Messages

31

Or Kill Me / Re: The Collective "You" (short).

« on: September 14, 2013, 03:51:22 am »

"one" vs. "you" seems to work sometimes, coupled with "sometimes" or something like that...

for example...

Example: "You know when you go outside and it's raining, and you didn't know beforehand, and you end up wet and irritated and crabby with your co workers? This is why you should always bring an umbrella." Completely made up, I'm sure you could provide your own. (Hey, there's another one!).

One would think when going outside and its raining, and didnt know beforehand, one would end up wet and irritated and crabby with its co-workers. This is why one should always bring an umbrella. Completely made up, Im sure everyone could provide their own."

32

Apple Talk / Re: Hi, Im Cris

« on: September 14, 2013, 03:44:25 am »

THERE CAN ONLY BE ONE - PUTOS!
/
/
/

33

Apple Talk / Re: I love Miley Cyrus

« on: September 13, 2013, 07:04:02 am »

Not just derived from this, but theres a certain thing that both dumb and smart people alike do that really annoys me... false equivalences between things that arent, which are made thru simplyfying them... a certain stubbornness to apply the same and typical analytical categories ad nauseum, over and over and OVER, AGAIN...

At certain point of doing that you stop listening, you stop hearing and im guessing you stop thinking because "OH no need to look into it, i know what that is all about!"...

I know its cognitive heuristics and all that jazz of cost efficiency but FUCK.

34

Apple Talk / Re: I love Miley Cyrus

« on: September 13, 2013, 05:45:49 am »

And i gotta say i also fell a bit prey to the "lack-of-female-agency" trope, but i don't consider it a mysoginistic type bias, but rather my assumption that all pop entertainers are puppets.

(Regardless of their sex/gender)

A very important detail that I keep mentioning but that seems to keep being unnoticed is that this is the first project of hers of which she has had complete creative and business control. This is something she's mentioned in interviews in connection to the "We Just Can't Stop" video. She is making the hiring and creative decisions. On her own. Which means that ultimately, she is responsible for the product she is selling. She may be, as RWHN put it, a tool, but she is a tool of herself in an industry she chose to work in.

She is not a slave, or a possession. She has agency.

I did read that you mentioned she has creative control, that's why i mentioned it after reading the entire thread in an apologetic way.

(Not sure if you are just re-emphasizing or saying im not noticing it.)

35

Apple Talk / Re: I love Miley Cyrus

« on: September 13, 2013, 05:10:17 am »

And i gotta say i also fell a bit prey to the "lack-of-female-agency" trope, but i don't consider it a mysoginistic type bias, but rather my assumption that all pop entertainers are puppets.

(Regardless of their sex/gender)

36

Apple Talk / Re: I love Miley Cyrus

« on: September 13, 2013, 05:07:42 am »

Or vice versa...What's being communicated isn't what's on the surface.  Which is a totally different thing.  If you know what I mean.

I think I do.

To be honest, I'm a fan of Bounce, so when I saw the VMA thing the first time, my reactions were: "Wow.  The sound mix is terrible.  She obviously can't hear the band.  What's with the tongue   Hm.  That's....that's not twerking.  She's just touching her toes."  And I more or less dismissed the rest as a failed skit.

I wasn't disturbed or outraged, but then again, I'm not really the target demographic here.  I also dismissed the haters, too.  But then, you all started pointing out the subtle things going on, and when I found out that her video was directed by the so-called king of the creepers, Terry Richardson, I got intrigued.  Now, though I can't say with any certainty what her inner motiviations are, her actions have certainly played out in a fairly seismic way, intentional or not.

But here's the thing:  The intention is almost irrelevant, even if she specifically planned this.  Or not.

The stage was set for the standard "20 year old dancing sexy for 40 year old creeps" (target audience).  Then the pedo bears.  Then the Beetlejuice thing.  Then the INSANELY GROTESQUE BURLESQUE, so to speak.  40 year old creeps do not feel show has delivered.  They don't understand it.  They start making monkey noises while banging on the keyboard about THAT SLUT, THAT WHORE, THAT DISGUSTING LITTLE TRAMP...As evidenced in the comments on youtube, facebook, etc.

Here's the really nasty part:  Rapists tend to say the same things about their victims, when they know or have observed their victims over a long period of time (as opposed to the far more rare stranger rape).  They do this to justify - mostly to themselves - their behavior.   She was a slut, so what they did didn't matter.

Then extend that just a tiny bit: 

1.  She's a SLUT AND A WHORE = "worthless".

2.  She's just another female shock act = "worthless".

There really isn't a practical difference.

What she was communicating - whether or not she intended to - was "All of my fans are disgusting 40 year old creepers, and I am aware of this.  NOW SO ARE THEY."

Beetlejuice and PedoBear are important things i overlooked, well noted 

37

Apple Talk / Re: I love Miley Cyrus

« on: September 13, 2013, 05:05:51 am »

I read the first page of this thread, and I want to express my ideas before I get sidetracked with it, because its something I've been thinking of since the VMAs and now its triangulated with Wrecking Ball.

I denominate this aesthetic trend as "Awkward Sexuality" thru a perspective that everything is calculated and planned out in the entertainment business and that there are no coincidences, just well crafted publicists and marketers constantly trying to one-up each other.

What is this product that is sold thru the incarnation of Ms. Cyrus? The synchretism between the all-out "femme fatale" or sexual-woman that is manifested thru the likes of (pop culture police, ill reference what i know but im no expert) say Shakira, Beyonce, Britney, or Katy Perry in which the sex card is played straight and direct thru the manner of "I have a great body and i know how to use it, and here i come"... and the fusion with it's counter-part, which is girly-girl innocence, such as say, Taylor Swift or Demi Lovato, in which "feely, touchy" things take prevalence over a sexuated message or expression. So the extremes can be analytically categorized as "sexuality" vs. "innocence", and in such a market of extremes, somebody necesarily would come in and eat up the in-between market of them - enter Miley.

1st observation: VMAs... with the bloated budget and image consulting she undoubtedly has, the shorts she wore in the presentation were not a last minute wardrobe malfunction... I think there's an overwhelming consensus that she has a very healthy, young and attractive body, so her body image and attractiveness is uncontested and thus can get away with a bad wardrobe without tarnishing that consensus... but besides the wardrobe (and the transition from the 1st attire) another thing that managed to catch everyone's eye was supposedly her "trashy" moves, and the more introspective and observant managed to understand that it was not the "trashy" nature of it, because that's a common day to day sight, but rather how it made themselves feel... "uncomftable", "awkward", "shame"...

2nd observation: Wrecking Ball... yes, shes naked except for her boots, shes "riding sensually" the demolition ball and shes licking a hammer... but its a type of b-side sensuality, it does not come off right, it's not played out properly enough and one is given enough time to read between the lines, see between the cracks that it's a comedy, suspension of disbelief is broken...

And in this manner she gobbles up the market between the extremes, playing "badly" both extreme tropes, but in reality, it's a synchretism between the sexual femme-fatale and the innocent girl coming-of-age. I rest my case.

Now if you pardon me, I'll be drinking bleach thru one of my ears.

I could handle the first 'thru', but for some reason using both 'synchretism" and 'thru' in one sentence breaks my brain. I can't read this.

Maybe I could type it out in Spanish to make it easier for you to read it? I write better that way.

38

Apple Talk / Re: I love Miley Cyrus

« on: September 13, 2013, 03:29:47 am »

I read the first page of this thread, and I want to express my ideas before I get sidetracked with it, because its something I've been thinking of since the VMAs and now its triangulated with Wrecking Ball.

I denominate this aesthetic trend as "Awkward Sexuality" thru a perspective that everything is calculated and planned out in the entertainment business and that there are no coincidences, just well crafted publicists and marketers constantly trying to one-up each other.

What is this product that is sold thru the incarnation of Ms. Cyrus? The synchretism between the all-out "femme fatale" or sexual-woman that is manifested thru the likes of (pop culture police, ill reference what i know but im no expert) say Shakira, Beyonce, Britney, or Katy Perry in which the sex card is played straight and direct thru the manner of "I have a great body and i know how to use it, and here i come"... and the fusion with it's counter-part, which is girly-girl innocence, such as say, Taylor Swift or Demi Lovato, in which "feely, touchy" things take prevalence over a sexuated message or expression. So the extremes can be analytically categorized as "sexuality" vs. "innocence", and in such a market of extremes, somebody necesarily would come in and eat up the in-between market of them - enter Miley.

1st observation: VMAs... with the bloated budget and image consulting she undoubtedly has, the shorts she wore in the presentation were not a last minute wardrobe malfunction... I think there's an overwhelming consensus that she has a very healthy, young and attractive body, so her body image and attractiveness is uncontested and thus can get away with a bad wardrobe without tarnishing that consensus... but besides the wardrobe (and the transition from the 1st attire) another thing that managed to catch everyone's eye was supposedly her "trashy" moves, and the more introspective and observant managed to understand that it was not the "trashy" nature of it, because that's a common day to day sight, but rather how it made themselves feel... "uncomftable", "awkward", "shame"...

2nd observation: Wrecking Ball... yes, shes naked except for her boots, shes "riding sensually" the demolition ball and shes licking a hammer... but its a type of b-side sensuality, it does not come off right, it's not played out properly enough and one is given enough time to read between the lines, see between the cracks that it's a comedy, suspension of disbelief is broken...

And in this manner she gobbles up the market between the extremes, playing "badly" both extreme tropes, but in reality, it's a synchretism between the sexual femme-fatale and the innocent girl coming-of-age. I rest my case.

Now if you pardon me, I'll be drinking bleach thru one of my ears.

39

Apple Talk / Re: MEANWHILE, IN JAPAN...

« on: August 28, 2013, 01:32:52 pm »

the element that makes it intricate and is a critical point is first seeing people running away, which serves as a type of "suspension of disbelief" from a social source

40

Apple Talk / Re: Shut Down the Internet!

« on: August 28, 2013, 04:35:33 am »

Smash your computer! Live in the desert!

41

Apple Talk / Re: ITT: SUU WILL FIX YOUR HISTORY

« on: August 27, 2013, 07:23:50 pm »

but i thought suu-fixx-ing things was nigels job  where did i even read that at? twids sig?

HISTORICAL QUESTIONS ONLY

Ok, are the songs of Rasputina accurate historical commentary?

42

Apple Talk / Re: ITT: SUU WILL FIX YOUR HISTORY

« on: August 27, 2013, 03:43:45 am »

but i thought suu-fixx-ing things was nigels job  where did i even read that at? twids sig?

43

Apple Talk / Re: If Any of You Really Loved Me, You'd Kill Yourselves Today.

« on: August 24, 2013, 08:04:11 am »

Here's some music to go along with it:

M.S.I.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V06TXd8CwRI]

44

Techmology and Scientism / Re: Hey you dirty hippies

« on: August 24, 2013, 07:09:05 am »

Weird, theres a very broad perception surrounding psychedelics, some schizophrenia, cognitive and memory decay and a lot of things...

45

Aneristic Illusions / Re: Okay, the fucking GOP is trolling. SHARK JUMPED, ITT.

« on: August 24, 2013, 06:07:20 am »

I seriously want a transcript of the whole thing. It's AMAZING.

Normally I would do it, but I'd have to stick a spork into my pineal gland after finishing it. 

THIS IS BECAUSE, BEING MEXICAN, YOU EAT TOO MANY VEGETABLES.  GREEN, GREEN VEGETABLES.

What they don't tell you Northeners is that everything is deep fried and is eaten in triple layered taco form, that's why all my compatriots are fat.

I just had a senator tell me that your people are herbivores.

WHO AM I GONNA BELIEVE, HERE?  A SENATOR, OR SOME FOREIGNER SALAD-SUCKING GENETICALLY PREDISPOSED SICKLE CELL FRIED CHICKEN?  UM.

You think nopales are vegetables? We call that MEAT, answer THAT smart guy!