River Of Slime |OT| Mission: Impossible

[Kara]

The late Victorian famines killed a lot of people but grain exports from the Raj increased so it's impossible to say if they were bad or not.

[GreatSageEqualOfHeaven]

of the only two empires I know anything about britian and united states definitely rank

[GreatSageEqualOfHeaven]

if i had any more knowledge i might offer a counterpoint that you dont have 1 in 200 men with king georges dna because he wasnt personally out a-raping in his conquests

[GreatSageEqualOfHeaven]

like churchill said, "Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government" end quote

[VomKriege]

We're losing communication with London, you're breaking lad, please repeat ! Has Boris Johnson launched the nukes ? Over.

[GreatSageEqualOfHeaven]

The inappropriate part in that NDT story (and if things happened as it was reported, there's plenty wrong with his attitude) isn't the invitation to drink an alcoholic beverage. Like Jesus Christ ERA.

I think it was back on GAF someone posted a survey that had something like 30% of millennials think that asking a co-worker out for a drink constitutes sexual harrassment, which, you know, I can't help but feel goes some way towards explaining incels

[VomKriege]

The inappropriate part in that NDT story (and if things happened as it was reported, there's plenty wrong with his attitude) isn't the invitation to drink an alcoholic beverage. Like Jesus Christ ERA.

I think it was back on GAF someone posted a survey that had something like 30% of millennials think that asking a co-worker out for a drink constitutes sexual harrassment, which, you know, I can't help but feel goes some way towards explaining incels

To be fair, depending on the people or the workplace, I can see how it could be a source of potential awkwardness to even inject that sort of thing in a professional environment, even if nothing reprehensible arises from it. If we're speaking specifically of a romantic move (because offering an alcohol drink isn't always for an ulterior motive, shocking I know).

[GreatSageEqualOfHeaven]

The inappropriate part in that NDT story (and if things happened as it was reported, there's plenty wrong with his attitude) isn't the invitation to drink an alcoholic beverage. Like Jesus Christ ERA.

I think it was back on GAF someone posted a survey that had something like 30% of millennials think that asking a co-worker out for a drink constitutes sexual harrassment, which, you know, I can't help but feel goes some way towards explaining incels

To be fair, depending on the people or the workplace, I can see how it could be a source of potential awkwardness to even inject that sort of thing in a professional environment, even if nothing reprehensible arises from it. If we're speaking specifically of a romantic move (because offering an alcohol drink isn't always for an ulterior motive, shocking I know).

sure, and even with romantic intentions there's a huge gap between "No? cool, no worries" and "Fucking frigid cockteasing bitch" because like most things in life the nuance is in the individuals involved and the way they conduct themselves - it was just mind blowing to me that such a huge chunk of people considered something that is generally considered extremely innocuous to be "sexual harrassment".

Like, 'fancy a drink after work sometime?' is usually a fairly safe temperature gauge to measure interest, and not used exclusively by men, and statistically a lot of people do meet their life partners at work.
I mean, it's not blocking the exit from the storeroom to try and intimidate a younger female subordinate and coerce them into a sexual relationship.

[GreatSageEqualOfHeaven]

can't find the GAF thread, but this looks like a reddit thread on the same report

https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/7r1lqk/25_of_millennial_men_think_asking_someone_for_a/

[Joe Molotov]

Is Nintendo not using voice-acting-unions unethical?

Unethical? What? No they can do what they want and it’s fine.

So Nintendo can’t be unethical? They can always do what they want?

https://www.resetera.com/threads/is-nintendo-not-using-voice-acting-unions-unethical.128323/post-22666247

I've been kinda rooting against this series after the brainwashing thing they attempted to do. This is atlus level shit

Tell me more.

https://www.resetera.com/threads/its-not-looking-good-for-male-same-sex-romantic-supports-in-fe-three-houses-and-thats-not-acceptable-support-spoilers.122922/post-23065564

KEEP EMAILING NINTENDO UNTIL THEY'RE BACK FROM SUMMER BREAK

[GreatSageEqualOfHeaven]

can't find the GAF thread, but this looks like a reddit thread on the same report

https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/7r1lqk/25_of_millennial_men_think_asking_someone_for_a/

Hmmm.. the linked article doesn't even come close to making that claim.

US -> % of respondents who replied "always or usually" -> "asking to go for a drink" -> just under 25% for males aged 18-30

[GreatSageEqualOfHeaven]

whats with riotous beef with data science? 

[HardcoreRetro]

Yes, we know. You have a huge dick.

[Tripon]

https://twitter.com/BenjiSales/status/1155561759039770625

Benji, which gamestop do you work at?

[Joe Molotov]

  Big Data

  SIGNIFICANT DATA

[clothedmacuser]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/power-levels-and-the-problem-of-dismissing-representation.131640/

First, a primer vid illustrating where I'm coming from on this:



That old chestnut "Who would win in a fight between X and Y character?" has been a part of nerd discourse for what feels like forever, and is especially prominent in the age of the internet with niche forums and content like "Death Battle." Tied into all of that is the nebulous concept of power scaling and more commonly known "power levels," or just how strong/fast/smart/tough or just generally powerful a character is. This is unsurprising as the most popular genre stories tend to be power fantasies about heroes and villains with special abilities in a battle over epic stakes. The problem with this viewpoint is that it can end up pushing away important aspects of character. Stories can become bogged down in the bloat of constant power-ups, debuffs, training, special moves, new abilities, etc. This isn't always a bad thing; JoJo's Bizarre Adventure gets away with it by creating suspense around the powers themselves by having them be highly unique and putting them into creative scenarios that leaves the audience guessing as to what could possibly happen next, but more often than not you end up in that Dragonball Z territory of constant powerup after powerup in a series of diminishing returns until you end up in self-parody.

The bigger problem I've seen recently that I want to talk about is when power levels are used in favor of arguments against representation, inclusivity, and diversity. More specifically, "Power Levels" have become a smokescreen for rejecting or sidelining prominent/lead representation in an attempt to remain "objective" in sticking to a diegetic analysis of how powerful a character can or ought to be. It's a tragic irony that so often heroes are portrayed as coming from an initial position of powerlessness only to gain or be granted great power (Luke Skywalker, Peter Parker, Harry Potter, Link, etc.) and become a hero, but that members of marginalized and/or minority communities who are, in the real world, in a relative position of powerlessness to the dominant, privileged, majority seeking powerful heroes in popular media face rejection, incredulity, or ridicule. There are several example to choose from, but I wanted to highlight two:

 

"How come Rey is so good with the Force so fast?"

Now, I want to be clear and upfront and say that having this complaint doesn't necessarily make you sexist, or anti-representation, or anything like that. I think there are a lot of people who have a different interpretation of what the Force should be and feel like Rey's progression goes against that. They view it as something you master and gain control of through training, like a martial art, or a weapon, or a superpower, and there is film evidence in support of this interpretation (mostly in the Prequels with the Jedi Academy stuff), whereas others (myself included) view the Force as something much more spiritual and personal, something akin to the relationship between faith and miracles, and is less a matter of practice or repetition and more a matter of self-discovery, introspection, and belief. This perspective also has film evidence (Yoda's comments on Dagobah, Obi-Wan talking about "becoming more powerful than you can possibly imagine" right before dying, etc.) but I feel like I'm dragging myself into a discussion about Star Wars and getting off topic and will leave it there. Suffice it to say that this interpretation doesn't mean you are against a woman being the lead in a Star Wars movie and being strong in the Force.

THAT HAVING BEEN SAID there are certainly people who take this position out of a sense that Rey being so good at the Force is "unearned" because, as a woman, she needs justification and rationale as to why she's as strong as she is. Nevermind that characters like Luke and Anakin have similarly demonstrated strength in the Force with little training, Rey's doing so apparently breaks belief in the story and makes her a "Mary Sue" because we need to justify everything about a character diegetically for it to be acceptable (here's where that video at the top applies). Apparently something as simple as "we want a woman to be the lead and be a Jedi Hero" needs to be earned, representation has to be justified, otherwise it's either pandering or "hypocritical," in that you're not being truly "equal" in attempting to give "preferential" treatment...to people who have been underrepresented, marginalized, and harmfully stereotyped in the history of genre fiction. Thus Rey's abilities and accomplishments and "power level" are rejected as bad storytelling by many in a smokescreen for wanting to keep "political issues" like representation out of their media. The other big example I wanted to highlight is:
 

This one is a bit more multi-faceted, as it has taken the form of multiple objections with the same root objection.

"How can a teenager like Shuri be the smartest person in the MCU, smarter than Bruce Banner and Tony Stark?"

"How can Wakanda be the most advanced nation on the planet and be completely hidden?"

"The technology of Wakanda is impractical and not really that advanced. Spear Lasers? Blanket shields?"

These criticisms are interesting to examine as they don't typically focus on T'Challa/Black Panther, but rather on Wakanda/their tech/advancement on a general level, which makes more sense if you consider the fact that Black Panther as a hero gets his "power" in the truest sense from his home and his people, rather than just the heart-shaped herb. These criticisms are often rooted in underlying conceptions of what advanced technology looks like, what a genius looks like, what a "civilized" society looks like, and those conceptions are informed by media and portrayals that historically have eschewed racially diverse representation. Shuri's smartness, Wakanda's dual supremacy and isolation, and their culturally-informed tech are outliers to these classical depictions, and thus apparently need justification or can be rejected outright. To focus on a specific example, there was a video review of Infinity War that took an aside to criticize the decision to depict Wakanda's main weaponry as spears as "dumb" because guns are more ergonomic to hold and thus a superior form of weaponry. Nevermind that this is from a universe where three of the main hero groups primary weapons are a bow, a shield, and a hammer, the later two of which are typically thrown as projectiles. It's a clear double-standard in terms of what is and isn't "justified," and a rejection of looking at this story and these character through the lens it's presenting, one about history and culture and people, in favor of one about number-crunching and functionality and practicality, which is disingenuous at worst and missing the point at best.

What I want to get at with these two examples are that "power levels" as a concept aren't really rooted in diegetic, in-universe explanations and rationale, but in dominant cultural narratives perpetuated by the creators and their culture (hence the video reference at the top), and that these narratives are on a fundamental level ignoring, dismissing, or outright rejecting non-dominant narratives and groups. If you try and go against the dominant narrative by rewriting it so that it's more open and inclusive to different people's and backgrounds, you face resistance in the form of a group of people increasingly obsessed with "objectivity" and having everything fit according to the terms their familiar and comfortable with. In the end, these are stories, and stories aren't real. It doesn't matter if a character loses a fight to a "weaker" character, or that a character gets "too powerful too fast," because in the end what matters are the more fundamental messages that story and characters are imparting, its themes, its ideas. What matters is its effect on the real people experiencing it.

Because although the stories aren't real, their impact is.

 

Ok human kotaku

[GreatSageEqualOfHeaven]

[blame space]

 

[GreatSageEqualOfHeaven]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/power-levels-and-the-problem-of-dismissing-representation.131640/

First, a primer vid illustrating where I'm coming from on this:



That old chestnut "Who would win in a fight between X and Y character?" has been a part of nerd discourse for what feels like forever, and is especially prominent in the age of the internet with niche forums and content like "Death Battle." Tied into all of that is the nebulous concept of power scaling and more commonly known "power levels," or just how strong/fast/smart/tough or just generally powerful a character is. This is unsurprising as the most popular genre stories tend to be power fantasies about heroes and villains with special abilities in a battle over epic stakes. The problem with this viewpoint is that it can end up pushing away important aspects of character. Stories can become bogged down in the bloat of constant power-ups, debuffs, training, special moves, new abilities, etc. This isn't always a bad thing; JoJo's Bizarre Adventure gets away with it by creating suspense around the powers themselves by having them be highly unique and putting them into creative scenarios that leaves the audience guessing as to what could possibly happen next, but more often than not you end up in that Dragonball Z territory of constant powerup after powerup in a series of diminishing returns until you end up in self-parody.

The bigger problem I've seen recently that I want to talk about is when power levels are used in favor of arguments against representation, inclusivity, and diversity. More specifically, "Power Levels" have become a smokescreen for rejecting or sidelining prominent/lead representation in an attempt to remain "objective" in sticking to a diegetic analysis of how powerful a character can or ought to be. It's a tragic irony that so often heroes are portrayed as coming from an initial position of powerlessness only to gain or be granted great power (Luke Skywalker, Peter Parker, Harry Potter, Link, etc.) and become a hero, but that members of marginalized and/or minority communities who are, in the real world, in a relative position of powerlessness to the dominant, privileged, majority seeking powerful heroes in popular media face rejection, incredulity, or ridicule. There are several example to choose from, but I wanted to highlight two:

 

"How come Rey is so good with the Force so fast?"

Now, I want to be clear and upfront and say that having this complaint doesn't necessarily make you sexist, or anti-representation, or anything like that. I think there are a lot of people who have a different interpretation of what the Force should be and feel like Rey's progression goes against that. They view it as something you master and gain control of through training, like a martial art, or a weapon, or a superpower, and there is film evidence in support of this interpretation (mostly in the Prequels with the Jedi Academy stuff), whereas others (myself included) view the Force as something much more spiritual and personal, something akin to the relationship between faith and miracles, and is less a matter of practice or repetition and more a matter of self-discovery, introspection, and belief. This perspective also has film evidence (Yoda's comments on Dagobah, Obi-Wan talking about "becoming more powerful than you can possibly imagine" right before dying, etc.) but I feel like I'm dragging myself into a discussion about Star Wars and getting off topic and will leave it there. Suffice it to say that this interpretation doesn't mean you are against a woman being the lead in a Star Wars movie and being strong in the Force.

THAT HAVING BEEN SAID there are certainly people who take this position out of a sense that Rey being so good at the Force is "unearned" because, as a woman, she needs justification and rationale as to why she's as strong as she is. Nevermind that characters like Luke and Anakin have similarly demonstrated strength in the Force with little training, Rey's doing so apparently breaks belief in the story and makes her a "Mary Sue" because we need to justify everything about a character diegetically for it to be acceptable (here's where that video at the top applies). Apparently something as simple as "we want a woman to be the lead and be a Jedi Hero" needs to be earned, representation has to be justified, otherwise it's either pandering or "hypocritical," in that you're not being truly "equal" in attempting to give "preferential" treatment...to people who have been underrepresented, marginalized, and harmfully stereotyped in the history of genre fiction. Thus Rey's abilities and accomplishments and "power level" are rejected as bad storytelling by many in a smokescreen for wanting to keep "political issues" like representation out of their media. The other big example I wanted to highlight is:
 

This one is a bit more multi-faceted, as it has taken the form of multiple objections with the same root objection.

"How can a teenager like Shuri be the smartest person in the MCU, smarter than Bruce Banner and Tony Stark?"

"How can Wakanda be the most advanced nation on the planet and be completely hidden?"

"The technology of Wakanda is impractical and not really that advanced. Spear Lasers? Blanket shields?"

These criticisms are interesting to examine as they don't typically focus on T'Challa/Black Panther, but rather on Wakanda/their tech/advancement on a general level, which makes more sense if you consider the fact that Black Panther as a hero gets his "power" in the truest sense from his home and his people, rather than just the heart-shaped herb. These criticisms are often rooted in underlying conceptions of what advanced technology looks like, what a genius looks like, what a "civilized" society looks like, and those conceptions are informed by media and portrayals that historically have eschewed racially diverse representation. Shuri's smartness, Wakanda's dual supremacy and isolation, and their culturally-informed tech are outliers to these classical depictions, and thus apparently need justification or can be rejected outright. To focus on a specific example, there was a video review of Infinity War that took an aside to criticize the decision to depict Wakanda's main weaponry as spears as "dumb" because guns are more ergonomic to hold and thus a superior form of weaponry. Nevermind that this is from a universe where three of the main hero groups primary weapons are a bow, a shield, and a hammer, the later two of which are typically thrown as projectiles. It's a clear double-standard in terms of what is and isn't "justified," and a rejection of looking at this story and these character through the lens it's presenting, one about history and culture and people, in favor of one about number-crunching and functionality and practicality, which is disingenuous at worst and missing the point at best.

What I want to get at with these two examples are that "power levels" as a concept aren't really rooted in diegetic, in-universe explanations and rationale, but in dominant cultural narratives perpetuated by the creators and their culture (hence the video reference at the top), and that these narratives are on a fundamental level ignoring, dismissing, or outright rejecting non-dominant narratives and groups. If you try and go against the dominant narrative by rewriting it so that it's more open and inclusive to different people's and backgrounds, you face resistance in the form of a group of people increasingly obsessed with "objectivity" and having everything fit according to the terms their familiar and comfortable with. In the end, these are stories, and stories aren't real. It doesn't matter if a character loses a fight to a "weaker" character, or that a character gets "too powerful too fast," because in the end what matters are the more fundamental messages that story and characters are imparting, its themes, its ideas. What matters is its effect on the real people experiencing it.

Because although the stories aren't real, their impact is.

 

Ok human kotaku

how come that poster got so shitty so quickly?

[headwalk]

this is your brain on disney.

[HaughtyFrank]

It's a tragic irony that so often heroes are portrayed as coming from an initial position of powerlessness only to gain or be granted great power (Luke Skywalker, Peter Parker, Harry Potter, Link, etc.)

Ascctually does Harry's connection to voldemort not grant him any great power. He's a mediocre wizard 

Also Rey using the jedi mind trick 2 minutes after she learned that she can use the force is bad writing. No walls of texts will convince me otherwise.

[Himu]

omfg







https://old.reddit.com/r/fatlogic/comments/ciw1i4/diet_mentality_crap_congratulations_for_weight/

[Lonewulfeus]

how little control must brainchild have over the rest of his life to get so anal about every thread he posts remaining exclusively on topic?

(Image removed from quote.)

(Image removed from quote.)

Jesus Christ he's the ugliest looking dude. shave that shit above your lip

I’m not gonna rip on him for his looks since he can’t control that, but different glasses could do him a world of good

[Tuckers Law]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/power-levels-and-the-problem-of-dismissing-representation.131640/

First, a primer vid illustrating where I'm coming from on this:



That old chestnut "Who would win in a fight between X and Y character?" has been a part of nerd discourse for what feels like forever, and is especially prominent in the age of the internet with niche forums and content like "Death Battle." Tied into all of that is the nebulous concept of power scaling and more commonly known "power levels," or just how strong/fast/smart/tough or just generally powerful a character is. This is unsurprising as the most popular genre stories tend to be power fantasies about heroes and villains with special abilities in a battle over epic stakes. The problem with this viewpoint is that it can end up pushing away important aspects of character. Stories can become bogged down in the bloat of constant power-ups, debuffs, training, special moves, new abilities, etc. This isn't always a bad thing; JoJo's Bizarre Adventure gets away with it by creating suspense around the powers themselves by having them be highly unique and putting them into creative scenarios that leaves the audience guessing as to what could possibly happen next, but more often than not you end up in that Dragonball Z territory of constant powerup after powerup in a series of diminishing returns until you end up in self-parody.

The bigger problem I've seen recently that I want to talk about is when power levels are used in favor of arguments against representation, inclusivity, and diversity. More specifically, "Power Levels" have become a smokescreen for rejecting or sidelining prominent/lead representation in an attempt to remain "objective" in sticking to a diegetic analysis of how powerful a character can or ought to be. It's a tragic irony that so often heroes are portrayed as coming from an initial position of powerlessness only to gain or be granted great power (Luke Skywalker, Peter Parker, Harry Potter, Link, etc.) and become a hero, but that members of marginalized and/or minority communities who are, in the real world, in a relative position of powerlessness to the dominant, privileged, majority seeking powerful heroes in popular media face rejection, incredulity, or ridicule. There are several example to choose from, but I wanted to highlight two:

 

"How come Rey is so good with the Force so fast?"

Now, I want to be clear and upfront and say that having this complaint doesn't necessarily make you sexist, or anti-representation, or anything like that. I think there are a lot of people who have a different interpretation of what the Force should be and feel like Rey's progression goes against that. They view it as something you master and gain control of through training, like a martial art, or a weapon, or a superpower, and there is film evidence in support of this interpretation (mostly in the Prequels with the Jedi Academy stuff), whereas others (myself included) view the Force as something much more spiritual and personal, something akin to the relationship between faith and miracles, and is less a matter of practice or repetition and more a matter of self-discovery, introspection, and belief. This perspective also has film evidence (Yoda's comments on Dagobah, Obi-Wan talking about "becoming more powerful than you can possibly imagine" right before dying, etc.) but I feel like I'm dragging myself into a discussion about Star Wars and getting off topic and will leave it there. Suffice it to say that this interpretation doesn't mean you are against a woman being the lead in a Star Wars movie and being strong in the Force.

THAT HAVING BEEN SAID there are certainly people who take this position out of a sense that Rey being so good at the Force is "unearned" because, as a woman, she needs justification and rationale as to why she's as strong as she is. Nevermind that characters like Luke and Anakin have similarly demonstrated strength in the Force with little training, Rey's doing so apparently breaks belief in the story and makes her a "Mary Sue" because we need to justify everything about a character diegetically for it to be acceptable (here's where that video at the top applies). Apparently something as simple as "we want a woman to be the lead and be a Jedi Hero" needs to be earned, representation has to be justified, otherwise it's either pandering or "hypocritical," in that you're not being truly "equal" in attempting to give "preferential" treatment...to people who have been underrepresented, marginalized, and harmfully stereotyped in the history of genre fiction. Thus Rey's abilities and accomplishments and "power level" are rejected as bad storytelling by many in a smokescreen for wanting to keep "political issues" like representation out of their media. The other big example I wanted to highlight is:
 

This one is a bit more multi-faceted, as it has taken the form of multiple objections with the same root objection.

"How can a teenager like Shuri be the smartest person in the MCU, smarter than Bruce Banner and Tony Stark?"

"How can Wakanda be the most advanced nation on the planet and be completely hidden?"

"The technology of Wakanda is impractical and not really that advanced. Spear Lasers? Blanket shields?"

These criticisms are interesting to examine as they don't typically focus on T'Challa/Black Panther, but rather on Wakanda/their tech/advancement on a general level, which makes more sense if you consider the fact that Black Panther as a hero gets his "power" in the truest sense from his home and his people, rather than just the heart-shaped herb. These criticisms are often rooted in underlying conceptions of what advanced technology looks like, what a genius looks like, what a "civilized" society looks like, and those conceptions are informed by media and portrayals that historically have eschewed racially diverse representation. Shuri's smartness, Wakanda's dual supremacy and isolation, and their culturally-informed tech are outliers to these classical depictions, and thus apparently need justification or can be rejected outright. To focus on a specific example, there was a video review of Infinity War that took an aside to criticize the decision to depict Wakanda's main weaponry as spears as "dumb" because guns are more ergonomic to hold and thus a superior form of weaponry. Nevermind that this is from a universe where three of the main hero groups primary weapons are a bow, a shield, and a hammer, the later two of which are typically thrown as projectiles. It's a clear double-standard in terms of what is and isn't "justified," and a rejection of looking at this story and these character through the lens it's presenting, one about history and culture and people, in favor of one about number-crunching and functionality and practicality, which is disingenuous at worst and missing the point at best.

What I want to get at with these two examples are that "power levels" as a concept aren't really rooted in diegetic, in-universe explanations and rationale, but in dominant cultural narratives perpetuated by the creators and their culture (hence the video reference at the top), and that these narratives are on a fundamental level ignoring, dismissing, or outright rejecting non-dominant narratives and groups. If you try and go against the dominant narrative by rewriting it so that it's more open and inclusive to different people's and backgrounds, you face resistance in the form of a group of people increasingly obsessed with "objectivity" and having everything fit according to the terms their familiar and comfortable with. In the end, these are stories, and stories aren't real. It doesn't matter if a character loses a fight to a "weaker" character, or that a character gets "too powerful too fast," because in the end what matters are the more fundamental messages that story and characters are imparting, its themes, its ideas. What matters is its effect on the real people experiencing it.

Because although the stories aren't real, their impact is.

 

Ok human kotaku

Holy shit some people just cannot fucking let go when others don’t like their Star War waifu.   

[Potato]

Who the fuck writes that much about anything for free?

[Lonewulfeus]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/what-songs-do-you-enjoy-in-languages-you-are-not-fluent-in.131659/

Waiting for Slayven to post an English song

[Tuckers Law]

Who the fuck writes that much about anything for free?

[Tripon]

https://twitter.com/ReeraTakes/status/1154512797914546178

[VomKriege]

https://twitter.com/ReeraTakes/status/1154512797914546178

Some of the Twitter replies are something else too. 

[clothedmacuser]

https://twitter.com/ReeraTakes/status/1154512797914546178

Image search "literally shaking with despair"



  Let's call it a day.

[HaughtyFrank]

https://twitter.com/ReeraTakes/status/1154512797914546178

I thought about helping the women in Saudi Arabia but unfortunately is there no anime industry

[Tripon]

https://twitter.com/ReeraTakes/status/1155268734543642624

Autism is literally a disability. That's why schools can service students with autism with special education funds.

[OnlyRegret]

https://twitter.com/ReeraTakes/status/1154512797914546178

[Joe Molotov]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/power-levels-and-the-problem-of-dismissing-representation.131640/

First, a primer vid illustrating where I'm coming from on this:



That old chestnut "Who would win in a fight between X and Y character?" has been a part of nerd discourse for what feels like forever, and is especially prominent in the age of the internet with niche forums and content like "Death Battle." Tied into all of that is the nebulous concept of power scaling and more commonly known "power levels," or just how strong/fast/smart/tough or just generally powerful a character is. This is unsurprising as the most popular genre stories tend to be power fantasies about heroes and villains with special abilities in a battle over epic stakes. The problem with this viewpoint is that it can end up pushing away important aspects of character. Stories can become bogged down in the bloat of constant power-ups, debuffs, training, special moves, new abilities, etc. This isn't always a bad thing; JoJo's Bizarre Adventure gets away with it by creating suspense around the powers themselves by having them be highly unique and putting them into creative scenarios that leaves the audience guessing as to what could possibly happen next, but more often than not you end up in that Dragonball Z territory of constant powerup after powerup in a series of diminishing returns until you end up in self-parody.

The bigger problem I've seen recently that I want to talk about is when power levels are used in favor of arguments against representation, inclusivity, and diversity. More specifically, "Power Levels" have become a smokescreen for rejecting or sidelining prominent/lead representation in an attempt to remain "objective" in sticking to a diegetic analysis of how powerful a character can or ought to be. It's a tragic irony that so often heroes are portrayed as coming from an initial position of powerlessness only to gain or be granted great power (Luke Skywalker, Peter Parker, Harry Potter, Link, etc.) and become a hero, but that members of marginalized and/or minority communities who are, in the real world, in a relative position of powerlessness to the dominant, privileged, majority seeking powerful heroes in popular media face rejection, incredulity, or ridicule. There are several example to choose from, but I wanted to highlight two:

 

"How come Rey is so good with the Force so fast?"

Now, I want to be clear and upfront and say that having this complaint doesn't necessarily make you sexist, or anti-representation, or anything like that. I think there are a lot of people who have a different interpretation of what the Force should be and feel like Rey's progression goes against that. They view it as something you master and gain control of through training, like a martial art, or a weapon, or a superpower, and there is film evidence in support of this interpretation (mostly in the Prequels with the Jedi Academy stuff), whereas others (myself included) view the Force as something much more spiritual and personal, something akin to the relationship between faith and miracles, and is less a matter of practice or repetition and more a matter of self-discovery, introspection, and belief. This perspective also has film evidence (Yoda's comments on Dagobah, Obi-Wan talking about "becoming more powerful than you can possibly imagine" right before dying, etc.) but I feel like I'm dragging myself into a discussion about Star Wars and getting off topic and will leave it there. Suffice it to say that this interpretation doesn't mean you are against a woman being the lead in a Star Wars movie and being strong in the Force.

THAT HAVING BEEN SAID there are certainly people who take this position out of a sense that Rey being so good at the Force is "unearned" because, as a woman, she needs justification and rationale as to why she's as strong as she is. Nevermind that characters like Luke and Anakin have similarly demonstrated strength in the Force with little training, Rey's doing so apparently breaks belief in the story and makes her a "Mary Sue" because we need to justify everything about a character diegetically for it to be acceptable (here's where that video at the top applies). Apparently something as simple as "we want a woman to be the lead and be a Jedi Hero" needs to be earned, representation has to be justified, otherwise it's either pandering or "hypocritical," in that you're not being truly "equal" in attempting to give "preferential" treatment...to people who have been underrepresented, marginalized, and harmfully stereotyped in the history of genre fiction. Thus Rey's abilities and accomplishments and "power level" are rejected as bad storytelling by many in a smokescreen for wanting to keep "political issues" like representation out of their media. The other big example I wanted to highlight is:
 

This one is a bit more multi-faceted, as it has taken the form of multiple objections with the same root objection.

"How can a teenager like Shuri be the smartest person in the MCU, smarter than Bruce Banner and Tony Stark?"

"How can Wakanda be the most advanced nation on the planet and be completely hidden?"

"The technology of Wakanda is impractical and not really that advanced. Spear Lasers? Blanket shields?"

These criticisms are interesting to examine as they don't typically focus on T'Challa/Black Panther, but rather on Wakanda/their tech/advancement on a general level, which makes more sense if you consider the fact that Black Panther as a hero gets his "power" in the truest sense from his home and his people, rather than just the heart-shaped herb. These criticisms are often rooted in underlying conceptions of what advanced technology looks like, what a genius looks like, what a "civilized" society looks like, and those conceptions are informed by media and portrayals that historically have eschewed racially diverse representation. Shuri's smartness, Wakanda's dual supremacy and isolation, and their culturally-informed tech are outliers to these classical depictions, and thus apparently need justification or can be rejected outright. To focus on a specific example, there was a video review of Infinity War that took an aside to criticize the decision to depict Wakanda's main weaponry as spears as "dumb" because guns are more ergonomic to hold and thus a superior form of weaponry. Nevermind that this is from a universe where three of the main hero groups primary weapons are a bow, a shield, and a hammer, the later two of which are typically thrown as projectiles. It's a clear double-standard in terms of what is and isn't "justified," and a rejection of looking at this story and these character through the lens it's presenting, one about history and culture and people, in favor of one about number-crunching and functionality and practicality, which is disingenuous at worst and missing the point at best.

What I want to get at with these two examples are that "power levels" as a concept aren't really rooted in diegetic, in-universe explanations and rationale, but in dominant cultural narratives perpetuated by the creators and their culture (hence the video reference at the top), and that these narratives are on a fundamental level ignoring, dismissing, or outright rejecting non-dominant narratives and groups. If you try and go against the dominant narrative by rewriting it so that it's more open and inclusive to different people's and backgrounds, you face resistance in the form of a group of people increasingly obsessed with "objectivity" and having everything fit according to the terms their familiar and comfortable with. In the end, these are stories, and stories aren't real. It doesn't matter if a character loses a fight to a "weaker" character, or that a character gets "too powerful too fast," because in the end what matters are the more fundamental messages that story and characters are imparting, its themes, its ideas. What matters is its effect on the real people experiencing it.

Because although the stories aren't real, their impact is.

 

Ok human kotaku

ummmmm

[Tasty]

Who the fuck writes that much about anything for free?

People with nothing better to do, e.g. children and neets [ed. note: redundant]

[Transhuman]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/power-levels-and-the-problem-of-dismissing-representation.131640/

First, a primer vid illustrating where I'm coming from on this:



That old chestnut "Who would win in a fight between X and Y character?" has been a part of nerd discourse for what feels like forever, and is especially prominent in the age of the internet with niche forums and content like "Death Battle." Tied into all of that is the nebulous concept of power scaling and more commonly known "power levels," or just how strong/fast/smart/tough or just generally powerful a character is. This is unsurprising as the most popular genre stories tend to be power fantasies about heroes and villains with special abilities in a battle over epic stakes. The problem with this viewpoint is that it can end up pushing away important aspects of character. Stories can become bogged down in the bloat of constant power-ups, debuffs, training, special moves, new abilities, etc. This isn't always a bad thing; JoJo's Bizarre Adventure gets away with it by creating suspense around the powers themselves by having them be highly unique and putting them into creative scenarios that leaves the audience guessing as to what could possibly happen next, but more often than not you end up in that Dragonball Z territory of constant powerup after powerup in a series of diminishing returns until you end up in self-parody.

The bigger problem I've seen recently that I want to talk about is when power levels are used in favor of arguments against representation, inclusivity, and diversity. More specifically, "Power Levels" have become a smokescreen for rejecting or sidelining prominent/lead representation in an attempt to remain "objective" in sticking to a diegetic analysis of how powerful a character can or ought to be. It's a tragic irony that so often heroes are portrayed as coming from an initial position of powerlessness only to gain or be granted great power (Luke Skywalker, Peter Parker, Harry Potter, Link, etc.) and become a hero, but that members of marginalized and/or minority communities who are, in the real world, in a relative position of powerlessness to the dominant, privileged, majority seeking powerful heroes in popular media face rejection, incredulity, or ridicule. There are several example to choose from, but I wanted to highlight two:

 

"How come Rey is so good with the Force so fast?"

Now, I want to be clear and upfront and say that having this complaint doesn't necessarily make you sexist, or anti-representation, or anything like that. I think there are a lot of people who have a different interpretation of what the Force should be and feel like Rey's progression goes against that. They view it as something you master and gain control of through training, like a martial art, or a weapon, or a superpower, and there is film evidence in support of this interpretation (mostly in the Prequels with the Jedi Academy stuff), whereas others (myself included) view the Force as something much more spiritual and personal, something akin to the relationship between faith and miracles, and is less a matter of practice or repetition and more a matter of self-discovery, introspection, and belief. This perspective also has film evidence (Yoda's comments on Dagobah, Obi-Wan talking about "becoming more powerful than you can possibly imagine" right before dying, etc.) but I feel like I'm dragging myself into a discussion about Star Wars and getting off topic and will leave it there. Suffice it to say that this interpretation doesn't mean you are against a woman being the lead in a Star Wars movie and being strong in the Force.

THAT HAVING BEEN SAID there are certainly people who take this position out of a sense that Rey being so good at the Force is "unearned" because, as a woman, she needs justification and rationale as to why she's as strong as she is. Nevermind that characters like Luke and Anakin have similarly demonstrated strength in the Force with little training, Rey's doing so apparently breaks belief in the story and makes her a "Mary Sue" because we need to justify everything about a character diegetically for it to be acceptable (here's where that video at the top applies). Apparently something as simple as "we want a woman to be the lead and be a Jedi Hero" needs to be earned, representation has to be justified, otherwise it's either pandering or "hypocritical," in that you're not being truly "equal" in attempting to give "preferential" treatment...to people who have been underrepresented, marginalized, and harmfully stereotyped in the history of genre fiction. Thus Rey's abilities and accomplishments and "power level" are rejected as bad storytelling by many in a smokescreen for wanting to keep "political issues" like representation out of their media. The other big example I wanted to highlight is:
 

This one is a bit more multi-faceted, as it has taken the form of multiple objections with the same root objection.

"How can a teenager like Shuri be the smartest person in the MCU, smarter than Bruce Banner and Tony Stark?"

"How can Wakanda be the most advanced nation on the planet and be completely hidden?"

"The technology of Wakanda is impractical and not really that advanced. Spear Lasers? Blanket shields?"

These criticisms are interesting to examine as they don't typically focus on T'Challa/Black Panther, but rather on Wakanda/their tech/advancement on a general level, which makes more sense if you consider the fact that Black Panther as a hero gets his "power" in the truest sense from his home and his people, rather than just the heart-shaped herb. These criticisms are often rooted in underlying conceptions of what advanced technology looks like, what a genius looks like, what a "civilized" society looks like, and those conceptions are informed by media and portrayals that historically have eschewed racially diverse representation. Shuri's smartness, Wakanda's dual supremacy and isolation, and their culturally-informed tech are outliers to these classical depictions, and thus apparently need justification or can be rejected outright. To focus on a specific example, there was a video review of Infinity War that took an aside to criticize the decision to depict Wakanda's main weaponry as spears as "dumb" because guns are more ergonomic to hold and thus a superior form of weaponry. Nevermind that this is from a universe where three of the main hero groups primary weapons are a bow, a shield, and a hammer, the later two of which are typically thrown as projectiles. It's a clear double-standard in terms of what is and isn't "justified," and a rejection of looking at this story and these character through the lens it's presenting, one about history and culture and people, in favor of one about number-crunching and functionality and practicality, which is disingenuous at worst and missing the point at best.

What I want to get at with these two examples are that "power levels" as a concept aren't really rooted in diegetic, in-universe explanations and rationale, but in dominant cultural narratives perpetuated by the creators and their culture (hence the video reference at the top), and that these narratives are on a fundamental level ignoring, dismissing, or outright rejecting non-dominant narratives and groups. If you try and go against the dominant narrative by rewriting it so that it's more open and inclusive to different people's and backgrounds, you face resistance in the form of a group of people increasingly obsessed with "objectivity" and having everything fit according to the terms their familiar and comfortable with. In the end, these are stories, and stories aren't real. It doesn't matter if a character loses a fight to a "weaker" character, or that a character gets "too powerful too fast," because in the end what matters are the more fundamental messages that story and characters are imparting, its themes, its ideas. What matters is its effect on the real people experiencing it.

Because although the stories aren't real, their impact is.

 

Ok human kotaku

ummmmm

If you think that post is awkward, you should see the second

[Himu]

[Uncle]

a resetera thread posted over 4 hours ago, graphically represented in its entirety

Very good post.

 

[blame space]

man cyndi you really love laughing at these dumb fatties huh XD

[HaughtyFrank]

I guess if you're going to be fat you might as well be fat and happy instead of fat and miserable. The delusion that it doesn't cause any health problems, is natural etc. is dumb though

[tuna_love]

man cyndi you really love laughing at these dumb fatties huh XD

be 👏 better👏👏

[Transhuman]

You guys are giving me NeoGaf vibes right now no offence

spoiler (click to show/hide)

take offence obviously

[close]

[nudemacusers]

I’m more into Shat Faming.

Shart Farming

[Lonewulfeus]

Someone posts this:



And all of the Disney shills childless millennials swarm to ruin the joke

This is a really tone deaf comparison considering that the vast majority of Disney's output has progressive left leaning messaging and a ton of their project leads tout the importance of diversity....

Funny thing is entertainment companies like Disney are small beans compared to companies AT&T. Telecoms companies  and Financial institutions pose a far larger threat to democracy.

I get that Disney is becoming too big and powerful, but they make fun products for kids and families to enjoy. Comparing them to Nazi imagery is just tone deaf and disrespectful to how awful and deadly the Nazi regime actually was.

Why does shit like this always get posted. Is it joking or people legit think this is gonna happen or something.

[Lonewulfeus]

You guys are giving me NeoGaf vibes right now no offence

spoiler (click to show/hide)

take offence obviously

[close]

And yet you keep posting here

[EightBitNate]

ResetEra: where can you can compare anything to Nazism (except things we like)

[Uncle]

I get that Disney is becoming too big and powerful, but they make fun products for kids and families to enjoy. Comparing them to Nazi imagery is just tone deaf and disrespectful to how awful and deadly the Nazi regime actually was.

* throws dart at resetera forums *



https://www.resetera.com/threads/pc-gaming-era-may-2019-romance-of-the-three-storefronts.114434/post-20930452

This new Titan Quest expansion any good?

I wanted to try it, but then I remembered it was published by nazi signal boosters THQ Nordic and decided to put it on ignore instead.

https://www.resetera.com/threads/justin-roiland-has-a-trover-saves-the-universe-commercial-made-starring-jontron.120520/post-21376404

Fuck Roiland and his skeezbag anti-union bullshit
Fuck JonTron and his worthless Nazi face
Fuck anyone apologizing what shitbags these fuckers are.

They wanna lie in beds with Nazis, so fucking be it. They can get pounded into the dirt with the rest of em.

[Himu]

I guess if you're going to be fat you might as well be fat and happy instead of fat and miserable. The delusion that it doesn't cause any health problems, is natural etc. is dumb though

No. They’re actively telling people it’s ok to be fat, it’s healthy to be fat. In the last image I posted it basically argues that thinking,”I need to lose weight” is stressful so you might as well stop trying and be “free”. They’re actively telling people not only they *shouldnt* lose weight, because it fits some societal standard for beauty or something, but also that they *can’t* lose weight. Which is awful to tell people who legitimately want to improve themselves. It’s dangerous and any attempt to make being obese normal should be shunned entirely with outright derision and mockery. Fat *people* deserve respect because they’re *people*. Being *fat* should never be accepted as the norm. Yes, people shouldn’t be trying to be shooting for supermodel bodies but that doesn’t make being morbidly obese okay.

[Uncle]

[Tasty]

Someone posts this:

(Image removed from quote.)

And all of the Disney shills childless millennials swarm to ruin the joke

This is a really tone deaf comparison considering that the vast majority of Disney's output has progressive left leaning messaging and a ton of their project leads tout the importance of diversity....

Funny thing is entertainment companies like Disney are small beans compared to companies AT&T. Telecoms companies  and Financial institutions pose a far larger threat to democracy.

I get that Disney is becoming too big and powerful, but they make fun products for kids and families to enjoy. Comparing them to Nazi imagery is just tone deaf and disrespectful to how awful and deadly the Nazi regime actually was.

Why does shit like this always get posted. Is it joking or people legit think this is gonna happen or something.

Do they not know about Walt Disney or

[thetylerrob]

Finally someone is woke enough to take the fats down a peg. So brave.

 

[GreatSageEqualOfHeaven]

This is a really tone deaf comparison considering that the vast majority of Disney's output has progressive left leaning messaging and a ton of their project leads tout the importance of diversity....

They talk so much about diversity, and lets face it, its the optics that only really matter right?

[Tasty]

[Himu]

Finally someone is woke enough to take the fats down a peg. So brave.

 

Actually, the people I’m laughing at are the woke ones.
 


Sounds like someone’s triggered.

[OnlyRegret]

Someone posts this:

(Image removed from quote.)

And all of the Disney shills childless millennials swarm to ruin the joke

This is a really tone deaf comparison considering that the vast majority of Disney's output has progressive left leaning messaging and a ton of their project leads tout the importance of diversity....

Funny thing is entertainment companies like Disney are small beans compared to companies AT&T. Telecoms companies  and Financial institutions pose a far larger threat to democracy.

I get that Disney is becoming too big and powerful, but they make fun products for kids and families to enjoy. Comparing them to Nazi imagery is just tone deaf and disrespectful to how awful and deadly the Nazi regime actually was.

Why does shit like this always get posted. Is it joking or people legit think this is gonna happen or something.

Guess I'll just repeat myself
http://www.thebore.com/forum/index.php?topic=46206.msg2672015#msg2672015

What terrible product or release can we blame for this pathetic corporate worship

[Himu]

Thanks for ruining my daddy's business, you fat fuck!

[paprikastaude]

Small humble companies like Disney need protection They are true allies, certainly not founded by an antisemite, nor hyping up the fun of monarchies in every second movie.

[paprikastaude]

This is a really tone deaf comparison considering that the vast majority of Disney's output has progressive left leaning messaging and a ton of their project leads tout the importance of diversity....

They talk so much about diversity, and lets face it, its the optics that only really matter right?

(Image removed from quote.)

Imagine if nazis like Redletter Media dared to humorously point out the fake wokeness of this soulless conglomerate  

[Drainage]

Whoa whoa whoa allow me to put Disney in context guys y’all

[HaughtyFrank]

You're obviously not alone. I just personally find this mindset sad. Traveling internationally and having cultural experiences have been some of the most valuable and rewarding experiences of my life. You're only going to be on this rock once. Why do you want to spend your vacation in a fake corporate playground?

You know where you can travel internationally? At Epcot. Just take a lap around World Showcase and you can experience 11 different cultures. All the pavilions are worked at by real natives from the countries and are funded by that countries government.

So no thanks, I would rather still just go to Disney World.

https://www.resetera.com/threads/childless-millennials-are-ruining-disneyland.131439/post-23142401


This is unbelievable