If any part of this site switches from talking in 1st person to 3rd, pay it no heed.
I love girls! I also Love CATS!. I need a creature. SOMEONE GIVE ME A CREATURE. I NEED A CREATURE
Hello, coherency, who's she? well today she's here a bit more. than usual.
I'm going to tell you 3 things. well a lot more than 3, but lets start with 3. you know the first one
everyone already knew it. the plot is incomprehensible, the cg is horid, the bits don't land, and uhh the whole christmas movie thing? yea it doesn't really land.
Christmas movie? oh shit i've spoiled it
I'm not sure who greenlit this one, horid idea, really stupid. There's not much more to say about this other than the fact that they tried to copy everything that was popular, and did it horribly. I hate christmas.
ok i'm exagerating, but, essentially, the idea of the brilliant inventor-ceo-engineer-technician-mechanic that's all over the public consciousness that led to the rise of guys like Elon Musk? yea that's iron man. Well, not all because we grew up seeing him on the big screen, but still, it's a lot of it. Funny enough, Elon Musk has a cameo in Iron Man 2. And, just like Stark in those films, he's implied to be the "Genius" behind his company, the exact line is something like "Those Merlin Engines of yours are really seomthing else". (this is referring to spaceX's rocket engines, which musk has literally nothing to do with the development and production of). Additionally, iron man 2 includes a part of the movie where Mr. Stark himself says the line "I've effectively privitized world peace", and gets a standing ovation, and then proceeds to continue being batshit insane via sci-fi lead poisening or something, and the only consequences of this? his sorta girlfriend sorta employee (yea don't ask) tells him to fuck off.
There's an intersting moment of humanization where he talks to a strawberry vender on the side of a california road, and bro is like, we belive in you Mr. Stark. Clearly at some point the script wanted to have some level of nuance to it but they got rid of it.
well, really, nothing, but, since you asked (or didn't, i don't care), There's a few issues with this. Firstly, Governments exist for certain reasons, those reasons are generally to infringe on the rights of creatures such as humans and/or the girls who live in my phone (shoutout to the ferretgirl), but they also exist to prevent corperations to infringe apon those rights even harder. Not only is a peice of big screen media that's worked its way into public consciousness (i hate that word) implying that governments are bad actually and we should let eccentric playboy billionare technocrats run the world instead, which, yea, bad take buddy, but, it gets worse here. Secondly: Mr Stark throws away the afformentioned strawberries. asshole, california roadside strawberries are the best. Third: we've now convinced people that ceos are smart people. mistake. Also, the way all the R
I'll leave you with one last thing. Many people have asked me how I can admire soviet urban desgin, while acknowlading that the USSR was, in general, a repressive state. I answer this question simply: I admire the teams of clerks and planners who spent all their days in the basement making people's lives better, whether it was just a job or a higher calling. Individualism is a curse on our society, the man in charge can (and will almost always be) a khrushchev, bezos, hitler, or musk, yet the people who work under them may be doing anything from building rocket engines, labelling packages, or planning apartment buildings, and they ought to be admired for that as a collective unit. Except for the people who worked under hitler. no admiration there. sorry buddy.
What is this? We don’t think that it is alcoholism. We don’t think that a drink’s associated emotions mean that. A real question is whether or not we have a problem. We’ve taken a step back and analyzed it. Father got worse, or at least. weirder. with alcohol. We don’t think we are. This is our 2nd drink this week. We keep close track. It helps keep us within a healthy zone (if that exists with literal poison). So if that’s not the case, than why are we calm? What does this mean?
What do we take from this image of the bottle in the dim light we have thought of. We know now. It’s about nighttime. Nighttime is melancholy. Melancholy isn’t bad. In fact, melancholy is calm. We think that for us it must be a positive emotion. Nighttime is a break from the hell of life. It’s concealment from the world. How does a drink relate to this? The feeling of alertness that my ADHD translates from a mix of alcohol and caffeine, a feeling that cannot come from one alone, but only from both (ADHD is wack). This is what allows my brain to work, to think, to become active. The shadow, and the light, the way our apartment is lit up late at night, everything seems so clear. Drinking alone is boring. But are we alone when we’re talking to our thoughts? We have long talked to ourselves, it helps keep us sane, we talk in our head, and sometimes out loud to ourself, my grandmother thinks it’s insane, but it’s a great way to go over your own ideas. Sometimes it helps to imagine different parts of myself talking to each other. How would they dress, how would they speak. What would be their genders? Is a part of me a boy? Could we ever feel comfortable expressing that? How does this all relate back to a bottle? The bottle both directly and indirectly is us. Directly, it’s the time we spend inside of our own head, once a week or so, and the way shadows behave at night. Indirectly, it’s the parts of us that we cannot find a way to express, hiding behind a smaller form of ourself.
I think the legacy of this era is going to be found by alien archelogists in like 3 million years after we either bring about the ai apocolypse or anihiliate ourselves with nukes and the biggest question on everyones mind will be: Why the fuck did they start using a word from an ostensibly children's (yea we're not going to talk abt the flamethrowers) TV show to describe robots.
Dear Liberals,
I'm not drinking this semester, yet,
I somehow am still crashing out.
Curious!
Update to random thoughts below
More twinks in dresses. Be the change you want to see (well not me i'm girlthing of some sort)
Random Thoughts Hours
If femme clothing is viewed as impractical, frivolous, weak, and may your head cut off French Revolution Style, and masc's clothing is an adaptation of the working class of the past, is it elitist to dress like a fag or is it revolutionary? Thanks for coming to my TED talk.
Ohhhh nooo we feel the need to talk about star trek again...
Being quick here, again, ain't no one reading this, we felt an interest to write about something we watched, so we did.
I've come to see the monolouge as the ideal form of character expression in film. it allows the character to directly face the audience and talk of something. In some shows the character may talk of their inner feelings, they may talk of morals, of ethics, etc. in Andor, Karis Nemik talks of the unnatural order of oppression;
The Imperial need for control is so desperate because it is so unnatural. Tyranny requires constant effort. It breaks, it leaks. Authority is brittle. Oppression is the mask of fear.
and he does so by directly facing the audience, figuratively. Or, a monolouge (yea shut up it's part of a dialouge but shut up Sisko's part isn't very neccecary to move it forward, dukat caries it on his own) may be used to create a hard irrefutable point about a character, as Gul Dukat says in Star Trek: Deep Space Nine S06E11 Waltz,
"Yes! Yes!! That's right, isn't it?! I knew it. I've always known it. I should've killed every last one of them! I should've turned their planet into a graveyard the likes of which the galaxy had never seen! I should've killed them all."
(one day we will talk about Nazis in media, nazis in star trek, Dukat, and why he's probobly the best written fictional 'Nazi' to ever be written). Regardless, thinking about the direction of modern star trek, I think I will leave us all (and by us we literally mean our own brain, this is 50% a journal) with the following from S07E16 Inter Arma Enim Silent Legas (translated in the episode as; "In times of war, the law falls silent"):
We needed somebody who wanted to play the game but who'd only go so far.
When the time came, you stood your ground. You did the right thing.
You reached out to an enemy. You told her the truth. You tried to stop a murder.
The Federation needs men like you Doctor. Men of conscience. Men of Principle.
Men who can sleep at night.
You're also the reason Section 31 exists.
Someone has to protect men like you from a universe that doesn't share your sense of right and wrong.
The last line of this stuck with me. "Someone has to protect men like you from a universe that doesn't share your sense of right and wrong". We keep using this justification for why we allow intellegence agencies, police officers, hell, even the state to exist. When will it be too much? When have we slipped down the slippery slope. The answer was the first time we used it. I would like someone to remind the writers of Modern Star Trek:tm: what this means, and the writers of most modern fiction of this as well.
So I know this is Alex's General Void to Shout Into that no one pays attention too, and not Alex's General Void to Shout Into About Star Trek™, but uhh we're talking about star trek again on here. Just a little bit.
Still unemployed, bored of Voyager, realising that Deep Space Nine is much better and we've only deluded ourselfs into thinking Voyager is good because compared to Modern Trek™, Spocks Brain is a good Episode (ok hot take we actually kinda like Spocks Brain). Anyways Alex would like to do a quick ramble about a certain episode of Deep Space Nine. Specifically, S03E10 - Fascination. It's easy to overlook this, the 3rd season is where DS9 really gets its footing, S01 definitely had a slow start. S02 had some good arcs, but still struggled when compared to the later seasons. It's easy to overlook Episode 10, sandwitched between the classic political Drama that we love of DS9 shown in S03E09 - Defiant, and a banger of a social commentary like S03E11 & S03E12 Past Tense Parts I & II, but I think it's equally as important as the racial and social commentary of Past Tense. Specifically, the episode follows a Star Trek Classic™ of 'Alien Shenanigans cause everyone to fall in love with eachother'. Odo admits to being in love with Kira, Jake gets over his legally questionable ex-girlfriend by confessing to Kira, Julian and Kira start making out, Obrien and Keiko have an argument. Berial starts hitting on Dax. Dax beats up Quark, Dax starts aggressively hitting on Sisko. You know. The classic.
WAIT Dax hitting on Sisko???? Didn't the writers purposefully avoid writing any romantic/sexual tension between the two because 'He knew her when she was a man'?. It's no secret that we (and we here means more than just Alex's Brain™, instead referring to fellow transgender Star Trek fans) have always claimed Jadzia Dax as one of our own, Alex would like to remind yall of the classic:
Kor Says Trans Rights!!!🏳️⚧️
So, our brain just figured this was well worth a quick ramble abt in the void; but the episode doesn't include Sisko being disgusted with her hitting on him, it doesn't include the sort of gaybashing subtext that one might've come to expect, and it most definitely doesn't treat her any different. The reason it's weird to Sisko is because her and Sisko are incredibly good friends, a friendship that has literally lasted across lifetimes, and because Dax is well known to almost never get into relationships. Anyways the end of the episode states that; Essentially everyone's (least) favourite character, Lwaxana Troi was busy being horny and her latent telepathic abilities just translated that to everyone who had even a latent subconscious attraction to anyone else. It makes Alex wish that DS9 had been writen maybe a few decades later, that the standards for Star Trek TV were still as high as they were back then, because they'd love to have O'Brien and Garek getting into a classic Yaoi Catfight over Bashir. Star Trek just wasn't ready for Yaoi in the 90s.
Goddamn Star Trek was good before it was all about how the Space CIA are good actually and how they are going are going to stop Space 9/11 from happening for the 70th fucking time and how Utopianism is supposedly inherently flawed and 'needs REAL MEN to defend them pussy ass liberals from threats they'd never be able to face on their own'. OUGH. You want a nuanced take on how a (deeply flawed, but well intentioned) utopia faces an impossible threat? Watch DS9.
P.S. "The Jadzia Dax Is Good Transgender Rep (even if she wasn't entirely meant to be it) But Adira Tal Isn't" rant is coming, Alex just doesn't want to rewatch Discovery, and doesn't have a paramount plus subscription. No it's not because Tal is non-binary, that's not why, before anyone acuses us of being "one of those people". Look at the pronouns on the top of this page. Thanks!
So I'm a well known (old)* star trek apologist. I'm a bit of a utopian dreamer, so it comes with the territory, the sort of "we must assume the best intentions for everyone regardless of their pasts" thing that trek (especially old trek) really loves to do. I've been (re)watching star trek voyager quite a bit recently, I'm currently lacking in a job, so you know. So basically here goes;
*The Exception to this rule is Star Trek: Lower Decks as I find it properly encompasses the utopian and moralist view (and inherent social justice themes compared to the ideals of it's time) that old trek aimed to preach, unlike DSC, SNW, or, god forbid PIC and S31. Also not a TOS apologist. it has issues. I know it does.
So, the last two episodes I've watched were titled Prey (S04E16) and Retrospect (S04E17), and these two have an interesting relationship to eachother. Prey follows Seven-of-Nine (a character that personally I don't like, and don't get me started on her outfits & Star Trek's "feminist" show, trust me i'll touch on that in a minute). Seven spends the entire show trying to convince her superior officer to to kill a creature that comes from a race that objectively just wants to eradicate all life except its own in the name of 'genetic purity'. The episode follows the classic trek utopian lesson of "yes but this one is injured and just wants to go home, we can't just kill it". The episode ends with Seven basically condemming the creature to death, and getting a moral lecture from Janeway. blah blah blah, etc. Now, why did I bring up an episode that I generally agreed with the themes of in a rant about complaining about another episode? Well, someone in the writing room decided that since Seven got away with being immoral last time that this time she needs to get "punished".
What you might ask, should follow up on an episode that leaves a bad taste in one's mouth but overall tells an important story/lesson? Restrospect (S04E17) asks: Why let's just have Seven be raped, but oh wait it's a false accusation based on her own false accusations and the guy who 'did it' got killed in the end. Not only does the order of episodes here matter a lot, it comes off as a way to punish Seven's character, and god knows how absolutely FUCKED that is, but the moral lesson here is what "Don't belive women when they accuse people of assulting them"?. Voyager always has a complicated place in my love of trek, since while DS9 was over here breaking actual barriers, (God knows I love Jadzia, I don't care that she likely wasn't written to be an anology to my own struggle, transgender trekkies across the world have claimed her.), Voyager was busy doing "hey look women can be captains too!". Is this an important thing? absolutely, but it feels vaugly regressive compared to DS9, and Voyager was less social-justice focussed anyways, instead opting to go for moral lessons every episode.
So, our supposedly "feminist" star trek has done the following with Seven's character in her FIRST half-season on the show:
Put her in a catsuit
Made Sexy Art of her as part of the promotional material
Regularly caused health issues to the actress due to costume issues (including, but not limited too, causing her to pass out, dehydration)
Oh and they wrote out a character that, despite her issues, I quite liked, so they could bring in "eye candy" to increase ratings (they'd tried to put the previous character in a catsuit halfway through the previous season, didn't work for the ratings aparently...)
Now this last part is purely conjecture, since I do not have any hard proof, but the actor who played Jadzia said this happened to her, partially due to Rick Berman so based on visual evidence and Rick Berman being involved in this show too, Seven's Actor appears to be wearing rather significant breast forms. So yea. There we go. "feminist" star trek. I've always had significant dislikes of VOY, although as a result of DSC, SNW, PIC, and S31 existing, we've definitely started to see VOY and TNG through rosy glasses that they don't all inherently deserve, this is just one example of it. Voyager always was rather "hey look we did progressiveism" but never actually wanted to try, I don't blame the writers, there's some good well intentioned stories in there, although Andrew Shepard Price and Mark Gaberman, maybe I do blame. Also Berman. It's always ok to blame Rick Berman.
Is it wrong for womenn to have Sex Appeal? Is it anti-feminist? no, absolutely not. But there is a certain Male-Gaze to Seven's portrayal across the show, and Restrospect portrays her as hysterical, confused, and ultimately at fault. It's insulting. it's disgusting. and it should NEVER have been broadcast.
So this page promises to be alex's place to shout into the void and document their devolving grip on reality, and the parallely devolving political landscape of the world. Ok. Here you go:(EDIT: yea I fell asleep while writing this post origionally)