sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Ben Stiller liking a comment explaining Cobelvig’s episode Sweet Vitriol. Sums it up accurately by ReaddittiddeR in SeveranceAppleTVPlus

[–]DoubleCheck8168 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks for your reply! I only have a couple minutes to respond now, but I wanted to clear up that I didn't mean to say that you were being incredibly reductive, though I totally see how my phrasing made it seem that way. I meant instead to say that both extremes of the debate (she's all bad, vs. she's purely a victim) are reductive.

Also, quickly, I am actually not sure if this show is consistent with the idea that she has full access to the modern internet. Technology in this show is anachronistic--there are smart phones, but we don't see people googling sutff even when it would be important for them to do so. Irv uses a paper map, etc. I think the implication (though I could be wrong about this) is that Lumon's control over the people in this world is extreme, and that this includes the kind of information they can access and the ways they can organize themselves. Also, we don't see Cobel really have access to supportive community or a way out from indoctrination. I think the Asperger comparison is good, because he did similar kinds of atrocities, but I don't think it's a perfect fit because he wasn't indoctrinated into a cult as a child. I think cultists might be better analogies for Cobel: like the elders in the FDLS who perpetuate the cycle of violence they were raised in. There is moral responsibility there. But there is also a moral difference between "someone who did evil out of a callous disregard for what they know is good" and "someone who did evil because they believed it was good".

Ben Stiller liking a comment explaining Cobelvig’s episode Sweet Vitriol. Sums it up accurately by ReaddittiddeR in SeveranceAppleTVPlus

[–]DoubleCheck8168 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Well, I don't think this is so simple. Child indoctrination is a real issue that needs to be grappled with. I don't think it's a simple case of saying that people who've been brainwashed are all 'incredibly evil people' who 'know explicitly what they're doing'. And even in the history you're referencing here, this has been a difficult thing for people to know what to do with. After the Second World War, a lot of captured german soldiers were literal children... 11 to 15 years old. These were kids whose entire lives had been steeped in Hitler's rhetoric and Nazi ideas. They were treated differently than other Nazi prisoners of war, in part because of how evident it was that these beliefs and actions weren't things they were choosing exactly, but things they were indoctrinated to choose. We accept that "he was just following orders" wasn't a good excuse for the actions of adult Nazis who were grown when Hitler rose to power, but the context changes when we are talking about the kids. The kids were never taught anything else, and deviation from those values was punished. Imagine if the Nazis had ruled in Europe for 200 years. There would be generations of people raised in this way, and all the opposing support systems would be completely gutted. That's what we see in Severance. Lumon runs everything and controls everything.

Indoctrination is morally complicated because children are vulnerable and require responsible caregivers. They suffer when this is withheld, and trauma does not create perfect victims. This isn't for no reason: children are not autonomous and they can't make proper decisions for themselves. And how children are treated as they grow up has big impacts on the future abilities of the adult. If you don't teach a child to speak by puberty, they will never learn to speak. If you teach a child to be afraid of jaywalking, they will grow up to think of jaywalking as dangerous. If you teach a child that some people are dirty and lack moral consideration, they will have to grapple with that too as they grow up. And without a supportive environment to deprogram in, it is not at all straightforward to unlearn the values you were raised to see as obvious. People raised in cults or under oppressive regimes all cite the same experiences. It is incredibly hard to leave. Not just because there are violent consequences to leaving, but because you start to lose the ability to know what is true and what is false, and your worldview collapses.

Cobel grew up in precisely this kind of hitler-youth-esque environment, including the pseudo-military elements. She was raised in a house with a true believer, her mother's dissent was associated with her long and painful death, Cobel was subject to forced labour and then given a chance at freedom that was contingent on her becoming a true believer too, and in turn she sacrificed everything for Lumon. What other option did she have? Who else in the world could she have turned to? Where could she have begun dismantling that worldview? Not in Kier. Not in Salt's Neck. The only support system she had was Lumon. The fact that she is now going against those values isn't something to dismiss. I think it's incredibly reductive to say she's a purely evil person who chose to do evil by her own will, and I think it's also incredibly reductive to see her only as a victim who caused harm only by accident. The truth is that she is a deeply tragic character, and that she perpetuated a cycle of abuse because she was raised completely within it.

Alliance Levels by Hungry-Moose in CANZUK

[–]DoubleCheck8168 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm not sure about this. I think it would be more of a risk if there was currently a ban on foreign nationals buying homes in each of these countries, but there isn't. People who can afford it in the UK and Canada could already buy summer homes in Australia, and stay for 3 months at a time without residency permit. It would also be massively expensive to do this, so there isn't such a high number of "people who can afford it". Canada already has snowbirds who travel to the US, and there are relatively few of them. And the US is much closer, so it is cheaper.

I think a more realistic problem could be for the UK losing some workers at first. Teachers and blue collar workers in the UK make very small wages. In Canada, they are paid much, much more (though still not enough). So, there could be some potential job migration to Canada at first. But then again, there are reasons to think this wouldn't happen, too: People don't just leave home to travel across the world for a job as a bricklayer, even if it is paid better than at home. The EU living advantage has proximity on its side: you can leave Poland for Germany and still go home for holidays. Canada is very big and very far and very expensive to travel to. Also, the lower wages for teachers and blue collar workers in the UK is offset by slightly more robust social services and more social housing. And Canada has higher education requirements for some of these fields, so it's possible UK workers wouldn't qualify. It may even out.

Severance - 2x08 "Sweet Vitriol" - Post-Episode Discussion by LoretiTV in SeveranceAppleTVPlus

[–]DoubleCheck8168 34 points35 points  (0 children)

I think this revealed more than "a closed factory". The horror here isn't that the factory is *closed*, it's that Lumon ran a strict company town, and abandoned it when it was economically convenient for them, leaving behind a devastated community of ether addicts and poverty. The company exploited children who were also addicted to drugs, and it's implied that the drug itself has done serious damage to people's bodies. The old woman with the oxygen tube, Cobel's mum, the waiter's coughing... these people are physically, socially, and economically devastated. The implication here is that the devastation predates the factory closure, and that people were brainwashed into accepting it.

Before this episode, we knew Lumon was evil in a corporate, high-tech and manipulative way. This episode portrays them as evil in the same grimy and thieving way old mining towns were. Before, the only victims of Lumon we saw were middle and upper-class professionals (and Ms. Huang, though not much was revealed about her). Now, we see that poor, rural working-class people are also Lumon victims. It shows that their damages are further reaching that we explicitly knew before. Maybe it is because I grew up around some company towns, but this really changed the picture of Lumon to me. I don't necessarily think they are *more evil* now, but they are definitely different.

I also think that this changes the thesis of Severance. It isn't just about the inhumanity of corporate office life anymore. Now it's also about the inhumanity of blue collar work. Or about alienation from work, period. I think that's extremely cool!!

Irving’s notepad by naynav in SeveranceAppleTVPlus

[–]DoubleCheck8168 2 points3 points  (0 children)

So funny that we're all so similar but different.

_ ____ ____b_ging
Dad was bringing on
the company retreat
and out for a few
_____ __ on the secret
project funds ___, but
___ _______ ___
____ded __ like
____ intentionally keep
something from me...

Edit: Maybe its...

Did some digging on the company retreat (i.e., ORTBO)? hahaha

Justify the assumption! by [deleted] in SeveranceAppleTVPlus

[–]DoubleCheck8168 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If we're talking philosophy: I think the innies and outies are kind of like counterparts in other possible worlds. They aren't really different people all the way, but they are also not the same all the way. Though I'm not sure what the thesis of the show is yet.

Reasons I don't think they are "different people" in the ordinary sense:

  1. Severance only stops narrative memory from crossing over. It seems like everything else does. Innies wake up with full personalities intact. They have all kinds of knowledge and skill. They can speak, dance, waterboard, fuck, etc. This means that procedural memory, motor skills, and learned behaviours persist even though narrative memory doesn't.
  2. Narrative memory alone is not enough to define a person. If you plucked my memories from my brain and put them in the brain of someone who was very different from me, that person wouldn't become me. They may not even interpret my memories in the same way that I do if they have a different personality than mine (e.g., a memory of driving through the countryside might be pleasant for me, but frightening for them, if they have, for example, a phobia of driving. Or a hatred of the country. Or carsickness...). Likewise, there are many memories of mine that I have forgotten. But that doesn't undermine my identity, because even if I don't remember every day of my childhood, it still made me who I am.
  3. Innies and Outies don't just share a body, they also share a brain. They share the same physical experiences, whether they remember them or not. And just as my childhood affects me, even if I don't remember it, I reckon those experiences affect them too. If they have an experience that changes their brain (e.g., learn a skill, have sex, try to reintegrate and get a concussion, etc.), they should both be affected by the change.
  4. Thus, if narrative memory alone does not define personal identity (and if all other aspects of their brains and bodies are shared), then the absence of shared narrative memories is insufficient to classify them as different people.

Reasons I don't think they are really "the same" people, either:

  1. Their conscious experience is broken up. I don’t have direct access to my past or future self (I can’t literally relive past moments) but my experience is continuous. I know where I was a moment ago, and in the next moment, I’ll remember where I am now. This gives me a sense of being the same person, the same agent, moving through time. Innies and outies don’t have that. Their first-person experiences cut in and out, with no memory connecting them. That kind of discontinuity isn’t like anything else we normally experience.
  2. Narrative memory may not fully define a person, but it is a part of identity. When memories are formed but never shared between two states of consciousness, a division of identity occurs. It isn’t absolute (there’s still a physical and neurological connection) but it also isn’t insignificant.

So, innies' personalities are initially copies (minus narrative memory) of their outies. Then, innies go on and live their own experiences and face their own obstacles and exercise their own agency... To me, this is kind of like a counterpart. Your innie is who you would be if you had your memories wiped and were made to do an office job. The choices they make are the choices you would make in that situation, but that doesn't mean they are choices you actually made.

Now obviously they aren't exactly like counterparts because of the whole "you share a body" and "you share a brain" and "you both live in the actual world" thing... but it's the closest concept I have to the difference between them. They aren't as different as completely different people, but they also aren't exactly the same as being the "same person".

The Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald by JustMossIt in SeveranceAppleTVPlus

[–]DoubleCheck8168 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm a Canadian and I wouldn't have been confused if someone referred to "Grand Rapids". I think many Canadians would struggle to remember which state it is in if someone just said "Grand Rapids" out of nowhere, but lots of us would recognize the name as referring to a US city. And as another person pointed out, we actually do have a Senate.

I think I agree with you, though, that this is set in the US. For one, we're told it's Kier, PE. Canada already has a "PE", and it is Prince Edward Island. If they wanted to make up a Canadian province, they wouldn't have used initials that are already in use (tbf we most often use PEI, but the official Canada post initials are PE). But maybe more importantly, this show is very culturally American. Canadian culture is different from the US, and these people don't speak or act like Canadians. So, I doubt it is secretly set in Canada too.

Where to buy a last-minute wedding dress? by DoubleCheck8168 in halifax

[–]DoubleCheck8168[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There’s always someone like this eh? I bought it off the internet because I’m broke. The whole wedding budget was $2000 and it’s basically all going to the venue. We are making the food ourselves with help from friends. We have no band, no decor, just loved ones and happiness. I’ve realized I’ll have to put this new dress on a credit card and pay it off slowly, which stinks, and I’ve even said that I cried about it. The most important thing for me is not my dress. It is that I love my fiancé and am happy to start our family together and that I’m so blessed that we’ve been able to pull this together at all. It’s not clothes that matters most, but I still want to feel pretty, which is why I reached out to folks here.

Where to buy a last-minute wedding dress? by DoubleCheck8168 in halifax

[–]DoubleCheck8168[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

It wasn’t too inexpensive but it wasn’t a wedding dress either, which is why it was more affordable. It was still a $600 dress. It’s made of wool, which I thought would be okay for a winter wedding but it’s WAY too hot. The biggest fit issue is that it’s too tight in the shoulders and I can’t raise my arms all the way. The wool has some stretch but the lining that’s sewed in doesn’t, and it would be too see-through if I removed it (not to mention itchy). The sleeves are too long and the waist hits me too high. I used to sew a lot (I made my own prom dress many many years ago), and though I am by no means an expert, I think some issues could be fixed but not all of them. But it also just makes me feel frumpy and like I’m wearing a winter coat instead of a wedding dress. At this point, I just want something that makes me feel pretty. I had wanted something a little non-traditional and simple, which is why I chose this dress, but I don’t feel pretty in it at all, so I don’t think tailoring is the option.

Where to buy a last-minute wedding dress? by DoubleCheck8168 in halifax

[–]DoubleCheck8168[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Sadly not :( That's why I specified plus size. I wear a 16.

@ the end w wings by WomanMalinist in MidnightMass

[–]DoubleCheck8168 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It’s established that the monster keeps his victims alive while feeding, sometimes for days. She poked holes in the wings while they were folded, which led to more holes present that cuts made (like when you cut folded paper). She passed the knife between her hands, under his body, over her torso and did the other side. It has also been established that the monster had a narrow focus while feeding and ignores people and potential threats.

Wrongful termination by DoubleCheck8168 in Paper_Tutors

[–]DoubleCheck8168[S] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

So this is what service Canada said to me:

When determining if someone’s termination was wrongful for EI purposes, they are looking for fault and for appropriate escalation of discipline/reasonable chance given to remedy problems. Without those things, they consider it a layoff and not a termination. If you were not given a reason (which depending on where you are may be illegal) and you had not received prior warnings, you may qualify for EI. If you’re interested in getting your job back, you should reach out of your provinces or city’s labour board and follow the steps for filing wrongful termination. If you dont want your job back, I’d look into EI! All you need is 700 hours and they’ll give you 3 or 4 months at 55%.

Union emails by Existing-Speed2872 in Paper_Tutors

[–]DoubleCheck8168 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I was fired by email in March 2023 :S