Mar 172014
 

Divergent_hqDivergent, by Veronica Roth

Synopsis: Teen girl in a vaguely post-apocalyptic society rebels against authority, gets a boyfriend, and saves the day.

Book Review: Let’s start with the good stuff. Roth is extremely good at making us sympathize with the protagonist, and despise the antagonist. I personally wanted to murder the hell out of Peter, and I would’ve loved to Ender him to death in self-righteous self-defense. Motherfucker has it coming, and totally deserves it. The portrayal of a broken system that leaves everyone as victims with no good choices is excellent. And whenever Roth sticks with things she knows about, her physical action is very strong and very sensory. Her prose is solid.

Unfortunately she moves further and further from her strengths as the story progresses. She repeatedly displays a complete lack of knowledge of both guns and computers that really kicks you out of the story. She abandons the antagonists she spent the first 2/3rds of the book getting us to hate and drops in a generic evil-genius-villain that we don’t care about at the end. Her world building is bad – she desperately needs to give us some hint as to what happened to 90% of humanity, what happened to the state and federal governments of the USA, and some explanation of how people are continuing to live basically a modern middle-class lifestyle without those things. Even a few lines would have been nice. And as good as her characterization is, her plotting is atrocious. She has friends/family of the protagonist run into gunfire unnecessarily – basically committing suicide – for no reason at all except that it’s their turn to die in order to motivate the protag. It’s like they know they’re in a novel and they need to do this to force the story into the course the author wanted it to go. This gets so absurd that in places where I was supposed to be feeling sad all I could feel was /facepalm. I wanted to hurl the book across the room. It was disappointing after such a strong start to the novel. Not Recommended.

Book Club Review: There isn’t much to talk about, because Roth gives us so little to work with. We had to resort to flipping to the “book club discussion” questions in the back, most of which were atrociously bad. Some of them made you say “Why yes, I do wish the author would have thought to ask that question when she was writing the book, perhaps that would have made it better.” While this isn’t the worst book we’ve read (by far!), it was one of the most disappointing, since you can see the potential. You end up reading the whole thing, hoping it’ll start shining again, rather than just skimming or quitting. And it never does. Not Recommended.

Mar 112014
 

Moby_DickVery few things irritate me as much as when some pretentious dickbag denigrates someone for reading what they consider to be low-class works, and tells them they should go read Moby Dick instead. First off all, congrats on just driving away another person from reading. You are making the problem worse.

But secondly, why are you grabbing for Moby Dick? It’s not that great a book, by today’s standards. I’ve heard large portions of it are about the workings and operation of whaling vessels, and long treatises about the whaling industry. As if it forgot it was a novel and tried being a textbook for a while. Moby Dick has become the standard cudgel, and anytime someone references it as a great book I immediately suspect that either A. They’ve never read it, or B. They’ve read so little fiction that they have no idea what makes a book good. They’ve simply accepted the received wisdom that Moby Dick is TEH AWESOMES which everyone must be beaten with until their eyes bleed.

I’m sure it was amazing for its time. But that’s the thing about progress – things keep getting better.  I don’t think that’s a fault of our predecessors. It’s not fair to compare modern TV/movies/novels to their counterparts from 40+ years ago. Citizen Kane was groundbreaking, but when put next to the best examples of modern cinema of the same genre, it doesn’t hold up. We (humans) keep learning more about what makes things better and become more skilled in applying the things we learn. It’s no more fair than belittling Newton for not discovering relativity. It takes a long time to grow a body of knowledge, and the current writers/directors/etc wouldn’t be where they are if they didn’t have the shoulders of those who came before them to stand on. They should be acknowledged for the work they’ve done to get us where we are. But they aren’t amazing by modern standards.

I feel that’s part of the reason why genre fic keeps growing, and literary fiction is stagnating. They’ve stopped reaching for new improvements, and have turned inward to navel-gazing and ancestor-worship.

Mar 062014
 

avoid-power-tool-accidents-1While working with power tools recently, I heard someone say “Remember, Safety Third!” I’d always heard “Safety First”, so I asked him to explain.

In his community (which handles power tools much more frequently than I do), it’s a combination joke and reminder. Everyone says “Safety First”, but this is a lie. If Safety really was First, they wouldn’t be using power tools at all. Power tools improve efficiency tremendously, but at the price of safety – it’s impossible to accidentally cut your own hand off with a traditional hand-saw. So things like time and money savings trump safety, and everyone knows it. That’s the “joke” part of it.

But more importantly is the “reminder” part. It reminds you that the Corporate Dragons may say “Safety First”, but they don’t mean it. YOUR safety is not THEIR highest priority. So it has to be YOUR OWN priority. You cannot trust them to act in your best interest in anything, ever. You must personally weigh when the costs outweigh the benefits, and act accordingly. Never trust a them to have your best interests at heart.

Remember, Safety Third.

Mar 052014
 

girl interruptedRachel Canning is an honor student at a private school, and has received a $20,000 scholarship. Lately she was suspended from school a few times, got caught drinking, and lost the captaincy of the cheerleading squad. Also, her parents don’t approve of her boyfriend. They kicked her out of the house, and now she’s staying at a friend’s house rather than living on the streets. She’s suing them for college tuition.

There’s a bunch of idiots calling her a spoiled brat. These people obviously have never met a teenager in their lives, and simply went straight from being 11 year olds to being 23 overnight.

This reminds me of a friend’s synopsis of “Girl, Interrupted”.

“A teenager acts like a teenager. Her parents freak the fuck out that their perfect china doll is showing agency, and lock her up in a mental institution.”

Look you fuckwads, making another sapient being is an enormous responsibility, and one that people shouldn’t enter into lightly. When they rebel – as all teenagers do – you suck it up and act like goddamned adults. If you are an upper-middle-class American you’ve taken on the responsibility of putting your offspring through college simply by conceiving them. You brought a new life into a world where securing a career takes an investment equal to years of median-level salary. This is your responsibility.

How many of the people cheering on these parents would be cheering on someone who adopted an adorable puppy, and then dumped it at a dog pound a year later because it wasn’t cute enough anymore?

How many of the them would be cheering on homophobic parents who chased their high-school-age son out of the house when they found out he’s gay? Abandoning him to live however he could on the streets.

This girl is lucky. She has friends she can stay with. Those friends have enough legal sense to realize society may have a vested interest in ensuring parents can’t simply abandon their children if they get a little unruly. She’s smart and pretty and her parents are well off, and I guess that’s a good enough reason to attack her and called her a spoiled brat. If they took five damn minutes to think about this, maybe they’d realize you don’t just create a new human and then discard it when it doesn’t fully subjugate itself to your will, ESPECIALLY when you were warned this is exactly how teens act. What the fuck happened to being responsible for your decisions?

But I guess if these parents’ role-model for a good parent is God, it’s not surprising they lack that level of responsibility. He’s notorious for murdering anyone who doesn’t debase themselves enough to soothe his fragile ego.

Mar 042014
 

Community S05E06 violenceI love Community (except for most of season 4, of course). Episode 6 of Season 5 touched on one of my favorite themes in fiction – the final basis of all power is the ability to do violence to others.

The episode follows Annie as she explores the bureaucratic anatomy of Greendale Community College. Greendale’s power structure is diffuse, with many small pockets of specialized power in a delicate balance. It’s an interesting (if brief) examination of motives of the powerful, and the repercussions their desires have on the populace at large. But that’s just the set up for the really interesting conflict.

The power balance in Greendale is tense enough that Annie can’t get her cork-board approved, so she decides to circumvent the entire system and simply install it herself. This is, of course, completely unacceptable to the powers that be. It is a challenge to the existing authorities, allowing it stand means a huge loss of credibility for those at the top. Why should anyone respect the Dean if his rules can be broken at a student’s whim? The actors below him will no longer be reined in by his authority and the resulting power struggle could cripple the whole school (well, moreso). So the Dean dispatches Hired Goons to take down the corkboard, as his prerogative as the recognized head of the Greendale Leviathan.

And here’s where it gets really interesting. Annie physically attacks the Hired Goons. Because when it all comes down to it, power structures are just ways of organizing how much violent force any particular coalition can muster. Leviathan is left with a choice – crush the opposition, or demure. Leviathan has much bigger goons and would almost assuredly win this direct physical confrontation. And demurring is always undesirable, as it weakens the Leviathan’s ability to credibly threaten others in the future. However in this case the opposition is more than just some student rabble. Annie is a founding member of a strong student coalition which has spent the past 4.5 seasons growing in influence in Greendale. They are admired by the student body, and have previously shown themselves able to spark or douse riots. They have allies within the greater community, and Annie has shown herself adept at navigating and wooing the Greendale power structure. Up until this point they have been nominal allies of the Dean, turning them into enemies would be unwise. Moreover, there is the possible intervention of the greater leviathan of State & Local Laws to consider (whose views on the matter are uncertain), and the Dean is sexually attracted to one of the other founding members of the group.

The Dean calls off the attack. Annie’s coalition is willing to fight and make this victory too costly for its rewards. And importantly, Leviathan has shown its teeth, and reminded those watching that anyone who wishes to challenge it needs to at least have the power base of Annie’s group.

(also, Annie has just (unwittingly?) made herself a bigger player in the Greendale power game. If this was a political show I’d be thrilled by the implications :) )

However, despite all the alliances and influence to consider, what it boiled down to in the end is who had the greater ability and willingness to do violence to the other side. The Hired Goons flexed their muscles. Annie jumped on one and beat him, and rallied the other founding members of her coalition to literally stand at her side in a wall of angry fists. It was their willingness to spill blood that was the decisive moment of their triumph. This is the sort of story I adore. The anger and desperation that pushes people to say “No more.” The point that turns them from participants in the façade of civilization, to people who demand the lies be thrown aside and the true violent nature of power be done to them as proof of dedication. That tipping point where the hand is called, and the real priorities of everyone are laid bare.

It was wonderfully done, especially for a 22 minute comedy show.

Feb 282014
 

picketIt’s strangely exciting watching the dystopian sci-fi you read as a kid slowly becoming reality in one of our own states. Michigan Legislature Wants to Pass Bill To Fine Citizens Up To $1k Per Day For Picketing

Omega-3s. Did McDonalds cause the decline of violence in America?

A question. The Vogons show up and bulldoze Earth to make way for their intergalactic highway. For the purposes of this question, the only place humans can now live is in the Vogons’ “Human Preserve Parks”, where we’re raised in captivity and then hunted for sport once we’re too old to reproduce.
Is this preferable to extinction? Or would the human race just be better off completely wiped out than stuck in that sort of existence?
Hunting of Rare, Exotic Antelopes Now Limited
One rancher commented: “Since we can’t hunt and eat them anymore, the ranch I work on will now be forced to stop its breeding program and exterminate the remaining stock as feral pests.”

Good News Everyone!
Today’s college grads are ashamed to take jobs at Wall Street, and are too embarrassed to tell their friends/family when they do. The top talent from the most prestigious colleges are steering away from finance and going into tech fields instead!
/cackles with glee

Remember when I said 50 years from now christianity would be trying to take credit for leading the charge for gay rights (like they claim it was Christianity that brought down slavery)? Looks like I waaaaaay undershot it. They’re starting already.

Great article on the premise that eCurrency came first, and cash was a recent invention.
…“Cash is a 100% anonymous and untraceable payments technology. It is like a weapon of mass destruction launched against law enforcement,”
…”there appears to be no authentication mechanism associated with cash payments or transfers, let alone one that matches modern security standards. Once someone has gained physical control of your ‘bills’, they are free to spend or use them as they wish and there is no way to reverse the transaction, stop them or even identify who has stolen them.”
(and more!)

Urban-scapes from a skyscraper, and urban-scapes being re-wilded.
(although I’m not sure I’m using the term “re-wilded” correctly)

US airman stands his ground in Florida, sentenced to 25 years
Three things:
1) He probably should be in jail. He’s not Zimmerman bad, but it’s bad. Don’t bring a gun to a fistfight, m’kay?
2) He *could* get off. Stand Your Ground laws are complete lunacy. Why bother even having laws against murder at all??
but biggest of all:
3) Stand Your Ground laws are selectively enforced. If this kid was a middle-aged white guy, he’d be free right now. Probably promoting his upcoming boxing match with DMX. I really wish we could take humans entirely out of the law-enforcement equation.

Remember: This Valentine’s Day, you should report anyone who’s wanking to the church. It’s like being a war hero, and you’re fighting Nazis. Only the Nazis are Satan?
(note – the video keeps getting taken down, and then someone else puts it back up. If this one is down by the time you click it, just search YouTube for Mormon Anti-Masturbation)
As others have mentioned, the smoldering look the two guys give each other at the end is THE BEST

How Obama Officials Cried ‘Terrorism’ to Cover Up a Paperwork Error
“This is the most transparent administration in history,” (quote not from story, just an old Obama quote for the lulz)

Key & Peele: Cunnilingus Class. Super hilarious, and good advice. :)

Aladdin came out at the perfect time for me to have these five seconds forever seared into my memory of adolescence (in a good way). Turns out Melissa never noticed.

The U.S. conservative movement is a failed eugenics project. Here’s why it could never have worked.
“Incapable and obsolete organizations, whose upkeep costs have exceeded their social value, should die in order to free up room for newer ones. Where there is immense controversy is what should happen to people when they fail, economically.Should they starve to death in the streets? Should they be fed and clothed, but denied health care, as in the U.S.? Or should they be permitted a lower-middle-class existence by a welfare state, allowing them to recover and perhaps have another shot at economic success? The Social Darwinist seeks not to kill failed individuals per se, but to minimize their effect on society. It might be better to feed them than have them rebel, but allowing their medical treatment (on the public dime) is a bridge too far (if they’re sick, they can’t take up arms). It’s not about sadism per se, but effect minimization”

What I learned from six months of GMO research: None of it matters
“The debate isn’t about actual genetically modified organisms — if it was we’d be debating the individual plants, not GMOs as a whole — it’s about the stories we’ve attached to them. Both sides have agreed that this thing, this rhetorical construct we call GMOs, will be used to talk about something bigger. It’s the setting for a proxy war, like the one in Afghanistan during the 1980s.”

The Most Unfortunate Design Flaws in the Human Body. For the creationist in your life. It’s been a long time since I’ve seen this many compiled in one place and edited for ease-of-reading.

via Alonzo Fyfe:
“It looks like we are going to have a litmus test of organizations interested in informing its readers and organizations eager to distort facts for the purpose of serving a political agenda.
The Congressional Budget Office released a report estimating that, because of Obamacare, about 2 million people who currently have to work in order to get medical insurance will likely quit their jobs since they can get insurance through Obamacare. (Thus, freeing up 2 million jobs that others can take.)
However, a number of propaganda machines are reporting that the Congressional Budget Office is reporting a loss of about 2 million jobs.
The second option is a flat-out lie.
Look for it. And where you find it, you can know that your news source is one that is more interested in politically useful fiction than fact.”
I enjoy predictions! Which news outlets do you think will go with the “lie” version? How much are you willing to bet on that? It’s calibration time!

I haven’t commented on the MRA article re women with short hair that’s been going around, cuz Trolls Gonna Troll. But it did provide the opportunity for a few great articles, like this one.
“I am regularly asked whether I think that feminism ought to be “rebranded” in order to threaten men less, because anything a woman does … must appeal to men first, or it is meaningless.”

Fascinating fic – The Last Christmas. An Engineer named Charles is given the role of Santa, ala Tim Allen’s “The Santa Clause”
“I want Li Xiu Yang to be given a gift that will leave her permanently physically healthy, uninjured, and with a mental state that is within three sigmas of normal for her age, gender, and culture. I want her to be free from any disability or degradation of any of her senses, organs, or other body parts. Whatever solution you give should age her at the normal rate until her twentieth birthday, at which point she should cease to age.”
The elf gave him a funny look, then began to shape the ball of grey goop. Three minutes later, he presented Charles with a small pebble.
“This is it?” he asked. “And it won’t turn her into some kind of monster, or cause her unbearable pain, or anything like that?”
The elf sighed and took the pebble back, then after a few moments of reconstruction handed it back to Charles.
“Well, that certainly inspired confidence,” he said dryly.

Almost Everything in “Dr. Strangelove” Was True. Still amazing we didn’t nuke ourselves to oblivion.

Apple and Google CEOs stole $9 Billion from the working class.

All I want for Christmas is an abortion
…I’m 36. I’m married. I have two kids already. I don’t want and can’t afford another kid…another car…a bigger apartment. I was on the most effective and foolproof birth control method available. I WAS DOING IT RIGHT.
And when we talk about abortion, we talk about the hand wringing. The indecisiveness. The longing to keep the baby.
…But fuck that narrative. It’s bullshit. It robs women of their right to be viewed as fully actualized human beings.
…I was fortunate. I didn’t need to have an abortion because the pregnancy terminated itself. But I can’t tell you how ready I was to have one. I have the family that I want. I have the family that I planned. I have the family that I’ve budgeted for. I have as much family as I can emotionally handle, all with special needs. I hate pregnancy. I hate newborn-hood. I do not want another baby.
…We need to change the way we talk about abortion. We need more women to understand that knowing, unequivocally, that abortion is the only right decision for you does not make you less of a woman. We need more women to understand that not wanting to be pregnant is not a moral flaw. We need more women to understand that abortions are good and safe and they save lives.

A great set of photos from, surprisingly, Google Street View. The images are of all sorts of places where the road ended for the streetview vehicles.

For everyone living in our consumer culture:

Advice for surviving long work weeks.

“In Israel, Godwin’s Law isn’t just a law, it’s a law.”

Feb 262014
 

hugh-hefner-girls-next-door-dogBack in the Bad Old Days there was only one major distributor of porn – Playboy.

Since it was run by Hugh Hefner, it swung wildly towards his tastes in women. They’re obvious – super-thin, blonde, big boobs. As a result, several generations grew up experiencing this as the model of beauty, and with this as their first encounter with sexuality.

Quickly this became known as what was desirable. Men started chasing these types of women purely for the status effects. When you’re young and insecure it’s extremely important to you that your peers think well of you. They will judge you by the mates you can attract. And when you’re very young, it doesn’t matter that much if you aren’t very attracted to that type – you can screw almost anything anyway, and being admired more important.

In this way Hugh Hefner unintentional screwed an entire generation of marriages. Once people start to get older, their true sexual preferences become much more important. If you don’t find that wasted-away look enticing it’s much harder to maintain a sexual relationship. Sexual frustration builds and divorce results. Partly because the men were too concerned with looking good in front of others to really listen to what their dicks were telling them, and partly because they didn’t have a lot of opportunities to query their dicks in the first place. When the majority of your tests are restricted to Playboy you don’t get a very representative sample.

Fortunately the internet came to save the day! Online porn is ubiquitous, anonymous, and extremely easy to access. The market for porn exploded. Suddenly 100% of men (and many women) were direct purchasers, rather than a handful of media moguls and publishers. And porn producers found it was incredibly easy to draw market share by giving people exactly what they wanted.

Which leads us to today, where literally every taste is pandered to, and everyone can easily find what appeals to them. This is especially important for the young and inexperienced, because when you’re first discovering your sexuality you aren’t quite sure what you like. When all you see is the stick-figure blondes  it may be excusable to come to the conclusion that’s what’s hot. But when you have the full spectrum of human beauty to peruse and pursue at your leisure, you quickly come to notice patterns in what you like. You scroll past boring waifish girls and click after the succulent well-curved ladies.

Then when you go out into the real world and date around a few times you’re much more likely to go after that which you already know you want. I won’t lie – status pressure is still real, it exists. But when you know what you want, and you can honestly look at someone and think “You know, she’s a great person and fun to be around, but she really just doesn’t do anything for me sexually” it’s much easier to shrug that pressure off. You save both of you a lot of time and possibly heart-ache. You don’t end up in marriages that are lacking in sexual desire.

In short – internet porn is helping people to know their own desires better, and at a younger age, and as a result avoid bad marriages. This is a good thing, and we should thank internet porn for making our relationships stronger. :)

Feb 252014
 

burning_rage_final_by_shadowphoenix88-d48hqdnCurrently there’s a trend in writing to avoid direct descriptives. Saying “he collapsed in exhausted” is a no-no. You describe his actions and let them speak for themselves, or you describe the physical sensations of exhaustion to let the reader feel the exhaustion. Such as “He dragged his leaden feet to the couch, eyes straining to stay open, until he could collapse in a heap on the cushions.” or “a deep ache suffused his body. It sunk to his core with a dull, constant pressure like weights pulling at his bones.” (respectively).

I don’t have an opinion either way on this. A trend is what it is, you go with it until it passes. But it does have two effects.

On the logistical side, it increases the word-count of stories. That’s irritating for someone who already struggles to fit within the limits most markets set, but it’s not that interesting.

The more fascinating part is that you begin to realize that writers have made up a veritable cornucopia of repetitive, unnecessary vocabulary.

As far as I know it’s always been considered a bit gauche to use the same word twice in quick succession. So if you’re trying to describe the faux pas of some maladroit bungler without looking awkward yourself, you need a plethora of words to do it gracefully. But really, how much difference is there between them? If they could be swapped willy-nilly without changing the meaning of the sentence, were all those extra words even needed?

I’m not trying to pick on fancy-pants writers in their ivory towers here. I think all humans in general over-imbue meaning onto simple subjective experiences. Consider something as simple and concrete as pain. We have a lot of words to flavor our pain. “Pain” is just pain, but misery often connotes a long, drawn-out process, and torment generally implies pain inflicted by an outside source.

But when you embrace the current trend and start describing the physical sensations of being in pain, you come to realize that this complexity is a conceit we force onto the concept. There are only a handful of ways we experience pain on the physical level. Our bodies are fairly simple organic mechanisms, with a few standard ways of throwing out distress signals. Because these signals are so simple and limited, they are often confused with each other and misinterpreted when their sources are not easily identifiable. (quick pro tip: get enough sleep, and exercise. That’s nearly half of emotional suffering.)

This doesn’t apply just to pain. Our emotional responses are really quite basic, and there’s only so many times you can describe a jump in heart rate or a tightening of the muscles. We humans like to think we’re so much more than basic stimulus-and-response. It’s the reason we invented all these words in the first place, isn’t it? To flatter ourselves. Now that the fancy words themselves aren’t enough we’re spending more and more time coming up with elaborate metaphors to paint a picture of what the word was originally supposed to evoke.

We no longer say: “I pushed through the pain of speaking those dreaded words.”

Now it’s “I forced up the core of dread that had been smoldering inside me for the last month, coals of hot regret. They burned me when I spoke.”

The second is certainly more poetic. But does it detract from the story to focus so much on the wording?

There is likely a happy medium which I, in my beginner’s exuberance, am entirely unaware of. Perhaps with time I’ll find it. Until then, my prose will alternate between stilted and purple. :)

Feb 212014
 
Not me

Not me

I recently had a story workshopped. Which, BTW, is the best thing ever, and every aspiring writer should do this. I gained three levels in one day. Anyway, in the story a male character is introduced and described by a female character as “tall, but not uncomfortably so.” A workshopper of the female persuasion asked me what the heck that meant.

“it isn’t clear who would be uncomfortable with (his) height or why (she) is considering potential uncomfortableness.  In what context is she making this observation?

(She) could be thinking that (he) is quite tall but not so tall that it would be awkward for him (socially? physically?) […] (She) could be thinking that (he) is quite tall but not so tall that it would be awkward for her (psychologically? romantically?)”

It took me a bit of thinking to understand this. I am a somewhat tall man – 6’2” (188cm for the non-Americans). When I run into someone more than a couple inches taller than me (over 195ish cm) I get a sort of instinctual “grrrrr” reaction. It’s stupid and I try to ignore it, but I’m wary of them. Who is this person daring to be that much taller than I am? What are they planning?

I should have realized this ages ago, but most women don’t have this reaction. Upon considering my workshopper’s questions I was reminded of something my SO told me not too long ago, which I obviously never internalized. Height is for women what boob-size is for men. The person can’t control it; it’s objectively stupid; and the sex appeal is undeniable and deeply ingrained. It’s very hard to ever reach the limit of “too much”. Swapping the two around when trying to think like the other gender can help quite a bit.

With that in mind, I suddenly saw exactly where the confusion arose. If I read “Her boobs were big, but not uncomfortably so” I’d immediately have the same questions. I had failed deeply at understanding a non-me POV. That line was atrocious.

I have much to learn.

Feb 202014
 

triggerdisciplineI found out something about myself recently. I was writing a short story in which the protagonist attacks her lover (the protagonist is the villain of the piece, so it’s ok. I hope.) She threatens her with murder, the murder of her loved ones, and initiates physical violence, partly to control her. These are Bad Things.

Also, she has a gun in her house that she keeps loaded. With a round chambered at all times.

Now, there is a school of thought that one should keep a round chambered. There’s arguments that A) the chances of an accidental discharge are miniscule, and B) are greatly outweighed by the increase in survival by not having to chamber a round in an emergency situation. I come from the school of thought that says both of these are complete horseshit, and people who do this are idiots. Treat your fucking death machine with some caution.

The thing is, I dislike her more for keeping the loaded gun around than I do for her domestic violence. I was bothered that a character I wrote would do that, and I strongly considered changing it. I did not consider changing her violent outburst.

I place more weight on negligent violations than most people. This is why I like Desirism so much – it also focuses on the problem of negligence. There’s a lot more evil done in the world by people who don’t care enough about the consequences of their actions to think about them (negligence) then is done by people who are actively malicious. Anti-vaxxers, for example.

Which leads to the strange occasions where I’m more upset by someone failing to practice proper firearm safety than I am about their physical assault of a loved one. That seems… wrong?