First
Frank
joined 4 years ago
My ideal type is one of those eu approved authentic micro-region things, but I like the knock-off from wisconsin.
How are they planning to beat em again when they're not willing to fire a shot and the cccp isn't around to do 80%+ of the ~~dying~~ voting?
The media was talking about it right up until the start of the war, or at least right up to 2014. Can't remember which. There's some memes out there showing the abrupt shift from the same papers.
It's contextual.
Chinese, afaik, was simplified because the thousands and thousands of ideograms were far too much and too unwieldy for many people and made both writing and printing difficult.
English would be extremely difficult to simplify. For one, it's already a more or less phonetic alphabet language. You mostly don't need to know how to spell something as long as you can stick the right phonemes together. People might make fun of you but they'll usually figure out what you're trying to say.
For two, English has more exceptions than rules. As an unholy bastard stapled together from a dozen different languages the "rules" of English are full of contradictions, bits of grammar from other languages, deliberate choices made by the speaker, and deliberate subversion and breaking of rules for effect. I'm told English is a nightmare to learn because the rules are so bizarre and inconsistent. Trying to create any kind of consistent or coherent system out of it would be a fool's errand, you'd be much better off just trying to get everyone to speak another language or build a conglang.
I am once again calling for death to the academie francaise.
Second Life, Ultima Online, VRchat, countless others. In UO people used to just hang out near the banks and talk to each other for hours as people came and went to deposit items or retrieve things. It was a very social experience, people would chill with their friends, roleplay, talk about life. All they really needed was cool clothes, ridable llamas, a neat environment, and an excuse.
Get a second opinion. They shouldn't be giving you a Bipolar I diagnosis without evidence of at least one full-bore manic episode. Bipolar II is harder to diagnose and certainly shouldn't be diagnosed casually.
For me, hypomania has the following symptoms
-
i have too much energy. I need to be in motion, walking around, pacing, playing with things. This goes beyond adhd distraction or stimming. There's a strong nervous energy and a compulsion to stay on the move.
-
pressured speech. I want to talk, constantly, about whatever is on my mind. It's more than just interest in a topic or excitement. I feel a strong pressure to just keep talking and talking and get agitated if i try to hold it back. Holding back speech requires conscious effort. My excitement and constant flow of speech is usually noticeable to friends and family.
-
hypersexuality - i'm thinking about sex constantly in a way that isn't normal. I have to consciously remind myself not to txt all my friends and invite them in to bed. I think i'm the sexiest person alive. I'm aware that this is abnormal and it requires continual awareness and effort to keep under control. When i'm experiencing hypersexuality i'll go to bed with almost anyone who asks nicely.
-
related to that, but not directly connected, i'll flirt with everyone. I really enjoy wordplay and clever innuendo and the increased confidence and perceived competence, combined with the broad increased interest in sex and need to speak, brings this out strongly. I use a lot of overwrought speach in general during hypomanic periods.
-
lack of perceived need for sleep. I sleep less and perceive myself to be more awake and alert than I am. This often gives way to anxiety as the effects of sleep deprivation catch up. I'm often up all night and well in to the morning
-
i feel like the coolest, smartest person in the room. It's never gone as far as grandiosity or delusion, but i feel very cool, smart, handsome, and capable in a way that is not normal confidence in my abilities or appearance.
-
lack of patience and low frustration tolerance. I have adhd so this is a thing normally. Hypomania takes it up several notches. People speak too slowly, loading screens in games are too slow, people move too slowly on the sidewalks. Anything that's not moving at my too-fast pace feels frustrating.
-
impulsive spending. I buy stuff i don't need, often just things I think are cool or that strike my interest in passing. I buy restaurant food more often. I buy large amounts of groceries thinking i'll make new dishes, or because I misjudged how much I needed or was appropriate.
-
emotional volatility - i'm prone to getting very upset and either crying or writing angry diatribes. I do not become violent, to myself or others, i just feel negative emotions very strongly. It can go the other way, too. Movies and books become totally overwhelming because any emotional response i feel to them is so strong. I write sappy love poetry to my partners.
-
an awareness that this is all wrong. It took years to figure out what was happening, but once I understood what a hypomanic episode was I was able to identify episodes that I'd had going back to childhood, and to identify them when they happened. I can tell when my mood is elevated, when the world has too many colors and i'm talking too fast, and i can mostly tell when that trips over to proper hypomania.
My friends can also tell, and will let me know if they think something is off or my mood is too elevated.
Bipolar is different for everyone, and Bipolar I is very different from Bipolar II. But there are a lot of common and typical symptoms most people share.
aripiprazole can be diagnosed to help with bipolar I depression, but the first-line treatment remains lithium. I'm not a medical professional, just a guy with Bipolar II, but immediately giving you abilify without trying you on lithium first does not sound like the usual course of treatment.
Bipolar, adhd, and autism have a huge amount of overlap in the symptoms they present. But a Bipolar I diagnosis, as far as I know, requires at least one confirmed manic episode, while Bipolar II requires pretty solid evidence of hypomania.
A lot of people diagnosed with bipolar struggle with accepting the diagnosis, that's a real thing. But the diagnosis is weighed heavily on having had identifiable manic or hypomanic episodes. If you can't define specific episodes of mania or hypomania i'd suggest getting a second opinion. Mania is almost always very obvious, it's a very extreme state. Hypomania is less drastic, as people usually aren't delusional or psychotic and have more awareness and control, but it's still quite different from normal behavior.
Hypomanic is Bipolar II, which presents differently from Bipolar I.
Three Body Problem is a very silly story.
63
NOTE The guys I did not respond to; https://libreddit.kavin.rocks/r/fallacy/comments/mq7a6s/about_the_theremian_argument/
Bro is saying "Uhh, The witcher is either racist because it depicts racism, or it's not racist because there were no black people in fantasy poland" which is just the most 
example of how chuds have no idea what is actually being critiqued when people talk about racism and represenation in media. rant follows;
The Witcher isn't racist because the author uses the story to explore racism as a system of violence and a hierarchy of power. Geralt, himself a minority subject to bigotry and violence from a hateful majority, stands in for the player as he encounters numerous people; Squirrels, dwarves, various "monsters" who are subject to the systemic violence of a fearful and ignorant majority.
Geralt himself has strong ideals that demonstrate his awareness of racism as a concept and his refusal of it; He won't hunt anyone who is intelligent without a good reason. A fat purse and fearful peasants aren't sufficient for him to turn his sword against a person whose only crime is being different.
The Witcher provides an example of a story where the author does not hide behind the Thermian Argument.
Likewise, the Elder Scrolls has always critically engaged with racism and imperialism. It's never hidden behind "the lore" or "That's what the characters would do".
Dunmer culture was notorious xenophobic, insular, and contemptuous of other peoples. Even after the armistice some Dunmer continued to enslave Betmer, and the non-Dunmer residents of Morrowind were treated with contempt. Even Dunmer born outside of Morrowind were considered outsiders and not true Dunmer.
And the story critically engages with this. It openly questions where Hlalu's enthusiasm towards emancipation is based on any principles, or simply a desire to take advantage of integration in to the Septim Empire. The Redoran grudgingly go along with the Hlalu king, not out of any concern or compassion for enslaved people, but because they view their loyalty to the King as more important than adherence to custom, but only barely. Dres continue to raid for slaves an employ slave labor.
Meanwhile, the Twin Lamps organization is clandestinely fighting against the remaining slaver holdouts.
The story doesn't say "There's slavery because that's just how things are in the story". It creates a complex interplay of different factions with different beliefs and attitudes towards slavery. Some oppose slavery for utilitarian reasons, others out of principle. Slavery is officially illegal, but Dres slavery is ignored and no one is stupid enough to anger the Telvanni by interrupting their studies to tell them they have to free their slaves.
This continues in all subsequent entries. The Knights of the Nine is premised on the return of an genocidal Ayleidoon demigod seeking revenge for the crimes of the ancient Alysseian Empire. The story is very clear that Umaril the Unfeathered is a total monster, a murderous bastard. But at the same time, the player has to mantle Pelinel Whitestrake to defeat Umaril. And when you learn about Pelinel you find out that he was an equally monstrous genocidal maniac (and an unstoppable war-cyborg from the distant future but that's more of a /r/teslore thing). And, to further complicate things, extent history books in the game tell that while Umaril and Peninel represent absolutist genocidal extremes, the reality of the Nedic revolt against the Ayleids was much more complicated, with Ayelids and Nedes alike changing allegiances for both utilitarian and moral reasons. The conflict between the Ayleids and the Nedes is not presented as an inevitable clash of civilizations or a fascist race war, but rather a violent political struggle where individual people and factions chose their sides for political and moral reasons rather than race essentialism.
Moving on to Skyrim, the story depicts the brutal aftermath of the Red Year. Many Dunmer are forced in to exile in Skyrim by the cataclysmic destruction of Vvardenfell. They find shelter with their historic racial enemies, the Nords. And not just any Nords, but with Ulfric's Nord Supremacist Stormcloaks. The Stormcloaks are willing to extend refuge to the Dunmer in their time of extreme need. But they're still racist; They hold great prejudice against the Dunmer and largely confine them to ghettos. Their position reveals the complexity of racism and humanity; They maintain their bigotry, but their specific system of racism does not extend to exterminating or enslaving an ethnic group they hate. The Dunmer are treated as second class citizens, but the Stormcloaks aren't Nazis or even Americans. They're a complex, real society, and their contradictory stance on the Dunmer reflects the often contradictory and complex nature of systems of racism in real life. The Stormcloaks aren't just racist because of the story says so, they offer an exploration of the complexities of racism, of the status of refugees, of ethnonationalist movements.
Likewise, we've got the Thalmor. The nearest direct real world equivalent of the Thamlor would be genocidal ethnonationalists if they also wanted to unmake reality and plunge everything and everyone back in to primordial chaos. The Thalmor represent an extremely powerful mythofascist nation that claims to be a unified Merish ethnostate. But TES doesn't just reduce this to a race war, nor does it indulge in race essentialism. The Thalmor in no way represent all Mer, or even all Altmer. Their claim to racial unity is bogus. They display open bigotry towards Mer they consider "lesser". They're opposed by Men and Mer of all types, demonstrating that ethnonationalism is always built on shallow myths that aren't reflective of actual people.
And all of this is placed in contrast with the Mede Empire. The Mede Empire is a failing quasi-imperial state. The sad remnent of the once might Septim Empire, the Mede Empire is struggling to maintain control and legitimacy in the face of a disastrous military and mythopoeic defeat by the Thalmor. The Empire engage in imperialism and colonialism, but it is also a multi-ethnic and egalitarian state that rejects both racism and slavery as counter to it's goals of a united Tamriel. nontheless, it uses war and military occupation to achieve it's goals. In telling this story TES engages with the contradictory beliefs and actions of real-world Western imperialism; The Stormcloaks are bigoted ethnonationalists, but their national struggle to be free of an imperialist state has merit. The imperialist state opposes bigotry and slavery, but uses violence to impose it's will on others. The Thalmor are an openly and brutallity ethnonationalist state that engages in both ruthless imperialism and bigotry, and has the secret goal of killing everyone in the world and then killing the world. Who are the good guys? Who are the bad guys? The Stormcloaks and Imperials are shown to be complex groups with justifiable goals and serious flaws. They're each contrasted with the Thalmor that represent an existential threat; The presence of the Thalmor motivates the Empire to invade Skyrim to retain control and prevent what is left of the Empire from fragmenting. The Stormcloaks desire for national liberation is justified in the face of Imperial occupation. The Thalmor are secretly manipulating the Stormcloaks in a plot to weaken the Empire.
None of this is shallowly justified by saying "that's just how the story is". The TES writers built a complex world of competing factions with competing goals. They created a war of brother against brother, of scheming nobility and shifting alliances, where two powerful factions are each fighting to achieve goals that cannot simply be dismissed as wrong or evil. The story does not give the player the luxury of picking a good guy and a bad guy. Whatever side of the conflict they choose to support there will be world shaking consequences where some will gain and others will suffer. And, further complicating matters, it seems that no matter what action the player takes or how the civil war in Skyrim ends, the greater scope villain of the Thalmor will be strengthened.
None of this is reductive "It's just this way because that's how the story is". All of these plotlines are structured not just to be consistent within the story, but also to investigate the nature of racism, power, violence, and empire. The Elder Scrolls is worthy of serious critique and consideration because it's stories are intended to give the player a space to explore, challenge, and justify their personal beliefs.
The storytellers openly invite the player to question and critique their story. They've created a space where important questions can be asked and wisdom can be nurtured. There's no need to say "That's just what happens in teh story" because they have consciously and deliberately refused the Thermian Argument. They're well aware that all stories are stories about ourselves, about humanity, about what we believe and why we believe it. They know that the story reflects the nature of the storyteller and the culture of which they are apart. They know that no one exists outside culture, and that no story exists alone, outside of history or culture and immune to critique.
That is why both The Witcher and TES are stories that engage with, discuss, and challenge racism.
I am once again calling for a Butlerian Jihad
view more: next ›
It's more of a 180 on rhetoric than action. Obummer was vicious to migrants, trying to win over the gop by displays of brutality. Or it was just Obama being Obama, i don't really have a good grasp of how self aware the man is or what his actual political goals ever were.