Apple Cider

I think my schedule does not allow for making a full game so I am offering writing (I'm funny, creative, I really like strong metaphors) and artistic skills. I'm more of a cartoony sort of style than illustrator but I can paint assets as well.

It's hard to broach as a topic because you are told or generally conditioned to believe that this is part of your life, now. And when you bring it up, people talk over you about how it's supposed to be complimentary. This shit starts far earlier than a lot of men realize, despite some of them participating in it, generally.

Was this week's opening music a mix without vocals and has this been subtly different every week or am I legitimately going crazy

I'm one of those sensitive types who believes it's in our best interest to try and be supportive of people who are being bullied, if we have the means to do so. Letting people tough it out when we can help them is kinda cruel. Yes, the world is a harsh place, but um, why do we let it end there when we can work to make people's lives better? Oh man, we are all going to die so we might as well let life be as hard as possible in the interrim. How nihilistic.

Why should anyone have to tough out being tormented day in and out?

Yeah, these sectors probably have a huge overlap in this way. The past few years have been a huge cultural clash online, and I saw some of it date back to the dickwolves moment as well.

I cannot deal with flatness. I moved to Wisconsin after living in the mountains of NY and it's fucking unreal.

Gamergate is less branching out, in my mind, as this shit has always been there and now just wants to adopt GG's organizational tactics because there's always going to be crybaby nerdlords who don't want diversity anywhere.

It only gets a touch frustrating, if I am to be honest, to have to explain what sexualization is when a lot of men seem to be panicking over it possibly implicating their own sexual interests in women in general. But then again, a lot of our sexual interests in people are informed by a really broken culture, so have fun with that, I know I have!

Is this what is happening when people say it's a "mute point"?

We really need a travel thread (do we have one?) because Bavette and Boeuf (Chicago) is booked solid for Saturday and I need a good downtown location near the river that has tasty dinner that I can go to. Preferably with meat and not TOO fancy but I was really looking forward to Bavette's fried chicken and steak frites.

Oh gosh, I haven't been paying close attention to this but I think I might use this as a way to do my first ever Twine game, perhaps, having never done anything with games or Twine at all.

Okay, my brain is fucking wracked right now, but WHY are you specifically mentioning this, IS THIS A REFERENCE TO SOMETHING

At Sean's LAN party, who duct taped themselves to the ceiling? (SANFRANDADLAN, 1000s of Dads packed into Moscone)

Going to take an amateur stab at this but I believe Twin Peaks was really one of the first long-form "prestige" shows that came into being, most TV shows were not an hour long at that time nor did they have dedicated multi-story arcs going on at the same time with overlapping character interactions. So in that way, it definitely set the stage for things in TV where one character's actions has unintended consequences on other character's storylines that are defined by chronological or geographical boundaries. (Sopranos = family, mobsters in NJ, Wire = small organized drug dealers in one section of Baltimore, etc.) Girl with the Dragon Tattoo is a stretch but you could make a case for twisting themes of sexual abuse and women's plights around organized masculine serial killing. Though that's not entirely new ground but I daresay that David Lynch is one of the few auteurs who have taken the time to give insight into the victim of said things. It's a weak parallel but interesting none the less.

If you really want to cover your bases with Real Human Women, the best way is just to be respectful of their agency and humanity. If you really want to interrogate "being ashamed of your sexual desires" then that's where the hetero-patriarchy comes into play - that women exist at all times for men's sexual advances or desires and not for themselves. It's okay to think someone is sexually attractive. It is not okay to think that that entitles you to anything including commentary, invading personal space, cat-calling, leering, etc. Trust me, I also find women sexually attractive but they are also human beings who deserve my respect and their privacy. However, when I talk about sexualization, it's usually how Women as a Group are portrayed in media and advertising, since that's a constructed set of messages.

I might have to actually back up and start a tumblr or something, but Tweet sized bites tend to work.

I am trying very hard not to sound mocking but you guys are really overthinking this - basically, don't treat a woman, fictional or not, like she's there for your sexual desires only. That means whatever - thinking that means you're obligated to her personal space, or time, or that your sexual desires are tantamount. However, this is a lot more related to things like consent and rape culture whereas I would say that sexualization still relates a lot more to images or media and that you're intended to see it that way, but being able to look at that and SEE it for what it is. http://www.themarysue.com/marvel-spider-woman-variant-butt/ Here's a good example. Basically in general, maybe don't treat women like that they are for sex or ogling in general, and that they are human beings with agency and feelings and privacy?

Shit on James' actor all you folks like, but I'd throw him one. Even Bobby looks good.

Yeah, sorry, I am doing a first listen of older episodes since I started listening when Danielle joined the show. I have no access to the secret episodes.

if a woman sexualizes herself, then of course, the entire culture that promotes it and requires it and centralizes it as the predominant narrative for women and their bodies would fall apart, of course, it would cease to have no problems whatsoever

I don't find it helpful, myself, as a person who critiques media, to talk about sexualization as it relates to a person choosing to be sexual as that falls into a way different category and that largely, sexualization as it stands to me, relates to the practice of portraying women in a sexualized manner for the purposes of the male gaze and objectification. It's almost like feminists don't all fucking agree on everything. A person choosing to look sexual FOR THEMSELVES in a picture, is vastly different than talking about how a woman in an advertisement is specifically portrayed in a sexualized manner. I find sexualization's general meaning to be a little too broad if we're looking to specifically talk about what instances of it are problematic. A good place where this thoroughly comes out is fucking breastfeeding: because a woman having her boobs out at all should be a neutral act but guess what we've hyper-sexualized over time, that's right, breasts!

No, because sexualization is specifically a term relating to how you present a person (or group of people) who are not you. In media. Think: movies, TV, advertising, games, books, etc. It's a specific method of styling, editing, contextualization that presents the woman for a very specific audience/interpretation. The way women are portrayed is often very different from how men are portrayed because they are not designed to be seen as anything other than sexual objects vs. full human beings with a full human experience. You dressing up sexy is you dressing up sexy. EXAMPLES: Women in advertising being shown with no faces/heads/being thrown some place Girl children being used in advertising posing in a manner that's very adult, with skimpy clothes The "butt/boobs" pose in comic books

No, it does not. It is specifically on the part of the viewer, not the person involved, and specifically relates to how women are portrayed (real-ly or fictionally) in media.

To sexualize someone (whether fictional or not) is a choice on the part of the viewer, not the person who actually should have control on that sexualization. It is adding sexual nuance without the permission of the person involved, or a fictional character who is your creation anyways, for the point of the audience.