Here's a little preview (no video, sorry) of my forthcoming documentary with Scott on the Indiana Ghost Trackers: I have footage of one of them interviewing a moderately mentally handicapped guy about a ghost of a little girl that talks to him though an oscillating fan in his room. The fan had no comment at the time of the investigation.
SNAFU: my animation project is behind schedule, to the point that I've pretty well jettisoned the simulated cloth in favor of solid puppets. It's a pisser to be sure, but I have to get this project done. I got the cloth to work to the point that it would hang from the figure properly, but it couldn't react to the figure moving fast enough, so the arms would move through the cloth and the garment would fall off. This isn't that kind of movie, so the only cloth in the scene will be the curtain, if I use cloth at all. At the current rate, I could have it working well enough two weeks after the project is due in both classes. The up-side to all of this is that I'm spending long periods of time in VIA-1 in AB, much like I used to do at USF. VIA-1 is a nice lab, but the room has old fluorescent lights instead of warmer incandescent lights like VIA-2 and the USF animation lab. If I could logically fit another abbreviation into this paragraph, I would.
I found this rant while browsing IM profiles, and it reminded me of my friends in undergrad.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
There's an abbreviation to contrast to USF quite nicely. Anyway, I'm in a position to be stupidly smug for the time being, so I'd like to pick apart the rant.
It's pretty darn misogynistic when you look past its view of nice guys to its view of generic girls, isn't it? "Most girls need that litany of support," it claims. That's pretty striking on its own, but then the ranter lists it as the reason to say nice things. It apparently has nothing to do with the truth; lies are just as nice as coincidental truths. See also the sentence on giving fished-for compliments. The mentality that sees people fishing for compliments sees them as very simple-minded, ready to believe anything, even a simple negation. For example, I suppose the perceived cast would be "I'm getting fat." If she really thinks she's getting fat, do you think so little of her that the right response is "Oh, no, you have a great figure," that is, "You're wrong because we disagree." If there's fishing going on, it's fishing for perspective. The right answer to questions about fat is pretty much the Holy Grail for men, I suppose, but consider a personality issue, perhaps something like "I'm such a *****." In this case, she has a particular incident or two in mind and is really wondering how that might have gone differently. The real nice guy wants to hear about that so they can determine whether she really did act so horribly. If so, it's not OK to lie and say it was fine, but it probably is nice to remind her that she's generally not a bad person.
Then in paragraph 3 it stops making any sort of sense. If she's having troubles with her boyfriend because he's a chump and a jerk, then who are you helping by pretending you think she should be eager for reconciliation? Obviously, it's not your cause; that would, after all, undermine the notion in this rant that nice guys are martyrs. Do you think she deserves a chump and a jerk? The absent boyfriend is the only one benefitting. Perhaps you've been swayed by some rhyme concerning the prioritization of "bros" before the girl coming between. Is there any justification for that saying? I think it's just flashy with its rhyme and derogatory word, thereby taking in many who don't think about it. By protecting the other guy, you hurt your own causes and encourage her to stay in a crummy relationship you apparently don't think she belongs in. The only way to ignore the fact that that's two people worse off and one better off is to ignore the woman as a person, which is the same attitude found in the opening paragraphs, as I pointed out. And remember, you don't even like the one you're helping.
I'll pass right on over the part about helping her into a lasting vendetta with society by plotting a "counter-rumor" and move on to find more hidden flaws. What kind of friendship do you have if she's "dragging" you to parties? You want to be with her only if there is something "serious" between you? Compare that to your notion of friendship and see if she's not mistaken when she calls you friend.
So the rant started with misogyny and continued with non-sense, but here they come together: "Nice guys don't seem to get laid as often as they should." I have no idea what moral code this "should" is based on that says it is the duty of nice guys to get laid. And see how silly it looks in that restatement: The real implication is that it's the duty of the nice guy's female friend to do such favors for him. By this mysterious "should," we find once again an attitude that women--there's no avoiding cliche here, I suppose--are second-class citizens, owing payment to their friends for acting like decent people.
Speaking of sounding cliche, it comes down to respect. The nice guy in this rant doesn't respect his friend; how can he be surprised by her looking elsewhere for a more fulfilling relationship?
So yes, keep holding doors, but do it because people appreciate having doors held for them, and you know they get the same feeling you do when someone holds a door for you.
---
I tried to talk to an oscillating fan once, but it just looked away.
Somehow I feel like I don't really need to sign this, and I'd be ashamed to anyway.
Your blog is the greatest thing ever. I thought the table cleaning guy incident was very insightful. These table cleaners need to be put in thier place! I'm totally linking this on my blog.
I love Ghosthunters. I hope I get a chance to see yours and Scott's project.
YOU SKERRED ME!
DON'T SKERE ME!
Loyal, do you see me house?
-- Tim
Post a Comment