ilzolende:

ozymandias271:

aprilwitching:

has anybody read the ted chiang short story “liking what you see

its interesting sci-fi. i read it/am reading it today!

anyway, the reason im making this post is that the story made me realize i basically have the supposedly fictional condition that the story describes as “calliagnosia”? i think!

i mean, im not face-blind, but ive always known i had some perceptual oddities when it came to faces. the story seems to say that a normal person automatically has some kind of emotional or visceral response to seeing a really “beautiful” (or really “ugly”) face, and also that it is easy for a normal person to tell right away if another person is beautiful or ugly, without having to think about it. 

i dont have that, though! i asked @pipistrellus if it knew what that meant, to respond to human faces that way, if that was, like, a Thing. 

it didnt know, and then we commiserated over the shared experience of, like, trying to join in other peoples talk about cute boy band members or cute actresses or w/e, but not really being able to tell which ones were supposed to be cute

pip kind of associated it with asexuality, which makes sense, but im not asexual– i can definitely be physically attracted to people– and i still have this issue

and, yk, i can think someone is interesting or appealing to look at, for sure, but it doesnt really seem to map on to whether they’re…?? like, sometimes people call other people “striking” and i get that! i TOTALLY understand “striking”! when someone is unusual-looking, with a lot of character and presence and visual interest to them. and sometimes im really attracted to that unusualness, that interestingness, right away. but like… “interestingness” for me, when its really attractive, is as likely to involve highly visible scars or crooked teeth as it is to involve big eyes or long, shiny hair or something. and the attraction still isnt really like a “turn on” thing or even a pleasure thing, not initially and not just based on appearance. its more a fascination, like how i feel when i see a really weird-looking, cool giant bug and immediately wanna pick it up or draw it or something. plus, while im not really face-blind, i do have a lot of trouble telling people with similar features apart unless i know them pretty well. (if anything, i think this pulls me away from very conventionally attractive types a little bit, bc they can end up looking super indistinct/bland to me. sometimes i have trouble following the plots of movies if the actors look too similar in that way. its like im watching several copies of the man in the tan jacket– “well– he definitely had hair! and facial features!”)

anyway, i always figured most people look interesting and distinctive somehow when you look at them long enough, so i never really questioned those “everyone is beautiful in their own way!” and “if you have a really great personality, it will eventually shine through your physical appearance and you will look wonderful!” cliches. sure, i thought they were cheesy, and ineffective in actually changing social values/standards of beauty at all, and maybe a little misguided in the sense of why are we so focused on physical “good looks” over other stuff anyway. but i never felt like they were fundamentally untrue? i suppose a lot of people do though ( “well some people just ARE beautiful or ugly!”)

i remember telling someone about one of my many intense teenage crushes once, and i remember she said, after a really long, awkward pause, “well…im glad someone is really into [person]. im glad someone thinks [person] is cute. thats sweet.”

Ooh I definitely have an instinctive reaction of, like, “pretty face!” and “ugly face!”

It seems pretty uncorrelated to conventional attractiveness though? Like on one hand I go “pretty!” at girls with big breasts and lots of makeup and stuff, but on the other hand I also go “pretty!” at people with really kinky hair, or pudgy bellies, or big noses.

Also one of the biggest things for me seems to be, like, affect? Like there are people who are meh until you see them move or talk or, especially, smile, and then suddenly they are THE PRETTIEST and you want to stare at them ALL THE TIME.

And I *can* be sexually attracted to people who don’t make me go “pretty!” at first; like, I’ve definitely dated people where I can tell that they don’t have any of the traits that make me go “pretty!”, but also I am full of The Feels, and so they are SUPER PRETTY to me anyway.

Liking What You See is also interesting from a youth-rights standpoint (and other standpoints I have), and it might be nice to discuss it that way sometime. In a post that started out being on that subject. I’ll write one later, perhaps, unless someone else writes one first.

@ ilzo: I’d be interested in that.

As for this conversation:

I’ve been considering the term “grey-aesthetic” regarding my relationship with beauty, and this seems to support that. Like, I can tell when someone (or something, I don’t feel like it’s different with faces vs objects) is pretty, and all else equal I’ll pick a pretty object over an ugly one, but it doesn’t feel…I usually don’t feel a pull towards pretty things, a desire to stare at it longer than I would stare at an aesthetically-neutral thing, a reward of pretty things doesn’t motivate me. I say I usually don’t feel a pull because every so often I do, every once in a while I’ll see a particular pretty thing that I feel an urge to stare at, and to possess if applicable. It’s always fleeting, though: before long (hours, maybe a day or two tops), it fades, and I’m back to “okay, so it’s pretty, so what?”.

(Actually, now that I think about it, sometimes it’s longer than a couple days with people; once it was a couple months, but that was someone I didn’t see very much. Perhaps the difference isn’t people vs objects, but rather level of access: a certain (fairly small) amount of time spent looking at the thing, however long it takes to get that much time in.)

(Also, on an unrelated note, this is the third Ted Chiang story I’ve been linked to (the others were “Hell Is the Absence of God” (broken link) and “Seventy-Two Letters”), and I liked all of them. Perhaps I should seek out more of Chiang’s work.)


Tags:

#storytime #recs #reply via reblog #(when I say it was a couple months I don’t mean it was *constant* for a couple months) #(just when he was around)


{{next post in sequence}}

sinesalvatorem:

theunitofcaring:

‘assimilationist’ seems to conflate a bunch of different complaints:

  • “This person/organization/movement priority seems to be trying to buy respectability for some members of our group at the expense of other members of our group!” 

Marching in Pride in stuffy grey suits might communicate ‘see? some gays are normal stuffy grey suit-wearing folks like yourself’ but also can lead to ‘I don’t mind gays, I just hate it when they’re really effeminate and act all gay and stuff’. I am not sure how the benefits of having some people realize “oh, some gay people are just like me” compares to the costs of having some people go “oh, I can still discriminate against gay people if I make it about how they act/dress while proclaiming my support for the good gay people”. And I don’t think it’s okay to say “don’t wear a stuffy grey suit to Pride, people might use you to justify their prejudice against other gay people” but maybe it’s good to say “if you’re feeling implicit social pressure to wear a stuffy grey suit to Pride, we have radically fucked up”. Relatedly…

  • the same things are becoming prized in LGBT+ spaces as are prized in mainstream spaces! this means that spaces which used to be safe and affirming for a certain kind of person have ceased to be that

This seems like it frequently happens and is bad. The problem is…mainstream society really honestly doesn’t prize those things in LGBT+ people, so “you have all of society, leave us out of it” leaves people alone and without support. Ideally we’d have spaces that are affirming of LGBT+ people who want to get a job, buy a house, and parent together and spaces that are affirming of LGBT+ people who want to live in a modified lighthouse with six of their best friends and host frequent kink parties and spaces that are affirming of LGBT+ people who want to live in a studio apartment, have lots of casual sex and plan the revolution against capitalism.

Those need to be different spaces. And I completely understand the pain and frustration that a person experiences when their space, the community where they felt supported and understood and at home, starts getting modified into a community supportive of a different sort of person. I think it’s fair to say “this community is for people who want to have lots of casual sex and plan the revolution, please make a different group to plan weddings and talk about how to get a mortgage”. But big community events, including Pride, should include all of those subgroups.

  • other LGBT+ people are wrong

I have seen people say that acknowledging the existence of Republican or Christian or Zionist or anti-feminist LGBT+ people is assimilationist, or that those people creating support groups for themselves is assimilationist. I think sometimes they mean by this that an influx of those people would bring about a painful version of the above “the community ceased to be what I needed from it” problem. But sometimes they seriously seem to just mean “those people are wrong and outgroup”, and in that case I think you should just make your criticisms of Republican or Christian etc etc people in general and not try to come up with an explanation of why it’s especially bad for LGBT+ people to be that way. I have yet to see such an explanation which wasn’t honestly pretty gross. 

Likewise, not sure why critiques of monogamy and amatonormativity need to start by yelling at two men who are getting married instead of yelling at, like, society.

  • a way of expressing general disagreement with a person whose opinions are more mainstream than you

This is why I have mostly given up on the concept of ‘assimilationist’. Lots of people seem to use it to mean “I disagree with you, and your opinion is more socially acceptable than mine, so I will accuse you of being an assimilationist”. Saying “you’re throwing some people under the bus” or “you’re modifying the community norms” seems to make the discussion more tractable and productive, so let’s cut to the chase and do that instead. 

OK, but now I actually do want to live in a queer lighthouse. Are there queer lighthouses, or spaces which support queer-lighthouse-building? Are any of my followers interested in joining my cult sea-stead phallus-shaped-lesbian-domicile perfectly-ordinary-home?

*cough* @nenya-kanadka *cough*


Tags:

#reply via reblog #queer lighthouses

fwips:

my pet peeve are fic summaries with something deep and obscure that not only tell me nothing about the story but dont MEAN anything theyre just words like

‘When lost eyes lock onto a summer’s shadow, will love make it in the end?? [content warnings]: anal fisting ‘


Tags:

#anything that makes me laugh this much deserves a reblog

{{previous post in sequence}}


ilzolende:

brin-bellway:

ilzolende:

dead links are kind of sad, really

all these things happened and the records are all gone and not because of secrecy

(people who i have chatted with: if you want a file full of human-readable logs sometime, let me know)

original post

*nod*

I try to keep chat logs too, but I misjudged how long it takes for MultiplayerSet chat to vanish, so my logs for…*checks* July 4th and September 1st are incomplete. Could I get copies of yours?

I don’t have Set logs. I have easily accessible GChat logs. Sorry.

Ah, okay.

(You can have mine if you want. It’s not much, but it’s something.)


Tags:

#reply via reblog

ilzolende:

dead links are kind of sad, really

all these things happened and the records are all gone and not because of secrecy

(people who i have chatted with: if you want a file full of human-readable logs sometime, let me know)

original post

*nod*

I try to keep chat logs too, but I misjudged how long it takes for MultiplayerSet chat to vanish, so my logs for…*checks* July 4th and September 1st are incomplete. Could I get copies of yours?


Tags:

#reply via reblog


{{next post in sequence}}

Today on ‘Alison Is A Fucking Idiot’:

sinesalvatorem:

sinesalvatorem:

Underwear: Did I pack it?

Like all headlines ending in question marks, the answer is no.

*head desk* *head desk* *head desk*

But wait: There’s more!

I forgot my thrice-damned chargers. Both phone and laptop. If I can’t borrow one tomorrow, I’ll be offline until Friday evening.

*head desk* *head desk* *head desk*

*wordless sympathetic noises*

I’ve been compiling a pre-made general-purpose packing list on my laptop, listing things I’d want to pack for any trip. (I may add sub-sections for different types/seasons of trip, haven’t decided yet.) Maybe you could do something similar to prepare for next time.

(I also keep my phone charger in the same pouch where I keep my phone, thus ensuring it is very difficult to bring my phone and not bring my charger, but that advice might be harder to generalise.)


Tags:

#Brin owns *two* 2010’s computers now #reply via reblog #(the following category tag was added retroactively:) #101 Uses for Infrastructureless Computers


{{next post in sequence}}

astronomy-to-zoology:

A Hoverfly (Family Syrphidae) and a Cranefly (Family Tipulidae) showcasing their halteresHalteres are small knobbed structures that were modified from the fly’s back pair of wings. They function like a gryroscope and give the fly stability in flight. When they beat they inform the fly about the rotation of its body allowing the fly to adjust. With their halteres balancing and guiding them flies are able to preform amazing aerial aerobatics. Making them very hard to catch

Video source


Tags:

#bugs #the more you know

the pope rap

sinesalvatorem:

thelastdogfighter:

finite-dreams:

thelastdogfighter:

so my wife (who was raised catholic) likes it when I get drunk and talk about popes. this is because 1) I am a delightful drunk and 2) i know a confusing amount about the history of the catholic church (especially considering that I am Jewish) and so since I am very tired, which is a bit like being drunk, I will share with you some of my favorite popes. with apologies to all devout catholics in the audience, what are you doing here, turn away now, abandon all hope ye who enter:

Pope Nope: Otherwise known as Pope Celestine V. Pope Nope was the founder of the Celestine Order. Pope Nope lived as a hermit in quiet seclusion and modesty.  Pope Nope absolutely did not want to be Pope.  After sending an angry letter to the Church saying they should pick a Pope ASAP (they’d been hedging on it for like two years), the Church said, ‘This is it. This is the guy.’ Pope Nope promptly tried to flee the country.  The Church sent people to physically drag him to Rome. One of his first edicts was to declare that the Pope was allowed to abdicate.  Surprisingly, he abdicated five months later.

Pope Douchebag:  Pope Boniface VIII.  Came on after Pope Nope. Declared first Catholic Party Times (jubilee) in Rome in 1300 (in an attempt to revitalize Rome in general, and yanno raise money, an ongoing theme in this story). This should’ve made him kinda cool, except he pissed of the King of France and the poet Dante Alighieri, who he sort of let get kicked out of Florence. This resulted in Dante Alighieri writing one of the most beautifully elaborate revenge fics in Western literature.  Now, Nope Douchebag (as a modern Dante would surely have called him)  wasn’t dead when The Divine Comedy was published, but Dante made sure that in Inferno, the chapter related to hell and all the lovely punishments waiting there, to have a character point to a flaming hole in the ground and say “AND THAT’S WHERE YOU’RE GOING, POPE DOUCHEBAG. THIS HOLE. IT WAS MADE FOR YOU,” so there’s that.

Pope Evil: Pope Alexander VI aka the Borgia Pope aka that guy you get into a slapfight with in Assassin’s Creed 2.  Alleged crimes include extreme amounts of nepotism, murder, rape, bribery, etc, etc.  He probably wasn’t actually necessarily as evil as everyone always says (most of the incest and murder stories were told by his political enemies) but bribery and nepotism was sort of just what you DID when you were Pope back in the day. He probably did not look like Jeremy Irons. He did, however, paint really tacky images of his favorite mistress all over the papal bed chambers which led to…

Pope Badass I:  aka Pope Julius II deciding ‘screw this I am NOT sleeping in a former Borgia love nest’ and so he decided to commission the building of Saint Peter’s Basilica aka one of the the biggest loudest holiest of holy ‘oh father in heaven how will we even do this?’ pieces of catholic architecture in the world.  Pope Badass did not believe in doing things half way. Pope Badass wanted to be remembered. He commissioned an assortment of remarkable artists at the time.  Bramante, Raphael, Michelangelo, like, a ton of ninja turtles. In the mean time, he also did little things like decide to retake the Papal states, the territory around the city of Rome, which the Church had lost over the last few centuries. How did he decide to do this? By ordering all the cardinals to suit up, get their armor on, go on a road trip, they were going to war.  If a local government didn’t do what he wanted fast enough? He excommunicated the whole city.  Pope Badass didn’t do anything half way.  He originally commissioned Michelangelo to build his future funeral tomb, but forever annoyed the grumpy artist because he kept pulling him away to work on new little side projects

like

yanno

the Sistine Chapel.

Yeah.

Party Pope: Pope Leo X, Medici Pope – yeah, from those Medici. Party Pope was not about to let being a member of the Catholic Church stop him from living the high life of Florentine nobility. Party Pope believed in huge banquets for all his friends and selling lots of indulgences to pay off that big basilica Pope Badass decided to build. Party Pope held a big banquet in which gold plates were thrown in the river. Party Pope had an actual real live pet elephant with red shoes. Party Pope kept conveniently putting off the letters written by a fellow by the name of Martin Luther, who kept writing him to be “uh, hey Party Pope, maybe you are partying a bit too hard, maybe you should like, cut down on that a little….” Party Pope did not stop partying.

Look, we’re not saying the Protestant Reformation was kind of his fault.

But

The Protestant Reformation was kind of his fault.

Pope Buzzkill: Pope Adrian VI. German. Didn’t change his name upon accepting the papacy. Arrived in the massive Roman hangover left by Party Pope. Decided “okay, yes, Catholics, we are partying too hard, let’s do something about that” and proceeded to try and pass a number of very strict laws and measures to try and curb the partying ways of the Church at that time. He was deeply unpopular for this. Because COME ON, Pope Buzzkill, it’s the RENAISSANCE.

He was so unpopular that, after his death, the Catholic Church did not elect another non-Italian Pope for some 500 years. Pope John Paul II. Yeah. As in the guy who was Pope 20 years ago.

They really didn’t like Pope Buzzkill.

Pope Weenie: SO THEY ELECTED ANOTHER MEDICI TO THE PAPACY. YEAH! CLEMENT VII!  PARTY POPE II! THINGS WILL BE AWESOME NOW! WE CAN HAVE MISTRESSES AND BRIBE EVERYONE AND GIVE OUR NEPHEWS HIGH POLITICAL POSITIONS AND

wait

France and The Holy Roman Empire are at war right now?

wait, why is Charles V coming over the scenic Italian countryside with all those really angry men

Yes, ladies and gentleman, through a general inability to manage the conflicting pressures from France and and the Holy Roman Empire, Pope Weenie wound up preciding 1527 over the Sack of Rome, in which the Holy Roman Emperor parked his expansive army in that big half constructed basilica that Pope Badass had decided to start building way back when.

Oh, and Pope Weenie didn’t grant Henry VIII that anullment he wanted. We’re not saying that the formation of the Anglican church was his fault. But it was kinda his fault.

Pope Badass II: Common lore says Pope Badass II aka Sixtus V got his start as an illiterate swineheard born to a peasant family in the Papal States. He rose his way up through the ranks through guile, beautiful oratory skills, and a will of iron. Pope Badass II was aware that as Pope, he did not have long on this earth, and he would get shit DONE.  When he looked at that unfinished basilica that Pope Badass I had started, Party Pope had sold indulgences to fund, and Pope Weenie had let troops run through, he said “You know what this needs? A finished dome.” He asked his architect how long this would take.

“Five years,” said his architect, trying to be optimistic. It would really take more like ten years, given all the work that still needed to go into and–

“Great,” said Pope Badass II, “Do it in two.”

AND THEN IT HAPPENED.

Pope Badass II also is amazing for his response to the sinking of the Spanish Armada, in which Queen Elizabeth managed to blow up a ton of ships belonging to Spain, which was at that time only, you know, the most powerful catholic nation in Europe. Was Pope Badass II pissed at this defeat against protestant forces? Who knows, but HE ALSO SEEMED TO THINK THIS WAS THE FUNNIEST THING HE’D EVER HEARD AND PRETTY MUCH WENT AHAHAHA THIS WOMAN WHO OWNS HALF AN ISLAND JUST TOTALLY WIPED THE FLOOR WITH THE SPANISH THAT IS AMAZNG HE WOULD TOTALLY MARRY QUEEN ELIZABETH IF HE WEREN’T POPE.

“Imagine what progeny we would have!” <— pretty much the quote. yes, ladies and gentleman, this is the VICAR OF CHRIST declaring that he would totally do Queen Elizabeth I.

Sadly, Pope Badass I also did some things that were not so badass. He was responsible for a lot of the Catholic Church’s harsher stances on birth control and abortion, of which we still see many the effects of today, so perhaps this puts maybe a bit of a damper on the true badassery he could have otherwise attained.

But one cannot deny he had excellent taste in ladies.

And also he got them to finish that dang dome.

And that’s my Pope Rap. Please feel free to add to it if you are a giant nerd like me and have collected random trivia about medieval and renaissance artists and political figures.  Perhaps, now that I have written this, my wife will no longer have to hear me talk about this every time I have like, half an appletini.

Perhaps. Perhaps.

But probably not.

okay but like

what about the dueling popes?

so like in 1378 the old pope died and the romans basically rioted because they wanted a roman pope this time, god damn it. only there was no canadate to be found, so the cardinals decided on a dude from naples because apparently that was the next best thing. only, and keep in mind all of the shenanigans above: this pope was too crazy. becoming pope had flipped the crazy switch, and he just like. went nuts. had a terrible temper, mad-eye moody levels of suspicion, and worst of all, a reformast! so most of the cardinals literally ran away to Anagni, and get this – elected another pope. Celement VII.

that’s right. suddenly we had two rival, legitimate popes.

so of course they, the popes, demanded that all the catholic countries take sides. this of course went over quite well, and in no way added to the shit that was the Ferdinand Wars.

during the entire western schism, as it became called, there ended up being eight popes, with at one point three at the same time. Three popes.

it’s too bad that Benedict and Pope Gregory XII both backed out of meeting at the last minute because otherwise we might have gotten the coolest meeting of fight club ever.

Reblogging because The Battle of Three Popes is some important Lord of the Rings business and this must be shared.

All the pope stories! All of them!

…Is it bad that I knew about most of these guys already?


Tags:

#history