This person does not exist. This is why. This is how you can help train the AI to create these images.

I find this both compelling and creepy. Compelling in that it's phenomenal we've come this far already in training artificial intelligences both to recognize what makes up a recognizable image of a human being, and allowing us as individual existing humans to help the machine learn. Creepy in that the first thing that crossed my mind was nefarious repurposing: how many of these images of nonexistent people are going to start showing up on Facebook profiles, Tindr and Grindr profiles, or used to 'catfish' other humans for emotional or financial grift reasons?

I've said this for a few years now, but this reinforces it: we now live in a time where we can no longer trust images, moving or still, to be true simply because we see them. This is further proof of that truth.

In other news, this wasn't surprising in the least. In fact, the only surprise I felt reading that article was that 25% of the grid being geared to adults strikes me as a tad low, and I thought it was higher. Also, the comments section for that post immediately went off the rails. I'm fairly sure I'm done commenting--I think I made my point, even if that point was instantly misunderstood--but I do find it interesting that the automatic first conclusion as to the ratio of sex/extreme content sims to non-sex/extreme content sims was 'dem filthy liberals'.

First, an image of the pool in question:



This is EVH's Rock Pool. Second, why I'm showing it:

[11:09] Emilly Orr: So far, the only problem besides pose adjustment with the pool? You kind of have to jump to get out.
[11:09] Mxxxxxxx Wxxxxxxxxx: It hits the spot
[11:09] Mxxxxxxx Wxxxxxxxxx: well..keeps one spry
[11:09] Emilly Orr grins
[11:10] Mxxxxxxx Wxxxxxxxxx: Maybe a set of lava stairs
[11:10] Emilly Orr: eee

I mean, I suppose I could pick up a good lava texture and a set of simple mesh stairs and toss in an animation script...but still, ow.

[11:10] Emilly Orr: Guess it would encourage people to walk quickly?
[11:11] Mxxxxxxx Wxxxxxxxxx: Sometimes one has to learn about sacrifice. It is a morality tale
[11:11] Emilly Orr: I see.
[11:12] Mxxxxxxx Wxxxxxxxxx: In order to achieve great heights, one must learn to let go of the things they stood upon before.
[11:13] Emilly Orr: While true, I don't think that generally means feet.
[11:13] Mxxxxxxx Wxxxxxxxxx: What else does one stand upon but feet
[11:13] Emilly Orr just grins and shakes her head
[11:13] Mxxxxxxx Wxxxxxxxxx: Once the feet have melted away like the past, one can crawl humbly to their goals
[11:14] Emilly Orr: Ah, it's a humility lesson.
[11:14] Mxxxxxxx Wxxxxxxxxx: yes.
[11:14] Mxxxxxxx Wxxxxxxxxx: People will be better off feetless
[11:14] Emilly Orr: If we learn to hover, maybe.
[11:14] Mxxxxxxx Wxxxxxxxxx: Less mischief afoot.
[11:15] Emilly Orr: Or maybe we'll....oh, that was terrible.
[11:15] Mxxxxxxx Wxxxxxxxxx: You knew
[11:15] Emilly Orr: I suspected, I didn't *know*
[11:15] Mxxxxxxx Wxxxxxxxxx: you knew in your heart that it was all for the pun.
[11:18] Emilly Orr grins
[11:18] Mxxxxxxx Wxxxxxxxxx: feel free to tell my morality tale to the girls

I'll go one better, this is groan-worthy enough to post to the blog.

It is never comfortable when someone needs to be hit with the clue-by-four. It is always painful, and can cause recriminations on both sides. In this particular instance, I was the one holding the clue-by-four, but I think it hurt me just as much, if not more.

The upshot is...I've been asked not to extend the rent on the annoying beach shack. Which, on the one hand, wouldn't bother me, because it's far from my favorite place. (Though I will gladly rent again from Fantasy Skyboxes, if I ever get up to where L$499 per week is comfortable again. Or just move back to Caledon.

However, none of that addresses the emotional turmoil, which will likely take some few days to settle. And I'm not sure how stable the ground will be from here. I'm not seeing trains, or fire, but there are definitely whistles in the distance. Because just ceasing to rent there, doesn't solve the issue that made me rent there in the first place.)



So this morning, in some attempt to calm before I log back in to the grid, I found myself going through saved images from the past. This was taken during the Praying Mary hunt. Note the flexi hair. And at this point, I can clearly perceive the difference between mesh and system, but...overall, I think it holds up fairly well for its age. It was taken back in 2012.



I don't remember the haunt I was in at the time. I do know this was from my doll days, back in 2013. It was a very interesting house, with sourceless teal light, and most of the haunts in it were also some interesting shade of teal, green or pale blue. Intriguing effect.



Aged pixels or not, this is still one of my favorite images from SL, taken in 2008, when I knew far less about photography and composition than I do now. The avatar I was wearing I don't even recall, and it can barely be made out anyway against the darkness of the rest of the tavern. But this was the height of Innsmouth as a sim--since this time, it's changed hands several times, and landscaping. I couldn't even tell if this little tavern still exists.



I remember getting in a bit of trouble for this, when I lived in Caledon Morgaine. After Sumie Kawashima passed, I'd put up her Darkhouse, a traditional tower lighthouse with a dark beam of light she'd given to me as a gift and an in-joke. The rest of the 'house' on the land was a floating chain attached to two floating, cavorite-ore-containing islands. It was a very narrow strip of land butting up against the mountain heights that separate Morgaine from Wellsian, so I thought a non-traditional 'home' took better advantage of the narrow dimensions. But people had...objected, let's say.

In retaliation, I built this skull--this was snapped in the process of building it, in 2008--and popped it up about a hundred meters above the house, slipped a green glowing snake into its mouth, and made the whole thing translucent. If I was going to be accused of being too strange and dark, I was going to fly the Dark Mark.

It stayed up for six months, Des defending my right to have it there, and what made me take it down was another resident across Morgaine's bay who'd logged in of a morning, looked out her window, and fell out of her desk chair. (In RL, yes.)

I didn't feel startling someone that badly was worth whatever value the protest had left, and took it down.

(It is notable that, two years later when I moved to Winterfell, and put the same tower up, and was told to take it down, I did...but replaced it with rubble and tumbled stones that stayed until I eventually left. That broke my heart, and while I understood no one knew what that lighthouse meant to me, to be summarily stripped of it because it was "too tall"--when essentially, I was on a small island in the middle of a forested zone with trees nearly as tall--well, emotionally, I left Winterfell that day. It just took a bit before I stopped renting, and formally moved out.



Yeah, probably. We'll see how it goes.

See you on the grid.

Well, today was the snapping point. I have given up and gotten my own place again.



Look...here's the thing. I'm an understanding person. I believe in polyamory. I believe in not treading on my partners' privacy, if they want to be with other people, and it's not understood to be a threesome or moresome situation. This is not a jealous twinge, is what I'm saying.



But I am beyond tired of logging in and being told "Hey, I have company", and I then have to invent a place to poof to that's either on a roleplay sim I'm not dressed for, or my work studio. Which a), is on a homestead so frequently I end up crashing once I port there, and b), I really only use for, well, work. Right?



And it's not the place I wanted. Hardly. While I do like both the people managing the Fantasy Skyboxes chain (a grand mix of skyboxen, ground homes and RP of medieval, fae and Game of Thrones variety), and how easy it is to rent there...it wasn't my choice. I am so not the beach bunny archetype.



And I'm going to have to remember, every time I come here, to set it for sunset or midnight, because--well, just LOOK at the first three pictures! All that sun! It's disturbing!



But...it's also cheap. Right now this annoying beach cabin is costing me L$199 per week. I can manage that. I can set home here and always have a 'home' to go to...if I get kicked out, again, of the home I have now because...there's company over who doesn't know I live there.

Cue aggrieved sigh.

And then this happened:

[22:06] mxxxx Gxxxx: plz 20L$
[22:06] Second Life: mrjoj Ghost paid you L$1.
[22:07] Emilly Orr: Plz get a job
[22:07] mxxxx Gxxxx: ok
[22:08] Emilly Orr: Wait. Why did you send me a Linden?
[22:08] mxxxx Gxxxx:
[22:09] Emilly Orr blinks

So, pulled the profile, as is my wont. Eight years on the grid, so that's at least seven years and eleven months past the time he should have figured out begging doesn't work. And I have no idea what language he speaks, but it's definitely not English. No, really--this phrase was on his profile picks: "mzh 7 arta7 lha 7 klna n7bha". I can't even take that into Google Translate because of the numbers. If anyone has any clue, feel free to let me know.

In other news, this bit of oddity:

[13:25] vxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Rxxxxxxx:

[13:02] Nxxxxx Bxx: [Zxxxx] 101: True Touching @ 2PM SLT ...an intellectual discussion on an M sim.

There are many forms of erotic interaction, ranging from "AFK sex" thru fantasy rituals involving space shuttles, opaque argot, and exploding incense.

Can we have intimate meetings with our authentic selves, not as fictional characters, while maintaining safe and sane boundaries?

In RL, similar challenges. Join us as we look at the measures they use to embrace clients while protecting themselves, their families, and their livelihoods.

[13:26] vxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Rxxxxxxx: BEHOLD! How the sausage is made.
[13:26] Vvxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Rxxxxxxx: wtf?
[13:26] Emilly Orr: "Opaque argot"?

Also..."exploding incense"?

[13:26] Vvxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Rxxxxxxx: I'm still reeling over the whole sausage recipe-women's studies in SL Thang going on
[13:28] Emilly Orr: Yeah, true.
[13:31] Emilly Orr: Especially as so many of their womens' studies classes center around ways to get money from the men they can't stand and are evil. Because, y'know, icky men.
[13:31] Emilly Orr: Baffling.
[13:34] Vvxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Rxxxxxxx: I just - honestly, WHY are you offering up the sausage recipe? Thankfully, I can't think of any CLIENTS who'd want to go to that.
[13:36] Emilly Orr: Well, the Sakura Academy seems to have died again for a bit, because [Ixxx] was running that, but back when it was, it was a ten-part course.
[13:38] Vvxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Rxxxxxxx: Packed full of feminist discourse?
[13:38] Emilly Orr: Appearance and Style, which is important; an Art of Conversation class, also how to keep it going; Building Client Relationships, though most of us come in knowing how to do that; Teamwork and Collaboration, which is also encouraged on the job; "Sharing Experience", which is our only iffy woo-woo sounding one; Business with Sensitivity, which was sort of how to mix business with a sensitive touch; Managing Difficult Clients; Technical Skills of the Trade; one class on 'Bringing It All Together', which I believe was supposed to be an overview; and the last one was the 'fast track' which just hit the high points of the other nine classes.
[13:38] Vvxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Rxxxxxxx is already packed full of feminist discourse, but she's learned to get play nice with others.
[13:40] Vvxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Rxxxxxxx: Also - [Ixxx]'s classes? I'd totally take.
[13:41] Emilly Orr: Oh, absolutely.
[13:41] Vvxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Rxxxxxxx: Did she advertise them on AC?

She means the Aether Chrononauts calendar and group, and that's when the penny dropped. My gods, the Hydrazine Queen is advertising these woo-fests on the Aether Chrononauts calendar. And no, no no no no. One simply does not do this. Not only are these things we don't necessarily want clients to learn, but we're essentially giving out information, for free, that anyone could sit in on, take notes on, then set up their own damn competing house. Are they mental?

Wait, don't answer that, I already know.

[13:42] Emilly Orr: No, no, these were always internal classes, not open to the public at all. You had to BE a Blossom to take one, period.
[13:43] Vvxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Rxxxxxxx: THAT makes sense.
[13:46] Emilly Orr: I hadn't caught on that she sent that through the Aether group. That's...insane. And really, really dumb.
[13:50] Emilly Orr: That means she's inviting both potential (or actual) clients, as well as potential (or actual) competition.
[13:50] Emilly Orr: One doesn't want the information, the other category is going to use it against her.
[13:50] Emilly Orr just shakes her head.
[13:51] Vvxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Rxxxxxxx: But let us bow before her big brain
[13:51] Emilly Orr grins

Hey, more power to them. This is the one thing we can honestly say about [Zxxxx] House, that their classes in Feminist Empowerment While Hooking are things Sakura has never offered, and it's also the one thing they aren't just imitating from us, like shoestring relations. So...let them do their woo thing. Obviously they're after a vastly different clientele anyway.

Oddity out of nowhere, and I'm keeping the references in to the actual group, this time, because it's relevant.

[11:25] sxxxxx Rxxxxxxx: Hey All I have a great Idea there should be a sales group called Wicked Wednesday and it just have BDSM sex Gorean related sale items hmmmmmmm sounds like a great idea right? Some one get on that... thanks..

Meet Mr. D. Named that way because his display name starts with a different letter than his in-world name. Mr. D's kind of a jerk.

[11:25] Emilly Orr: 25L started as a Gorean-merchants-only group.
[11:25] Cxxxxxx Mxxxxxx: laughs that is a good idea, but most of the 25l one is BDSM
[11:26] Emilly Orr: That too
[11:26] Cxxxxxx Mxxxxxx: lol
[11:26] Emilly Orr: Even on weeks where it's tilted largely towards clothing stores, there are collars, there are harnesses, there are camisks, there are cages. So we're sort of already there.
[11:27] sxxxxx Rxxxxxxx: no no they are not they are mostly all modern reg clothing

I don't know where he gets this. I went to the 25L group's Flickr page, and didn't even have to scroll far to find examples. (Note: some of these are NSFW.)

This was a slave bed from Krescendo. Deliciously Bound, who mostly makes fetish gear, put out this merchant sack camisk a bit back. In fact, there's a lot of camisks on offer, nearly every week--like this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this...I mean, we all get the idea by now, right?

Then there are the harnesses, like this one, and this fetishy number. And this piece, while not a leather harness, could probably still work.

How about a leather thong for the guys? That was an offering one week. And this fur stole was unisex and modifiable, and it would certainly work with Mr. D's character in Gor. (So would this set of trews and this fur drape for that matter. Or this outfit. Or this sweater.)

There have been some harem girl outfits, some general "Arabian" style outfits like this one, this one and this one, some poses that could easily be used in a bondage setting, and while this is slightly more modern, I could see it on some bondmaid in a tavern dance pit.

How about collars? I remember this one and this one, this one...and there have been others.

And I've seen veils, like this one and this one.

There have been Gorean-appropriate footwear offerings, like these sandals, and these strapped boots. There are also occasionally fur leggings.

And as far as furnishings, this could work in a Gorean setting, it's even in healer's colors. And this hanging bed also could work in Gor. This chair would also be perfectly appropriate in a Gorean home or hall. And there was this cage for slave girls, and every couple of weeks, someone offers up a fur.

This bit of statuary was a reproduction of the "Swords in Stone" monument at Hafrsfjord, Norway.

If he wanted to kidnap a panther girl, there was this.

I remember buying this set, of claw blades, which come in a bloody and clean version. They live in my Hallows folder, but I'm absolutely sure that a sufficiently creative sadist could have made use of them.

There's also been a variety of Free Women gowns--I'm not bothering to link them--and some few 'bond girl' kirtles, like this.

And finally, while this set piece would require some creativity, the ottoman, at least, had appropriate animations for a BDSM scene.

I trust we all get the point by now, right? There are items. There are other items that are available on the 30L and 35L lists. And if you're looking to upscale a little bit, joining the Smooching Serpents group will get you at least one daily "sale" item--just keep in mind their idea of "sale" pricing is usually L$399 for one hour, instead of L$1899. It's still an amazing deal, absolutely, it's just not L$25, L$30, or L$35.

Are there more items made for women than men? Sure. Because there are more women than men in SL. But male items do exist. They are there. And this idiot has managed to miss all of them.

[11:27] Cxxxxxx Mxxxxxx: i wish more creators worked silks and such towards the mesh bodies now
[11:27] Emilly Orr: You haven't been hitting every store, then. But I said 25L STARTED Gorean. They've adapted since to modern, to Victorian, to occasional SF attire.
[11:27] Cxxxxxx Mxxxxxx: they are extremely hard to find

She's talking about silks here, not male items.

[11:28] sxxxxx Rxxxxxxx: sorry if your seeing that stuff please send me those sales list

You're just not looking. And I would have pulled something together, but you're such a jerk I have zero desire to help you.

[11:28] Emilly Orr: They are. I still have to use some flexi panel skirts when I'm wearing silks.
[11:28] Cxxxxxx Mxxxxxx: also 30L has a few BDSM/gor items
[11:28] Emilly Orr: [Dxxxx], Girly's, Luas, Roawenwood just off the top of my head. They're about half BDSM/bondage, half fashion.
[11:29] Emilly Orr: 30L has done the same thing-- they started as purely modern, and have slowly added in furniture stores, and stores that build for fetish.
[11:29] Cxxxxxx Mxxxxxx: am sure if you send a NC to the head of the group they can work out something like that if needed
[11:29] sxxxxx Rxxxxxxx: no they don't they have things that I would not call BDSM they have lil cute things that has a cuddle or something, that No one but maybe some high rise petty boys and girls would own

Are you kidding? So...what you're saying is that it's not that there aren't BDSM and fetish items on the list, it's that they don't fit your narrow, pig-headed definition of "manly" BDSM items? Really?

[11:30] Cxxxxxx Mxxxxxx: chuckles is why i do the kinky event and fetish fair
[11:31] Txxxxxx Hxxxxx: maybe you should hit a bdsm event? there's Romp right now

It's a good point. There's generally some bondage-geared event every month in SL, let alone all the wide variety of stores with adult items who cater to the community.

[11:31] sxxxxx Rxxxxxxx: and sure the hell nothing that a Guy that has a measurable amount of testosterone would have

Y'know...usually the guys who say they're entirely made of testosterone are desperately afraid they're gay. Not saying that describes Mr. D, but it's a trend.

[11:32] Emilly Orr: Romp is open now, The Gacha Garden is doing a Fetish round, there's XXX, I think Red Light District is close to opening up again...
[11:32] Txxxxxx Hxxxxx: but at Redeux there is Artisan Fantasy with their amazing stuff, and Painfully Divine is offering a spanking bench too :D I am sure there are more things, these are just the two immediately coming to my mind

I was first introduced to Painfully Divine solely as a bondage shop, because of their line of rose-thorn furnishings and collars. They've expanded since then, but I still tend to think of them as BDSM first.

Artisan Fantasy is more just...really good pieces, for landscaping, furnishings, occasional homes, the rare actual outfit...but they do have a line of adult furnishings that are very nice.

[11:32] Cxxxxxx Mxxxxxx: i have a nice littel dungeon along with my capture/rape cellar.... but then i have no testosterone
[11:32] Emilly Orr: Right, I think Kinky's still open too
[11:32] Emilly Orr: Painfully Divine usually shows up in the 30L list, but yeah, nearly everything she makes is geared to BDSM/bondage.
[11:33] Txxxxxx Hxxxxx: I think Painfully Divine is in 25LT :)
[11:33] Cxxxxxx Mxxxxxx: i go and look at each store on the lists and only buy what i may use, im picky but thats just me [11:33] Cxxxxxx Mxxxxxx: she normally is too
[11:33] Cxxxxxx Mxxxxxx: so is roawenwood

Don't get me wrong, all of the sales groups try to bring in 'new blood', so to speak, but there is a core group that shows up on every list. And many of those still tilt towards Gorean and BDSM items, because that's how this list started.

[11:34] Emilly Orr: I am too, I used to hit every store and if I thought I could use it at all, I'd buy it. I'm pickier these days.
[11:34] Cxxxxxx Mxxxxxx: even boxing up and tossing really old stuff my inventory is at 27K
[11:35] Emilly Orr: Don't even. I've been steadily culling since January 2018 and I am only NOW down to 157K
[11:35] Emilly Orr: On the other hand, I know half of that is textures.
[11:35] Cxxxxxx Mxxxxxx: need a texture organizer
[11:39] Emilly Orr: I need to go through them first. I don't want to put anything in an organizer I'm not keeping.
[11:39] Cxxxxxx Mxxxxxx: not sure i have an empty one though
[11:41] sxxxxx Rxxxxxxx: still say we need things that guys with testosterone would buy not guys with man buns smirks ...... yes yes I am arguing this because I miss annoying [Txxxxxx]
[11:42] Cxxxxxx Mxxxxxx grabs popcorn to watch
[11:43] sxxxxx Rxxxxxxx: tosses some butter and pop corn cheese to [Cxxxxx]
[11:43] Cxxxxxx Mxxxxxx: ohh thank you...keep going ill watch *smiles*
[11:43] Cxxxxxx Mxxxxxx: btw very nice to meet you [Dxxxx] Sir

At this point, the conversation trailed off. Also at this point, especially with that side line about him missing irritating a group mod, I pulled Mr. D's profile.

It will surprise no one that he's Gorean, that he's a sadist, that h thinks he's a Dom, that most of his groups are Gorean, that he's the typical "I do what I want/don't go running to my mate if I'm screwing someone else" guy. Now, that doesn't disqualify him for respect, partnered people are allowed to do what they choose to, though my personal opinion is that it's better if their partners know and support their actions. But, it does indicate a general mindset.

Also, he's in all three 'number' groups, with the exception of 55L Thursdays--he's in the 25L group, the 30L group, and the 35L group, so why the hell hasn't he seen this already? I maintain he's just not looking. Or he's dismissing the male items he finds as not being for him, you know a REAL man, instead of some "man bun" wearing sissy.

And please, get real. I've seen Marines in man buns. Hells, I've seen bodybuilders in skirts, so give the hell up. There is no "one way" to define masculinity, and trapping yourself in a box for your gender just isolates you.

Pfft, he sounds like a wannabe anyway.

Oh, this is going to get grim. This is the first thing that's made me actually grateful that I haven't bought the materials to start in making things for Etsy (because I was still facing sewing everything by hand, as ten-plus years after moving into this apartment building we still don't have the sewing machine set up), though I did check my bank account in a panic to verify I wasn't one of the people affected. (Spoiler: I'm not, but that may well be because while I have a storefront, it doesn't have product yet.)

According to this Etsy moderator, this wasn't a hack or a mathematical error, but a change to the site itself that caused certain storefronts to be massively overcharged. Which is fine, I suppose (it's not fine), I mean, we're all happy it's not a hack, but...Etsy creators who were hit by this change in code were not happy in general:

TheraClay:

"Etsy drafted $395 out of my checking today?

"WT heck is going on? Did Etsy draft this out of my account? It's showing as a positive balance? I really need a response here, Etsy"

lovestrucksoul:

"My bank just cancelled my card bc Etsy tried to take over $5000 this morning :( I’m standing in the store unable to make a purchase for a crying 5 year old, wth???"

StuffedBras:

"Me Too. Etsy just charge my CC for $344.46 and I already had a postive balance. Now my Balance is showing higher balance by adding what they just charged.

Why doesn't etsy have a email support or phone number to get answers?"

BedazzledWitchery:

"I agree. I find it pretty disgusting Etsy that you continue to charge sellers higher and higher fees for ZERO customer service. We as sellers should have an email support/customer service phone number/chat dialogue. I have been on Etsy for five years, but I am seriously thinking of closing my shop and going to another webhosting/online shop."

Starting to sound like Linden Lab, isn't it?

ApparelArtbyMare:

"Same here. $1266+ was taken. I am definitely concerned. Supposedly I will receive a deposit from them which I should use to pay the debt which is charged on my cc and pending. With banks being closed on Monday this creates a delay of an additional day for the weekend to make sure it is resolved. Very uneasy. I've had alot of success with Etsy for the past 10 years or so but this has truly made me hesitate and wonder what is going on."

Peaceofmindinc:

"Yes, almost 5k was taken out. They deposited the amount into the payment account."

VictoriaLynnBoutique:

"Over $7,200 from mine. Can you say BIG overdraft?? Sucks."

StampedGold:

"Please let us know if they will be refunding credit cards. I do not want to pay any interest or have any actual charges go through on the over $4000 they just charged my $3000 limit credit card!!"

lovestrucksoul again, later in the same thread:

"Suntrust said they tried to charge me over $5,400 10 times :("

That's unconscionable.

SansoneStationery:
"They charged my credit card a heart-stopping $1,634.68 through automatic card payment (even though my sales consistently cover my fees daily)."

SopersCoins:
"They hit me for $1695. They are not legally allowed to charge cards for no reason. They did this on this Friday because this is when people’s biweekly checks get direct deposited. SCAM"

DarolsDivineDesigns:

"Well, they drafted $788.00 out of my bank account today! Completely unacceptable!"

TlcCreatesVintage:

"My card was charged over 1,000 dollars!!! WTF......and now they are just going to deposit that back into our accounts which will take till Tuesday for me to actually have that money!!!!! Not acceptable. It's a three day weekend PEOPLE!! We won't see that money anytime soon"

And it goes on, complaint after complaint, panicked Etsy seller after panicked Etsy seller. Jumping to the end of the thread:

LeafLee:

"I was charged over 1300$ and etys sent it to my bank account after chargeing a fee. Ya'll know most of the people who work for you view even 500$ as alot of money right? I'm a disabled woman just struggling to live here and this is some garbage to deal with. The money should have been returned to my card not sent to my bank account! Etsy REALLY MESSING UP HERE! I HAVE BEEN A LOYAL SELLER FOR OVER A DECADE!!"

ThreadTreasuresEmbro:

"Can you tell me DOES ETSY TEST MODIFICATIONS BEFORE THEY ROLL THEM OUT ONTO PRODUCTION SERVERS? If not, shame on you. If Etsy does, then your testing procedures need to be reviewed.

"This is unacceptable. All sellers need to know EXACTLY what happened."

BlackberryDesigns:

"I am rather shocked, not that this happened, but that Etsy has not been pro-active in making sure we were updated on a hourly basis. Twitter being the best use for this and the forums. Yes you do take in lightly as, once again, we are left in the dark. I suspect this is going to morph into a PR nightmare for Etsy because of their lack of 'Transparency'."

That70sChickVintage:

"The only 'site change' that I can think of is the change in forums. Has there been a security breach or hack?

"How could a 'site change' arbitrarily charge various amounts to Etsy Seller accounts/credit/debit cards ranging in the hundreds to the thousands of dollars?

"There should be regular updates in the announcement section, pinned to the top until this issue is resolved.

"CEO needs to put out a statement as to what this 'site change' was that allowed this to happen.

"With all due respect, hundreds of thousands of dollars in charges made in error deserves more than a brief update in the 'bugs' section."

MinxouriVintage:

"What site changes?

"The ones on that page where they list experiments.

"Oh yeah, they removed that a week ago."

SavoyFaire:

"Not only did I have mid month charges on Friday that bounced but I have charges on Tuesday that will now bounce as well as late fees and my credit rating will be affected. We trust you with our cards. Why wasn't this immediately sent like that Paypal offers now funds hit within half an hour by end of day Friday. That team should have stayed until every one was made whole. Who would even just say oh well they can wait until Tuesday to hit Wednesday especially with a holiday weekend? Not handled right at all."

CARUSSDESIGNZ:

"This is very unprofessional esp with all the changed. And the fact that even the Forums have changed and you need 2 'sign in' is truly crazy. Etsy is becoming more like eBay and that was why eBay Sellers came 2 Etsy in the first place. Im NOT very happy. Very very unprofessional and WE the Sellers have 2 pay the price for it. ON top of that with yet another Holiday and weekend, another delay. Would YOU like 2 get paid late ?"

SimonsTreasures:

"I want to know how we're going to get in touch with Etsy to discuss the credit card charges or bank fees that they've promised to pay. They don't answer the phone. I've called an Etsy number they sent me and they don't answer. An automated message tells you how to receive a call back and then they never call. So, they are going to pay the fees incurred, but how do we tell them what the fees are?"

soulharborjewelry:

"As a seller, I'm extremely concerned about all of this. I received the email from Etsy that my deposit was returned to my payment account so my bank account won't be seeing any money from Etsy until later this week. I'm also concerned about this from a buyer's perspective. I've read posts on other social media sites about people not wanting to buy on Etsy because of this. If you think this isn't hurting ALL of us, you're dead wrong. I've had a pretty quiet weekend for sales and I'm worried that this has already impacted my income."

SweetEscapesbyDebbie:

"This is absolutely ridiculous. Etsy attempted an $18,900 charge which did not go through on my bank account but now my account is frozen on a holiday weekend. Absolutely inexcusable."

Absolutely, I agree. There is no conceivable coding situation I can envision for an e-commerce site that would deduct such high--and seemingly completely random--amounts from their clients, and worse, the fact that they're not simply returning them to the same accounts charged, but rather, putting the fund back to each Etsy seller's 'payments' account--which means each seller has to manually send those funds back to their banks--this is going to cause even more overdrafts, stress, and all manner of panic.

Etsy will suffer over this. People are already talking about moving over to Redbubble, Shopify, society6 and other e-commerce sites over this issue. This is dire. And Etsy is doing very, very little to reassure anyone.

For anyone who knows me, it will come as no surprise that I have a minor obsession with serial killers. Now, I'm a lot better than I used to be--I haven't read the two encyclopedias I own on them for years now, and I can no longer recite any of seventy-odd histories of pain, brutality and death when tossed a name. I think this is actually a healthier thing, so I'm not overly encouraging myself to pick it back up as a hobby.

But I still keep my hand in, in certain specific areas. I like watching "true crime" documentaries on Netflix and YouTube. I've been a subscriber of LordanArts for his "BrainScratch" series for years, as well as Ranil Gort, Mortis Media, Gloomy House, ScareMe, Luth Luther, Scary Mysteries, Deburke321, Scare Theater, and Ask a Mortician, because she's a lot of fun. I'm so in love with one creator's work (Cayleigh Elise, she used to write and edit for Rob Gavagan before she branched out on her own video series) that I became part of her Patreon just to support her. What she does kills her heart, but she's driven to cover it--mostly Jane Doe cases (cases so old they may never be solved because the killers and any remaining family members who might know what happened have died) and cases of missing children--because, in many cases, getting the word out has led to breakthroughs on these open investigations.

Why am I telling you all this? Because last night, I fell down the rabbit hole on YouTube.

Now, this isn't hard to do--pick a topic, there's a strange wild path to follow down--but this one turned up some interesting things.

I started with Shauna Rae, who'd put up a fascinating video about a strange hiking mishap in Panama.  Watched a couple of hers, then from there, I discovered Samantha M, who apparently focuses on Australian cases of foul play. I watched a few of hers, and then in the sidebar, saw a mention of Stephanie Harlowe's coverage of the Kenneka Jenkins case. The description of that video led me to Gray Hughes Investigations, who apparently has an entire playlist devoted to Kenneka Jenkins--the actual facts, the suppositions, and all the conspiracy theories. It's exhaustive.

Now, if you've never heard about Kenneka Jenkins, it is truly one of the more heartbreaking cases out there--but it was not a murder. It was an extraordinarily unfortunate accident--Ms. Jenkins had gone to a party while taking a prescription drug that severely impairs cognition when in the presence of alcohol, and genetically, she had a predisposition to getting drunk anyway. What an equivalent girl would need six beers to achieve, Kenneka could reach in half of one bottle. Some people are just wired that way.

But both these factors combined to lead her out of the party a few minutes after her friends left to get her cell phone charger from her mother's car, which she had taken to the hotel where the party was. In surveillance footage, she is obviously intoxicated. From what I personally know about the prescription drug she was taking (it has a lot of off-brand uses, but my bet is, she was given it to prevent migraines), this drug both induces short-term memory loss as well as balance issues. Pair that with alcohol, and her inebriated decision to go find her friends in the lobby (but having hit the button in the elevator for "LL", which she very well may have blurrily seen as "L"), the end result was a 19-year-old girl wandering aimlessly through the administration sector of the hotel, trying to find her way out.

The major oddity in this case is that, after several minutes of wandering brought her to an unfinished kitchen area, she found the door to a (mysteriously active, though not perfectly working) walk-in freezer, and...walked in. And the door shut behind her. This is, absolutely, tragic happenstance. And--again, absolutely, no question of this--had the police officer with whom her mother spoke, trying to get them to come to the hotel to search for her daughter, not essentially blown it off as "hey, kids wander off, c'mon, she's an adult"--maybe, maybe, there is a vanishingly slim chance she could have been revived.

But understand, at the time Kenneka's mother became involved, she had already been trapped in a pitch-black walk-in freezer for four hours. She may have already died at that point. Or, if she hadn't, she may have, when revived, had so much brain damage that she would never have been off a ventilator. We just don't know, and we'll never know.

But the case was officially ruled an accident. Could the hotel have done more, by calling someone in upper management to send security in to review the surveillance tapes? Of course. Could the police officer Kenneka's mother spoke with have evidenced just a smidge more empathy for the situation, and sent a car by? Obviously. That neither of these things were done is also tragic, but again, by the time the hotel staff was asked to review the tapes, Kenneka may have already been dead. We have no way of knowing how fast it took her to freeze to death in the walk-in.

And yes, while this case does spur some dim echoes of Elisa Lam, in all other aspects they are vastly different cases. Ms. Lam was traveling alone, not with friends; Ms. Lam, while she was taking prescription drugs to balance her bipolar syndrome and diagnosed depression, was not taking anything that could have caused any amnesiac effects; and while she did have anti-psychotic rescue medication with her, and evidence from the toxicology report suggests she had not taken them for several days, it wasn't something she was used to taking every day.

There will always be the mystery of how, exactly, she went through a locked door onto the roof and climbed into an open water tank without a ladder on the side, but...everything else, including her behavior in the hotel's elevator, is simple happenstance. We will never know how everything happened in Ms. Lam's case either, but Kenneka Jenkins' case, at least, has far less disturbing, surreal aspects. It is a heartbreaking tragedy, but it is the tragedy of a sort that happens every day.

At any rate, I just wanted to cover some of these channels, in a minor way. That's all. If you're not interested in criminal activity, murders, and disturbing cases, you don't have to click any of the links. Not everyone is, and that's perfectly fine.

She hadn't written a poem in some time, and one was teasing at the edges of her mind. Something about...loss, and..frustration, and...a confused sense of betrayal, maybe...that could never really be betrayal, because she was supposed to understand, right?



She didn't understand. She had great trouble understanding. But it proved impossible to articulate.



Still, the poem was teasing at her. Something about constructions that constrain. Something about chill constriction in the place of warm embrace. Something reflective of someone that can no longer be reflected.



Something about living in the bones of a dead love, being surrounded by that constant pain, unsure of whether staying was a better option (because even if painful, the emotions were true), than striking out and finding a new home (that would hold no memories, no personality, no...soul). A new home that would begin, and remain, empty and barren of all emotion and personality.



And then...the house was deleted. Not by her. She was more careful than she had ever been before with her own homes, because of the emotional weight of place. She checked and triple checked to ensure that every box she rezzed out was deleted, and only that box, not a stick, not a stitch, of the house surrounding.



But it was deleted nonetheless. It had disappeared into the ether where all dead things stay, never to return.



And now we are left with memories. And the shreds of what was. Is it better? Is it worse? I can't even tell.



All I know is, it's harder to breathe with the house gone, than with it existing.

I always thought that Valentine's Day started with the Roman fertility festival of Lupercalia, held in the spring, and a French festival between the tenth and twelfth centuries called "Gallant's Day" or "Gallantines". Turns out I was wrong.

Well, not about Lupercalia, that part's true. In the fifth century, though, shortly before his death, Pope Gelasius I issued an edict that Lupercalia would no longer be celebrated, at least as Lupercalia. It would henceforth be the Feast of the Purification, and celebrated on February 15th...but that festival was later moved to February 2nd, to suppress another pagan festival. There were a lot of different names, depending on places, but the most well-known one at this point is Imbolc, the Celtic festival of new growth and new life. Specific to England was the Wives' Feast, specific to Rome (at that time) was the minor festival of Juno Februa, specific to other parts of the British Isles was Brigantia, the first festival of Brigit or Bride (who later was sainted by the Roman Catholic Church in an attempt to bring her worshippers into the fold).

And the thing about Gallantines, well, that's partially right, but mostly wrong. Around the same time, fourth or fifth century, the Normans were celebrating "Galatin's Day" in mid-February, which seems, from the limited accounts I've been able to find, to be a day either celebrating women's capacity to love, or women's love for each other? There's not a lot of information. I don't know where the French connection came into play, but Pope Gelasius I did his best to stamp out "Galatin's Day" as well, where the early Church had influence.

One scholar, Jack B. Oruch, claimed that Chaucer actually invented what's become the modern Valentine's Day Celebration. This is one of the stanzas of the poem "The Parlement of Foules" in Middle English:

For this was on Seynt Valentynes day,
Whan every foul cometh ther to chese his make,
Of every kinde, that men thynke may;
And that so huge a noyse gan they make,
That erthe and see, and tree, and every lake
So ful was, that unnethe was ther space
For me to stonde, so ful was al the place.

and translated:

For this was on Saint Valentine's Day,
When every fowl comes there to chase his match,
of every kind, that men think may;
And that is so huge a noise they began to make,
That earth and sea, and tree, and every lake
So full was it, so difficult was their space
For me to stand, so full was all the place.

In 1385, Chaucer penned "The Compleynt of Mars", which contained this passage:

Who syngeth now but Mars, that serveth thus
The faire Venus, causer of plesaunce?
He bynt him to perpetuall obeisaunce,
And she bynt her to loven him for evere,
But so be that his trespas hyt desevere.
Thus be they knyt and regnen as in hevene
Be lokyng moost; til hyt fil on a tyde
That by her bothe assent was set a stevene
That Mars shal entre, as fast as he may glyde,
Into hir nexte paleys, and ther abyde,
Walkynge hys cours, til she had him atake,
And he preide her to haste her for his sake.

and translated:

Who sings now but Mars, that serves thus
The fair Venus, bringer of delight?
He bent himself to perpetual service,
And she bent herself to love him forever,
But so be that his trespass was deserved.
Thus they were knight and queen as in heaven
By looking most; until employed on a tide
That by her agreement both spake
That Mars shall enter, as fast as he may glide,
Into her next palace, and there abide,
Walking his course, till she had him beside,
And he prayed to her to hasten for his sake.

Whether or not this theory is true, what is true is that Shakespeare, who was a contemporary--and fellow reader--of Chaucer, took influence from these works and wrote several plays based both on love lost and love found.

So between the two of them, at least, lies the rise of the modern version of the holiday.

I had intended to cover the so-called "Saint" Valentine, but if you thought this history so far is murky and odd, let me just say that the Roman Catholic Church itself lists three Saint Valentines, with no real distinction as to which one is supposedly the actual saint of the holiday assumed to have named it.

So I'll stop here, and just wish everyone a good day, whatever they celebrate. Indulge if you wish to, love if you wish to, drink and make merry if you wish to--all options are open. Enjoy.

(Continued from part four.)

And this is the very last part of this very long discussion.

[10:54 PM] Iron: Often any action and any inaction will all harm someone. And then you've got the debate over what harm counts are more or less harmful, the whole train thing, etc etc. It's not simple even with that answer.
[10:54 PM] Iron: I've always found this story to be an interesting one on the subject
(also available in PDF format: https://learning.hccs.edu/faculty/selena.anderson/engl2307/readings/a-good-man-is-hard-to-find-by-flannery-oconnor/view )

I'm...not entirely sure what the point of that story is, entirely. Other than being objectionable.

[10:56 PM] Fermium: Having read articles and other viewpoints, I find that some - if not a good portion - of the 'outrage' and 'offense' are justified and valid. I can disagree with their actions, I could disagree with their conclusions, but I at least understand them.
[10:57 PM] Fermium: These aren't people 'looking to be outraged'. They are people who are outraged because of the broader and larger context it is set in, and the fears and worries they hold.
[10:58 PM] Fermium: We forget how recent lynching was a thing. We forget that many people still alive were born when Black people weren't allowed to drink at the same water fountain as Whites.
[11:00 PM] Fermium: General we, not we as in us here.
[11:00 PM] Emilly Orr: The law against lynching, formally making it a hate crime, was passed in 2018, wasn't it? If not, then it was passed in January of THIS year.
[11:00 PM] Emilly Orr: Took us how many hundreds of years to actually declare lynching a bad thing?
[11:01 PM] Iron: *An illegal thing.
[11:02 PM] Iron: Since we're talking about good and bad anyway, might as well discuss how I don't think legality or illegality defines something as good or bad. :p
[11:02 PM] Iron: It's more of a... guideline.
[11:02 PM] Iron sails off in his pirate ship.
[11:03 PM] Emilly Orr: Laws are always guidelines. But in general, they're guidelines we agree to, in order to function as a society.
[11:03 PM] Iron: Yeah.
[11:10 PM] Emilly Orr: And those laws can change. Our Constitution has changed. Canada's laws have changed. Nothing is set in stone and fixed until the end of time.
[11:40 PM] Fermium: Freudian Slip anyone?

Wau, no kidding. The "abolition of civil rights". Sure, it could be one of our president's typical misstatements, or it could his end goal all along. Who's to know for sure?

[11:42 PM] Platinum: slip?
[11:42 PM] Platinum: I think he meant it.

I do too.

[11:43 PM] Arsenic: It's things like this that makes me pretty sure that, if he colluded with Russia, he himself was only barely involved and it was handled 99% by his various GOP handlers. The man can't even give a speech right, off a teleprompter, what makes anyone think that he could keep high treason a secret?br /> [11:44 PM] Arsenic: And it's not even a Dubya kinda thing, this guy is just a stumbling incompetent and even his own party periodically tears into him.
[11:45 PM] Fermium: I'm not convinced he has kept it a secret.br /> [11:45 PM] Fermium: I think it's less 'Keeping Treason secret' to him and more 'Just business, not illegal'

Thus endeth the discussion. Did we resolve anything? Not really. We all agree there is systemic racism in the US, and other countries. We have no idea how to foundationally address it, and we all know our current administration won't do one single thing to work towards healing the rifts of racism, because most of them are hard-core racists themselves.

It does make me think if the same is true in other countries where whites are the minority, but...the biggest example I can think of is South Africa, and there, the minority white population, largely from Dutch roots, enforced apartheid from the late 1940s to the mid to late 1990s, and in fact, the aftershocks of apartheid continue to be felt throughout the continent today.

I refuse to believe that the problem is inherently in how white people are wired, because white people that are not raised by racist parents, to be racist parents and adults, do not, in general, have these deep-seated issues of fear and anger. I know it's largely cultural, that most of us either exhibit or experience casual racism, depending on the color of our skin, and that is definitely a bad thing, bad for us as individuals, and bad for society as a whole. But the deep internal fear that spawns white nationalist groups has to be taught, by parents who were also taught. It is not part of our bone and blood, because children will play with anyone, children have no rules until adults impose them.

And maybe that's the answer. Maybe, if we ever arrive at a rationalist society, where licenses for parenting have to be granted, and parents-to-be have to pass a parenting class to prove they know how to parent...just as we require driving classes for driving licenses, ...maybe then that can be part of the curriculum as taught: how dangerous, how damaging, and how ultimately fruitless racism is.

Until then, these incidents will keep happening.

(Continued from part three.)

[10:06 PM] Fermium: And see, now having taken a look at the side of the 'outraged', why do you dislike the treatment, what about it do you dislike? WHat do you think is unfair or unearned?
[10:08 PM] Platinum: the people that don't seem to think that he's any different now than he was during that time. and trying to say his work should be, or actively pushing to get his work cancelled.
[10:10 PM] Emilly Orr: ^^^
[10:10 PM] Emilly Orr: That
[10:11 PM] Emilly Orr: There is a vast difference between Harvey Weinstein and Liam Neeson, to put it another way
[10:11 PM] Iron: That he discussed a thing in the past he was clearly very apologetic for and was using it as an example of a terrible thing he did once, that was about potentially doing a much worse thing at the time, and that that has made people angry at him in the present even though he showed he no longer feels that way.
[10:12 PM] Iron: Right, and the pushing for and successful cancellation of work that followed it.
[10:13 PM] Emilly Orr: Right.
[10:13 PM] Emilly Orr: Versus Weinstein, and hey, Bill Cosby, we can drag him into this too--Weinstein is STILL insisting he did nothing wrong, and Cosby, he wanted to plead innocent to all charges, and even his own lawyers were like, "Dude..."
[10:14 PM] Iron: I watched that video you posted, [Fermium], and apparently he's fumbled over his words since then. Which is fair for people to be upset about. It was a racist action he took at the time, no doubt.

I do think it's less that he's revising the original story, or trying to downplay it, and more that it's so emotional for him he's fumbling the speaking clearly portion of things. But that's just me, I don't know if that's actually true.

[10:14 PM] Platinum: some of the sentiment seems to maybe be about him giving that admission during an interview to promote a new movie. But it came about when asked what he drew on to play out someone seeking revenge, so it was relevant to the interview.
[10:14 PM] Emilly Orr: Absolutely. I do not deny that racism in any way. And only some of that is explained by culture.
[10:15 PM] Platinum: I mean, I would say most of it is explained by culture
[10:15 PM] Emilly Orr: Well, I meant, not US culture. I meant, being born and raised in Ireland, where blacks were not exactly treated well.
[10:15 PM] Platinum: that's usually where most racism ends up coming from, in modern times. how kids end up raised with racist ideas put into their head.
[10:16 PM] Iron: But not anger to the point of getting him to cancel his shows now. Just if he's denying it was a race based action he needs it explained that it was a racist action. But that video also did rightly point out that his attempt at apologizing and atonement is being ignored by people.
[10:16 PM] Emilly Orr: Not a patch on what we did to black people--or Indians--or the Chinese--or the Japanese--but definitely not well.
[10:16 PM] Platinum: yes. and from what I'm seeing, 40 years ago in Ireland it was even worse than it is today
[10:16 PM] Emilly Orr: Yes.
[10:17 PM] Iron: I do not blame him for canceling his late night show appearance currently. Anything he says in even any sort of slight manner that could be construed as problematic will end with him being absolutely slaughtered.
[10:17 PM] Iron: And that sucks.
[10:17 PM] Emilly Orr: And the real horror of that story he told? It isn't the racism. It's that something bad happened to a friend of his, and she couldn't remember a name, all she remembered was "he was black"--what if she was lying? What if she did know the guy and was afraid of him? Invented a black guy as a plausible decoy? Now we have this man, crazed across with frustrated rage, searching to kill someone who shares one trait with this maybe guy.

To me, that's almost more horrifying. I'm not saying his friend, who obviously he cared for, faked a rape story. I'm saying, it is not at all uncommon to be raped by someone we know, who then threatens us into silence, and then for us, being scared into irrationality, naming someone entirely different from the person who actually raped us. (If we mention it at all--it goes that way, too, sadly.)

[10:18 PM] Emilly Orr: And that's what I mean. EVERYONE is one step away from torches and pitchforks.
[10:18 PM] Emilly Orr: With the right motivation, the right push at the wrong time, we all go over the cliff.
[10:19 PM] Iron: Yes.
[10:20 PM] Iron: I'm glad the majority of us don't end up doing so, at least not successfully to the point of committing crimes like that. [10:20 PM] Iron: But none of us are as far away from committing them as we'd like to think we are.
[10:20 PM] Emilly Orr: Oh, absolutely. I am very glad of that. I'm glad most of us possess at least enough empathy to take that half-step to the side and think, wait a minute....
[10:21 PM] Emilly Orr: But yes. That, that's it. And I think people are missing that in their rush to sacrifice the next man on the altar of #MeToo.
[10:21 PM] Iron: It's been an issue for a long time, with viewing criminals as no longer human and the like too. Absolutely, at some point, all of this comes back to dehumanization. And lack of empathy.
[10:22 PM] Iron: It also goes into why I'm against the common man owning a gun.
[10:22 PM] Iron: I don't trust all y'all. :p
[10:22 PM] Iron: I don't trust myself!
[10:22 PM] Iron: But that's a whole 'nother debate.
[10:22 PM] Iron: One I shouldn't be getting into when I have bookkeeping homework...
[10:23 PM] Fermium: He didn't apologize
[10:23 PM] Fermium: He was ashamed, but he never actually apologized

Didn't he apologize on Good Morning America? Though at this point, Michelle Rodriguez, his costar in Widows, has now apologized for defending him.

[10:24 PM] Fermium: An innocent man could have been beaten, killed, because he was black. That's how lynching happens. Yes, he's ashamed, that's great. But there is a larger issue.
[10:25 PM] Fermium: And it wasn't once. It was five or six times.
[10:25 PM] Iron: Yeah he did it for like a week, going out, from what I recall.
[10:25 PM] Iron: He was in that state of mind for a while.
[10:25 PM] Fermium: Yes. But not once.
[10:26 PM] Fermium: Once in his life maybe. But that's sort of trivializing it.
[10:27 PM] Fermium: Most things are only ever once in your life. All it would have taken is once for a black person to be killed wrongly to get revenge on one black person who may have raped his friend.
[10:27 PM] Emilly Orr: I'm not dismissing that, either. He could have killed someone. He's ashamed that he could have, yes, but he still, somewhere, feels that reaction was justified. That is not good.
[10:27 PM] Fermium: I don't think he feels the action is justified

This could have been me reading into things, too. Not meaning so much feeling his actions during that mad week were justified now, but that he felt his actions were justified at that time. Right?

[10:27 PM] Iron: Y'know what's weird? Like, this brings something to mind.
[10:28 PM] Iron: How did he go out multiple times and not once see a black man?
[10:28 PM] Fermium: Understandable, yes. Justified, no.
[10:28 PM] Fermium: You ever been to Ireland?
[10:29 PM] Fermium: But no, he went out and was looking to find a black person who would start a fight with him.
[10:29 PM] Iron: Oh right, right.
[10:29 PM] Fermium: That way he could claim self defense
[10:29 PM] Fermium: And justify it.
[10:29 PM] Iron: That's right.

[Iron] then linked the Good Morning, America interview I linked above.

[10:34 PM] Iron: It's interesting that he says he would have done the same if his friend had said the person was Irish, or Scot, or Lithuanian.
[10:38 PM] Emilly Orr: Yeah. And maybe, maybe he would have. Part of me doesn't think so, based on the way he still, after all these years, growls "black bastard" in the interview.
[10:39 PM] Iron: That part of it struck me, yeah. I figure he was trying to explain his mindset at the time.
[10:39 PM] Emilly Orr: nods.
[10:39 PM] Emilly Orr: It's still a chilling phrase.
[10:39 PM] Iron: And the guy that raped her? It's not an inappropriate phrase to describe. I mean, technically so, as he's likely not the technical definition of a bastard (although one never knows) but in the insulting way.
[10:40 PM] Fermium: You're missing the forest through the trees.
[10:40 PM] Fermium: Ignore what he said or whether he actually would have if she had said those things.
[10:40 PM] Iron: It's a bit weird to combine a technically accurate word with a technically inaccurate word, bit of incongruity in the phrasing there, but yeah.
[10:41 PM] Fermium: Focus on the way he describes it. When asked if he would have done the same thing if it was a white man, he branches off into 'Sure, Irish, Scot, Brit, Lithuanian.'
[10:41 PM] Fermium: There's a casual racism in that.
[10:41 PM] Fermium: Which most people have.
[10:41 PM] Fermium: But is important to point out.

This is another excellent point, that I think a lot of white people hearing his description float right by. Because we see different types of white people, and most of us only see one single type of non-white people--they're all black, they're all Hispanic, they're all Asian. We are not enculturated to differentiate.

[10:41 PM] Fermium: To him, Black is black. But White? White can be British, or Scottish, or Irish, or a bunch of things!
[10:41 PM] Iron: He was just explaining himself, answering the question.
[10:41 PM] Fermium: But Black is black.
[10:42 PM] Emilly Orr: Exactly.
[10:42 PM] Iron: This is why he'll be slaughtered when he gets interviewed right now.
[10:42 PM] Fermium: It's not a major thing, it's just casual racism, it's something to be aware of. Casual racism, casual sexism.
[10:42 PM] Iron: I'm aware of it. I do it too. S'not good.
[10:42 PM] Iron: It is good to be aware of it.
[10:43 PM] Iron: But he shouldn't lose work over it.
[10:43 PM] Emilly Orr: Personally, I think casual racism can be more horrifying than knee-jerk, reactionary racism. Because it's that socially acceptable, "oh, everyone feels that way" racism. Which shouldn't ever be dismissed.
[10:43 PM] Fermium: He hasn't lost any work besides Spike Lee dropping him. Who, being Spike Lee makes sense he'd rather not associate with him, at least for now.
[10:44 PM] Emilly Orr: But the other thing I'm wondering? Why did this come up now? He's done endless interviews for the Taken series, been asked this exact question for those films, but...now, this story comes out? Why?
[10:45 PM] Iron: Because he was asked where he gets the feeling of revenge from in the interview and that's what came to mind. I don't think there's more to it than just that.
[10:45 PM] Fermium: That's sort of what I mean. There's this almost counter-rage that happens when people dismiss how people feel or what they call for. They simplify, they extrapolate.
[10:45 PM] Fermium: People can call for whatever they want. They have that right. It comes down to whether it's enough to matter to a studio or not.
[10:45 PM] Emilly Orr: But it didn't come up for the other films he's done with revenge as a theme--and look over his IMDb, he's done a LOT of them--and this never surfaced before?
[10:46 PM] Iron: Maybe he thought better of it those other times, if it came to mind at all?
[10:46 PM] Iron: Clearly being truthful hasn't worked out so well for him.
[10:46 PM] Emilly Orr: Maybe.

Maybe. But this was another odd point for me. Why did this story come out now? What drew it to the forefront of his mind, when the last twenty years of his acting career in revenge epics didn't draw it out?

[10:46 PM] Iron: And people can call for things, yeah, but it doesn't make it right for them to do so.
[10:47 PM] Iron: Coming from my perspective of what is right and wrong.
[10:47 PM] Fermium: What makes it wrong.
[10:47 PM] Emilly Orr: Careers in this climate can be ruined over casual comments. Look at James Gunn. Is it deserved? Sometimes. Can people change? I have to believe they can, and I refuse to believe that once change occurs, they can go back to those old modes of thinking. (Or, at least, usually.)
[10:48 PM] Iron: What makes anything wrong, [Fermium]?
[10:48 PM] Iron: And I agree Emi.
[10:49 PM] Emilly Orr: How about a less charged word, then? It makes it unfortunate, that he decided now, in the midst of one-strike-you're-out society, to tell this story. Very bad timing.
[10:49 PM] Fermium: That is a very deep question, [Iron].
[10:49 PM] Iron: Yeah. One often discussed in Philosophy classes, heh.
[10:50 PM] Iron: And yeah, bad timing. I do think it will, for the most part, blow over at least and not be completely career ending.
[10:50 PM] Iron: So it could be worse.
[10:50 PM] Iron: But still unfortunate for the time being.
[10:53 PM] Fermium: The easy answer is 'When it harms someone' but that's not always true. A boycott would hurt someone in some fashion. So, instead perhaps directly harming someone. Though I'd also say that people trying to enforce their values via laws on other people is wrong. But what makes that different than calling for a boycott? The more subtle answer to that is the ability of the group to actually accomplish it. What power they hold, so to speak.
[10:53 PM] Fermium: Either way, not really important. I'm not saying it's right, just not sure what specifically makes it wrong. It's subjective, all of this is subjective.

And we'll pick this up in one last part.

(Continued in part five.)

(Continued from part two.)

Again, we're pretty much picking up mid-conversation: read part one and part two if you don't know what's being discussed.

[9:46 PM] Iron: I try to avoid dictating without power in part because it implies I have authority over the person, and will definitely more often lead to them being angry and ignoring rather than considering what I have to say. That's how I react when someone dictates to me without power, anyway. I have authority issues about being clear who has power over me and on what subjects so I very strongly react negatively to people powerlessly dictating over me that way, heh.
[9:46 PM] Iron: If I have to be dismissive to use the term, which I may have to be in some ways, then so be it. But I'm not dismissing them entirely, I am using the term to say that I am paying attention to and looking at that group of people. I am dismissing the individuality of each person because it is necessary to do so to address the overall intent as a whole. I cannot state my opinion about each single person involved because there are thousands, all with nuances and I am a single being.

That's a good point too. Part of what we do as humans is label. We pick out patterns, we identify by general traits, it's how we're wired to exist in the world. So to a certain extent, categorization will always be a part of who we are as humans.

[9:46 PM] Iron: As a note, I find it better, if possible, to use an example that is counter to one's usual opinion sometimes so as to not contribute to just always painting the "other" group as always the villains. So maybe like, looking at people that were dismissing those that are boycotting Gillette or something would have worked better, but sure.
[9:46 PM] Iron: I am certain a number of people dismissed the Chik-Fil-A boycott after looking into it and finding they disagreed with it. I'd still eat there, if friends were going there. I'd hesitate before going there on my own, there are less problematic chicken places to eat at easily available, but that's just me. The chicken is probably still good and so are most of the people that work there. But see, that's not me dismissing the issue, that's me thinking about it and deciding the strict boycott doesn't make sense to my choices for me personally so I know it's a bit different. In this case I understand people that do boycott it because some money will still support the owner or whatnot.

Our perspectives, our learning, our observations, form our lives. If we never get out of our insular spaces, we don't learn about the larger world. And at times, that reaching out gets us harmed, or makes us angry, or makes us sad. All we can do at that point is use our own experiences to evaluate the new experiences and see if they can integrate in a meaningful way.

Of course, it's easier for me to say that, because I'm for the Chick-fil-A boycott. We don't order from Papa John's for similar reasons. I've only gone into a WalMart once, under duress, and I deliberately bought nothing. I have never bought anything from Starbuck's. I'm kind of pro-boycott, because hitting corporations in the finances works much better than writing letters, calling them, leaving messages, protesting outside their offices. If enough people refuse to buy from Business A, most of the time, Business A reconsiders. At the very least, Businesses B and C will perk up and say to the protesters, hey, WE aren't like THEM, come buy OUR things instead.

Though all of this is a longer-winded way to say I don't really understand the big divisive deal over Chick-fil-A. Simple biscuits are easy to make, the secret to Chick-fil-A chicken in the first place is pickle juice, and their "secret sauce" is pretty similar to other large chains. So what's the big deal? Just make it at home. Easy, done, no reason to ever go into the chain again.

[9:46 PM] Iron: Dismissal of individuality is necessary when addressing large issues. It has to be done. I am not trying to say outrage culture is a thing and so it can be dismissed. I'm trying to say outrage culture shouldn't be a thing, but it is, and I wish it could be ignored and dismissed but it isn't. It is too loud. It is a bad thing, in my opinion, that is too loud and not easily dismissed. I am very much not dismissing it by saying so, I am addressing it.
[9:46 PM] Iron: Lumping people is needed. I recognize they are individuals at their core, but the culture, the movement, is a larger than individual thing that exists and I need to reference its existence using words to do so.

Because again, it's easy for us to lump an entire group with certain traits into one box, than address each of them as individuals.

[9:46 PM] Iron: I don't hate the people involved in it. I don't like hating people. I can hate general movements but not easily hate people. Which is also part of why I wish people were more selective about including a movement as part of their identity but that's a whole different thing.
[9:46 PM] Iron: I should note that there are liberal based shows that will use deceptive methods to stoke hatred as well. But less of them, in my experience, for sure.

Oh, absolutely. No one's hands are clean where identity politics are concerned. All sides have done harm.

[9:46 PM] Iron: I'm not convinced that's true, that he'd never work again, especially if he never went through with it. I mean, there are black celebrities who claim to have shot someone and have successful careers after, although I'm thinking of rappers. That's always seemed odd to me how that type of violence is celebrated in that realm.
[9:47 PM] Iron: But point is, you assume he'd never have a job again. If so, that sucks. I'd be against that as well. Moreso than I'd be against the way they are treating Liam currently, because that's harsher than how they are treating Liam. I don't think I've indicated that treating a black man the same way, or worse, than they are treating a white man would be okay. Both are wrong.
[9:47 PM] Iron: Also getting shot isn't the same as being raped but that might be besides the point.
[9:47 PM] Fermium: Getting raped is worst.
[9:47 PM] Fermium: But that's subjective.
[9:48 PM] Fermium: They are both heinous crimes.
[9:49 PM] Iron: Yep yep. Just wasn't entirely sure why the switch from rape to being shot, for the example.

I know I made the shift earlier in discussing mass shooters because it's easier to come up with codified examples. (I think I say this later on this conversation as well. I believe the same reasoning applies here with the switch to being shot.

[9:50 PM] Emilly Orr: This thing that [Platinum] said--"people just being outraged and only caring about the outrage". That's it. That's it exactly.
[9:51 PM] Emilly Orr: I'm not talking about the people who are genuinely hurt by this, the ones who are thinking, man, I looked up to this guy as an actor/friend/date/whatever, and now feel confused as to how they SHOULD feel about him and his actions.
[9:51 PM] Emilly Orr That, I get.
[9:51 PM] Emilly Orr: I'm talking about that large stripe of people--and right now, it's being seen in ALL sections of the political spectrum--that are outraged by things just to BE outraged by things.

Okay, hold up for a moment, me. Am I saying this because I'm thinking subconsciously of the incel community? Especially the virulently self-loathing, and misogynistic, "black pill" contingent? There is a group that is part of that community that does get outraged just to get outraged. They seem to live to be outraged at "horrible" women and "attractive" men. Am I just thinking of that when I'm using the term "outrage culture" and "outrage warriors"?

[9:53 PM] Emilly Orr: The switch from rape to being shot is because I see how easy it would be to get to that place. It's terrifying. It SHOULD be terrifying. Shooters were the easiest example I had, but really, it's anyone who temporarily steps away from empathy. For any reason. Anyone who looks at an entire race of people and can say honestly they are not human, they're animals, they don't deserve whatever they have because they aren't "like us". Whomever we identify "us" as.
[9:54 PM] Fermium: This all started because I stated that my dislike is of people who get outraged about people being outraged.

True. And it expanded into a larger conversation from there.

[9:54 PM] Fermium: And I stand by that. I find that people are too quick to call someone's or some group's outrage 'misplaced' or an 'overreaction'. Even listening and parsing what has been said by everyone else here, I'm still getting that same feeling, though you are all my friends and I know you better than that.

[9:54 PM] Fermium: But it is a dismissal, and in a sense it is a refusal. A refusal to understand why they are outraged and instead just say 'They are looking to be outraged' 

And that is also a good point. Am I seeking a way to dismiss a group of people, myself? Am I stepping away from my own empathy about individuals to cull the herd?

[9:54 PM] Fermium: It took me ten minutes of searching to find comments and views that explain why people are outraged about Liam. And they have a point.

They do, yes. (And I  can't figure out the coding in the above quotations that make it look like two separate statements, and I'm giving up trying.)

[9:54 PM] Emilly Orr: Liam did it. The Black Israelite movement, holy hells, that's how they TRAIN their people to interact with others--that only black people in their movement are human and worthy. All whites are animals, all blacks who work with whites are Uncle Toms, anyone else is to be ignored as nonentities.
[9:55 PM] Emilly Orr: And that's fair, [Fermium], I thought I scrolled back to the beginning of things, but apparently I didn't. Not the first time this has happened with long discussions.
[9:56 PM] Iron: Still reading, but I meant the switch from rape to being shot in [Fermium]'s example of Denzel. But that doesn't take away from what you said there or anything.
[9:56 PM] Emilly Orr: Ah. Which is apparently part of what I missed.

Which is also slightly confusing, because, when I went back in the chat to capture all of this, there wasn't much beyond the Denzel allegory, so...I did tackle it from the beginning, as I'd originally thought, I'd just somehow missed the Denzel reference. No clue why.

[9:56 PM] Iron: np
[9:58 PM] Fermium: Oh. Because it was relevant to the broader topic of racism. The example I used is not uncommon for black people in America. White people get away with a lot. I was originally going to use Police, which would have been just as valid, but went for a more random schmo. [10:02 PM] Iron: Ah I see.

Pretty much. The police-as-allegory would also have been a good example, but that is only partially racism, the rest, I truly believe, involves the rise of Homeland Security and the militarization of local police forces.

[10:04 PM] Iron: But I do need to be clear that while I am against the treatment of Liam, and would be against the same treatment of a black man in his situation. More against it if the treatment was worse, which it might very well unfortunately be.
[10:04 PM] Iron: I can be against multiple potential situations.
[10:05 PM] Fermium: You can, but the majority cannot. As MIB stated...
[10:05 PM] Fermium: A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it.

And again, I'm going to divide this into a fourth part, because we're still not even close to the end. Ye gods.

(Continued in part four.)

(Continued from part one.)

We pick up in media res:

[8:23 PM] Iron: What's a better way to indicate that there are a quite a number of people that act this way, feeding off of each other in groups? I'm not dismissing that it exists, I'm using a term to indicate what the term itself means as a definition. It is a way of being that groups of people have chosen to operate as, and they bolster each other by doing so in those groups. It is what the groups are focused around. It is their culture.
[8:26 PM] Iron: What is a better term to reference a group of people that operate in the same manner and strengthen each other's chosen way of being? Outrage Group Methodology?
[8:27 PM] Iron: If it's the term that is the issue, I am open to a different one. But it seems to apply fairly accurately as a definition of a culture that is about being outraged.
[8:29 PM] Iron: If a person or a group of people is about making change and improving things, then outrage is not their culture, it is a tool.
[8:30 PM] Iron: But when something or someone does change and improve and that is not recognized and people continue just being outraged on the subject, then at that point they have become part of a group that is focused on outrage over improvement.
[8:36 PM] Fermium: But it seems to apply fairly accurately as a definition of a culture that is about being outraged.
[8:36 PM] Fermium: That sentiment is the issue, not the term itself. That it's a culture that is about being outraged, when the truth is often more it's a culture that is outraged. They don't exist to be outraged, they are outraged. There is no way to really term them, people have different reasons.
[8:37 PM] Fermium: Plus, again, this goes back to the term itself yes, but Outrage Culture isn't a specific group of people. It's everyone. It's the same as people calling Millenials the 'Participation Awards' culture. If there are a specific group or even just people who, unrelatedly, are often at the forefront of these issues and being outraged, then that really is a different thing.
[8:38 PM] Fermium: And we have a term for that.
[8:38 PM] Fermium: It's Social Justice Warrior.
[8:40 PM] Fermium: We saw what happened there. The term got used so often to become meaningless, which let it be reclaimed as a thing to be proud of unrelated to the original meaning of a 'keyboard warrior' type.

Okay, so, are the terms "Social Justice Warrior" and "Outrage Warrior" interchangeable terms? If so, then I'm as guilty of labeling as anyone else. Is there enough differentiation between them that they indicate different things? How I originally heard SJW as an insult, and used SJW as an insult, was specifically that group of individuals who wanted to be offensive in their own opinions while objecting to other people being offensive. Is that the same thing as "Outrage Warrior"? And where does cancel culture come in, because I know that is a presence in today's society (again, at least American culture, though there is evidence this is creeping into English culture as well).

[8:41 PM] Iron: I need a term for when groups of people are outraged beyond the point in time of the company/person having done their due to fix/address their action. Because that is a thing that happens, I can find much proof if required.
[8:41 PM] Iron: What term should I use?

That does seem to be the question.

[8:42 PM] Iron: It would help if it would also apply to people that are overly outraged over minor things, because that is also a thing although is obviously more opinion based. But my opinions are valid as well so terms to explain them are helpful.
[8:45 PM] Iron: As an aside, I'm not convinced SJW was reclaimed. It just means different things to different people at this point I believe.
[8:46 PM] Iron: Justice, of a social nature or otherwise, as a concept is a good thing though. So I don't use it as an insult myself. Justice is good.
[8:47 PM] Iron: So is fighting for it. It's never really made much sense as an insult imo.

But the original term arose as an insult, it was never used as a complimentary term on Tumblr, and it definitely was never used in a complimentary sense off Tumblr. So in what sense does it not make sense as a dismissive, insulting term?

[8:48 PM] Fermium: I don't think you need a term. Just say, "I think those people are overreacting" "I understood their point, but it's time for them to let it go."
[8:49 PM] Fermium: And the truth is, you're sort of still dictating whether someone can be angry or not about something. You disagree, or have a different perspective/morals/beliefs. That's all.
[8:49 PM] Fermium: You can't really find Objective evidence of people staying outraged too long, only subjective evidence that most people might agree with. But maybe they won't! And that's okay.

To be fair, constant outrage, even constant anger, is exhausting. Harlan Ellison used to say in interviews that what kept him going was going to sleep every night angry, and waking up every morning angry. But he carried a ton of stress from that, and had several heart attacks, which I believe were at least partially caused from that level of constant anger/rage/irritation. It's not good for us, long-term, to stay angry.

[8:53 PM] Iron: you're sort of still dictating whether someone can be angry or not about something I'm dictating what my opinion is on someone acting that way. I need to be clearer on that, apparently. But the things I say are from my opinion, I know that. People can act however they want, I can't change how people are allowed to act. But I can point out why it's harmful to do so, if I can get someone to agree on what is and isn't harmful. Which is another matter as well of course.

That first sentence was slightly cumbersome to read, but what I believe was intended here is, the person protesting about this person dictating how others should feel, is now dictating how this person should feel about that. And it's a fair point--asking someone to feel a certain way is one thing; telling someone to feel a certain way is attempting to impose our own will, ethics, ideals, upon that other person.

[8:53 PM] Iron: There are enough people overreacting frequently enough that a term is useful. But even without that term if I just say they are overreacting I will get called out exactly the same for being dismissive, so I don't think that would fix the issue of using the term outrage culture or not.

Truth.

[8:54 PM] Iron: Allowed isn't really the same thing as okay, sort of. Depending on what counts as "okay". Being continually angry no matter what causes harm and isn't okay in my opinion. But it is allowed.
[8:55 PM] Iron: Okay is a bit weird that way, in how flexible it is.
[8:55 PM] Iron: Pretty useful, but also not great for strict definitions.
[8:56 PM] Iron: Maybe a better way for me to put it is that it is "okay" but not "good". Yeah, that fits better. You're right, it's okay that they can have that opinion, but the opinion itself is harmful (from my viewpoint) and (to me) that is not then okay. It is harmful. Not the ability to have the opinion, that is good, but the opinion itself.

That is a better way to put it, I think.

[8:57 PM] Iron: Thinking on it more, the issue I have with calling it just "overreacting" is that that misses out on the group aspect of it.
[8:57 PM] Iron: And that's an important part.
[8:58 PM] Iron: If it's just one person doing so, then yeah, that works.
[8:58 PM] Iron: But it's this whole thing where one person bolsters each other's anger, and it builds up and keeps going.
[8:59 PM] Iron: So it is overreacting, yes, but there's a whole group pushing each other along that goes with it that is important to the situation's description as well to include.

Ah, so we're back to mob mentality, again, which I also address below.

[9:03 PM] Platinum: [Iron] gets it, again.
[9:03 PM] Emilly Orr: I also think people are missing the lesson that Liam is presenting, with that story.
[9:03 PM] Platinum: they are.
[9:04 PM] Emilly Orr: Every person is one bad day away from snapping. Everyone. His bad day was when a friend was raped, and he went crazy for a week. Most school shooters reach that tipping point. Dylann Roof very nearly didn't shoot up the church he shot up, even though he'd gone in that church specifically TO shoot it up, because they were "so nice".
[9:04 PM] Emilly Orr: He did it anyway.
[9:04 PM] Emilly Orr: But everyone has the mob in them. Every single one of us.
[9:06 PM] Platinum: but yes, as [Iron] said, we're not dictating what people can be angry about. I don't have the power or authority to dictate anything to anyone. And even if I did have the power to dictate and tell them to shut up, and they would have to, I don't think I would do that, necessarily.
[9:06 PM] Fermium: sighs.

Frustration was starting to show, yes, because there was cross-chatter, which lends itself easily to the possible perception that one is not being heard as well as they perhaps could be heard.

[9:08 PM] Iron: Sometimes I word things in such a manner so that they come across as commands dictating how someone else should act.
[9:08 PM] Iron: It's not what I mean, it's how I would like the other person to act.
[9:08 PM] Iron: But it does sometimes come out as a command instead and that's my bad.
[9:08 PM] Emilly Orr: I don't think I've received that message when you do a deep dive into some topic.
[9:08 PM] Platinum: they're allowed to put what they want out there, and I'm allowed to be frustrated by it because it's harmful.

Yes to both--we are a disparate group of friends, with some disparate views on society and morality. Sometimes things do get heated, because we are coming from such different places on occasion. But by and large, that's the one thing we hold to--we are allowed to say what we feel, others are allowed to say what they feel, and if we disagree, well, we're going to from time to time.

[9:09 PM] Iron: I try to avoid it but I make mistakes, especially when I don't re-read something before I put it out there. Thank you, Emi, I'm glad to hear that.
[9:10 PM] Platinum: and if using terms like outrage culture or outrage warriors helps me to put a term onto what's frustrating to me, I'm allowed to do that too.
[9:10 PM] Iron: It is helpful to know how it's being interpreted by others though, of course.
[9:10 PM] Iron: In case I end up needing to explain what I meant by it, if there's a misinterpretation.
[9:11 PM] Platinum: sure. and I have no problem defining precisely what I mean by it if needed. as I have.
[9:11 PM] Iron: So I do appreciate knowing that it's sometimes coming across as dismissing someone's ability to be outraged over a matter entirely, or whatnot.
[9:11 PM] Iron: Yeah.
[9:13 PM] Emilly Orr: And [Platinum], you are. Outrage culture is killing us.
[9:14 PM] Platinum: I are?
[9:14 PM] Emilly Orr: Right. You are right in naming it a backlash reaction from outrage warriors, from the cancel culture movement.
[9:15 PM] Platinum: ah, ok. was confused for a moment :p
[9:15 PM] Emilly Orr: nods
[9:15 PM] Fermium: You can dictate without power. Understand that. If I tell you that your lack of belief in God is a sin. I'm dictating that to you. You can disagree, you can be angry, you can ignore me. But I am dictating it.
[9:15 PM] Fermium: There isn't a way to address a group of people who are angry about something you disagree with that isn't dismissive. All you can do is say "I don't get those people." or "I disagree with them and condemn what they are doing."

So what's a better way to address it? Some statements are always going to come off as addressed to the group at large, either a group we know or a group of unknowns that share one or two traits. Should we only communicate, one on one, to specific individuals, and leave group dynamics entirely out of it?

[9:15 PM] Fermium: It's like the Conservatives who basically dismissed the people who said we should boycott Chik-Fil-A. They thought they were overreacting, being outraged about something stupid. They dismissed them and dictated to them that they were wrong for feeling the way.
[9:16 PM] Fermium: There isn't another way to honestly take that.
[9:16 PM] Fermium: Now, understand, I'm not saying you can't. I've never once said you couldn't. I am just trying to make aware that it is dismissive, and if you are okay with that, then fine. Everyone has their own morals and limits. Me, I find dismissal more harmful than engagement, which isn't to say there aren't times outright dismissing someone is good. And that does apply to both sides. There are people who don't want to engage, and that's fine too.
[9:16 PM] Fermium: My point is, understand what you are saying, intent or not, when you stereotype or lump varying people who might all have their own different reasons together as 'Overreactors' or 'Outrage Warriors'.

And I acknowledge this is a correct statement. It's not as ultimately dismissive as name-calling, but it is dismissive, it does group people into easily ignorable/dismissable sections of society, and that makes it easier for us to at least temorarily lower their social status as individuals in our view. And we have enough problems with social striation as it is.

[9:16 PM] Fermium: The only people I personally hate are those that lie, spread misinformation, and outright manipulate to stoke those same feelings. Which, guess what, is often what Conservatives do. See any Conservative Talk Radio. See Trump and his 'Fake News'.
[9:16 PM] Iron: I feel bad for Fawkes I feel like he's trying to catch up to responding to all the things we're saying b-
[9:16 PM] Iron: Oh good, there we go, got it out.

That is one of the only problems with this chat service--since all streams are saved as one single "thread", so to speak, of any given conversation, there can be issues where separation between thoughts is more difficult than it needs to be. Now, one answer to that is to further define sub-servers to address specific issues. One friend of mine, on his sub-server, further defines the groups on that server to include things like internet/computer security issues, cute animals, positive news, depressing news, and nightmare fuel, among others. (And yes, he set up the nightmare fuel section for me. Is anyone surprised?)

[9:20 PM] Platinum: it all comes down to harm. I can point out why the conservatives are wrong in that boycotting chik-fil-a is overreacting and wrong to feel that way. because the money going to chik-fil-a is known to end up going to groups that engage in harmful actions/lobbying against LGBTQ people.
[9:22 PM] Platinum: in the same way, I can point out the harm that people just being outraged and only caring about the outrage, or continuing the outrage after a person/group/company/whatever recognizes the issue in their actions and works to correct it. or in cases like Liam, being outraged at them for coming out and admitting to something they recognize as terrible and feel shame over. because it will stop other people from doing the same for fear of being the next target of undue outrage, and maybe having their life ruined over something it shouldn't be.
[9:24 PM] Platinum: and yes, the people that lie, purposely spread misinformation, refuse to be corrected and continue to spread the same misinformation, and especially which falsely continue to stoke outrage for whatever reason, are particularly despicable, and I likewise would hate such people.
[9:26 PM] Platinum: if saying they're outrage warriors or part of outrage and cancel culture is dismissive, then it is I suppose. I only see it as disagreeing with them. But I'm also not on most social media and not looking to engage and have lengthy debates with strangers over why I see their actions as the wrong thing to do. I don't want my life to be about that, at this stage.
[9:27 PM] Platinum: my initial statements were a simple statement of frustration over these things among a group of friends which I assumed could understand those feelings, whether or not they agreed with them.
[9:27 PM] Fermium: [Platinum]. Tell me. [Iron] too, or anyone.
[9:27 PM] Fermium: What do you think would happen if a prominent Black actor. Denzel for instance. Came out and said how after his friend was shot by some white guy in 'self-defense' he walked the streets with a bat hoping to smash some white person's skull in?

He'd be crucified.

[9:28 PM] Fermium: Spoiler. The answer is he'd never have a job again. Liam Neeson is privileged. Even the outrage he is getting - and I'd agree, based on my current understanding of events, that it is misplaced - but even that outrage is honestly nothing much. He isn't going to get Mel Gibsoned, and even if he did, GUESS WHO IS ACTING AGAIN.
[9:29 PM] Fermium: You can't keep a good white boy down. Anti-Semitic [f*cking a**hole] or not.
[9:30 PM] Fermium: should have gone with Idris Elba.

It's not that Smith and Elba are interchangeable in any way, but I think the point is made just as easily with Smith as with Elba. Idris Elba is known for someone 'grittier' roles, as is Denzel Washington. Will Smith, on the other hand, made a rap career out of refusing to curse, and for the bulk of his acting, never made an R film, and very few PG-13 features. Even someone with that "clean" a reputation, so to speak, would still be crucified if he'd said the thing Liam Neeson said in that interview.

[9:30 PM] Platinum: that may be true. and would still be part of the same problem to me. and I would be just as upset at people getting outraged at Denzel(as the given example), as the people putting out the misplaced outrage toward Liam
[9:37 PM] Fermium: Oh hey, Ava DuVernay made the same point.

I'd also point to a response Ms. DuVernay got below that tweet:

"Somebody on here said a while ago that it's not even privilege. It's power. White power. The same stuff that fueled his desires to kill Black folks fuels the aparatus tapdancing to convince us it's no big deal or that he's a hero for not actually bludgeoning an innocent to death."

And that's kind of the main point, isn't it? The two camps seem to be somewhat evenly divided between "He didn't actually kill anyone, he's learned from that mistake" and "He COULD have easily killed someone, change or not, he nearly openly committed premeditated murder".

[9:44 PM] Fermium: is also, at the moment, far less convinced the outrage is 'misplaced.'
[9:44 PM] Fermium: https://www.facebook.com/thedailyshow/videos/liam-neesons-racist-confession/615436418885605/

I don't have Facebook, which means that some FB posts I can see, but most I can't, so I'm just leaving the link here and hoping it does, in face, reinforce the point that is being made.

[9:45 PM] Fermium: There are some very valid reasons why people are outraged about this, or at least, angry about it.
[9:45 PM] Fermium: Which means it isn't misplaced, it's just misunderstood.

And, I think this one is also getting long--we had a lot to say, hashing this out to some sort of vague conclusion--so I will be splitting this into a part three, which will likely be posted tomorrow.

(Continued in part three.)