oceana

So Apple has censored the German Bildzeitung's app which includes Bild's famous naked girl (Bild, for those of you who don't know, is a famous German tabloid, and apparently they always feature a "page-three girl" on page 1. If you have the app, you can shake your iphone and the girl undresses! (how exciting! *not*)
As this obviously involves naked breasts, Apple has decided that it is unsafe to have on an iphone, which is a clean and family-friendly toy. That was, as I understand it, after the banned the page-three girl from the normal Bild-app, which, I suppose, lets you read the paper on your iphone.

Here's
a link to the article in Spiegel-online, german only, but I'm sure you'll find something if you google.

Now, I don't have an iphone nor have I ever read even a single page of a Bild-paper. But I call censorship when I see it, and this is censorhip, and it sucks. Sure, it's only the naked girl, but what if next time, Apple doesn't like something that Bild writes? Will they ban that as well? And what is it about the naked girl anyway? It
always shocks me how afraid US-americans are of breasts. So afraid that livejournal would likely delete this post if I were to use an icon showing a nipple with it. (since I am posting via email, I cannot even choose an icon, so no danger there). Are BREASTS really so scary that we have to value the protection of our kids not to be
exposed to OMG!BREASTS higher than freedom of speech?

I don't think so.

(and let's not get into the whole "why do your kids have an iphone unsupervised and why were they allowed to get that app?")

Personally, I'm hoping for a legal showdown. It's not completely unlikely that German courts could force Apple to accept Bild's app on the iPhone, and that seems to me the kind of sign that The World According to Apple desperately needs right now. I for one, am not going to buy an iPhone anytime soon, that much is sure.

On the other hand //beginning of sarcasm//, this kind of censorship could be a really good thing. I own a LG tv, for example. I never watch tv, because the programs over here are so bad. What if LG could ban the programs they don't like from my TV? Tell [insert network of your choice) to stop producing [insert really bad show of your
choice], or it will be forever banned from LG tvs! Other companies could have similar deals, so you could choose your program by buying the right tv! no more zapping, no more changing channels, buy the right TV and be sure never to have to endure anymore news about Twilight on your tv, ever again! Of course, if you wanted one TV for
the kids to watch Disney channel on and one where you can watch Queer as Folk, you'd probably have to buy two tvs, but whose counting? (also, I doubt there'd be any more Queer as Folk, so good riddance, one less show to steal your precious time).
And it would work the other way around as well: cancel the CEO's favourite show? On no, network, don't do it, or we will ban you from our hardware! Kill of the favourite character? I don't think so, you don't wanna get banned, network!

See what I mean? Censorship can be brilliant!

You could do the same thing with practically everything, like books, for example. Imagine if amazon.com would ban all the really crappy books from their store - book-buying would be so easy! I mean, if all the bad books are banned, logically all that remains are good books!

Of course, amazon would never do that.

Or, wait, they already did!


The one thing I know for certain is, that if I were king of the world, the world would be a lot different, and it certainly wouldn't be the world according to Apple, or Google, or Microsoft (though I'm beginning to think that Microsoft is the least evil of potential world rules, and how did that happen?). So, let's not give Apple and Co. the chance to become king. Trust me, my world would be a lot more fun with
a lot less censorship.

In the meantime,Google is being invested by the European Commission due to possible infractions of anti-trust laws. According to Microsoft and Co., Google supposedly discriminates them in their search algorithm.

I'm amused.


One last random suggestion: If all this censorhip talk hurts your brain, why don't you send your toys on a trip to Prague, completely uncensored. Unless your toys are naked, of course.

Apparently the cold has us all locked inside and in front of our computers, where we have nothing better to do than to rant. And the rant du jour seems to be incest fic, once again.


In Which I Write An Essay About Not Writing An Essay

I, too, was tempted to write yet another essay about incest fic, which I did, actually, quite a good one too, if I may say so. The more I think about it, the more interesting (at least to me) my conclusions become. But after following the recent discussions, I don't feel like posting it anymore, for one simple reason: 90% of fandom seems to be unable to have a reasonable discussion about any fannish subject, especially a delicate one like incest fic. I don't mean people flaming the writer, no, I mean the simple process of reading an essay, understanding it and reacting to the arguments made within. Look at any discussion in fandom and you will find, as I myself have often experienced, that the replies of the author often begin with "As I said before...".


I'm tired of this. It's one thing that people can't properly voice their own arguments. I'm a lawyer, I expect to be better at that than others. It's another, more annoying thing, if people bring up something that is an argument, but that is completely beside the point. Many fannish discussions read to me like this:

Me: "Cows can be black and white."
Commenter:"If I want my dogs to be yellow then I can damn well MAKE them yellow."
Me: *bangs head against the wall*

The sad thing, and also the reason why it is an agonizing process to try to follow these discussions, is that people often react to that kind of statement. Which means that an essay that was supposed to be about the color of cows, ends up being a controversy about dog food. Of course, if we'd actually talk about cows and dogs, people would be able to make the distinction, but take any more intelligent subject and they are not. Which is not to say that cows and dogs are not intelligent, oh no, I would never say that. (see how I barely avoided having the first comment to this be something like "but cows are very intelligent!"?)


What annoys me most, however, is that people are not even able to understand a text in the first place. Write certain key words, like incest, rape, slash=feminism or Rodney's nipples in any context, and you can be sure to get the same results from the same people, no matter what the rest of your text says. Which proves that

a) some people don't even bother to read your opinion (but react to the keyword and then are rude enough to comment and expect their opinion about Rodney's nipples to be read, even though they didn't care to read yours)

and

b) some people try to read the rest of your arguments, but are unable to understand them (and then, maybe not even realizing that they didn't understand them, comment on the keywords anyway).

Option a) makes me angry, option b) makes me just sad. Unfortunately, it's hard to tell them apart, and so my participation in fannish discussions often ends in frustration and many *bangs head against wall* comments. But don't get frustrated, you are not alone with your insufficient reading comprehension skills. Many highschool kids today can barely follow a comic book.


I admit that as a lawyer, I feel sort of responsible when people don't understand my arguments. After all, I'm getting paid to put legal facts into words that laymen can understand. If I'm not able to write an argument on a fannish subject in a way that other fans can understand, I'm doing something wrong. Or so I thought for a long time, which was even more frustrating. But that's not it at all. It all depends on the audience. As a lawyer, I can't choose my audience, but as a fan, I can. And I will, because unlike in real life, no one here pays me for talking to the stupid people. So I choose not to have discussions with people who are too stupid to understand me anymore, or with people who are so rude that they ignore what I'm saying. Yes, I referred to people as stupid. Get over it.

I will still happily participate in any intelligent discussion, with people who are intelligent enough to understand me (and I, hopefully, am intelligent enough to understand them). But it also means that I will ignore all the "My Dog is YELLOW" people, whose "arguments" don't even deservce to be called arguments. An argument, by definition, is a statement in support of another statement. Meaning: if you read an essay and want to respond to it, your statement should respond to something the author of the essay said (preferably in said essay, which seems to be yet another problem for some people). A statement about dogs, no matter how true, cannot be an argument in a discussion about cows. It's that simple.


Two arguments I'd especially like to never EVER see again (oh, I wish!) are the following:

1) Fiction is not reality.
This can be found in any fannish discussion. I think there is a Secret Club somewhere, whose members detect fannish discussion only to insert a "Fiction is not reality" comment in one of its many incarnations, and then wait to see what happens. And lo and behold, someone always falls for it.

I'm not quite sure what the "Fiction is not reality" is supposed to say, since it is, as shown above, rarely if ever used as a real argument. Most often it appears in a context that makes me think that whoever wrote it wants to say something like that: "Fanfiction is not reality, therefore everything is allowed, especially as it is based on fictional characters."

This is wrong for many reasons. While I can whole-heartedly agree with the statement "Fiction is not reality.", I cannot agree with the implied "fanfiction is not reality."

See, many fans forget that - unlike writers of original fiction, whose only limit is their imagination, - fanfic writers have a reality. TV, books, comics, whatever you base your fanfic on is your reality. Fanfiction is therefore a special kind of fiction, one that is based on imagined events while at the same time making claims about its "source reality." It is a mixture between fiction and non-fiction. With the source reality also being fiction and thus being a lot more flexible than real events, fanfic has much more possibilities than "real" non-fiction, but they are not endless.

In other words: if you state in your fanfic that Dean is driving a white Ferrari, and has always done so, your are wrong. (Yes, fanfic writers can be wrong, and people are allowed to say it!) On the other hand, if you want to write a fanfic in which Dean's car mysteriously turns into a white Ferrari (car-changing demon, perhaps, or crossover with Miami Vice), the fiction part of fanfic allows you to do so. You don't even have to explain yourself to your readers, though in my experience readers appreciate some kind of explanation for blatant changes in canon (=your reality).


2) The other "argument", my favourite one, without which no fannish discussion is complete, is the wonderful

If you don't like it, you don't have to read it!!!

Apart from the fact that this is not an argument (see above) and therefore has no right to be in the discussion (and you can tell that it doesn't feel welcome by the way it stands there, all alone or in groups, accompanied by the heated exchange of progressively irrelevant reactions), apart from that, it is true.

Completely true.


If I don't like a fic, I don't have to read it.
Signed,
Oceana


Well, let me tell you something: If I don't like a fic, I may not HAVE to read it, but I can still do so if I want. And you know what? I can then tell you or anyone else that I don't like it. I can even say why I didn't like it. This is even more true for a whole genre of fiction, but really, it goes for your individual fic, too.

As long as you can throw out your fics into the public where anyone can see or read them, people are allowed to react to them. You don't get to tell people that they were not supposed to read your fic. If you are allowed to write and publish your fics, I am certainly allowed to have an opinion about them and to WRITE about that opinion, on the internet, in public, where everyone can read it. Even you.

If you don't like my opinion?

Oh, you don't have to read it.



Thank you, and good night.

( In which I talk about incest and Supernatural, so some of you should ignore this post (you know who you are, sorry) )

Go ahead, start yelling at me.

leadensky has a post over here about why she disagrees with RPF/RPS.

I know, it's old, it's all been said before, but then, what in fandom hasn't been said before? But I still found it interesting, because unlike most people, she actually has arguments for her opinion. Arguments with which I disagree.
Which is funny, because I can totally understand why people have issues with RPS or find it wrong. I just couldn't understand her argument.

Under the cut, you will find what my comment in her lj. I don't usually do that sort of thing, but
a) I don't know the first thing about leadensky and have no idea if she is interested in discussing this (yes, I heard that some people do not like it when you disagree with them. I still have trouble understanding that.)
b) some of the discussions over there have already turned into the usual "Chill out", "She can say what she wants, it's her LJ!" kindergarten plays that we all know and love,
c) no one but me seems to have disagreed with her so far, and everyone just says "this is such a great argument, yay you", so I'm fully expecting to be attacked by someone over there any time soon
and
d) the words fandom_wank were already mentioned, in which case all hope is lost.

So I thought I'd post what I wrote here, because I fully trust my flist to hit me vigorously but politely on the head if they disagree with me. Also, seeing how this is my lj, coming here to tell me that I'm not allowed to disagree, because "That is her lj, she can write whatever she wants!" is kind of a moot point.
*mocks kindergarden*
(I'm not mocking leadensky, it's not her fault that the discussion over there turned ugly)

Also, my comment isn't merely a reply. It stands on it's own, I just use some of the other arguments to show mine. And I was to lazy type it all again, so it's in the form of a comment. I don't mean to discuss leadensky's opinion here, if you want to argue with her, do it over there. I'd like to hear what you guys think about my POV.

( Come on, tell me why I'm wrong and why I suck and why I should never ever mention RPS again. You know you want to. )

I completely missed the whole Pegasus B kerfuffle, and I'm not sad about it.

The only thing I got out of it is that somebody screamed that there wasn't enough het, and then the whole "slash neglects women" thing came up. Which inevitably leads to "TV neglects women" and "Why aren't there more interesting females lead roles" up to evil male network owners who discriminate poor women.
And like so many things fandom get all hot and bothered about, this is one of the arguments you can't win.
Because no matter what you say to the people who bring this up, they'll argue against it.
Explain that in your opinion women play an important part in whatever show they are watching?
It won't be "important enough".

Point out female lead roles to them?
They'll say that the female character is too male.

Ask what makes a woman "too male"?
They'll probably shoot you dead and scream "traitor!" at them.

I am so sick of that.
You know what? Get over it. Get over whatever issues you have with being a woman, and accept that some of us are quite happy in our bodies and with our sexuality.
And accept that some of us like men.
Take me for example:
I like men. I really like men. I like their muscles and their smell and the way they hold doors open for you just because you are female, and how they start talking a bit louder about their new motorbike with their friends in a bar, hoping you'll notice them. I like their bodies. Hell, I even like chest hair, and I never thought that would ever happen when I was fifteen.
I like to have sex with them.
And I really like nothing more than two watch them doing manly things on TV, read about them doing manly things in fic, having manly sex with other manly men. Read about them as MEN.
Because I like MEN.

Don't get me wrong, I like women too. But I chose to read and fantasize about MEN. My choice.

And if you can't accept that, that's your bad luck. But please leave me alone with your frustrated little cries for equal opportunity fic. I want to enjoy my fantasy men without interruption.

Also?
I don't think going down on my knees to give a blowjob is degrading.

There.
That will give you enough material to talk about with your therapist for years.

*wipes sweat from forehead*
I sure feel better now.

Edited: I meant what I said about not having followed the Pegasus B kerfuffle, so please, let's not bring it in here. I just needed to blow off some steam because I suddenly felt like I had to apologize for liking men. Isn't that discriminating? No one ever asked me to apologize for liking women. *g*

I like to watch people. Drinking coffee somewhere with a good friend, watching people is one of my favourite hobbies. I like to imagine what they do for a living, where they come from, what their lives are like.
And the Paris' Metro is a heaven for people-watchers like me.

( You can probably skip this, since I'm mainly talking to myself about women I saw in the Metro )

I've got a little quiz for you, and I really need help in finding the solution.

A giant has caught 50 dwarfs. He gives them one chance to survive. He places them behiund each other. Every dwarf can see all the dwarfs in front of him, but none behind him. Then he puts caps in black and white on their heads. They don't know the color of the cap they are wearing. The dwarfs have had the chance to think of a tactic before, but they are not allowed to communicate now. The last dwarf is asked first what color cap he is wearing. If he gives the wrong answer, he is eaten.
how many dwarfs can survive, and how?

I don't know the solution myself, but it seems to be a classical logical problem with an exact solution. I was hpoing that one of you had come across it before.
Help!

Since everyone and their dogs is talking about politics on LJ today, I had to revise my policy of keeping my LJ politics-free.
I'm not sure what I'm saying with this entry, or if I am saying something, but it felt like something I wanted to do.

To make a few things clear, because political posts tend to piss people off:
I'm a democrat (and I don't mean the political party, I mean the political system. I don't have opinions about parties.)
I believe in the power of the free will.
I believe that there are certain basic rights, which are fundamental to every democracy, and that each of us has to see to their protection and realisation.
I believe that every measure that limits these rights for ANYONE is an offense against the constitution, and cannot possibly serve to "protect the state and the constitution." You can't protect the constitution by disabling it.

That said, I present you with an
( excerpt from the German Constitution )

I don't mean to say my country is better than others. That would be stupid, because I didn't choose to be born here, so being proud of it is a bit silly. This has nothing to do with countries or nationalities.
I posted this as a reminder of what basic democratic rights should look like.
They give me hope that the world can be made a better place to live in.
Because the world is how we choose to make it.

Questions? Complaints? Anything else?
Leave a comment, and I'll try to answer it.

And if anyone could explain to me why we have such a lovely constitution but still don't show Firefly or Sports Night, or West Wing for that matter, I'd appreciate it.