![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[sticky entry]](http://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/entry/sticky_entry.png){kind=small}
So, I decided to make this easier on myself, and use an already existing framework--the Creative Commons licenses. My terms for derivative works of my fanworks are the same as presented in this license:
Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0)
If you want to make sure I'm okay with something not explicitly allowed by that license, you will need to ask me first. I'll decide that sort of stuff on a case-by-case basis. But all the stuff allowed by that license is fine for you to do without asking me first.
Since these are fanworks we're talking about, you should keep in mind that copyrights of the original works these are based on still apply, of course.
Also, while I do not require this, I hope you'll point out any derivative works you make to me! I've been delighted by any fic or art based on my work that I've seen thus far, but even if I didn't personally like a work, I wouldn't begrudge an author making it. Because it's impossible to anticipate all possible derivative works that could be created from my own, I will say that such works do not have my automatic endorsement, but I allow them and I might even promo ones that I personally enjoy!
The Politics of Entertainment
May. 22nd, 2025 04:16 pmA lot of mainstream TV and movies specifically promote "Western" values and especially the values of the United States government as inherently superior to all others. Specifically, this media promotes capitalism, imperialism, and colonialism regardless of whether it's geared towards liberal or conservative consumption. In short, a lot of media is simply sugarcoated propaganda. This is especially true of children's media, and why "it's just a children's cartoon" is not a valid argument for a piece of media not containing embedded political values. Quite the opposite, actually. The whole point of children's media containing such values is to help ensure the absorbsion and adoption of those values by the future generation. The point is to get to them early, so these values become their default.
Now, the people involved in creating this propaganda are not necessarily aware that that is what they are doing. Indeed, many of these people may consider themselves apolitical or even countercultural. But their awareness of their place in the machine is unnecessary for the machine's usage of them. The machine functions in a way such as to elevate those most useful to it while suppressing the rest.
Some examples:
Star Wars - The depiction of the Ewoks employs a number of incredibly racist tropes, including depicting them as cannibals and them accepting C3P0 as a god. The colonialist aspect of the core worlds in the prequels like Coruscant is purposely obscured by making the Separatist government headed by Sith puppets and relegating things like the genocide of the Geonosians to a relative footnote outside the movies.
Star Trek, especially modern Star Trek - While Star Trek has always had implicit militaristic undertones (considering their supposedly peaceful mission of exploration they sure are involved in a lot of wars and their ships are sure decked out to the teeth in weapons), the last seasons of Picard and Discovery especially doubled down on this. Also Picard has a white saviorism arc involving the romulans that it never even bothers to resolve.
Avatar: The Last Airbender - contrast the narrative choice to depict the oppressed Jet and Hama as incredibly evil and, in Hama's case, irreedeemable, to the narrative's treatment of Zuko and Iroh. The narrative never treats Iroh as an actual villain, and Zuko is not only given a redemption arc, but becomes ruler of the Fire Nation at the end of the story.
Avatar - the white savior fantasy in space. The white savior fantasy is inherently colonialist.
Legend of Korra - basically doubles down on the colonialist and imperialist apologism of its predecessor. Also adds a copaganda angle.
Now, the people involved in creating this propaganda are not necessarily aware that that is what they are doing. Indeed, many of these people may consider themselves apolitical or even countercultural. But their awareness of their place in the machine is unnecessary for the machine's usage of them. The machine functions in a way such as to elevate those most useful to it while suppressing the rest.
Some examples:
Star Wars - The depiction of the Ewoks employs a number of incredibly racist tropes, including depicting them as cannibals and them accepting C3P0 as a god. The colonialist aspect of the core worlds in the prequels like Coruscant is purposely obscured by making the Separatist government headed by Sith puppets and relegating things like the genocide of the Geonosians to a relative footnote outside the movies.
Star Trek, especially modern Star Trek - While Star Trek has always had implicit militaristic undertones (considering their supposedly peaceful mission of exploration they sure are involved in a lot of wars and their ships are sure decked out to the teeth in weapons), the last seasons of Picard and Discovery especially doubled down on this. Also Picard has a white saviorism arc involving the romulans that it never even bothers to resolve.
Avatar: The Last Airbender - contrast the narrative choice to depict the oppressed Jet and Hama as incredibly evil and, in Hama's case, irreedeemable, to the narrative's treatment of Zuko and Iroh. The narrative never treats Iroh as an actual villain, and Zuko is not only given a redemption arc, but becomes ruler of the Fire Nation at the end of the story.
Avatar - the white savior fantasy in space. The white savior fantasy is inherently colonialist.
Legend of Korra - basically doubles down on the colonialist and imperialist apologism of its predecessor. Also adds a copaganda angle.
Interpretation in Reality and Fiction
May. 20th, 2025 05:13 pmI think a key difference between reality and fiction is the role interpretation plays in our understanding of them. Because while both reality and fiction must be interpreted in an ethical sense, in fiction the question of what is and what has happened also becomes an element of interpretation, and takes on an ethical dimension that isn't inherently present in reality itself.
With both, our interpretation of ethical implications plays a key role in our understanding them. And while I am not a ethical relativist in the sense of viewing all ethical stances as equally valid, I am one in the sense of acknowledging that ethics is meaningless outside of the context of the minds of thinking and feeling beings and only gains meaning by existing inside the minds of those beings. It is something that exists purely because we believe in it, purely because we want it to exist, and what is viewed as ethical is relative to the mind doing the viewing.
In contrast, the events that transpire in the real world exist regardless of our wishes and thus the mere fact of their occurrence does not endow them with any particular ethical dimension, good or bad--it is instead our ethical evaluations that endow them with that ethical status. The real world exists outside of our wants, desires, and goals, and its nature is thus not relative to those internal motivations.
This is why everything that happens to a character in a fictional work can be analyzed within an ethical framework, including tragic accidents and unexpected fortune. This is why I don't think watsonian analysis is inadequate for analyzing the ethical implications of a work. This doesn't mean I don't think it has its place--it is part of the act of interpretation that occurs when immersing ourselves in a fictional world. As a fanfic writer, I find watsonian analysis essential to constructing a narrative within an existing story. But I think it inherently falls short once it tries to grapple with the ethical implications of that fictional world to those of us in the real world. Because watsonian analysis treats the fictional world as if it were real, as if it can have events that exist outside of intent. But no events in fiction can exist outside of the intent of either the author or the reader. Furthermore, we cannot treat the desires and wishes of the characters in the story as existing separately from the intent of the author and reader.
I think this is an important distinction that must be grappled with when analyzing fiction as opposed to reality.
With both, our interpretation of ethical implications plays a key role in our understanding them. And while I am not a ethical relativist in the sense of viewing all ethical stances as equally valid, I am one in the sense of acknowledging that ethics is meaningless outside of the context of the minds of thinking and feeling beings and only gains meaning by existing inside the minds of those beings. It is something that exists purely because we believe in it, purely because we want it to exist, and what is viewed as ethical is relative to the mind doing the viewing.
In contrast, the events that transpire in the real world exist regardless of our wishes and thus the mere fact of their occurrence does not endow them with any particular ethical dimension, good or bad--it is instead our ethical evaluations that endow them with that ethical status. The real world exists outside of our wants, desires, and goals, and its nature is thus not relative to those internal motivations.
This is why everything that happens to a character in a fictional work can be analyzed within an ethical framework, including tragic accidents and unexpected fortune. This is why I don't think watsonian analysis is inadequate for analyzing the ethical implications of a work. This doesn't mean I don't think it has its place--it is part of the act of interpretation that occurs when immersing ourselves in a fictional world. As a fanfic writer, I find watsonian analysis essential to constructing a narrative within an existing story. But I think it inherently falls short once it tries to grapple with the ethical implications of that fictional world to those of us in the real world. Because watsonian analysis treats the fictional world as if it were real, as if it can have events that exist outside of intent. But no events in fiction can exist outside of the intent of either the author or the reader. Furthermore, we cannot treat the desires and wishes of the characters in the story as existing separately from the intent of the author and reader.
I think this is an important distinction that must be grappled with when analyzing fiction as opposed to reality.
[REDACTED]
May. 17th, 2025 01:17 amOne of the problems I consistently encounter when socializing is that I simply am unwilling to explain myself because that would almost invariably entail revealing more about myself than I am willing to.
Though I can't help but doubt that it would matter even if I did. Plenty of people tell their life story online and aren't treated any better for it despite far more difficult or dire circumstances than my own. I've seen that as instructive: sympathy is less important to the social order than superiority. So perhaps my issue is more illusory than it appears. Would things go any better for me if I was more open? The evidence indicates not.
And yet, at the same time, I feel my lack of openness does somehow alienate me from others beyond the already rampant disconnection and derision people typically seem to have towards each other.
It's a problem I see no satisfactory answer to.
Though I can't help but doubt that it would matter even if I did. Plenty of people tell their life story online and aren't treated any better for it despite far more difficult or dire circumstances than my own. I've seen that as instructive: sympathy is less important to the social order than superiority. So perhaps my issue is more illusory than it appears. Would things go any better for me if I was more open? The evidence indicates not.
And yet, at the same time, I feel my lack of openness does somehow alienate me from others beyond the already rampant disconnection and derision people typically seem to have towards each other.
It's a problem I see no satisfactory answer to.
Help Ayah's Family Buy Flour
May. 9th, 2025 01:17 pmAdapted from my Tumblr reblog here:
Mar 17, 2025
(Updated Mar 21, 2025)
CURRENT STATUS: €2,914/€50,000
This campaign has been vetted by 90-ghost and vetted by association as seen here as their relative is vetted by el-shab-hussein and #166 on the verified fundraiser list.
The bio links to the GoFundMe here:
---
May 9, 2025
The brutal blockade of Gaza has caused flour prices to skyrocket to €1,400 a kilo. Please help Ayah's family buy flour by donating, or by reblogging if you can't donate.
CURRENT STATUS: €3,437/€50,000
FLOUR FUNDS: €20/€1,400
One thing about social media that has really changed my outlook on life is how it's made me so much more aware that I'm not the only person who feels x or does y. That sure, I'm the only person that has the exact combination of traits I have, but any one trait? Not just a me thing. And it's been really helpful to me to learn about other people's experiences that I resonate with. It's really helped me better understand why I have some of the difficulties that I do.
Earl Grey Stained Glass Floral Cookies Vegan Gluten Free
I can't say how these taste, as I've never tried them, but they look amazing, and they're both vegan and gluten free, so I'm...making a note of them.
I can't say how these taste, as I've never tried them, but they look amazing, and they're both vegan and gluten free, so I'm...making a note of them.
Fiddlehead Ferns
May. 2nd, 2025 02:34 amTried fiddlehead ferns for the first time tonight and thought they were tasty. I ate them after blanching them as instructed.
Got a little carried away though and ate all of them. Maybe next time I'll have enough restraint to save them for a dish.
Got a little carried away though and ate all of them. Maybe next time I'll have enough restraint to save them for a dish.
How India’s Hindu Nationalists Are Weaponizing History Against Muslims
India used to be a secular democracy, but its current leader, Narendra Modi of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), advances a radically different vision. Modi wants India to become a Hindu nation, in which India’s religious minorities (about 20% of the population) are second-class citizens and Muslims especially (about 14% of Indians) are compelled to accept increasing majoritarian violence. Indeed, stories of terrorizing Indian Muslims have become depressingly common in Modi’s India, with human rights groups documenting rising violence with each passing year. International groups, such as Freedom House and V-Dem, consider India only “partly free” and an “electoral autocracy” owing to the sharp decline of human and civil rights.
The BJP has always considered Muslims to be less Indian than Hindus. The political party was formed in 1980 as an offshoot of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), an all-male paramilitary organization founded in 1925 and modeled on Italian fascist groups such as Mussolini’s Blackshirts. Both the BJP and RSS view India as a nation for Hindus, by Hindus, and seek to coalesce and mobilize a Hindu identity that historically was porous and varied.
Early Hindu nationalist leaders endorsed violence against Indian Muslims. For example, in December 1938—mere weeks after Kristallnacht—the Hindu nationalist leader V. D. Savarkar declared that Muslims who oppose Hindu interests “will have to play the part of German-Jews.” The RSS’s second leader, M. S. Golwalkar, proclaimed that Germany’s “purging the country of the semitic Race - the Jews” is “a good lesson for us in Hindusthan to learn and profit by.” Such genocidal calls remain current today. In 2021, a Hindu nationalist leader urged his followers to be prepared to kill millions of Indian Muslims. Watchdog groups, including Genocide Watch and Early Warning (a project of the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum), caution that signs of genocide are already manifest in India.
Modi is a lifelong member of the RSS. Before he became India’s Prime Minister in 2014, he was Chief Minister of Gujarat, a state which, during his watch in 2002, saw India’s worst communal riots since partition—leaving at least 1,000 people dead, most of them Muslim. This earned him international rebuke, including a 2005 U.S. travel ban, and notoriety at home as an anti-Muslim strongman. That reputation helped propel Modi and the BJP to victory in India’s 2014 general election. After five years of rising Hindu nationalist violence against Indian Muslims, Modi led the BJP to another election win in 2019. Although many Indians—including many Hindus—oppose the BJP, it currently enjoys unprecedented power to reshape India.
A Wish For A Home Not on Loan
Apr. 28th, 2025 08:17 pmI wish having my own home was a realistic dream. I hate having to pay someone for my continued existence within a shelter.
The Problem With Opposing Viewpoints
Apr. 26th, 2025 07:52 pmI think that the belief that opposing viewpoints are necessarily more likely to cause people to think more deeply about their positions is very misguided. What causes people to think more deeply about their positions is being exposed to arguments or complexities they haven't fully thought of before. Opposing viewpoints can be (and often are) one or even all parties strawmanning the other. Opposing viewpoints can be the same 101 level arguments you've heard a million times already. And they can be vastly unequal in quality or seriousness. Devoting oneself equally to examining a blatantly contradictory or false argument as one does a logically or factually rigorous one is to construct a false equivalence of merit, to allow "but we just can't possibly know" or "everyone is equally at fault" to justify apathy and inaction.
What I think is too often overlooked is the effort to better justify one's own position. Because even when we are correct, correctness is not enough. It is important to understand our own position and understand the world around us well enough to know what we should do, not just what we should believe. It can be all too easy to convince ourselves that we have nothing left we need learn about our own politics, either to refute it or to fully embrace it.
But there is always more to learn. And also, even when we do want to better understand political positions we don't hold, understanding them through the lens of people holding those positions actually discussing their details outside of an explicit debate or overt attempt to portray opposing viewpoints can be a lot more valuable. Also, opposing viewpoints approaches tend to set up false dichotomies, vastly oversimplifying the diversity of beliefs people can hold.
Anyway, I think the main idea here is that the opposing viewpoints structure is just not a good way to better understand beliefs, whether they're your own or others.
What I think is too often overlooked is the effort to better justify one's own position. Because even when we are correct, correctness is not enough. It is important to understand our own position and understand the world around us well enough to know what we should do, not just what we should believe. It can be all too easy to convince ourselves that we have nothing left we need learn about our own politics, either to refute it or to fully embrace it.
But there is always more to learn. And also, even when we do want to better understand political positions we don't hold, understanding them through the lens of people holding those positions actually discussing their details outside of an explicit debate or overt attempt to portray opposing viewpoints can be a lot more valuable. Also, opposing viewpoints approaches tend to set up false dichotomies, vastly oversimplifying the diversity of beliefs people can hold.
Anyway, I think the main idea here is that the opposing viewpoints structure is just not a good way to better understand beliefs, whether they're your own or others.
Socializing: An Unavoidable Difficulty
Apr. 26th, 2025 06:18 pmI tend to have a lot of reluctance to interact with other people because the nature of socialization is that the only way to reasonably practice it is by actually socializing with actual real people. There just isn't a reasonable substitute to that. Which means whenever you mess up, you mess up in real life! Also, while there may be many different choices you can make, it sometimes feels like there are no good ones.
But also, socializing is not really a very optional activity. We may have some choices of how and when and who we socialize with, but not so much if we socialize at all. Or at least, the consequences of not socializing at all tend to be pretty steep, and so most choose to avoid those consequences if they can, despite the many hazards of socializing. Certainly I've decided that being a full-time hermit is simply not a realistic option for me.
But also, I think making connections is worth it. Those connections can be difficult, they can be painful, and they can be transient, sometimes incredibly so. But they're also what made me who I am today.
But also, socializing is not really a very optional activity. We may have some choices of how and when and who we socialize with, but not so much if we socialize at all. Or at least, the consequences of not socializing at all tend to be pretty steep, and so most choose to avoid those consequences if they can, despite the many hazards of socializing. Certainly I've decided that being a full-time hermit is simply not a realistic option for me.
But also, I think making connections is worth it. Those connections can be difficult, they can be painful, and they can be transient, sometimes incredibly so. But they're also what made me who I am today.
I feel a little bad that I don't update this blog as much as I used to (because I post more on Pillowfort) but also I regularly see people's blogs on here with a 'last updated 5000 weeks ago' or something like that so I guess comparatively speaking that makes me the Dreamwidth equivalent of one of those Tumblr bloggers who only stop posting when Tumblr says they've exceeded their daily post limit.
But only comparatively.
But only comparatively.
RFK Jr.'s autism study to amass medical records of many Americans
The National Institutes of Health is amassing private medical records from a number of federal and commercial databases to give to Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s new effort to study autism, the NIH's top official said Monday.
( Read more... )
Medication records from pharmacy chains, lab testing and genomics data from patients treated by the Department of Veterans Affairs and Indian Health Service, claims from private insurers and data from smartwatches and fitness trackers will all be linked together, he said.
The NIH is also now in talks with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to broaden agreements governing access to their data, Bhattacharya said.
A slide presented by National Institutes of Health Director Dr. Jay Bhattacharya at a meeting of the agency's advisers, discussing the new autism research initiative.
In addition, a new disease registry is being launched to track Americans with autism, which will be integrated into the data. Advocacy groups and experts have called out Kennedy for describing autism as a "preventable disease," which they say is stigmatizing and unfounded.
This is eugenics. Also, while there's little we can do about the expansion of the surveillance state, I do think there are some important actions that people can take regarding this. If you live in the US:
1). If you know any autistic people, avoid exposing them to this surveillance to the extent possible. Obviously this will have varying levels of feasibility and usefulness depending on the situation, but in our surveillance state age, a big part of security is just not drawing attention when you can avoid it, including in medical contexts. When possible, discuss the situation with them so you can follow their wishes.
2). If you are autistic, please take this information into consideration. Whether or not you are able to mask at all will obviously factor into whether concealing this information is even possible in most contexts. Nevertheless, in any contexts where it is possible, you may wish to consider doing so. Again, you can't do much about the fact that there's a lot of information out there on just about everyone. But it may be possible in some contexts (for example online, and especially publicly) to avoid purposely drawing attention to that information. And in an age where the information governments have far exceeds their capacity to process and make use of it, that can make all the difference.
Of course, that obviously might not be adequate protection, so you may wish to look into other possibilities. I can't tell you what the specific best options are for your situation. But I do know that most of those possibilities require help from others, whether those others are friends, family, or a group based on helping autistic people. In times like this, knowing who you can trust can be just as important as knowing who you can't.
3). If you suspect you are autistic, you will want to take this information into consideration when determining how or if you seek a diagnosis.
There is Just So Much
Apr. 21st, 2025 12:48 amI think I haven't become any more chill as I've gotten older but have reached a point where I've got so much to deal with that things that at one time would have been a focus of my neuroticism are now just kind of distantly unpleasant to me. There's just so many much more pressing issues that require my attention.
To the extent this quells useless rumination it's good, I guess. But it does also mean that I can't devote as much time as I'd like on the smaller things.
To the extent this quells useless rumination it's good, I guess. But it does also mean that I can't devote as much time as I'd like on the smaller things.
Never Enough Words For Thoughts
Apr. 19th, 2025 05:16 pmThere are always so many things I want to say. The problem is coming up with the words to say them with.
Alas, I am a Tetrapod
Apr. 9th, 2025 11:48 pmSeveral hundred million years ago, my distant ancestors crawled out of the sea to begin their life on land.
And now I I'd like to know,
How do I crawl back in?
ramble-tags: would like to know, how to spontaneously aquire ability to breathe water, to be clear, I don't think this would solve my problems, so much as substitute entirely new ones, but at least they'd be super cool ones
And now I I'd like to know,
How do I crawl back in?
ramble-tags: would like to know, how to spontaneously aquire ability to breathe water, to be clear, I don't think this would solve my problems, so much as substitute entirely new ones, but at least they'd be super cool ones
Amazing Languages
Apr. 2nd, 2025 02:48 amI wish I was better at languages, but regardless, I enjoy learning things about them. I love learning new language facts.
One thing I find absolutely bizarre and baffling is people who call themselves vegans saying 'oh, but of course I eat meat if I spend time with friends, otherwise how else would I socialize?'
And I'm just thinking
1. You need to find better friends. This is not even about asks you are making of them. I don't expect everyone around me or even all my friends to share all my ethics, including my veganism. That would be great, but it's not the reality I live in. But this isn't about that. This is about them imposing their food choices on you.
It's about the expectation that you're the problem if for whatever reason, you don't want to eat what they're eating. Like sure, that poses extra complications for people if you don't eat what they do, but if that's not something someone is willing to accommodate for their friends, that's a problem with them. And you can certainly offer to do things to make that easier on them, but even if you don't, forcing someone to eat something they don't want to eat is not friendship or hospitality. It's an attack on bodily autonomy.
2. Your ethics does not mean anything if it is contingent on social convenience. Do you do this for your other ethical precepts too? Like do you litter with your friends if they think environmentalism is cringe? It's one thing to have actual physical obstacles to doing something, another to just go along with injustice and oppression because everyone else is doing it. The latter is not only a major way injustice becomes enforced, but enlists you directly in its continuance.
3. Oh, you're not vegan for ethics but for health reasons? Well, that's not veganism, then. That's plant based eating. Common misconception.
And I'm just thinking
1. You need to find better friends. This is not even about asks you are making of them. I don't expect everyone around me or even all my friends to share all my ethics, including my veganism. That would be great, but it's not the reality I live in. But this isn't about that. This is about them imposing their food choices on you.
It's about the expectation that you're the problem if for whatever reason, you don't want to eat what they're eating. Like sure, that poses extra complications for people if you don't eat what they do, but if that's not something someone is willing to accommodate for their friends, that's a problem with them. And you can certainly offer to do things to make that easier on them, but even if you don't, forcing someone to eat something they don't want to eat is not friendship or hospitality. It's an attack on bodily autonomy.
2. Your ethics does not mean anything if it is contingent on social convenience. Do you do this for your other ethical precepts too? Like do you litter with your friends if they think environmentalism is cringe? It's one thing to have actual physical obstacles to doing something, another to just go along with injustice and oppression because everyone else is doing it. The latter is not only a major way injustice becomes enforced, but enlists you directly in its continuance.
3. Oh, you're not vegan for ethics but for health reasons? Well, that's not veganism, then. That's plant based eating. Common misconception.
On Pragmatism
Mar. 18th, 2025 01:35 amI think having a lot of pragmatism in life is very necessary, but I also think that people sometimes mistake the path of least resistance for pragmatism, and I must say, these can be, and often are, two entirely different things.
