Pet Peeves

[Sunbird]

On the subject of Nutella and peanut butter: I love them both. (Creamy PB much more than crunchy.) I storming LOVE Reese's cups and have been known to eat creamy peanut butter straight out of the jar. Whenever I eat ice cream, I go for all the chocolate- and PB-type toppings.

 

But on the subject of pet peeves--I was just reminded of another one of mine today. Those people who drive along in the right lane and turn their right blinker on but refuse to use the right-turn lane, forcing all the traffic behind them to slow down because they won't get out of the way.

[Orlion Blight]

The NFL draft.

[RippleGylf]

Teachers who are inconsistent and vague about collecting homework.

 

One of my teachers, nicknamed (by himself) the "Math Cowboy," does this a lot. 

 

 

"Oh, the 1.4 math homework you got today is technically due tomorrow."

 

5 months later...

 

"Hey, do you all have that 1.4 worksheet ready to turn in?"

 

 

Then there are times when, after arriving in class after going to an in-school performance of "The Mystery of Edwin Drood", he says, "By the way, you should have that 75-problem exam review to turn in tomorrow. As well as the past month of homework."

 

This leads to me, being the procrastinator that I am, doing all of this in one night, getting two hours of sleep. Why did you not do it earlier, you ask? Maybe because I felt I should do homework that I knew was going to be collected, rather than do pointless drill problems that may never be collected. By the way, he never collected it. 

[Oversleep]

I'm not familiar with Witcher, but that sounds like a complaint straight from the more politically inclined corners of Tumblr. To quote one prominent blog: "There is never an excuse for not having a POC character in your story." Even if it's wildly implausible, apparently. 

It's not only implausible (BTW, first game had a major black antagonist, but I somehow feel it wouldn't count for them), but also pretty ironic: one of the major themes throughout the books and games is racism. It's just not skincolor, but actual races (humans, elves, dwarfs, gnomes and so on). And of course witchers are pretty much outcasts. Of course the whole thing is much, much more complex and it's explored far more than I am able to describe here.

BTW, I find it very interesting that the whole thing with political correctness is an American thing. The way I see it, it's because you have a much more diverse society (and history of slavery) and when somebody does not include non-white people it can be perceived as racist.

But Poland has been very homogenous for very, very long and I think I could count non-white people I met on two hands. So when I write a story, it's natural for me to make the cast mainly white. If somebody makes a game out of it and stays true to the source material, I get attacked by SJWs for not making the cast as diverse as the society they are used to. Weird.

Anyway, this has been a rant too long and too absorbing than it's worth. So to end on uplifting note: If you can get the books, read them. Seriously. You won't regret it (until you read through all of it and realize there is nothing more).

[TwiLyghtSansSparkles]

It's not only implausible (BTW, first game had a major black antagonist, but I somehow feel it wouldn't count for them), but also pretty ironic: one of the major themes throughout the books and games is racism. It's just not skincolor, but actual races (humans, elves, dwarfs, gnomes and so on). And of course witchers are pretty much outcasts. Of course the whole thing is much, much more complex and it's explored far more than I am able to describe here.

BTW, I find it very interesting that the whole thing with political correctness is an American thing. The way I see it, it's because you have a much more diverse society (and history of slavery) and when somebody does not include non-white people it can be perceived as racist.

But Poland has been very homogenous for very, very long and I think I could count non-white people I met on two hands. So when I write a story, it's natural for me to make the cast mainly white. If somebody makes a game out of it and stays true to the source material, I get attacked by SJWs for not making the cast as diverse as the society they are used to. Weird.

Anyway, this has been a rant too long and too absorbing than it's worth. So to end on uplifting note: If you can get the books, read them. Seriously. You won't regret it (until you read through all of it and realize there is nothing more).

 

Here in the US, the arguments for more diverse books and movies are solid: America is a diverse place, but the vast majority of media we consume center on white protagonists, to the point where it's actually pretty difficult to think of a recent popular protagonist who wasn't white. And I agree with those arguments. Representation is important for way more reasons than I could list here—everyone needs someone to identify with, reading about characters with different experiences teaches empathy, etc.—and we need more of it. 

 

However, I think the SJW bloggers take those excellent arguments to an unfeasible extreme. "There is never an excuse for not having a POC character in your story," they say. Well, what if you're writing about a Viking society in the Low Middle Ages? This was well before anyone in Europe even knew about Africa. Do you choose not to write about the Vikings because doing so precludes the addition of a POC character? 

 

To be fair, the SJWs do have some good arguments, but I avoid their blogs. Why? Well, I frequented some of those blogs for a while before I realized that their advice was paralyzing my writing. "Yes, yes, add more POC characters!" they said, so I added more POC characters. "Oh, but watch out for this, and this, and this and this and this. And if you don't adhere to every rule we're setting out, you're racist." It puts writers in a double bind: If you don't write about POC characters, you're racist; but if you don't write about them exactly the way the SJWs want you to, you're racist. 

 

And, the funny thing is, they're right about one thing: We don't just need representation, we need good representation. Well-done representation. Accurate representation. But their idea of accurate is so exacting that I'm beginning to conclude that the most hardcore SJWs won't be satisfied with any books save for the ones they write themselves. 

Edited April 30, 2016 by TwiLyghtSansSparkles

[Arrae]

About the diversity issue: some video games have problems with making all of their female characters look like the same same big-boobed, stick-skinny, spine-must-be-broken-to-pull-that-pose-off lady over and over again.

 

I could complain about it promoting unhealthy body expectations for women or showing an unwelcome face to about half the population (women have money too, companies!) or even how it shatters suspension of disbelief, but I won't. There's already plenty of topics about that on tumblr.

 

All I'll say here is this: don't these artists get bored, creating the same body shapes over and over again?

Edited April 30, 2016 by Arraenae

[Orlion Blight]

I

BTW, I find it very interesting that the whole thing with political correctness is an American thing. The way I see it, it's because you have a much more diverse society (and history of slavery) and when somebody does not include non-white people it can be perceived as racist.

Well, there's also history of racism as well, which very much continues to this day (one minor but relevant example is casting white people for a movie about Egyptians and Hebrews).

Also, you do yourself a disservice if you assume all online "SJW" are the same immature adolescent white kids who just found out about racism and that Santa isn't real. They don't know what they are talking about because they still don't know what racism is and how it affects the racist and the people being discriminated against. That's why their ideas are so laughably simplistic as "include a black guy!"

Anyway, pet peeve...um, when someone says something to the effect of "I can't be racist, I get along with black people/have a black friend!" Here's a hint: if you hear anyone say that, they have racist views and are trying to justify them. You might even hear them refer to their black friends as "the good ones".

[Delightful]

About the diversity issue: some video games have problems with making all of their female characters look like the same same big-boobed, stick-skinny, spine-must-be-broken-to-pull-that-pose-off lady over and over again.

I could complain about it promoting unhealthy body expectations for women or showing an unwelcome face to about half the population (women have money too, companies!) or even how it shatters suspension of disbelief, but I won't. There's already plenty of topics about that on tumblr.

All I'll say here is this: don't these artists get bored, creating the same body shapes over and over again?

May I introduce you to thehawkeyeinitiative.com some of the women it parodies.....they have an extra limb between hip and stomach. It's disturbing.

I'm not familiar with Witcher, but that sounds like a complaint straight from the more politically inclined corners of Tumblr. To quote one prominent blog: "There is never an excuse for not having a POC character in your story." Even if it's wildly implausible, apparently.

So there's a really bad movie I saw This post has been reported for attempting to skirt the rules friends a while ago, which is probably the only reason is aw the whole thing. It was a Snow White story in medieval England setting. There was one Asian dwarf, and one black woman among the silent background villagers. It was totally random and pretty obvious they cast one Asian person and one black person to be politically correct without actually understanding what representation means. The movie was hilariously bad regardless.

And apparently there were black people in England back then, they just get whitewashed out of our history books. I don't know terribly much on the subject. i guess I'm saying that just cause we assume the people somewhere are all white doesn't mean they are/were.

Edited April 30, 2016 by Delightful

[maxal]

Here in the US, the arguments for more diverse books and movies are solid: America is a diverse place, but the vast majority of media we consume center on white protagonists, to the point where it's actually pretty difficult to think of a recent popular protagonist who wasn't white. And I agree with those arguments. Representation is important for way more reasons than I could list here—everyone needs someone to identify with, reading about characters with different experiences teaches empathy, etc.—and we need more of it. 

 

However, I think the SJW bloggers take those excellent arguments to an unfeasible extreme. "There is never an excuse for not having a POC character in your story," they say. Well, what if you're writing about a Viking society in the Low Middle Ages? This was well before anyone in Europe even knew about Africa. Do you choose not to write about the Vikings because doing so precludes the addition of a POC character? 

 

To be fair, the SJWs do have some good arguments, but I avoid their blogs. Why? Well, I frequented some of those blogs for a while before I realized that their advice was paralyzing my writing. "Yes, yes, add more POC characters!" they said, so I added more POC characters. "Oh, but watch out for this, and this, and this and this and this. And if you don't adhere to every rule we're setting out, you're racist." It puts writers in a double bind: If you don't write about POC characters, you're racist; but if you don't write about them exactly the way the SJWs want you to, you're racist. 

 

And, the funny thing is, they're right about one thing: We don't just need representation, we need good representation. Well-done representation. Accurate representation. But their idea of accurate is so exacting that I'm beginning to conclude that the most hardcore SJWs won't be satisfied with any books save for the ones they write themselves. 

 

This is a never ending argument... People do not want to be told how to write their stories, and rightly so, but at the same time if they keep on writing as they had been writing in the past, things will never evolve. Featuring prominent black characters on prime time television has helped the black people rights movement. This is where, I believe, the problem lies: it appears as if every single minority community basically had to fight to get rights in the States. Such problematic never happened (I am not saying racism never happened or is never happening, but white people have never, as far as I know, beaten on black people, putting them in jail for no reason or forbidden them the right to vote.) over here which is probably why, as a foreigner, I don't always quite get why it is so important. 

 

The same could be said about female and LGBT characters: by featuring more and more characters from traditionally oppressed group of people you actually help the general perception to move from negative to positive. I have once read how having 24 featured a black President helped paved the way for Obama: I have no idea if it is true, but I have read such commentary in the past.

 

Most people agree POC representation is desirable, but nobody agrees where the threshold should be. In other words, how can you write something which is universally satisfying for all possible readers? It is a never ending debate. Do all books need to solely feature POC as their main characters for the hardcore SJW to be pleased? There are times when I have no idea what needs to be done to satisfy the critics. I understand the crusade, I just don't understand how it should be handled.

 

However, I once stumble on a thread which explained the percentage of POC, women, Natives, Asian, LGBT in books with respect to their relative percentages in the population... I dunno which books it included, but the results were interesting and surprising.

 

As for Vikings, apparently, there were black Vikings... What I would want to know is which percentage and what was the likelihood I would stumble on one were I transported through time. People have also argued dark haired Vikings weren't representative... So again, where do we draw the line?

[Oversleep]

We just need time-travelling demographers. Send a squad to Middle-ages and we will finally know what percentage of what groups to include.

[TwiLyghtSansSparkles]

This is a never ending argument... People do not want to be told how to write their stories, and rightly so, but at the same time if they keep on writing as they had been writing in the past, things will never evolve. Featuring prominent black characters on prime time television has helped the black people rights movement. This is where, I believe, the problem lies: it appears as if every single minority community basically had to fight to get rights in the States. Such problematic never happened (I am not saying racism never happened or is never happening, but white people have never, as far as I know, beaten on black people, putting them in jail for no reason or forbidden them the right to vote.) over here which is probably why, as a foreigner, I don't always quite get why it is so important. 

 

The same could be said about female and LGBT characters: by featuring more and more characters from traditionally oppressed group of people you actually help the general perception to move from negative to positive. I have once read how having 24 featured a black President helped paved the way for Obama: I have no idea if it is true, but I have read such commentary in the past.

 

Most people agree POC representation is desirable, but nobody agrees where the threshold should be. In other words, how can you write something which is universally satisfying for all possible readers? It is a never ending debate. Do all books need to solely feature POC as their main characters for the hardcore SJW to be pleased? There are times when I have no idea what needs to be done to satisfy the critics. I understand the crusade, I just don't understand how it should be handled.

 

However, I once stumble on a thread which explained the percentage of POC, women, Natives, Asian, LGBT in books with respect to their relative percentages in the population... I dunno which books it included, but the results were interesting and surprising.

 

As for Vikings, apparently, there were black Vikings... What I would want to know is which percentage and what was the likelihood I would stumble on one were I transported through time. People have also argued dark haired Vikings weren't representative... So again, where do we draw the line?

 

I'm all for more representation. The more the merrier. The US entertainment industry does have a problem, and that problem is called "making every protagonist white, often male, cis, and straight." We need more minority representation, and we need good minority representation. Who cares what Hollywood says, that a white audience can't relate to a non-white character? I can! Anyone can! They're human, aren't they? Humans can relate to humans. That's how empathy works, Hollywood.

 

What I dislike about the hardcore SJWs, and why I steer clear, is because the ones I've seen and summarily avoid have a sort of double-sided attitude toward white writers who want to write minority characters. Writing With Color is one of the more frequently recommended, and at least once a month, one of the mods will write a long piece about how little minority representation there is, how this harms minorities, and why we need more. It's a call to arms for writers, and writers answer the call. White writers send in questions about the minorities they've chosen to write about. 

 

And the mods tear into them. 

 

Mind you, the mods never come right out and say "This is a stupid question and you're a stupid person for asking it." But their tone says it pretty clearly. And yes, some of the questions asked are stupid—but that's ostensibly why blogs like yours exist. People writing outside their experiences are asking these mods questions about their experiences so they can portray minority characters in a supportive and accurate way. They're not arrogantly saying "I know everything there is to know about your culture, pat me on the back for deigning to write about it so well." They're coming to the mods in humility, asking questions in hopes of receiving a reply that will help them improve their work. 

[+Slowswift]

I'm all for more representation. The more the merrier. The US entertainment industry does have a problem, and that problem is called "making every protagonist white, often male, cis, and straight." We need more minority representation, and we need good minority representation. Who cares what Hollywood says, that a white audience can't relate to a non-white character? I can! Anyone can! They're human, aren't they? Humans can relate to humans. That's how empathy works, Hollywood.

 

What I dislike about the hardcore SJWs, and why I steer clear, is because the ones I've seen and summarily avoid have a sort of double-sided attitude toward white writers who want to write minority characters. Writing With Color is one of the more frequently recommended, and at least once a month, one of the mods will write a long piece about how little minority representation there is, how this harms minorities, and why we need more. It's a call to arms for writers, and writers answer the call. White writers send in questions about the minorities they've chosen to write about. 

 

And the mods tear into them. 

 

Mind you, the mods never come right out and say "This is a stupid question and you're a stupid person for asking it." But their tone says it pretty clearly. And yes, some of the questions asked are stupid—but that's ostensibly why blogs like yours exist. People writing outside their experiences are asking these mods questions about their experiences so they can portray minority characters in a supportive and accurate way. They're not arrogantly saying "I know everything there is to know about your culture, pat me on the back for deigning to write about it so well." They're coming to the mods in humility, asking questions in hopes of receiving a reply that will help them improve their work. 

 

I never know when to take blogs like that seriously. Like, I want to not screw up big time, but not describing POC with words like "cocoa" because it implies POC are something to be consumed? I don't know where to draw the line, and tbh I'ma need more than an angry SJW blog post to convince me.

[Orlion Blight]

I never know when to take blogs like that seriously. Like, I want to not screw up big time, but not describing POC with words like "cocoa" because it implies POC are something to be consumed? I don't know where to draw the line, and tbh I'ma need more than an angry SJW blog post to convince me.

I think that's more a "show don't tell problem"

[Mistrunner]

The musical The Book of Mormon.

 

I try not to have a sense of humor about it, but the fact of the matter is that it's horribly offensive and I wish it did not exist.

 

So.

 

I don't want to be that person who can't take a joke, but it really crosses the line for me. I mostly stay away from conversations about it. But it really, really bothers me, and it makes me nervous that that's where people are getting information about my church.

 

(Don't go see it. Please.)

[TwiLyghtSansSparkles]

The musical The Book of Mormon.

 

I try not to have a sense of humor about it, but the fact of the matter is that it's horribly offensive and I wish it did not exist.

 

So.

 

I don't want to be that person who can't take a joke, but it really crosses the line for me. I mostly stay away from conversations about it. But it really, really bothers me, and it makes me nervous that that's where people are getting information about my church.

 

(Don't go see it. Please.)

 

I haven't seen it, and I don't plan to. 

 

Jokes about religion in general don't strike me as funny. That belief system that just became the butt of a joke is how some people in the world find meaning, and even if it's not real to the person telling the joke, it's real to the person who believes that religion. I'm not necessarily saying all religions are true, because the simple fact is that I don't know. What I do know is that a person's faith is precious to them. Why mock it? 

Edited May 4, 2016 by TwiLyghtSansSparkles

[The Invested Beard]

I haven't seen it, and I don't plan to. 

 

Jokes about religion in general don't strike me as funny. That belief system that just became the butt of a joke is how some people in the world find meaning, and even if it's not real to the person telling the joke, it's real to the person who believes that religion. I'm not necessarily saying all religions are true, because the simple fact is that I don't know. What I do know is that a person's faith is precious to them. Why mock it? 

 

Amen. I'd much rather sit down and have a rational discussion/theological debate than make fun of people.

[Orlion Blight]

I haven't seen it, and I don't plan to.

Jokes about religion in general don't strike me as funny. That belief system that just became the butt of a joke is how some people in the world find meaning, and even if it's not real to the person telling the joke, it's real to the person who believes that religion. I'm not necessarily saying all religions are true, because the simple fact is that I don't know. What I do know is that a person's faith is precious to them. Why mock it?

That's pretty much the message of the musical. It pretty much says that yes, religious belief can be outlandish and silly but the value of it is not its reason or believability, but the positive effects it has on its adherents.

I, at least, think those are two lessons everyone should keep in mind:

1) Your beliefs will appear to be outlandish and silly to many.

2) That doesn't really matter so long as those beliefs have a positive impact.

To be sure, I'm not going to blare it or share any part of it here if people do not care to have anything to do with it, but it really is much more than "oh, those silly Mormons"

Edited May 4, 2016 by Orlion Determined

[Delightful]

And then there are Jewish jokes that Jews tell other Jews that are sometimes offensive. Go figure. Like why on earth would you make a joke with anti-Semitic stereotypes from Europe?? That was a long time ago, it's not even a coping mechanism anymore.

 

Edit: After some thinking I believe I need to add: Maybe for Holocaust survivors and their children it is still a coping mechanism. I don't know, I can't directly speak for them. I do know that I personally dislike it when people make that kind of "joke"

Edited May 7, 2016 by Delightful

[TwiLyghtSansSparkles]

GUISE.

Stop reaching over my desk to grab pens. THAT IS MY PERSONAL SPACE. If you want a pen, ask for it and I will give. I am not a pen Scrooge. I am generous with my pens. What I am not generous with is violations of my personal space. You wouldn't reach out and grab that pen if it were in my shirt pocket, would you?

No?

Then treat my desk as if it's a shirt pocket.

Stop reaching over my desk for pens.

[Sunbird]

The musical The Book of Mormon.

 

I try not to have a sense of humor about it, but the fact of the matter is that it's horribly offensive and I wish it did not exist.

 

So.

 

I don't want to be that person who can't take a joke, but it really crosses the line for me. I mostly stay away from conversations about it. But it really, really bothers me, and it makes me nervous that that's where people are getting information about my church.

 

(Don't go see it. Please.)

 

I haven't seen it, but that's because I have a similar attitude toward it based on what I have heard/read from other people either in person or on the Internet. (Kind of like how I detest Fifty Shades of Grey without having read it thanks to the fact that its pornographic and sexually abusive nature is common knowledge these days.) Religion is too close to people's hearts for it to be something you can innocently and inoffensively make that kind of jokes about. But I think LDS church officials have made the best out of it by stationing missionaries outside the theaters where the musical is shown to talk about the real Book of Mormon to people as they come out.

[Orlion Blight]

Coverage of the Game of Thrones show. Seriously, bloggers, news folks, and Facebook jerks can not wait even ten minutes after the episode ends before they have to endlessly analyze what happened.

[Kaymyth]

Coverage of the Game of Thrones show. Seriously, bloggers, news folks, and Facebook jerks can not wait even ten minutes after the episode ends before they have to endlessly analyze what happened.

 

Oh, come on, it's not like we're any better whenever a new Sanderson novel comes out.

[Oversleep]

Oh, come on, it's not like we're any better whenever a new Sanderson novel comes out.

Unfortunately true. BoM and SH release was a nightmare... and I'm pretty sure I roughly know what happens in Secret History. Without even reading it.

[Delightful]

Unfortunately true. BoM and SH release was a nightmare... and I'm pretty sure I roughly know what happens in Secret History. Without even reading it.

This is me and major people/circumstances of significance in GoT. It's basically impossible *not* to know certain things. Edited May 11, 2016 by Delightful

[Quiver]

Coverage of the Game of Thrones show. Seriously, bloggers, news folks, and Facebook jerks can not wait even ten minutes after the episode ends before they have to endlessly analyze what happened.

 

I'm more bothered about spoilers., The sheer popularity of the show has outright forced me to watch it as soon as it airs (which is the middle of the orning here), simply because if I don't, I have to avoid the internet all day. Otherwise I can expect to see a dozen posts about THAT INCREDIBLE PLOT TWIST or whatever.