I spent much of this past week in Washington – talking with friends still in government, former colleagues, high-ranking Democrats, a few Republican pundits, and some members of Congress from both sides of the aisle. It was my first visit to our nation’s capital since Trump became president.
1. Washington is more divided, angry, bewildered, and fearful – than I’ve ever seen it.
2. The angry divisions aren’t just Democrats versus Republicans. Rancor is also exploding inside the Republican Party.
3. Republicans (and their patrons in big business) no longer believe Trump will give them cover to do what they want to do. They’re becoming afraid Trump is genuinely nuts, and he’ll pull the party down with him.
4. Many Republicans are also angry at Paul Ryan, whose replacement bill for Obamacare is considered by almost everyone on Capitol Hill to be incredibly dumb.
5. I didn’t talk with anyone inside the White House, but several who have had dealings with it called it a cesspool of intrigue and fear. Apparently everyone working there hates and distrusts everyone else.
6. The Washington foreign policy establishment – both Republican and Democrat – is deeply worried about what’s happening to American foreign policy, and the worldwide perception of America being loony and rudderless. They think Trump is legitimizing far-right movements around the world.
7. Long-time civil servants are getting ready to bail. If they’re close to retirement they’re already halfway out the door. Many in their 30s and 40s are in panic mode.
8. Republican pundits think Bannon is even more unhinged than Trump, seeking to destroy democracy as we’ve known it.
9. Despite all this, no one I talked with thought a Trump impeachment likely, at least not any time soon – unless there’s a smoking gun showing Trump’s involvement in Russia’s intrusion into the election.
10. Many people asked, bewilderedly, “how did this [Trump] happen?” When I suggest it had a lot to do with the 35-year-long decline of incomes of the bottom 60 percent; the growing sense, ever since the Wall Street bailout, that the game is rigged; and the utter failure of both Republicans and Democrats to reverse these trends – they gave me blank stares.
couple of things that bugged me about that born sexy yesterday video, which imo are kind of emblematic of when white men try to dissect misogynistic and abusive tropes.
1. the infantilization of women and sexualization of children are part and parcel because they seek to blend the two into an indistinguishable figure. the video does not once make the obvious correlation to pedophilia, despite featuring A WOODY ALLEN FILM in his critique. he explicitly mentions power imbalances but doesn’t hit on the essence of this particular power imbalance, i.e. that making it acceptable to desire a woman who is childlike in nature erodes necessary boundaries of consent and age division.
2. he says nothing about consent issues despite showcasing clip after clip of such scenarios.
3. his inclusion of race is perfunctory and brief even though, again, infantilization is hugely racialized. like, the fact that he felt he was coining a term (“born sexy yesterday”) for this trope when woc have been discussing infantilization of themselves AND white women in media for DECADES is so irritating lmfao.
4. “innocence is not sexy… experience is very sexy” is such a nasty thing to say like bruh this would all have been much easier if you had realized that sexiness is subjective and irrelevant to this conversation and that this trope is disgusting because it further blurs the lines between little girls and adult women. he spent far too long examining the psychology of why men might desire a “powerless childlike woman” because “they’re threatened by their powerful and experienced equals” and not nearly enough time acknowledging that more than one example he included was made by an abuser. is that not a tip off? does that not tell you everything you need to know about a storytelling trend? the people who make and propagate it?
How does a team clinch a playoff spot? Does that mean even if they lose their remaining games they'll still make it?
okay, let me explain it on the example of Leafs or/and Capitals, I’m gonna try to make it as simple as possible, for those who don’t know the NHL well yet.
this is the Atlantic Division only; table of it
first three (3) teams of each division (amount of the teams in the divison doesn’t matter– it’s always three) automatically clinch a playoff spot. so let’s edit it.
as you can see, the Leafs are 4th, 3 points behind Bruins. a couple years ago it would end like this, no chance for the Leafs to get to the playoffs, of course if we’re talking about the season ending this soon.
however, we have Wild Card these years and this is where it gets more difficult. it really used to be simplier without it.
here’s Eastern Conference, all these teams except of the Islanders are in playoff position now. they’re also the only eastern teams to be so.
the Wild Card is basically (or almost literally) combination of two (2) best teams of the specific conference that have not enough points to be in top three in their own divisions.
you can see all these teams are mixed, from two different divisions.
kinda tricky thing about this is that there could be 3 teams of Atlantic Division in the playoffs + 5 teams of Metropolitan Division (3 top of the division + 2 Wild Card teams), it literally happened last season, same with the Western Conference where there were only 3 Pacific Division teams in the playoffs. so yes, the Islanders and Bolts are direct, really serious enemies of the Leafs in the run for playoffs though they’re not playing in the same division.
but what if the Leafs end up having the same number of points at the end of the regular season, as the Islanders have? well, then that’s quite easy. or not. I’m gonna explain this on the Caps, which have the same amount of points as the Blue Jackets but are still listed as first in the division.
NHL deals with this following ways.
(let’s say we’re/you’re rooting for the Capitals)
1.the first and most important thing you must look at, is the number of games played. 71 - 71. same. this doesn’t solve the problem, so here comes the next thing you look at.
(if the Jackets played one less game, they would be listed first automatically)
2. you would think the second criterion is number of wins, right? well, not exactly… the W column stands for all wins overall- including shootouts, but that’s not the column we’re thinking about now. we’re looking at this one. ROW.
it literally says Regulation plus Overtime Wins. like I said, W is wins overall, but ROW is only number of games won in regulation time and overtime.as you can see, the Capitals have won 46 games overall this season so far, but 45 of them were won in regulation or overtime. that means they have only 1 game in shootouts this season. so shootouts are really not that important to the NHL.
and as you can see, this number is the same with the two teams. again.
3.third and usually the final criterion is the number of points the Caps have earned in games against the Blue Jackets. so basically, it’s a thing about who has been better in the mini Caps-Jackets series of 4 games this season so far.
the first game of this season the Capitals played against the Blue Jackets ended with regulation win of the Capitals, 3-2, so the score is ‘2 points - 0 points’
the second game they played ended with regulation win of the Capitals, 5-0. ‘4 points - 0 points’
that’s all they have played against each other this season. they’re playing 2 more games against each other until the end of the regular season– since they’re in the same division the number of games playing against each other is 4 per regular season.
so what’s the score in the mini series? 4-0 for the Capitals.
so this is finally the reason why they’re listed first in the battle of division title against the Blue Jackets.
4. but since we’ve come this far, let’s talk about the last criterion anyway. this one is simple. NHL literally describes it as ‘The greater differential between goals for and against for the entire regular season.’
now you have to look at these three columns.
the first one, GF, stands for Goals For so the number of all goals they have scored in this season. it includes shootouts goals, where one win in the shootouts = plus one goal. this column is tied, again.
the second one, GA, stands for Goals Against so the number of all pucks they have officialy let get past their goalie’s goaline. you can see that the Capitals have been less time got scored at than the Jackets.
the third one, DIFF, goal differential is always and simply this: GF - GA = DIFF.
so 228 minus 159 is 69, that’s the Capitals’ DIFF; while 228 minus 164 is 64, that’s the Blue Jackets’ DIFF.
(DIFF can be totally below 0, Avalanche’s -96 is the worst DIFF in the NHL currently, while Capitals’ +69 is the best.)
the Capitals have this number higher than the Jackets, so even if they have lost one of the games against the Jackets in regulation (let’s ignore the GF/GA change), and the score in the mini series would be ‘4 points - 4 points’, the Capitals would still be listed first in the division, because of the DIFF.
oohhhh and one thing. what about the x next to the names of the teams?
the x next to a team means the team will 100% get to the playoffs, even if they/it lose every single remaining regular season game, even if their divisional opponents win every single remaining regular season game.
the y next to a team will soon appear to a team that will 100% end the regular season with the Divisional Title– will 100% end first in its division.
the z next to a team will soon appear to a team that will 100% end the regular season with 1st place in its conference.
the p next to a team will soon appear to a team that will 100% end the regular season with 1st place in the entire league. there’s an actual trophy for it, called Presidents’ Trophy. the latest winner of it, for the 2015-16 season were the Capitals.
okay, I really enjoyed writing this, more than I expected and I hope the anon, and so you others, find this at least a bit helpful.
A few things on Louis’ management, James Grant Group:
Their music division includes 2 brands which are listed separately: “James Grant Music” and “Hall or Nothing Music” (HN - which we now know is the group headed by Starbucks mystery guy, Martin Hall.)
Of the 11 acts in this entire roster, which include The Script, J*mes Arthur and the Manic Street Preachers, only TWO are managed by James Grant Music : Louis Tomlinson and Fleur East.
Everyone else is managed under Hall or Nothing - including J*mes Arthur. Look at the logo on Louis’ pic “JG” compared to others marked “HN”
Think about that for a minute: why would Louis Tomlinson, global popstar, sign with James Grant Music when its roster is pretty unremarkable, and technically only includes one other artist apart from himself?
In what world would this have been an attractive proposition? Even with the rest of the group, there are only really 4 known names, and Louis’ is the biggest and most successful.
One more thing - JGG has a brand called “James Grant Social” and yes, they manage a roster of social media stars. Makes you wonder even more why Louis’ social media accounts are so poorly managed given that they have a social media division that would know how to optimize accounts, create fan engagement, and development efficient promo. We’ve seen none of that for Louis’ accounts - if anything they’re more all over the place now and completely under utilized even for Louis’ own solo projects. His social media assets have truly not been treated as actual ASSETS at this point.
So much of this doesn’t make sense and never has since we found out Louis signed with JGG in June 2016. Their poor support for and management of Louis really just drives the point home stronger.
(And yes, for those wondering, this is updated info: it used to be that Louis and J*mes Arthur were in a seperate division for Syco/Sony.)
p.s. Deckstar’s roster is going to bring an absolute influx of well-known music stars to JGG. It’s JGG Music who is benefitting most from this merger.
If u don't use ot4 or ot5 to denote whether something was before or after Zayn left or whether a gif/photo contains all 5 boys vs 4 because it was after March 2015, then what do you use for tagging?? Or like, if it was up to u what would u want everyone to tag things as?
Oh, it’s much deeper than tagging. It’s really the issue of the fandom either A) not thinking critically at all, or B) being hypocritical about what they apply logic to. It’s also about people, no matter what they think happened (Zayn’s leaving wasn’t fishy vs. Zayn’s leaving being super fucking fishy), being willing to immediately believe the worst about someone they should already know the true good character of.
In more specific terms, it’s about the fandom buying everything the media and the narrative says about Zayn without valuing logic and the things Zayn says from his own mouth more. It’s about fans willfully interpreting everything related to Zayn as negative, deciding they have a grudge against him because of those perceived “slights”, and then erasing and demonizing him in equal measure.
To state a surprising truth, there isn’t a single person in this fandom that believes everything the narrative says about One Direction. They probably think they do, but they don’t. I’ve seen people who constantly mock the idea of a narrative or a constructed media image and yet they still push back when the boys are said to be dating someone that’s not confirmed, said to have been rude, said to be doing odd things (sheep placenta facials anyone?), said to have a bad relationship with each other, said to be violent or on drugs, etc.
The thing is, people THINK they believe everything is simple and truthful, but at a basic level, they have their own beliefs about who the boys are based on what they’ve seen in interviews. If those conflict with what they’re told, they scoff at what’s being fed to them.
This is fact and yet a large chunk of the fandom had very little problem turning around and believing everything bad the media said about Zayn, even when the things he himself said and did were so different from that.
A specific example is this whole thing that people believe Harry and Zayn have a problem when NEITHER. HARRY. NOR. ZAYN. EVER. SAID. A. BAD. WORD. OR. SHOWED, SIGNS. OF. TENSION.
I can understand believing Louis and Zayn fought a little bit more (even though evidence suggests the Twitter fight was all a planned show), but the only things that ever happened with Harry and Zayn were some BS news articles with no source and Harry making a few jokes about the unnecessary tension and glee the interviewers had when talking about Zayn.
Up until the very last show Zayn was at, he and Harry were acting normal and close. Even after Zayn’s last show, Harry was right there with the other boys in leaving space for Zayn on stage. Even after THAT, Harry was involved in things that referenced Zayn in a positive way.
(When a fan showed Harry this picture of Zayn in concert)
There is NO basis for believing there’s an issue between Zayn and Harry, yet the fandom believes it because it’s what the press has said. They apparently want to believe it since there’s been little to no pushback.
With the ability to reason, there should only be 2 divisions in fandom: those who believe the narrative no questions asked and those who don’t. Instead, there are those who believe the narrative no questions asked, those who believe it about some and not others, and those who question and examine everything.
“OT4″ and “all 4 boys” are heavily associated with the erasure of Zayn from the band- even the pre-March 25 band-, the degradation of Zayn’s character, failures of logic, gross hypocrisy, and the diminishment of the amazing bond OT5 share.
I understand and acknowledge that not all people using it have those intentions or participate in those actions (which is why it doesn’t bother me as much when people I follow and know have good intentions use it), but so many do that it leaves a terrible taste in my mouth every time I see it. Zayn’s career prospects, personal desires, name, and reputation have been so unfairly and so badly abused that the injustice of it makes me furious. Anything connected to it makes me furious and that’s why “OT4″ and “all 4 boys” has that affect on me.
It’s not something I’m expecting everyone would use, but @paynoisbatman uses “zayn’s boys” when there are 4, or “liam’s boys” if Liam’s the one missing, etc. It’s a great way of showing that the missing member is still important and is still part of the love all 5 share. When it comes to “all 4 boys”, you simply have to drop the “all”. It might take a tiny bit more typing, but it’s worth it to represent the situation accurately and honor the contributions of and bond between all 5.
i think we need to work more on classifying the different eras of emo…… u have ur Traditional 90s Emo like taking back sunday, green day, brand new, new found glory, blink 182, jimmy eat world…. then u have the Golden Era of emo!!! panic at the disco, my chemical romance, fall out boy etc. then u move into the Economic Boom of 2000s Emo….. the academy is, mayday parade, paramore, all time low, simple plan, anyone who played warped tour between 2005-2011. then u have ur New Wave Emo which basically consists of halsey and twenty one pilots and post-hiatus fall out boy which is distinctly different from pre-hiatus fall out boy. and THEN u have the 2 divisions of punk fans. either u get people who are into modern pop punk like the wonder years, a day to remember, state champs, the front bottoms etc OR the people who are into that post punk stuff like american football, the world is a beautiful place, fidlar etc. God what a time to be alive. this will be the subject matter for my senior thesis