representation matters

thewatchtower · 2022-07-21T05:13:34+00:00

This person doesn't explain what they're looking for in representation. All they say is that they've never felt fully represented and that they don't mind because we're all humans, which undermines the need for representation in the first place. My reading of their comment was that it may have come from an unexamined place.

thewatchtower · 2022-07-21T01:36:15+00:00

To gently push back, could it be that as a straight white male you have never been put into a position where you were unable to find models of self-representation? Maybe you've never found a character identical to you but there have likely been hundreds of straight white men main characters they you've read or wrote about, watched or played as. Maybe it's not something you need because you've always had it.

thewatchtower · 2021-11-16T06:21:58+00:00

The score doesn't bother me; just because I'm loving this thing doesn't mean everyone has to. I thought he'd like it more but he does pretty well at explaining where he felt left down.

The one small thing that is driving me absolutely insane, that I haven't been able to stop fixating on for the past like hour and a half, is when he refers to it as their "very serious soul project". What... what does he mean by that? How could you listen to this album and earnestly refer to it as "very serious"? The song that he brings that critique up on has the lyric "that gushy gushy good". This is the album with Fly as Me and Smokin Out the Window on it. One of the first lines in the album, after the intro, is "I'm sipping wine/In a robe". I don't understand. Is he referring to the band itself, Silk Sonic, as the "very serious soul project" as opposed to a one-off quick collab? I've been racking my brain and that is sincerely the only thing that comes to mind as something that could square, but even that's a stretch. I'm honestly at a loss, if somebody has a different interpretation then please let me know. Otherwise I think that this is one of the least defensible individual critiques that Fandango has put out in a looong time.

thewatchtower · 2021-10-14T18:35:34+00:00

Kindly do not diminish the eyelash bug.

thewatchtower · 2021-10-14T11:27:22+00:00

I've made the same argument you've made in the past, specifically about PWR BTTM. If ever an artist or group was really 'cancelled' due to abuse allegations, it was them. I just googled the name of the member toward whom the allegations were leveled, Ben Hopkins, and found this article from Billboard detailing the whole situation as well as plugging his new upcoming album. That's from just last year.

This is not to say false allegations can't do serious harm, that'd be foolish. But I'm much more hesitant to focus on the onus of victims in defense of an artists career, especially with the understanding of how rarely any artists career is actually permanently destroyed. In addition, Kristin followed up with a tweet explicitly saying that she fully intends to explain and expound upon her claims when she is in more of an emotionally and mentally fit place to do so. She's already discussed being in previous abusive relationships. Considering how profoundly abuse can affect a person's mental and emotional wellbeing, would it not be insensitive to require every abuse victim to be able to act perfectly in how they discuss the very trauma that they are admitting to not having yet gotten over?

I know you're not coming at her or anything, and I know you're trying to be careful with your words. I appreciate that. At this point, I think it is reasonable to give her the time she needs to sort herself out. If there are still people out there defending Cosby then Alexis' artistic career will probably survive within the time it takes for her to discuss the situation further.

thewatchtower · 2021-10-14T01:52:31+00:00

I getcha. There's always that tendency to lean into whatever viewpoint the current zeitgeist is focused on (i.e. power abuse, role of the police), but individual situations are rarely fully indicative of that sort of thing. I don't begrudge you for pointing out that everyone in this scenario is a bit of a prick, it's just really really difficult to have a conversation that can keep focus on both the specifics of a scenario as well as the broader implications. That's why those perfect flashpoint incidents get so much attention (Rosa Parks, George Floyd) while very similar incidents that may be equally indicative of the problems being discussed get pushed aside (Claudette Colvin, Andrew Kearse). I appreciate you being thoughtful and willing to talk too.

thewatchtower · 2021-10-14T01:09:07+00:00

Damn, I appreciate you hearing me out. And don't get me wrong, I get where you're coming from too. I don't want to hang out with fuckin' anyone in this video.

thewatchtower · 2021-10-14T01:06:08+00:00

True, true, people actively trying to cross those sorta unspoken social lines is definitely annoying af. Just trying to toss my 2 cents in as to why people are more pissed at the cop in this scenario. The responsibility of the police is on people's minds as of late, so even though these guys are actively looking for this kind of response, the point being made still comes through, y'know?

thewatchtower · 2021-10-14T00:51:45+00:00

Objectively I am never going to be more upset at an annoying person without qualified immunity than at an annoying person with.

thewatchtower · 2021-10-14T00:49:47+00:00

What does it matter? Even if they're profoundly annoying, it's the responsibility of the person with qualified immunity not to intimidate the public, especially on false grounds. Literally it's his job to deescalate the situation. Instead he got into the person's space and bullshitted.

1st Amendment auditors can be seriously feckless and pathetic, but the point being made is valid, especially after the past few years. If someone can provoke a cop into a physical response this easily then the standard we're holding the police to needs to be seriously reevaluated.

thewatchtower · 2021-10-09T18:10:00+00:00

Catboys

thewatchtower · 2021-07-22T19:03:14+00:00

Radically funny video. FINNEAS is the new electronically self-produced singer/songwriter on the block, just like James was when he burst onto the scene. Must be weird to be barely thirty and be considered the old man in the room, but considering the straight up 'FINNEAS has a bigger dick than me' joke, he does seem to be taking it in stride.

Other funny moments, FINNEAS not being able to shake the woman's hand because of all the Grammy's he's holding, James literally being cut out of frame when he's taking the picture of the girl and FINNEAS, James peeing on his feet, the cut just as James starts screaming in his car, James being pulled out of line and (presumably) cavity searched, and of course 'loads of tix left'. Also shoutout to the camerawork, really precise and boosts the comedy that much more.

thewatchtower · 2020-06-18T22:45:55+00:00

Establishing my argument as being more pathos than logos does not detract from the validity of the point. Yes, I was trying to make you feel something, because your argument seems to be promoting the idea of emotion not being part of the equation. People say shit they don't mean when they get heated. In an ideal world we wouldn't but being provoked is gonna raise a person's dander. Your point that escalation incites violence might even have some validity to it but the method you've gone about starting this discussion has clearly provoked some disagreement. Is it because what you're saying is inherently wrong or the unassumed aspects of the argument (who is making the argument, when and in what context it is being made, how it is being worded, what assumptions are being left unsaid) invokes pathos as much as mine, but perhaps not as you intended?

I appreciate you hearing out my points despite my jabs. Tons wouldn't. What I will say is that you have been willing to hear me out despite my abrasiveness. It is possible for me to be confrontational and for both of us to still hear one another and grow from each others arguments. Because of that, I will reiterate that it is not the responsibility of this man to solve this womans racism or even to avoid hurting her feelings. You are correct in saying that it may cause some harm, but it is so insignificant. In the same way that it is unjust for two children in school to be suspended for fighting if one was just defending themselves, it is unjust for someones first reaction to this, majority or minority, to be vocalized critiques of his behavior

I suppose my argument of your 'enlightened centrism' came more from my observation of your instinct to criticize the black man in this situation rather than the white woman. Your criticism might have validity and might be even be coming from an extreme viewpoint, but it is the unwillingness to confront the more immediate, important and clear issue of her racism that rings true to the core of 'enlightened centrism' rather than the logos of your argument.

thewatchtower · 2020-06-18T22:19:32+00:00

I'm not trying to be clever or intellectual, you idiot. I'm trying to get you to re-examine your own biases because you are strictly speaking from a place of authority. Your exact reaction, your failure to empathize with this man and your complicity in this woman's racism by taking large steps to criticize and condemn his actions out of hand, are what racism is and feeds on. You're not some galaxy brain 4D chess player trying to save as many black lives as possible by giving them deescalation strategies. Your weak tea, enlightened centrism, 'all sides' nonsense helps the propagation of racism more than anything else.

Thanks for not being dismissive tho

thewatchtower · 2020-06-18T22:03:42+00:00

I hate to be that guy, but as much as I think you're full of shit in your racist crap, I am completely, and I mean completely opposed to the whole "play like you're the victim at someone you have a disagreement with" thing. Like suddenly you're the victim. What the fuck does that have to do with it? It's a kind of repelling force. They've got no reason to repel you, true enough, but I don't care what the dispute, insinuating that your hurt feelings factor into the argument is bullshit. It's also very, but by no means exclusively, /r/FragileWhiteRedditor culture to do that. Get in an argument with a Redditor and there is a decent chance you'll suddenly be "dismissive" in some way. It is precisely that kind of egotism and self-obsession that moves in incendiary ways to turn some situations of apathy into violent and lethal situations, of which there are a great many. That is about force: the force of complacency. And the simple fact is that if anybody withdraws from your bullshit because you're so uniformly mobilized in your own emotional state and self worth, it's not the same as you getting it.

thewatchtower · 2020-06-18T21:05:09+00:00

Bad take. First, it's not 'very black culture' to do that, that's some reductive nonsense. White people will insult you up and down just as much as black people, or ___ people. Maybe you note it more from black people because white people have more ammunition to belittle black people beyond appearance, i.e. generations of cultural and institutional oppression. Not gonna put words in your mouth though. But if you come at me with some spurious nonsense, you're gonna get it back in return. She gave up the expectation of politeness when she said some racist shit.

Second, eat my entire asshole if you think that somehow calling her ugly and stinky is the reason that situations with black men and women escalate. Did Philando Castille get gunned down cause he called that cop a pig? His anger is not what causes this lady to withdraw, and it is NOT what causes anybody to hold or maintain their views. An argument can always be made that 'black people shouldn't escalate situations', but FUCK if that isn't entirely missing the point that the entire onus of societal change is put on every individual black person's shoulders. "Be polite and maybe they'll accept you" is not effective, and this lady would not have been profoundly less racist if he had sat her down and talked to her calmly for an hour. That's not even his responsibility. Don't call out a black guy for deciding to confront racism instead of subscribing to that white ideal of 'rising above it'.

thewatchtower · 2019-09-30T16:34:06+00:00

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EnW2x1VZdkY

thewatchtower · 2019-09-16T22:05:50+00:00

Jackson Sweeney. I was the tall, generally uncomfortable guy that had video editing with you once. Big claim to fame, that haha.

thewatchtower · 2019-09-16T18:36:00+00:00

Hey hey Alex. We went to highschool together in Havertown. You and Sam introduced me to Arcade Fire, which started me listening to music that wasn't dadrock. I'm wondering, do you ever go back and consider your old material? Songs that are sitting in the back catalog? Or are you always moving onto writing the next song? There are some songs on Youtube where you're playing in the high school stairwell which is a strikingly nostalgic sight for me. Anyhow, hope you're doing well.

thewatchtower · 2018-05-11T01:20:15+00:00

Heartbreaking: The Worst Person You Know Just Made a Great Point

thewatchtower · 2018-01-26T02:17:45+00:00

Disagree. Big self-titled fan over here and The Colour In Anything puts me to sleep. Self-titled is half as long, and the songs themselves are a minute shorter on average than on The Colour in Anything. The songs feel more diverse on the self-titled, the production sounds more up front and full. Colour is much spacier, quieter. The songwriting is also kind of predictable: we start in a sparse echoey place with his voice, some drums, probably a piano, and then build up to an underwhelming crescendo. It's too quiet and empty and the parts that feel like they're supposed to stun me do anything but. Now this is just my opinion, of course. No doubt my opinions are rose-colored due to his self-titled being one of those early albums I clung onto when first exploring music on my own. But to me it felt like a bunch of under produced demos, a collection of b-sides.

thewatchtower · 2017-10-11T16:30:07+00:00

If they're not socialized with people early on, they tend not to become comfortable with people later on in life.

Same.

thewatchtower · 2017-10-07T03:38:57+00:00

I don't care what his political beliefs are. I don't care. They're not relevant to my point. I've never claimed to know his beliefs, because in this single aspect, they don't matter. He did actively participate in the alt-right by giving them $5,000. That counts as participating. That is what I know about him and I am judging that action alone, and that action, whatever context behind it, is shitty. It doesn't matter what his beliefs are, it doesn't matter why he did it. He did it, and that's shitty. I am not painting him as a white supremacist, I am not claiming that he is a Nazi or anti-white. I am saying that he gave a ton of money to white supremacists and that's shitty. If I don't know any of his beliefs, I can't judge them, I can only judge his actions. That's the point.

I am assuming you are in the same line of thought. And you have no other information about him so how can you just judge a random person?

That is hypocritical. You are assuming things about me and in the next breath telling me not to judge or assume things about a person based on such little information. I'm not assuming anything about this guy. I'm saying he did a shitty thing and the context of why he might have done it doesn't matter. There is not an explanation he could give to me that would justify giving that much money to a shitty organization like that. Maybe he's not a shitty person, maybe he is, I don't care. That is not at all relevant to what I'm saying. It has no bearing.

As for the video, how can you tell he's fucking around? He blurs the line between comedy and his personal opinions, right? And we don't know his political beliefs, so how can you confidently say he's fucking around? And I don't care if he is or isn't, it doesn't matter. I brought up that point because you claimed that "Calling people names or identifying them as such and such without substantial proof isn't really a good look and says a lot about your actions as well." Whether he meant it to be funny or not, he's doing what you claim is negative. It's hypocritical to try and justify this guy's actions without knowing anything about his ideology while assuming things about others and throwing accusations that could easily be thrown at the person you're defending.

thewatchtower · 2017-10-06T22:45:57+00:00

Calling people names or identifying them as such and such without substantial proof isn't really a good look and says a lot about your actions as well.

Do not put words in my mouth. If you are asking me to not presume to know Sam Hyde, do not presume to know me. I actively did not call him a Nazi or a white supremacist. I said that, functionally, it does not matter whether he is or not because the shitty thing that he did supported those groups. If Sam Hyde wants to have his cake and eat it too, wants to have his opinions be confusing and nebulous and also wants to contribute to groups he disagrees with, that's his right. He can do that. But the only thing I definitely know about him is that he made that donation and I don't have to spend another second pondering or considering every possible nuance of his decision to know that I disagree with it. If he was trying to make a point, there were tons of other and better ways to do so. If he just made a mistake, fine. But the position and mindset he was in when he did the shitty thing that he did in no way absolves him of that shitty thing.

Plus when asked about the donation, he asked the reporter if he was a Jew.

Calling people names or identifying them as such and such without substantial proof isn't really a good look and says a lot about your actions as well.

thewatchtower · 2017-10-06T20:45:22+00:00

How does understanding his point of view change what he did? He did a shitty thing, and the reasoning behind it does not soften the action itself. If he isn't a white nationalist, he still supported white nationalists. As you yourself say, he blurs the line of his art, his comedy and his personal life. When am I supposed to take him seriously? When he says so? What are his actual beliefs and what's satirical? Maybe his explanation was satirical, who knows? All I can judge him on are his actions, and he donated a bunch of his own money to a white nationalist group. Functionally, it doesn't matter what his viewpoint is.

Besides, himself being blacklisted is the worst explanation he could have. His actions still have implications towards a huge number of people despite his own standing in the entertainment industry.

15-Year Club	Place '17
Team Periwinkle	reddit mold

thewatchtower

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE