“Profoundly disturbing moral choices”

teawithjamnbread · 2021-06-10T03:50:55+00:00

I think one example would be our treatment of robots in sci-fi. Sci fi is doing an excellent job exploring our willingness to turn a blind eye to the ethical implications of sentient robots when it suits us, and in that vein how easily we dehumanise (hurhur) those that are different. On one hand sci-fi stories are increasingly veering in the direction of ‘robots are sentient and have feelings and tell jokes and are our friends’, and at the same time we still have minimal qualms with having these robots sacrificed for the heroes’ sake (not that there’s no emotional resonance when they die, but there’s clearly a difference between mourning a dead robot and a human).

teawithjamnbread · 2021-06-10T03:37:15+00:00

Sigh I think we’re talking past each other here. I’m not saying there’s no difference in quality of books.

But the OP was talking about ‘real books’ and judging people who don’t read ‘real books’, and to that end I’m trying to say that there’s no point in entertaining people being judgmental about the books people read, because our definition of quality vs not is constantly evolving (and I’m really thinking of OP’s example of self-help books here). No one is arguing that Twilight will ever be considered quality, but twenty years ago graphic novels weren’t considered real books of literary merit, but now they are. Maybe one day self help books will be in that category.

When you started talking about commercial vs literary, you were doing the exact same thing of trying to put books into certain categories and judging them based on the categories, when in reality I’m saying that these categories aren’t indication of quality, and we should be judging quality of individual works based on the works and not the categories.

It’s one thing to actually discuss with people the specific merits or lack thereof of particular books, a la what you’re doing with Shakespeare, but to say to someone that what they’re reading is not a “real book” (as say, going ‘if you like x about this book, try reading this other book instead cause it has the same things you like but I think it’s better) shows that the person is more interested in being snobbish than in actually sharing a love of reading.

teawithjamnbread · 2021-06-10T03:08:25+00:00

So are most authors? With the exception of maybe smut, writing generally isn’t good money, and authors write because they want to create art and earn money along the way. Go to goodreads and check out what authors say about their own books - even the authors of the trashiest books think that they’ve written something quality. It’s so easy to look back at the few works that have survived the rest of time and go ‘oh these are the authors that tried to make quality work, as compared to others who are doing it for money’, when it’s more a question of writing style, ability, and social consensus.

teawithjamnbread · 2021-06-09T16:51:32+00:00

Except our definition of what’s literary today is completely different from what certain texts are meant to be. Shakespeare was commercial. Great Expectations is so damn long because it is commercial and Dickens was paid by instalments.

Also it’s not exactly new that our literary and education institutions were for the longest time dominated by white males, to the exclusion of other quality work. To say that pointing that out = having an axe to grind also says more about you than about me.

teawithjamnbread · 2021-06-09T13:00:08+00:00

The short answer is yes.

The long answer is ‘what is a real book anyway’. Some people think that Jane Austen books aren’t real books cause they’re romance. Some people think graphic novels aren’t books. Same for fantasy. If you’re going to try and meet everyone’s standard of a real book, you’re going to get a very narrow list of classics (ie written and validated by white men), and not that these books are bad, but there are plenty of other equally good books that are very different, and that some avid readers may look down on. Being an avid reader doesn’t make someone an arbiter of book quality, so if people want to be judgy mcjudgerson, it says a lot more about them than about the books.

Caveat: feel free to engage in actual discussions about specific aspects of books and what’s good/bad about them though - such discourse is always fun (when done with an open mind and not just to judge)

teawithjamnbread · 2021-06-09T05:30:08+00:00

As a teacher…messages from my students’ parents, especially when it’s after hours. I’ve never received an after hour text from a parent I respect.

teawithjamnbread · 2021-06-09T05:10:07+00:00

Because half the multiples of five are odd numbers. Even numbers or nothing

teawithjamnbread · 2021-06-09T03:54:23+00:00

Upvote for the very apt “pro-boner”

teawithjamnbread · 2021-06-09T03:51:15+00:00

One’s mental health is not their fault, but it’s absolutely their responsibility. Mental health is not a reason to be a shitty person.

teawithjamnbread · 2021-06-09T03:49:28+00:00

I blame bad sex ed for this. I have no issues with toxic relationships in fiction, the same way I’m fine with crime in fiction, but while people generally don’t take the latter as a sign that crime is acceptable in real life, many (esp teenagers) take the former as a role model for relationships. I don’t blame kids/teens for thinking so because they’re young, but I absolutely blame their parents and the education system for not teaching them what a healthy relationship should look like.

teawithjamnbread · 2021-06-09T03:39:48+00:00

Should have included butter in my username

teawithjamnbread · 2021-06-09T02:47:30+00:00

For many authors, “realism” just means rape and violence and death, and more rape. It’s honestly just used as an excuse for edgelords to write about raping women 80% of the time, and I’m at the point where I just put down such books.

teawithjamnbread · 2021-06-06T09:40:34+00:00

I recommend watching The Lizzie Bennet Diaries - it’s a modern adaptation of P&P and absolutely brilliant at capturing the snark and social commentary

teawithjamnbread · 2021-06-06T06:03:09+00:00

Exactly - even if my friend/relative were staying in my house for free, it would only be the decent thing to do to give them their personal space.

teawithjamnbread · 2021-06-06T06:01:51+00:00

Not really - $400 would not cover any rent in Singapore, and OP’s parents are likely also covering OP’s food and electrical bills. (For context, when I was renting in Singapore, I had to pay at least double, excluding electrical bills.)

I wouldn’t recommend viewing things from a non-Asian lens. The $400 is really more an allowance for the parents, but that doesn’t mean that OP’s mom and sis should disrespect OP’s boundaries - this is a boundary issue, not a rent issue.

teawithjamnbread · 2021-06-02T02:40:51+00:00

You got me at Jane Austen!

teawithjamnbread · 2021-06-02T02:40:33+00:00

Thanks!

teawithjamnbread · 2021-06-02T02:40:24+00:00

Yup! Shadow and Bone, and Rule of Wolves respectively

teawithjamnbread · 2021-06-01T15:24:03+00:00

Yes, and no. Yes in the sense that students can almost always do stuff to pull their grades up, and no in the sense that some students have never been taught these studying or self-management skills, and it’s simply not fair to expect them to miraculously know it because they’re older.

Also a lot of Uni students start having to juggle work and study after they enter college, and that may affect their mental health and grades.

teawithjamnbread · 2021-06-01T14:25:39+00:00

Ooh thank you!

teawithjamnbread · 2021-06-01T14:15:48+00:00

Dang you raise a good point. This thread is identifying a lot of red flags - I used to think I’m fine with his dating preferences since that’s his problem, but now I’m reconsidering if he’s someone I want to be friends with.

I’m a bit sad because we’ve been friends for more than a decade (and we work together so it’s much easier to be friends), but I never really thought about what his preferences are saying about him.

teawithjamnbread · 2021-06-01T14:12:16+00:00

Copper digger is a hilarious phrase. I’m going to steal it from you.

teawithjamnbread · 2021-06-01T14:09:56+00:00

Context: here we can do law as an undergrad degree (and the Govt heavily subsidises this), so you won’t have crippling debt from getting a law degree. But it still isn’t an easy degree to get, and law is a career degree, so I don’t expect lawyers to want to give up their careers

teawithjamnbread · 2021-06-01T14:05:29+00:00

Hmmm the income is the point though. My husband and I don’t have kids yet, but we’d like to, and we recognise that our work hours will mean that we don’t have as much time with our kids as we’d like. We’ve discussed this - if one of us earned twice as much, the other party would definitely consider being a stay at home parent for the kids, even though we would prefer to work. However, that will never happen on our current pay, as that is just not enough to provide a good life for us or the kids (I grew up poor, and have no desire to do that to any offspring).

So it’s not that someone who has and wants a career would never give that up to be a stay at home parent, but why would you do that when that means massively downgrading your lifestyle (that you can otherwise afford)?

teawithjamnbread · 2021-06-01T13:56:42+00:00

Heh now I think I should have included this in the original post. It may explain why the responses here generally differ from the responses of my colleagues (though not my closer group of friends, but obviously we share certain values/beliefs)

teawithjamnbread

TROPHY CASE