Personal - Death Is Bad

Comes The Huntsman – Rachael Acks

Dec 082013

This started out as a reply to Anaea Lay’s deconstruction of Comes The Huntsman (by Rachael Acks). It got too long to be a comment, so I turned it into a blog post. As the old adage says – “If you have more than a couple of lines to say, don’t clog up someone else’s comments section. Get your own blog and post it there, where it can be ignored properly.” :)

I think the direct-metaphor approach is too literal for a story like this. It didn’t occur to me until Anaea mentioned it that this could be read as two intertwined narratives. I read it much like I read Vellum – something happened, but the enormity of the event can never be put into words. So instead the event is repeated and re-examined, over and over, from countless different angles. Every story is a separate story, not a continuing narrative, with separate characters. But every story is the same story, and the characters are always the same – in essence if not in flesh. And if the story, the event, could be put into words, it would be a simple two-word story: people die.

The apples are, if one had to assign them a meaning, deep personal connections with other people. The heart, along with the drawing hand, is the willingness to feel and be vulnerable. The Huntsman is people you care about. But… never directly. Only in a vague “gesturing at the emotions underlying the concepts” way, so they’re fluid. Sometimes they’re literal.

i. “it was that same urge we all feel for the split second we look out over the railing of a bridge and wonder what it would be like to jump and fly away. I was never brave or mad enough to fly from a bridge. I should never have been mad enough to eat that apple.” – taking a chance on somone is scary. Connecting with someone, caring about them, makes you able to be hurt by them.

ii. see, told ya so

iii. you can be hurt simply by accident. No malice intended. And there was no way this could have been prevented – the hurt comes about by the very nature of who you are, and who the other person is. The only way this could have been avoided would be to never have formed a connection at all.

iv. you can be hurt beyond all reason by someone else acting to stop their own pain. How could this have been prevented? Too many knots, too many reasons, one cannot untangle the messes these humans make of their lives. But it happened right after the protagonist of iv lashed out and intentionally(?) hurt her friend, and it feels like an in-kind retributive strike. But one completely out of proportion to the crime, unimaginable in severity. The truth of fact may be different, but the truth of feeling says she’s to blame, and she cuts off her hand in penance. And she cuts off her vulnerability to others in defense.

v. A safe life. Prevent the hurt.

vi. A safe life also hurts. But not as much as the pain you’re defending against. It could never hurt as much as that pain did.

vii. A safe life. Is it living at all?

viii. Maybe the dull pain of a safe life isn’t worth it. Step outside, try again… Wait. No. Pain. Ow. God. Pain.

ix. So much pain. But different from the dull safe pain. Better. It is shared. This makes it tolerable.

x. The truth of feeling is altered. Time passed, the hurt heals. The defenses are now worse that what was being defended against, and the defender leaves her stronghold/prison. Normally this section would make up 98% of an Oprah bookclub book, and it would be boring and tedious and we’d all roll our eyes. That’s the difference between literary fiction and really good speculative fiction. A good SF writer makes it beautiful, and poetic, and cuts right inside you with words that say exactly what is needed and never a single letter beyond that. But never leaving out a single word that’s needed to get there. The end.

xi. And it was good. Or… better, at least.

God this is a good story. I’m again struck by it in the re-reading.

And I take it back, I guess there is a bit of a narrative. But it is, as Anaea said, emotional, not chronological. I think my only quibble with Anaea’s take on the story is that I feel it was being analyzed too literally. The friend/lover/Hunstman distinction shouldn’t be there… they all blend together into “person that I care about/can hurt me”. I don’t feel there is a breakthrough, only a passing of time. The sadness is always there, but it grows distant – and that is both awful and beautiful. Because people die, even though they shouldn’t.

Of course Rachael probably is shaking her head at how badly we misread everything she was trying to say. But that’s ok, that’s why we have death of the author. So everyone can get exactly what they most need from a piece of art, regardless of intentions. :)

Subverting the Christmas Tree – The Tree of Knowledge

Musings On Present Day, Personal 2 Responses »

Dec 042013

As most people already know, the Christmas Tree doesn’t have anything to do with Christianity. It was a pagan symbol for a pagan holiday, and when the Christian church appropriated the holiday they simply took many of its traditional customs and decorations along for the ride without question. I dunno if they were being clever or lazy, but it clearly worked.

It does make for a delicious point of irony however, which I exploit to multiply my enjoyment of the holiday immensely.

The early church fathers obviously never stopped to think about how this symbolism would be interpreted by someone unfamiliar with Christmas’s pagan origins, AND unfamiliar with Christian holiday traditions, but who IS very familiar with the Christian holy scriptures. Granted, such a combination would be very unusual back in their day. And, given that I haven’t heard what I’m about to say before, probably this day as well.

Assume no previous knowledge of Christmas at all, but a decent knowledge of one of the popular protestant bibles. If someone were to ask you about the most famous tree in the Christian myths, what would you say? Almost invariably – the Tree in the Garden of Eden which Adam & Eve ate from. The Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. Some might mention the almost-as-famous Tree of Life, but that one didn’t get any screen time in the stories. More esoteric answers might include Daniel’s giant tree or Jesus’s cursed fig tree, but neither of those is as well known.

Furthermore, the fruit of those trees is inconsequential. When one observes an actual Christmas Tree as most people decorate it, there is great importance placed upon the fruits of the tree. Spherical glass ornaments, often elaborately decorated, are placed all over the tree. The resemblance to idealized, exaggerated fruits is striking. Lights are also hung from the tree, perhaps supernatural berries, glowing and enticing. Both are designed to catch the attention of the viewer. What biblical fruit is as important as the one which Adam and Eve ate in Genesis?

This seems somewhat odd though, because this Tree and its Fruit are not pleasing to the Christian God. As we read in the Genesis story, he instructed the humans to avoid this Tree, warning that it would kill them. When they did eat of its fruit he flew into a fearful rage and banished them from the Garden – setting angelic guards and burning swords at the entrance – to ensure they couldn’t get their hands on the Tree of Life as well. Why would a Christian be venerating the Tree of Knowledge?

Ah, but eating of the Fruit did bring benefits to mankind. First, it exposed the lies of Yahweh – they did not die. But far more importantly – it opened their eyes, bringing them knowledge and making them wise. In fact it made them as wise as God himself, thus his panic. (Gen 3:22 – And the Lord God said, “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.”) In this way the tale is similar to that of Prometheus stealing fire from the Gods and giving it to Man. By their sacrifice all of humanity was uplifted, and we are now better, stronger, smarter than we were before. Enough so to be a threat.

And this is why I love the Christmas Tree so much. It is a celebration of Mankind’s first steps forward into seizing our own destiny. Showing gratitude to those who came before us and paid the price so their children could aspire to greater. And giving the finger to a god who would keep us ignorant. The Christmas Tree of Knowledge says “We remember. You tried to keep us weak and servile, and you failed. We’re still growing in power and in knowledge, and we’re coming for you next.”

I love that most Christians don’t seem to realize this is what their holiday centerpiece implies, and it makes me smile every time I see one being raised. So put up your own Tree of Knowledge and celebrate humanity. And if you want to really drive the point home, put some educational books around the base, or replacing the star on top. Just so no one mistakes you for one who doesn’t grasp the significance of what we celebrate to this day.

The Dick Punch

Musings On Present Day, Personal 1 Response »

Dec 022013

Back in the early days of my current relationship, before we were officially together, my SO punched me in the dick. We were at the Renaissance Festival, drinking a bit, and she grabbed something from my hand and ran off with it. I took off after her, caught up, and grabbed at her shoulder. On instinct she spun right around, fist swinging in low, and socked me right in the junk. I collapsed to my knees. About a minute later the nearest security guy came by and said “That was the funniest damn thing I’ve seen this month, but you really need to clear the path for others.” That was the point I realized this girl was awesome, and this relationship could be going places.

I try hard to respect people. Part of respecting people is not hitting on them inappropriately. Unfortunately there are few clear rules on this matter. Be friendly, flirt, read cues, back off if the other party isn’t interested. Don’t hit on people at work (yours or theirs). Feel free to hit on people at bars and parties. But things in real life are fuzzy. For example – how do conventions fit in to this? Some people think of them more as work, others as more of a party. Not too long ago an open couple propositioned someone in a very ham-handed way, as recounted in this blog post. They approached a speaker at a con, whom they’d had some cursory contact with previously, and handed her a card with a topless photo as an invitation. They probably felt they were being honest and non-threatening, but the speaker was mortified and felt sexually harassed.

I’m especially wary of this as I call myself a feminist, and making women feel less safe is antithetical to what I’m working towards. I’m also very sex-positive; and so I only want to approach women/couples who are open to such an approach, and remain platonic friends and colleagues with those who aren’t. It can be difficult to determine who is receptive and who isn’t, as there’s no way to ask without implying your intent (yes, I know about Down (formerly Bang With Friends), but haven’t used it). Due to social custom it generally befalls the man to initiate these interactions, so even when you’re fairly confident the feeling is mutual, the guy is the one who has to take the risk of looking like a creep and making the women feel unsafe. It’s possible to misjudge a person or situation, maybe falling for wishful thinking. There is an omnipresent danger of crossing lines you didn’t mean to cross.

What’s worse – sometimes you won’t even know you’re doing it. Social pressures are so fucked up that – flying in the face of all reason – women are strongly discouraged from letting men know when they’re being creepers or assholes! The term “strongly discouraged” is a massive understatement. Take ElevatorGate. Rebecca Watson (who is fucking awesome!) was at a con, drinking into the wee hours. She went to retire to her hotel room, and a guy who’d been lurking around followed her into the elevator, and when they were alone and trapped together propositioned her. She said that this was uncomfortable/creepy, and mentioned in a video “Guys, don’t do that.” This was GREAT advice, given with a smile. It is good knowledge to have, and is particularly useful for young geeky males who don’t have a lot of experience with women and need to know these sorts of things. It should have gotten nods from the experienced and thanks from the inexperienced. Instead Rebecca was subjected to a months-long intimidation and harassment campaign, including daily rape threats and death threats. The words “ElevatorGate” still live in infamy. Because a woman dared to make the world a slightly better place for everyone who isn’t an enormous asshole.

I try to err on the side of caution, but there’s always some doubt. My now-SO had already demonstrated assertiveness/self-possession/honesty. But we’d only known each other a couple months and I was still wary. The dick-punch was like an exclamation point. It drove home that yes – she really was willing to assert her agency in all aspects. I would never have to worry that I was doing something to irritate or hurt her which she wasn’t letting me know about. I could trust her to look after her own interests, I could let go of always second-guessing my actions. She was an equal, not a thing to be protected.

It was the best start I can imagine for a relationship. :)

Do not blame porn. DO thank a gay guy.

Musings On Present Day, Personal 2 Responses »

Nov 192013

I recently had a conversation with the father of a 12-year-old who was worried that his son would get a grossly distorted view of sex from porn, since there’s so much of it these days and it can get pretty extreme.

Well sure. There are some things you’ll learn from porn that are wrong if porn is your only source. Just as there are many aspects of life that you will get drastically wrong if Hollywood is your only source. I don’t consider this to be significant. Conscientious parents will inform their kids that porn is Kabuki Sex (as Dan Savage says), and will tell them that in real life people need foreplay, anal doesn’t happen until much later (if at all), and so forth. Kids who don’t have such parents (as I didn’t) will learn these lessons extremely quickly once they become sexually active. Seriously, those lessons are picked up in a flash, because they’re so vital to getting laid.

There’s also this weird concern that porn will teach boys to disrespect women.

No.

Porn is obviously ludicrous. Any boy with a female teacher learns immediately that they do not keep you after class to have sex with you. No one ever thinks those actions translate to real life. The stigma and secrecy that goes along with porn is enough of a signal on its own that it does not reflect real-life behavior. A kid will treat women with the respect or disrespect that has been demonstrated to him by his parents, peers, and society. If there are behavioral issues with your kid, look there. Porn is as responsible for his mistreatment of women as video games are responsible for his violent outbursts (ie: not at all). Again I point to the statistic that 100% of men watch porn and this doesn’t make them any more hostile to women. Every kind father, every young male feminist, every decent boyfriend – all watch porn. Hasn’t made them evil.

I’m actually more concerned about the self-image issues boys can get from porn than the female-issues. Their first girlfriend will quickly straighten out the female issues, but with no other males to compare themselves to, boys can internalize a lot of wrong ideas that will stick with them for a long time.

For example:

*The idea that all men are ready to fuck at the drop of a hat, as long as the female is willing. Sometimes, I just plain don’t want to fuck. I’m not in the mood. The shaming of being “unable to get it up” is really intense when you believe that this is the measure of your manhood. It took quite a while for me to become OK with saying No.

*The idea that the only thing men want is sex, all the time, to the exclusion of all else. Sometimes I really do just want to read, or play a game, or work on a project. Don’t feel bad that I’m not always drooling over you, it’s not a sign of anything wrong with you. And don’t imply there’s something wrong with me if I’m not lured away from my desk by the promise of titties. They’re fun, they’re not the Holy Grail

*The idea that men don’t have feelings, or at least none that matter in the face of sex. If I dislike you personally, I can’t have sex with you. Again, that doesn’t mean I fail at masculinity.

The thing is – these aren’t problems because of porn. These are problems that are part of the fabric of our society. These messages are constantly broadcast to all of us, in movies, in sitcoms, in casual banter. They’re reinforced by women as well as men. If this was not the case, and these tropes showed up only in porn, they’d have no noticeable effect on anyone. They’d be just as silly and ignorable as the old “you’re going to get sex every time you deliver a pizza to a woman” trope.

My only proposed solution right now is to read/listen to a lot of Dan Savage. I suppose that guys talking frankly with other guys about sex could also work, but that’s waaaaaaay too “gay” for most people to actually do, especially at the age that it’s needed. For lots of young straight guys, the best they can do is surreptitiously listen in on gay guys discussing sex. I think the acceptance of gay culture is one of the best things to ever happen to straight male sexuality, because gay guys actually have other guys’ sex lives to compare their own to – other penises to use as references. They brought some actual discussion of sex from the male perspective into the room. Before that, all men had to compare themselves to are the myths and legends of history’s great liars.

Last Night

Personal No Responses »

Nov 082013

She: Hi baby. I just fed the dog dinner.
He – sits down to eat
Dog – comes over to ask for his dinner
He: Don’t try to play that game, I know you just ate.
Dog – indicates he can’t remember the last time he had anything to eat, can’t he have just a tiny morsel?
He: I know you’re lying to me, and I know you just ate
Dog – finds this implausible
He: You see, these noises us humans are constantly making aren’t purely emotive – they are also a form of telepathy. I can know anything that she knows, if she so wishes.
Dog – hesitates
He: Thus I know she fed you.
Dog – continues to plead for food, undeterred by the human’s lies

Toastmasters Icebreaker

Personal No Responses »

Oct 302013

I’ve joined a Toastmasters group to improve my public speaking. This is my first talk given in the group, the Icebreaker. I speak about being an alcoholic for three years, and then not doing that anymore.

I have been informed that I need to move a bit, add some gestures, and take my hands out of my pockets. I will be working on that next.

Mile Hi Con 2013

Personal No Responses »

Oct 222013

I went to MileHiCon this past weekend. It was awesome. Here are details.

One of the first things I did was run into Paolo Bacigalupi, multiple-award-winning author of The Windup Girl. At the last MileHiCon I had attended, two years ago, I had tagged along as Aarron Hughes from our Book Club took him to lunch. They were talking in the hallway when I showed up, and I came over to say hi. Paolo recognized me. Allow me to emphasize – from a lunch conversation two years ago, just one fan out of dozens that day and I’m sure thousands in the intervening time – he actually recognized me and placed me as one of the people he went to lunch with. I was blown away. I am awful with names, and only slightly better with faces. Example: during the con a girl with pink hair said hi to me, and chatted with me for a few minutes. It was clear we’d met in the past few months, she knew my name, and referred to recent local cons. However I had no idea who she was, she didn’t even look familiar. I am really freakin’ bad with that sort of thing. Every now and then I still space out the names of my fellow book-club attendees, and I see them every few weeks! Paolo is brilliant and charming and I was stunned. That’s him in the red. (I’m in the center. Yes, that’s who you think it is on the right. I’ll get to that!)

Of course with Paolo at the con, I stalked him through several of his panels. Because of Con Rule #1.

1. Panel topics are irrelevant. Panelists are paramount.

A panel about the most interesting topic in the world can be a complete bore if no one of interest is on it. It can be awkward and stuttering despite the best moderator and supportive audience. Likewise, a panel about pocket lint can be fascinating and/or hilarious with the right panelists. They will be a pleasure to watch regardless of what they speak on.

A mildly bad panelist will stay quiet and not say much at all. But a really bad panelist will drown the panel with a fire-hose of concentrated boring drivel. They will not stop talking about their books, their protagonists, their worlds, their languages; without ever giving anyone a reason to care. A good panelist is interesting because s/he will reveal insights about the world, or dramatic moments from their lives, and make you care. A great panelist will do the same with charm and style. If you find a great panelist, follow them around, all their panels will be awesome.

Paolo Bacigalupi is a great panelist. At one of his panels he warned us of the coming reign of our Mutant Boar Overlords. Turns out when the Fukushima nuclear reactor went critical following the 2011 tsunami, the local farmers set all their livestock free as they evacuated the area to avoid the radiation. They couldn’t take them along, and this was less cruel than leaving them locked down to starve to death. The domestic pigs mated with the wild boars and the resultant hybrid offspring are extremely smart, very aggressive, and are overrunning the area. It’s a big problem, and authorities are hunting down radioactive boars as we speak. His delivery was hilarious, we were all entertained, and illustrative of unforeseen consequences and the perils of technology. And it tied in with his novels without being pandering or boring – I was enriched for the telling. This is what panels should be.

(btw – always sit near the front. Sometimes there aren’t any microphones, sometimes the mics fail or aren’t that good.)

I left early on Friday (went to go see a friend’s band playing at a bar), so I didn’t get to enjoy the Friday after-hours festivities, which I hear were a ton of fun. Next time!

Saturday saw me attending the Strong Women in Film & Fiction panel, with Molly Tanzer speaking. Molly is intensely interesting – she has strong, well-informed opinions, she has an amazing voice (I’m a sucker for voices), and she’s Our People. Yes – around our age, sharing our humor and geekdom, with tons of meme-inspired jokes and strong meta-awareness. Having publicly committed to talking with more girls, I went up after the panel and said hi. Which leads to Con Rule #2:

2. Don’t be afraid to engage

Authors are just like you – they want to interact with fun, interesting people. But they have an entire audience before them, there’s no good way to pick out one to talk with. Go up and introduce yourself and have something based on the last 50 minutes you spent listening to them to say to them. Don’t be too worried about annoying/irritating them, most people will let you know rather quickly if they’d prefer you weren’t around. Let them make that decision, don’t make it for them!

Needless to say, the talking went well. :) We chatted for a bit, it was fun, and I promised to show up to her reading the next day. I had to bail on a panel about patent law that I really wanted to go to, and that included Aaron (friend from book club) as a panelist. I had told him I’d go, but c’mon – cute intelligent girl takes precedence any day. I’m sure he understands.

A bit later I was walking the halls when I saw someone who looked suspiciously like Ted Chiang. Yes, THAT Ted Chiang. The best SF story author currently writing. I had been warned by Paolo yesterday that he might show up, so I was on the lookout. And I had brought my copy of Stoires of Your Life and Others. I stopped, and asked him if he was Ted Chiang (YES HE WAS!) and asked him if he would sign the book. Then I proceeded to TALK WITH TED CHIANG FOR NEARLY AN HOUR!

OK, I’ll admit it… I fanboy-ed out a bit. I was nervous and kept saying how awesome he was and how much I loved his work, and generally acted like a doofus. But he took it well, and we talked a bit about his writing process, a couple of his stories, and why he declined a nomination for Liking What You See, and had some general chatter as well. He’s obviously brilliant, but also rather reserved. He speaks quietly and seems to hold back a bit. Perhaps my enthusiasm startled him. But it was amazing. :) Here’s another pic.

Looking at these pics now, it occurs to me that we’re mirroring each other in both of them. Which is like – wtf? I don’t think I was mirroring him, because I was paying attention to the camera and couldn’t see those at my side. I don’t think he was mirroring me for the same reason, and cuz he is the high-status one in this situation. Did we just both naturally assume those postures by coincidence? Crazy.

I also went to see Ian Tregillis talk. His forthcoming book is a noir murder mystery where the murder victim is the Archangel Gabriel. Hell yeah! He read an excerpt and passed around a copy of the cover art. It’s really cool and afterward I asked if he had any extra, and if I could buy one if so. He said he did have one spare, and since I was the first to ask I could simply have it outright! And then he even agreed to autograph it for me!! At this time, it may be the only one in existence!
Also, go see him talk if you get a chance, he’s just as smart as you’d expect anyone who’d plotted out the Milkweed Trilogy to be.

Here’s a picture.

Speaking of things I got signed, this is the Ted Chiang autograph I mentioned earlier:

During one of his panels Paolo made a reference to Stuff White People Like. I pulled my copy off the shelf when I got home and had him autograph it the next day. There may be lots of signed copies of his books around, but I’m probably the only person who’s got his signature on the cover of SWPL!

And finally, here’s Cat Valente’s signature on the audio book version of Deathless. She said it’s the first time she’s signed an audiobook. Another unique item!

I could have engaged her in conversation at this point. And I SHOULD have. But I didn’t. :( I’ll get into that when I get to Sunday.

Come Saturday evening I went to a house party where I managed to continue to make new contacts, spending a lovely couple hours chatting and flirting with the delightful Danielle Burkhart and Miranda Suri. I have at this pointed had more interaction with new people in a 24-hour period than I’ve had in…. well, since I first joined the book club I guess. And back then I’d had the support of two shots of vodka and the structure of discussing a common book to help! I do believe I’m getting much better at this “being social” thing! I would have stayed later into the night, but I wanted to get back to the con by 9pm for the panel about Writing Sex with both Paolo and Cat Valente. (Cat is a good panelist as well. And since WorldCon 2012 , I’ve kinda been crushing on her).

The panel was fantastic. At one point a flaming dickbag stood up and was all “Sex is corrupting our children, m’kay? You should write words about sex and put them on a paper that children can get their hands on!” (exaggerated for effect, but that was the gist). CAT JUMPED ON HIS ASS and smacked him right now. It was awesome. Often if there’s a dick in an audience that makes an idiotic comment the panelists will just kinda nod, say something placating, and move along. It keeps the peace, but it always makes me sad to see. Cat did not take any of that shit. She stood up and told him what a fucking idiot he was, why he was wrong, and that he wanted to shut up about it now. It was glorious. My crush level increased.

This is Cat, btw, from her reading earlier in the day. She has an amazing voice. If you’ve never read anything of hers you should, very soon. Her writing is unlike anything else out there right now. She does not write prose – she writes story-length and novel-length poetry, with plot and character growth. The story she’s reading in this pic is a Western (surrealist, of course) and she had the drawl that made it stunning. Her voice sounded like the desert – dusty and merciless, and stretching to the horizon, if you could squint hard enough to make it out under the beating sun. I wish I had recorded it. It’s not fair that only a few dozen people witnessed such a thing.

But back to the Saturday sex panel. Afterwards there was a bit of a continuing discussion in the hall with the panelists, and I managed to insert myself into that once again. (I swear, there’s no better way to start a conversation with someone than to listen to them talking on a subject for 50 minutes and then continuing in that vein. Why don’t dates start like this?) So once again I was talking with Paolo, and this time I got to interact directly with Cat as well! And we were discussing sex and porn, and porn’s effects on children (specifically Paolo’s soon-to-be-teenage son).

This was an amazing day.

By Sunday, I was hurting. I went back for a third day, because I had told several people I would. But honestly, it was too much. This has led to the creation of Con Rule #3.

3. Know Your Limits

Day three was when I got the audio book signed by Cat. I could have kept talking, and it even seemed like she might welcome the distraction. I had a perfect subject as well – it was her first signed audio book… had she ever thought (or been asked) to narrate her own books? She’s got a beautiful voice. Etc etc from there. But I was low on social energy. I’d met many people, and half of them had been people I idolize, and Cat was 1. New, 2. Idolized, and 3. Crush-object. I thanked her and turned away. One step at a time.

A bit later I ran into Paolo. I chatted again for a bit, but I started to go off the rails. I rambled about my girlfriend for a bit. Why did I do that? He is not interested, it has nothing to do with anything. He politely excused himself and ran after Cat (which I would have done in his position as well). It was then that I realized I was just about out of spoons.

I just looked up that term to link it, and it seems that it’s bad form to use the “out of spoons” analogy if you are not actually dealing with a crippling chronic illness in your life. So I’ll be more aware and not appropriate that term in the future, but I’m leaving this in the post so that the word can spread and others can be enlightened as I have been.

I was asked to dinner with one of the lovely ladies from the previous day as I was leaving, but I knew I could take no more and needed to recharge. So I went home. Next time I see her she won’t be a stranger, so it won’t be nearly as much energy to chat and socialize. :) That’s the great thing about meeting new people.

In summary – I had a great time, if perhaps a bit overtaxing at the end. Next year will be even better. And this post is way too long as it is, so I’m stopping here!

Freedom is Not Having To Give A Fuck

Personal 1 Response »

Oct 212013

I was at MileHiCon over the weekend, during which time I spoke with Paolo Bacigalupi (/shameless-name-drop). He related his legal difficulties with Night Shade Books (publisher of Windup Girl) and how glad he was that at the time he was drawing a good income from his YA series. Night Shade Books was holding his adult-SF-fiction career hostage, and he was in a much stronger position because he didn’t have to give a fuck – he had a YA career going as well.

Ted Chiang related similar (but less dramatic) circumstances. He makes a reasonable living doing freelance technical writing, which allows him to write what he wants (short stories & novelettes rather than novels), about things that interest him, and at the pace he wants, allowing him to put in the time to make his stories exactly the way he wants them. (I’ve mentioned before that Ted Chiang is the best short story writer of our times. This is one of the reasons why.)

Here’s a fascinating article – Why have young people in Japan stopped having sex?

“I find some of my female friends attractive but I’ve learned to live without sex. Emotional entanglements are too complicated,” he says. “I can’t be bothered.”

This is exactly the problem with relationships. Once you get involved with other people, they complicated your life. You can’t help but be complicated by them when you do care, and caring is dangerous. In Japan they’ve managed to almost completely replace what you traditionally needed other humans for with technology and super-stimuli. I don’t blame anyone for making that trade, sometimes I wish I could make it myself.

It’s one of the reasons I find the concept of marriage so poisonous. People should stay together for exactly as long as they wish to be together. The bondage of marriage forces people to pretend to keep giving fucks about each other after they don’t actually want to anymore. It gathers up all those complications and strangles a couple with them, and adds in a few more just to rub it in. To be truly in love with someone is to be free to leave, and choose not to. A fuck given freely is priceless, one that is extorted means nothing.

A Simpler Explanation

Personal, Speculations No Responses »

Oct 162013

(What’s this, two posts in one day? Madness!)

Yesterday I explained why I attended an anti-Monsanto rally despite being pro-GMO (generally).

It occurred to me while I was writing it that I was protesting too much. I went ahead and finished the post, because I thought it was interesting and it made a point. And also because I realized having a follow-up post on the topic I’m about to cover would be much more interesting with an example already published.

Those familiar with the “free will” and “consciousness” debates will have already come across the argument that human consciousness is basically a giant PR gambit. Decisions are made, and actions are undertaken, before we are consciously aware that we’ve made a decision. Our conscious mind doesn’t decide much of anything – it is there to put together a coherent story of why we did things that is acceptable to those around us and present it to them. And a story is far more likely to be believed by an audience if the teller believes it as well – thus a primary duty of the conscious self is self-deception.

(Incidentally, this is why hacking yourself is vital if you want to actually change anything about yourself. Simply deciding to make a change won’t alter shit. You need to bust out the tools and go to work on your subconscious, because you are not in direct control.)

There is a far simpler explanation for why I went to the anti-Monsanto rally. My SO strongly wanted to go. As the provider of the overwhelming majority of my emotional support and sexual activity, her happiness and her opinion of me is very important to my life. Attendance would raise me in her esteem, and make her happy. My abstaining would disappoint her a lot. We have several friends who likewise would approve, and very few who would disapprove more than a token amount. There was much to gain from going, and not much to lose.

By coming up with the explanation that I did (yesterday’s post), I could almost completely mitigate the negative aspects of attendance – those who would disapprove of the rally attendance would accept the excuse given and reduce the penalties for doing so. I could keep my self-image as one who is pro-tech and reasonable, while strengthening the image of one who cares about politics. More than anything else, I could keep my own self-image of those without admitting I could be swayed by something as base as what other people would like of me.

I considered not publishing yesterday’s post at all, once I figured it was likely an elaborate self-deception. But – just because it’s not my actual motivation for going doesn’t mean it’s not true. I don’t disagree with anything I said.

I do appreciate the meta-thinking training I’ve gleamed from Overcoming Bias and LessWrong. Without that I never would have noticed what my brain was doing, and I would have pigeon-holed myself further into that identity.

Maul continued

Book Club Review, Musings On Present Day, Personal No Responses »

Oct 142013

Several of the people in our book club who disliked Tricia Sullivan’s Maul said they were disappointed by the fact that it was billed as “feminist SF”, because they didn’t consider it to be particularly feminist. Certainly not in the ways of older feminist works that explore gender politics and imbalances in societal power. In contrast, I thought it was quite feminist, but in a more internal way.

Sex has always been a part of feminism. Obviously sexual agency is paramount to all humans, but there has been some disagreement as to what sexual agency really is. There are a number of leaders who believe that women shouldn’t ever go out of their way to be pleasing to men – that this cheapens and demeans them. After fighting so long and hard to be viewed as more than simple sex objects, it’s a travesty to choose to objectify oneself.

But the thing is – being objectified can be fun. When you feel safe and you like the people around you, it is pleasurable to know that they take pleasure in looking at you. Sometimes it’s exciting to be used as an object for someone else’s sexual gratification (yes, only with consent). I find that pleasurable, and I know many others who do as well.

I struggled for a long time with the fact that what is sexy (objectification, submission, machismo, etc) is also intellectually unpalatable. We’re supposed to respect each other and treat each other as equals at all times, right? This was part of the discourse as well – Dworkin once stated that all penetration is violation.

Ultimately, respecting someone includes respecting their desire to be objectified in certain settings. (Or as Daphne Greengrass would say “girls should be allowed to pursue boys in whichever way they please”). Treating each other equally means acknowledging that someone has the mental capacity and maturity to decide what they’re attracted to and how they want to fuck. It means being able to draw a line in life, saying “This is how we act in the real-world, because all people deserve this respect and dignity. And this is how the two (or three or however many) of us act in the bedroom, because we deserve to enjoy the sex we have.” Acknowledging that how we fuck has no impact on who we are outside the bedroom, and has no implications for how we deserve to be treated, is a fundamental part of fixing the sexuality issue.

If we want to rip off our clothes and twerk on some guy’s crotch on stage, that’s how we roll. It doesn’t mean we have any less rights or deserve any less respect. We can still own property, get married to each other, and should be paid as much as anyone else in our skill-level.

I consider Maul to be a feminist book because it explores these sorts of issues. Sun (teen girl character) is deeply chagrined that what is sexy doesn’t seem very liberated. It was refreshing to watch someone going through the same struggles I did at that age.

Even better – in the future-timeline story, women control all the power in society, and men are very rare. In that world, the average woman is left without any male sex partners, or any ability to procreate. Meanwhile the rich and powerful women at the top have dick-on-tap. All the dick they can handle, and in 31 different flavors. Moreover, all of society has simply come to accept that macho, arrogant, risk-taking behavior is sexy in men, and therefore the males all have to over-exaggerate these features and display them for the women. Even when it’s all a charade. The women, OTOH, don’t care what they look like or bother to spend much time appealing to what men desire. It’s a beautiful reversal of current society, where women are prized for the features that most men find sexy and women display and exaggerate those. It reinforces that it’s not what is considered attractive that’s the problem, it’s the failure to divorce sexuality from other non-sexual concerns.

Older Entries Newer Entries