#e-drama

[juju-fisher]

If you lie, harass others on social media, and basically act like a child, don’t be surprised when and if it comes back to bite you in the ass -- and don’t cry crocodile tears on that same social media when it does.

[omegon-beta-blog]

(via https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPH6ISL8T4k)

[brainboxboygaming-blog]

On A new TotalBiscuit of E-Drama and Panels at Cons

So, apparently over the past few days a new shitstorm has been a brewing that is of course centered Total Biscuit. He was recently at a fairly large convention known as dragon con, of which part of his attendance was holding a non age restricted, public, and live version of his Co-Optional Podcast. So this is normally not enough to cause drama. But apparently a 10-11 y/o girl laughing is.

Before I continue, let me summarize the typical Co-Optional Podcast for you. The co-optional podcast entails in these steps

1.Introductions

2. random shit discussed

3. Talk about the sponsor (currently Crunchy roll IIRC)

4. Occasionally video games

That Process last for about 2-3 hours each podcast. And that’s all really needed to continue. I personally do not watch it as I find it incredibly dull and conflicting with my college life at the moment. But other people (some of whom are my friends) really enjoy it so whatever.

So the issue in question Is that a little girl had laughed and later on got loud & restless. People apparently on the Total Biscuit Subreddit Complained about the podcast with many, not all, but many focusing on the girl. I do not know what was said specifically, but I do know that what was said was enough to get both TotalBiscuit and His Wife Genna to officially denounce the Subreddit.

Look I know many people don’t care about it. in fact if the like to dislike ratio on the video is any indication (which it is not reliable), then the people who found the girl obnoxious is in the very vocal minority. I realize that yes It can be Annoying at times. but you need to realize that the girl isn’t at fault here. Having been a 10-11 y/o, helped raise in my youngest sister, and as Both TB and Genna can attest as they are parents as well, Kids are naturally raucous. It’s simple as that.

Add that on top of a live event (which always have lower Production quality than pre recorded stuff), then you get, what you get. If anyone is to blame it would be the parents, and not for the laughing either. but for the reported shouting out repeatedly that happened later in the podcast. But even then that’s ONLY IF the parents made no effort to stop the child.

So, we now move onto panels at conventions. First those are public events, you don’t need an invitation, or reccomendation, as long as you have your convention pass, you can get in. Second the fact that those who where unable to attend the panel itself were able to see it later is a bonus, as panels are primarily for those in attendance( though rumor, I repeat , RUMOR is that the panel room was very small due to a fuck up by the con administration), and not for those who see it on the internet.

One Alternative i’ve heard was put an age restriction to future panels though I have to say that it wouldn’t of helped. you’ll always have that one asshole that’s far louder than he should be.

So. I stand with total biscuit on this one. I wouldn’t go as far as shunning the only place people can actually discuss your content, but ultimately I agree that this situation was really sad and stupid. SO personally If your a person who didn’t like the production value of that particular podcast? Get over it. it’s not like it can kill you, get you fired, or whatever. It just means that a piece of entertainment is having a dry spell.

[tvnikki]

[e-drama] [SyFy] Killjoys (2015) - Scifi

The first season ended on quite a cliffhanger. Similar to Cowboy Bebop or Firefly, Killjoys is about a space bounty hunting team full of short episodic exploits that develops major political conflict arcs by the end of the season. It was fun watching the early episodes but they weren’t the best in terms of acting/writing. By the end of the season though, there were a lot of intriguing plot elements that made me hang on.

The story basically drops you into this complex world and you kind of have to figure out how it works. When D’avin, the third member of the trio joins the team, he becomes the viewer’s point of entry as he didn’t understand how society worked in this part of the universe. I liked how the show captured society through recognizing and showing: power, privilege, classes, occupations, living conditions, attitudes but it still could use some general explanations of how everything connected. The politics, relationship and history between the different groups of people were only briefly mentioned. It was difficult to understand the political maneuvering and events in the show and its impacts on the Quad. The official website has some interesting background information that I never got from the show which was disappointing after already watching it.  

I took notice of how many white people were in the show. It’s actually not surprising for any show to have predominant white cast but I found it very glaring because there are a few POC characters sprinkled around and there is a big difference in how they are portrayed compared to white characters. The white characters have the important roles and even supporting white characters have backstories while POC characters only serve a function. White Doctor Pawter heals our heroes but is also a discraced privileged Qreshi princess? White informant Alvis gives info to our favourite killjoys but is also a religious/revolution leader? White mentor Khlyen trained dutch but is involved in all of the political intrigue somehow? Who messed with D’avin? a white character. Who fixed that tech thing and decrypted vital info? a white character. Who gets in the way of our heroes? white characters. 

We had 4 reoccurring POC characters. Our main girl Dutch, Barkeep Pree, fellow asshole killjoy Fancy and Rich Bitch Elite Delle Serah Kendry. Dutch is the only one that really counts in screen time, dialogue and character development.  The other POC characters were interesting and had a lot of potential but still, only used to serve a function. Pree served to entertain, Fancy served as a rival/obstacle and Serah served to push the plot forward. With more seasons, I can only hope that they could get more time but they already have a disadvantage compared to already established white characters.

Racism was mentioned in the show… It perked my interest wondering if it was actually used correctly (I don’t think so). Dutch called someone racist for their hateful attitude/speech towards westerlins. The hateful person, lived on Leith (a moon inhabited by middle class citizens) for many generations and hated the fact that they had to give up their lands to 7th gen westerlyns (lower class/immigrants inhabitants of Westerley, another moon) for political reasons. In this society, each class is completely segregated. It doesn’t have anything to do with race (as everyone is mostley white) but everything to do with class, privilege and oppression. Racism should definitely be included as it always intersects with other issues and relevant to any human society. Think about Dutch and Fancy being the only POC Kill Joys… the difficulties they would have faced to get to where they are now. For them to gain respect from their colleagues who would snipe their targets, make their jobs 10x more difficult, or even talking more loudly/slowly to them because they think they are inferior. The RAC evaluating candidates based on Quad centric standards like language, general knowledge, strategy, values making it more difficult because they come from a different solar system or cultural customs. Local authorities actively stopping them from doing their jobs because they look suspicious and any documented proof can be forged. As the only female Killjoy and earning lv 5 due to her skill and connections, Dutch would have definitely pissed of all of her colleagues. They would dismiss her and on a daily basis, insult her abilities, talk over her, disobey her orders and judge her appearance. Although with time and experience peoples attitudes may change but every mission there new people come into her life that renew those obstacles and people that never change) Think about the possibilities.

The character development in the show was spotty. I love Dutch and John’s platonic relationship that looks really sweet and genuine. You don’t get to see that often in media. I wish there was more screen time to show how it came to be that way. I was expecting a flashback of their past adventures or an origin story but we did not get that! The characters just told us how they met and Dutch just summarized her origins. Flashbacks instead focused on how interesting powerful and mysterious her mentor was.

I really hate D’avin’s character. He is a plot hog and other characters have to prop him up to make him look good. He has a full plot arc unlike John and Dutch. We know throughout the first few episodes something was wrong with him and he was searching for answers. He had two onscreen relationships in the first season, he got a full episode resolving his problems plus related team drama and he has locked in more plot for the next season. It’s like the show revolves around him. The show portrays him as if he is an expert at strategy making other characters seem incompetent (Dutch & Fancy). Dutch is a trained assassin and professional high ranking killjoy. You expect me to believe she does not know how to watch her back or to execute strategic maneuvers? D’avin the Killjoy noob basically overides Dutch’s authority when he joins the missions. The show goes out of its way to illustrate that D’avin’s soldier experience has greater value than a Killjoy’s experience on a Killjoy mission.  Everyone is like yeah, D’avin’s the expert, we should see what he thinks. It makes me sick. He was a soldier. A human cock fighter. I would expect him to be able to follow orders, work in a team, be mission oriented, fight well and do things according to protocol but he missed the mark.

This development could have instead illustrated the unconsciously sexist attitudes of a newbie male team member. Thinking he knows more or has more authority than the woman in charge, he dismisses her way of doing things, mansplains to her how to do her job but eventually realizes she IS a pro at what she does and follows her lead as a part of the team. And apologizes for being a douchebag. Think of the missed opportunity!

D’avin also had two on screen romantic relationships in the first season and both were just so hard to watch because he is written to be so flat and awkward. He’s always looking at the girls he’s interested… staring intensely at them. Sometimes he has a heart to heart with them... silence... Stare... touch... Sex. Seriously both of his ships are like that. I kind of find it creepy if someone does that and you are not even interested in them.

Anyway, those were my thoughts on the show!!

[lupercalialove]

can someone break down this whole Zubat scam for me, I was totally not paying attention when I should have

[tvnikki]

[e-drama][CBC] Being Erica (2009)

This complete series (4 seasons) was the best slice of life show I have seen.

If you could change the past, what would you do? Erica Strange has been living with regrets in her past as well as having difficulties at the present. It is interesting to see how she overcomes them through time travel therapy. The power to change the past doesn't become as significant compared to how she learns to deal with uncertainty, conflicts, and relationships by looking into the past. There are funny and awkward moments as well as tragic and dramatic moments in the series that will definitely hook you in.

[cryptocockatoo-blog]

When I sent my earlier message to you, I was meaning to refer to instances where a person or group is repeatedly telling you "You are wrong about your gender" and "That doesn't really hurt, like you say it does." I don't think whether there is malicious intent or not matters, because the outcome is the same: the target person doubting their grasp on their own mind. Trying to explain away a trans person's gender as them having a poor grasp on reality is a really common thing that happens.

Thanks for the clarification, and fair enough, when someone repeatedly says things like “you’re insane”, and uses this to invalidate things such as but not limited to your gender identity, then that would come closer to the definition of actual gaslighting than a single rude remark, but typically, in abusive relationships, the abuser seldom limits their denial to one specific thing. In fact, your blog is the first I’ve seen to define it to include this type of behavior, and I feel it presents a somewhat shallow understanding of it, and the impact it has on people.

I’ve had my sexual orientation invalidated, myself, and told that it’s something to be “fixed”, but I don’t think that’s even comparable to the kind of mind games that abusers tend to play. With gaslighting, that “What are you talking about? It’s all in your head” extends to everything about that person, not just one aspect of them. Gaslighters keep twisting the victim’s perception of reality, until that person is so used to being told they’re wrong no matter what, that they’re unable to trust their own judgment anymore, and rely on the abuser to decide on their opinions, their memories, their everything. Is this really the kind of thing that happens when a bunch of uneducated chumps unwittingly deny the existence of LGBT identities? I’m not saying that it isn’t damaging as well, I’m just saying that the magnitude of said damage is of a different level.

I guess my main problem here is that it’s a descriptor for a type of dysfunctional relationship, and not one for the kind of societal power dynamics that SJ bloggers talk about, so saying that it’s possible for a group of people to gaslight a single individual is a stretch, or at least extremely unlikely (happening to come across several ignorant and offensive people is unpleasant, but seeing that gaslighting describes the way the abuser acts, not its’ impact in the target, using it in this scenario is incorrect specifically due to this, because none of those people are consciously, purposefully involved in the “big picture”). Someone in Cat’s thread already suggested delegitimization and invalidation as alternatives, and I think those would be far more appropriate for this situation, because they’re not inherently connected to the kind of relationships that I just described.

In case that got a little long winded, my thesis is twofold:

1) Discrediting a single thing about a person has to be part of a big picture consisting of said individual also denying other things about that person, in order for it to be gaslighting. Otherwise, it’s invalidation.

2) Gaslighting is something that happens between two people (save for the rare event when a group of people conspire against a single person), and is not a descriptor of group dynamics. Using it to describe relations between different groups is not its’ original, intended usage.

Does this put my views into a better perspective for you? I pretty much just insist that people use commonly agreed definitions for terms or accept the consequences when they don’t, that is, understanding that using unconventional definitions for words can and do cause miscommunication.

[cryptocockatoo-blog]

Disagreeing with someone's statement of "This is my gender identity" or "That hurts" is psychological abuse. It is an attempt to make the person doubt their ability to process and understand their internal experiences. It is gaslighting.

Thank you for responding to my ask, although I’m not sure who you are? Anyway, the thing about gaslighting is the fact that it’s a term for a prolonged pattern of abuse, not a solitary incident. Second is the difference in intent: having an opinion, even an ignorant or unsavory one, is not motivated by a need to hurt someone. Seriously, no one bases a personal worldview on a need to be mean, if they happen to be hurtful, that’s an unintended consequence, not their original aim. Remember when people didn’t quite understand bisexuality? No one honestly refused to accept it out of a need to hurt bisexuals, they were simply uneducated on the subject. When using words relating to abuse when referring so someone with a disagreeable stance on identity politics, it can and does make light of the struggles of people who have had to endure psychological abuse. Gaslighting is seriously not limited to simply disagreeing with someone’s spiritual or political opinions or identities, it’s an attempt to eliminate the victim’s ability to determine what’s real and what isn’t altogether, until they’re unable to have a will of their own at all. I would rather not recite the things I’ve gone through in detail, so I beg you to look up narcissistic abuse yourself. Seriously, I doubt that hearing someone’s stupid uneducated opinion on the internet causes more mental trauma than years of having to deal with someone with NPD.