if none of those links led anywhere, please return here and accept my apology. this one should work.
if none of those links led anywhere, please return here and accept my apology. this one should work.
What would rejecting this helplessness look like? The right see adulthood as a process of settling down, getting married and having children; in effect, conforming to conventional gender roles and being productive members of the workforce. We obviously don’t have to buy into that, at any age. But we can aspire towards a different form of maturity: looking after ourselves, treating other people with care, being invested in something beyond our own immediate satisfaction. Infantilising yourself can often seem like a plea for diminished responsibility. Most of us will have encountered someone who, when criticised for behaving badly, appeals to their own vulnerability as a way of letting themselves off the hook. No matter what they do or the harm they cause, it’s never fair to criticise them, because there’s always some reason – often framed through therapy jargon or the language of social justice – why it isn’t their fault. Childishness grants them a perpetual innocence; they are constitutionally incapable of being in the wrong.
But we will never make the world better if we act like this. Thinking of yourself as a smol bean baby is a way of tapping out and expecting other people to fight on your behalf. It also makes you a more pliant consumer. Social media is awash with the idea that ‘it’s valid not to be productive’, as though productivity were the only manifestation of capitalism and streaming Disney+ all day is a form of resistance. It’s much rarer to encounter the idea that we have a responsibility about what we consume, or that satisfying our own desires whenever we want is not always a good thing: “there is no ethical consumption under capitalism” has morphed into “there is no unethical consumption under capitalism”.
Although it’s mostly just annoying, self-infantilisation’s pervasive existence in the culture could also be the harbinger of something more sinister. Last year, the comic book author Alan Moore suggested that the popularity of superhero films represents an “infantilisation that can very often be a precursor to fascism”. This might sound hyperbolic, but it’s true that a certain kind of kitsch infantilism was always a feature of Nazi art, which was hostile to moral ambiguity and formal complexity. Hitler himself was a Disney adult. If the desire to relinquish responsibility for your own life can be considered an infantile trait, it’s easy to see why this would make you more susceptible to authoritarianism. Today’s white nationalists – with their cartoon Pepes and their ‘frens’ – are as smooth-brain and babyish as any online community, while right-wing reactionaries have recently taken to eulogising 90s video games, Blockbuster and Toys R Us – a glorious past that has been robbed from us by wokeness.
In a more subtle way, conservatives self-infantilise by denying their own agency: faced with the supposed “excesses” of the movements for LGTBQ+ rights and racial justice, they see themselves as being pushed towards extremism. But categorising other people as children – who can be overruled in their own best interests – forms part of the same project: in recent years, there has been a concerted effort to raise the age at which trans people can access gender-affirming care. Legislators in at least three states in the US are currently moving to deny this treatment to adults up to the age of 25, on the basis that they are not yet mature enough to provide informed consent. Oppressed groups aren’t always infantilised – in a process known as ‘adultification’, children from racialised minorities are typically viewed as having more agency, which makes them more likely to be criminalised– but the right is happy to deploy a diversity of tactics. Just as it’s a common behaviour in abusive relationships, infantilisation can be a mechanism for political domination and control.
As such, the struggle against infantilisation has always formed a part of feminist, anti-racist, disability justice and anti-colonial movements, which recognised that there is no better way to rob people of agency than treating them as something lesser than an adult. This is all the more reason not to indulge it ourselves. Even if infantilisation is being pushed upon us, even if the helplessness we feel has a tangible basis in reality, even if adulting really does suck, we can still choose to see ourselves as capable of changing our own lives and the world around us. “The harms are undeniable,” says Cohen. “Bottom line: it’s a way of learning to love your oppressor. It takes an acute loss of agency and control and transforms it into a state to be desired and enjoyed. Once you embrace this way of being, the demands and rewards of adult life are going to seem all the more remote and all the more forbidding and unpleasurable.”
The New Yorker report, based on the complaint and interviews with sources, said that the assistant's allegations included that she was frequently made to work from Guilfoyle's apartment while the Fox host "displayed herself naked" and that Guilfoyle showed her photographs of the genitalia of men she'd had sexual relations with.
For many, Falling Down became a cinematic litmus test, with viewers seeing D-FENS as a villain, a hero, or sometimes both. His extreme responses to everyday aggravations, marital failures, and various confrontations were derided by some critics, and hailed by others. While some characterizations in the film have not aged well (like the stereotypical Latino gangbangers), the story did manage to capture, as Newsweek declared in a 1993 cover story, “White Male Paranoia.”
Today, in our increasingly fragmented and uncivil society, Falling Down still feels relevant. Scenarios that seemed outrageous then—D-FENS making his fast food complaints while wielding a gun; a young kid showing him how to use a bazooka; the rants of the cartoonish white supremacist store owner—are now reflected in our strange modern reality. Smith’s screenplay was not just of its time; it showed us where we were headed.
“At various points, Levinson’s scripts contained disturbing sexual and physically violent scenes between [Lily Rose] Depp and Tesfaye’s characters, three sources familiar with the matter claim. In one draft episode, there allegedly was a scene where Tesfaye bashes in Depp’s face, and her character smiles and asks to be beaten more, giving Tesfaye an erection. (This scene was never shot, the source says.) Another proposed scenario was for Depp to carry an egg in her vagina and if she dropped or cracked the egg, Tesfaye’s character would refuse to “rape” her — which sent Depp’s character into a spiral, begging him to ‘rape’ her because she believed he was the key to her success. (This scene also was not filmed because production couldn’t find a way to realistically shoot the scene without having Depp physically insert the egg, another source explains.)”
In a meticulously researched new book, the lives of five literary wives are examined and the often abusive relationships they found themselves in
What shall we call contemporary Republican ideology? Is it conservatism? Libertarianism? Authoritarianism? Trumpism? Fascism?
How about kayfabe?
Old kayfabe was built on the solid, flat foundation of one big lie: that wrestling was real. Neokayfabe, on the other hand, rests on a slippery, ever-wobbling jumble of truths, half-truths, and outright falsehoods, all delivered with the utmost passion and commitment. After a while, the producers and the consumers of neokayfabe tend to lose the ability to distinguish between what’s real and what isn’t. Wrestlers can become their characters; fans can become deluded obsessives who get off on arguing or total cynics who gobble it all up for the thrills, truth be damned.
Does all that remind you of anything?
Neokayfabe is the essence of the Republican strategy for campaigning and governance today. That’s no surprise, given Mr. McMahon’s influence on G.O.P. politics. His product, filled with bigotry and malevolence, was a primary cultural influence on countless millennials, especially during the W.W.F.’s late-century peak (in 1999, Gallup estimated that 18 percent of Americans, roughly 50 million people, counted themselves as pro wrestling fans), and those millennials have entered the Beltway — and the voting booth. Ms. McMahon has become a major Republican fund-raiser, candidate and official. And, most important of all, there’s the Trump connection.
Mr. McMahon and Donald Trump have been close friends for nearly 40 years. Even before he met Mr. McMahon, Mr. Trump had been a lifelong fan of pro wrestling — as well as a chronic dissembler — but it was Mr. McMahon who ushered Mr. Trump into the world of neokayfabe. Mr. Trump acted as the “host” of two installments of “WrestleMania.” Most spectacularly, Mr. Trump performed as himself in a story line where he and Mr. McMahon pretended to be bitter enemies, sending proxy wrestlers to engage in trial by combat at 2007’s “WrestleMania 23.” Mr. Trump is the first — though possibly not the last — member of the W.W.E. Hall of Fame to occupy the Oval Office.
Before he met Mr. McMahon, Mr. Trump had probably never worked a rowdy arena into a bitter, liberated frenzy by feeding it a mix of verboten truths and outrageous lies. But that skill, so essential in wrestling, would become Mr. Trump’s world-changing trademark.
We’re being too generous to other industries if we single out politics as the only place where neokayfabe has taken over, whether through wrestling’s influence or by convergent evolution. Think of entertainment: Some pop stars’ massive success largely rests on fans’ assumption that carefully choreographed “behind the scenes” hints about inspiration and heartbreak are legit. Or finance: Many C.E.O.s speak with blinding optimism about their companies because they cannot distinguish between their own truths and falsehoods anymore. Or, dare I say it, the news media: Pundits compete for attention, and nothing grabs outraged clicks quite like planting a ludicrous argument in the soil of an inarguable truth.
In May of 1999, when Mr. McMahon was approaching the peak of his cultural influence, a wrestler named Owen Hart fell more than 70 feet during a failed zip-line stunt at a wrestling show. He hit the ring. The fall killed him. Thousands of people in the live audience saw it happen, and at least some weren’t sure if what they were seeing was real. An ambulance, used for Mr. McMahon as part of a set piece involving a fake injury earlier in the show, took Mr. Hart to the hospital, where he was declared dead. But the event continued, and eventually the crowd was able to cheer along. In the world of neokayfabe, even something as real as death seemed like it could be fake.
I love pro wrestling, but I fear neokayfabe. It turns the world into a hall of mirrors from which it is nearly impossible to escape. It rots the mind and eats the soul. And yet, we cannot return to the world of old kayfabe, either — we know too much. Perhaps the only antidote to neokayfabe is radical honesty. It’s less fun, but it tends to do less material harm, in the long run.
Jason Eisener, director of Hobo With a Shotgun and the recently released
Kids vs. Aliens, revealed as such via Twitter on Friday. He claimed that back in 2018, he pitched a standalone film to Paramount focused on Casey. That movie would’ve featured Shredder’s daughter Karai and eventually Raphael, who Eisener said would’ve taken visual inspiration from the 1990 film. What’s more, the director released a tone reel for the hypothetical film, set to “I” by Dio and featuring footage from The Raid 2, Stranger Things, Goon, and the original TMNT movie.
Another makes the case that audience members did not give their own consent to witness characters in movies or shows having sex, and are therefore disturbed or violated by those scenes. I don’t think pathologizing language about assault when discussing movies is particularly helpful. I find the idea that viewing a movie is some sort of passive exercise to be bizarre. You choose to watch a movie. There are detailed ratings systems involved. The scenes are not randomly happening to a person; the person made an active choice to watch them. But here I am, just reporting to you what the people online are saying.
Then there’s this one: The fictional characters in a show or movie have not consented to us watching them have sex. Honestly, I can’t even touch this one.
It’s taking every ounce of self-control for me not to be glib about any of this. (I would like to know who I can invoice for the dentist bill when I show up for an emergency appointment after I have ground my teeth down to nubs while scrolling through these tweets, however.) I recognize there is a diversity of opinion that merits consideration, and that not every person will share my perspective on everything. I do, however, have one major question: What the hell are these movies that these people have been watching?
If there has been any trend in the last few years—the last decade really—it’s been the frustrating lack of sex in movies. They’ve become impotent! Sure, there is a smattering of steamy flicks each year, but, by and large, critics have been bemoaning the industry’s sanitization.
Director Nicola B. Marsh looks at the murders that inspired movies including 'Badlands' and 'Natural Born Killers.'
The Board explained that for the past year, Florida has been dealing with a lot of problems, outrageously high insurance costs, natural disaster screw-ups, home and rental prices, and the refusal to expand Medicaid. All of the key issues Floridians desperately need help with are dying on the altar of DeSantis' anti-woke agenda.
HYPER-ANNOTATION #001 from glitch writing to posthuman porno contributors: wayne mason, alan sondheim, d.m. mitchell, ellie chou, made in dna, francisco borges, giselle bolotin, bec lambert, n.casio poe, sophia yung, tom bland, dan mcneil, kirill azernny, hallidonto, hister grant, tod foley, cæla Ⓥ, david roden, zak ferguson, andrew c. wenaus, kristine snodgrass, akua, miyazaki tatsuya, charles thomas carter, david kuhnlein, julio aliseda, alvin tung, pharmakustik, timothy burns, matt burns, shaun lawton cover artwork: akua publisher: kenji siratori ISBN: 978-1-387-30578-0
In this era of comic-book movies, reboots, and IP, a new Dick Tracy seems like a can’t-miss project. The original film, directed by and starring Warren Beatty, became a major hit in 1990, grossing over $100 million in the U.S. alone. And yet a sequel never materialized.
Well, would you settle for a 30-minute TV special where Warren Beatty talks to himself as Dick Tracy over a Zoom call?
So what the hell was that all about? You can go to the Dick Tracy Wikipedia page to find out; the section titled “Possible sequel, legal issues and reboot” contains nine paragraphs and almost 1,000 words on the subject. In short(ish): In the 1980s, Beatty had bought the rights to make Dick Tracy movies directly from Tribune, the owners of the original comic strip. Then he brought his rights to Disney, where he made his Dick Tracy movie.
For a variety of reasons, he was never able to get a sequel off the ground, and eventually Tribune tried to reclaim their rights so they could try to make their own Dick Tracy films or TV shows — at which point Beatty claimed they were trying to breach their deal and filed suit.
In the legal battle that followed, Tribune claimed that per the original contract after a “certain period of time” without a new Dick Tracy movie, series, or special, they’d get their rights back. According to a Reuters report on the outcome of the case (which Beatty won), in 2006, Tribune set Beatty a letter “that gave him two years to begin production on Dick Tracy programming.”
And so, in 2008, Beatty made the first Dick Tracy Special that’s embedded above. The judge in that case found that “Beatty’s commencement of principal photography of his television special on November 8, 2008 was sufficient for him to retain the Dick Tracy rights.”
Warren Beatty Just Made One of the Weirdest Sequels Ever