Linky Friday: The Saga Continues

Will Truman

Will Truman is the Editor-in-Chief of Ordinary Times. He is also on Twitter.

Related Post Roulette

39 Responses

  1. LeeEsq says:

    RD2: My personal belief is that when it comes to heterosexual romantic media, men do not like love stories aimed at women and women do not like love stories aimed at men for the most part because they get annoyed by the other genders fantasy.

    RD3: Every radical political and social movement and many non-radical ones were based on the relentless energy of young people in their late teens and early twenties. Many of the Old Bolsheviks, the people who joined the party before 1917, would be high school or college when the joined. More than a few Fascists and Nazis started off rather young. This means that there might be a grain of truth in Ed West’s theory. Not an entire truth because many middle aged and senior citizens seem to becoming more partisan to in their politics but I can see how having lots of single young people without girlfriends or boyfriends end up diverting a lot of energy into politics rather than romance.

    I have no idea what to do about this. The current romantic-sexual system seems to be a bad fit for many people’s actual social skills and works best for the most extroverted, physically attractive, and adventurous people. It evolved naturally though and trying to get it back to something else is impossible. Wanting masses of people with average or bellow average social skills and looks to adopt to the current system also seems really unrealistic.

    RD4: People don’t read fantasy novels for realistic depictions of relationships. This post is just as dumb and tedious as the why hasn’t Westeros experienced the Industrial Revolution posts. Anise Strong should know better like the authors of the industrial revolution in a fantasy setting article.

    He4: Sex on weed? Doesn’t seem possible. Everybody would get the munchies and want to go to Taco Bell instead.Report

    • Kimmi in reply to LeeEsq says:

      Tell me that again when you understand what a love story is.
      Doctor Who is a fantastical love story — women and gay men write oodles of fanfics about it.
      The actress playing the Doctor’s Wife has gotten death threats.

      … and tell me again that men don’t like Doctor Who? (Lord knows Neil Gaiman is a fanboy).

      Or Sherlock, for all the yaoi fangirls out there. (Punked them hard last episode, sure enough. But hey, queerbaiting is fun! (or so I’m told…))Report

    • Kimmi in reply to LeeEsq says:

      He4: Why do you think weed’s so popular? Makes girls less… unwelcome of gross boys advances. That’s a lot of reason for a lot of drugs, dude!Report

    • PD Shaw in reply to LeeEsq says:

      RD4: At least the piece on the industrial revolution takes the material at its face value; Martin wants to create a realistic late medieval setting, do the pieces suggest there would actually be early industry? Who know?

      Anise Strong wants to fix stories, not listen to them. If Elrond could get laid, he would have a better relationship with his daughter. If Westeros developed an enlightened modern outlook on divorce, there would not be so much war and murder. I suppose if Martin followed Strong’s fixes to make GoT a Pilgrim’s Progress, the series would have been over long ago.Report

      • Brent F in reply to PD Shaw says:

        From another angle, what GRRM understands and Strong doesn’t is that these indisovlable dynastic arranged marriages that so often make their participants miserable have an important social and political function in that society and are a large part of how that society avoids a Hobbesian war of all against all in a polity with a tiny and weak central government.

        That’s one of the great engine for drama within the series. On one hand, these ironclad social obligations can be horrible to live up to. On the other hand, rebelling against them can fill graveyards.Report

      • LeeEsq in reply to PD Shaw says:

        Anise Strong seemed to be going more after the happily ever after fantasy couples rather than the Game of Thrones couples, which are realistic for the type of relationships they are like.Report

  2. Brandon Berg says:

    He4: There’s probably some class of people more unethical than bioethicists, but I don’t know what it is.Report

    • Kimmi in reply to Brandon Berg says:

      The powers that be do a damn good job of it.

      (Kimmi, I deleted the rest of your comment for the very simple reason that I am really really tired of that particular example and I think discussing it at every opportunity is detrimental to the quality of the comment section. I get that it’s a true example and it isn’t fair of me to delete it, but I figure I let a lot of questionable-from-other-people stuff you say slide – not all of it! – because I understand your context, you stop talking about that particular island on this site, and we’re both being kind to each other. Deal? – Maribou)Report

  3. Kolohe says:

    He5 – 420 69 404

    (hier tho?)Report

    • veronica d in reply to Kolohe says:

      Somting about “sex on weed” leading to a 404 is indeed funny.

      I don’t smoke before sex, cuz I like to perform well. One of my gf’s, however, often does. She gets high and mellow and then we play sensation games. It’s pretty great.

      I wonder what the article said.Report

      • LeeEsq in reply to veronica d says:

        Probably something about parties replacing the traditional mumblings with “Ring my Taco Bell” or “Oh My Dorito Burrito” and not really caring about less than stellar performance because they are mellow.Report

      • veronica d in reply to veronica d says:

        I guess the link works now. The actual article is, well, rather underwhelming. Obviously the writer has not tried any of these things, nor really investigated how one might incorporate getting high with sex. So, whatever.

        Note, you don’t always get the munchies (obvi). Heightened sensation can be really great. However, there is the risk of anxiety, paranoia, and dissociation, which can come along with a marijuana high. You’ll want to discuss these issues with your partner. Be prepared. In many ways, this should be approached similarly to how one approaches BDSM. Take things slowly. Know your partner. Know their limits, and your own. Etc.

        Anyway, drug fueled sex can be really fun, or really terrible, like most things in life.Report

  4. Oscar Gordon says:

    RD3 being married requires that a person learns to compromise on issues and pick battles.

    At least, if they want a happy marriage.Report

    • veronica d in reply to Oscar Gordon says:

      There are levels of compromise. For an obvious example, no one should stay with an abusive partner. Likewise, if one partner becomes emotionally distant, and if they refuse to work to fix the issue, then it seems reasonable for the other partner to move on. So, regarding a partner who is a Trump supporter — I can speak for myself. First, it’s wildly unlikely I’d end up in such a relationship anyhow, for all kinds of reasons. (For example, tranny dyke.) But on the outside chance it happened —

      — look I’m not talking about being partnered with a moderate republican. That seems manageable. But an actual MAGA-hat-wearing Trumpist? Fuck that noise. They gotta go! This girl is worth more than that.

      I dunno. There is this weird cycle between men who have problems with women and the alt-right, which only deepens their problems with women. We can pull back the camera and look at this as a big social issue, but then I can look at my private life and ask, would I want to date someone who is part of this dysfunctional, hyper-masculine frustration vortex?

      I certainly would not.Report

    • LeeEsq in reply to Oscar Gordon says:

      From what I’ve read kindness and generosity are at the heart of all happy romantic relationships and most likely a lot of Platonic relationships to. Kindness and generosity are rare virtues though. They might be absolutely necessary for maintaining a good romantic relationship but are practically useless for getting into a relationship. Many people also seem very good at expecting kindness and generosity towards them but expect to be very vigorous towards their partners.

      Kindness and generosity also do not have an easy relationship with consent. For consent to be the chief romantic and virtue than the person who is giving consent must have the power to say no or impose any obligation he or she wants. The power to impose obligations isn’t kind and generous though, which require bending and compromise. We are screwed.Report

    • veronica d in reply to Oscar Gordon says:

      [looks like my comment was moderated to heck]Report

      • Maribou in reply to veronica d says:

        @veronica-d Yep, that cause you used a word we have blacklisted as a slur. You know which one (at least I bet you can guess), and we both know you get to use it whenever you want, but the computer isn’t that clever. We can’t tell it who has earned the right to use that word by having it flung at them 1 million times. We just got really tired redacting that particular slur by hand when 99 percent of the time it shouldn’t show up in the first place. It’s an effective filter.

        If you elide or don’t use the word, in future, a) you won’t have to deal with it being moderated and b) it will be a lot less confusing for commenters who can’t wrap their heads around it being a slur in the first place (which tbf there are historical reasons for also but guess what, friends, I moderate in the now, not in the 70s).

        But if you do want to use it I’ll just re-approve it, every time, no worries there.Report

        • veronica d in reply to Maribou says:

          @maribou — Ah yes, the one I asked you all to treat as a slur. Silly me. 😉

          Actually I had intended to not use that word here, out of a respect for consistent rules, although I use it muchly among my friends. It’s one of those “we can use it, you can’t” things, which I hate fighting over.

          Anyway, I’m a silly old trans.Report

  5. Richard Hershberger says:

    Ga1: You’re trolling me, right? From the article:

    In the early days of baseball, it was considered unmanly to use a glove. Broken bones were common. The first mass-produced gloves had little padding and no fingers. In the 1920s and ’30s, companies started producing gloves with a web between the thumb and forefinger, to create a pocket.

    This is a mishmash of half-truths and straight-up BS. On the other hand, the bit about early gloves having no fingers is both true and surprising to find in what is otherwise a complete mess of a paragraph.

    This did inspire me to look to see when the first mass-produced webbed gloves were marketed. Based on a quick and desultory search, it was by 1902 at the latest.Report

  6. Saul Degraw says:

    RD3: Lee is right here. Almost every political movement and ideology (left and right) has depended on the passion and energy of youth. This is not just for extremists movements like the Bolsheviks, the Cultural Revolution, the Nazis and Fascists. The Democratic majority that started in the 1930s came about because of a lot of young people being pushed to the economic left during the Great Depression. Lots of Republicans politicians today were impressionable youth during the Reagan 80s.

    Cohabitation: There are lots of factors that go into early cohabitation or not. Cities are expensive and I think a lot of couples move intogether early to save on rent and because it is better to live with your lover* than randos from Craigslist. My girlfriend and I have the opposite problem, we both have rent-stabilized apartments in the super-expensive Bay Area so neither of us wants to move. We both concur that I have the better apartment but she lives in the better neighborhood.**

    Asking Dad for Permission: I never got this concept and refuse to do it but I’ve known women who called it a nice gesture.

    *I might be the only person who likes the term lover.

    **There were also some trend pieces about couples who broke up but still lived with each other for the same the rent is to high problem.Report

  7. DensityDuck says:

    Heh. There are pictures going around of fire ants forming masses to float across floodwaters; the ants are so small that the water surface tension forms a barrier around their limbs.

    My wife says that if you touch one of these masses it crawls all over you, and fire ants can kill you with stings. I’m thinking it’s something like The Blob…Report

  8. Marchmaine says:

    Ed2 and RD5 are related. But I’m gonna be cryptic today.Report

    • Maribou in reply to Marchmaine says:

      @marchmaine I’d be curious to know if the connections you see between the two articles are the same ones I see… I definitely think there’s a connection.Report

      • Marchmaine in reply to Maribou says:


        {Dang, I might not have thought through the rules to this game very well.}Report

        • Maribou in reply to Marchmaine says:

          @marchmaine I’ll show you mine if you show me yours?Report

          • Marchmaine in reply to Maribou says:

            Well, Virginia is a long way to travel for that game… but ok.Report

            • Maribou in reply to Marchmaine says:

              @marchmaine I of course meant rhetorically. Ahem.

              Here, I’ll go first.

              If people were more deliberate about who they told about what, they wouldn’t end up in Title IX investigations. If colleges were more deliberate (sidenote and transparent) about how they investigated Title IX accusations, they wouldn’t end up royally flubbing the entire thing so that some people get witch hunted and other ones do really awful things and emerge unscathed. (My school seems to have mostly been pretty deliberate and what I’ve heard about Title IX investigations (I was actually a secondary witness in one, against a student, for one of the things that really *should* matter – and I later heard through channels and observed myself that he problem got resolved without any significant punitive action, and everyone involved including the person who was accused and the formal complainant was happier than not with the results.) If the government was (A LOT) (MANY TIMES A LOT) more deliberate about what it required colleges to do and how much of its own power it asked them to abrogate unto themselves, all this weird compliance stuff that leads to vigorous scandalmongering would be greatly simplified; young women who actually *have* been sexually assaulted on campus, or subjected to sexual harassment and/or a seriously hostile environment in the classroom, would have some real recourse instead of a secretive shadow system that may or may not do anything to help them; and people like the guy linked to in the article wouldn’t be subject to the whims of vindictive colleagues.

              Your turn?Report

  9. CK MacLeod says:

    Thanks for the link to that very serious 2012 April Fools Day post – pleasant surprise!Report