TheBananaKing

@TheBananaKing@lemmy.world

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

TheBananaKing,

The disclosure isn’t complete, it’s only the people who haven’t been excluded in previous orders.

As all the perpetrators are rich and can afford fancy lawyers, that mainly just leaves the victims.

So yeah, the victims are the ones that will get fucked over. Again.

Is there an artist so horrible that no matter how hard you try that you cannot separate their art from them?

Similar to the recent question about artists where you can successfully separate them from their art. Are there any artists who did something so horrible, so despicable, that it has instantly invalidated all art that they have had any part in?

TheBananaKing,

Why would I try to do so in the first place?

Imagine someone telling you “you have to separate the product from the corporation. Yes, they lobby to permit slave labour and are directly funding the genocide in Palestine, but they make one fine chicken sandwich - and if you don’t put down your silly objections to focus on that, you have failed as a human being”.

Fuck that, fuck everything about that.

Art is political. Fiction doubly so. You cannot and should not try to rip art free from its cultural context, because that context is the perspective that gives it meaning in the first place.

And extra-splintery fuck the idea that the onus is on the audience to sweep everything under the carpet for horrible people.

We’re in no danger of running out of art. We have an unlimited supply of artists just waiting for a break in the canopy to sprout up and grow into something new and exciting. If a handful of toxic assholes get canceled despite being popular, then so much the better.

TheBananaKing,

Every work has the author’s stank all over it, it can’t not. It’s seen through their eyes and spoken through their lips (or fingers I guess).

Once you know what it is, it will - and should - colour your perception. If it turns out to be something toxic, then you’re allowed to be viscerally repelled by it. It’s okay. It’s not intellectual dishonesty to have an emotional-based opinion on art ffs.

Now if you let your opinions on engineering get affected by emotion, that’d be another matter. When deciding whether a bridge is safe to carry traffic, you absolutely should not let your personal feelings about the architect factor into the decision.

But this is art we’re talking about. Entertainment. Works designed specifically for emotional impact, with no value outside of that. How you feel about them is the only valid criterion.

If a work squicks you out because the author is a piece of shit, that’s a genuine, valid and authentic opinion - it’s pretending otherwise that would be dishonest.

And in my experience, the ones shouting the loudest about the intellectual integrity angle tend to be fanbois with a huge emotional attachment to the work from their adolescence. Buncha simps, in other words.

Which fine, feelings are valid - but they should damn well own it. If nostalgia > victims, then have the balls to just say it, don’t try to well-ackchewally it into some lofty principle, because it isn’t.

TheBananaKing,

First up, fandom is free advertising; fuck them I’m not promoting their product for them, even if I don’t buy it.

But more than that, it’s sending a message that the behaviour is something we’re willing to condone, that we stand with the abuser rather than their victims.

Imagine telling a sexual assault survivor to just lie back and enjoy the masterful comic stylings of Bill Cosby, or at least to shut up and let you enjoy it, because they’re ruining the funny.

Would that person have reason to consider you a friend or ally after that?

The Harry Potter IP, for instance, is just a giant anti-trans flag now, and the people who wave it around are picking a side. They can’t pretend they’re not; pinning the logo to their chest is explicitly endorsing the author’s views, and spitting in the face of every trans person in their life.

Does "Rock music is evil / of the devil" have racist roots?

As a Christian most of the circles I’m around are pretty chill…no stone-cold fundamentalists. But I have been around people (and even had family members) who are 100% convinced that rock music is evil and will lead people to engage in witchcraft and draw pentagrams all over their home....

TheBananaKing,

I don’t think so, at least not for everyone.

My grandfather (born round the start of the first world war) was hideously racist, not overtly religious, but neither of those seemed to figure into his horrified disgust and moral panic at “rock and roll”. Seriously, he’d be less shocked at someone wiping their ass with a slice of bread and eating it, than he would be at them playing rock music in the house. If it featured on a TV ad, or came in the window from someone driving past, it was like he was under siege.

Part of it was the sex-and-drugs angle, I’m sure, but I think even that was a small part of the whole.

I think the biggest part was that it was a symbol of counterculture, of men growing their hair long and rejecting the order and authority of the world he was born into. He experienced a fuckton of social change in his lifetime, he couldn’t navigate the culture any more, and this left him lost, angry and afraid. There were these people pissing on all the symbols he understood, and waving around a bunch he didn’t, while rejecting all the values he’d been taught - and dancing about it, like (from his perspective) a horde of crackheads ransacking a library and smearing shit on everything for lulz.

I mean, I wince and block channels with any kind of ‘reaction videos’, and I’m only genX. I get it, to a degree - though I’m trying at least to ensure that when I get irretrievably stuck in the past, it’s at least from this century. But the change I’ve been through only stretches from Kojak to Skibidi Toilet whatever the fuck that is. His stretched from before cars or refrigeration to the internet itself. I don’t think I’ll see as big a transformation as he did in his time; I hope I cope a shitload better than he did with what I do see, but who knows?

TheBananaKing,

You get that power, you use it on people who are making the world a shittier place first.

Now, that’s not precisely moral, but let’s be honest, beyond a bit of minor larceny there’s not a whole lot of personal gain you can realistically achieve.

Steal a truckload of cash? Sure, but then you’ve got to launder the heck out of it, and I’ve seen Ozark, that’s more drama than I want in my life even if I had the skills, which I don’t. And nobody pays cash even for groceries any more, have to wait for one of the non-card registers to open up and it’s a pain in the ass. Maybe you could rig a horse race or something, but the people involved in serious gambling are very good at spotting anomalous wins, and your life wouldn’t be worth dick the second time you tried it.

That pretty much leaves pranks and murder, and you’re a damn fool if you bring that within a dozen miles of any kind of personal connection.

Which pretty much only leaves assassination of high-level assholes as something that would a:) make a noticeable difference, b:) keep you under the radar and c:) be immensely satisfying.

TheBananaKing,

Snipers are a thing. And at best, who wants to spend their life on the lam? I want to play video games and eat toast, it’s hard to do that if you can’t spend an entire day in any given location.

TheBananaKing,

Well, not a selish idiot, that’s the trouble.

If I could think of a way to become comfortably well-off without eitehr getting in trouble or living in crippling anxiety that I was going to get in trouble, that might be another story.

It’s just that getting away with shit is for rich people with powerful connections, and bootstrapping into that state without passing through an uninsulated trouble phase is pretty damn nontrivial. They don’t let just anyone into the club, and they stomp anyone who dares to try.

I don’t actually know about the international-super-assassin club, but I’m willing to bet it’s either a fair bit more porous, or a lot more discreet, to the point that you never have reason to suspect they’re onto you.

TheBananaKing,

It does kind of sound like a police car that drove into a duckpond and is sadly shorting out…

TheBananaKing,

It’s groupchat for social media apps.

If you’ve got just one app you use, and the admins go all Elon on the place, you either put up with it or you’re out in the cold.

If you have a hundred different apps - you don’t have that problem, but it’s a fragmented mess you can’t possibly keep track of.

But the fediverse gives you the best of both worlds. It’s hundreds of apps, but they each pull in the feed of all the others - and if the admins of any one app turn out to be evil clowns, the other apps can quietly snip them out of the feed, just like making a new groupchat with everyone but Karen in it.

It’s slowly coalescing into a handful of major cliques defined by the kinds of people they don’t want to talk to.

Low effort posts

Ask Lemmy is a place to ask thought provoking questions. The mods have been lenient with some of the recent posts on the basis that they must provoke thought for some people, but after seeing two posts essentially saying “what do you think of my stick?”, I believe we can raise the bar a bit on what kind of thoughts we want...

TheBananaKing,

The only good way to play scrabble is by adding the rule that you must play the funniest word you can make.

TheBananaKing,

Even better, portals.

All the benefits of teleportation, plus you could slap a portal to the sun in front of people you don’t like.

TheBananaKing,

What purpose does the belief part cover?

In my experience, this usually fills in for something that people need to be true.

What are your experiences with polyamory, first or second hand?

I personally am in a phenomenally stable polyamorous relationship. I’ve been married to my wife for 12 years, and she has had the same boyfriend for about half of that time. It’s a really fulfilling arrangement for all of us in various ways. We’re all genuinely happy and satisfied. I’m kind of casually looking for a...

TheBananaKing,

Yep, ‘opening up’ to fix a bad relationship is as terrible an idea as having a child to fix one.

Poly relationships are fine and great and positive, but they absolutely need a solid, healthy foundation to rest on.

TheBananaKing,

Bach, definitely.

I don’t care for later composers; I love the elegant-yet-complex structure of early/ier music and I have yet to find anyone who can explain to me precisely what I mean by that.

I have a huge mental blind spot when it comes to music theory; I don’t understand a damn thing about it and likely never will, so I can’t put this in actual smart-people words.

But Bach (along with a number of earlier composers) sounds immensely fucking clever, like he’s carrying on a conversation on three different levels at once, and somehow doing counterpoint down the timeline instead of across it, even with an unaccompanied cello.

Whereas your beethovens and mozarts of the world seem to use ten times as much sound and fury, or ten times as many twiddly bits… to say very little at all. If you boiled out all the redundancy, all the structures would collapse and you’d have nothing left over.

If anyone knows what the fuck I’m talking about and is able to translate, I’ll be eternally grateful.

TheBananaKing,

The posters do nothing.

How can some random Australian in the middle of the suburbs ‘bring them home’?

They aren’t put up from a genuine desire to help the victims, they’re propaganda to stir emotions and brew support for the genocide in Palestine.

And, as we can see, bait to identify and attack anyone who has a problem with that.

TheBananaKing,

It’s a nice bit of doublespeak.

Imagine if the UK started carpet-bombing major cities in Northern Ireland, and called it UK vs the IRA, as opposed to UK vs NI.

See, we’re not killing people, we’re killing terrorists. It’s fine, stop complaining, just let us do it.

Will human societies always enshittify themselves?

It seems society always goes down the shitter over and over following the same path. People rise to wealth and power extracted on the repression of the masses, massive disparity, ignorance exemplified, xenophobia and blaming minorities for any possible issue, laws signed with golden pens but becoming more meaningless when...

TheBananaKing,

Yes, it’s a drunkard’s walk. All systems constantly and inevitably evolve towards concentration of resources.

People talk about entropy being the big-bad, but selection is entropy’s personal wetwork consultant, and she is a cold heartless bitch.

It’s like a rainforest: you start off with a bunch of tree species that all grow at the same rate. Then some chance mutation makes one tree grow just a little bit faster, and hey look not only does it get the sunlight the others trees don’t, it shades them out so they can’t compete. That’s some hellacious selection pressure right there, and so the arms race is on.

You can’t stop that from happening, it’s baked into the very fabric that all the systems are built on.

Some deer decides that big antlers are hot, and a million years later all the males are stuck walking round with a fucking tree growing out of their head. Fuck the individual, keep them teetering on the edge of starvation or violent death at all times, extract maximum efficacy at all costs.

Goodhart’s law ruins everything.

Everything from biology to economics and fucking video games. Oh no, you don’t get to play a fun creative entertaining build, you slavishly follow the meta or you’re out of the running. It’s the same in business, it’s the same everywhere you fucking look.

Every slightly sub-optimal build of [organism | business model | social organisation | I dunno, school of fucking architecture ] since the beginning of forever has been outcompeted by something slightly more effective, and has been abandoned, throat slit and dumped on the roadside like an underperforming child prostitute.

And enshittification is just one aspect of this. Anything that exists can be out-competed by something else a little more ruthless, a little more exploitative or unscrupulous, a little more expensive, a little more shitty. And at any step, someone can not take that step, in which case things stay as they are… or they can take it, in which case it gets worse. And once they have taken the step, there’s no going back. One little step at a time, salami-slicing us all to hell.

You can never fix it from inside the system, because the system is always rigged to protect itself - you don’t get there in the first place unless you’ve already subverted the things that could stop you. All you can ever hope to do is burn it all down and start again.

TheBananaKing,

They don’t want to reconstruct it, they want to raze it to the ground and kill everyone, then oh look free land.

TheBananaKing,

That’s the most mildly interesting thing I’ve ever seen.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • localhost
  • All magazines
  • Loading…
    Loading the web debug toolbar…
    Attempt #