Maybe it’s not the most elegant example but the barbie movie of last summer is an interesting example of a piece of media that addresses the fact that certain types of male socialization is harmful to everyone if you can approach it with an open mind.
Imagine the same points being made in a different movie, without all that Barbie Girl Power. In a movie not marketed towards gals. Just doesn’t happen. Pretty much all the male hero arcs in (non-kid) media are geared towards the female gaze and phantasies, not issues actual men face. And why not of course we live in capitalism and that’s what sells the most tickets. No, “guy saves the day” doesn’t really get men off, by and large “the roof for once doesn’t need fixing and I can kick back” is way more attractive.
while simultaneously putting a lot of pressure on being “a real man” that gets the girl,
Meanwhile, gals are asking “where are all the real men gone”. Everyone is willing to tell you versions of “this is how it works” without actually understanding the issue, from “just open up” (which gets you ignored at best, cast out at worst), to “just punch everything”, which of course also doesn’t work.
There is a distinct lack of solutions, or even a desire to build a new tradition of behaviour that does not require ideological buy-in, or only works for abusive couples (like Dworkin and her victim). Things that align with instinct. E.g. you can’t simply demand non-violence and then only look at physical violence: What’s a guy to do if a gal becomes psychologically abusive? That’s the point where “Real men don’t hit woman, we tickle” then suddenly makes a ton of sense. You don’t get to attack me at my weak spot and not get a proportional response.
My two cents? Difference feminism has been dismissed prematurely. Of course, get rid of all the ancient toxic normative shit the groups that brought it up brought with them, but fail to include difference on a fundamental level and well-meant but absolutely counterproductive advise such as “just open up” will never vanish due to a structural incapability to see the other side as you insist that it’s the same as you: Way worse than essentialising a banana as a banana is essentialising it as an apple. That’s also how you get shit like the new Mulan: Because apparently the only way a gal can ever achieve anything is to be born magical so that she can fight like a guy. I mean it kinda works as a transmasc egg fantasy but they should’ve just kept the old story, or, better yet, not make a re-make at all, as the old story did show how a gal can, indeed, save the day, with brains and guts instead of brawn or magic (and of course the new one’s a Mary Sue but I wanted to complain about theme, not just shoddy writing). Am I beginning to rant? Probably better stop.
Not even close. French presses are way larger, holding a can instead of a mug, generally glass, and are pure immersion brewers while aeropresses are immersion/infusion hybrids, giving you way more options. The grind sizes you use are also vastly different: French press grind is coarse to survive the long immersion, while people generally grind for aeropress in between filter coffee and espresso fineness – roughly what supermarkets sell as espresso fine (which it isn’t, espresso fine grind is basically the consistency of talcum powder and spoils within minutes).
And while it wouldn’t be right to claim that you can use them to make actual espresso you can use them to make concentrates that come darn close, definitely appropriate for a cappuccino, or tiramisu. You really don’t want to make concentrates with immersion.
Oh and by default aeropresses use paper filters, while French presses use sieves. Preferences differ but as you can get sieves for the aeropress again you have more options.
In short, it’s the brewer for someone who cares about coffee, probably has a (hand) grinder (and a mere chestnut at that), avoids buying any supermarket coffee and knows a source of proper but non-fancy beans, but doesn’t really want to go full nerd about it. Also, isn’t a hipster paying through their nose to get a Hario filter holder and papers in a Melitta region (or the opposite), or gets a ceramic filter holder which only means you have to heat it up… no upsides. Speaking of nerds.
In even shorter, it’s at a very very solid performance vs. fuss sweetspot. At least if you’re making a mug of coffee, if you need to supply a table full of guests… honestly if I had to do it right now I’d throw grinds and water into a pot, wait a bit, then filter the whole thing through an ordinary kitchen sieve followed by an ordinary paper filter holder, and hope for the best.
I’m pretty sure every compositor worth its salt (that is, kde or wlroots-based) reparents on fullscreen. KDE also does variable refresh rate and at that point I’m happy – I’m not playing competitive shooters any more and VRR is such an upgrade I’m not even noticing frame rates dropping. Back in the days not hitting 60 was terrible, sometimes I had to settle for 30 (though before LCDs you could do rates in between), now I can go “ah, around 40-50 but I like the bling let’s keep it at that”. Dropped frames are simply magnitudes worse than delayed frames.
You’re the one who’s naive if you hadn’t thought that through.
What about handing the cement over to Palestinians you can trust (and you know very well they do exist), or international aid organisations, and watching the whole thing with drones?
You seem to be keen on using your creativity and imagination to show how things can’t work. That’s not bad, that’s providing security. Where it becomes a problem is when it replaces thinking of ways how it can work.
Indulge me, suspend your disbelief for a couple of minutes and apply yourself to coming up with something that can be done. Hamas is using pipe sections to build rockets? Fine, tank trucks and canisters exist. Logistically inefficient? Yes. Unviable? Hell no. Then you can say “because of Hamas you now have to carry your water”, not “because Hamas you now have no water”. In one of those two you come across as guarded, but friendly, in the other as heartless.
If Israel does less, it will be perceived by militants
Who the fuck cares about the perception of militants. Worry about the perception of the rest. Worry about Palestinians seeing Israel as the bigger problem than Hamas, worse, as a fucking ally of Hamas.
I do know that continuing to blame the entirety of blame and responsibility of Israel doesn’t move us closer to any sort of resolution.
And blaming everything on Hamas and demanding the impossible – that fascists magically deradicalise – is moving us closer to resolution? That’s the absolutely least likely scenario, yet you declare it to be the only possibility when you say “the ball is in Hamas court”.
Maybe, in this all, we’re looking too far ahead. Would you oppose a Smolanim government that would not giving up on passive security, but stop all the antagonising? The settlements, the turning of PLO territory into Swiss cheese, the “fund Hamas because Fatah is too reasonable” approach? Because if anything should come out of this then it’s wide understanding that the right’s approach to security failed even more than the left’s. Yes maybe Rabin was too naive, people were too hopeful back then (I certainly was), that doesn’t mean that moving to annex the west bank will bring security.
If only it were that simple. Hey, let’s present Hamas with official Israeli workers to kidnap and kill.
Who the fuck said anything about neglecting security and being naive?
Hamas and all of the other extremist militant groups have the crucial ball though. They’re the ones who are in the only position to end this.
No. That’s an excuse to avoid being creative and if you’d reflect about it you’d see it. It’s social conditioning saying “we’re the victims, always”.
What’s your plan for the future? Continue the Otzma Yehudit way of “antagonising until they give up”? That’s what got you into this position in the first place. It’s the reason the IDF wasn’t near Gaza and Hamas saw an opening because the IDF was busy in the west bank backing settlers harassing Palestinians. Realise that there’s portions of the Israeli society who want this to continue, whether they admit it or not, because it is convenient for them, because a scared populace can be way more easily convinced to vote for them. Don’t be complicit in that.
But you all would rather blame Israel than the militants
Israel is militarily, technologically, and economically far superior. That means you have options that Palestinians who want to de-escalate don’t have, thus the ball is in your court. Or, well, practically all of the balls that can be played towards de-escalation are in your court. That’s not a special yardstick we carved just for you, it’s not about “who started it” or “who did worst” but “who is in a better position to end this”.
Also y’all speak English and are on the internet. I could rant to you about Fatah corruption but what good would that do.
How do we remove dictators like Hamas from power?
Hamas has more than one wing, all dependent on each other, and one of them you can right-out supplant. Heck it even meshes with security concerns: Instead of saying “Gaza can’t have concrete because Hamas” say “We’re going to donate concrete but because of Hamas we’re going to do the pouring, tell us where you want those houses”
More generally speaking: You will need to be able to take a punch while showing that you can be an asset to your region of the world meaning internally, you’ll have to make sure that forces who right-out enjoy having an external enemy to fuel their eternal war have absolutely no influence. Doesn’t even need much, all the civil society needs to do is to be receptive enough to understand that Kahanites and Nazis are the same shit with a different coat of paint so that the Israeli Antifa will come back out of exile – Berlin, I know, of all places. It’s an excuse for a city they could’ve at least chosen Hamburg but I digress.
It won’t be easy and it won’t be quick, trust isn’t built in a fortnight. There’s no quick solutions, there’s only approaches which breed resentment and those who don’t, and one kind is perpetuating hatred, the other isn’t. I know this kind of stuff can sound like platitudes but it really isn’t. Being disciplined in that regard is the only way.
More concretely, right now, don’t fucking blow the Saudi Arabia deal. If you need to stop the offensive to do that, do it.
Every restriction is an attempt to reduce violence and terrorism.
Every restriction also breeds resentment and thus increases violence and terrorism.
There’s one question I want to ask here, and it’s not an easy one, and Israel will take a long time to come to a national consensus on it: Was it just money that Israel funnelled to Hamas to weaken the PLO, or also fighters?
Once you understand how you created that monster you’ll also understand how to starve it. Minds can be changed, the mechanics of conflict and conflict resolution can’t.