Is this true, @christicarras? How do you know they're not real pronouns? Are other people supposed to be the judge of the authenticity of another person's identification? Does the @latimes get to decide which sources have fake pronoun preferences vs. which have real ones?
Looked at one way, this is trolling. Looked at another way, this is performance art designed to poke holes in the arbitrariness of our new social rules & how selectively their enforcers apply them.
I direct you all toward this. Those who champion a sense that identity ought to be thoroughly parsed, bespoke, never assumed, are often extremely comfortable turning around and...assuming they know someone's status as white or cisgender. Why?
Noting that @christicarras disputes @VitoGesualdi's account elsewhere on this thread (adding here for transparency & since I was not privy to convo between them), saying she did not say what Gesualdi tweeted. Happy to hear his account, but offering that info here for accuracy.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Yes, a small minority of people who get canceled have already cultivated a loyal audience for themselves & can easily survive it (via Substack, Patreon). For every one of them, I guarantee you there are 50 others who are chronically miserable, suicidal, unhirable, abandoned.
If I worked for a non-Reason publication & got canceled, there's no chance I have enough readers/followers to be able to successfully leverage that. I'd surely lose some of my most liberal friends. Pretty sure I'd just have husband, family, & an unpaid writing hobby.
You have to be *really* big, and really late in your career, with a good network, to be able to get through a cancellation. For a lot of people––especially those in more risk-averse industries where you have to pay dues––it'd be a disaster to try to get hired post-cancellation.
But the Associated Press said the protesters were peaceful! Maybe "peaceful protesters" means something different to major media orgs nowadays than, you know, actually peaceful.
AP has since corrected the caption, but you have to wonder: How do mistakes as significant as these get made in the first place? What are they smoking? And how many times has this caption or this description already been uncritically recited?
If I were to believe major news outlets' telling of the incident, it'd be:
-a 100% peaceful protest w perhaps hundreds of Netflix employees participating
-organizer has no racist language in her past
-counterprotesters were aggressive, yelling profanities
This guy? He has a history of spinning yarns, making big deals out of things that aren't, looking for attention & fame, being rewarded for that behavior. An enlightening read about Frederick Joseph from Sept. '20: vice.com/en/article/m7j…
Sarley could very well have said terrible things to him before the filmed portion (or have a past of saying racist things, engaging in escalatory behavior). We just don't know! What we do know is that Joseph isn't a particularly credible narrator; proceed w caution.
Public health experts (& the media who boost them) are, in many cases, living in a delusional fantasy land. People should live a perma-reduced life? OK, what about single people––should they go out and date? What about people who make a living working at crowded bars?
What about celebrations? Those involve us congregating together! What about when winter in NYC comes––avoiding indoor dining will be a lot harder then. What about people who get joy from going out to fine restaurants, or to packed bars on game day to watch their team?
These things seem trivial & surely there's a point of contagiousness at which people would alter behavior. But it's not at all useful for pub health experts to say "live a life that bears little resemblance to the one you had before for at least 1.5 years, but maybe many more!"
Life will never be risk-free. A vaccinated 40-year-old's odds of dying, if they contract COVID, is astonishingly low. When people get hysterical about this, it's important to be empathetic, but also to say: Your fears are unwarranted & you should speak w your therapist.
She teaches high school; so few teens 19 & under have died since start of the pandemic––59 total in the state of TX right now. Each one of those deaths is heartbreaking, but, again, the risk of ppl in this age group dying from COVID is extraordinarily low.
IDK, maybe I'm wired differently, but I used to get anxious on planes (& motion sick). First I tried happy drugs to solve this (thanks doc); then I tried a hefty dose of plane crash stats & reading about turbulence & grasping just how rare plane-related deaths are. It cured me!
I'm becoming increasingly annoyed by the "masks are no real imposition" crowd. Yeah, they're a relatively easy & low-cost protective measure, but they take something significant––but hard to measure––away from human interaction. We can't see other people's reactions, we can't
hear their words as well, small talk & the types of little interactions that build trust & friendliness have been largely eradicated. For children, still developing their social skills/ability to read nonverbal cues, this is so much worse.
It's a lonelier world we inhabit now, and I don't think people are wrong to mourn or reject that, especially when we have better tools in our arsenal (vaccines!) to fight COVID spread, and when there seems to be no exit plan for masking (esp things like planes, public transit).