![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Some people might tell you that being creative means working entirely without rules. They're wrong. Not just because everything has rules (and while rules were made to be broken, the secret to art is knowing when to break them), but because there is a truly important rule behind all creative work, one that nobody will ever tell you but which everyone knows, even if they don't follow it.
Nobody gives a shit what you think.
We all have beliefs and opinions. It's part of sentience. Only drones don't disagree with anybody. What people don't want is to be told other people's opinions and beliefs at gunpoint. And when you're an artist, you're holding a gun to your audience's head. When you pull the trigger, you're hitting their emotions.
As Tuco put it, "When you have to shoot, shoot, don't talk."
I used to know an artist named Agent Elrond (not her real name, of course, she just thought she was being clever). Not a bad artist, but my gods, she would go on and on about what she thought, both in her art and her description of said art. I don't think I would have minded so much if she didn't favor censorship, but that's another story. The fact remains: her (nominal) skill as an artist was tainted and destroyed by her inability to keep her mouth shut.
When did people start hating System of a Down? When they turned their concerts into lectures.
Which Saw movies are least popular? The ones that rant about health insurance. Almost nobody likes 99% of Saw V (the last percent is the ending, the one part people adore).
Why is Spec Ops: The Line such a divisive game? Because it won't shut the fuck up.
I could go on, but the point's made. The more you inject your own views into a creative project, the more you weaken it. Nobody gives a shit what you think.
Nobody gives a shit what you think.
We all have beliefs and opinions. It's part of sentience. Only drones don't disagree with anybody. What people don't want is to be told other people's opinions and beliefs at gunpoint. And when you're an artist, you're holding a gun to your audience's head. When you pull the trigger, you're hitting their emotions.
As Tuco put it, "When you have to shoot, shoot, don't talk."
I used to know an artist named Agent Elrond (not her real name, of course, she just thought she was being clever). Not a bad artist, but my gods, she would go on and on about what she thought, both in her art and her description of said art. I don't think I would have minded so much if she didn't favor censorship, but that's another story. The fact remains: her (nominal) skill as an artist was tainted and destroyed by her inability to keep her mouth shut.
When did people start hating System of a Down? When they turned their concerts into lectures.
Which Saw movies are least popular? The ones that rant about health insurance. Almost nobody likes 99% of Saw V (the last percent is the ending, the one part people adore).
Why is Spec Ops: The Line such a divisive game? Because it won't shut the fuck up.
I could go on, but the point's made. The more you inject your own views into a creative project, the more you weaken it. Nobody gives a shit what you think.
My View on Modern Feminism
Sep. 20th, 2013 07:46 pmOh, boy, this is going to get me skewered...
Let's establish something before I begin here. I am what I like to refer to as an "honorable pervert". What this means exactly is as follows:
- I have a sex life, though not a particularly active one (twice a year is my current record), thus far entirely with prostitutes. I pay them well and try to avoid employing the services of women who are being coerced or abused into the business.
- I view pornography on a daily basis. I have a fairly extensive collection of pornographic DVDs, magazines, and visual novels (also called "H-games").
- I used to be a regular visitor to strip clubs, but have led that aspect fade since I began engaging the services of prostitutes; I figured out that it cost me about the same to have sex as it did to purchase cover, the one-drink minimum, and contact dances, but the former didn't come with as much frustration as the latter.
- I am not sure of my orientation. The only fact I've managed to nail down is that I feel no attraction to cisgender males.
- HOWEVER... I do not approve in any way of violence against any gender, and consider rape (more a crime of power than one of sex) to be an unjustifiable, unpardonable sin. I would never harm someone unless it were to defend my life or the life of another, and do not condone nor accept others being exploited or abused. (We could go around all day as to whether this applies to the adult entertainment industry, but that is not the topic of discussion.)
I say all this as a form of complete disclosure. For you see, I do not consider myself a feminist.
Do I support equal rights for men and women? Of course! I do not believe that, aside from considerations for biology and personality, there should be any cultural difference between males and females. All should have an equal chance to prosper and full access to opportunities regardless of gender.
The problem here is that this is not how feminism is presented in the public arena anymore. Modern feminism has changed, and not (I would argue) for the better.
Listen to what modern feminists say on YouTube, write in their blog or Twitter posts, or otherwise communicate. They do not speak on the issues of equal pay, true discrimination, or lack of opportunity. Instead, they focus on biases, real or imagined, in public and in the popular culture.
This is my issue with modern feminism. Instead of focusing on real extant problems, it has transformed into what I will refer to as "Sarkeesian feminism" - the quest to scour public conduct of anything that could even vaguely be considered offensive to women, whether anyone is actually offended by it or not. The more you look, the more feminists continue to act as what YouTube commentator Thunderf00t refers to as "professional victims", seeking out things to find offensive.
Is this the full extent of the feminist movement? No, but it is by far the most noticeable and loudest portion. And that is why I can't consider myself a feminist - those who are the most influential in the public sphere have turned it into something I cannot support.
Let's establish something before I begin here. I am what I like to refer to as an "honorable pervert". What this means exactly is as follows:
- I have a sex life, though not a particularly active one (twice a year is my current record), thus far entirely with prostitutes. I pay them well and try to avoid employing the services of women who are being coerced or abused into the business.
- I view pornography on a daily basis. I have a fairly extensive collection of pornographic DVDs, magazines, and visual novels (also called "H-games").
- I used to be a regular visitor to strip clubs, but have led that aspect fade since I began engaging the services of prostitutes; I figured out that it cost me about the same to have sex as it did to purchase cover, the one-drink minimum, and contact dances, but the former didn't come with as much frustration as the latter.
- I am not sure of my orientation. The only fact I've managed to nail down is that I feel no attraction to cisgender males.
- HOWEVER... I do not approve in any way of violence against any gender, and consider rape (more a crime of power than one of sex) to be an unjustifiable, unpardonable sin. I would never harm someone unless it were to defend my life or the life of another, and do not condone nor accept others being exploited or abused. (We could go around all day as to whether this applies to the adult entertainment industry, but that is not the topic of discussion.)
I say all this as a form of complete disclosure. For you see, I do not consider myself a feminist.
Do I support equal rights for men and women? Of course! I do not believe that, aside from considerations for biology and personality, there should be any cultural difference between males and females. All should have an equal chance to prosper and full access to opportunities regardless of gender.
The problem here is that this is not how feminism is presented in the public arena anymore. Modern feminism has changed, and not (I would argue) for the better.
Listen to what modern feminists say on YouTube, write in their blog or Twitter posts, or otherwise communicate. They do not speak on the issues of equal pay, true discrimination, or lack of opportunity. Instead, they focus on biases, real or imagined, in public and in the popular culture.
This is my issue with modern feminism. Instead of focusing on real extant problems, it has transformed into what I will refer to as "Sarkeesian feminism" - the quest to scour public conduct of anything that could even vaguely be considered offensive to women, whether anyone is actually offended by it or not. The more you look, the more feminists continue to act as what YouTube commentator Thunderf00t refers to as "professional victims", seeking out things to find offensive.
Is this the full extent of the feminist movement? No, but it is by far the most noticeable and loudest portion. And that is why I can't consider myself a feminist - those who are the most influential in the public sphere have turned it into something I cannot support.
As I may have made clear, I more or less live on the Internet. So all of this anti-SOPA shutdown business made today really, really boring.
I got the point six hours ago, guys. You can stop pretending you're making a statement now. This would have had an impact if you did it BEFORE President Obama spoke out against the bills.
This SOPA/PIPA business is like living in Looking Glass World - the more support lines up against the bills, the more people worry about them. I didn't hear a word about it until the major tech companies started protesting; then you started seeing anti-SOPA videos and petitions everywhere.
What, were you guys afraid to open your mouths until someone famous told you what to say?
I'm not scared. Why should I be?
1. Those weighing whether or not to vote for PIPA (SOPA is basically dead) want to stay in office, and they know voting in favor of it will jeopardize their jobs.
2. If it gets passed, Obama has all but vetoed it in advance.
3. Veto gets overruled? Supreme Court can still declare it unconstitutional - and they've already nailed several similar bills that have tried to restrict the Internet.
There's a reason I've taken to calling today "Internet Chicken Little Day".
I got the point six hours ago, guys. You can stop pretending you're making a statement now. This would have had an impact if you did it BEFORE President Obama spoke out against the bills.
This SOPA/PIPA business is like living in Looking Glass World - the more support lines up against the bills, the more people worry about them. I didn't hear a word about it until the major tech companies started protesting; then you started seeing anti-SOPA videos and petitions everywhere.
What, were you guys afraid to open your mouths until someone famous told you what to say?
I'm not scared. Why should I be?
1. Those weighing whether or not to vote for PIPA (SOPA is basically dead) want to stay in office, and they know voting in favor of it will jeopardize their jobs.
2. If it gets passed, Obama has all but vetoed it in advance.
3. Veto gets overruled? Supreme Court can still declare it unconstitutional - and they've already nailed several similar bills that have tried to restrict the Internet.
There's a reason I've taken to calling today "Internet Chicken Little Day".
I've Had Bad Luck With Preachers Lately.
Aug. 20th, 2011 11:08 pmToday I attended a funeral. The deceased was Aunt Dar (full name: Darlene Ann Corporon; not a relative by blood, but a dear friend), mentioned previously.
The presiding reverend for the service was one Reverend Brad Singleton. He opted to use Aunt Dar's funeral as a pulpit to witness for Christ.
I knew Dar well. He didn't (to the point he kept pronouncing her last name "Cor-porn" - it's "Cor-por-ron"). She was NOT a very religious person in life. She would not have appreciated someone using her funeral to preach for their religion.
It's in bad taste to use someone's death as a jumping-off point to go on about "making Jesus the master of your life". Particularly if you can't even get that person's name right.
At my brother's wedding, the deacon performing the service used his opening remarks to make veiled but clear attacks against gay marriage. I managed to hide my disgust at seeing my brother's most important moments used for political ranting, but it was a hard row to hoe.
There's a fine line between incorporating God into every aspect of your affairs and being an asshole for Christ, and these men seem to be masters at crossing it.
Rest in peace, Aunt Dar. I hope that jackass didn't disturb your crossing.
The presiding reverend for the service was one Reverend Brad Singleton. He opted to use Aunt Dar's funeral as a pulpit to witness for Christ.
I knew Dar well. He didn't (to the point he kept pronouncing her last name "Cor-porn" - it's "Cor-por-ron"). She was NOT a very religious person in life. She would not have appreciated someone using her funeral to preach for their religion.
It's in bad taste to use someone's death as a jumping-off point to go on about "making Jesus the master of your life". Particularly if you can't even get that person's name right.
At my brother's wedding, the deacon performing the service used his opening remarks to make veiled but clear attacks against gay marriage. I managed to hide my disgust at seeing my brother's most important moments used for political ranting, but it was a hard row to hoe.
There's a fine line between incorporating God into every aspect of your affairs and being an asshole for Christ, and these men seem to be masters at crossing it.
Rest in peace, Aunt Dar. I hope that jackass didn't disturb your crossing.
A Rant on Writing Romantic Attraction
Jun. 26th, 2011 10:31 amShort version: The world won't end if you don't put a romance in your stories, and if you can't do it right, you shouldn't do it to begin with.
( The long version follows. )
Short version: It's fine for your main character to know information that the rest of the cast needs to learn, but please don't make them smug about it unless the situation calls for it.
( The long version follows. )
( The long version follows. )
A Rant About Source Material Bashing
Jun. 17th, 2011 09:48 amShort version: when you're dealing with someone else's work, it's not a good idea to say "Oh, my creation is (the true one/so much better/not as lame)".
( The long version follows. )
( The long version follows. )
