speaking of small owls... or not.
Sep. 5th, 2006 08:46 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
reenkaA) Man oh man, I love Harlan Ellison <333333333 Can we please save our offense for the people who are actually lamebrained assholes instead of brilliant (if immature/obnoxious/perverted) old men? No? :/ Ahhh, that one's never going to go over well with some people, I know.... Still. I mean, a lapse of proper behavior in public isn't the same thing as being a bad person... god, I really wish I could stop arguing this point :/ :/ (Can you tell why I started out being a Draco Malfoy fan?? No? *snorts* I wonder if the people who become/are Draco fans these days don't think 'obnoxious asshole' is a really good description of him... sometimes I wonder.) But yeah, Harlan is SO the Draco Malfoy of the professional fantasy writers biz :> I bet Draco would grope Hermione's breast if the occasion arose and be like, 'well, she can take it', ahahaha, oh, they're brothers in lamitude <3333
EDIT - Disclaimer: I'm only talking about the personal, psychological ramifications & issues, not trying to imply anything about 'proper' social response or standards.
Well, the kerfuffle's probably 'cause most people value the behavior itself over motivation/subtleties of context... but it's gotten to the point where my mom tells me 'I think you're a good person' and I said, 'why?' So she says it's because I'm honest (and I laughed) and then she clarified 'honest about the things that matter', and I raised an eyebrow. Finally, she said 'you've got a sense of honor-- modified for you', ahaha & that I'm not a mean person. So I was like 'are mean people bad?' and she said yes. This exchange is so funny to me 'cause I had a 'MEAN PEOPLE SUCK' sticker I was very proud of when I was 20 or something; I still think mean people suck, but I also think that since more than half the world's population doesn't know 'mean/truly cruel' from 'harmlessly obnoxious' or even 'impolite'(!!!), I'll just go around defending mean people.... *sigh*
I should really shut up about this topic; I realize how repetitive I am :/ It just really HURTS MY BRAIN that people don't get that impolite/obnoxious != mean evil bastard. This is not advanced ethics, is it? :O
...Although I think the question of 'can a mean person still be a Good person?' is an interesting one. Cruelty/sadism is one of the true... uh... negative qualities that exist, and perhaps the only truly bad quality as far as I'm concerned (though extreme self-centeredness and desire to control/subjugate others tie in), but. I think too many people think verbal obnoxiousness is the same thing (ethically) as the actual biggie (which is wanton cruelty itself). Granted, it's a sign of insensitivity, but there can be a range there, I hope :/
If people are being funny, even if they're not funny at all, by definition they're not in the same ballpark as someone who's just cruel. Secondly, true cruelty depends on knowing who you're being cruel to and how they'll react; a truly cruel person picks on someone they know is vulnerable and sensitive (or submissive/can't fight back/born victim). It's merely an obnoxious/rude/wanky person who picks on someone they consider either tough or an equal, or someone who's not there and will never hear of it. There's also a third type of meanie who picks on people they truly think are mean/bad/wrong (but not 'stupid' or 'ugly', because there's no possible even skewed moral justification there)-- I'd say they're just badass or 'tough', like a vigilante/judge stereotype. (Ahh, Gryffindors, ahahahahah...ha.) Anyway, these three types are seriously different in terms of ethics and the best way to deal with them, I think.
For instance: people have told me that I seem v. sensitive to them & they think of themselves as mean enough (but in control enough) that they -could- say/do things to really hurt me but they don't 'cause we're friends. I'm sorry, but these people don't know me well enough~:) I don't think you can just hurt someone like that if they haven't got the mentality of a victim (ie, caring what people think, unaware of their flaws/issues, unself-confident about their strength or ability to fight back or succeed). I'm not 'out there' as being a toughass, and in fact I'm pretty (sometimes extremely) sensitive about what people say to me, but... I'm also extremely self-aware. There's literally nothing you can do/say to me about myself that 1) I'm unaware of; 2) I don't have faith I can work through eventually, given this exchange doesn't involve violence (well, violence would take a lot longer to deal with, since I'm least confident physically). So just as there are predators, there are victims-- one sort of allows/forms the existence of the other; therefore, not being a victim, it would be very difficult for a predator to gain mental access to me no matter how 'mean' or 'bad' he/she was.
Anyway, people who're just obnoxious and like to mouth off or do jackass-type things for a laugh aren't predators, pure & simple. They're more like hyenas, I guess-- well, there's a range from seagull or crow-type scavengers to hyenas, maybe :D There's a huge difference in nature between a crow and a hawk, say-- though human beings who have power & like to use it are often a lot more mentally unbalanced than hawks. I mean, hawks are a natural part of the ecosystem in which they exist in the same way mice are-- but human beings who have those sorts of dominant/cruel natures tend not to know their place. (Btw, if I had to be a bird of some kind, I'm probably a small owl-- I mean, I could always go for fresh meat, but mostly I don't make a big fuss and go with nice easy insects.) Um. Okay, that was a tangent -.-
~~
B) Man, it is beyond rare these days that I come across something that makes me really feel like an HP fan (in terms of fic or art or whatever)... but the funny thing is, I really am, actually. The last time I felt it before recently was when I saw Platform 9¾ (or the stretch of wall at King's Cross that has part of a trolley attached, whichever). Man, that was ace. Yesterday, I was sort of happy reading JKR's old post-HBP interview (which my deluded brain found slashily inspiring), and then![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
furiosity's 'The Revenant' had an adorable Draco. I wish this sort of 'ooooh, DRACO IS SO CUTE' thing happened to me more often... I remember when I read hackthis & Silvia & had that squeeing gurgle of adoration every time. (Ahahaha, I was so lame I used to read angsty obscure stuff like Jay's 'Disarm' & squee too. Well, okay, I used to squee at everything. :/ What. :/ Um.)
Aaaaanyway, I had a point and here it is: I was looking at the Swedish HP book covers at The Leaky today, and ooooh! *commence sparkly-eyed cooing* I love the OoTP one, but what I REALLY love is the HBP one <3333333333 I AM SO FULL OF TEH HBP!HARRY LOFF <3333333 That Harry is my Harry, wah <3. I wanna cuddle-wuddle him and call him Geooorge... um. So yeah. HBP! LOVE! :> Man, I really wish they sold these as posters... *weepz*
C) I've been on a kick for m/m/f (uh, pr0n) past few days, and woefully I don't like either Hermione/Harry/Draco nor (really) Harry/Ron/Hermione (and things like Sirius/James/Lily or Sirius/Remus/Tonks are actually a squick), so in terms of HP, I'm totally stuck. I sort of want to request Harry/Draco/Ginny on one of those request challenge comms, but I'm pretty sure no one would bother writing it really in character (... if that can even be done, which it probably can't without an epic, and even I don't want to read 300p for porn).
Still, I'm vaguely inspired to write lots of 'normal' boysmex from seeing a bunch of nekkid boy pics ♥. The thing I really like is how many are smiling or being cute & playful. Most pics with girls have this 'artificially slutty' quality to the playfulness... I dunno. Like, the boys are a lot more unself-conscious & 'natural' than most girls of the same age-range I've seen, which is awesome <3. So I had this mental process where 'playful gay boys' naturally progressed to 'playful bi boys', just to up the shameless slut factor, ahahah (plus my Harry remains mostly straight this way) :D
Also, I really like this article saying it makes more sense to separate romantic & sexual bisexuality rather than just saying 'if it's not romantic, it's not bisexual' the way people do. I also like the idea that 80% of guys are bisexual but heteroromantic & homoplatonic, hahaha. It seems to bear out what I've observed, and leaves room for slash-- I mean, they could have tons of very deeply platonic sex, I don't mind!! :D
D) Sometime asked me why I'm so verbose recently. I'm like, "..... GOOD QUESTION". -.-;;
EDIT - Disclaimer: I'm only talking about the personal, psychological ramifications & issues, not trying to imply anything about 'proper' social response or standards.
Well, the kerfuffle's probably 'cause most people value the behavior itself over motivation/subtleties of context... but it's gotten to the point where my mom tells me 'I think you're a good person' and I said, 'why?' So she says it's because I'm honest (and I laughed) and then she clarified 'honest about the things that matter', and I raised an eyebrow. Finally, she said 'you've got a sense of honor-- modified for you', ahaha & that I'm not a mean person. So I was like 'are mean people bad?' and she said yes. This exchange is so funny to me 'cause I had a 'MEAN PEOPLE SUCK' sticker I was very proud of when I was 20 or something; I still think mean people suck, but I also think that since more than half the world's population doesn't know 'mean/truly cruel' from 'harmlessly obnoxious' or even 'impolite'(!!!), I'll just go around defending mean people.... *sigh*
I should really shut up about this topic; I realize how repetitive I am :/ It just really HURTS MY BRAIN that people don't get that impolite/obnoxious != mean evil bastard. This is not advanced ethics, is it? :O
...Although I think the question of 'can a mean person still be a Good person?' is an interesting one. Cruelty/sadism is one of the true... uh... negative qualities that exist, and perhaps the only truly bad quality as far as I'm concerned (though extreme self-centeredness and desire to control/subjugate others tie in), but. I think too many people think verbal obnoxiousness is the same thing (ethically) as the actual biggie (which is wanton cruelty itself). Granted, it's a sign of insensitivity, but there can be a range there, I hope :/
If people are being funny, even if they're not funny at all, by definition they're not in the same ballpark as someone who's just cruel. Secondly, true cruelty depends on knowing who you're being cruel to and how they'll react; a truly cruel person picks on someone they know is vulnerable and sensitive (or submissive/can't fight back/born victim). It's merely an obnoxious/rude/wanky person who picks on someone they consider either tough or an equal, or someone who's not there and will never hear of it. There's also a third type of meanie who picks on people they truly think are mean/bad/wrong (but not 'stupid' or 'ugly', because there's no possible even skewed moral justification there)-- I'd say they're just badass or 'tough', like a vigilante/judge stereotype. (Ahh, Gryffindors, ahahahahah...ha.) Anyway, these three types are seriously different in terms of ethics and the best way to deal with them, I think.
For instance: people have told me that I seem v. sensitive to them & they think of themselves as mean enough (but in control enough) that they -could- say/do things to really hurt me but they don't 'cause we're friends. I'm sorry, but these people don't know me well enough~:) I don't think you can just hurt someone like that if they haven't got the mentality of a victim (ie, caring what people think, unaware of their flaws/issues, unself-confident about their strength or ability to fight back or succeed). I'm not 'out there' as being a toughass, and in fact I'm pretty (sometimes extremely) sensitive about what people say to me, but... I'm also extremely self-aware. There's literally nothing you can do/say to me about myself that 1) I'm unaware of; 2) I don't have faith I can work through eventually, given this exchange doesn't involve violence (well, violence would take a lot longer to deal with, since I'm least confident physically). So just as there are predators, there are victims-- one sort of allows/forms the existence of the other; therefore, not being a victim, it would be very difficult for a predator to gain mental access to me no matter how 'mean' or 'bad' he/she was.
Anyway, people who're just obnoxious and like to mouth off or do jackass-type things for a laugh aren't predators, pure & simple. They're more like hyenas, I guess-- well, there's a range from seagull or crow-type scavengers to hyenas, maybe :D There's a huge difference in nature between a crow and a hawk, say-- though human beings who have power & like to use it are often a lot more mentally unbalanced than hawks. I mean, hawks are a natural part of the ecosystem in which they exist in the same way mice are-- but human beings who have those sorts of dominant/cruel natures tend not to know their place. (Btw, if I had to be a bird of some kind, I'm probably a small owl-- I mean, I could always go for fresh meat, but mostly I don't make a big fuss and go with nice easy insects.) Um. Okay, that was a tangent -.-
~~
B) Man, it is beyond rare these days that I come across something that makes me really feel like an HP fan (in terms of fic or art or whatever)... but the funny thing is, I really am, actually. The last time I felt it before recently was when I saw Platform 9¾ (or the stretch of wall at King's Cross that has part of a trolley attached, whichever). Man, that was ace. Yesterday, I was sort of happy reading JKR's old post-HBP interview (which my deluded brain found slashily inspiring), and then
furiosity's 'The Revenant' had an adorable Draco. I wish this sort of 'ooooh, DRACO IS SO CUTE' thing happened to me more often... I remember when I read hackthis & Silvia & had that squeeing gurgle of adoration every time. (Ahahaha, I was so lame I used to read angsty obscure stuff like Jay's 'Disarm' & squee too. Well, okay, I used to squee at everything. :/ What. :/ Um.)Aaaaanyway, I had a point and here it is: I was looking at the Swedish HP book covers at The Leaky today, and ooooh! *commence sparkly-eyed cooing* I love the OoTP one, but what I REALLY love is the HBP one <3333333333 I AM SO FULL OF TEH HBP!HARRY LOFF <3333333 That Harry is my Harry, wah <3. I wanna cuddle-wuddle him and call him Geooorge... um. So yeah. HBP! LOVE! :> Man, I really wish they sold these as posters... *weepz*
C) I've been on a kick for m/m/f (uh, pr0n) past few days, and woefully I don't like either Hermione/Harry/Draco nor (really) Harry/Ron/Hermione (and things like Sirius/James/Lily or Sirius/Remus/Tonks are actually a squick), so in terms of HP, I'm totally stuck. I sort of want to request Harry/Draco/Ginny on one of those request challenge comms, but I'm pretty sure no one would bother writing it really in character (... if that can even be done, which it probably can't without an epic, and even I don't want to read 300p for porn).
Still, I'm vaguely inspired to write lots of 'normal' boysmex from seeing a bunch of nekkid boy pics ♥. The thing I really like is how many are smiling or being cute & playful. Most pics with girls have this 'artificially slutty' quality to the playfulness... I dunno. Like, the boys are a lot more unself-conscious & 'natural' than most girls of the same age-range I've seen, which is awesome <3. So I had this mental process where 'playful gay boys' naturally progressed to 'playful bi boys', just to up the shameless slut factor, ahahah (plus my Harry remains mostly straight this way) :D
Also, I really like this article saying it makes more sense to separate romantic & sexual bisexuality rather than just saying 'if it's not romantic, it's not bisexual' the way people do. I also like the idea that 80% of guys are bisexual but heteroromantic & homoplatonic, hahaha. It seems to bear out what I've observed, and leaves room for slash-- I mean, they could have tons of very deeply platonic sex, I don't mind!! :D
D) Sometime asked me why I'm so verbose recently. I'm like, "..... GOOD QUESTION". -.-;;
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Re: that's a tough one
Date: 2006-09-13 04:46 pm (UTC)HOLY CRAP I KNOW SOME FANS OF HARRY WHITEWASH HIM BUT THAT'S JUST HILARIOUS.
Also: a) and b) have nothing to do with psychology and sex. and c)... like, I don't like the fanon where Draco is this disgusting little grovelling worm, but where do they get him having such a strong will? (Everyone is fandom is so polarizing and unsubtle.)
And now I'm reminded that the majority of people seems to think bottoming is a form of weakness. Like they were animals and the beta was just admitting the alpha is too mighty for him. =.=
Re: that's a tough one
Date: 2006-09-13 04:54 pm (UTC)...yeah, basically I don't know why I bother with people who'd hit a certain level of 'unable to hold an intelligent conversation', but THEY TALK TO ME FIRST! :/ The thing she had in common with the OEL manga person (http://adora-spintriae.livejournal.com/253625.html?thread=1640633#t1640633) from this weekend is this apparently total inability to actually -listen- to what I said. :/
fixed typos
Date: 2006-09-13 05:09 pm (UTC)Anyway after some time spent observing Sasunaru shippers (I swear, that's ALL they talk about, who tops that is) I decided you can't really make any conclusive argument one way or the other from YA canons. I think people will always project their own sexual experiences onto the characters and there's a lot of leeway because they aren't so sexually defined (if at all). This is how you get arguments like "Draco tops because he's popular" from sexually inexperienced or just not very emotionally intelligent people. Actually now I am contradicting myself with saying their arguments are weaker but I guess I meant that the debate is even harder than "DRACO LOWERED IS WAND BECAUSE OF HIS COSCIENCE Y/N" and people twist the canon around with that as well, projecting all sort of made-up facts/stereotypes on the scene.
I know I am obsessive. However, I understand why you're so angry at bad logic. Btw, I had a break-through re=moral readings of characters too and I understand your hatred now; I don't hate moral readings per se but I hate people who assume the only way to relate to a character is by JUDGING THEM. So you're irrational if you like Jaime more than Catelyn.
Re: fixed typos
Date: 2006-09-13 05:17 pm (UTC)YESSSSSSSS!! :D :D :D :D! *does the little dance of being understood* :> People constantly assume I judge when I don't judge and it DRIVES ME UP THE FUCKING WALL :O!
Also: "not very emotionally intelligent" sums it up nicely :>
Re: fixed typos
Date: 2006-09-13 05:31 pm (UTC)Also there's a difference between JUDGING A CHARACTER AND MAKE A DISPASSIONED, OBJECTIVE evaluation of their morals.
ALSO THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SUCH EVALUATION AND LIKING A CHARACTER!!! wtf some people seem to think you like a character because you analyzed the text and identified him/her as the nice one.
I actually had a post written about this for the asoiaf boards but then the idea of jumping in the wank turned me off. wanna read?
Re: fixed typos
Date: 2006-09-13 05:44 pm (UTC)Mostly it's people who think you have to judge (one way or the other) if you read-- it's that projection that's everywhere that bothers me/turns me off many moral readings. If I say something, people say 'but how does this apply to judgment', and that's if they ask and not assume. They just assume the judgment has to constantly determine how you feel about something but also how you think. In the circle of moral reading, moral reading is THE reading, it seems like. I dunno.
I can rationally do a moral reading if I felt like it, I just generally don't, especially in books where I don't like the moral structure enough to delve into it too much -.-;;; I like JRRT's moral structure, but even there not enough to think too long/hard in those terms-- it's much more pleasant than with JKR, though I still like Harry even if the context of the world/people's reactions to him/the social structure is meh. Well, full of caricatures & questionable fairness. I dunno, it hurts my head.
The point is, I get really annoyed when all of this dislike gets mixed with disapprove and then gets projected onto -me-. ^^;;;
Re: fixed typos
Date: 2006-09-13 06:09 pm (UTC)I want to say I adore every word you just typed ;_;
Re: fixed typos
Date: 2006-09-13 06:13 pm (UTC)Re: that's a tough one
Date: 2006-09-13 05:24 pm (UTC)Re: that's a tough one
Date: 2006-09-13 05:35 pm (UTC)You know once I was ranting in my head about Harry and I totally called him "that boring self-righteous little bastard". Heh.
Re: that's a tough one
Date: 2006-09-13 05:37 pm (UTC)People really are delusional. Most people, I mean, not just H/Hr fans :))
Re: that's a tough one
Date: 2006-09-13 05:50 pm (UTC)I think fandom adds to the delusional instinct with the creation of fanon. Basically without all those numbers behind you you wouldn't really be so confident about your delusional ideas that Jon is privileged. I mean, I see how one would dislike Jon and then try to rationalize it by twisting him into a despicable type; but it's much more difficult to argue back when there's the supporting mass behind them basically turning the idea from "debatable" to "obvious".
Other bad logic/delusional examples:
A common coping mechanism for [fact in canon the reader doesn't like] is throwing out a random, completely unrelated theory that negates the [fact in canon the reader doesn't like] and then pretend the burden is on the other person to prove it wrong.
This relates to the Stubborn Skepticism where people end up saying you can doubt everything in a text because it's all perspective anyway or some other half-arsed excuse for why they're saying you can't trust the author on anything basically. So what are we discussing?
Re: that's a tough one
Date: 2006-09-13 05:56 pm (UTC)A common coping mechanism for [fact in canon the reader doesn't like] is throwing out a random, completely unrelated theory that negates the [fact in canon the reader doesn't like] and then pretend the burden is on the other person to prove it wrong.
yeah, like, f threw all these factoids at her (and I did too) & she just countered with interpretations & conjectures as if that was as good as facts. I'm like, WHAT KIND OF THINKING IS THAT? And I'm not a logical person!! NOT AT ALL! How come I realize what bullshit is & they don't???!