I will be explaining the special words used that the woke will both claim are super important to know, but will also refrain from defining because they want to keep it on the down low. They mostly want to do that because they know their reasoning doesn’t make any sense and because it’s self contradictory, but that’s okay for them because they are, by their own admittance, anti-logic and “there is no real wokeness”.
Actually, before I explain the jargon, I want to get into that “there is no such thing as woke” talking point they always do. This is the same thing as saying “I want everyone to do x and there is no x”. Or when they are less radical, they will say something like “Everyone should do x, but nobody has done x yet.” But recently it’s been more like “This thing in the media has always been x, which is why we need it to be more x”.
As you can see, the narrative is always changing and they are always telling people to do something. This is the opposite of postmodernism in how it’s authoritarian, but is part of postmodernism because of the subjective aspect, as well as the neo-dada form of anti-art. The “art” of woke art is meant to express representation, and this representation is supposed to be of a group, and this group is supposed to look a particular way, absent of any stereotypes, negative or positive, and absent of any grand narratives, pre-modernist or modernist.
Therefore, all we’re left with is… appropriation and exploitation of marginalized groups.
Something tells me they didn’t think this through. It’s almost as if their goal is to be the thing they claim to fight against, but they don’t want to be called racist or sexist or whatever phobic because they don’t want to lose social power. This enforcement of an ideology, an ideology that tries to equally exploit for money, is put under the acronym DEI: Diversity, equity, and inclusion. This is a profitable business to get into, because DEI is estimated to have corporations annually spend $17 billion on DEI programs and organizations by the year 2027. In 2003, it was estimated that corporations spent $8 billion. In 2022, that number was recorded at $9 billion.
What do these numbers mean? It means companies are wasting money on this and they’re losing money after enacting woke policies.
When we combine wokeness with the socialist/Marxist mentality of the postmodernist, we end up with a constant drain of capital on the end of the media maker. The one making the art LOSES MONEY when they go woke, which is why we say “go woke, go broke.” There is no intention on making money with wokeness. This is why governments added wokeness to what is called the ESG score, which is a score that governments use to subsidize companies that follow things like climate change advocacy, DEI, and following whatever regulations a country puts in like mask regulations.
Follow these things, get closer to the “leader” score, and you get more money from the government. This is why companies don’t care when they lose customers, because at the end of the day, they are kept afloat by tax dollars. Then the people in charge of these companies buy the lowered stock that was hit by a controversy, and they have it go back up between woke projects. This is why the CEO of a corporation loves woke backlash, as long as they can pretend they had nothing to do with the woke decision. This is why, for example, Budlight decided they had nothing to do with hiring Dylan Mulvaney AFTER the boycotts worked, instead of, you know, while hiring him to be a spokesperson for the beer on April Fools day of all days.
So the go broke part is for the company itself, while the people using wokeness for their benefit are grifting and taking short term gains. Same thing was for something like BLM, which is an organization that revealed the money donated for the purpose of helping black communities was instead used to buy the founders mansions. The idea that wokeness brings in the cash and it can be called “woke capitalism” is absurd due to the lack of longevity the concept has. This is like calling a stolen item that gets sold at a pawn shop “illegal capitalism”. It doesn’t mean much, and it’s just trying to tie capitalism in with something negative, which is hilarious since wokeness is meant for the left.
With that out of the way, I’m going to get into the jargon, which will allow us to see some of the “philosophy” behind woke. The first one is “critical theory” which is what everything under wokeness is based on to enact a policy. This is how they choose who is marginalized and who isn’t. The term critical race theory originated in the 1980s through discussions about laws because some people decided that equality was not enough. It’s not enough that you can treat a person as an equal, like how a liberal does, because somehow a person born in 1980 is influenced by their ancestry from 1480. Judith Butler helped popularize critical queer theory, which lost the critical part once that aspect was seen as bad, thanks to critical race theory.
They kept all of the critical theory roots, but they removed the word critical because they don’t want to appear… critical. This also happened when Lisa Tuttle popularized the current form of feminist theory, where they remove the critical part because of the stigma they know the word has. No matter what, deception and omission must be used to get their agenda through, because that’s all they know how to do. They cannot get power unless they deceive people into giving them their power. And I find that a little odd since critical theory is a Marxist theory that came from the Frankfurt School from a man named Max Horkheimer, way back in 1937.
Max’s idea was that the enlightenment was a mistake, making him anti-modernist, but the postmodernists of this school of thought will still insist that there is something modernist about critical theory. They claim it’s because Marx was objective because Marx thought something objective is whatever is practiced, yet nothing he claims that is practiced was ever true, so it’s sort of a strange way to misdirect people into thinking that his appeal to his own version of rationalism was somehow actual rationalism. In other words, it’s wordplay. But, we can still say something like his attachment to science being a key element of his ideology, with science trying to be used to determine the natural world, is sort of modernist.
And this is the first step into getting confused as to what anything is, which is why people need a clear explanation as to what something like a modernist is. A good way to explain if something is actually modernist is if you can ask a writer if they believe in marxism and objectivity. If they say no, then we can see that Marxism appeals to the postmodernist in a way that is by design, not by accident. This is why Jordan Peterson is forced to call actual Marxists “neo-Marxists” and “cultural marxists”, because of the constant wordplay that is used by the very same Marxists.
Now, I want to harp on Marxism due to the fact that every single critical theory that the woke adopted is a Marxist theory. Critical theory was based on Marxism and critical theory declared that cultural equality was required in order to prevent fascism. It determined that individuals are not the ones behind social problems, but instead these problems were caused by social structures and cultural bias. What are these problems and what are the solutions, you may ask?
Well, critical theory doesn’t have any of that covered. In fact, the goal was to NOT cover any of those and to just say “social problems are at the social level” and that’s it. Congratulations, theory complete. The social thing is about society and society is how individuals interact. So it’s not the individual’s fault, it’s how they act with each other that’s the problem. So the theory is saying we need to change our act in order to solve the problems, and this was followed by the feminists who say we need to help the women get up in life. This was followed by the CRTists who said we need to help certain races get up in life. This was followed by the Queer Theorists who said we need to help the LGBT get up in life. There is the body positivity, the handicapped, the “don’t slut shame me" movement, and the list goes on and on.
Now we’re in a world where all of these things are in our media and forced into our media because somehow critical theory is the new normal, but you’re not allowed to say it’s forced. If you say it’s forced, some people might reject it and then the enforcers lose power, so they will always say “this is how media always was”. This is how we now have people claiming that ancient civilizations were pro-trans and pro-gay, even though they weren’t and I thought the entire point in CHANGING society is because these social problems are ingrained into society?
This is how the woke say one thing and then mean another. They want the power, but claim the power is given to someone else, while they take the power for themselves. Something like gender is told to be super important and something even worth committing suicide over, but then the lady who made up queer theory says that gender is performative, meaning that it doesn’t matter. Feminism is told to be super important because this is how we can help women become equal, and then we’re told by the person who made current feminist theory that “you’re not born a woman, you become one, even if you were born a male.”
This “equality of power” that the critical theorists said they wanted quickly turned into an “equality of babbling”. Nothing under wokeness makes any sense, and neither does the origin of the term woke. It is meant to mean a person is awake, that they were sleepwalking through life and now they are aware that bad things are happening in society. What are these bad things? Well, whatever you can make up and convince others is bad, since it’s all subjective. If someone steals a VCR and they are black, you can say the police who arrested the thief are evil because they are oppressing a desperate black man who “wouldn’t have stolen if society just treated him better.”
Of course, this implies that rapists only rape because they weren’t treated well enough by society, but only of that rapist is a particular skin color. The woke quickly tie the “need to rape” with skin color, and then call others racists. Actually, now that I’m on the race topic, let’s lay out CRT and how they view race from their supposed “law related origins”.
CRT determines that race doesn’t actually exist, that white people created race to then create racism. I’ll say that again to make sure if you caught that. CRT, a belief about how race works, claims that race doesn’t exist. But then it blames a particular race because… it’s not racist. Did I mention that this belief is anti-evidence and anti-reason? Yes, they do not want reason or evidence to be used for laws, because these things are biased. Instead they want storytelling from the marginalized person, who is called black, even though they don’t believe black as a race exists. This storytelling can be something like “I was walking down the street and I saw a police officer and I felt fear. I should not feel fear. That means the police officer is racist because I’m black and they made me fear.”
To make it even worse, they determine that color blindness from laws causes racist laws to form, because discrimination can occur from certain laws like murder rates, drug use, and theft. Something like being on time to work is considered racist, because a clock is a construction by white people to keep black people down. There’s always something designed by the white man to “keep black people down” because they believe white people only have power because they can keep others down. This is why they advocate to pull all of the non-whites up by forcing white people to hire non-white people into roles in movies or something like a job or using affirmative action to force black people into college classes by reducing their requirements.
Apparently, when you go to the military, the goal is not to have a good soldier but to allow more women to get in by reducing the standard for them. The goal of getting black people into college is to reduce the requirements for them so that they can get in, while increasing the requirements for Asians because there are too many Asians in college. But if we look at media, and only the US media, we can see there is a lack of Asians, so Asians are forced into film sets. Yes, there are plenty of Asians in, you know, Asian countries, soaking up all of the film time, but they don’t count.
In fact, they don’t count because white people don’t watch them as much, so now we have to have an enforcement of Asians being translated into English for western audiences to indulge in Asian culture, which is why Netflix transfers money from the west to the east and tries to get a bunch of Korean, Chinese, Japanese, and Thai content out. A lot of this Asian content is also LGBT, because even though these Asian countries don’t care for such content, the west must believe that the east is super open about it. There will be something like a comedy about a pregnant male that comes from Korea, and the west will take that and say it’s empowering because it fights against gender norms.
Meanwhile, the story is just a postmodernist joke about how it would be funny if men felt pregnancy pain. And it’s because there was a postmodernist comedy called Junior which had the joke “wouldn’t it be funny if a big buff Austrian dude was pregnant?”
My point is that wokeness is just appropriation, through and through. If it’s ancient bigotry, they will say it’s woke. If it’s modernist liberalism, they’ll say it’s woke. If it’s postmodernism making fun of wokeness, they’ll say it’s woke. No matter what, they will spin something to call it woke, just so that they can say liberalism is evil and equality is evil. Their goal is to have an equal outcome, which is their excuse to give certain groups more money and fame, all while ignoring merit. The very idea of rejecting merit as a qualifier is the reason woke media is designed to lose money, and is also a way to tie woke to postmodernism.
I think this is enough explanation of the jargon for now. Not sure if I missed anything, but I think enough of a point is made on that part to have anyone understand how wokeness works. The metaphysics is the same as postmodernist, it’s all subjective. The epistemology is through lived experience because of the storytelling that’s deemed as superior to reason. The ethics is social justice, because they demand equity, aka equal outcome. The politics are marxist, meaning their goal is to remove capitalism because capitalism is an evil product of liberalism. And finally the aesthetic is what I would call anti-art.
I guess I might be able to explain the aesthetics, but it’s rather loose. The problem is that art to the woke is just propaganda. The don’t really give a story or plot with woke media, instead they just take something generic and roll with it, assuming they even give it a plot. For example, there is a woke comic from Marvel(since every comic from them is woke now) where a superhero gets stopped by a cop for being native american. This female, possibly lesbian, native american uses her powers to have the cop realize he’s racist by mind controlling him into thinking he’s racist.
Work with me here…
So the cop is at his house later and decides that he can’t live with himself as a racist person, so he shoots himself in the head. The native american woman watches him from afar and goes “my work here is done” and considers herself a hero for the day. Comic book issue over. So the plot of that story was “super hero uses powers to make a random cop kill himself because racism.”
There is nothing in the story we can call true, nothing we can call interesting, nothing can be called entertaining, nothing can be called useful, nothing can be called anything other than utterly pointless. But the point was to say “racism exists. Stay woke.” That’s the message. That’s the reason an artist spent a month working on a comic and that’s why a company invested money into it to sell it to people who decided to pay money for it and read it. I have no idea who paid money to read that, but I can safely say it wasn’t that many people.
The goal is not to have people buy the product, it’s to simply say the product exists and point to it and go “see, a company put money into that group.” This is kind of like an updated version of “everyone gets a trophy” but instead of everyone, it’s the non-whites, non-cis, non-straights, and non-males. And instead of a trophy you get a product people don’t want to buy.
This is why I consider any answer as woke in my test as an indication of a person being woke. You really do need to jump through a bunch of hurdles to get stuck into this kind of mentality and the only question that people got woke was the one where lived experience is the answer. I think a better term might be anecdotal evidence, because like I said, the woke will reject reason and evidence and instead focus on storytelling, with storytelling here meaning you’re saying what you thought happened through your subjective opinion, and this can be anything you want it to be.
Hell, I can say something like “I felt like a unicorn” and that is considered a lived experience, because somehow I know what a unicorn feels like and somehow you now need to believe I did. So maybe anecdotal is the proper term to use, but then the woke will avoid that one since they know it looks like a fallacy and they can’t socially bring themselves to be stigmatized like that when they think it’s not acceptable. So it’s one of those things where I can either have one wording that causes a false positive or the other wording that will cause a false negative. But, then again, if someone is woke already, they would fail other questions anyway, so maybe I can put that one as not really important to worry about.
So there you have it, definitions and grave detail into all 4 types. I’m sure someone will conjure up more questions and I’m sure a postmodernist will say I’m wrong about everything, but at that point, I did my part so it’s not my problem.
Onto the next section that follows the next question: How do you justify reducing things to something like woke?
Reductionism is when you take something that is complex, like a story, and reduce it to particular fundamentals to provide a sufficient explanation. This is something like when a story gets reduced to a genre when you label it with a genre, because the genre is fundamental. This can also be something like calling yourself a Christian when you believe in the teachings of Christ. Sure, you have other qualities about yourself, but this can be an explanation into something that explains very quickly because it broadens the scope. But the question is HOW do I do this with something like woke, or modernism.
Simple: you look at the definition and go “ah, I see, that’s what it’s doing.”
Pre-modernism and modernism are objective, postmodernism and woke are subjective. Already these two groups are split by a single key factor. I can instantly say woke is a terrible storytelling way of thinking because the goal is to treat merit and superior quality as oppressive, so there is no possible way of making a good story that’s woke. It’s, by design, unable to be good. If we take postmodernism, we can say that it instantly rejects telling the truth, so it must make something up with exploitation and it’s going to be like fast food for the brain. It is, by design, unable to stand the test of time.
But then if we take something like modernism, we can see a truth is there, even if it tries to be individual, because then a guide based on personalities can be seen, and a way might be unlocked. This is why a modernist story is considered classic, and we look up to it as inspiration. Pre-modernism is as primitive and societally significant as you can get, to the point where it’s part of history books as a mythology. We base entire cultures around this type of media and we follow through with our daily life by using this type of media as a guide. In fact, pre-modernism is found IN postmodernism by accident when a postmodernist tries to appropriate, which is why we can find something like alchemy and Gnosticism in a postmodernist movie like The Matrix. There are modernist concepts like The Rabbit Hole in The Matrix, despite The Matrix trying to subvert it and reject it.
So like a genre, the direction of your modernist variant is reliant on both intention and focus, rather than if something is there. I can have a cockroach crawl into my cake when I’m baking it, that doesn’t mean cockroach is part of the recipe. So the goal of the test is to see what kind of recipe people are following and we can determine what kind of cook they are in how they view recipes. There is no danger of reductionism because reductionism is used to prevent dangers. In fact, in the most ironic way possible, to claim reductionism is dangerous here is to use dangerous reductionism to make such a claim, because it reduces the entire process to the idea of dangerous.
Now for the last question: How do you prevent people from rejecting pre-modernism?
Page has determined that if you claim form = function = truth, then you have caused pre-modernism to be the same as woke. As I’ve explained, they aren’t the same thing. Yes both are based on religions, with wokeness being based on Gnosticism, which is to self worship and deem yourself as the true god that is imprisoned in your body by the demiurge, but that isn’t the same thing as “telling an actual truth”.
Gnosticism is sophistry mixed with satanism. I always forget the term and can never find it, but it’s the belief that you’re alone and you’re talking to yourself even when you talk to others. This is how people get trapped in an echo chamber, because all the can do is hear themselves talk and tackle their own ideas of what could be wrong, which requires them accepting they could be wrong, and if they don’t accept that possibility, then everything goes in one ear and out the other. They start to follow a script, become an NPC, and all they can do is become violent once the script runs dry.
Can the pre-modernist become the same thing? Absolutely not. The benefit of a pre-modernist is that we don’t believe we rule the world. We understand that the world is in control, the supernatural controls the world, and we are below all of that as measly humans. We are the cameraman, not the director. Better yet, we are the audience watching a live feed with a cameraman controlling what we get to see, and we’re not involved in any of the production. This acceptance of humility allows the pre-modernist to seek truth, which is how a mythology is born in the first place. The only valid criticism is that the subjects become so grand and universal that they are basic and unable to really tackle the more personal and social issues that modernism tackles.
This basic and broadness is what Page considered “unentertaining”. But during a later exchange, during the making of this response, I found something fascinating. Page’s definition of entertaining is contradictory, because she believes it is objective in the fact that entertainment exists, but WHAT WE SEE as entertaining is subjective. So the complaint that something could be unentertaining isn’t valid, because it doesn’t mean anything if it’s subjective. It’s like saying a traditional dish doesn’t taste good and that’s why that traditional dish is bad to limit people to it.
Well, what if every good dish becomes traditional because people see it as tasty? I am not limited to my own personal tradition, I can enjoy another person’s tradition. I can eat sushi as a German who loves bratwurst and sauerkraut. I can eat pad thai and I can eat sweet and sour pork. I can eat baba ghanoush and shepherd’s pie.
Do you know why I can eat these? Because they are all food that is made of nutrients that people ate since the dawn of time. My human body needs stuff that humans eat for nutrients and there is a select number of nutrients that I need per day because it’s the stuff my body uses. Same goes for storytelling and the specific things my brain will use to gain wisdom and intelligence. The pre-modernist believes that there are these end points that we can address and say “this is the form, this is the end point, can’t go past that.”
The modernist claims “this is scientifically why we can’t go past a certain point, but we might get more information later that will allow us to pass that point.”
Then the postmodernist says “that point is a made up line, the limitation is made up, and the idea you’re in a particular position is also made up, so just mess with things and call them different things.”
Then the woke say “That point doesn’t exist but it’s oppressing me.”
As you can see, the pre-modernist is the most coherent because it’s the most accepting of how things are. I think what Page misunderstood is that some people think a form is what humans determine the form to be, and the form is left as that. Wrong. Form is to reach an endpoint and we cannot physically reach this endpoint, meaning the form will only be in our mental state through symbolism when we’re trying to think of such. Thus, symbolism is the key factor, and all you have to do is make the symbol more clear.
What really struck me as odd is that Page also declared the Bible as entertaining, meaning a pre-modernist work is the prime example of entertaining while her rejection of pre-modernism is because it is not entertaining. I cannot make any sense of that contradiction other than maybe Page believing that media being full of lies is entertainment and that’s not allowed under pre-modernism, which doesn’t mean anything to me.
That’s like going “well, your philosophy doesn’t allow contradictions and uses only logic, so it’s not a good philosophy.”
At that point, we simply have to call such a person postmodernist, because only a postmodernist would demand such a thing.
What am I going to do now that the test was tested? Well, I am sure I am going to make 5 sets of 4 questions for sure, with the 2 overarching questions added in the beginning and end. I will also try to use that google forms thing so that it can be a real test. When I get a website up for my company, I will have the test as part of the entrance exam to join the club. Pre-modernists are preferred, modernists are welcomed, postmodernists are tolerated, and woke are excluded. Sorry, we don’t allow such hateful people into the club. We like to work with normal functional people, and the woke do not meet either requirement.
And I know it doesn’t seem like it, but I am working on the test to have writers see what they KNOW about writing. That one is going to be a bit harder to put together, since I was thinking of getting written answers rather than multiple choice. I think the hardest part with that one will be figuring out how to work in creativity, since that one is tricky to sense if it’s intentional or accidental. But, like always, if I need help, I’ll ask.
Till next time.
2023.06.10 13:42 AdSignificant1382 Recall training for a dog that isn’t food motivated?
I’m trying to teach my 19 month old dog recall via whistle (because I can’t shout and the sound is free of any emotion).
So far I’ve done the basic thing where I use the whistle near her and then follow up with a high value treat. I’ve been doing this for a while and I have her at a point where she usually comes when this is done somewhere inside the home.
However, if she decides she currently doesn’t want a treat, she doesn’t budge - which kind of defeats the purpose of the whistle recall. We haven’t even progressed into higher distraction environments and I can already see she does it only on a “when I feel like it” basis.
Her toy / play motivation is the same. Always highly dependent on her mood. Her biggest motivator is and has always been access to the environment, but I have no clue how that is paired with recall in training. Any tips?
submitted by AdSignificant1382 to puppy101 [link] [comments]
So far I’ve done the basic thing where I use the whistle near her and then follow up with a high value treat. I’ve been doing this for a while and I have her at a point where she usually comes when this is done somewhere inside the home.
However, if she decides she currently doesn’t want a treat, she doesn’t budge - which kind of defeats the purpose of the whistle recall. We haven’t even progressed into higher distraction environments and I can already see she does it only on a “when I feel like it” basis.
Her toy / play motivation is the same. Always highly dependent on her mood. Her biggest motivator is and has always been access to the environment, but I have no clue how that is paired with recall in training. Any tips?
2023.06.10 13:39 smartfold007 The old feelings started to relapse
It's been half a year since I went no contact with her and now my body wants to go back to her, not as a lover but as a friend. I miss the moments we spent together even though I know how toxic it was and soul-absorbing.
We met at work. Strange thing was that we became best-friends in a blink of an eye. We started hanging around, I met her boyfriend we used to chat every single day. I felt like I was bound to her "magic", even though she was treating me like shit sometimes, never accepting my believes, interests and we used to debate a lot, but she never accepted my word yet we couldn't stop talking and hanging around. She was always the one complaining about life, how miserable she is and I was always there to reassure her that everything she does is splendid (it was true, she never accepted that she is good enough). There was a period when I distanced myself from her, too much toxicity that affected my daily life. I was so self-conscious about everything, even the clothes that I wear were matched in order to be accepted by her when I arrive at work or at the pub.
Out of nowhere, we meet at a party and she gets emotional that I will leave work and she would never see me again. It was a strange thing she did, she cut off contact with anyone who isn't around her, even when her boyfriend would leave for a week, she wasn't contacting him. So I reassured her that we would still be friends and see each other occasionally. That's when things took a turn. She became the nicest girl, she would compliment me every day and the worst of all, one night she went for a kiss. She reassured me that she broke up with her boyfriend because he gave her "unconditional love"? I still can't understand that reason but she knew when I was the most emotionally unstable and took the chance. Thing is she cheated on him and then week later she broke up. She was constantly telling me that she would do anything to make me happy. She praised me like I was some deity. She even went full hardcore, even though I knew that she is vanilla, shy and has an extreme insecurity. She did hardcore sex with me, telling me that she has never done it before but she would do anything for me even get pierced and tattoo on the chest just because I liked that. But something was off, I sensed emptiness in her eyes and I felt drained after seeing her. My gut was telling me to back off. She was constantly crying that she loves me yet she thinks that this won't last but she wanted to keep going because I was the type of stable person she need in her life. So I cut her off. She didn't even flinch, like it was nothing. Thanked me for making her never feel happiness again and blamed me for being toxic and that she had an ick? from the beginning.
Month later she messaged me that she was constantly thinking about me, that she wanted a closure and I wished her the best. She deleted me from every social media and went no contact. Last thing I found out from my ex colleagues is that she started dating someone immediately.
Thing is I can't get her out of my head every single day. She haunts me. That give and take torture broke me. Two months after we split, I started feeling better but these days I can't because this period reminds me of her, when we met and I thought that I found my soul-mate.
Thanks for reading this whole story. Take care of yourselves :)
submitted by smartfold007 to NarcissisticAbuse [link] [comments]
We met at work. Strange thing was that we became best-friends in a blink of an eye. We started hanging around, I met her boyfriend we used to chat every single day. I felt like I was bound to her "magic", even though she was treating me like shit sometimes, never accepting my believes, interests and we used to debate a lot, but she never accepted my word yet we couldn't stop talking and hanging around. She was always the one complaining about life, how miserable she is and I was always there to reassure her that everything she does is splendid (it was true, she never accepted that she is good enough). There was a period when I distanced myself from her, too much toxicity that affected my daily life. I was so self-conscious about everything, even the clothes that I wear were matched in order to be accepted by her when I arrive at work or at the pub.
Out of nowhere, we meet at a party and she gets emotional that I will leave work and she would never see me again. It was a strange thing she did, she cut off contact with anyone who isn't around her, even when her boyfriend would leave for a week, she wasn't contacting him. So I reassured her that we would still be friends and see each other occasionally. That's when things took a turn. She became the nicest girl, she would compliment me every day and the worst of all, one night she went for a kiss. She reassured me that she broke up with her boyfriend because he gave her "unconditional love"? I still can't understand that reason but she knew when I was the most emotionally unstable and took the chance. Thing is she cheated on him and then week later she broke up. She was constantly telling me that she would do anything to make me happy. She praised me like I was some deity. She even went full hardcore, even though I knew that she is vanilla, shy and has an extreme insecurity. She did hardcore sex with me, telling me that she has never done it before but she would do anything for me even get pierced and tattoo on the chest just because I liked that. But something was off, I sensed emptiness in her eyes and I felt drained after seeing her. My gut was telling me to back off. She was constantly crying that she loves me yet she thinks that this won't last but she wanted to keep going because I was the type of stable person she need in her life. So I cut her off. She didn't even flinch, like it was nothing. Thanked me for making her never feel happiness again and blamed me for being toxic and that she had an ick? from the beginning.
Month later she messaged me that she was constantly thinking about me, that she wanted a closure and I wished her the best. She deleted me from every social media and went no contact. Last thing I found out from my ex colleagues is that she started dating someone immediately.
Thing is I can't get her out of my head every single day. She haunts me. That give and take torture broke me. Two months after we split, I started feeling better but these days I can't because this period reminds me of her, when we met and I thought that I found my soul-mate.
Thanks for reading this whole story. Take care of yourselves :)
2023.06.10 13:35 willmagnify Notes on “A Tale of Two Cities: the development of early Arhada city states (0-500 AD)”, Part 2
Note to self 93,
Made it back to the library. "A Tale of two cities" was still there waiting for me, thankfully (the beauty of having niche interests!). I moved on to the chapters speaking directly about the two case studies and copied the most interesting passages.
These were the most noteworthy parts on Kamābarha:
I will be briefer on Amadahai, skipping all the things that are shared between the two cities. There are a couple of divergences that I think shed some light on how differently the political environment of the two cities evolved.
submitted by willmagnify to DawnPowers [link] [comments]
Made it back to the library. "A Tale of two cities" was still there waiting for me, thankfully (the beauty of having niche interests!). I moved on to the chapters speaking directly about the two case studies and copied the most interesting passages.
These were the most noteworthy parts on Kamābarha:
1. Kamābarha – Establishment and growth[...]
Though there is still a certain degree of debate, scholars speculate that Kamābarha is the earliest of Arhada cities. It would be expected, considering its proximity to a great number of Middle Pottery sites and its strategic location at the intersection of the Great lake and the southern basin, offering opportunities for a higher degree of cultural interaction – which inevitably leads to cultural maturity.
Indeed, the rise of Kamābarha has left tangible markings in the archaeological record: the construction of Kamābarha III, the layer that first gives us some indication of a level of state control over the region (in the form of contract tablets and other material remains, symbolism associated with governance and a mature elite power, as well as the sheer size of its palace and granary) has been unanimously placed in the 6th century BD. For the purposes of this text, we are interested in understanding what the city looked like before and immediately after that date, in order to understand its peculiar character, as well as the ingredients that brought its success.
Kamābarha's wealth was chiefly in its copper reserves. The stretch of land between the Great lake and the southern Tritonean lakes, traversed by what the Arhada referred to as Green River, contained plentiful mineral deposits, ranging from pure copper, silver, and zinc-contaminated copper, otherwise known as "natural brass". This naturally occurring alloy was perhaps Kamābarha greatest export, although the metallurgical culture of Formative Tritonea was rather scant, and most uses for these metals were either decorative or for the production of cold-worked arrowheads. These items are found as far west as early Hortens sites and as far south as the Aluwa. They were either transported as fully formed arrowheads or as plates which were then worked locally by the importers. Within the confines of Kamābarha and its environs, however, we can find a higher ratio of copper artisanal goods and artistic objects than weapons: an indication of a lack of pressure to militarise. Brass is found on the decorations of Kamābarha's palace, in the form of mirrors, bracelets, jewellery. The oldest example of a painted copper plate – a typical Arhadan decorative items consisting of a flat copper surface covered on both sides with oil paint, was found in Kamābarha III. Chemical analyses confirm that what appears today as a simple oxidised copper disk was in fact coloured with bright pecan oil based paints.[...]
That is not to say that the production of military gear, or, indeed, warfare, was inexistent. The dispersal of arrowheads along the north shore of the Great Lake gives us a clear indication that Kamābarha's influence was not based only on agricultural wealth or cultural influence: some amount of force was indeed employed in the creation of its political network.
2. Kamābarha –Internal Politics[...]
Kamābarha's political structure was the natural evolution of the typical characters of pre-formative Arhada centres, as discussed earlier. At the top of the hierarchy were the "famous", as the nobility was known, and below was everyone else. Tracing the rise to power of the "famous" clans is no easy feat, but its clear that, through generations of wealth accumulation, a set of dynamics which allowed the flourishing of a restricted group of landowners culminated in a clear class divide between this group of hereditary leaders and the manpower contributing to their wealth.
At the time of Kamābarha III it seems like four or five clans shared the spaces of the palatial district, with the number dropping to three, either through the merger of two clans or the extinguishing of the families, in the 7th century. This has been suggested by the symbolism prevalent on funerary urns found within the site, with each clan being associated with a specific symbol: in early Kamābarha III we find the tortoise, the heron, the parrot, and two variations of the burning house motif – one flanked by two pecan trees, the other standing on its own. It's unknown whether the last two represented a single clan or two separate ones. As the period progressed, however, we find that later urns are only marked with heron, parrot and burning house logograms. These three clans probably included a great deal of people, between the matriarchs, the leaders and a third class of non-inheriting clan members.
Power was seemingly based on seniority, passing from the son of the eldest matriarch, who would hold leadership within the village, to the next; his second in line – either a brother or the son of the second-senior matriarch – would act as a representative. Note how power passes from the matriarchs, and not from the men themselves: it's the eldest mother that produces the city's leader, but that does not mean that the leader is necessarily the senior nobleman.
One aspect of this system that is currently under debate is whether the wealth of the four (later three) clans was pooled together or if they maintained some additional independent wealth: it would seem like that was the case. It is now believed that the Ibosso hadân (marriage vessel) was treated as a person's independent wealth: each clan would put the wealth of their Ibosso hadân together with the other members of their clan, but separate from the common wealth of the city; non-inheriting clan members would keep theirs separate shares. All other goods – the herds, the harvest from the paddies, and items produced by the clan for the treasury – were handled communally by the Council of the matriarchs and the two male leaders: the internal leader, or "First Leader", handling issues pertaining to the administration of the city at large, and an external one, a "Second Leader", whose duties involved diplomatic journeys to client villages and the collection of payments.A diagram of power relations in Kamābarha, for reference. I was impressed by how mobile social classes were, even within such a hierarchical society. There's an entire chapter dedicated to this:
2.b Kamābarha –Lower Classes and social mobilityI was fascinated about the "Shrine Keeper" figure, but I could find very little about it. I found this on shrines, though:
Overall, two other social classes were recognised aside from the members of the famous clans; the commoners and the clanless. The commoners formed the bulk of the population: there could have been anything between one and two hundred minor clans inhabiting Kamābarha, most of which were farmers and horticulturalists, but many of whom were moving towards specific arts and crafts as the quality of life increased due to the higher level food security provided by the state. The men of this social class would be called for military duty by the leadership in times of war – when the time came to exact payment by force from a client city, for example – but all evidence points to this being a rather rare occasion. Clans mostly contributed to the palace economy, in the form of corvée labour (wherein each clan had to provide a fixed number of workers for the paddy) or the production of specialised goods. Because of this, having a clan could prove to be expensive, and when those payments could not be met, clanhood would be revoked: this gave rise to the Clanless, a more generalistic group comprised of those without the means to provide work to the palace as an organised force as well as all prisoners of war, foreigners or recent immigrants that have not yet entered the social fabric of the city. These people worked the paddies in exchange for wages, paid in the form of zizania or tobacco, and would be the first group to which the most labour intensive jobs were assigned.
That is not to say that people statically belonged to one class or other; People of a famous clan could intermarry with commoners – this was somewhat rare, as the preference was to marry within one of the other famous families or with the upper class of the other cities, both client and independent. But in times of need, when there weren't suitable partners of the same generation, the Matriarchs who regulated upper class unions, could allow a commoner to enter their group. Another means of social betterment for commoners was being chosen as a favourite at the palace: when an artist or artisan – commonly a woman, but sometimes a man as well – was considered to be highly skilled by a member of the four inner clans, they could chose to sponsor them, sacrificing personal wealth to allow them to live at the palace, where they would continue their craft for the benefit of the palace's treasury. Within the palace, Favourites were then allowed to marry and reside until their death: their children, growing with the children of the famous clans, often grew up to be considered suitable marriage partners. The Clanless had ways to climb the social ladder as well: becoming a Kabaima, a helper, for the inhabitants palace was considered to be an honourable post, the highest honour for someone without a Clan. They were similarly allowed to live and marry within the palace, and where often given some payment for their descendants at the end of their service, when they reached old age or died.
In an intermediary position the commoners and the famous where the non-inheriting children of the latter. The sons and daughters of the men of the clan were not included in the matrilineal passage of power and had to find themselves a position in society: the men were often encouraged to join the "high guard", responsible for the private property of the clan within the city, and both men and women could become "Shrine keepers", organising religious functions and overseeing the community who took care of the shrine's upkeep. These positions were open to commoners too, but Famous commoners, due to their closeness to the clan (and thus, to leadership), were preferred for this kind of position.
5. Kamābarha – Early Tritonean shrines, the rise of an architectural typology:[...]
Within the context of northern Arhada cities, we can see the emergence of a new building type: specialised shrines, independent of the palace district. These prove to be an evolution of the domestic type: the courtyard framing a centred, central-plan building was a clear re-elaboration of palaces; the difference however is in the proportions between the single parts. The courtyard building surrounding the shrine proper, now a mere framing device, grew narrower and shorter, while the central building acquired prominence, both in size and in height. The central structure contained one large square room where votive statuettes, offerings and precious materials were gifted from people honouring the spirits to whom the shrine was dedicated. Because early shrines were made of wood, we have little direct information regarding their appearance, for which we need to employ pictorial and sculptural sources (clay models of shrines are a common pottery item, used for votive purposes). It has been proposed that early shrines were often rebuilt as the object of devotion changed according to the needs of the city – it's believed that this rebuilding of the shrine often corresponded with the promotion of a new Shrine Keeper. Eventually, shrines would be built in more durable materials, making rebuilding less practical, but in this early stage the reconstruction of the shrine was probably a ritual occurrence.
It must be noted that shrines had their way of accumulating wealth, through the management of the offerings given by the devout: some shrines in Kamābarha had enough to surpass a number of the wealthiest non-famous Clans. Because the appointment to shrines was handled by the council of Matriarchs, however, the Famous Clans always had a way to indirectly handle those resources, through the appointment of a family member.I copied some more drawings: one is a fascinating scheme of how temple typologies became more and more complex through the ages (though the last example is some 1000 years outside the timeline of the essay) and the other is an axonometric view of temple "E".
I will be briefer on Amadahai, skipping all the things that are shared between the two cities. There are a couple of divergences that I think shed some light on how differently the political environment of the two cities evolved.
1. Amadahai – Establishment and Growth[...]
One key difference between Amadahai and Kamābarha was in their location: while Kamābarha was built along the coast of the Great Lake, Amadahai was founded in a strategic location at the head of the land bridge that closes off most of the small lake Thidorovôdjo from the larger Odjohivôdjo. This thin strip of land was reinforced with rows of paddies on both sides, creating a lush environment for the agricultural production of the urban centre. The warmer climate of Amadahai also provided the locals with a longer growing season, ensuring a higher production of high quality fruits and fruit products – wines, preserves, oil – that would be traded all over Tritonea and beyond. It seems that Amadahai's initial wealth was derived especially from this production and a booming trade of cosmetics in the form of spiced and perfumed oils, the large scale production of pigments such as indigo dye, ochre, and oil paint. It is worth dedicating a few words to this last product: while oil paints, as mixtures of pecan oil and pigments, had been used throughout Arhadan territory for some time (especially within the Southern Pottery School), Amadahai is the first site where the chemical analyses of archeological findings detected the use of hempseed oil – which acts as a better drying oil. Indeed, the high quality of the paintwork in pottery is one of the key feature of the Southern Pottery school, and some examples of painted pots, pipes and oil vessels are still visible today, with several exemplars being held at Newtown's Royal Museum of Horean Archaology. Tobacco was another notable export of the city and its wider political network: its climate was well suited for the cultivation of the leaf which was then carried throughout the lake system.
Amadahai also served as a centre of agricultural development, with the innovation of at least two very important crops being connected to the site of Amadahai II (contemporary with Kamābarha III). The first is Taraxacum ceratophorum, the wild Tritonean Dandelion, which the Arhada domesticated around the 5th Century, and began to select over the course of the next Centuries to obtain a series of crops we commonly eat to this day. Taraxacum was used for a number of different functions: the roots could be used to create brews, the leaves could be eaten raw, the petals could be crushed into dyes or used as aromatics.A picture of the Wooly Cattail from the book! I had no idea it was first domesticated there, though thinking about it, it makes sense. I suppose I have to thank the people of Amadahai for the sweater I'm wearing right now. Some notes on politics, then I'll have to leave the library – the old man at the desk is giving me looks.
Even more economically important was the creation of the Cattail variant Typha domestica var. lanifera, also called "Southern Cattail" or "Wooly Cattail". The fluff of wild cattails was hard to spin because of the shortness of the strands. As such, hemp-cattail blends started off as a common alternative to either of the pure fibre, softening the roughness of hemp and supplementing the scarcity of workable Typha fibre. Over the years, as cattail-flower fibre goods became more prised for their soft texture, the plant was selected for longer and sturdier fibres, larger heads and shorter stalks. The gathering of the fibre was light enough work to allow for the material to spread even thogh the cattail itself, domesticated from Typha Domingensis, required warmer climates, impeding its spread to the northern half of the Arhada territories in lake Sibozjivôro. This ensured that its cultivation would remain a southern specialty for some time, further ensuring Amadahai's commercial success.
2. Amadahai – Internal PoliticsAmadahai's political diagram for reference.
The key differences in the political structure of early Amadahai can be easily appreciated when ne observes the power structures within its leadership class. Where Kamābarha had four or three leading clans, Amadahai maintains a stable number of six clans.
Because the members of the leading families represent a greater percentage of the city's demography, the leadership of early Amadahai is thought to be less top-heavy: all mothers of the six ruling clans participated in the council and, rather than having a single elder matriarch as the head of the council – as was the case in Kamābarha –, the duties of the council were split between three members, elected by the matriarchs amongst the matriarchs.[...]
The "Speaker" had a similar functions to the senior matriarch of Kamābarha but her role was mostly that of a representative and prima inter pares, rather than a final authority. She was flanked by two peers, equally chosen by the entire council: a "Treasure mother", who acted as a steward for the shared wealth of the clans, and a "Lore mother". The responsibilities of this final figure were perhaps the widest: amongst them was a cereful knowledge of genealogy and the history of Amadahai and all its client cities, the recording of contracts of obeisance and clientele, the approval and arrangement of marriages between members of the Famous clans, as well as the mentorship of younger women who might succeed her. While the Speaker of the council evidently held the most outwardly active role, the Lore Mother, in lieu of her deep knowledge, wisdom and powerful responsibilities, was treated with the most respect amongst the three.
If we look at the political role of men, we can see that even their division of power was more egalitarian than in Kamābarha: while we can still notice a clear division between First Leader and Second Leader, in a similar fashion to what we see in the northern city, we find that the second leader does not act independently in matters of war, being assisted instead by a war council formed of all the adult men of the clan. This speaks to Amadahai's deeper martial culture, born of a more conflictual relationship with its southern neighbours. The war council culminated in the creation of a sort of military elite – hunting and engaging in sporting culture during times of peace and commanding forces of commoners and clansless people in times of war. This is visible in the developement of specialised weapons (in Amadahai II we see the first depictions of recurve self bows in pictographs, pottery and sculpture) as well as an increase in arrowhead production dated from this period. There is current debate over whether the "Famous commoner" class could join this group, but the consensus seems to be that while they could become commanders, they did not have the rights to speak or vote in the war council proper.
While both an elite military role and priesthood were acceptable paths for famous commoners, it seems that these options were barred to all other commoners (another difference from Kamābarha). Again, this is possibly explained by the higher numbers of nobles in the city. A "lower guard", overseeing the protection of everything within the city but outside the palace was manned by commoners, whereas the "higher guard", acting as personal protectors of the Famous men and right hand men in times of war, were chosen exclusively amongst the non-inheriting relatives of the clan. The same goes for the priesthood: men and women of the clan's blood but outside the line of inheritance were invited to oversee the running of a temple: to be appointed, a "famous commoner" would require the backing of a member of one of the clans – usually via their father – and unanimous consent from all the members of the high leadership: the three matriarchs and the two leaders. These postings were diplomatically and economically sensitive: they allowed one of the clans to give an affiliated party a role within the leadership of a shrine, tapping into additional resources for the benefit of their family.Alright, I guess that's enough research for my thesis – I'm super tired. I might still borrow this book when I can. End of note.
2023.06.10 13:33 AutoModerator [Genkicourses.site] ✔️Brett Kitchen & Ethan Kap – P2 Virtual Selling Accelerator ✔️ Full Course Download
![[Genkicourses.site] ✔️Brett Kitchen & Ethan Kap – P2 Virtual Selling Accelerator ✔️ Full Course Download](https://external-preview.redd.it/zxvV4NAlpZHGcazC2ym9WMnBuJU35CXyzUa9BAHrGgo.jpg?width=320&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=743a975239f9e3ccd94c47b48a686e2fdc94c990 "[Genkicourses.site] ✔️Brett Kitchen & Ethan Kap – P2 Virtual Selling Accelerator ✔️ Full Course Download") | ➡️https://www.genkicourses.site/product/brett-kitchen-ethan-kap-p2-virtual-selling-accelerato⬅️ submitted by AutoModerator to GenkiCourses_Cheapest [link] [comments] Get the course here: [Genkicourses.site] ✔️Brett Kitchen & Ethan Kap – P2 Virtual Selling Accelerator ✔️ Full Course Download https://preview.redd.it/p7lue6tb6x4b1.png?width=600&format=png&auto=webp&s=240e0906e105d6f3aba1a055b48c36e1cc06cda6 Courses proof (screenshots for example, or 1 free sample video from the course) are available upon demand, simply Contact us here What You Get: MODULE 1: The Presuppositional Playbook Psychology The most fundamental difference in face to face, vs virtual selling is the absolute need to have the prospect be pushing for the sale. They must be the one driving for the solution. They have to want it more than you do. They have to be more engaged in the process than they are face to face. When you sell virtually the more you talk, the worse your close rates will be. When you are sitting with a prospect together, it’s easy to have the momentum of the meeting and the relationship you’ve developed together carry the sale to the finish line. This does not happen virtually. There is a distance, a void between you and the prospect that is easy for them to take your information and disappear, taking it to another advisor they know better. Presuppositional Selling does two important things. First, it structures the sales interaction in such a way that the prospect discovers intrisically the problems, pains, gains, and desire for a solution. One of the most powerful ways P2 selling works is helping the prospect see what they have not seen before. It changes context. It changes the frame. The Crucial 1st Appointment The first appointment in the leverage point that determines the success or failure of your entire sales process. Do a poor first appointment by talking too much, or ‘spilling your candy in the lobby’ and you’re doomed. Prospects won’t show up on the next call, and they will be lost and gone forever. There is an art and a science to doing the first appointment effectively and you’ll see exactly how to do it right. It starts with our 13 steps first appointment playbook. In this playbook you’ll get:
|
2023.06.10 13:31 EffectSubstantial909 Lost Terran - 6
6
Franz learns about the place he found himself as it turns out he found himself in one of the core worlds owned by a space faring civilization.
More than that there’s countless alien civilizations outside of the one he’s in, apparently he’s now in the Cret Republic despite having nobles running the Senate it still calls itself a republic.
Interestingly one thing Franz noticed is that the gender ratio leans heavily on the female side, strangely enough it’s not just the Cre’taxsians that has strange gender ratio all of the civilization has this over the top gender ratio, there are several times more female per one male.
Anyways today he’s meeting with a Senator
The door slides open and a familiar face appears
‘Isn’t that the women with the fancy coat?’ Franz thought
“Greetings, I hope that you’ve been treated well?”
“Oh yes the people here are very accommodating”
She smiles then said “really? I’m glade to hear that, from what I heard you seems hesitant to share information about your species”
“I hope that you’ll be understanding in the fact that I’m simply safeguarding my specie from any potential threats”
“I trust that you’ve learned enough in these past few days that the Cre’taxsian people are an honorable race and would want nothing more then to find allies in a hostile galaxy”
‘Well shit she knows how to play with words’ Franz thought as he’s currently in their “care” he can’t just say “your republic is crab” he’ll have to be neutral/skeptical at most and agreeing at worst.
“The Cret Republic is indeed a fine nation with honorable traditions and have earned some level of trust”
At Franz’s reply she smiles as she just won her first minor victory. The former general and currently a Senator believes that it’ll only be a matter of time before the male in-front of her opens up.
“Really? Can you tell me something about your species?”
“Our home world is called Earth and it’s the 3rd planet form our Sun and from what I tell from the information I was given it’s classified as a super high gravity world by galactic standards”
The Senator seemingly nods at the revelation that his species is from a high gravity world as it would explains how his high strength and how he was able to have such large leaps.
Like so far no intelligent species have been found to be from a super high gravity world, that would mean that humans are the first intelligent species to be known to inhabit a super high gravity planet, those would make establishing a diplomatic relations with his species even more important.
Even one of their males is able to tear 3 Hasperax mechs just imagine what an army of them could do?
As a former general Jil’adamas could imagine how terrible it would be if there was a stick force of such individuals.
“So can you tell me where your worlds is located at?”
‘She seems to think that humans is a spacefaring civilization… well … she’s not exactly wrong…. It’s just that the Mars base only has like 20 or so people’ Franz thought
“As I have previously explained I didn’t study Astronomy so can’t even find the general direction of my home even if O wanted to”
“What about your society? How does your people live?”
“ Our society is a “Patriarchal” society, it’s a society where male are the dominant gender”
At the revelation the Senator’s eyes turns wide as even the scientists listening outside also turns wide.
Then a commotion happens outside
“(Woooooo)” “(Oh my goddess~)”
a female scientist who has a masochist fetish exclaimed while another whistles
“Patriarchal” is a fictional society that was believed to only appears in novels but here it is! The dream of every herbivore females!
(Just think of male’s response to Femdom genre. Most men would be like “ohhh yeah” to the thought being pushed down by a female)
Bonk
“(You perverted bitch!)” yelled the head scientist as she bonks the degenerate staff’s head
As the head scientist quells the commotion outside back in the room.
The Senator coughs before asking “you’re not joking are you?”
“I’m not speaking in jest, Earth has always been a traditionally male dominated society”
“(Oh My Goddess!)” “(So Male dominated species does exists!?)” “(Wooooo)” “(Wooooo)”
That revelation is followed by a bunch of wooing and whistling outside the room.
It is fill by a bunch of bonking noises as the head scientist reigns in her staff the majority of which are single and are desperately trying to find a mate.
The Senator’s eyes frowns before asking “and your male based society has no problems ruling?”
The Senator has assumed that the gender ratio of Earth to be similar to the rest of the galaxy. One male per 10 females.
“In humans males has always been much stronger then females, there has been movement to change that in recent years but by and large Earth is still a male dominated society”
The Senator nodded recalling how this one male defeated 30 elite enforcers, 3 Hasperax enforcer mechs and 2 Pretorian commandos .
The Senator is currently imagining a small team of human males suppressing revolts.
She’s imagining that Earth is an authoritarian state where superhuman males ruling over a vast number of weaker females.
The Senator has her own bias towards males as a patriarchal society is until now just a fantasy.
That’s how she interpreted Franz’s words.
“So how does your people run country?”
‘Well time for some bullshiting’ Franz thought
“There’s the UN which encompasses all the significant human nations states”
Franz it trying to make the UN sound much much more powerful then it actually is, in actuality the UN is a joke!
Like China is a life time member of its Human rights council, it’s resolutions are just words and has no binding power, it’s criminal court are filled with corruption and most of the world in particular major powers just ignores them entirely.
The UN is nothing more then just a show for nations to pretend that they’re cooperating when they’re clearly are not.
“I see so what does this UN do?”
“The UN’s purposes is to maintain stability and security, develop friendly relations among nation state members, achieve internal cooperation, and serve as a centre for diplomatic dialogues.”
She raises her brow at his explanation as his explanation didn’t tell her anything! Which is the point cuz the UN doesn’t do anything.
“You said members nations? Can you tell me about them?”
“The 5 major members states that are permanently seated at UN’s “Supreme” council.
The British Commonwealth (yes, the Brits got their act together), the Fifth French Republic, the United States, People’s Republic of China and the Russian Federation”
“From the names I can tell they have different types of government” The Senator commented
“The British Commonwealth is a Parliamentary Monarchy, the United States is a Constitutional Republic, The Fifth French Republic is a Parliamentary Republic, China is a Socialist Republic and the Russian Federation is a Federal Republic ”
Franz tried to make it sound as compatible with the Cret Republic by omitting the undesirable parts in some of them, Franz also tried to make it sounds like the governments would be too complicated to explain so that he can just brush off any attempts to get further information.
“Can you explain how they function?”
“Too complicated to explain”
“I… see” she replied before narrowing her eyes.
At this time point the scientist sent a massage to the Senator requesting access to his devices.
“The chief scientist seems to have taken an interest in your devices and would like to examine them in detail”
‘She must mean my iPhone’ Franz thought
“I would politely decline these ”
“Might I know why”
“Those are my personal items and contains valuable memories from my homeland”
“I promise you that the scientist team are the finest on this world so you can rest assured”
Then Franz looks at the door and ever so slightly tilts his head making sure to give the impression of “yeah right” just a few seconds ago there was hooting outside.
“I’m sorry but I’m not ganna risk it”
—————————————
Meanwhile outside the room
Slam
‘These degenerates! Look at what they’ve done! I’m ganna give them a good scolding later’
With his reply the head scientist who was listening in slams her fist in her desk then she angrily stares her staff.
Her staff trembles as they know they’re ganna get it after this.
————————————
Back inside the room
They continues a bit of small talk Franz still trying to be as vague as possible while the Senator trying to get as much information as possible, unfortunately Franz is trained as a diplomat so accidentally let something slip.
“Electronics?” The Senator asked curiously as pretty much everyone uses photon based computers with the exception of a few select species that uses biological/chemical computers, those species tended to be hive species.
‘Shit!’ Franz cursed at himself before deciding to concede this one to them
“Yes, I’ve noticed that the computers here seems to be photon based, back home computers are almost entirely electrical electrical based using Electrons instead of Photons”
That came as major surprise as of what he said is true then what Franz has in his pocket is a the first example of a functional electrical computer that has only been thought as theoretical before.
‘Judging by the way he operates it its seems comparable to our datapad, which means that their electrical technology is fairly mature’ the head scientist thought as she can’t wait to get her hands in his device.
The head scientist urges the Senator to do something to get that device.
Of course the Senator knows the implications of such a discovery.
“The head scientist seems to really want to examine your device” the Senator commented again.
“I’ll decline again but certain other arrangements could be made”
“Oh?” The perked the Senator’s ears
“I heard that you have something called discovery and research rights, in which the ones that made the discovery gets a royalty every time their discovery or research is used or referenced in something that produces monetary value”
Cre’taxsian nobility works in multiple different ways.
There’s the land nobles that lives off people using their lands, military generals that would be awarded with lands upon completion of their term there by becoming a nobility and the scientists who made great discoveries are awarded with the title of nobility.
Of course the title in of itself would be useless if they still lived a pauper’s life after they made a great contribution so there’s a thing called discovery and research rights in which they get royalties every time someone uses their research.
These rights can be inherited and any research based their’s, they will also get a cut.
It is at this moment that the Senator realizes the implications of Franz’s demands as her eyes went wide.
Franz is basically demanding a nobility title.
Of course Franz didn’t put too much weight on the title, what he really cares is that money.
Franz is a materialist he’s not a wanker like Diogenes who can be happy living in a pot and wanking in front stranger.
you can have all the honor in the world but it would mean nothing of you can’t even eat a single piece of bread.
“You realize the implications of your request right?”
“I’m just making sure human achievements are appropriately “appreciated”. Of course the choice is always yours to not accept this deal but this deal is pretty fair and even advantageous to you even”
She is silent for a moment before
“Very well but it’ll have to be verified first before you can have the right”
“Sure I’ve got no problem with that we can work out the details later, in the mean time I’ve also taken an interest in your intellectual rights in particular the one pertaining to creative entertainment.”
Seeing that the Senator having a puzzled look Franz continues on “you see my mobile device has a collection of human entertainment and I’m thinking releasing some of them. Naturally I expect to be compensated appropriately”
His phone has 230 petta byte of storage data and speeds of 2 exaFlops. Tens thousands of 8k videos of various shows, movies and documentaries, it also has his own personal collection of games on it too.
He was stationed in a 3rd world country where internet was limited so he downloaded a lot of movies into his phone before he got sent there.
(Franz is from 50 years into the future, our phones now has more capacity then the classrooms size computer 50 years ago. I’m basing the states of Franz’s future iPhone on what came up on the top results of a 5 second google search)
(1 Petta byte is 1,000,000 Giga byte. An hour of 8K movie takes around 40 Gb of memory. Right now a AAA game in 4k takes about 25 to 50 Gb with some taking 100Gb. So if just change it to 8K the game would be 200Gb, it’s the future so games would be much more complicated so it should enter into the Terra byte range)
The Senator didn’t think much of it and agrees to it without much hassle as how much can such a tiny device contain anyway?
“That can be arranged”
The rest of the conversation pretty much went smoothly after that.
submitted by EffectSubstantial909 to HFY [link] [comments]
Franz learns about the place he found himself as it turns out he found himself in one of the core worlds owned by a space faring civilization.
More than that there’s countless alien civilizations outside of the one he’s in, apparently he’s now in the Cret Republic despite having nobles running the Senate it still calls itself a republic.
Interestingly one thing Franz noticed is that the gender ratio leans heavily on the female side, strangely enough it’s not just the Cre’taxsians that has strange gender ratio all of the civilization has this over the top gender ratio, there are several times more female per one male.
Anyways today he’s meeting with a Senator
The door slides open and a familiar face appears
‘Isn’t that the women with the fancy coat?’ Franz thought
“Greetings, I hope that you’ve been treated well?”
“Oh yes the people here are very accommodating”
She smiles then said “really? I’m glade to hear that, from what I heard you seems hesitant to share information about your species”
“I hope that you’ll be understanding in the fact that I’m simply safeguarding my specie from any potential threats”
“I trust that you’ve learned enough in these past few days that the Cre’taxsian people are an honorable race and would want nothing more then to find allies in a hostile galaxy”
‘Well shit she knows how to play with words’ Franz thought as he’s currently in their “care” he can’t just say “your republic is crab” he’ll have to be neutral/skeptical at most and agreeing at worst.
“The Cret Republic is indeed a fine nation with honorable traditions and have earned some level of trust”
At Franz’s reply she smiles as she just won her first minor victory. The former general and currently a Senator believes that it’ll only be a matter of time before the male in-front of her opens up.
“Really? Can you tell me something about your species?”
“Our home world is called Earth and it’s the 3rd planet form our Sun and from what I tell from the information I was given it’s classified as a super high gravity world by galactic standards”
The Senator seemingly nods at the revelation that his species is from a high gravity world as it would explains how his high strength and how he was able to have such large leaps.
Like so far no intelligent species have been found to be from a super high gravity world, that would mean that humans are the first intelligent species to be known to inhabit a super high gravity planet, those would make establishing a diplomatic relations with his species even more important.
Even one of their males is able to tear 3 Hasperax mechs just imagine what an army of them could do?
As a former general Jil’adamas could imagine how terrible it would be if there was a stick force of such individuals.
“So can you tell me where your worlds is located at?”
‘She seems to think that humans is a spacefaring civilization… well … she’s not exactly wrong…. It’s just that the Mars base only has like 20 or so people’ Franz thought
“As I have previously explained I didn’t study Astronomy so can’t even find the general direction of my home even if O wanted to”
“What about your society? How does your people live?”
“ Our society is a “Patriarchal” society, it’s a society where male are the dominant gender”
At the revelation the Senator’s eyes turns wide as even the scientists listening outside also turns wide.
Then a commotion happens outside
“(Woooooo)” “(Oh my goddess~)”
a female scientist who has a masochist fetish exclaimed while another whistles
“Patriarchal” is a fictional society that was believed to only appears in novels but here it is! The dream of every herbivore females!
(Just think of male’s response to Femdom genre. Most men would be like “ohhh yeah” to the thought being pushed down by a female)
Bonk
“(You perverted bitch!)” yelled the head scientist as she bonks the degenerate staff’s head
As the head scientist quells the commotion outside back in the room.
The Senator coughs before asking “you’re not joking are you?”
“I’m not speaking in jest, Earth has always been a traditionally male dominated society”
“(Oh My Goddess!)” “(So Male dominated species does exists!?)” “(Wooooo)” “(Wooooo)”
That revelation is followed by a bunch of wooing and whistling outside the room.
It is fill by a bunch of bonking noises as the head scientist reigns in her staff the majority of which are single and are desperately trying to find a mate.
The Senator’s eyes frowns before asking “and your male based society has no problems ruling?”
The Senator has assumed that the gender ratio of Earth to be similar to the rest of the galaxy. One male per 10 females.
“In humans males has always been much stronger then females, there has been movement to change that in recent years but by and large Earth is still a male dominated society”
The Senator nodded recalling how this one male defeated 30 elite enforcers, 3 Hasperax enforcer mechs and 2 Pretorian commandos .
The Senator is currently imagining a small team of human males suppressing revolts.
She’s imagining that Earth is an authoritarian state where superhuman males ruling over a vast number of weaker females.
The Senator has her own bias towards males as a patriarchal society is until now just a fantasy.
That’s how she interpreted Franz’s words.
“So how does your people run country?”
‘Well time for some bullshiting’ Franz thought
“There’s the UN which encompasses all the significant human nations states”
Franz it trying to make the UN sound much much more powerful then it actually is, in actuality the UN is a joke!
Like China is a life time member of its Human rights council, it’s resolutions are just words and has no binding power, it’s criminal court are filled with corruption and most of the world in particular major powers just ignores them entirely.
The UN is nothing more then just a show for nations to pretend that they’re cooperating when they’re clearly are not.
“I see so what does this UN do?”
“The UN’s purposes is to maintain stability and security, develop friendly relations among nation state members, achieve internal cooperation, and serve as a centre for diplomatic dialogues.”
She raises her brow at his explanation as his explanation didn’t tell her anything! Which is the point cuz the UN doesn’t do anything.
“You said members nations? Can you tell me about them?”
“The 5 major members states that are permanently seated at UN’s “Supreme” council.
The British Commonwealth (yes, the Brits got their act together), the Fifth French Republic, the United States, People’s Republic of China and the Russian Federation”
“From the names I can tell they have different types of government” The Senator commented
“The British Commonwealth is a Parliamentary Monarchy, the United States is a Constitutional Republic, The Fifth French Republic is a Parliamentary Republic, China is a Socialist Republic and the Russian Federation is a Federal Republic ”
Franz tried to make it sound as compatible with the Cret Republic by omitting the undesirable parts in some of them, Franz also tried to make it sounds like the governments would be too complicated to explain so that he can just brush off any attempts to get further information.
“Can you explain how they function?”
“Too complicated to explain”
“I… see” she replied before narrowing her eyes.
At this time point the scientist sent a massage to the Senator requesting access to his devices.
“The chief scientist seems to have taken an interest in your devices and would like to examine them in detail”
‘She must mean my iPhone’ Franz thought
“I would politely decline these ”
“Might I know why”
“Those are my personal items and contains valuable memories from my homeland”
“I promise you that the scientist team are the finest on this world so you can rest assured”
Then Franz looks at the door and ever so slightly tilts his head making sure to give the impression of “yeah right” just a few seconds ago there was hooting outside.
“I’m sorry but I’m not ganna risk it”
—————————————
Meanwhile outside the room
Slam
‘These degenerates! Look at what they’ve done! I’m ganna give them a good scolding later’
With his reply the head scientist who was listening in slams her fist in her desk then she angrily stares her staff.
Her staff trembles as they know they’re ganna get it after this.
————————————
Back inside the room
They continues a bit of small talk Franz still trying to be as vague as possible while the Senator trying to get as much information as possible, unfortunately Franz is trained as a diplomat so accidentally let something slip.
“Electronics?” The Senator asked curiously as pretty much everyone uses photon based computers with the exception of a few select species that uses biological/chemical computers, those species tended to be hive species.
‘Shit!’ Franz cursed at himself before deciding to concede this one to them
“Yes, I’ve noticed that the computers here seems to be photon based, back home computers are almost entirely electrical electrical based using Electrons instead of Photons”
That came as major surprise as of what he said is true then what Franz has in his pocket is a the first example of a functional electrical computer that has only been thought as theoretical before.
‘Judging by the way he operates it its seems comparable to our datapad, which means that their electrical technology is fairly mature’ the head scientist thought as she can’t wait to get her hands in his device.
The head scientist urges the Senator to do something to get that device.
Of course the Senator knows the implications of such a discovery.
“The head scientist seems to really want to examine your device” the Senator commented again.
“I’ll decline again but certain other arrangements could be made”
“Oh?” The perked the Senator’s ears
“I heard that you have something called discovery and research rights, in which the ones that made the discovery gets a royalty every time their discovery or research is used or referenced in something that produces monetary value”
Cre’taxsian nobility works in multiple different ways.
There’s the land nobles that lives off people using their lands, military generals that would be awarded with lands upon completion of their term there by becoming a nobility and the scientists who made great discoveries are awarded with the title of nobility.
Of course the title in of itself would be useless if they still lived a pauper’s life after they made a great contribution so there’s a thing called discovery and research rights in which they get royalties every time someone uses their research.
These rights can be inherited and any research based their’s, they will also get a cut.
It is at this moment that the Senator realizes the implications of Franz’s demands as her eyes went wide.
Franz is basically demanding a nobility title.
Of course Franz didn’t put too much weight on the title, what he really cares is that money.
Franz is a materialist he’s not a wanker like Diogenes who can be happy living in a pot and wanking in front stranger.
you can have all the honor in the world but it would mean nothing of you can’t even eat a single piece of bread.
“You realize the implications of your request right?”
“I’m just making sure human achievements are appropriately “appreciated”. Of course the choice is always yours to not accept this deal but this deal is pretty fair and even advantageous to you even”
She is silent for a moment before
“Very well but it’ll have to be verified first before you can have the right”
“Sure I’ve got no problem with that we can work out the details later, in the mean time I’ve also taken an interest in your intellectual rights in particular the one pertaining to creative entertainment.”
Seeing that the Senator having a puzzled look Franz continues on “you see my mobile device has a collection of human entertainment and I’m thinking releasing some of them. Naturally I expect to be compensated appropriately”
His phone has 230 petta byte of storage data and speeds of 2 exaFlops. Tens thousands of 8k videos of various shows, movies and documentaries, it also has his own personal collection of games on it too.
He was stationed in a 3rd world country where internet was limited so he downloaded a lot of movies into his phone before he got sent there.
(Franz is from 50 years into the future, our phones now has more capacity then the classrooms size computer 50 years ago. I’m basing the states of Franz’s future iPhone on what came up on the top results of a 5 second google search)
(1 Petta byte is 1,000,000 Giga byte. An hour of 8K movie takes around 40 Gb of memory. Right now a AAA game in 4k takes about 25 to 50 Gb with some taking 100Gb. So if just change it to 8K the game would be 200Gb, it’s the future so games would be much more complicated so it should enter into the Terra byte range)
The Senator didn’t think much of it and agrees to it without much hassle as how much can such a tiny device contain anyway?
“That can be arranged”
The rest of the conversation pretty much went smoothly after that.
2023.06.10 13:30 playr3legendary I've never met a decent person
I'm almost 40, I do not know nor have i ever known a single decent person in my entire 40 yrs of existence. I understand it's all perspective, I understand that people may have their own personal views about me and that maybe I brought it upon myself. I also understand that it could just be me and whatever inherent bias I may have based on my own personal life experiences. However, I do know 1 thing for a fact. I know I wouldn't treat people how people treat me. I'm not saying I don't have friends or don't have relationships. I'm not saying I hate people or that I'm angry at the world. What I am saying tho is that 100% of everything negative that has happened in my life was a direct result of someone else. No random accidents, thank whatever God you want for my health and many other things I am grateful for. I am talking specifically about people situations. Example, People standing so close behind you in the check out line physically touching you and then gets upset when you tell them to back off. Getting ghosted from people who invited you to join them. Mr tough guy you got a problem bro? The jerk who wouldn't move his feet while trying to walk past, made you walk over his leg for reasons I don't even understand. The neighbor that pretends to be friendly, pretends to care about protecting the community but refuses to help when an actual crime occurs because he doesn't want to get involved. One sided relationship with so called friends. You can go out of your way to help them but the second you need their help there's always an excuse. The "friend" who only talks about himself and what he's going through. The friends that only take but never gives, I literally gave a truck to one of my "friends" a leftover old work truck to help him get started with his landscaping business. Known the guy for almost 20 yrs I have never asked him for anything nor felt that I was owed. The one time I needed help, he agrees "I got you bro" haven't heard from him since. An act of kindness to a stranger online, we met gaming played together for years. Seemed like a genuine good dude, Asked me for some help to go see his dying family in Italy, I said sure, gave him a few dollars and never heard from him again. A person I had been gaming with for years, throws away a friend over literally a 100 bucks.. getting sucker punched from behind because he "thought" I was hiting on his girl. A girl that wasn't even his girl. this is a small example of my experiences, The snake, the backstabber, the user, the fake the fraud, the tough guy, the girl that broke your heart not only couldn't care less about your feelings but even rubs it in your face for not being financially stable enough for her. my crime and punishment for being poor. These situations in itself doesn't bother me, I have accepted that this is life, this is reality. What makes me upset is being kind to people only to be treated like garbage in return. I know there are genuine good people out there. I see it all the time, real friends helping each other, having each other's back, lifelong friends. The girlfriend that will stop at nothing to protect you, good people who does good things and ask for nothing in return.. I know good people exist but I personally have never met one.
submitted by playr3legendary to TrueOffMyChest [link] [comments]
2023.06.10 13:27 disjointed_chameleon Strange dreams?
I'm not normally the type to put too much stock into abstract things having meaning, so to speak. I work in STEM, and tend to be the type of person that believes in cold, hard fact and evidence that can be proven or demonstrated. However, a dream I had last night has stuck with me.
TLDBLUF: Married for eight (almost nine) years. Contemplating divorcing my husband. In addition to having serious anger problems, having a history of excessive drinking issues, and being emotionally, verbally, and psychologically abusive, he's also been chronically unemployed/underemployed for just about five years now. Over the past four years or so, he's also made some extremely irresponsible financial decisions, and I've basically been forced to financially 'clean up the mess', so to speak. He also refuses to get any type of help, and refuses to leverage (FREE!) resources that are available to him (he's a veteran). So, in a nutshell, not only have I been keeping us afloat for almost five years, but I've also simultaneously been treated like crap. I often feel like I'm essentially paying to be treated like crap, and it sucks donkey kong.
After years of putting up with it, I finally started taking a stand against it when 2023 began. I've begun making efforts to eat healthier, exercise daily, save a small amount of $ each week (something is better than nothing), and most importantly, have started pushing back on his abusive behavior by standing up for myself when he treats me like crap. I also recently started therapy for myself.
Last night, I had a weird dream. In the dream, I had been informed that he was dead/had died. I have vivid images of what this dream included: being led to a coffin with his body in it, and me breaking down and crying over it. Another vivid image is a bunch of people/letters showing up at the front entrance of my house, with messages of support and care. The dream also included me randomly breaking down in tears at different times.
I can't help but wonder if this is some sort of 'sign', or something of the sort. Like, a proverbial 'nail in the coffin' signifying that this marriage really does need to or should end. Again, I'm not the type of person to put much stock into things like dreams, but this dream felt oddly cryptic, and so vivid it almost felt real.
Has anyone else had strange dreams as they navigate the process of divorce/separation/contemplating divorce?
submitted by disjointed_chameleon to TwoXChromosomes [link] [comments]
TLDBLUF: Married for eight (almost nine) years. Contemplating divorcing my husband. In addition to having serious anger problems, having a history of excessive drinking issues, and being emotionally, verbally, and psychologically abusive, he's also been chronically unemployed/underemployed for just about five years now. Over the past four years or so, he's also made some extremely irresponsible financial decisions, and I've basically been forced to financially 'clean up the mess', so to speak. He also refuses to get any type of help, and refuses to leverage (FREE!) resources that are available to him (he's a veteran). So, in a nutshell, not only have I been keeping us afloat for almost five years, but I've also simultaneously been treated like crap. I often feel like I'm essentially paying to be treated like crap, and it sucks donkey kong.
After years of putting up with it, I finally started taking a stand against it when 2023 began. I've begun making efforts to eat healthier, exercise daily, save a small amount of $ each week (something is better than nothing), and most importantly, have started pushing back on his abusive behavior by standing up for myself when he treats me like crap. I also recently started therapy for myself.
Last night, I had a weird dream. In the dream, I had been informed that he was dead/had died. I have vivid images of what this dream included: being led to a coffin with his body in it, and me breaking down and crying over it. Another vivid image is a bunch of people/letters showing up at the front entrance of my house, with messages of support and care. The dream also included me randomly breaking down in tears at different times.
I can't help but wonder if this is some sort of 'sign', or something of the sort. Like, a proverbial 'nail in the coffin' signifying that this marriage really does need to or should end. Again, I'm not the type of person to put much stock into things like dreams, but this dream felt oddly cryptic, and so vivid it almost felt real.
Has anyone else had strange dreams as they navigate the process of divorce/separation/contemplating divorce?
2023.06.10 13:22 disjointed_chameleon Weird dreams?
I'm not normally the type to put too much stock into abstract things having meaning, so to speak. I work in STEM, and tend to be the type of person that believes in cold, hard fact and evidence that can be proven or demonstrated. However, a dream I had last night has stuck with me.
TLDBLUF: Married for eight (almost nine) years. Contemplating divorcing my husband. In addition to having serious anger problems, having a history of excessive drinking issues, and being emotionally, verbally, and psychologically abusive, he's also been chronically unemployed/underemployed for just about five years now. Over the past four years or so, he's also made some extremely irresponsible financial decisions, and I've basically been forced to financially 'clean up the mess', so to speak. He also refuses to get any type of help, and refuses to leverage (FREE!) resources that are available to him (he's a veteran). So, in a nutshell, not only have I been keeping us afloat for almost five years, but I've also simultaneously been treated like crap. I often feel like I'm essentially paying to be treated like crap, and it sucks donkey kong.
After years of putting up with it, I finally started taking a stand against it when 2023 began. I've been making efforts to eat healthier, exercise daily, save a small $ money each week (something is better than nothing), and most importantly, start pushing back on his abusive behavior. I also recently started therapy for myself.
Last night, I had a weird dream. In the dream, I had been informed that he was dead/had died. I have vivid images of what this dream included: being led to a coffin with his body in it, and me breaking down and crying over it. Another vivid image are a bunch of people/letters showing up at the front entrance of my house, with messages of support and care. The dream also included me randomly breaking down in tears at different times.
I can't help but wonder if this is some sort of 'sign', or something of the sort. Like, a proverbial 'nail in the coffin' signifying that this marriage really does need to or should end. Again, I'm not the type of person to put much stock into things like dreams, but this dream felt oddly cryptic, and so vivid it almost felt real.
Has anyone else had strange dreams as they navigate this process?
submitted by disjointed_chameleon to Divorce [link] [comments]
TLDBLUF: Married for eight (almost nine) years. Contemplating divorcing my husband. In addition to having serious anger problems, having a history of excessive drinking issues, and being emotionally, verbally, and psychologically abusive, he's also been chronically unemployed/underemployed for just about five years now. Over the past four years or so, he's also made some extremely irresponsible financial decisions, and I've basically been forced to financially 'clean up the mess', so to speak. He also refuses to get any type of help, and refuses to leverage (FREE!) resources that are available to him (he's a veteran). So, in a nutshell, not only have I been keeping us afloat for almost five years, but I've also simultaneously been treated like crap. I often feel like I'm essentially paying to be treated like crap, and it sucks donkey kong.
After years of putting up with it, I finally started taking a stand against it when 2023 began. I've been making efforts to eat healthier, exercise daily, save a small $ money each week (something is better than nothing), and most importantly, start pushing back on his abusive behavior. I also recently started therapy for myself.
Last night, I had a weird dream. In the dream, I had been informed that he was dead/had died. I have vivid images of what this dream included: being led to a coffin with his body in it, and me breaking down and crying over it. Another vivid image are a bunch of people/letters showing up at the front entrance of my house, with messages of support and care. The dream also included me randomly breaking down in tears at different times.
I can't help but wonder if this is some sort of 'sign', or something of the sort. Like, a proverbial 'nail in the coffin' signifying that this marriage really does need to or should end. Again, I'm not the type of person to put much stock into things like dreams, but this dream felt oddly cryptic, and so vivid it almost felt real.
Has anyone else had strange dreams as they navigate this process?
2023.06.10 13:13 thetuman22 What supplement(s) help you get to sleep?
I tried melatonin, then it stopped working.
I tried magnesium glycinate, then it stopped working.
Now I am on a combo of the two, and it seems to do the trick but am anticipating it to stop working too after some time.
I've also tried tart cherry juice which works but does probably affect blood sugar, so I went ahead and bought capsules and will give that a try in the near future.
What supplements do you take?
P.S. I am always working on sleep hygiene. My problem is falling asleep; it takes hours and sometimes I do not plan early enough to go to bed and screw myself over. Think the root of the bad habit is eating 1) late (within couple hours or even an hour of bedtime) and 2) too much (I can't seem to correct the habit of treating dinner as the largest meal of the day and digestion/full stomach definitely negatively impacts sleep).
submitted by thetuman22 to sleep [link] [comments]
I tried magnesium glycinate, then it stopped working.
Now I am on a combo of the two, and it seems to do the trick but am anticipating it to stop working too after some time.
I've also tried tart cherry juice which works but does probably affect blood sugar, so I went ahead and bought capsules and will give that a try in the near future.
What supplements do you take?
P.S. I am always working on sleep hygiene. My problem is falling asleep; it takes hours and sometimes I do not plan early enough to go to bed and screw myself over. Think the root of the bad habit is eating 1) late (within couple hours or even an hour of bedtime) and 2) too much (I can't seem to correct the habit of treating dinner as the largest meal of the day and digestion/full stomach definitely negatively impacts sleep).
2023.06.10 13:12 MediaVsReality The Kind and The Hero - A Short Story about how the Media Attacks Good People
PART 1 — The King’s Problem
The King did not know empathy.
If he saw somebody in pain, he felt nothing. If he watched a child cry, he felt nothing. And if he saw an injured bird on the road, he would press the sole of his boot on top of it without a second thought.
This was just as he governed.
The people lacked food, yet the King felt nothing. And did nothing. For in his palace, he had all the food he would ever need.
The people lacked medicine, yet the King felt nothing. And did nothing. For in his palace, he had all the medicine he would ever need.
The people lacked education, yet the King felt nothing. And did nothing. For in his palace, he had all the books and scholars he would ever need.
In his palace built entirely of solid gold, he was the most powerful King in all the land.
But the King had a problem. One thorn in his side. One little nuisance that kept him awake at night.
From nowhere, a man had appeared. His name: Rohe
Rohe spoke atop a platform in the streets to the people. He spoke of the unjust nature of The King’s rule, of the palace made of solid gold and the endless luxuries stored within it.
Rohe blamed the King for the hunger the people had suffered. And he blamed the King for the deaths of brothers, sisters, children, mothers and fathers due to the lack of medicine.
And finally, Rohe told the people to rise up against the King, storm the palace of solid gold and take back control of their food, their medicine and their land.
Worst of all, to the King’s terror, the people had begun to support Rohe. In the streets, Rohe would draw thousands of supporters. “Freedom for the people” they would chant in unison.
The King was utterly furious. How dare these low-born peasants chant such things. How dare these stupid, ignorant and inferior men even consider stealing his rightfully owned riches.
Something had to be done.
Not knowing what to do, he spoke to his 3 most trusted advisors.
The first advisor suggested he have Rohe killed.
The second advisor suggested he have Rohe thrown in jail.
The third advisor, the most cunning and mischievous of the 3, disapproved of the plans of the first 2 advisors. Killing him or throwing him in jail, he explained, would encourage the crowds still further.
Instead, he suggested something different entirely. He suggested they turn the people against Rohe.
“How?” asked the King curiously. “How can we turn the people against him”?
The third advisor adjusted the large, rounded glasses that lay on top his big, crooked nose and grew a mischievous smile. “Why the newspapers, of course.”
PART 2 — The Third Advisor
The lands had hundreds of different newspapers, but only 3 main ones, which were by far the most widely read.
The people believed these newspapers to be run by well-meaning people who aimed to tell them honestly of the goings-on throughout the world.
The truth was different.
While it was made to appear that these newspaper were run independently, they were in fact controlled by the King himself. Whenever the King needed, he could control everything that was written inside one of the 3 main newspapers.
The King granted the cunning third advisor the task of turning the people against Rohe. And so, the third advisor began his research:
To his dismay, he found Rohe to be perfect. A true hero.
Through his research, he discovered several things about Rohe:
- He had a loving wife and two young children.
- He had grown up poor and had managed to create a little bit of wealth through hard work on his farm.
- He was strong, with big, bulging muscles and a handsome face.
- On his farm worked 10 white men and 2 black men, all of whom he treated with great kindness and respect.
- He was rarely at home with his family. He was always working, helping at the local school or in the streets doing his speeches.
Upon finishing his research, a crooked smile crept upon the face of the third advisor. He adjusted his spectacles and muttered to himself.
“This is all I need…”
PART 3 — The Article
Rohe — The People’s Hero Or Attention Seeking Conspiracy Theorist?
Rising from an obscure background, Rohe the so-called “Hero” has ballooned in popularity in recent months. Everywhere he goes, commotion follows; drawing crowds of thousands of worshipping fans who hang on every word he says.
He has been reported bellowing his ideology in Lockwood, Brimshore, Farmsdale and even as far as Watershire. It seems as though Rohe is a mastermind at drawing the attention of others. Where does this attention go? Well, to himself of course. With his handsome dark hair and muscular physique, public image is seemingly the fuel that Mr Rohe feeds on. ‘
“He’s come from God! He’s like God himself!” exclaimed one of his fanatic supporters as we interviewed them.
Mr Rohe’s main message seems to be against the King himself; spouting obscure claims such as “The King is keeping all the food for himself while the people starve!”, he cried into a crowd in Lockwood last week. Of course, this isn’t a new line of thought, with other such violent figures as “John the Terrorist” and the now proven liar and fraud Christopher Whittle.
Experts tend to agree that the food hardship some are currently facing is due to a series of unfortunately poor harvests as well as changing whether conditions. We asked the lead food resource advisor in the kingdom for his opinion on the matter. “We’ve heard this all before” he said while holding back a laugh, “Mr Rohe is just parroting the same old conspiracy theories we hear every year”.
While Mr Rohe screams non-stop of the riches of others, his own wealth has been quietly building. Donations from his fanatic supporters have allowed him to purchase a second piece of farmland on top his already wealthy estate. Unsurprisingly, his workforce consists of almost entirely white men with a mere handful of coloured workers throughout his farms.
We travelled to Mr Rohe’s farm and spoke with his wife, who told us “We as almost never see him! He’s constantly on the road. He pops by to see the kids and check on the farm every week or so”. It seems as though it’s difficult to pay close attention to your family when you’re so busy drawing attention to yourself in the streets.
Mr Rohe’s fans seem to admire him deeply, but such adoration can turn nasty. His most extreme supporters have abused, harassed and on one occasion physically assaulted Mr Rohe’s critics. “His fans are relentless”, says well-known critic Johnathon Adams. “The harass me day and night and have even threatened to attack me.
While Mr Rohe does not endorse such violent behaviour, he does not exactly deter it either. He describes the King as “evil” and “corrupt” and once stated that “sometimes the power of the fist is necessary”.
Mr Rohe’s rhetoric seems to attract all kinds of unsavory characters; the aforementioned “Jack the Terrorist” as well as well-known woman beater Joseph Smith have both stated their support for Mr Rohe.
In the end, the key to Mr Rohe’s appeal is also his greatest weakness. He wants to be the man who knows everything and can explain everything. But his arguments are riddled with conspiracy theories and crude distortions of the truth.
Even so, his critics will have a tough time. Mr Rohe’s wave of popularity is unlikely to come crashing down any time soon.
PART 4
A year had passed, and over the months the third advisor wrote countless similar articles and published them in the 3 main newspapers.
To his and the King’s delight, their plan had worked flawlessly.
Support for Mr Rohe began to wane. Many began to accuse Mr Rohe as being a racist. Others claimed he was mistreating his wife. Most began to be see Mr Rohe as somebody not to be taken seriously.
The people started feeling a sense of distrust and dislike towards Mr Rohe deep in their stomachs. They didn’t know exactly why they felt this way, but felt it they did.
Something had switched inside their minds. They began to see everything Mr Rohe did through a negative lens. His previously heroic speeches now seemed shrill and childish. His impressive physique and sharp jaw now seemed vain and self-centred. And his claims about The King and what was really inside his palace made of solid gold now had doubt cast upon them. Some still believed Mr Rohe, some thought him to be exaggerating, most simply threw their hands up in confusion and forgot all about it.
When Mr Rohe made a speech on the streets, many rolled their eyes at his crazy supporters. And with growing frequency, an opposing group of protesters would appear and shout over him. They made claims that Mr Rohe was a racist, and they made jokes about the 2 farms Mr Rohe owned.
The King’s problem had been solved.
The third advisor became one of the King’s closest confidantes and was allowed access to many of the luxuries inside the palace: food, women and anything else he could possibly dream of.
As for the people, their lives steadily got worse and worse. Their food supplies dwindled, medicine became rare to find and the people became sadder, more depressed and more desperate. Despite this, most accepted their situation as “the way life is”, while others blamed God for their misfortune.
One day, another man began to make speeches on the streets against the King. His name: Varios. The People began to call him their “Savior”.
The King passed his pen over to the third advisor. “Ready?”
The third advisor grew a wicked grin.
“Of course”
submitted by MediaVsReality to JordanPeterson [link] [comments]
The King did not know empathy.
If he saw somebody in pain, he felt nothing. If he watched a child cry, he felt nothing. And if he saw an injured bird on the road, he would press the sole of his boot on top of it without a second thought.
This was just as he governed.
The people lacked food, yet the King felt nothing. And did nothing. For in his palace, he had all the food he would ever need.
The people lacked medicine, yet the King felt nothing. And did nothing. For in his palace, he had all the medicine he would ever need.
The people lacked education, yet the King felt nothing. And did nothing. For in his palace, he had all the books and scholars he would ever need.
In his palace built entirely of solid gold, he was the most powerful King in all the land.
But the King had a problem. One thorn in his side. One little nuisance that kept him awake at night.
From nowhere, a man had appeared. His name: Rohe
Rohe spoke atop a platform in the streets to the people. He spoke of the unjust nature of The King’s rule, of the palace made of solid gold and the endless luxuries stored within it.
Rohe blamed the King for the hunger the people had suffered. And he blamed the King for the deaths of brothers, sisters, children, mothers and fathers due to the lack of medicine.
And finally, Rohe told the people to rise up against the King, storm the palace of solid gold and take back control of their food, their medicine and their land.
Worst of all, to the King’s terror, the people had begun to support Rohe. In the streets, Rohe would draw thousands of supporters. “Freedom for the people” they would chant in unison.
The King was utterly furious. How dare these low-born peasants chant such things. How dare these stupid, ignorant and inferior men even consider stealing his rightfully owned riches.
Something had to be done.
Not knowing what to do, he spoke to his 3 most trusted advisors.
The first advisor suggested he have Rohe killed.
The second advisor suggested he have Rohe thrown in jail.
The third advisor, the most cunning and mischievous of the 3, disapproved of the plans of the first 2 advisors. Killing him or throwing him in jail, he explained, would encourage the crowds still further.
Instead, he suggested something different entirely. He suggested they turn the people against Rohe.
“How?” asked the King curiously. “How can we turn the people against him”?
The third advisor adjusted the large, rounded glasses that lay on top his big, crooked nose and grew a mischievous smile. “Why the newspapers, of course.”
PART 2 — The Third Advisor
The lands had hundreds of different newspapers, but only 3 main ones, which were by far the most widely read.
The people believed these newspapers to be run by well-meaning people who aimed to tell them honestly of the goings-on throughout the world.
The truth was different.
While it was made to appear that these newspaper were run independently, they were in fact controlled by the King himself. Whenever the King needed, he could control everything that was written inside one of the 3 main newspapers.
The King granted the cunning third advisor the task of turning the people against Rohe. And so, the third advisor began his research:
To his dismay, he found Rohe to be perfect. A true hero.
Through his research, he discovered several things about Rohe:
- He had a loving wife and two young children.
- He had grown up poor and had managed to create a little bit of wealth through hard work on his farm.
- He was strong, with big, bulging muscles and a handsome face.
- On his farm worked 10 white men and 2 black men, all of whom he treated with great kindness and respect.
- He was rarely at home with his family. He was always working, helping at the local school or in the streets doing his speeches.
Upon finishing his research, a crooked smile crept upon the face of the third advisor. He adjusted his spectacles and muttered to himself.
“This is all I need…”
PART 3 — The Article
Rohe — The People’s Hero Or Attention Seeking Conspiracy Theorist?
Rising from an obscure background, Rohe the so-called “Hero” has ballooned in popularity in recent months. Everywhere he goes, commotion follows; drawing crowds of thousands of worshipping fans who hang on every word he says.
He has been reported bellowing his ideology in Lockwood, Brimshore, Farmsdale and even as far as Watershire. It seems as though Rohe is a mastermind at drawing the attention of others. Where does this attention go? Well, to himself of course. With his handsome dark hair and muscular physique, public image is seemingly the fuel that Mr Rohe feeds on. ‘
“He’s come from God! He’s like God himself!” exclaimed one of his fanatic supporters as we interviewed them.
Mr Rohe’s main message seems to be against the King himself; spouting obscure claims such as “The King is keeping all the food for himself while the people starve!”, he cried into a crowd in Lockwood last week. Of course, this isn’t a new line of thought, with other such violent figures as “John the Terrorist” and the now proven liar and fraud Christopher Whittle.
Experts tend to agree that the food hardship some are currently facing is due to a series of unfortunately poor harvests as well as changing whether conditions. We asked the lead food resource advisor in the kingdom for his opinion on the matter. “We’ve heard this all before” he said while holding back a laugh, “Mr Rohe is just parroting the same old conspiracy theories we hear every year”.
While Mr Rohe screams non-stop of the riches of others, his own wealth has been quietly building. Donations from his fanatic supporters have allowed him to purchase a second piece of farmland on top his already wealthy estate. Unsurprisingly, his workforce consists of almost entirely white men with a mere handful of coloured workers throughout his farms.
We travelled to Mr Rohe’s farm and spoke with his wife, who told us “We as almost never see him! He’s constantly on the road. He pops by to see the kids and check on the farm every week or so”. It seems as though it’s difficult to pay close attention to your family when you’re so busy drawing attention to yourself in the streets.
Mr Rohe’s fans seem to admire him deeply, but such adoration can turn nasty. His most extreme supporters have abused, harassed and on one occasion physically assaulted Mr Rohe’s critics. “His fans are relentless”, says well-known critic Johnathon Adams. “The harass me day and night and have even threatened to attack me.
While Mr Rohe does not endorse such violent behaviour, he does not exactly deter it either. He describes the King as “evil” and “corrupt” and once stated that “sometimes the power of the fist is necessary”.
Mr Rohe’s rhetoric seems to attract all kinds of unsavory characters; the aforementioned “Jack the Terrorist” as well as well-known woman beater Joseph Smith have both stated their support for Mr Rohe.
In the end, the key to Mr Rohe’s appeal is also his greatest weakness. He wants to be the man who knows everything and can explain everything. But his arguments are riddled with conspiracy theories and crude distortions of the truth.
Even so, his critics will have a tough time. Mr Rohe’s wave of popularity is unlikely to come crashing down any time soon.
PART 4
A year had passed, and over the months the third advisor wrote countless similar articles and published them in the 3 main newspapers.
To his and the King’s delight, their plan had worked flawlessly.
Support for Mr Rohe began to wane. Many began to accuse Mr Rohe as being a racist. Others claimed he was mistreating his wife. Most began to be see Mr Rohe as somebody not to be taken seriously.
The people started feeling a sense of distrust and dislike towards Mr Rohe deep in their stomachs. They didn’t know exactly why they felt this way, but felt it they did.
Something had switched inside their minds. They began to see everything Mr Rohe did through a negative lens. His previously heroic speeches now seemed shrill and childish. His impressive physique and sharp jaw now seemed vain and self-centred. And his claims about The King and what was really inside his palace made of solid gold now had doubt cast upon them. Some still believed Mr Rohe, some thought him to be exaggerating, most simply threw their hands up in confusion and forgot all about it.
When Mr Rohe made a speech on the streets, many rolled their eyes at his crazy supporters. And with growing frequency, an opposing group of protesters would appear and shout over him. They made claims that Mr Rohe was a racist, and they made jokes about the 2 farms Mr Rohe owned.
The King’s problem had been solved.
The third advisor became one of the King’s closest confidantes and was allowed access to many of the luxuries inside the palace: food, women and anything else he could possibly dream of.
As for the people, their lives steadily got worse and worse. Their food supplies dwindled, medicine became rare to find and the people became sadder, more depressed and more desperate. Despite this, most accepted their situation as “the way life is”, while others blamed God for their misfortune.
One day, another man began to make speeches on the streets against the King. His name: Varios. The People began to call him their “Savior”.
The King passed his pen over to the third advisor. “Ready?”
The third advisor grew a wicked grin.
“Of course”
2023.06.10 13:08 kylexyz001 23 [M4F] [Relationship] Ohio/Worldwide- Let's Be Each Other's Everything (Longest post ever?)
Brace yourselves, this is gonna be a long one.
Table of Contents
1…… The Main Goal
2…… What I’m Seeking
3…… Personality
4…… Interests
5…… Physical Characteristics (with pics)
6…… Expectations of You
7…… Living Situation
8…… Deal Breakers
9…… Closing Remarks
(1)
The Main Goal:
Well if you’re browsing this subreddit then much like me, you were alone this weekend and I’m sure you’d like to change that as much as me. I won’t lie, I am going through a rough part of my life right now. It’s difficult for me to find the energy for anything at the moment and I’m just really seeking affection in general, anything that will give me a push. I don’t want to be that person who brings everyone down but I could really use someone to talk to right now. I’d really like to find someone who’s similar to me so much to the point that we do everything together and talk about everything while not having to pretend to be interested. I want someone with whom we can mutually spew our emotions onto and have those feelings reciprocated. Not an emotional punching bag, but an emotional teddy bear to hug and cuddle until everything feels better as many times as we need. There’s people who I’m sure have told you the same, they’ll be there no matter how many times you need the support, no matter how many times the insecurities and bad thoughts come back but they don’t mean it. I will be the exception, I’m not so ignorant to think some nice words and tales of relating to you will magically forever heal whatever ails you then get mad when you seek the same support again. Mental ailments are rarely temporary and I don’t care about someone because they’re perfect, caring about someone means being there no matter how many times they need you to be. It doesn’t feel like a chore, it doesn’t get old, and it never will.
(2)
(2.a)
What I'm Seeking:
I will upfront let you know if I’m clicking better with someone else or if you’re the one, I’m not here to tread the sea of fish or keep my options open, I’m here for one singular person.
(2.b)
Relationship:
A relationship is difficult for me right now, it’s been nearly half a year since I got out of my last relationship and the reasons for it ending are partially responsible for how I’ve been feeling and why it’s so hard for me to seek the comfort I so desperately crave. I will tell you about it but for the sake of not treating the entirety of the internet as my therapist, it’ll be in private. I really need the comfort of intimacy and the warmth of someone who cares. I'm not going to feel better if I just sulk and don’t move on. This is my attempt to get better, I’ll admit I’m not great right now and I don’t expect you to be either. If we can help each other heal, then I’d be more than happy :) A relationship isn’t just being there for when someone’s at their best. Even if a relationship is hard at the moment, I do want a life partner and I don’t want to be alone. Things aren’t going to get easier without you so I don’t want to hesitate. I view my other as an equal, I don’t like categorizing us into specific roles. We take care of each other and treat each other how we like to be treated, whatever that is, it's as simple as that. I don't care if you're "successful" or not, living simple lives with our days filled with love is the ultimate measure of success to me.
(3)
Personality:
(3.a)
On the Surface:
As you can tell I can be rather… stoic but that’s largely due to my current stressors, I truthfully am goofy and fun loving but I just can’t find it in me right now. I want to return to that but without someone to light up my world it’s been difficult to just have fun and enjoy stuff. I’m definitely more introverted, you won’t catch me at any parties or really outside at all. I definitely prefer being home though the occasional outing is not out of the question and one day I’d like to travel to other countries because I think that kind of perspective is important.
(3.b)
The Core of My Being:
I like being a spectator to it all and if we bear witness to humanity burning or its miraculous recovery, I want to watch it with you. I enjoy watching humanity advance, less so when it devolves but I want to watch it to the end nonetheless. I’m both a realist and someone who lives with my head in the clouds dreaming of scenarios or worlds that don’t exist. I’m saying that I enjoy a good narrative and can suspend my disbelief to enjoy something but you won’t catch me refusing vaccines or ignoring blatant facts for the sake of some pseudo science or witch doctor’s remedy. I’m an atheist but I do not rule out existence after death, not because I’m agnostic but because due to the nature of potentially infinite time at some point after how many googol years with a googol amount of 0s after that, something’s bound to replicate your consciousness perfectly at some point. It’s actually a really fascinating topic I like talking about. If infinite time and infinite possibilities exist, does non existence exist? Though that’s an awfully existentially dreadful thought process considering the ramifications of infinite existence and infinite possibilities during said infinite existence. I would say I’m confidently left leaning and I don’t think I could truly get along with anyone right leaning, at least America’s definition of right leaning. Left and right seems to have just become; do people deserve to suffer or do they deserve to live good lives? Being political is not something I expected to become but how can you not be when crimes against human rights are being passed on a daily basis and at the end of the day, everything’s political. Oftentimes I imagine the perfect moment as relaxing with my significant other playing games or cuddling in a cold room under blankets.
I value that special someone above all of the existential thoughts, the bad of the world, the good of the world, they practically become my world. So many worries wash away when I’m with them. I don’t know if that’s the defense mechanism my brain created to not feel bad 24/7 but if it is, I’m currently without it.
(3.c)
Insecurities:
I talk of philosophy and politics here but really I spend most of my time just playing games, watching stuff, and trying to not be sleep deprived. I’m also nowhere near as well spoken, heck sometimes I feel like my speech is broken. I won’t claim to be something I’m not, I sit at home while I complain about the world doing nothing about it wishing I had someone here with me. I’m not noble nor do I really want to be, I have morals I uphold but much like most other hypocrites I acknowledge that my comfortable life is built on the suffering of others without doing anything about it. Why? My sleep problems? Am I depressed? Is that why I have no energy to do anything? Do I just think nothing I could do could help? I can’t nail it down myself, maybe it’s a mix of everything, maybe I’m just a bad person. I have always told myself that if I had wealth I would help people but if I get that kind of wealth will I just become a wealth hoarder who tries to justify my riches as something I earned rather than something given to me through incredibly lucky circumstances? If I do help people is it because I’m a good person or out of guilt? Will I die alone? I feel like I drive everyone away with my clinginess, I get paranoid often and need reassurance often. It’s something I want to work on, something I’ve been trying to work on. Hearing that someone cares about me just never gets old. I value self awareness even if it’s painful.
(3.d)
Socializing:
I’m definitely a socially anxious/awkward mess, especially around strangers. I do feel a large amount of anxiety in public, people can’t tell by looking at my face since I kind of go stone faced in an attempt to block everything out but yeah you’ll notice that if we go out in public. Growing up my pediatrician said I was probably autistic, never got a formal diagnosis so that’s just great. But yeah that explains why I can’t make eye contact with people, I kinda just stare at the ground and avoid their gaze at all costs. A lot of these social struggles go away to a great degree once I know you for a bit but yeah I apologize for how terrible I am at socializing at first. Don’t let my social struggles fool you though, I love cuddling and being close with my person.
(3.e)
Sexuality:
I am a heterosexual male, though I’m not very masculine like at all. I may even be a bit feminine sometimes. Not that I believe any activity or manner of acting belongs to a gender but I don’t know how else to describe it. I’m definitely super affectionate and love it when my partner is too. I am open to dating demi people but I do have a libido so I don't think asexual would work out.
(4)
Interests:
(4.a)
Video Games:
As stated before, I do spend a lot of my time playing video games. It’s been hard lately with me having no energy but I really do want to play more games and have a good time playing them with you! I primarily play on PC though I do have a switch. I’m primarily into platform fighters, roguelikes, open world, survival, and sandbox games. As for single player story games, I enjoy watching them through twitch or youtube but for the most part I don’t play them myself. I’d watch you play them though!
Here’s a list of games we can play:
-Minecraft (Java)
-Risk of Rain 2
-Gunfire Reborn
-Roboquest
-7 Days to Die
-Phasmophobia
-Rust
-Unturned
-Bloons TD 6
-Platform fighters: Super Smash Bros. Melee, Slap City, Multiversus, Flash Party, Fraymakers
Whatever you want to play I’ll give it a shot! I will say that League bores me to death but I’ll play it for you :) I try to avoid MMOs, not because I don’t like them but because of how addicted I can get to them. I enjoy learning games in-depth so MMOs can be a fast track to addiction.
I recently got Kerbal Space Program 2 and ehhh not really worth it right now but hopefully later it will be? I’m super excited for Tears of the Kingdom! In the far off future I’m excited for Rivals of Aether 2 which is a platform fighter releasing in 2024, let me know of your most anticipated releases and I’ll see if I could play them with you!
Also I never got into FPS games but I could totally see myself playing like CoD with you or Escape From Tarkov. Any FPS really, I’m down.
I am a fan of Pokemon but with how things have been lately I don’t know how long that will last. Pixelmon is a common Pokemon mod I play for Minecraft if you want to play that! Also if I say I want to play something with you I mean it but there are often times when no matter how much I want to I'm just drained and can do little more than lay in bed so please don't think I'm making an excuse.
(4.b)
Science:
I really enjoy keeping up with the latest advances in pretty much everything, it could be biology, technology, astronomy, anything! I love seeing progression and I love talking about it! Really I could go on and on about what I’m obsessing about that day. I particularly love technology, ask me for my laptop specs I dare you. When I was little I always wanted to be a scientist of any kind but then insomnia and fear of college stuff hit me like a truck aaaand that’s the end of that dream.
(4.c)
Anime:
You got me, I like anime but I’d like to think my tastes are benign.
Here’s some of my favorites I can list from the top of my head:
- To Your Eternity
- Vinland Saga
- Spice and Wolf
- Re:Zero
- Mob Psycho
- Dr. Stone
- Attack on Titan
- Spy x Family
- My Hero Academia
- Ranking of Kings
- Demon Slayer
Okay I can go on and on but I will say I don’t like pointless fan service and the spamming of cliche anime moments. I mostly enjoy action and anything well animated if it doesn’t have a potato story. Heck Demon Slayer could be my top 3 out of season 2’s animation alone. I don’t watch slice of life often or romance but I would with you!
(4.d)
Misc:
I’m not going to go on and on about the tiniest little things when the main ones are covered but I’ll watch pretty much any show with you and anything really. I like random youtube videos that explain some kind of lore or mystery, sometimes mini documentaries too.
As for food I looove sushi and I’m a sucker for fast food. Okay and candy, definitely candy.
I used to play tennis but haven’t really had the opportunity nor friends to play it with and I’m way too socially anxious to seek it out. Also I will say that when we move to something like discord I type waaaay more casually. I’m not going to expect long paragraphs back and forth like we’re writing English papers for each other, I do enjoy long conversations but seriously don’t worry about having to put the utmost effort into every response, I just like making good first impressions I guess.
(5)
(5.a)
My Physical Characteristics:
I’m 5’8 (172cm), 128 pounds (58kg), with curly brown hair and blue eyes. I like keeping my hair long in the winter and cutting it in the summer. I’m pretty slim in general so if you’re looking for someone large, that’s not me. I don’t work out but my work is pretty physical so at least I’m not totally inactive. I don’t have the urge to work out or gain muscle but I do want to maintain my slim figure so if I start losing control of that I’ll work out. I like to keep my face shaved because I don’t think I look good with a beard/mustache so if you’re into those I apologize. I have an average amount of body hair? I’d prefer to be completely shaved but it’s easy to lose motivation with that battle, if you prefer shaved then I’d have no problem complying. Anyways here’s what I look like: https://imgur.com/a/MZZgf2t
(5.b)
My Physical Preferences:
Having physical preferences makes me feel shallow, if I could make myself not have them I would but unfortunately that’s now how that works. I don’t care if you’re shorter or taller than me and I don’t care if you weigh more or less than me. All I ask is that you’re slim-average weight. I would never ask for someone to be something I’m not. I don’t care about tattoos or piercings.
(6)
Expectations of You:
I am not looking for someone “exciting” or someone to “keep me on my toes” I’m not looking for someone to cater to my every whim or anything like that. I don’t care if you’re “boring” or if you aren’t “successful”. I know it’s a common thing for people to not want a “boring” relationship and to seek something argumentative or something with constant challenges but I just want to be with you. During the exciting times, the boring times, and everything in-between, all of it will be great with you! Maybe we do argue sometimes or maybe there will be challenges but that will never be something I purposefully seek out and I don’t want that to be something you seek out either. I will not play tricks on you and I will not play mind games, I expect the same from you. We all have personal measures of success we may or may not have lived up to but what I care about most is our commitment to each other. If we have each other we can get through tough times, near the ends of our lives I want us to look back and feel that this life together was worth more than anything. That’s not saying I want us to be haphazard, I don’t want us to make poor decisions for the sake of yolo and I want us to always be rational, especially with each other. I want you to be someone I can trust to make decisions and weigh the options with a level head, I’ll try my best to live up to the same for you. Most of all I want empathy, understanding, someone to feel the utmost comfort and trust in.
(7)
Living Situation:
Currently my life is pretty relaxed, I work 3 times a week as a night shift stocker. I currently live in a 2 bedroom apartment with my roommate but we’re looking to move into someplace larger by the end of the year if everything works out. The internet is weirdly great for Ohio too like I have fiber and later this year we’re supposed to be getting dedicated fiber so that’s neat. I’m not attached to Ohio so the ultimate goal living location wise is probably moving to a country that won’t send you into a lifetime of dealing with the repercussions from one medical emergency.
(8)
Deal Breakers:
Might as well make this simple and make it a list.
- Anti-vaxxers
- Unironically believing astrology
- Right wingers
- Hard drugs (occasional 420 and alcohol is fine, may even join you)
- Wanting children, there was a time when I was younger when I wanted children but with the state of the word that’s a definite no and I feel like I wouldn’t be able to handle the stress. I’d love a stress free life with as much time with you as possible.
- Homophobic
- Transphobic
- Racist
- Super Religious
- Don’t be a bigot and don’t deny facts.
(9)
Closing Remarks:
Well you made it, I was thinking that finding someone I’d be willing to put a lifetime of effort into at least required this much effort. If I think of anything more I’ll update the post. Also about timezones, it really doesn’t matter where in the world you are. I don’t have a sleep schedule and I have most of the week off from work so it really doesn’t matter.
I request that in your response you do put effort into it, it doesn’t have to be anywhere near as long as this but at least enough so I know that you read this and enough about you so I know why you saw potential compatibility. I will seriously read all of it and respond the best I can. I do also request a pic included in your response (sfw please) or one soon after we start talking to prove identity, I’ll send identity proving pics too. As long as this post is up, you can send a reply!
submitted by kylexyz001 to MeetPeople [link] [comments]
Table of Contents
1…… The Main Goal
2…… What I’m Seeking
3…… Personality
4…… Interests
5…… Physical Characteristics (with pics)
6…… Expectations of You
7…… Living Situation
8…… Deal Breakers
9…… Closing Remarks
(1)
The Main Goal:
Well if you’re browsing this subreddit then much like me, you were alone this weekend and I’m sure you’d like to change that as much as me. I won’t lie, I am going through a rough part of my life right now. It’s difficult for me to find the energy for anything at the moment and I’m just really seeking affection in general, anything that will give me a push. I don’t want to be that person who brings everyone down but I could really use someone to talk to right now. I’d really like to find someone who’s similar to me so much to the point that we do everything together and talk about everything while not having to pretend to be interested. I want someone with whom we can mutually spew our emotions onto and have those feelings reciprocated. Not an emotional punching bag, but an emotional teddy bear to hug and cuddle until everything feels better as many times as we need. There’s people who I’m sure have told you the same, they’ll be there no matter how many times you need the support, no matter how many times the insecurities and bad thoughts come back but they don’t mean it. I will be the exception, I’m not so ignorant to think some nice words and tales of relating to you will magically forever heal whatever ails you then get mad when you seek the same support again. Mental ailments are rarely temporary and I don’t care about someone because they’re perfect, caring about someone means being there no matter how many times they need you to be. It doesn’t feel like a chore, it doesn’t get old, and it never will.
(2)
(2.a)
What I'm Seeking:
I will upfront let you know if I’m clicking better with someone else or if you’re the one, I’m not here to tread the sea of fish or keep my options open, I’m here for one singular person.
(2.b)
Relationship:
A relationship is difficult for me right now, it’s been nearly half a year since I got out of my last relationship and the reasons for it ending are partially responsible for how I’ve been feeling and why it’s so hard for me to seek the comfort I so desperately crave. I will tell you about it but for the sake of not treating the entirety of the internet as my therapist, it’ll be in private. I really need the comfort of intimacy and the warmth of someone who cares. I'm not going to feel better if I just sulk and don’t move on. This is my attempt to get better, I’ll admit I’m not great right now and I don’t expect you to be either. If we can help each other heal, then I’d be more than happy :) A relationship isn’t just being there for when someone’s at their best. Even if a relationship is hard at the moment, I do want a life partner and I don’t want to be alone. Things aren’t going to get easier without you so I don’t want to hesitate. I view my other as an equal, I don’t like categorizing us into specific roles. We take care of each other and treat each other how we like to be treated, whatever that is, it's as simple as that. I don't care if you're "successful" or not, living simple lives with our days filled with love is the ultimate measure of success to me.
(3)
Personality:
(3.a)
On the Surface:
As you can tell I can be rather… stoic but that’s largely due to my current stressors, I truthfully am goofy and fun loving but I just can’t find it in me right now. I want to return to that but without someone to light up my world it’s been difficult to just have fun and enjoy stuff. I’m definitely more introverted, you won’t catch me at any parties or really outside at all. I definitely prefer being home though the occasional outing is not out of the question and one day I’d like to travel to other countries because I think that kind of perspective is important.
(3.b)
The Core of My Being:
I like being a spectator to it all and if we bear witness to humanity burning or its miraculous recovery, I want to watch it with you. I enjoy watching humanity advance, less so when it devolves but I want to watch it to the end nonetheless. I’m both a realist and someone who lives with my head in the clouds dreaming of scenarios or worlds that don’t exist. I’m saying that I enjoy a good narrative and can suspend my disbelief to enjoy something but you won’t catch me refusing vaccines or ignoring blatant facts for the sake of some pseudo science or witch doctor’s remedy. I’m an atheist but I do not rule out existence after death, not because I’m agnostic but because due to the nature of potentially infinite time at some point after how many googol years with a googol amount of 0s after that, something’s bound to replicate your consciousness perfectly at some point. It’s actually a really fascinating topic I like talking about. If infinite time and infinite possibilities exist, does non existence exist? Though that’s an awfully existentially dreadful thought process considering the ramifications of infinite existence and infinite possibilities during said infinite existence. I would say I’m confidently left leaning and I don’t think I could truly get along with anyone right leaning, at least America’s definition of right leaning. Left and right seems to have just become; do people deserve to suffer or do they deserve to live good lives? Being political is not something I expected to become but how can you not be when crimes against human rights are being passed on a daily basis and at the end of the day, everything’s political. Oftentimes I imagine the perfect moment as relaxing with my significant other playing games or cuddling in a cold room under blankets.
I value that special someone above all of the existential thoughts, the bad of the world, the good of the world, they practically become my world. So many worries wash away when I’m with them. I don’t know if that’s the defense mechanism my brain created to not feel bad 24/7 but if it is, I’m currently without it.
(3.c)
Insecurities:
I talk of philosophy and politics here but really I spend most of my time just playing games, watching stuff, and trying to not be sleep deprived. I’m also nowhere near as well spoken, heck sometimes I feel like my speech is broken. I won’t claim to be something I’m not, I sit at home while I complain about the world doing nothing about it wishing I had someone here with me. I’m not noble nor do I really want to be, I have morals I uphold but much like most other hypocrites I acknowledge that my comfortable life is built on the suffering of others without doing anything about it. Why? My sleep problems? Am I depressed? Is that why I have no energy to do anything? Do I just think nothing I could do could help? I can’t nail it down myself, maybe it’s a mix of everything, maybe I’m just a bad person. I have always told myself that if I had wealth I would help people but if I get that kind of wealth will I just become a wealth hoarder who tries to justify my riches as something I earned rather than something given to me through incredibly lucky circumstances? If I do help people is it because I’m a good person or out of guilt? Will I die alone? I feel like I drive everyone away with my clinginess, I get paranoid often and need reassurance often. It’s something I want to work on, something I’ve been trying to work on. Hearing that someone cares about me just never gets old. I value self awareness even if it’s painful.
(3.d)
Socializing:
I’m definitely a socially anxious/awkward mess, especially around strangers. I do feel a large amount of anxiety in public, people can’t tell by looking at my face since I kind of go stone faced in an attempt to block everything out but yeah you’ll notice that if we go out in public. Growing up my pediatrician said I was probably autistic, never got a formal diagnosis so that’s just great. But yeah that explains why I can’t make eye contact with people, I kinda just stare at the ground and avoid their gaze at all costs. A lot of these social struggles go away to a great degree once I know you for a bit but yeah I apologize for how terrible I am at socializing at first. Don’t let my social struggles fool you though, I love cuddling and being close with my person.
(3.e)
Sexuality:
I am a heterosexual male, though I’m not very masculine like at all. I may even be a bit feminine sometimes. Not that I believe any activity or manner of acting belongs to a gender but I don’t know how else to describe it. I’m definitely super affectionate and love it when my partner is too. I am open to dating demi people but I do have a libido so I don't think asexual would work out.
(4)
Interests:
(4.a)
Video Games:
As stated before, I do spend a lot of my time playing video games. It’s been hard lately with me having no energy but I really do want to play more games and have a good time playing them with you! I primarily play on PC though I do have a switch. I’m primarily into platform fighters, roguelikes, open world, survival, and sandbox games. As for single player story games, I enjoy watching them through twitch or youtube but for the most part I don’t play them myself. I’d watch you play them though!
Here’s a list of games we can play:
-Minecraft (Java)
-Risk of Rain 2
-Gunfire Reborn
-Roboquest
-7 Days to Die
-Phasmophobia
-Rust
-Unturned
-Bloons TD 6
-Platform fighters: Super Smash Bros. Melee, Slap City, Multiversus, Flash Party, Fraymakers
Whatever you want to play I’ll give it a shot! I will say that League bores me to death but I’ll play it for you :) I try to avoid MMOs, not because I don’t like them but because of how addicted I can get to them. I enjoy learning games in-depth so MMOs can be a fast track to addiction.
I recently got Kerbal Space Program 2 and ehhh not really worth it right now but hopefully later it will be? I’m super excited for Tears of the Kingdom! In the far off future I’m excited for Rivals of Aether 2 which is a platform fighter releasing in 2024, let me know of your most anticipated releases and I’ll see if I could play them with you!
Also I never got into FPS games but I could totally see myself playing like CoD with you or Escape From Tarkov. Any FPS really, I’m down.
I am a fan of Pokemon but with how things have been lately I don’t know how long that will last. Pixelmon is a common Pokemon mod I play for Minecraft if you want to play that! Also if I say I want to play something with you I mean it but there are often times when no matter how much I want to I'm just drained and can do little more than lay in bed so please don't think I'm making an excuse.
(4.b)
Science:
I really enjoy keeping up with the latest advances in pretty much everything, it could be biology, technology, astronomy, anything! I love seeing progression and I love talking about it! Really I could go on and on about what I’m obsessing about that day. I particularly love technology, ask me for my laptop specs I dare you. When I was little I always wanted to be a scientist of any kind but then insomnia and fear of college stuff hit me like a truck aaaand that’s the end of that dream.
(4.c)
Anime:
You got me, I like anime but I’d like to think my tastes are benign.
Here’s some of my favorites I can list from the top of my head:
- To Your Eternity
- Vinland Saga
- Spice and Wolf
- Re:Zero
- Mob Psycho
- Dr. Stone
- Attack on Titan
- Spy x Family
- My Hero Academia
- Ranking of Kings
- Demon Slayer
Okay I can go on and on but I will say I don’t like pointless fan service and the spamming of cliche anime moments. I mostly enjoy action and anything well animated if it doesn’t have a potato story. Heck Demon Slayer could be my top 3 out of season 2’s animation alone. I don’t watch slice of life often or romance but I would with you!
(4.d)
Misc:
I’m not going to go on and on about the tiniest little things when the main ones are covered but I’ll watch pretty much any show with you and anything really. I like random youtube videos that explain some kind of lore or mystery, sometimes mini documentaries too.
As for food I looove sushi and I’m a sucker for fast food. Okay and candy, definitely candy.
I used to play tennis but haven’t really had the opportunity nor friends to play it with and I’m way too socially anxious to seek it out. Also I will say that when we move to something like discord I type waaaay more casually. I’m not going to expect long paragraphs back and forth like we’re writing English papers for each other, I do enjoy long conversations but seriously don’t worry about having to put the utmost effort into every response, I just like making good first impressions I guess.
(5)
(5.a)
My Physical Characteristics:
I’m 5’8 (172cm), 128 pounds (58kg), with curly brown hair and blue eyes. I like keeping my hair long in the winter and cutting it in the summer. I’m pretty slim in general so if you’re looking for someone large, that’s not me. I don’t work out but my work is pretty physical so at least I’m not totally inactive. I don’t have the urge to work out or gain muscle but I do want to maintain my slim figure so if I start losing control of that I’ll work out. I like to keep my face shaved because I don’t think I look good with a beard/mustache so if you’re into those I apologize. I have an average amount of body hair? I’d prefer to be completely shaved but it’s easy to lose motivation with that battle, if you prefer shaved then I’d have no problem complying. Anyways here’s what I look like: https://imgur.com/a/MZZgf2t
(5.b)
My Physical Preferences:
Having physical preferences makes me feel shallow, if I could make myself not have them I would but unfortunately that’s now how that works. I don’t care if you’re shorter or taller than me and I don’t care if you weigh more or less than me. All I ask is that you’re slim-average weight. I would never ask for someone to be something I’m not. I don’t care about tattoos or piercings.
(6)
Expectations of You:
I am not looking for someone “exciting” or someone to “keep me on my toes” I’m not looking for someone to cater to my every whim or anything like that. I don’t care if you’re “boring” or if you aren’t “successful”. I know it’s a common thing for people to not want a “boring” relationship and to seek something argumentative or something with constant challenges but I just want to be with you. During the exciting times, the boring times, and everything in-between, all of it will be great with you! Maybe we do argue sometimes or maybe there will be challenges but that will never be something I purposefully seek out and I don’t want that to be something you seek out either. I will not play tricks on you and I will not play mind games, I expect the same from you. We all have personal measures of success we may or may not have lived up to but what I care about most is our commitment to each other. If we have each other we can get through tough times, near the ends of our lives I want us to look back and feel that this life together was worth more than anything. That’s not saying I want us to be haphazard, I don’t want us to make poor decisions for the sake of yolo and I want us to always be rational, especially with each other. I want you to be someone I can trust to make decisions and weigh the options with a level head, I’ll try my best to live up to the same for you. Most of all I want empathy, understanding, someone to feel the utmost comfort and trust in.
(7)
Living Situation:
Currently my life is pretty relaxed, I work 3 times a week as a night shift stocker. I currently live in a 2 bedroom apartment with my roommate but we’re looking to move into someplace larger by the end of the year if everything works out. The internet is weirdly great for Ohio too like I have fiber and later this year we’re supposed to be getting dedicated fiber so that’s neat. I’m not attached to Ohio so the ultimate goal living location wise is probably moving to a country that won’t send you into a lifetime of dealing with the repercussions from one medical emergency.
(8)
Deal Breakers:
Might as well make this simple and make it a list.
- Anti-vaxxers
- Unironically believing astrology
- Right wingers
- Hard drugs (occasional 420 and alcohol is fine, may even join you)
- Wanting children, there was a time when I was younger when I wanted children but with the state of the word that’s a definite no and I feel like I wouldn’t be able to handle the stress. I’d love a stress free life with as much time with you as possible.
- Homophobic
- Transphobic
- Racist
- Super Religious
- Don’t be a bigot and don’t deny facts.
(9)
Closing Remarks:
Well you made it, I was thinking that finding someone I’d be willing to put a lifetime of effort into at least required this much effort. If I think of anything more I’ll update the post. Also about timezones, it really doesn’t matter where in the world you are. I don’t have a sleep schedule and I have most of the week off from work so it really doesn’t matter.
I request that in your response you do put effort into it, it doesn’t have to be anywhere near as long as this but at least enough so I know that you read this and enough about you so I know why you saw potential compatibility. I will seriously read all of it and respond the best I can. I do also request a pic included in your response (sfw please) or one soon after we start talking to prove identity, I’ll send identity proving pics too. As long as this post is up, you can send a reply!
2023.06.10 13:08 Niotsques SOME QUESTIONS: About Grey Knights
- How complex is the entire process of becoming a GK from the gathering of recruits to the trials they have to through and the implantation process among other stuff since they are suppose to be an ultra-special Chapter how different is it from the likes of most other Space Marines?
- Since they got a MIB/No Witnesses policy who provides them with all their equipment and wargear?
- Do they have serfs? And speaking of, how does their policy work with the thousands of people who man their ships, or even the general upper human staff members, officers and ship Captains and such?
- How strong is their mental conditioning? Is it possible for a Grey Knight to go rogue for their own reasons or disagree with their Chapter's reasoning and way of doing things or would they entirely be treated like a Fallen element ala Dark Angels and be hunted down and terminated?
2023.06.10 13:06 SnooCalculations5648 Recommendations for Knee Physio
Been having lots of trouble with knee pains :( Does anyone have any good physiotherapists that specialised in treating knee pains? I am south east but will travel anywhere Thanks!
submitted by SnooCalculations5648 to melbourne [link] [comments]
2023.06.10 13:05 MediaVsReality The King and the Hero - A Short Story about how the media upholds the status quo
PART 1 — The King’s Problem
The King did not know empathy.
If he saw somebody in pain, he felt nothing. If he watched a child cry, he felt nothing. And if he saw an injured bird on the road, he would press the sole of his boot on top of it without a second thought.
This was just as he governed.
The people lacked food, yet the King felt nothing. And did nothing. For in his palace, he had all the food he would ever need.
The people lacked medicine, yet the King felt nothing. And did nothing. For in his palace, he had all the medicine he would ever need.
The people lacked education, yet the King felt nothing. And did nothing. For in his palace, he had all the books and scholars he would ever need.
In his palace built entirely of solid gold, he was the most powerful King in all the land.
But the King had a problem. One thorn in his side. One little nuisance that kept him awake at night.
From nowhere, a man had appeared. His name: Rohe
Rohe spoke atop a platform in the streets to the people. He spoke of the unjust nature of The King’s rule, of the palace made of solid gold and the endless luxuries stored within it.
Rohe blamed the King for the hunger the people had suffered. And he blamed the King for the deaths of brothers, sisters, children, mothers and fathers due to the lack of medicine.
And finally, Rohe told the people to rise up against the King, storm the palace of solid gold and take back control of their food, their medicine and their land.
Worst of all, to the King’s terror, the people had begun to support Rohe. In the streets, Rohe would draw thousands of supporters. “Freedom for the people” they would chant in unison.
The King was utterly furious. How dare these low-born peasants chant such things. How dare these foolish, ignorant and inferior men even consider stealing his rightfully owned riches.
Something had to be done.
Not knowing what to do, he spoke to his 3 most trusted advisors.
The first advisor suggested he have Rohe killed.
The second advisor suggested he have Rohe thrown in jail.
The third advisor, the most cunning and mischievous of the 3, disapproved of the plans of the first 2 advisors. Killing him or throwing him in jail, he explained, would encourage the crowds still further.
Instead, he suggested something different entirely. He suggested they turn the people against Rohe.
“How?” asked the King curiously. “How can we turn the people against him”?
The third advisor adjusted the large, rounded glasses that lay on top his big, crooked nose and grew a mischievous smile. “Why the newspapers, of course.”
PART 2 — The Third Advisor
The lands had hundreds of different newspapers, but only 3 main ones, which were by far the most widely read.
The people believed these newspapers to be run by well-meaning people who aimed to tell them honestly of the goings-on throughout the world.
The truth was different.
While it was made to appear that these newspaper were run independently, they were in fact controlled by the King himself. Whenever the King needed, he could control everything that was written inside one of the 3 main newspapers.
The King granted the cunning third advisor the task of turning the people against Rohe. And so, the third advisor began his research:
To his dismay, he found Rohe to be perfect. A true hero.
Through his research, he discovered several things about Rohe:
- He had a loving wife and two young children.
- He had grown up poor and had managed to create a little bit of wealth through hard work on his farm.
- He was strong, with big, bulging muscles and a handsome face.
- On his farm worked 10 white men and 2 black men, all of whom he treated with great kindness and respect.
- He was rarely at home with his family. He was always working, helping at the local school or in the streets doing his speeches.
Upon finishing his research, a crooked smile crept upon the face of the third advisor. He adjusted his spectacles and muttered to himself.
“This is all I need…”
PART 3 — The Article
Rohe — The People’s Hero Or Attention Seeking Conspiracy Theorist?
Rising from an obscure background, Rohe the so-called “Hero” has ballooned in popularity in recent months. Everywhere he goes, commotion follows; drawing crowds of thousands of worshipping fans who hang on every word he says.
He has been reported bellowing his ideology in Lockwood, Brimshore, Farmsdale and even as far as Watershire. It seems as though Rohe is a mastermind at drawing the attention of others. Where does this attention go? Well, to himself of course. With his handsome dark hair and muscular physique, public image is seemingly the fuel that Mr Rohe feeds on. ‘
“He’s come from God! He’s like God himself!” exclaimed one of his fanatic supporters as we interviewed them.
Mr Rohe’s main message seems to be against the King himself; spouting obscure claims such as “The King is keeping all the food for himself while the people starve!”, he cried into a crowd in Lockwood last week. Of course, this isn’t a new line of thought, with other such violent figures as “John the Terrorist” and the now proven liar and fraud Christopher Whittle.
Experts tend to agree that the food hardship some are currently facing is due to a series of unfortunately poor harvests as well as changing whether conditions. We asked the lead food resource advisor in the kingdom for his opinion on the matter. “We’ve heard this all before” he said while holding back a laugh, “Mr Rohe is just parroting the same old conspiracy theories we hear every year”.
While Mr Rohe screams non-stop of the riches of others, his own wealth has been quietly building. Donations from his fanatic supporters have allowed him to purchase a second piece of farmland on top his already wealthy estate. Unsurprisingly, his workforce consists of almost entirely white men with a mere handful of coloured workers throughout his farms.
We travelled to Mr Rohe’s farm and spoke with his wife, who told us “We as almost never see him! He’s constantly on the road. He pops by to see the kids and check on the farm every week or so”. It seems as though it’s difficult to pay close attention to your family when you’re so busy drawing attention to yourself in the streets.
Mr Rohe’s fans seem to admire him deeply, but such adoration can turn nasty. His most extreme supporters have abused, harassed and on one occasion physically assaulted Mr Rohe’s critics. “His fans are relentless”, says well-known critic Johnathon Adams. “The harass me day and night and have even threatened to attack me.
While Mr Rohe does not endorse such violent behaviour, he does not exactly deter it either. He describes the King as “evil” and “corrupt” and once stated that “sometimes the power of the fist is necessary”.
Mr Rohe’s rhetoric seems to attract all kinds of unsavory characters; the aforementioned “Jack the Terrorist” as well as well-known woman beater Joseph Smith have both stated their support for Mr Rohe.
In the end, the key to Mr Rohe’s appeal is also his greatest weakness. He wants to be the man who knows everything and can explain everything. But his arguments are riddled with conspiracy theories and crude distortions of the truth.
Even so, his critics will have a tough time. Mr Rohe’s wave of popularity is unlikely to come crashing down any time soon.
PART 4
A year had passed, and over the months the third advisor wrote countless similar articles and published them in the 3 main newspapers.
To his and the King’s delight, their plan had worked flawlessly.
Support for Mr Rohe began to wane. Many began to accuse Mr Rohe as being a racist. Others claimed he was mistreating his wife. Most began to be see Mr Rohe as somebody not to be taken seriously.
The people started feeling a sense of distrust and dislike towards Mr Rohe deep in their stomachs. They didn’t know exactly why they felt this way, but felt it they did.
Something had switched inside their minds. They began to see everything Mr Rohe did through a negative lens. His previously heroic speeches now seemed shrill and childish. His impressive physique and sharp jaw now seemed vain and self-centred. And his claims about The King and what was really inside his palace made of solid gold now had doubt cast upon them. Some still believed Mr Rohe, some thought him to be exaggerating, most simply threw their hands up in confusion and forgot all about it.
When Mr Rohe made a speech on the streets, many rolled their eyes at his mad supporters. And with growing frequency, an opposing group of protesters would appear and shout over him. They made claims that Mr Rohe was a racist, and they made jokes about the 2 farms Mr Rohe owned.
The King’s problem had been solved.
The third advisor became one of the King’s closest confidantes and was allowed access to many of the luxuries inside the palace: food, women and anything else he could possibly dream of.
As for the people, their lives steadily got worse and worse. Their food supplies dwindled, medicine became rare to find and the people became sadder, more depressed and more desperate. Despite this, most accepted their situation as “the way life is”, while others blamed God for their misfortune.
One day, another man began to make speeches on the streets against the King. His name: Varios. The People began to call him their “Savior”.
The King passed his pen over to the third advisor. “Ready?”
The third advisor grew a wicked grin.
“Of course”
submitted by MediaVsReality to capitalism_in_decay [link] [comments]
The King did not know empathy.
If he saw somebody in pain, he felt nothing. If he watched a child cry, he felt nothing. And if he saw an injured bird on the road, he would press the sole of his boot on top of it without a second thought.
This was just as he governed.
The people lacked food, yet the King felt nothing. And did nothing. For in his palace, he had all the food he would ever need.
The people lacked medicine, yet the King felt nothing. And did nothing. For in his palace, he had all the medicine he would ever need.
The people lacked education, yet the King felt nothing. And did nothing. For in his palace, he had all the books and scholars he would ever need.
In his palace built entirely of solid gold, he was the most powerful King in all the land.
But the King had a problem. One thorn in his side. One little nuisance that kept him awake at night.
From nowhere, a man had appeared. His name: Rohe
Rohe spoke atop a platform in the streets to the people. He spoke of the unjust nature of The King’s rule, of the palace made of solid gold and the endless luxuries stored within it.
Rohe blamed the King for the hunger the people had suffered. And he blamed the King for the deaths of brothers, sisters, children, mothers and fathers due to the lack of medicine.
And finally, Rohe told the people to rise up against the King, storm the palace of solid gold and take back control of their food, their medicine and their land.
Worst of all, to the King’s terror, the people had begun to support Rohe. In the streets, Rohe would draw thousands of supporters. “Freedom for the people” they would chant in unison.
The King was utterly furious. How dare these low-born peasants chant such things. How dare these foolish, ignorant and inferior men even consider stealing his rightfully owned riches.
Something had to be done.
Not knowing what to do, he spoke to his 3 most trusted advisors.
The first advisor suggested he have Rohe killed.
The second advisor suggested he have Rohe thrown in jail.
The third advisor, the most cunning and mischievous of the 3, disapproved of the plans of the first 2 advisors. Killing him or throwing him in jail, he explained, would encourage the crowds still further.
Instead, he suggested something different entirely. He suggested they turn the people against Rohe.
“How?” asked the King curiously. “How can we turn the people against him”?
The third advisor adjusted the large, rounded glasses that lay on top his big, crooked nose and grew a mischievous smile. “Why the newspapers, of course.”
PART 2 — The Third Advisor
The lands had hundreds of different newspapers, but only 3 main ones, which were by far the most widely read.
The people believed these newspapers to be run by well-meaning people who aimed to tell them honestly of the goings-on throughout the world.
The truth was different.
While it was made to appear that these newspaper were run independently, they were in fact controlled by the King himself. Whenever the King needed, he could control everything that was written inside one of the 3 main newspapers.
The King granted the cunning third advisor the task of turning the people against Rohe. And so, the third advisor began his research:
To his dismay, he found Rohe to be perfect. A true hero.
Through his research, he discovered several things about Rohe:
- He had a loving wife and two young children.
- He had grown up poor and had managed to create a little bit of wealth through hard work on his farm.
- He was strong, with big, bulging muscles and a handsome face.
- On his farm worked 10 white men and 2 black men, all of whom he treated with great kindness and respect.
- He was rarely at home with his family. He was always working, helping at the local school or in the streets doing his speeches.
Upon finishing his research, a crooked smile crept upon the face of the third advisor. He adjusted his spectacles and muttered to himself.
“This is all I need…”
PART 3 — The Article
Rohe — The People’s Hero Or Attention Seeking Conspiracy Theorist?
Rising from an obscure background, Rohe the so-called “Hero” has ballooned in popularity in recent months. Everywhere he goes, commotion follows; drawing crowds of thousands of worshipping fans who hang on every word he says.
He has been reported bellowing his ideology in Lockwood, Brimshore, Farmsdale and even as far as Watershire. It seems as though Rohe is a mastermind at drawing the attention of others. Where does this attention go? Well, to himself of course. With his handsome dark hair and muscular physique, public image is seemingly the fuel that Mr Rohe feeds on. ‘
“He’s come from God! He’s like God himself!” exclaimed one of his fanatic supporters as we interviewed them.
Mr Rohe’s main message seems to be against the King himself; spouting obscure claims such as “The King is keeping all the food for himself while the people starve!”, he cried into a crowd in Lockwood last week. Of course, this isn’t a new line of thought, with other such violent figures as “John the Terrorist” and the now proven liar and fraud Christopher Whittle.
Experts tend to agree that the food hardship some are currently facing is due to a series of unfortunately poor harvests as well as changing whether conditions. We asked the lead food resource advisor in the kingdom for his opinion on the matter. “We’ve heard this all before” he said while holding back a laugh, “Mr Rohe is just parroting the same old conspiracy theories we hear every year”.
While Mr Rohe screams non-stop of the riches of others, his own wealth has been quietly building. Donations from his fanatic supporters have allowed him to purchase a second piece of farmland on top his already wealthy estate. Unsurprisingly, his workforce consists of almost entirely white men with a mere handful of coloured workers throughout his farms.
We travelled to Mr Rohe’s farm and spoke with his wife, who told us “We as almost never see him! He’s constantly on the road. He pops by to see the kids and check on the farm every week or so”. It seems as though it’s difficult to pay close attention to your family when you’re so busy drawing attention to yourself in the streets.
Mr Rohe’s fans seem to admire him deeply, but such adoration can turn nasty. His most extreme supporters have abused, harassed and on one occasion physically assaulted Mr Rohe’s critics. “His fans are relentless”, says well-known critic Johnathon Adams. “The harass me day and night and have even threatened to attack me.
While Mr Rohe does not endorse such violent behaviour, he does not exactly deter it either. He describes the King as “evil” and “corrupt” and once stated that “sometimes the power of the fist is necessary”.
Mr Rohe’s rhetoric seems to attract all kinds of unsavory characters; the aforementioned “Jack the Terrorist” as well as well-known woman beater Joseph Smith have both stated their support for Mr Rohe.
In the end, the key to Mr Rohe’s appeal is also his greatest weakness. He wants to be the man who knows everything and can explain everything. But his arguments are riddled with conspiracy theories and crude distortions of the truth.
Even so, his critics will have a tough time. Mr Rohe’s wave of popularity is unlikely to come crashing down any time soon.
PART 4
A year had passed, and over the months the third advisor wrote countless similar articles and published them in the 3 main newspapers.
To his and the King’s delight, their plan had worked flawlessly.
Support for Mr Rohe began to wane. Many began to accuse Mr Rohe as being a racist. Others claimed he was mistreating his wife. Most began to be see Mr Rohe as somebody not to be taken seriously.
The people started feeling a sense of distrust and dislike towards Mr Rohe deep in their stomachs. They didn’t know exactly why they felt this way, but felt it they did.
Something had switched inside their minds. They began to see everything Mr Rohe did through a negative lens. His previously heroic speeches now seemed shrill and childish. His impressive physique and sharp jaw now seemed vain and self-centred. And his claims about The King and what was really inside his palace made of solid gold now had doubt cast upon them. Some still believed Mr Rohe, some thought him to be exaggerating, most simply threw their hands up in confusion and forgot all about it.
When Mr Rohe made a speech on the streets, many rolled their eyes at his mad supporters. And with growing frequency, an opposing group of protesters would appear and shout over him. They made claims that Mr Rohe was a racist, and they made jokes about the 2 farms Mr Rohe owned.
The King’s problem had been solved.
The third advisor became one of the King’s closest confidantes and was allowed access to many of the luxuries inside the palace: food, women and anything else he could possibly dream of.
As for the people, their lives steadily got worse and worse. Their food supplies dwindled, medicine became rare to find and the people became sadder, more depressed and more desperate. Despite this, most accepted their situation as “the way life is”, while others blamed God for their misfortune.
One day, another man began to make speeches on the streets against the King. His name: Varios. The People began to call him their “Savior”.
The King passed his pen over to the third advisor. “Ready?”
The third advisor grew a wicked grin.
“Of course”
2023.06.10 13:04 kylexyz001 23 [M4F] Ohio/Worldwide- Let's Be Each Other's Everything (Longest post ever?)
Brace yourselves, this is gonna be a long one.
Table of Contents
1…… The Main Goal
2…… What I’m Seeking
3…… Personality
4…… Interests
5…… Physical Characteristics (with pics)
6…… Expectations of You
7…… Living Situation
8…… Deal Breakers
9…… Closing Remarks
(1)
The Main Goal:
Well if you’re browsing this subreddit then much like me, you were alone this weekend and I’m sure you’d like to change that as much as me. I won’t lie, I am going through a rough part of my life right now. It’s difficult for me to find the energy for anything at the moment and I’m just really seeking affection in general, anything that will give me a push. I don’t want to be that person who brings everyone down but I could really use someone to talk to right now. I’d really like to find someone who’s similar to me so much to the point that we do everything together and talk about everything while not having to pretend to be interested. I want someone with whom we can mutually spew our emotions onto and have those feelings reciprocated. Not an emotional punching bag, but an emotional teddy bear to hug and cuddle until everything feels better as many times as we need. There’s people who I’m sure have told you the same, they’ll be there no matter how many times you need the support, no matter how many times the insecurities and bad thoughts come back but they don’t mean it. I will be the exception, I’m not so ignorant to think some nice words and tales of relating to you will magically forever heal whatever ails you then get mad when you seek the same support again. Mental ailments are rarely temporary and I don’t care about someone because they’re perfect, caring about someone means being there no matter how many times they need you to be. It doesn’t feel like a chore, it doesn’t get old, and it never will.
(2)
(2.a)
What I'm Seeking:
I will upfront let you know if I’m clicking better with someone else or if you’re the one, I’m not here to tread the sea of fish or keep my options open, I’m here for one singular person.
(2.b)
Relationship:
A relationship is difficult for me right now, it’s been nearly half a year since I got out of my last relationship and the reasons for it ending are partially responsible for how I’ve been feeling and why it’s so hard for me to seek the comfort I so desperately crave. I will tell you about it but for the sake of not treating the entirety of the internet as my therapist, it’ll be in private. I really need the comfort of intimacy and the warmth of someone who cares. I'm not going to feel better if I just sulk and don’t move on. This is my attempt to get better, I’ll admit I’m not great right now and I don’t expect you to be either. If we can help each other heal, then I’d be more than happy :) A relationship isn’t just being there for when someone’s at their best. Even if a relationship is hard at the moment, I do want a life partner and I don’t want to be alone. Things aren’t going to get easier without you so I don’t want to hesitate. I view my other as an equal, I don’t like categorizing us into specific roles. We take care of each other and treat each other how we like to be treated, whatever that is, it's as simple as that. I don't care if you're "successful" or not, living simple lives with our days filled with love is the ultimate measure of success to me.
(3)
Personality:
(3.a)
On the Surface:
As you can tell I can be rather… stoic but that’s largely due to my current stressors, I truthfully am goofy and fun loving but I just can’t find it in me right now. I want to return to that but without someone to light up my world it’s been difficult to just have fun and enjoy stuff. I’m definitely more introverted, you won’t catch me at any parties or really outside at all. I definitely prefer being home though the occasional outing is not out of the question and one day I’d like to travel to other countries because I think that kind of perspective is important.
(3.b)
The Core of My Being:
I like being a spectator to it all and if we bear witness to humanity burning or its miraculous recovery, I want to watch it with you. I enjoy watching humanity advance, less so when it devolves but I want to watch it to the end nonetheless. I’m both a realist and someone who lives with my head in the clouds dreaming of scenarios or worlds that don’t exist. I’m saying that I enjoy a good narrative and can suspend my disbelief to enjoy something but you won’t catch me refusing vaccines or ignoring blatant facts for the sake of some pseudo science or witch doctor’s remedy. I’m an atheist but I do not rule out existence after death, not because I’m agnostic but because due to the nature of potentially infinite time at some point after how many googol years with a googol amount of 0s after that, something’s bound to replicate your consciousness perfectly at some point. It’s actually a really fascinating topic I like talking about. If infinite time and infinite possibilities exist, does non existence exist? Though that’s an awfully existentially dreadful thought process considering the ramifications of infinite existence and infinite possibilities during said infinite existence. I would say I’m confidently left leaning and I don’t think I could truly get along with anyone right leaning, at least America’s definition of right leaning. Left and right seems to have just become; do people deserve to suffer or do they deserve to live good lives? Being political is not something I expected to become but how can you not be when crimes against human rights are being passed on a daily basis and at the end of the day, everything’s political. Oftentimes I imagine the perfect moment as relaxing with my significant other playing games or cuddling in a cold room under blankets.
I value that special someone above all of the existential thoughts, the bad of the world, the good of the world, they practically become my world. So many worries wash away when I’m with them. I don’t know if that’s the defense mechanism my brain created to not feel bad 24/7 but if it is, I’m currently without it.
(3.c)
Insecurities:
I talk of philosophy and politics here but really I spend most of my time just playing games, watching stuff, and trying to not be sleep deprived. I’m also nowhere near as well spoken, heck sometimes I feel like my speech is broken. I won’t claim to be something I’m not, I sit at home while I complain about the world doing nothing about it wishing I had someone here with me. I’m not noble nor do I really want to be, I have morals I uphold but much like most other hypocrites I acknowledge that my comfortable life is built on the suffering of others without doing anything about it. Why? My sleep problems? Am I depressed? Is that why I have no energy to do anything? Do I just think nothing I could do could help? I can’t nail it down myself, maybe it’s a mix of everything, maybe I’m just a bad person. I have always told myself that if I had wealth I would help people but if I get that kind of wealth will I just become a wealth hoarder who tries to justify my riches as something I earned rather than something given to me through incredibly lucky circumstances? If I do help people is it because I’m a good person or out of guilt? Will I die alone? I feel like I drive everyone away with my clinginess, I get paranoid often and need reassurance often. It’s something I want to work on, something I’ve been trying to work on. Hearing that someone cares about me just never gets old. I value self awareness even if it’s painful.
(3.d)
Socializing:
I’m definitely a socially anxious/awkward mess, especially around strangers. I do feel a large amount of anxiety in public, people can’t tell by looking at my face since I kind of go stone faced in an attempt to block everything out but yeah you’ll notice that if we go out in public. Growing up my pediatrician said I was probably autistic, never got a formal diagnosis so that’s just great. But yeah that explains why I can’t make eye contact with people, I kinda just stare at the ground and avoid their gaze at all costs. A lot of these social struggles go away to a great degree once I know you for a bit but yeah I apologize for how terrible I am at socializing at first. Don’t let my social struggles fool you though, I love cuddling and being close with my person.
(3.e)
Sexuality:
I am a heterosexual male, though I’m not very masculine like at all. I may even be a bit feminine sometimes. Not that I believe any activity or manner of acting belongs to a gender but I don’t know how else to describe it. I’m definitely super affectionate and love it when my partner is too. I am open to dating demi people but I do have a libido so I don't think asexual would work out.
(4)
Interests:
(4.a)
Video Games:
As stated before, I do spend a lot of my time playing video games. It’s been hard lately with me having no energy but I really do want to play more games and have a good time playing them with you! I primarily play on PC though I do have a switch. I’m primarily into platform fighters, roguelikes, open world, survival, and sandbox games. As for single player story games, I enjoy watching them through twitch or youtube but for the most part I don’t play them myself. I’d watch you play them though!
Here’s a list of games we can play:
-Minecraft (Java)
-Risk of Rain 2
-Gunfire Reborn
-Roboquest
-7 Days to Die
-Phasmophobia
-Rust
-Unturned
-Bloons TD 6
-Platform fighters: Super Smash Bros. Melee, Slap City, Multiversus, Flash Party, Fraymakers
Whatever you want to play I’ll give it a shot! I will say that League bores me to death but I’ll play it for you :) I try to avoid MMOs, not because I don’t like them but because of how addicted I can get to them. I enjoy learning games in-depth so MMOs can be a fast track to addiction.
I recently got Kerbal Space Program 2 and ehhh not really worth it right now but hopefully later it will be? I’m super excited for Tears of the Kingdom! In the far off future I’m excited for Rivals of Aether 2 which is a platform fighter releasing in 2024, let me know of your most anticipated releases and I’ll see if I could play them with you!
Also I never got into FPS games but I could totally see myself playing like CoD with you or Escape From Tarkov. Any FPS really, I’m down.
I am a fan of Pokemon but with how things have been lately I don’t know how long that will last. Pixelmon is a common Pokemon mod I play for Minecraft if you want to play that! Also if I say I want to play something with you I mean it but there are often times when no matter how much I want to I'm just drained and can do little more than lay in bed so please don't think I'm making an excuse.
(4.b)
Science:
I really enjoy keeping up with the latest advances in pretty much everything, it could be biology, technology, astronomy, anything! I love seeing progression and I love talking about it! Really I could go on and on about what I’m obsessing about that day. I particularly love technology, ask me for my laptop specs I dare you. When I was little I always wanted to be a scientist of any kind but then insomnia and fear of college stuff hit me like a truck aaaand that’s the end of that dream.
(4.c)
Anime:
You got me, I like anime but I’d like to think my tastes are benign.
Here’s some of my favorites I can list from the top of my head:
- To Your Eternity
- Vinland Saga
- Spice and Wolf
- Re:Zero
- Mob Psycho
- Dr. Stone
- Attack on Titan
- Spy x Family
- My Hero Academia
- Ranking of Kings
- Demon Slayer
Okay I can go on and on but I will say I don’t like pointless fan service and the spamming of cliche anime moments. I mostly enjoy action and anything well animated if it doesn’t have a potato story. Heck Demon Slayer could be my top 3 out of season 2’s animation alone. I don’t watch slice of life often or romance but I would with you!
(4.d)
Misc:
I’m not going to go on and on about the tiniest little things when the main ones are covered but I’ll watch pretty much any show with you and anything really. I like random youtube videos that explain some kind of lore or mystery, sometimes mini documentaries too.
As for food I looove sushi and I’m a sucker for fast food. Okay and candy, definitely candy.
I used to play tennis but haven’t really had the opportunity nor friends to play it with and I’m way too socially anxious to seek it out. Also I will say that when we move to something like discord I type waaaay more casually. I’m not going to expect long paragraphs back and forth like we’re writing English papers for each other, I do enjoy long conversations but seriously don’t worry about having to put the utmost effort into every response, I just like making good first impressions I guess.
(5)
(5.a)
My Physical Characteristics:
I’m 5’8 (172cm), 128 pounds (58kg), with curly brown hair and blue eyes. I like keeping my hair long in the winter and cutting it in the summer. I’m pretty slim in general so if you’re looking for someone large, that’s not me. I don’t work out but my work is pretty physical so at least I’m not totally inactive. I don’t have the urge to work out or gain muscle but I do want to maintain my slim figure so if I start losing control of that I’ll work out. I like to keep my face shaved because I don’t think I look good with a beard/mustache so if you’re into those I apologize. I have an average amount of body hair? I’d prefer to be completely shaved but it’s easy to lose motivation with that battle, if you prefer shaved then I’d have no problem complying. Anyways here’s what I look like: https://imgur.com/a/MZZgf2t
(5.b)
My Physical Preferences:
Having physical preferences makes me feel shallow, if I could make myself not have them I would but unfortunately that’s now how that works. I don’t care if you’re shorter or taller than me and I don’t care if you weigh more or less than me. All I ask is that you’re slim-average weight. I would never ask for someone to be something I’m not. I don’t care about tattoos or piercings.
(6)
Expectations of You:
I am not looking for someone “exciting” or someone to “keep me on my toes” I’m not looking for someone to cater to my every whim or anything like that. I don’t care if you’re “boring” or if you aren’t “successful”. I know it’s a common thing for people to not want a “boring” relationship and to seek something argumentative or something with constant challenges but I just want to be with you. During the exciting times, the boring times, and everything in-between, all of it will be great with you! Maybe we do argue sometimes or maybe there will be challenges but that will never be something I purposefully seek out and I don’t want that to be something you seek out either. I will not play tricks on you and I will not play mind games, I expect the same from you. We all have personal measures of success we may or may not have lived up to but what I care about most is our commitment to each other. If we have each other we can get through tough times, near the ends of our lives I want us to look back and feel that this life together was worth more than anything. That’s not saying I want us to be haphazard, I don’t want us to make poor decisions for the sake of yolo and I want us to always be rational, especially with each other. I want you to be someone I can trust to make decisions and weigh the options with a level head, I’ll try my best to live up to the same for you. Most of all I want empathy, understanding, someone to feel the utmost comfort and trust in.
(7)
Living Situation:
Currently my life is pretty relaxed, I work 3 times a week as a night shift stocker. I currently live in a 2 bedroom apartment with my roommate but we’re looking to move into someplace larger by the end of the year if everything works out. The internet is weirdly great for Ohio too like I have fiber and later this year we’re supposed to be getting dedicated fiber so that’s neat. I’m not attached to Ohio so the ultimate goal living location wise is probably moving to a country that won’t send you into a lifetime of dealing with the repercussions from one medical emergency.
(8)
Deal Breakers:
Might as well make this simple and make it a list.
- Anti-vaxxers
- Unironically believing astrology
- Right wingers
- Hard drugs (occasional 420 and alcohol is fine, may even join you)
- Wanting children, there was a time when I was younger when I wanted children but with the state of the word that’s a definite no and I feel like I wouldn’t be able to handle the stress. I’d love a stress free life with as much time with you as possible.
- Homophobic
- Transphobic
- Racist
- Super Religious
- Don’t be a bigot and don’t deny facts.
(9)
Closing Remarks:
Well you made it, I was thinking that finding someone I’d be willing to put a lifetime of effort into at least required this much effort. If I think of anything more I’ll update the post. Also about timezones, it really doesn’t matter where in the world you are. I don’t have a sleep schedule and I have most of the week off from work so it really doesn’t matter.
I request that in your response you do put effort into it, it doesn’t have to be anywhere near as long as this but at least enough so I know that you read this and enough about you so I know why you saw potential compatibility. I will seriously read all of it and respond the best I can. I do also request a pic included in your response (sfw please) or one soon after we start talking to prove identity, I’ll send identity proving pics too. As long as this post is up, you can send a reply!
submitted by kylexyz001 to r4r [link] [comments]
Table of Contents
1…… The Main Goal
2…… What I’m Seeking
3…… Personality
4…… Interests
5…… Physical Characteristics (with pics)
6…… Expectations of You
7…… Living Situation
8…… Deal Breakers
9…… Closing Remarks
(1)
The Main Goal:
Well if you’re browsing this subreddit then much like me, you were alone this weekend and I’m sure you’d like to change that as much as me. I won’t lie, I am going through a rough part of my life right now. It’s difficult for me to find the energy for anything at the moment and I’m just really seeking affection in general, anything that will give me a push. I don’t want to be that person who brings everyone down but I could really use someone to talk to right now. I’d really like to find someone who’s similar to me so much to the point that we do everything together and talk about everything while not having to pretend to be interested. I want someone with whom we can mutually spew our emotions onto and have those feelings reciprocated. Not an emotional punching bag, but an emotional teddy bear to hug and cuddle until everything feels better as many times as we need. There’s people who I’m sure have told you the same, they’ll be there no matter how many times you need the support, no matter how many times the insecurities and bad thoughts come back but they don’t mean it. I will be the exception, I’m not so ignorant to think some nice words and tales of relating to you will magically forever heal whatever ails you then get mad when you seek the same support again. Mental ailments are rarely temporary and I don’t care about someone because they’re perfect, caring about someone means being there no matter how many times they need you to be. It doesn’t feel like a chore, it doesn’t get old, and it never will.
(2)
(2.a)
What I'm Seeking:
I will upfront let you know if I’m clicking better with someone else or if you’re the one, I’m not here to tread the sea of fish or keep my options open, I’m here for one singular person.
(2.b)
Relationship:
A relationship is difficult for me right now, it’s been nearly half a year since I got out of my last relationship and the reasons for it ending are partially responsible for how I’ve been feeling and why it’s so hard for me to seek the comfort I so desperately crave. I will tell you about it but for the sake of not treating the entirety of the internet as my therapist, it’ll be in private. I really need the comfort of intimacy and the warmth of someone who cares. I'm not going to feel better if I just sulk and don’t move on. This is my attempt to get better, I’ll admit I’m not great right now and I don’t expect you to be either. If we can help each other heal, then I’d be more than happy :) A relationship isn’t just being there for when someone’s at their best. Even if a relationship is hard at the moment, I do want a life partner and I don’t want to be alone. Things aren’t going to get easier without you so I don’t want to hesitate. I view my other as an equal, I don’t like categorizing us into specific roles. We take care of each other and treat each other how we like to be treated, whatever that is, it's as simple as that. I don't care if you're "successful" or not, living simple lives with our days filled with love is the ultimate measure of success to me.
(3)
Personality:
(3.a)
On the Surface:
As you can tell I can be rather… stoic but that’s largely due to my current stressors, I truthfully am goofy and fun loving but I just can’t find it in me right now. I want to return to that but without someone to light up my world it’s been difficult to just have fun and enjoy stuff. I’m definitely more introverted, you won’t catch me at any parties or really outside at all. I definitely prefer being home though the occasional outing is not out of the question and one day I’d like to travel to other countries because I think that kind of perspective is important.
(3.b)
The Core of My Being:
I like being a spectator to it all and if we bear witness to humanity burning or its miraculous recovery, I want to watch it with you. I enjoy watching humanity advance, less so when it devolves but I want to watch it to the end nonetheless. I’m both a realist and someone who lives with my head in the clouds dreaming of scenarios or worlds that don’t exist. I’m saying that I enjoy a good narrative and can suspend my disbelief to enjoy something but you won’t catch me refusing vaccines or ignoring blatant facts for the sake of some pseudo science or witch doctor’s remedy. I’m an atheist but I do not rule out existence after death, not because I’m agnostic but because due to the nature of potentially infinite time at some point after how many googol years with a googol amount of 0s after that, something’s bound to replicate your consciousness perfectly at some point. It’s actually a really fascinating topic I like talking about. If infinite time and infinite possibilities exist, does non existence exist? Though that’s an awfully existentially dreadful thought process considering the ramifications of infinite existence and infinite possibilities during said infinite existence. I would say I’m confidently left leaning and I don’t think I could truly get along with anyone right leaning, at least America’s definition of right leaning. Left and right seems to have just become; do people deserve to suffer or do they deserve to live good lives? Being political is not something I expected to become but how can you not be when crimes against human rights are being passed on a daily basis and at the end of the day, everything’s political. Oftentimes I imagine the perfect moment as relaxing with my significant other playing games or cuddling in a cold room under blankets.
I value that special someone above all of the existential thoughts, the bad of the world, the good of the world, they practically become my world. So many worries wash away when I’m with them. I don’t know if that’s the defense mechanism my brain created to not feel bad 24/7 but if it is, I’m currently without it.
(3.c)
Insecurities:
I talk of philosophy and politics here but really I spend most of my time just playing games, watching stuff, and trying to not be sleep deprived. I’m also nowhere near as well spoken, heck sometimes I feel like my speech is broken. I won’t claim to be something I’m not, I sit at home while I complain about the world doing nothing about it wishing I had someone here with me. I’m not noble nor do I really want to be, I have morals I uphold but much like most other hypocrites I acknowledge that my comfortable life is built on the suffering of others without doing anything about it. Why? My sleep problems? Am I depressed? Is that why I have no energy to do anything? Do I just think nothing I could do could help? I can’t nail it down myself, maybe it’s a mix of everything, maybe I’m just a bad person. I have always told myself that if I had wealth I would help people but if I get that kind of wealth will I just become a wealth hoarder who tries to justify my riches as something I earned rather than something given to me through incredibly lucky circumstances? If I do help people is it because I’m a good person or out of guilt? Will I die alone? I feel like I drive everyone away with my clinginess, I get paranoid often and need reassurance often. It’s something I want to work on, something I’ve been trying to work on. Hearing that someone cares about me just never gets old. I value self awareness even if it’s painful.
(3.d)
Socializing:
I’m definitely a socially anxious/awkward mess, especially around strangers. I do feel a large amount of anxiety in public, people can’t tell by looking at my face since I kind of go stone faced in an attempt to block everything out but yeah you’ll notice that if we go out in public. Growing up my pediatrician said I was probably autistic, never got a formal diagnosis so that’s just great. But yeah that explains why I can’t make eye contact with people, I kinda just stare at the ground and avoid their gaze at all costs. A lot of these social struggles go away to a great degree once I know you for a bit but yeah I apologize for how terrible I am at socializing at first. Don’t let my social struggles fool you though, I love cuddling and being close with my person.
(3.e)
Sexuality:
I am a heterosexual male, though I’m not very masculine like at all. I may even be a bit feminine sometimes. Not that I believe any activity or manner of acting belongs to a gender but I don’t know how else to describe it. I’m definitely super affectionate and love it when my partner is too. I am open to dating demi people but I do have a libido so I don't think asexual would work out.
(4)
Interests:
(4.a)
Video Games:
As stated before, I do spend a lot of my time playing video games. It’s been hard lately with me having no energy but I really do want to play more games and have a good time playing them with you! I primarily play on PC though I do have a switch. I’m primarily into platform fighters, roguelikes, open world, survival, and sandbox games. As for single player story games, I enjoy watching them through twitch or youtube but for the most part I don’t play them myself. I’d watch you play them though!
Here’s a list of games we can play:
-Minecraft (Java)
-Risk of Rain 2
-Gunfire Reborn
-Roboquest
-7 Days to Die
-Phasmophobia
-Rust
-Unturned
-Bloons TD 6
-Platform fighters: Super Smash Bros. Melee, Slap City, Multiversus, Flash Party, Fraymakers
Whatever you want to play I’ll give it a shot! I will say that League bores me to death but I’ll play it for you :) I try to avoid MMOs, not because I don’t like them but because of how addicted I can get to them. I enjoy learning games in-depth so MMOs can be a fast track to addiction.
I recently got Kerbal Space Program 2 and ehhh not really worth it right now but hopefully later it will be? I’m super excited for Tears of the Kingdom! In the far off future I’m excited for Rivals of Aether 2 which is a platform fighter releasing in 2024, let me know of your most anticipated releases and I’ll see if I could play them with you!
Also I never got into FPS games but I could totally see myself playing like CoD with you or Escape From Tarkov. Any FPS really, I’m down.
I am a fan of Pokemon but with how things have been lately I don’t know how long that will last. Pixelmon is a common Pokemon mod I play for Minecraft if you want to play that! Also if I say I want to play something with you I mean it but there are often times when no matter how much I want to I'm just drained and can do little more than lay in bed so please don't think I'm making an excuse.
(4.b)
Science:
I really enjoy keeping up with the latest advances in pretty much everything, it could be biology, technology, astronomy, anything! I love seeing progression and I love talking about it! Really I could go on and on about what I’m obsessing about that day. I particularly love technology, ask me for my laptop specs I dare you. When I was little I always wanted to be a scientist of any kind but then insomnia and fear of college stuff hit me like a truck aaaand that’s the end of that dream.
(4.c)
Anime:
You got me, I like anime but I’d like to think my tastes are benign.
Here’s some of my favorites I can list from the top of my head:
- To Your Eternity
- Vinland Saga
- Spice and Wolf
- Re:Zero
- Mob Psycho
- Dr. Stone
- Attack on Titan
- Spy x Family
- My Hero Academia
- Ranking of Kings
- Demon Slayer
Okay I can go on and on but I will say I don’t like pointless fan service and the spamming of cliche anime moments. I mostly enjoy action and anything well animated if it doesn’t have a potato story. Heck Demon Slayer could be my top 3 out of season 2’s animation alone. I don’t watch slice of life often or romance but I would with you!
(4.d)
Misc:
I’m not going to go on and on about the tiniest little things when the main ones are covered but I’ll watch pretty much any show with you and anything really. I like random youtube videos that explain some kind of lore or mystery, sometimes mini documentaries too.
As for food I looove sushi and I’m a sucker for fast food. Okay and candy, definitely candy.
I used to play tennis but haven’t really had the opportunity nor friends to play it with and I’m way too socially anxious to seek it out. Also I will say that when we move to something like discord I type waaaay more casually. I’m not going to expect long paragraphs back and forth like we’re writing English papers for each other, I do enjoy long conversations but seriously don’t worry about having to put the utmost effort into every response, I just like making good first impressions I guess.
(5)
(5.a)
My Physical Characteristics:
I’m 5’8 (172cm), 128 pounds (58kg), with curly brown hair and blue eyes. I like keeping my hair long in the winter and cutting it in the summer. I’m pretty slim in general so if you’re looking for someone large, that’s not me. I don’t work out but my work is pretty physical so at least I’m not totally inactive. I don’t have the urge to work out or gain muscle but I do want to maintain my slim figure so if I start losing control of that I’ll work out. I like to keep my face shaved because I don’t think I look good with a beard/mustache so if you’re into those I apologize. I have an average amount of body hair? I’d prefer to be completely shaved but it’s easy to lose motivation with that battle, if you prefer shaved then I’d have no problem complying. Anyways here’s what I look like: https://imgur.com/a/MZZgf2t
(5.b)
My Physical Preferences:
Having physical preferences makes me feel shallow, if I could make myself not have them I would but unfortunately that’s now how that works. I don’t care if you’re shorter or taller than me and I don’t care if you weigh more or less than me. All I ask is that you’re slim-average weight. I would never ask for someone to be something I’m not. I don’t care about tattoos or piercings.
(6)
Expectations of You:
I am not looking for someone “exciting” or someone to “keep me on my toes” I’m not looking for someone to cater to my every whim or anything like that. I don’t care if you’re “boring” or if you aren’t “successful”. I know it’s a common thing for people to not want a “boring” relationship and to seek something argumentative or something with constant challenges but I just want to be with you. During the exciting times, the boring times, and everything in-between, all of it will be great with you! Maybe we do argue sometimes or maybe there will be challenges but that will never be something I purposefully seek out and I don’t want that to be something you seek out either. I will not play tricks on you and I will not play mind games, I expect the same from you. We all have personal measures of success we may or may not have lived up to but what I care about most is our commitment to each other. If we have each other we can get through tough times, near the ends of our lives I want us to look back and feel that this life together was worth more than anything. That’s not saying I want us to be haphazard, I don’t want us to make poor decisions for the sake of yolo and I want us to always be rational, especially with each other. I want you to be someone I can trust to make decisions and weigh the options with a level head, I’ll try my best to live up to the same for you. Most of all I want empathy, understanding, someone to feel the utmost comfort and trust in.
(7)
Living Situation:
Currently my life is pretty relaxed, I work 3 times a week as a night shift stocker. I currently live in a 2 bedroom apartment with my roommate but we’re looking to move into someplace larger by the end of the year if everything works out. The internet is weirdly great for Ohio too like I have fiber and later this year we’re supposed to be getting dedicated fiber so that’s neat. I’m not attached to Ohio so the ultimate goal living location wise is probably moving to a country that won’t send you into a lifetime of dealing with the repercussions from one medical emergency.
(8)
Deal Breakers:
Might as well make this simple and make it a list.
- Anti-vaxxers
- Unironically believing astrology
- Right wingers
- Hard drugs (occasional 420 and alcohol is fine, may even join you)
- Wanting children, there was a time when I was younger when I wanted children but with the state of the word that’s a definite no and I feel like I wouldn’t be able to handle the stress. I’d love a stress free life with as much time with you as possible.
- Homophobic
- Transphobic
- Racist
- Super Religious
- Don’t be a bigot and don’t deny facts.
(9)
Closing Remarks:
Well you made it, I was thinking that finding someone I’d be willing to put a lifetime of effort into at least required this much effort. If I think of anything more I’ll update the post. Also about timezones, it really doesn’t matter where in the world you are. I don’t have a sleep schedule and I have most of the week off from work so it really doesn’t matter.
I request that in your response you do put effort into it, it doesn’t have to be anywhere near as long as this but at least enough so I know that you read this and enough about you so I know why you saw potential compatibility. I will seriously read all of it and respond the best I can. I do also request a pic included in your response (sfw please) or one soon after we start talking to prove identity, I’ll send identity proving pics too. As long as this post is up, you can send a reply!
2023.06.10 13:02 FelicitySmoak_ On This Day In Michael Jackson HIStory - June 10th
 | 1970 - The Jackson 5 perform "The Love You Save" & "ABC" on the Groovy Show TV program in Los Angeles. submitted by FelicitySmoak_ to MichaelJackson [link] [comments] 1972 - Michael third solo single, "I Wanna be Where You Are", on Motown enters the Billboard US Top 40 singles chart at #38. It will peak at #16 during a 9 week run. 1972 - Lookin' Through the Windows by The Jackson 5 on Motown Records enters the Billboard US Black Albums Chart where it will peak at #3 during a 29 week run 1975 - “Forever Came Today” is the last official single of the Jackson 5 released by Motown 1979 - Last concert of the first US leg of the Destiny World Tour at the War Memorial Auditorium (now Greensboro Coliseum) in Greensboro, North Carolina. Tour resumes in October 1993 - Michael makes an appearance at an afternoon rally at a middle school in Los Angeles to launch a new DARE programme called DAREPLUS (‘Play and Learn Under Supervision’) program for the school, an initiative educating children on the perils of substance abuse and gang membership Jackson was a member of the Board of Directors of DARE (‘Drug Abuse Resistance Education’) and he was presented with a t-shirt for which he said: “Thank you very much. I love you all. Thank you.”All members of the 'Challengers Boys & Girls Club' were invited to Neverland 1993 - Michael announces that "HTW"s total earnings of $1.25 million, along with his entire Super Bowl XXVII proceeds from that year will be funneled to "Heal L.A.", for the children having suffered from the Los Angeles’ riots at the time. The Big Brothers of Los Angeles give Jackson a rocking chair made by a woman who made them for President Kennedy and the Pope. Another group of children visiting the ranch get a sneak peak preview of Tom & Jerry: The Movie. The film wasn't scheduled to begin running in theaters until July 30th, but Michael received an advance copy from Joseph Barbera. 1997 - Michael plays the second of two nights at the Amsterdam Arena (now Johan Cruyff Arena) in Amsterdam,Netherlands , to an audience of 50.000. 1999 - Michael is in Paris, France. He stayed one day at Le Crillon hotel as he shopped around the town on his brief stop there for business related meetings 1999 - It is reported that the opening of the first 'Michael Jackson Dance Studio' (formerly announced as the 'Michael Jackson Entertainment School') happened in Tokyo. Michael couldn't attend the inauguration of the school but planned on going soon. 2002 - Michael Jackson arrives in London and checks in the Marriott Renaissance Hotel. 2004 - Ray Charles passes away and Michael issues a statement: "I am saddened to hear of the death of my friend, Ray Charles. He was a true legend...an American Treasure. His music is timeless; his contributions to the music industry...unequaled; and his influence, unparalleled. His caring and humility spoke volumes. He paved the way for so many of us, and I will forever remember him in my heart."2003 - Michael finally gives his deposition in Indianapolis before going to Merville, Indiana Last month, Jackson he fell ill and was hospitalized before he could be deposed in a lawsuit filed by Gordon Keith (who signed the Jackson 5 to his Gary, Indiana-based Steeltown Records in 1967) and musician Elvy Woodard. The men claim that the Jackson 5 used the name of another Gary band and two of their songs without license. Jackson’s attorney, Bob Meyer, says the suit has no merit, noting that Michael was only 9 years old at the time. The deposition took place at a hotel from 11:21 a.m. to 5:10 p.m “Michael was extremely comfortable today,” he said. “He really surprised me.” Meanwhile, an attorney for the plaintiffs, Norman Reed, described Jackson’s deportment as “jovial,” though he went on to say that Jackson couldn’t answer every question because certain events in question occurred more than three decades ago Michael hires Charles Koppleman as his new business adviser. 2005 - Jury Deliberations Day 6 Jurors in the trial will be back again on Monday after ending their first full week of deliberations without reaching a verdict The jurors asked a number of questions today and also requested to have some testimony read back to them. Judge Melville held at least three meetings with attorneys from each side Legal experts say the lengthy and complex instructions issued by the Judge may be responsible for the extended deliberations. "This is a huge, huge celebrity trial, so you can bet that they're going to want to read those jury instructions pretty carefully," said Donna Shestowsky, a law professor at the University of California. Shari Seidman Diamond, a law professor at Northwestern University, agreed: "Running through these instructions is the use of words that are real words in everyday life that have different legal meanings." She said that terms such as "attempt," "reasonable" and "conspiracy" have specific meaning in criminal law and "we know that makes instructions harder to deal with." Diamond said that judges could make jury instructions more palatable but rarely did so as they were more concerned with making sure the instructions were unflawed and would not lead to a reversal on appeal. Peter Tiersma, a member of the California Judicial Council's task force on criminal jury instructions, said it was easier for a judge to simply copy the text of a legal opinion or of a statute in the instructions. He said that no matter how dense or incomprehensible the instructions were, "if you changed it, you risked getting it wrong." As an example, Diamond pointed out that the explanation of 'reasonable doubt' was buried on page 45 of the instructions, which offered little explanation of why jurors should ignore certain pieces of evidence. https://preview.redd.it/f52dnqltm35b1.jpg?width=612&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2753c19dbc11c6413de15208242432e1cdb0437c About 2,200 journalists received press credentials to cover the Michael Jackson trial, more than the O.J. Simpson and Scott Peterson trials combined. Major TV networks have committed dozens of staff members and some news organizations have even installed land lines, fearing that the explosion of phone calls following a verdict could jam the region's cell phone networks. Reporters from every continent except Antarctica are covering the story, a reminder that Michael's popularity remains intense outside the US. News organizations from more than 30 countries were represented "The appetite for Michael Jackson is insatiable," said Graeme Massie, who has covered the trial for Splash, a British news agency. "In the U.S., people may believe that Jackson's star has fallen, but in Europe it still shines brightly." The case is being closely watched in Japan where they are thinking of moving to a jury system. "People in Japan are interested in the King of Pop, but they also want to know how the jury will treat celebrities," said Wataru Ezaki, who works for a Japanese news organization in Southern California. "They want to see if jurors can be fair. It's a very unique case." Deliberations will resume Monday morning at 8:30 a.m. 2009 - AllGood Entertainment Inc. filed a $40 million lawsuit against Michael claiming breach of contract and fraud in an attempt to stop Jackson from performing in London. The New Jersey-based company filed the suit in federal court in New York stating that it signed a deal with Jackson's manager, Frank DiLeo for a pay per view reunion concert with the other Jackson siblings 2013 - Jackson v AEG Trial Day 26 Katherine Jackson was at court for the morning session Randy Phillips Testimony Jackson direct Panish showed a June 20th email from Tim Leiweke (CEO of AEG) to Dan Beckerman (CFO/COO of AEG) in which Beckerman described Phillips as jittery: "Trouble with Michael. Big trouble."Beckerman responded: "I figured something might be wrong given how jittery Randy has been this week. Is it "pre-show nerves" bad or "get a straight jacket/call our insurance carrier" bad?"Phillips said he was not jittery, but concerned with the show. Jittery meaning shaking and he said he doesn't think that's how he was. Phillips said Dr. Murray receiving $150k per month being the cause of Michael's sickness in June of 2009 never crossed his mind Phillips said he did not recall what was discussed in a phone conversation with Murray. In his video deposition that was shown to the jury, Phillips first said the conversation lasted three minutes. He was shown phone records that showed it lasted 25 minutes. Phone records show Phillips had a 25 minute phone call with Conrad Murray after Kenny Ortega's emails on June 20, 2009. Phillips said he didn't think the call lasted that long, doesn't recall what they talked about. "It's very possible I might have even read him these emails," Phillips testified, referring to the "Trouble at the Front" chain. "I would not have discussed his health other than what it was in the content of the emails" Phillips said everyone in the This Is It production got a list with everyone's phone numbers. He doesn't know how Dr. Murray got the list. Phillips was asking about how Conrad Murray got his home phone number. He initially said it might have been on a list given to tour personnel. Phillips then said that Murray may have gotten it from Jackson's former manager, Frank Dileo. Phillips testified that Dr. Murray called his home number. Panish showed picture of the business card Phillips gave Dr. Murray with his cell number on the back. The card was found in the doctor's car. Panish then asked Phillips about an email he sent director Kenny Ortega, telling him Murray was "unbiased and ethical", the email serves as Phillips' best recollection of his conversation with Dr. Murray. This morning, Panish frequently asked Randy Phillips whether he was truthful with Ortega. Panish: "Did you make that up and lie to Mr. Ortega?"Panish talked about email Phillips wrote to Ortega on Jun 20: "Kenny, it's critical that neither you, me or anyone else around this show become amateur psychiatrist or physicians. I had a lengthy conversation with Dr. Murray, who I'm gaining immense respect for as I get to deal with him more. He said that Michael is not only physically equipped to perform and, that discouraging him to, will hasten his decline instead of stopping it. Dr. Murray also reiterated that he's mentally able to and was speaking to me from the house where he has spent the morning with Michael. This doctor is extremely successful (we check everyone out) and does not need this gig so he is totally unbiased and ethical. It is critical we surround Michael with love and support and listen to how he wants to get ready for July 13th... You cannot imagine the harm and ramifications of stopping this show now. It would far outweigh "calling this game in the 7th inning". I'm not just talking about AEG's interests here, but the myriad of stuff/lawsuits swirling around Michael that I crisis manage every day and also his well-being. I am meeting with him today at 4p at the Forum. Please stay steady. Enough alarms have sounded. It is time to out out the fire, not burning the building down. Sorry for all the analogies. Randy"Phillips said he thought Dr. Murray was extremely successful based on the clinics he had and business he would've to close to go on tour. Phillips: "It was an assumption I made"As to the "we check everyone out" reference in the email, Panish asked if that was a true statement or untrue. Phillips: "It's not, it's hard to say yes or no on that. It is not true because everyone would imply everyone"Panish asked about the reference "he doesn't need the gig". "I made another assumption based on the information I had," Phillips explained, "I didn't have any basis to say he was unbiased and ethical" Panish used the email to try to show that 3 people _ Ortega, Murray and John Hougdahl _ were warning Phillips about Jackson's health. Phillips said Murray didn't agree with the assessments of Michael's health by Ortega and Hougdahl (the tour production manager). After multiple questions, Phillips said many of the statements in the email about Murray weren't true. Those statements included that AEG Live checked everyone out, and that Murray was an accomplished doctor who was unbiased and ethical. "At the time, I thought it was the truth", Phillips said of the above statements Phillips testified he wrote email to Sony exec asking her to remind him to tell her where Dr Murray was the night he was to be caring for Michael. Judge only allowed plaintiffs' attorney to say it was a social establishment, but the place was a strip club Panish then asked Phillips about the suggestion that Jackson needed a psychiatrist. Phillips confirmed what he said last week -- he never consulted a psychiatrist. He said today it wouldn't have been appropriate. As to having a mental health professional, "no one brought a psychiatrist," Phillips said, "because Michael didn't need one" Phillips testified he had conflicting information coming from Dr. Murray and Kenny Ortega regarding Michael. Panish pressed Phillips about the fact that he sent completely opposite emails to Ortega and AEG high ups. "It was because they were sent for different purposes," Phillips explained. Of the statements to Ortega, Phillips told the jury: "I just wanted to calm things down until we had this meeting"Before the morning break, Panish showed some of the emails he showed Phillips last week. Panish only had his copy, which had notes on it. Panish gave Phillips his annotated version of the email, but Phillips refused to look at them. Flipped them over so he couldn't see them. "I don't want to help you with your case", Phillips said of reviewing Panish's annotated copies of the emails. That brought some laughter. Phillips was ultimately given a clean copy of the emails, provided by his defense lawyers. Phillips said he remembers the meeting on June 20th lasted at least an hour. Dr. Murray and Phillips were sitting on one couch, Michael was on a bench and Ortega on another couch. In his deposition, Phillips said Ortega talked about Michael's physical and mental status. On the stand today, Phillips explained Ortega did very little talking in the meeting. "He addressed Michael coming to rehearsals. I do not believe he talked about Michael's physical condition and mental state. Dr. Murray did most of the talking," Phillips testified. Panish pressured Phillips about him changing the testimony. "My memory is getting better about the events of four years ago," Phillips said. "The purpose of the meeting was to find out what was happening with Michael because of the events on the 19th" Panish: "Did Mr. Ortega say he was concerned Michael was not getting enough sleep?"Without getting into details, Phillips said Ortega and Murray "were a little combative" at the meeting. Phillips said Murray reassured everyone that Jackson's health was fine. He said Jackson also assured them nothing was wrong with him. He said Murray told the group that Jackson may have had the flu, or some similar ailment. He said Jackson's health was discussed. Phillips said he couldn't recall whether Jackson's sleep issues were discussed. A portion of Randy Phillips' deposition was played in which he said sleep issues were discussed at the June 20, 2009 meeting The meeting happened in the afternoon, Phillips said. Panish asked if Michael was shaking in that meeting. Phillips said "No, not at all" A vase was broken in one of the production meetings, Phillips explained. He said Frank Dileo, Paul Gongaware & himself were present. Phillips said he doesn't know who broke the vase, but he thinks it may have been Frank DiLeo. Phillips denied a vase was broken during the June 20th meeting at Michael's house. Panish: "Did you have a meeting with Michael where you threatened to pull the plug and take everything he had?"Phillips said Michael was a phenomenal father & denied ever saying to anyone at the meeting that Michael was on skid row or going to become homeless. Panish: "Did you ever tell Michael you were paying for his toilet paper?"Phillips denied that Murray said during the June 20th meeting that he "couldn't take it anymore." Phillips denied that Murray's contract was discussed at the meeting, saying that would have been inappropriate. Phillips was also again asked about emails a couple of AEG executives (former CEO Tim Leiweke and Dan Beckerman) traded about him. The email described Randy Phillips as jittery, and alluded to either him or Jackson having a "mental breakdown." Phillips denied he was having a mental breakdown, and said he didn't want to put words in the other executives' mouths. In the deposition played to the jury, Tim Leiweke said the reference to "mental breakdown" in the email could've been to Randy Phillips not Michael. Panish played depo of Dan Beckerman, in which he said he didn't recall what prompted him to say Phillips was jittery. Panish: "Did you think that Michael needed a straight jacket?"Phillips said it was a question of "stage fright and the show will go on" or "I can't do this let's cancel" scenario. Panish: "Do you think Michael needed a straight jacket?"Regarding the straight jacket email, Phillips said the way he read it he can't tell if it was referring to him or Michael. Panish pointed out that insurance was only if Michael had a break down, not Phillips. Thus, the email must've referred to Michael Questioning then moved back to the June 20th meeting, with Phillips describing Murray as "demonstrative" toward director Kenny Ortega. Phillips said Murray's message to Ortega was essentially "stay in your lane" and not to interfere with medical issues. "The meeting got a little bit heated when Dr. Murray was admonishing Kenny," Phillips recalled, but said hostile is too harsh of a word. Phillips said lack of sleep was discussed in the June 20th meeting, but wasn't the main focus. Phillips said the reason of the meeting was to find out what happened in the night before, what was the issue and also Michael missing rehearsals. Phillips said Michael had the best two rehearsals after the June 20th meeting. "Kenny told Michael to take the next two days off, spend some time with the kids," Phillips testified. Phillips was then asked about emails he sent to Leiweke, others, about the results of the June 20th meeting at Jackson's house. This was after Jackson's attorney, John Branca, earlier in the day had suggested a counselor to work with Jackson. Phillips email: "Anyway, things are not as bleak as Kenny's emails. John, now is not the right time to introduce a new person into his life"After this email is when Phillips made the "badgering" comment to Panish that prompted Judge Palazuelos' admonition to him. Suddenly, judge decides to take a break at 2:24 pm and sends the jury out of the courtroom. Outside the presence of the jurors, judge admonished Phillips for not answering the questions asked. "Mr. Phillips you need to answer questions," said Judge Yvette Palazuelos, frustrated. "Lawyers are trying to getting the answers." Judge told Phillips that arguing with the lawyers isn't really going to help his case, it will just lengthen his testimony. She noted his testimony is taking much longer than expected, and at this pace he will be here for another week. Phillips told the judge he's just trying not to say the wrong things or be caught in tricky questions. Judge: "It seems like they are pretty straight forward questions, but when you offer info, it may not be good for you" AEG's attorney Jessica Bina defends Phillips saying the questions are compound, but that she believes he's trying to answer the questions. Panish said he wants to finish today, that he hasn't argued with the witness or judge. "I really tried hard, for me, it's hard!" Panish said. Phillips said he understood and wants to go back to work as well. Promised to be better. Phillips said the email he wrote saying "this guy is trying to concern me" was referring to Kenny Ortega. "I had two concerns: wanted Kenny to be open minded until the meeting and I didn't want Kenny to quit," Phillips explained. At this point they were about $30 million plus in advance, Panish said. Phillips said it was about $28 million, which was a lot of money. Email on 3/13/09 from Leiweke to Phillips: "Phil (Anschutz) can be such a paranoid scrooge. He thinks he's smarter than everyone"After a break and admonition, Phillips testified about some of his concerns surrounding the show.He said he was concerned about Ortega. Phillips said he was concerned that Ortega as getting into an "entrenched position" regarding Jackson's health and rehearsals. Phillips: "I was also quite concerned that Kenny would throw up his hands in the air and quit."The CEO was talking directly to the jury. Phillips said again that his concern with Ortega was that he wasn't going into the meeting with an open mind and that he was going to quit. Panish played Phillips deposition where he said he didn't remember what he was concerned about regarding Ortega. "I think my answer today is clarification," Phillips said, adding he did not change his testimony. Panish questioned whether his description was something he "just remembered right now." Phillips responded, "I'm remembering a lot of things now." Panish shot back that Phillips hadn't remembered many things during his deposition. In his depo, played to the jury, Phillips said there were no discussions on June 20th about Michael taking a couple of days off. However, in court today, Phillips testified Ortega suggested that he take two days off After the June 20th meeting, Jackson took two days off and resumed rehearsals. At that point, Phillips began working out of Staples Center. Phillips said one of the changes to come out of the June 20th meeting was that he would be at Staples, looking in on rehearsals. Phillips was also shown an email from his assistant, looking for a physical therapist for Jackson on June 22, 2009 At this point, Phillips was asked about Arnold Klein. He was shown a June 23rd email from Jackson's business manager Michael Kane. Kane: "On the list of doctors that will help get (us) from today to the opening night, where does Arnold Klein stand on the list?"Phillips responded about Klein: "He scares us to death because he is shooting him up with something"Kane responded: "Well since we owe him $48k and he wants payment maybe I should stop paying him and he'll stop shooting him up. I have the details of what he is doing"Phillips told jurors the email was a response to a $48,000 bill that Jackson's manager received for the treatments by Dr. Arnold Klein. The treatments included numerous shots of cosmetic drugs such as Restalyne and botox, as well as other unidentified intramuscular shots, Phillips said, citing the bill. Phillips said he maintains his position that he didn't know what, if anything, any doctor was giving Michael. Phillips was asked about Jackson's rehearsals on June 23 and 24. He said he couldn't remember which songs were performed which day. Phillips said he watched them in its entirety, which lasted about 3 hours. He said Michael was engaged about an hour and a half to two hours. Panish: "Michael never did the whole show, did he, sir?"On 6/25/09 the insurance broker wrote to Dr. Murray at 12:54:15 pm, probably London time (approximately 5am LA time): " We are dealing with a matter of great importance and your urgent attention would be greatly appreciated"The email talked about getting Michael's medical records. Phillips said he learned from the media that Dr. Murray had been treating Michael since 2006. Panish: "This is Dr. Murray doing something to help AEG get insurance, fair enough?"On 8/18/09 Phillips wrote email to Michael Roth: "I think I know what Michael died of and this would exonerate Conrad"Lionel Richie's ex-wife Brenda called Philips and said Michael died of a combination of other drugs and Propofol. Phillips said he never told police, the DA or Dr. Murray's attorneys about it because he thought the info was not reliable. Panish: "Did you want Dr. Murray to get exonerated?"Panish played video of Phillips' deposition where he said he didn't remember what the information was but his memory has been refreshed Judge then adjourned session for the day. Trial resumes tomorrow morning. Panish said he has one more hour of questioning. The attorneys estimated Phillips will be done testifying by Wednesday afternoon Court Transcript |
2023.06.10 12:57 Einhorntorte Let's rework Winx / abandoned and unexplored plotlines!
We know there's a bunch of storylines that didn't get explored to the fullest. Here's things I'd want. All of this potentially gives us a season 2.5, 3.5, 4.5 and a completely reworked season 5.
💖 Convergence magic being explored deeper and tied in more and more over time. 💖 Another general group thing I wanted, was for the Winx to be actual teachers for more than one episode. Sure, Bloom is an okay mentor to Roxy, but imagine the Winx actually raising the next generation of Alfea fairies?! 💖 Each girl getting a home planet Arc as guardian fairy , and then we have a movie where they safe the magical dimension as adult company of light ! 💖 Speaking of adults: season 4 and wow tried to give them careers, but what about really exploring that. Musa and Aisha scouting young creative talent, Bloom illustrating and writing children's books, Stella running a successful designer label, Flora and Miele making plant potions and remedies for the entire dimension, while Tecna and Timmy revolutionize Red fountain tech.
💙 The specialists have their own magic, and a bond with dragons! WHY isn't this explored more. How does the guys' magic work?!
💙❤️ Riven consistently falls for darkness. It's always reconned somehow. We need a full plot of this so the boy can make peace with himself. The old Winx website bios talked about him being abandoned as a child, please elaborate!
💙💚 💙🩵 We do agree we need a deep dive into Brandon's (and by extension Sky's) childhood? Like how did he end up as Sky's servant, what prompted them to do the switch thing, how did they keep Stella (and everyone else lol) fooled for an entire year before the winx story began?
💙🧡 💙💜 Helia and Nabu getting backstory/ Home Planet arcs exploring their magic and training the girls in it. Especially Nabu and Aisha strengthening and challenging one anothers skills, having a full mighty Andros arc where they meet Roy as some sort of teache companion.
💙💛 Timmy actually standing up to Tecna's parents. Better yet, Timmy's parents absolutely loving Tecna. (Yes I'm say Zenith/ family subplot for my boy!)
🩵 BLOOM CANNOT USE HER SIRENIX WISH ON DAPHNE. (Thanks for coming to my Ted talk) Instead let's expand on nymph lore and give screentime/ history to all of them. From what I understand there could be actual Greek mythology in here. S1 Bloom is an absolute fantasy/ mythology Geek. Wich, oh wow, proves useful on our mission with Diana, Sybilla And Roxy! We see Vanessa and Marion getting along just fine, but I actually would like for Bloom to struggle with her dual identity after her Bio parents are found. Being adopted/ socialized as a human would be a great deeper bonding plot for her and her student Roxy. Also Musa needs to sit Bloom down for a serious chat in season 4. Bloom takes Vanessa's generosity for granted and needs to be corrected. I feel like Musa, who didn't grow up an aristocrat or princess, has every right to have a confrontation arc with Bloom over just accepting such a huge present and taking people for granted. Speaking of Bloom and Musa's bond, this could be further explored through their mutual gift of seeing/ feeling people's auras. They'd make an awesome team solving conflict in Gardenia and all around the magical dimension. Diaspro is actually shown to have a personality in that one season 2 episode. How about we rewind her relationship with Bloom from there. Flora makes them make friends and Diaspro actually becomes sort of helpful to the Winx in her way. She can still be a petty snob, I just want to eliminate Sky Drama. Speaking of Sky, no inconsistent healing dragon flame, it's Flora who revives him, and he ain't resurrected, just badly hurt.
🧡 Stella having more moon power / a subplot of her trying to connect with Luna and Luna's magic. In this version, Luna isn't her watered down nick self, but a strict, cold, formal queen who Stella has trouble standing up to. She gives Stella a challenge, and Musa and Aisha help her perceiver. Aisha calls the guys for backup at the tail end of it, and Brandon, egged on by Amore, delivers the godmother of all speeches about love. Musa and Aisha add their bit about how familial love and the absence there of is so impactful, so that in the end Luna kinda sorta softens up and talks to Radius to at least be somewhat friendly again. We all know Stella is the real leader of the club. Let her just shine on more missions and let both Flora and Stella actually stand up to Bloom rather than giving in to her.
🩷 Flora teaching at Linphea academy and bringing Miele over to Alfea! A whole subplot that has a wholesome educational message for kids about how to treat Nature. Miele aging consistently and not sliding anymore. ( Miele is like 4 -3 years younger than Roxy in realtime.) To that point, Flora, Miele and Roxy on a mission together. And adventure to preserve/ save Linphea. Please give me Flora fights like the ones she had with Darcy. Don't let her be the weakest Winx all the time! Just because someone is delicate, doesn't mean they can't stand up for themselves!
💙 I'd rewrite all of season 5 to do Aisha justice! For convince, let me condense it in two sentences: She gets to properly grieve Nabu, while Musa and Stella console and support her process. AISHA IS THE LEADER OF THE SIRENIX MISSION. Also while on Summer break back after season 2, we get a special about the Winx hanging out on Andros And having aquatix adventures (remember the mermaid form of magic Winx that was actually gorgeous?) Aisha, Flora and Musa find/ meet Aisha's childhood friend Anne, And introduce her to the King and Queen of surface Andros. They're shocked, but auntie Ligea knew the whole time 😹 Flora clicks with Anne instantly, and invites her to Linphea after finding out Anne has been developing a passion for underwater gardening. Anne reveals she's actually from somewhere between Andros and Melody and is also besties with Terssa and Galatea. She becomes a sort of courier between the realms. - Also Anne Bonds with Livvy, and since at this point my Andros lore content is 3 seasons Long, how about more pixie content as well?! Yes I actually love Pop pixie xD
❤️ Musa deserves the world in my opinion. She deserves to use her sirenix wish on something cool. Like everlasting Harmony in all magical waters, wich brings peace for Daphne, and eliminates the island of trash that was movie 3. Remember her plot point at cloud tower, that she's actually kinda good at dark magic? Musa, Stella, and Aisha (maybe on Stella's moon power arc & Riven's origin arc) get an entire educational plot on how trauma messes with you even long after it's over, and how to overcome it. Also I'm not saying dark Musa plotline, but her And Bloom are almost equals in training sessions. (disregard dragonflame op) how about Musa, Aisha, Stella and recently healed Bloom are in Luna's challenge: The three girls that haven't been corrupted before get negativity affected by the dark side of moon magic, and each spend an individual episode overcoming their darkness. With Bloom and their pixie to guide them. - Stella being the positive person she is gets out first. She helps Bloom coach Aisha through, and lights her Staff as to be Aisha's light in the dark. Musa however has the hardest time getting out, so we spend a double episode getting her out. There's an epic fight because Musa wants to stay in her memories. She knocks out Bloom like it's no trouble. It's the pixies (Amore in particular) who have the best idea to reach her, so Stella and Aisha ultimately get Musa out of her darkness. Also her musical career inside magix totally picks up after the concert episode. Stella is kinda her manager now, and we nix the season 4 Jason subplot, because my girl already is successful and doesn't need a random man for this. On the topic of exploring realms, the origins of Musa's Flute are just as important as Stella's ring. They spend a bit of time recharging on melody and go on an adventure with Galatea, who shows them a lot of magical musical history. Musa's moms Koto (harp) has a secret magical message for her that's super sweet.
💜 I said Zenith Arc for Timmy. Do I have to say Zenith arc for Tecna? Basically anything that'd give us more wholesome Timmy and Tecna. I'd also like to know what she was doing in the Omega dimension ice caves. Like, give this a solo episode!
💚 Roxy, Mirta and Galatea forming their own club and carrying the torch. Roxy actually unlocking all her powers she'll need to be queen. For enchantix, Roxy goes back to gardenia in the Summer and somehow saves Mike and Vanessa's lives, so now Bloom is forever in Roxy's debt.
submitted by Einhorntorte to winxclub [link] [comments]
💖 Convergence magic being explored deeper and tied in more and more over time. 💖 Another general group thing I wanted, was for the Winx to be actual teachers for more than one episode. Sure, Bloom is an okay mentor to Roxy, but imagine the Winx actually raising the next generation of Alfea fairies?! 💖 Each girl getting a home planet Arc as guardian fairy , and then we have a movie where they safe the magical dimension as adult company of light ! 💖 Speaking of adults: season 4 and wow tried to give them careers, but what about really exploring that. Musa and Aisha scouting young creative talent, Bloom illustrating and writing children's books, Stella running a successful designer label, Flora and Miele making plant potions and remedies for the entire dimension, while Tecna and Timmy revolutionize Red fountain tech.
💙 The specialists have their own magic, and a bond with dragons! WHY isn't this explored more. How does the guys' magic work?!
💙❤️ Riven consistently falls for darkness. It's always reconned somehow. We need a full plot of this so the boy can make peace with himself. The old Winx website bios talked about him being abandoned as a child, please elaborate!
💙💚 💙🩵 We do agree we need a deep dive into Brandon's (and by extension Sky's) childhood? Like how did he end up as Sky's servant, what prompted them to do the switch thing, how did they keep Stella (and everyone else lol) fooled for an entire year before the winx story began?
💙🧡 💙💜 Helia and Nabu getting backstory/ Home Planet arcs exploring their magic and training the girls in it. Especially Nabu and Aisha strengthening and challenging one anothers skills, having a full mighty Andros arc where they meet Roy as some sort of teache companion.
💙💛 Timmy actually standing up to Tecna's parents. Better yet, Timmy's parents absolutely loving Tecna. (Yes I'm say Zenith/ family subplot for my boy!)
🩵 BLOOM CANNOT USE HER SIRENIX WISH ON DAPHNE. (Thanks for coming to my Ted talk) Instead let's expand on nymph lore and give screentime/ history to all of them. From what I understand there could be actual Greek mythology in here. S1 Bloom is an absolute fantasy/ mythology Geek. Wich, oh wow, proves useful on our mission with Diana, Sybilla And Roxy! We see Vanessa and Marion getting along just fine, but I actually would like for Bloom to struggle with her dual identity after her Bio parents are found. Being adopted/ socialized as a human would be a great deeper bonding plot for her and her student Roxy. Also Musa needs to sit Bloom down for a serious chat in season 4. Bloom takes Vanessa's generosity for granted and needs to be corrected. I feel like Musa, who didn't grow up an aristocrat or princess, has every right to have a confrontation arc with Bloom over just accepting such a huge present and taking people for granted. Speaking of Bloom and Musa's bond, this could be further explored through their mutual gift of seeing/ feeling people's auras. They'd make an awesome team solving conflict in Gardenia and all around the magical dimension. Diaspro is actually shown to have a personality in that one season 2 episode. How about we rewind her relationship with Bloom from there. Flora makes them make friends and Diaspro actually becomes sort of helpful to the Winx in her way. She can still be a petty snob, I just want to eliminate Sky Drama. Speaking of Sky, no inconsistent healing dragon flame, it's Flora who revives him, and he ain't resurrected, just badly hurt.
🧡 Stella having more moon power / a subplot of her trying to connect with Luna and Luna's magic. In this version, Luna isn't her watered down nick self, but a strict, cold, formal queen who Stella has trouble standing up to. She gives Stella a challenge, and Musa and Aisha help her perceiver. Aisha calls the guys for backup at the tail end of it, and Brandon, egged on by Amore, delivers the godmother of all speeches about love. Musa and Aisha add their bit about how familial love and the absence there of is so impactful, so that in the end Luna kinda sorta softens up and talks to Radius to at least be somewhat friendly again. We all know Stella is the real leader of the club. Let her just shine on more missions and let both Flora and Stella actually stand up to Bloom rather than giving in to her.
🩷 Flora teaching at Linphea academy and bringing Miele over to Alfea! A whole subplot that has a wholesome educational message for kids about how to treat Nature. Miele aging consistently and not sliding anymore. ( Miele is like 4 -3 years younger than Roxy in realtime.) To that point, Flora, Miele and Roxy on a mission together. And adventure to preserve/ save Linphea. Please give me Flora fights like the ones she had with Darcy. Don't let her be the weakest Winx all the time! Just because someone is delicate, doesn't mean they can't stand up for themselves!
💙 I'd rewrite all of season 5 to do Aisha justice! For convince, let me condense it in two sentences: She gets to properly grieve Nabu, while Musa and Stella console and support her process. AISHA IS THE LEADER OF THE SIRENIX MISSION. Also while on Summer break back after season 2, we get a special about the Winx hanging out on Andros And having aquatix adventures (remember the mermaid form of magic Winx that was actually gorgeous?) Aisha, Flora and Musa find/ meet Aisha's childhood friend Anne, And introduce her to the King and Queen of surface Andros. They're shocked, but auntie Ligea knew the whole time 😹 Flora clicks with Anne instantly, and invites her to Linphea after finding out Anne has been developing a passion for underwater gardening. Anne reveals she's actually from somewhere between Andros and Melody and is also besties with Terssa and Galatea. She becomes a sort of courier between the realms. - Also Anne Bonds with Livvy, and since at this point my Andros lore content is 3 seasons Long, how about more pixie content as well?! Yes I actually love Pop pixie xD
❤️ Musa deserves the world in my opinion. She deserves to use her sirenix wish on something cool. Like everlasting Harmony in all magical waters, wich brings peace for Daphne, and eliminates the island of trash that was movie 3. Remember her plot point at cloud tower, that she's actually kinda good at dark magic? Musa, Stella, and Aisha (maybe on Stella's moon power arc & Riven's origin arc) get an entire educational plot on how trauma messes with you even long after it's over, and how to overcome it. Also I'm not saying dark Musa plotline, but her And Bloom are almost equals in training sessions. (disregard dragonflame op) how about Musa, Aisha, Stella and recently healed Bloom are in Luna's challenge: The three girls that haven't been corrupted before get negativity affected by the dark side of moon magic, and each spend an individual episode overcoming their darkness. With Bloom and their pixie to guide them. - Stella being the positive person she is gets out first. She helps Bloom coach Aisha through, and lights her Staff as to be Aisha's light in the dark. Musa however has the hardest time getting out, so we spend a double episode getting her out. There's an epic fight because Musa wants to stay in her memories. She knocks out Bloom like it's no trouble. It's the pixies (Amore in particular) who have the best idea to reach her, so Stella and Aisha ultimately get Musa out of her darkness. Also her musical career inside magix totally picks up after the concert episode. Stella is kinda her manager now, and we nix the season 4 Jason subplot, because my girl already is successful and doesn't need a random man for this. On the topic of exploring realms, the origins of Musa's Flute are just as important as Stella's ring. They spend a bit of time recharging on melody and go on an adventure with Galatea, who shows them a lot of magical musical history. Musa's moms Koto (harp) has a secret magical message for her that's super sweet.
💜 I said Zenith Arc for Timmy. Do I have to say Zenith arc for Tecna? Basically anything that'd give us more wholesome Timmy and Tecna. I'd also like to know what she was doing in the Omega dimension ice caves. Like, give this a solo episode!
💚 Roxy, Mirta and Galatea forming their own club and carrying the torch. Roxy actually unlocking all her powers she'll need to be queen. For enchantix, Roxy goes back to gardenia in the Summer and somehow saves Mike and Vanessa's lives, so now Bloom is forever in Roxy's debt.
2023.06.10 12:41 lexus432 [Help] A6000 Acting up after using aftermarket battery
Hi Everyone,
Has anyone experienced their A6000 acting up after using an aftermarket battery? I've purchased a "Neewer NP-FW50", upon installation my kit lens did not "power up" and apperture info in -- , also buttons cannot be accessed (aside from the shutter and play button). Tried using other lenses same result. Manual lenses can be used but same issue with the buttons.
Issues are: All lens are treated as manual/third party lens l Apperture info at -- All buttons except shutter ans play button does not function
Tried hard resetting by removing battery pack and turning the power tab to on for a few hours (draining internal battery ) then the A6000 works as usual. But after charging the camera (with usb cable) issue recurred. Now to use the camera I need to "hard reset" the unit.
Thanks in advance for you inputs!
submitted by lexus432 to a6000 [link] [comments]
Has anyone experienced their A6000 acting up after using an aftermarket battery? I've purchased a "Neewer NP-FW50", upon installation my kit lens did not "power up" and apperture info in -- , also buttons cannot be accessed (aside from the shutter and play button). Tried using other lenses same result. Manual lenses can be used but same issue with the buttons.
Issues are: All lens are treated as manual/third party lens l Apperture info at -- All buttons except shutter ans play button does not function
Tried hard resetting by removing battery pack and turning the power tab to on for a few hours (draining internal battery ) then the A6000 works as usual. But after charging the camera (with usb cable) issue recurred. Now to use the camera I need to "hard reset" the unit.
Thanks in advance for you inputs!
2023.06.10 12:33 AutoModerator [Genkicourses.site] ✔️Brett Kitchen & Ethan Kap – P2 Virtual Selling Accelerator ✔️ Full Course Download
| | ➡️https://www.genkicourses.site/product/brett-kitchen-ethan-kap-p2-virtual-selling-accelerato⬅️ submitted by AutoModerator to GenkiCourses_Cheapest [link] [comments] Get the course here: [Genkicourses.site] ✔️Brett Kitchen & Ethan Kap – P2 Virtual Selling Accelerator ✔️ Full Course Download https://preview.redd.it/p7lue6tb6x4b1.png?width=600&format=png&auto=webp&s=240e0906e105d6f3aba1a055b48c36e1cc06cda6 Courses proof (screenshots for example, or 1 free sample video from the course) are available upon demand, simply Contact us here What You Get: MODULE 1: The Presuppositional Playbook Psychology The most fundamental difference in face to face, vs virtual selling is the absolute need to have the prospect be pushing for the sale. They must be the one driving for the solution. They have to want it more than you do. They have to be more engaged in the process than they are face to face. When you sell virtually the more you talk, the worse your close rates will be. When you are sitting with a prospect together, it’s easy to have the momentum of the meeting and the relationship you’ve developed together carry the sale to the finish line. This does not happen virtually. There is a distance, a void between you and the prospect that is easy for them to take your information and disappear, taking it to another advisor they know better. Presuppositional Selling does two important things. First, it structures the sales interaction in such a way that the prospect discovers intrisically the problems, pains, gains, and desire for a solution. One of the most powerful ways P2 selling works is helping the prospect see what they have not seen before. It changes context. It changes the frame. The Crucial 1st Appointment The first appointment in the leverage point that determines the success or failure of your entire sales process. Do a poor first appointment by talking too much, or ‘spilling your candy in the lobby’ and you’re doomed. Prospects won’t show up on the next call, and they will be lost and gone forever. There is an art and a science to doing the first appointment effectively and you’ll see exactly how to do it right. It starts with our 13 steps first appointment playbook. In this playbook you’ll get:
|
2023.06.10 12:29 MediaVsReality The King and The Hero - A Short Story About How The Media REALLY Works
PART 1 - The King's Problem
The King did not know empathy.
If he saw somebody in pain, he felt nothing. If he watched a child cry, he felt nothing. And if he saw an injured bird on the road, he would press the sole of his boot on top of it without a second thought.
This was just as he governs.
The people lacked food, yet the King felt nothing. And did nothing. For in his palace, he had all the food he would ever need.
The people lacked medicine, yet the King felt nothing. And did nothing. For in his palace, he had all the medicine he would ever need.
The people lacked education, yet the King felt nothing. And did nothing. For in his palace, he had all the books and scholars he would ever need.
In his palace built entirely of solid gold, he was the most powerful King in all the land.
But the King had a problem. One thorn in his side. One little nuisance that kept him awake at night.
From nowhere, a man had appeared. His name: Rohe
Rohe spoke atop a platform in the streets to the people. He spoke of the unjust nature of The King's rule, of the palace made of solid gold and the endless luxuries stored within it.
Rohe blamed the King for the hunger the people had suffered. And he blamed the King for the deaths of brothers, sisters, children, mothers and fathers due to the lack of medicine.
And finally, Rohe told the people to rise up against the King, storm the palace of solid gold and take back control of their food, their medicine and their land.
Worst of all, to the King's terror, the people had begun to support Rohe. In the streets, Rohe would draw thousands of supporters. "Freedom for the people" they would chant in unison.
The King was utterly furious. How dare these low-born peasants chant such things. How dare these stupid, ignorant and inferior men even consider stealing his rightfully owned riches.
Something had to be done.
Not knowing what to do, he spoke to his 3 most trusted advisors.
The first advisor suggested he have Rohe killed.
The second advisor suggested he have Rohe thrown in jail.
The third advisor, the most cunning and mischievous of the 3, disapproved of the plans of the first 2 advisors. Killing him or throwing him in jail, he explained, would encourage the crowds still further.
Instead, he suggested something different entirely. He suggested they turn the people against Rohe.
"How?" asked the King curiously. "How can we turn the people against him"?
The third advisor adjusted the large, rounded glasses that lay on top his big, crooked nose and grew a mischievous smile. "The newspapers, of course."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PART 2 - The Third Advisor
The lands had hundreds of different newspapers, but only 3 main ones, which were by far the most widely read.
The people believed these newspapers to be run by well-meaning people who aimed to tell them honestly of the goings-on throughout the world.
The truth was different.
While it was made to appear that these newspaper were run independently, they were in fact controlled by the King himself. Whenever the King needed, he control everything that was written inside one of the 3 main newspapers.
The Kong granted the cunning third advisor the task of turning the people against Rohe. And so, the third advisor began his research:
To his dismay, Rohe was close to perfect. A true hero.
- He had a loving wife and two young children
- He had grown up poor and had managed to create a little bit of wealth through hard work on his farm.
- He was strong, with big, bulging muscles and had a handsome face.
- On his farm worked 10 white men and 2 black men, all of whom he treated with great kindness and respect.
- He was rarely at home with his family. He was always working, helping at the local school or in the streets doing his speeches.
Upon finishing his research, a crooked smile crept upon the face of the third advisor. He adjusted his spectacles and muttered to himself.
"This is all I need..."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PART 3 - The Article
Rohe — The People's Hero Or Attention Seeking Conspiracy Theorist?
Rising from an obscure background, Rohe the so-called "Hero" has ballooned in popularity in recent months. Everywhere he goes, commotion follows; drawing crowds of thousands of worshipping fans who hang on every word he says.
He has been reported bellowing his ideology in Lockwood, Brimshore, Farmsdale and even as far as Watershire. It seems as though Rohe is a mastermind at drawing the attention of others. Where does this attention go? Well, to himself of course. With his handsome dark hair and muscular physique, public image is seemingly the fuel that Mr Rohe feeds on. '
"He's come from God! He's like God himself!" exclaimed one of his fanatic supporters as we interviewed them.
Mr Rohe's main message seems to be against the King himself; spouting obscure claims such as "The King is keeping all the food for himself while the people starve!", he cried into a crowd in Lockwood last week. Of course, this isn't a new line of thought, with other such violent figures as "John the Terrorist" and the now proven liar and fraud Christopher Whittle.
Experts tend to agree that the food hardship some are currently facing is due to a series of unfortunately poor harvests as well as changing whether conditions. We asked the lead food resource advisor in the kingdom for his opinion on the matter. "We've heard this all before" he said while holding back a laugh, "Mr Rohe is just parroting the same old conspiracy theories we hear every year".
While Mr Rohe screams non-stop of the riches of others, his own wealth has been quietly building. Donations from his fanatic supporters have allowed him to purchase a second piece of farmland on top his already wealthy estate. Unsurprisingly, his workforce consists of almost entirely white men with a mere handful of coloured workers throughout his farms.
We travelled to Mr Rohe's farm and spoke with his wife, who told us "We as almost never see him! He's constantly on the road. He pops by to see the kids and check on the farm every week or so". It seems as though it's difficult to pay close attention to your family when you're so busy drawing attention to yourself in the streets.
Mr Rohe's fans seem to admire him deeply, but such adoration can turn nasty. His most extreme supporters have abused, harassed and on one occasion physically assaulted Mr Rohe's critics. "His fans are relentless", says well-known critic Johnathon Adams. "The harass me day and night and have even threatened to attack me.
While Mr Rohe does not endorse such violent behaviour, he does not exactly deter it either. He describes the King as "evil" and "corrupt" and once stated that "sometimes the power of the fist is necessary".
Mr Rohe's rhetoric seems to attract all kinds of unsavory characters; the aforementioned "Jack the Terrorist" as well as well-known woman beater Joseph Smith have both stated their support for Mr Rohe.
In the end, the key to Mr Rohe's appeal is also his greatest weakness. He wants to be the man who knows everything and can explain everything. But his arguments are riddled with conspiracy theories and crude distortions of the truth.
Even so, his critics will have a tough time. Mr Rohe's wave of popularity is unlikely to come crashing down any time soon.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PART 4
A year had passed, and over the months the third advisor wrote countless similar articles and published them in the 3 main newspapers.
To his and the King's delight, their plan had worked flawlessly.
Support for Mr Rohe began to wane. Many began to accuse Mr Rohe as being a racist. Others claimed he was mistreating his wife. Most began to be see Mr Rohe as somebody not to be taken seriously.
The people started feeling a sense of distrust and dislike towards Mr Rohe deep in their stomachs. They didn't know exactly why they felt this way, but felt it they did.
Something had switched inside their minds. They began to see everything Mr Rohe did through a negative lens. His previously heroic speeches now seemed shrill and childish. His impressive physique and sharp jaw now seemed vain and self-centred. And his claims about The King and what was really inside his palace made of solid gold now had doubt cast upon them. Some still believed Mr Rohe, some thought him to be exaggerating, most simply threw their hands up in confusion and forgot all about it.
When Mr Rohe made a speech on the streets, many rolled their eyes at his crazy supporters. And with growing frequency, an opposing group of protesters would appear and shout over him. They made claims that Mr Rohe was a racist, and they made jokes about the 2 farms Mr Rohe owned.
The King's problem had been solved.
The third advisor became one of the King's closest confidantes and was allowed access to many of the luxuries inside the palace: food, women and anything else he could possibly dream of.
As for the people, their lives steadily got worse and worse. Their food supplies dwindled, medicine became rare to find and the people became sadder, more depressed and more desperate. Despite this, most accepted their situation as "the way life is", while others blamed God for their misfortune.
One day, another man began to make speeches on the streets against the King. His name: Varios. The People began to call him their "Savior".
The King passed his pen over to the third advisor. "Ready?"
The third advisor grew a wicked grin.
"Of course"
submitted by MediaVsReality to conspiracy [link] [comments]
The King did not know empathy.
If he saw somebody in pain, he felt nothing. If he watched a child cry, he felt nothing. And if he saw an injured bird on the road, he would press the sole of his boot on top of it without a second thought.
This was just as he governs.
The people lacked food, yet the King felt nothing. And did nothing. For in his palace, he had all the food he would ever need.
The people lacked medicine, yet the King felt nothing. And did nothing. For in his palace, he had all the medicine he would ever need.
The people lacked education, yet the King felt nothing. And did nothing. For in his palace, he had all the books and scholars he would ever need.
In his palace built entirely of solid gold, he was the most powerful King in all the land.
But the King had a problem. One thorn in his side. One little nuisance that kept him awake at night.
From nowhere, a man had appeared. His name: Rohe
Rohe spoke atop a platform in the streets to the people. He spoke of the unjust nature of The King's rule, of the palace made of solid gold and the endless luxuries stored within it.
Rohe blamed the King for the hunger the people had suffered. And he blamed the King for the deaths of brothers, sisters, children, mothers and fathers due to the lack of medicine.
And finally, Rohe told the people to rise up against the King, storm the palace of solid gold and take back control of their food, their medicine and their land.
Worst of all, to the King's terror, the people had begun to support Rohe. In the streets, Rohe would draw thousands of supporters. "Freedom for the people" they would chant in unison.
The King was utterly furious. How dare these low-born peasants chant such things. How dare these stupid, ignorant and inferior men even consider stealing his rightfully owned riches.
Something had to be done.
Not knowing what to do, he spoke to his 3 most trusted advisors.
The first advisor suggested he have Rohe killed.
The second advisor suggested he have Rohe thrown in jail.
The third advisor, the most cunning and mischievous of the 3, disapproved of the plans of the first 2 advisors. Killing him or throwing him in jail, he explained, would encourage the crowds still further.
Instead, he suggested something different entirely. He suggested they turn the people against Rohe.
"How?" asked the King curiously. "How can we turn the people against him"?
The third advisor adjusted the large, rounded glasses that lay on top his big, crooked nose and grew a mischievous smile. "The newspapers, of course."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PART 2 - The Third Advisor
The lands had hundreds of different newspapers, but only 3 main ones, which were by far the most widely read.
The people believed these newspapers to be run by well-meaning people who aimed to tell them honestly of the goings-on throughout the world.
The truth was different.
While it was made to appear that these newspaper were run independently, they were in fact controlled by the King himself. Whenever the King needed, he control everything that was written inside one of the 3 main newspapers.
The Kong granted the cunning third advisor the task of turning the people against Rohe. And so, the third advisor began his research:
To his dismay, Rohe was close to perfect. A true hero.
- He had a loving wife and two young children
- He had grown up poor and had managed to create a little bit of wealth through hard work on his farm.
- He was strong, with big, bulging muscles and had a handsome face.
- On his farm worked 10 white men and 2 black men, all of whom he treated with great kindness and respect.
- He was rarely at home with his family. He was always working, helping at the local school or in the streets doing his speeches.
Upon finishing his research, a crooked smile crept upon the face of the third advisor. He adjusted his spectacles and muttered to himself.
"This is all I need..."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PART 3 - The Article
Rohe — The People's Hero Or Attention Seeking Conspiracy Theorist?
Rising from an obscure background, Rohe the so-called "Hero" has ballooned in popularity in recent months. Everywhere he goes, commotion follows; drawing crowds of thousands of worshipping fans who hang on every word he says.
He has been reported bellowing his ideology in Lockwood, Brimshore, Farmsdale and even as far as Watershire. It seems as though Rohe is a mastermind at drawing the attention of others. Where does this attention go? Well, to himself of course. With his handsome dark hair and muscular physique, public image is seemingly the fuel that Mr Rohe feeds on. '
"He's come from God! He's like God himself!" exclaimed one of his fanatic supporters as we interviewed them.
Mr Rohe's main message seems to be against the King himself; spouting obscure claims such as "The King is keeping all the food for himself while the people starve!", he cried into a crowd in Lockwood last week. Of course, this isn't a new line of thought, with other such violent figures as "John the Terrorist" and the now proven liar and fraud Christopher Whittle.
Experts tend to agree that the food hardship some are currently facing is due to a series of unfortunately poor harvests as well as changing whether conditions. We asked the lead food resource advisor in the kingdom for his opinion on the matter. "We've heard this all before" he said while holding back a laugh, "Mr Rohe is just parroting the same old conspiracy theories we hear every year".
While Mr Rohe screams non-stop of the riches of others, his own wealth has been quietly building. Donations from his fanatic supporters have allowed him to purchase a second piece of farmland on top his already wealthy estate. Unsurprisingly, his workforce consists of almost entirely white men with a mere handful of coloured workers throughout his farms.
We travelled to Mr Rohe's farm and spoke with his wife, who told us "We as almost never see him! He's constantly on the road. He pops by to see the kids and check on the farm every week or so". It seems as though it's difficult to pay close attention to your family when you're so busy drawing attention to yourself in the streets.
Mr Rohe's fans seem to admire him deeply, but such adoration can turn nasty. His most extreme supporters have abused, harassed and on one occasion physically assaulted Mr Rohe's critics. "His fans are relentless", says well-known critic Johnathon Adams. "The harass me day and night and have even threatened to attack me.
While Mr Rohe does not endorse such violent behaviour, he does not exactly deter it either. He describes the King as "evil" and "corrupt" and once stated that "sometimes the power of the fist is necessary".
Mr Rohe's rhetoric seems to attract all kinds of unsavory characters; the aforementioned "Jack the Terrorist" as well as well-known woman beater Joseph Smith have both stated their support for Mr Rohe.
In the end, the key to Mr Rohe's appeal is also his greatest weakness. He wants to be the man who knows everything and can explain everything. But his arguments are riddled with conspiracy theories and crude distortions of the truth.
Even so, his critics will have a tough time. Mr Rohe's wave of popularity is unlikely to come crashing down any time soon.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PART 4
A year had passed, and over the months the third advisor wrote countless similar articles and published them in the 3 main newspapers.
To his and the King's delight, their plan had worked flawlessly.
Support for Mr Rohe began to wane. Many began to accuse Mr Rohe as being a racist. Others claimed he was mistreating his wife. Most began to be see Mr Rohe as somebody not to be taken seriously.
The people started feeling a sense of distrust and dislike towards Mr Rohe deep in their stomachs. They didn't know exactly why they felt this way, but felt it they did.
Something had switched inside their minds. They began to see everything Mr Rohe did through a negative lens. His previously heroic speeches now seemed shrill and childish. His impressive physique and sharp jaw now seemed vain and self-centred. And his claims about The King and what was really inside his palace made of solid gold now had doubt cast upon them. Some still believed Mr Rohe, some thought him to be exaggerating, most simply threw their hands up in confusion and forgot all about it.
When Mr Rohe made a speech on the streets, many rolled their eyes at his crazy supporters. And with growing frequency, an opposing group of protesters would appear and shout over him. They made claims that Mr Rohe was a racist, and they made jokes about the 2 farms Mr Rohe owned.
The King's problem had been solved.
The third advisor became one of the King's closest confidantes and was allowed access to many of the luxuries inside the palace: food, women and anything else he could possibly dream of.
As for the people, their lives steadily got worse and worse. Their food supplies dwindled, medicine became rare to find and the people became sadder, more depressed and more desperate. Despite this, most accepted their situation as "the way life is", while others blamed God for their misfortune.
One day, another man began to make speeches on the streets against the King. His name: Varios. The People began to call him their "Savior".
The King passed his pen over to the third advisor. "Ready?"
The third advisor grew a wicked grin.
"Of course"
2023.06.10 12:28 TinyFlan4013 "Sustainable clothing brand Patagonia manufactures in the same factories as fast-fashion; textile workers are being exploited"
The Dutch independent investigative journalism platform 'Follow the Money' wrote a article about Patagonia.
"Sustainable clothing brand Patagonia manufactures in the same factories as fast-fashion; textile workers are being exploited"
Clothing brand Patagonia seems to be doing everything right: for its employees, for the people who make the clothes and for the environment. The company’s image – they say they’re in business to save our home planet – is very different from fast-fashion brands like asos, Primark and Nike. But Patagonia’s clothes are manufactured in exactly the same factories and under the same deplorable conditions.
When Yvon Chouinard started creating climbing equipment in his parents’ backyard in Burbank, California, he used steel. Soon he earned a reputation for making the ‘best’ climbing equipment in America. But every time a climber slammed one of those steel pegs into a rock, the gap got a little bigger and eventually unusable. Chouinard realised he was making money by destroying the rocks and therefore also the sport. And so he switched to aluminium blocks, which did not damagethe rocks.
The change was expensive and risky for the young company, but the moral dilemma was reason enough for Chouinard to implement the change. And to be very outspoken about it. It was a success: within a year, 40 per cent of the US climbing community stopped using steel.
Chouinard applied this experience when he started the outdoor brand Patagonia in 1973. He wanted to make only high-quality clothing that would last. And limit the impact on the environment as much as possible. In 1996, the brand switched to 100 per cent organic cotton, only to increasingly replace it with recycled materials. But the responsibility that Chouinard attributed to the company extended further.
In 2002 he decided to give one per cent of sales to environmental organisations every year. In 2011, Patagonia placed a full-page ad in the New York Times calling on consumers to ‘not buy this jacket’ in order to draw attention to the problematic nature of overconsumption in the clothing industry.
In addition, the clothing had to be manufactured fairly: in 2012, the top of the company made paying living wages to everyone who makes Patagonia products a ‘priority’. In 2020, Patagonia launched a campaign encouraging consumers to demand more from clothing brands: ‘Demand recycled. Demand organic. Demand Fair Trade,’ Patagonia urged its viewers.
In 2022, the then 84-year-old Chouinard caused worldwide astonishment, when he gave away 98 per cent of his shares to a newly formed NGO, the Holdfast Collective, which is ‘committed in its fight against the environmental crisis and protecting nature.’ Henceforth, the company’s profits would no longer flow to himself or his children but to the climate. ‘Earth is now our only shareholder,’ Chouinard said. Billionaire gives company away to climate, newspapers like The New York Times, The Washington Post and The Guardian reported*.*
This construction saved the NGO an estimated 700 million dollars that Chouinard would have had to pay in tax if he had sold the company and donated the proceeds to the same NGO. But according to Chouinard, this option allowed him to do something else: protect Patagonia’s values. Because he did not give the voting shares to Holdfast Collective but to a family trust. This allows his family to continue determining the company’s direction.
The company’s turnover – its European headquarters are in Amsterdam − grew by more than 50 per cent that year to about 1.5 billion dollars.
The actions earned Patagonia an image as being the ultimate sustainable frontrunner. In April, Time Magazine named Chouinard one of the world’s 100 most influential people. ‘Patagonia is a company people look up to in awe,’ the magazine wrote.
The complete opposite of Patagonia is a company like Primark. The Irish retail chain is known for selling on-trend low-quality clothes at low prices. Its revenue model is based on mass: high volumes with low margins.
Primark continuously creates new garment collections designed to be worn only a few times, after which they fall apart. The company uses advertising, clearance sales and influencers to urge consumers to keep buying as much as possible.
Media regularly report on the subsequent consequences. One, in particular, is that the people who make the clothes suffer from high production pressure at low cost. ‘Primark supplier accused of locking up factory workers in Myanmar protests,’ The Guardian headline read in 2021. That same year, The Clean Clothes Campaign NGO wrote: ‘Primark uses pandemic to put further pressure on factory workers in manufacturing countries.’
Patagonia and Primark seem like two extremes on the slow versus fast-fashion spectrum. Yet the brands have something in common. Some of their clothing is manufactured in the exact same factory.
PATAGONIA IN AMSTERDAM In 2014, Patagonia moved its European headquarters from Annecy town in the French Alps to Amsterdam. Reflecting on this, current CEO Ryan Gellert told the city marketing website I Amsterdam: ‘We established headquarters here in 2014 because we wanted a place where we could attract and retain pan-European and global talent, [...] and where there was an active community working on sustainability issues. As we searched potential locations across Europe, Amsterdam remained high on our list.’
According to Tax Law Professor Jan van de Streek, tax benefits may also have played a role in the choice of the Netherlands. This is because Patagonia did not register in the Netherlands as a BV but as a cooperative with two US members: Patagonia International Inc and Patagonia Global LLC. ‘Why choose something as strange as a cooperative structure?’ Van de Streek remarks to Follow the Money. ‘Because it is exempt from dividend tax. I think it’s naive to think there’s any other reason for that.’
Responding to questions about this, Patagonia said: ‘Since its inception, Patagonia Europe Coöperatief has paid regular corporate income taxes in all European countries where we do business, including the Netherlands, and has never used the tax efficiencies of a cooperative.’
‘At the suggestion of our advisors', Patagonia chose a cooperative structure ‘because it's the most flexible type of entity that suited our business purpose. However, Patagonia has chosen not to pursue any of the tax advantages available under the cooperative entity type. Patagonia Europe has not paid dividends to its parent company.'
In the factory hall, there are long tables with pieces of white fabric on them. An employee walks past with sea-green paint and a stencil forming the letters ‘asics’. Further along, a machine prints a grey logo on a purple tank top for Decathlon.
‘So far, we don’t really notice any difference between working with Patagonia and working with Primark or Decathlon,’ says Kevin Fernando. Fernando is the manager at the factory, which dyes, prints or embroiders logos and prints on fabrics. Regal Image was recently approved as a supplier to Patagonia, a process that took nine months. Fernando shows the designs for the 2024 summer collection. Light blue fabric features ‘Patagonia’ in pink letters, and a rainbow is printed on orange fabric.
‘Like most clothing companies, we do not make our products, nor do we own any of the factories that do,’ Patagonia writes on its website about the decision to outsource the manufacturing process. ‘We design, test, market and sell Patagonia gear. These are our areas of strength. We pay other companies [...] to produce fabrics and do the actual cutting and sewing.’
At least two-thirds of the factories that manufacture Patagonia clothing also work for clothing brands that, according to the consumer website Good on You, have little or no sustainability policies in place (Patagonia itself is touted by Good on You as sustainable). This is evident from an analysis by Follow the Money based on data from Open Supply Hub, which aims to make supply chains in the clothing industry more transparent.
One day people make clothing for Patagonia, and the next day, they make items for brands such as GAP, Levi Strauss, Calvin Klein, Hugo Boss, Tommy Hilfiger, Nike, Amer Sports, Asics, US department store chain Target, e-commerce platform Amazon, supermarket Aldi and fast-fashion icons ASOS, Boohoo, H&M and Zara.
‘How is this possible?’ visual culture professor Anneke Smelik responds. Smelik researches sustainable fashion at Radboud University. ‘I know Patagonia as the most sustainable brand out there. I expected them to manufacture in small factories close to home. This means they have absolutely no control over working conditions.’
PATAGONIA IN SRI LANKA Patagonia works with 14 factories in Sri Lanka that are part of (or partner with) two companies: MAS Holdings and the Hirdaramani Group.
MAS Holdings was founded in 1987 by three brothers: Mahesh, Ajay and Sharad Amalean. The company began manufacturing lingerie and later expanded to sportswear, swimwear and T-shirts. With factories in 17 countries and roughly 2.4 billion dollars in turnover by 2022, MAS is Sri Lanka’s largest clothing manufacturer. The Amalean brothers are among the wealthiest men in the country.
The company emphatically presents itself as a sustainable clothing manufacturer. For instance, the company promises to emit 25 per cent less CO2 by 2025 than in 2019, and CEO Suren Fernando expects the group to earn half its revenue from sustainable products by then.
In May 2023, MAS received a Presidential Environment Award from President Ranil Wickremesinghe for the company’s commitment to the environment. The company describes the welfare of its employees as ‘its top priority’. On the subject of paying a living wage, the company makes no promises.
In the early 1900s, Parmanand Hirdaramani, then 16 years old, started a clothing shop in Sri Lanka’s capital Colombo. Today, his great-grandson Aroon Hirdaramani runs the Hirdaramani Group, which has grown into an international clothing conglomerate with factories in Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Vietnam and a turnover of around 900 million US dollars.
Hirdaramani also presents itself as a sustainable producer. The company’s website states: ‘At Hirdaramani, we do the right thing. We have always done that. It’s about making good decisions today that benefit everyone in the long run.’
Since 2019, all Hirdaramani factories in Sri Lanka have been producing climate neutrally. For 2025, the company has set several targets on material use, water use, waste and leadership. Paying a living or higher wage is not a target.
In 2016, Aroon Hirdaramani and his wife Mona surfaced in the Pandora Papers. It emerged that Hirdaramani owned two investment companies in the British Virgin Islands. The reason for this is unclear. The fact is that companies based there do not have to pay tax on income, profits, dividends and interest, among other things.
Patagonia checks whether a factory complies with these standards through independent auditor visits at least once a year, says the brand after being questioned by Follow the Money. Checks are also carried out by the Fair Labor Association (FLA) and FairTrade: two NGOs that provide Patagonia’s manufacturing process and clothing with a sustainability label.
A part of those audits is public. Since 2016, the FLA has publishedassessments of seven Patagonia factories, including three in Vietnam, three in Sri Lanka and one in China. During those inspections, auditors found dozens of violations, varying greatly in severity.
For instance, almost 2000 employees at a factory in Vietnam were paid less for their overtime than what they should have received and employees’ ages were not recorded (thus child labour cannot be ruled out). Another check found out that applicants had to provide their menstrual date. Employees told the interviewers they were not allowed to become pregnant in the first six months of their employment. Less serious violations dealt with issues such as working without protective equipment, blocked emergency exits, or a lack of policies on harassment or discrimination.
One problem crops up in every report. Textile workers in factories manufacturing clothes for Patagonia work far longer hours than legally permitted: up to 17 hours a day and more than 80 hours a week, well beyond what is permissible according to Patagonia’s code of conduct.
‘Long working hours with insufficient breaks often lead to health problems,’ the Clean Clothes Campaign recently wrote about this issue. ‘Managers pressure employees to work 10- to 12-hour and sometimes even 16- to 18-hour days. The number of hours increases as the deadline approaches. Those who protest are simply fired. Moreover, workers depend on overtime to supplement their low wages.’
At the Regal Image factory in Sri Lanka, manager Fernando assures that his employees work a maximum of five days a week and 10 hours a day. But during the tour, a line manager starts talking about the duration of his shift: from eight in the morning to a quarter to 10 in the evening – almost 14 hours. ‘It’s busy,’ says Fernando, casually.
‘This is what the fast-fashion model does,’ says Smelik. ‘Brands want their products to be in store within a few weeks. So when a factory receives an order from such a brand, the production targets and overtime skyrocket.’
Now, almost 20 years later, she knows Sri Lankan labour law like the back of her hand. Her office is a hexagon with five windows, all open. Textile workers from nearby factories approach her via these windows to greet her or ask for help.
When a transman walks past, she says, ‘He applied to MAS Shadowline [one of Patagonia’s suppliers, ed] a month ago. They said they didn’t want him because he is transgender. He can’t get work anywhere. And he cannot go back to his village because he is Muslim. His family will shoot him.’
When about six women wearing yellow MAS polos come and ask for a food parcel, Dandeniya shakes her head. ‘We don’t have enough. Since the country’s economic crisis, some families barely eat two meals a day. How am I supposed to choose who can eat and who can’t?’
That evening, she introduces Priya (31). Priya has been working for MAS Shadowline for almost two years, sewing the side seams on leggings or T-shirts. She makes many clothes for yoga brand Lululemon and for Lacoste (famous through the crocodile logo), but sometimes also for Patagonia.
‘The worst part is the scolding,’ she says in her home a few streets away: a room of about 12 square metres. It contains a double bed, a small kitchenette and a wardrobe. Despite the fan on the wall, it is sweltering hot inside. She shares a toilet and a shower with others.
‘My supervisor’s manager is a terrible man. He touches everyone in a bad way, and if you say you don’t want that, you have a problem. He yells at me if I have to go to the bank or the doctor. “Then who will do the work? Who will meet the target?” And he’s not the only one. They talk to us like we are animals.’
When asked about her production targets, she breathes a deep sigh. ‘The other day, Lululemon placed a huge order, and now everyone is stressed. On the first day, we had to make seventy items per hour, but on the second day, it was suddenly a hundred. Otherwise, we won’t make the delivery date.’ During the working day, she does not drink water so that she does not waste time going to the toilet. Despite this, she seldom meets the target. And that means: no bonus.
Without that bonus, Priya earns 32,000 rupees a month (97 euros). Her room costs 7,000 rupees (21 euros), and a meal 300 rupees (1 euro). She has no money left for other things.
‘Since the crisis, we are increasingly hearing stories from our members of textile workers using drugs,’ says Dandeniya. ‘Also in MAS factories that Patagonia works with. They use it to work faster. Sometimes also against the hunger.’
Chamila Thushari, union leader of Dabindu Collective, confirms the story. ‘They use Ice (Crystal Meth) or Babul.’ She points to her collar and to the sole of her shoe. ‘This is how they smuggle it in. The management knows this happens but allows it. All they care about is production targets are being met.’
An employee of a third union, GTZ-GSEU, confirms that drug use among textile workers in the Free Trade Zone is a problem.
Patagonia says these claims are ‘new’ to them and ‘serious’, but says, without evidence, it cannot comment.
Patagonia wants all people who make clothes to earn a decent wage. In 2015, the company promised that within 10 years, all employees in its supply chain would be earning a living wage that would be enough to live on. That is, enough for food, water, housing, education, healthcare, transport and other essential needs.
With 18 months to go, only 40 per cent of its factories pay a living wage, according to Patagonia. They would not reveal the factories concerned. Suppliers reportedly ‘have the right to maintain their factories’ wage data confidential’.
Patagonia wants all people who make clothes to earn a decent wage. In 2015, the company promised that within 10 years, all employees in its supply chain would be earning a living wage that would be enough to live on. That is, enough for food, water, housing, education, healthcare, transport and other essential needs.
With 18 months to go, only 40 per cent of its factories pay a living wage, according to Patagonia. They would not reveal the factories concerned. Suppliers reportedly ‘have the right to maintain their factories’ wage data confidential’.
To determine a living wage, Patagonia uses the Anker Research Institute’s calculation method. According to that method, you can live decently in urban Sri Lanka if you earn a minimum of 83,231 Sri Lankan rupees (263 euro) a month. Priya’s salary does not even cover half that. And at the recently approved Regal Image print factory, the basic wage is even lower: 21,000 rupees (66 euro), says Fernando.
Thulsi Narayanasamy is frustrated by Patagonia’s approach to sustainability. She is director of advocacy at the Worker Rights Consortium, an independent non-profit organization that monitors and investigates labor conditions in the global apparel and textile industry. ‘Patagonia spends millions on green initiatives. Why can’t they pay the people who make their clothes properly?’
Patagonia says it ‘has no authority over how much textile workers get paid, as they are in no way, shape or form the employer of these workers.’ Narayanasamy, however, is convinced Patagonia can pay a living wage, if the brand would want to. ‘They could bring production in-house or pay more to suppliers that’s ringfenced for wages high enough to achieve a living income. It’s so well established that brand’s pricing practices directly impact wage levels, it’s a fallacy to deny this.’
‘I think we should ask ourselves: why don't clothing brands have their own factories?’ She asks the question, then answers it. 'Brands don't want to be responsible for the people who produce their clothes. All brands benefit from that, including Patagonia.
RESPONSE FROM PATAGONIA When asked why it does not pay its suppliers more for decent wages for workers, Patagonia replied: ‘Relying on one brand to simply cover the gap is a band-aid solution and does not serve the factory in the long run. If the one brand that pays the gap were to leave the factory, then those wages for workers would go away, leaving the factory with a shortfall they would not be able to cover. Additionally, if the brand just writes a check to the factory, then there is no guarantee that the money would go towards workers’ wages. The brand has no authority over how much workers get paid as they are in no way, shape or form the employer of those workers.’
About the long working hours, Patagonia says: ‘Excessive overtime is pervasive globally, which is why it is audited regularly. If we find a problem that can be resolved, we work with our factory partners to implement sustainable solutions. This can take many years, but we find this is the best outcome for the workers and the factory.’
In response to the allegations about drug use among textile workers, Patagonia says: ‘These are serious and new allegations, however without evidence, we are not able to comment on them. We are continuing to conduct our ongoing monitoring program and we remain committed to addressing systemic issues to ensure workers’ wellbeing across our supply chain.’
Link to the article: https://www.ftm.eu/articles/sustainable-clothing-brand-patagonia-uses-same-suppliers-fast-fashion-brands-do-workers-exploited?share=p8cq84oSmbUiJtEQUObUZSPZh8ZNReEKHj0wGJnBMQUMqLcwK9PC1kpMJCev5Mo%3D%26utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sharebuttonnietleden&utm_source=linkbutton
submitted by TinyFlan4013 to PatagoniaClothing [link] [comments]
"Sustainable clothing brand Patagonia manufactures in the same factories as fast-fashion; textile workers are being exploited"
Clothing brand Patagonia seems to be doing everything right: for its employees, for the people who make the clothes and for the environment. The company’s image – they say they’re in business to save our home planet – is very different from fast-fashion brands like asos, Primark and Nike. But Patagonia’s clothes are manufactured in exactly the same factories and under the same deplorable conditions.
When Yvon Chouinard started creating climbing equipment in his parents’ backyard in Burbank, California, he used steel. Soon he earned a reputation for making the ‘best’ climbing equipment in America. But every time a climber slammed one of those steel pegs into a rock, the gap got a little bigger and eventually unusable. Chouinard realised he was making money by destroying the rocks and therefore also the sport. And so he switched to aluminium blocks, which did not damagethe rocks.
The change was expensive and risky for the young company, but the moral dilemma was reason enough for Chouinard to implement the change. And to be very outspoken about it. It was a success: within a year, 40 per cent of the US climbing community stopped using steel.
Chouinard applied this experience when he started the outdoor brand Patagonia in 1973. He wanted to make only high-quality clothing that would last. And limit the impact on the environment as much as possible. In 1996, the brand switched to 100 per cent organic cotton, only to increasingly replace it with recycled materials. But the responsibility that Chouinard attributed to the company extended further.
In 2002 he decided to give one per cent of sales to environmental organisations every year. In 2011, Patagonia placed a full-page ad in the New York Times calling on consumers to ‘not buy this jacket’ in order to draw attention to the problematic nature of overconsumption in the clothing industry.
In addition, the clothing had to be manufactured fairly: in 2012, the top of the company made paying living wages to everyone who makes Patagonia products a ‘priority’. In 2020, Patagonia launched a campaign encouraging consumers to demand more from clothing brands: ‘Demand recycled. Demand organic. Demand Fair Trade,’ Patagonia urged its viewers.
In 2022, the then 84-year-old Chouinard caused worldwide astonishment, when he gave away 98 per cent of his shares to a newly formed NGO, the Holdfast Collective, which is ‘committed in its fight against the environmental crisis and protecting nature.’ Henceforth, the company’s profits would no longer flow to himself or his children but to the climate. ‘Earth is now our only shareholder,’ Chouinard said. Billionaire gives company away to climate, newspapers like The New York Times, The Washington Post and The Guardian reported*.*
This construction saved the NGO an estimated 700 million dollars that Chouinard would have had to pay in tax if he had sold the company and donated the proceeds to the same NGO. But according to Chouinard, this option allowed him to do something else: protect Patagonia’s values. Because he did not give the voting shares to Holdfast Collective but to a family trust. This allows his family to continue determining the company’s direction.
The company’s turnover – its European headquarters are in Amsterdam − grew by more than 50 per cent that year to about 1.5 billion dollars.
The actions earned Patagonia an image as being the ultimate sustainable frontrunner. In April, Time Magazine named Chouinard one of the world’s 100 most influential people. ‘Patagonia is a company people look up to in awe,’ the magazine wrote.
The complete opposite of Patagonia is a company like Primark. The Irish retail chain is known for selling on-trend low-quality clothes at low prices. Its revenue model is based on mass: high volumes with low margins.
Primark continuously creates new garment collections designed to be worn only a few times, after which they fall apart. The company uses advertising, clearance sales and influencers to urge consumers to keep buying as much as possible.
Media regularly report on the subsequent consequences. One, in particular, is that the people who make the clothes suffer from high production pressure at low cost. ‘Primark supplier accused of locking up factory workers in Myanmar protests,’ The Guardian headline read in 2021. That same year, The Clean Clothes Campaign NGO wrote: ‘Primark uses pandemic to put further pressure on factory workers in manufacturing countries.’
Patagonia and Primark seem like two extremes on the slow versus fast-fashion spectrum. Yet the brands have something in common. Some of their clothing is manufactured in the exact same factory.
PATAGONIA IN AMSTERDAM In 2014, Patagonia moved its European headquarters from Annecy town in the French Alps to Amsterdam. Reflecting on this, current CEO Ryan Gellert told the city marketing website I Amsterdam: ‘We established headquarters here in 2014 because we wanted a place where we could attract and retain pan-European and global talent, [...] and where there was an active community working on sustainability issues. As we searched potential locations across Europe, Amsterdam remained high on our list.’
According to Tax Law Professor Jan van de Streek, tax benefits may also have played a role in the choice of the Netherlands. This is because Patagonia did not register in the Netherlands as a BV but as a cooperative with two US members: Patagonia International Inc and Patagonia Global LLC. ‘Why choose something as strange as a cooperative structure?’ Van de Streek remarks to Follow the Money. ‘Because it is exempt from dividend tax. I think it’s naive to think there’s any other reason for that.’
Responding to questions about this, Patagonia said: ‘Since its inception, Patagonia Europe Coöperatief has paid regular corporate income taxes in all European countries where we do business, including the Netherlands, and has never used the tax efficiencies of a cooperative.’
‘At the suggestion of our advisors', Patagonia chose a cooperative structure ‘because it's the most flexible type of entity that suited our business purpose. However, Patagonia has chosen not to pursue any of the tax advantages available under the cooperative entity type. Patagonia Europe has not paid dividends to its parent company.'
‘No difference’
That factory is called Regal Image and is located in Sri Lanka. To be precise, in the Free Trade Zone of Katunayake, less than two kilometres from the international airport. The industrial estate is guarded 24/7 by Sri Lankan police. Access is only possible with a special pass.In the factory hall, there are long tables with pieces of white fabric on them. An employee walks past with sea-green paint and a stencil forming the letters ‘asics’. Further along, a machine prints a grey logo on a purple tank top for Decathlon.
‘So far, we don’t really notice any difference between working with Patagonia and working with Primark or Decathlon,’ says Kevin Fernando. Fernando is the manager at the factory, which dyes, prints or embroiders logos and prints on fabrics. Regal Image was recently approved as a supplier to Patagonia, a process that took nine months. Fernando shows the designs for the 2024 summer collection. Light blue fabric features ‘Patagonia’ in pink letters, and a rainbow is printed on orange fabric.
‘Like most clothing companies, we do not make our products, nor do we own any of the factories that do,’ Patagonia writes on its website about the decision to outsource the manufacturing process. ‘We design, test, market and sell Patagonia gear. These are our areas of strength. We pay other companies [...] to produce fabrics and do the actual cutting and sewing.’
‘No control over working conditions’
Patagonia promises to only partner with factories that are ‘like-minded’ and who share their ‘philosophy.’ Patagonia has found sixty-one suitable factories: two in the US, one in Portugal and the remainder in 12 different low-wage countries. The bulk of the products are made in Vietnam and Sri Lanka.At least two-thirds of the factories that manufacture Patagonia clothing also work for clothing brands that, according to the consumer website Good on You, have little or no sustainability policies in place (Patagonia itself is touted by Good on You as sustainable). This is evident from an analysis by Follow the Money based on data from Open Supply Hub, which aims to make supply chains in the clothing industry more transparent.
One day people make clothing for Patagonia, and the next day, they make items for brands such as GAP, Levi Strauss, Calvin Klein, Hugo Boss, Tommy Hilfiger, Nike, Amer Sports, Asics, US department store chain Target, e-commerce platform Amazon, supermarket Aldi and fast-fashion icons ASOS, Boohoo, H&M and Zara.
‘How is this possible?’ visual culture professor Anneke Smelik responds. Smelik researches sustainable fashion at Radboud University. ‘I know Patagonia as the most sustainable brand out there. I expected them to manufacture in small factories close to home. This means they have absolutely no control over working conditions.’
PATAGONIA IN SRI LANKA Patagonia works with 14 factories in Sri Lanka that are part of (or partner with) two companies: MAS Holdings and the Hirdaramani Group.
MAS Holdings was founded in 1987 by three brothers: Mahesh, Ajay and Sharad Amalean. The company began manufacturing lingerie and later expanded to sportswear, swimwear and T-shirts. With factories in 17 countries and roughly 2.4 billion dollars in turnover by 2022, MAS is Sri Lanka’s largest clothing manufacturer. The Amalean brothers are among the wealthiest men in the country.
The company emphatically presents itself as a sustainable clothing manufacturer. For instance, the company promises to emit 25 per cent less CO2 by 2025 than in 2019, and CEO Suren Fernando expects the group to earn half its revenue from sustainable products by then.
In May 2023, MAS received a Presidential Environment Award from President Ranil Wickremesinghe for the company’s commitment to the environment. The company describes the welfare of its employees as ‘its top priority’. On the subject of paying a living wage, the company makes no promises.
In the early 1900s, Parmanand Hirdaramani, then 16 years old, started a clothing shop in Sri Lanka’s capital Colombo. Today, his great-grandson Aroon Hirdaramani runs the Hirdaramani Group, which has grown into an international clothing conglomerate with factories in Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Vietnam and a turnover of around 900 million US dollars.
Hirdaramani also presents itself as a sustainable producer. The company’s website states: ‘At Hirdaramani, we do the right thing. We have always done that. It’s about making good decisions today that benefit everyone in the long run.’
Since 2019, all Hirdaramani factories in Sri Lanka have been producing climate neutrally. For 2025, the company has set several targets on material use, water use, waste and leadership. Paying a living or higher wage is not a target.
In 2016, Aroon Hirdaramani and his wife Mona surfaced in the Pandora Papers. It emerged that Hirdaramani owned two investment companies in the British Virgin Islands. The reason for this is unclear. The fact is that companies based there do not have to pay tax on income, profits, dividends and interest, among other things.
Sixteen-hour workdays
Eligibility to manufacture Patagonia products requires a supplier to meet a list of sustainability criteria. Those criteria are set out in a code of conduct for suppliers. For example, child labour, forced labour, or physical, sexual or verbal harassment are not allowed. All national laws must be respected. Suppliers must respect workers’ right to freedom of association, may not force workers to work overtime and must ensure healthy working conditions. Working weeks of more than 60 hours or more than six days in a row is not acceptable to Patagonia.Patagonia checks whether a factory complies with these standards through independent auditor visits at least once a year, says the brand after being questioned by Follow the Money. Checks are also carried out by the Fair Labor Association (FLA) and FairTrade: two NGOs that provide Patagonia’s manufacturing process and clothing with a sustainability label.
A part of those audits is public. Since 2016, the FLA has publishedassessments of seven Patagonia factories, including three in Vietnam, three in Sri Lanka and one in China. During those inspections, auditors found dozens of violations, varying greatly in severity.
For instance, almost 2000 employees at a factory in Vietnam were paid less for their overtime than what they should have received and employees’ ages were not recorded (thus child labour cannot be ruled out). Another check found out that applicants had to provide their menstrual date. Employees told the interviewers they were not allowed to become pregnant in the first six months of their employment. Less serious violations dealt with issues such as working without protective equipment, blocked emergency exits, or a lack of policies on harassment or discrimination.
One problem crops up in every report. Textile workers in factories manufacturing clothes for Patagonia work far longer hours than legally permitted: up to 17 hours a day and more than 80 hours a week, well beyond what is permissible according to Patagonia’s code of conduct.
‘Long working hours with insufficient breaks often lead to health problems,’ the Clean Clothes Campaign recently wrote about this issue. ‘Managers pressure employees to work 10- to 12-hour and sometimes even 16- to 18-hour days. The number of hours increases as the deadline approaches. Those who protest are simply fired. Moreover, workers depend on overtime to supplement their low wages.’
At the Regal Image factory in Sri Lanka, manager Fernando assures that his employees work a maximum of five days a week and 10 hours a day. But during the tour, a line manager starts talking about the duration of his shift: from eight in the morning to a quarter to 10 in the evening – almost 14 hours. ‘It’s busy,’ says Fernando, casually.
‘This is what the fast-fashion model does,’ says Smelik. ‘Brands want their products to be in store within a few weeks. So when a factory receives an order from such a brand, the production targets and overtime skyrocket.’
‘They talk to us like we are animals’
The office of Stand Up Lanka, a union led by Ashila Niroshine Dandeniya, is located just outside the Free-Trade Zone. She started working in a MAS factory, part of MAS Holdings that is a supplier to Patagonia, in 2003. Her colleagues elected her to represent them as a member of the factory’s employees council. But when she addressed the matter of wages, she was fired. She challenged her dismissal, got compensation, and discovered that there were laws in place to protect people like her.Now, almost 20 years later, she knows Sri Lankan labour law like the back of her hand. Her office is a hexagon with five windows, all open. Textile workers from nearby factories approach her via these windows to greet her or ask for help.
When a transman walks past, she says, ‘He applied to MAS Shadowline [one of Patagonia’s suppliers, ed] a month ago. They said they didn’t want him because he is transgender. He can’t get work anywhere. And he cannot go back to his village because he is Muslim. His family will shoot him.’
When about six women wearing yellow MAS polos come and ask for a food parcel, Dandeniya shakes her head. ‘We don’t have enough. Since the country’s economic crisis, some families barely eat two meals a day. How am I supposed to choose who can eat and who can’t?’
That evening, she introduces Priya (31). Priya has been working for MAS Shadowline for almost two years, sewing the side seams on leggings or T-shirts. She makes many clothes for yoga brand Lululemon and for Lacoste (famous through the crocodile logo), but sometimes also for Patagonia.
‘The worst part is the scolding,’ she says in her home a few streets away: a room of about 12 square metres. It contains a double bed, a small kitchenette and a wardrobe. Despite the fan on the wall, it is sweltering hot inside. She shares a toilet and a shower with others.
‘My supervisor’s manager is a terrible man. He touches everyone in a bad way, and if you say you don’t want that, you have a problem. He yells at me if I have to go to the bank or the doctor. “Then who will do the work? Who will meet the target?” And he’s not the only one. They talk to us like we are animals.’
When asked about her production targets, she breathes a deep sigh. ‘The other day, Lululemon placed a huge order, and now everyone is stressed. On the first day, we had to make seventy items per hour, but on the second day, it was suddenly a hundred. Otherwise, we won’t make the delivery date.’ During the working day, she does not drink water so that she does not waste time going to the toilet. Despite this, she seldom meets the target. And that means: no bonus.
Without that bonus, Priya earns 32,000 rupees a month (97 euros). Her room costs 7,000 rupees (21 euros), and a meal 300 rupees (1 euro). She has no money left for other things.
‘Since the crisis, we are increasingly hearing stories from our members of textile workers using drugs,’ says Dandeniya. ‘Also in MAS factories that Patagonia works with. They use it to work faster. Sometimes also against the hunger.’
Chamila Thushari, union leader of Dabindu Collective, confirms the story. ‘They use Ice (Crystal Meth) or Babul.’ She points to her collar and to the sole of her shoe. ‘This is how they smuggle it in. The management knows this happens but allows it. All they care about is production targets are being met.’
An employee of a third union, GTZ-GSEU, confirms that drug use among textile workers in the Free Trade Zone is a problem.
Patagonia says these claims are ‘new’ to them and ‘serious’, but says, without evidence, it cannot comment.
A living wage
That Patagonia, known for being sustainable, has its clothes manufactured in the same factories as other much less sustainable brands is seen as an advantage by the company. ‘Patagonia has a powerful brand voice, but we are a quite small player in the apparel sector. Therefore, we are always looking for ways to scale our impact and to elevate the industry standards across the board, bringing other apparel retailers along on the journey with us. So, continuing to engage in shared production facilities is crucial to this work.’Patagonia wants all people who make clothes to earn a decent wage. In 2015, the company promised that within 10 years, all employees in its supply chain would be earning a living wage that would be enough to live on. That is, enough for food, water, housing, education, healthcare, transport and other essential needs.
With 18 months to go, only 40 per cent of its factories pay a living wage, according to Patagonia. They would not reveal the factories concerned. Suppliers reportedly ‘have the right to maintain their factories’ wage data confidential’.
Patagonia wants all people who make clothes to earn a decent wage. In 2015, the company promised that within 10 years, all employees in its supply chain would be earning a living wage that would be enough to live on. That is, enough for food, water, housing, education, healthcare, transport and other essential needs.
With 18 months to go, only 40 per cent of its factories pay a living wage, according to Patagonia. They would not reveal the factories concerned. Suppliers reportedly ‘have the right to maintain their factories’ wage data confidential’.
To determine a living wage, Patagonia uses the Anker Research Institute’s calculation method. According to that method, you can live decently in urban Sri Lanka if you earn a minimum of 83,231 Sri Lankan rupees (263 euro) a month. Priya’s salary does not even cover half that. And at the recently approved Regal Image print factory, the basic wage is even lower: 21,000 rupees (66 euro), says Fernando.
Thulsi Narayanasamy is frustrated by Patagonia’s approach to sustainability. She is director of advocacy at the Worker Rights Consortium, an independent non-profit organization that monitors and investigates labor conditions in the global apparel and textile industry. ‘Patagonia spends millions on green initiatives. Why can’t they pay the people who make their clothes properly?’
Patagonia says it ‘has no authority over how much textile workers get paid, as they are in no way, shape or form the employer of these workers.’ Narayanasamy, however, is convinced Patagonia can pay a living wage, if the brand would want to. ‘They could bring production in-house or pay more to suppliers that’s ringfenced for wages high enough to achieve a living income. It’s so well established that brand’s pricing practices directly impact wage levels, it’s a fallacy to deny this.’
‘I think we should ask ourselves: why don't clothing brands have their own factories?’ She asks the question, then answers it. 'Brands don't want to be responsible for the people who produce their clothes. All brands benefit from that, including Patagonia.
RESPONSE FROM PATAGONIA When asked why it does not pay its suppliers more for decent wages for workers, Patagonia replied: ‘Relying on one brand to simply cover the gap is a band-aid solution and does not serve the factory in the long run. If the one brand that pays the gap were to leave the factory, then those wages for workers would go away, leaving the factory with a shortfall they would not be able to cover. Additionally, if the brand just writes a check to the factory, then there is no guarantee that the money would go towards workers’ wages. The brand has no authority over how much workers get paid as they are in no way, shape or form the employer of those workers.’
About the long working hours, Patagonia says: ‘Excessive overtime is pervasive globally, which is why it is audited regularly. If we find a problem that can be resolved, we work with our factory partners to implement sustainable solutions. This can take many years, but we find this is the best outcome for the workers and the factory.’
In response to the allegations about drug use among textile workers, Patagonia says: ‘These are serious and new allegations, however without evidence, we are not able to comment on them. We are continuing to conduct our ongoing monitoring program and we remain committed to addressing systemic issues to ensure workers’ wellbeing across our supply chain.’
Link to the article: https://www.ftm.eu/articles/sustainable-clothing-brand-patagonia-uses-same-suppliers-fast-fashion-brands-do-workers-exploited?share=p8cq84oSmbUiJtEQUObUZSPZh8ZNReEKHj0wGJnBMQUMqLcwK9PC1kpMJCev5Mo%3D%26utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sharebuttonnietleden&utm_source=linkbutton