regulators and the industries they love

Liberal documentary: Things are bad in this one industry because hierarchical profit-seeking entities are corrupting it and we’re making this documentary to shed light on the problem and maybe we can use government effectively to regulate the corporations in this one particular area – a well-placed bandaid will fix this third-degree burn.


anonymous asked:

Hi i have a question Everyone is saying there are going to be 4 videos of love yourself highlight reel because they're using these chinese letters, but i was wondering if there are going to be more videos?? Or the 4 videos sums up the whole love yourself series and that's it??

Yes I said that earlier today in this post HERE they are the four steps of Chinese regulated classic writing

And yes there will be more videos I think, these are just the “Highlight Reel” of the Love Yourself series because the definition of REEL is “A part of a film” or “A short compilation of sample film work used as a demonstrative resume in the entertainment industry”. 

For now we had two Reels: 

  1. - the beginning: The encounters with the girls
  2. - the undertaking: Transition to another view point, how the boys search for each other or remember each other in little things. 

The followings will be: 

  1. - the turning point: Maybe something major will happen or there will be a changing to another view point
  2. - the conclusion: I don’t know if BigHit will post it soon but we shall see
A day in the life of a Republican

Joe gets up at 8:00 AM to prepare his morning coffee. He fills his pot full of good clean drinking water because some stupid bleeding heart liberal fought for minimum water quality standards.

He takes his daily medication with his first swallow of coffee. His medications are safe to take because some nanny state loving liberal fought to ensure their safety and work as advertised.

All but $10.00 of his medications are paid for by his employer’s medical plan because some liberal union workers fought their employers for paid medical insurance, now Joe gets it too. He prepares his morning breakfast, bacon and eggs this day. Joe’s bacon is safe to eat because some commie liberal fought for laws to regulate the meat packing industry.

Joe takes his morning shower reaching for his shampoo; His bottle is properly labeled with every ingredient and the amount of its contents because some socialist liberal fought for his right to know what he was putting on his body and how much it contained. Joe dresses, walks outside and takes a deep breath. The air he breathes is clean because some tree hugging liberal fought for laws to stop industries from polluting our air.

He walks to the subway station for his government subsidized ride to work; It saves him considerable money in parking and transportation fees. You see, some snowflake liberal fought for affordable public transportation, which gives everyone the opportunity to be a contributor.

Joe begins his work day; He has a good job with excellent pay, medicals benefits, retirement, paid holidays and vacation because some liberal union members fought and died for these working standards. Joe’s employer pays these standards because Joe’s employer doesn’t want his employees to call the union.

If Joe is hurt on the job or becomes unemployed he’ll get a worker compensation or unemployment check because some stupid liberal didn’t think he should lose his home because of his temporary misfortune.

It’s noon time, Joe needs to make a Bank Deposit so he can pay some bills. Joe’s deposit is federally insured by the FSLIC because some liberal wanted to protect Joe’s money from unscrupulous bankers who ruined the banking system before the depression.

Joe has to pay his Fannie Mae underwritten mortgage and his below market federal student loan because some stupid liberal decided that
Joe and the government would be better off if he was educated and earned more money over his lifetime.

Joe is home from work, he plans to visit his father this evening at his farm home in the country. He gets in his car for the drive to dad’s; His car is among the safest in the world because some cry baby liberal fought for car safety standards.

He arrives at his boyhood home. He was the third generation to live in the house financed by Farmers Home Administration because bankers
didn’t want to make rural loans. The house didn’t have electric until some big government liberal stuck his nose where it didn’t belong and
demanded rural electrification (those rural Republicans would still be sitting in the dark).

He is happy to see his dad who is now retired. His dad lives on Social Security and his union pension because some liberal made sure he could take care of himself so Joe wouldn’t have to. After his visit with dad he gets back in his car for the ride home.

He turns on a radio talk show, the host keeps saying that liberals are bad and conservatives are good (the host doesn’t tell Joe that his beloved Republicans have fought against every protection and benefit Joe enjoys throughout his day). Joe agrees, “We don’t need those big government liberals ruining our lives; After all, I’m a self-made man who believes everyone should take care of themselves, just like I have.”

-John Gray

Fic -- Lemon and Strawberry -- Nine/Rose

Summary: Lemon and strawberry, yellow and pink, they go together just like gelato and a hot summer’s day

A/N: shameless Nine/Rose fluff for my lovely friend the-untempered-prism who is as sweet as strawberries =) And please check out the absolutely lovely art that she drew to accompany this here!!

Betababes: the equally sweet as strawberries fadewithfury and whoinwhoville =)

The piazza is crowded.

And bloody hot.

Even the stucco buildings bake under the unrelenting scorch of the August sun, their façades parched from the arid Sicilian air and starting to flake off, more reminiscent of overcooked croissants than heavy paint. He and Rose are among the myriad souls out and about despite the oppressive heat—and he gets more than a few stares from shoppers out on their errands. He doesn’t pay them any mind, of course, instead rolling his eyes inwardly at the ape tendency to stare at things they don’t understand. He knows what they’re likely wondering—how on earth can he stand to be wearing a black leather jacket on a day like today?

Keep reading

Ok, the episode’s over so I can do this now: be warned I reference large spoilers below:

Here are some of the stories they could have told with Michael Ginsberg: Stories about adoptees Stories about the aftermath of the holocaust Stories about being jewish in a seriously wasp-y industry Stories about having to establish boundaries with a loving but overbearing parent Stories about being working class and political about it (he is one of the most deeply working class characters I have ever seen, and that was one of the reasons I have loved him so) Stories about having problems with anxiety or emotional regulation Stories about not fitting in with norms regarding masculinity Stories about being bisexual in a time when that was never, ever talked about Seriously, the treatment of his sexuality makes me rage. I know that’s the least of the problem here, but still. Like, okay: in this ep Megan has a threesome with Don and some chick because she’s desperate to hold on to him or some shit - nevermind that she gave him his walking papers last ep. They can’t write her with any consistency at all. And it’s so gross and male gaze-y. I swear Weiner just wants to watch Jessica Pare kiss other women. But when Ginsberg admits he has feelings for both Stan and Peggy it’s tied directly to severe mental illness. Male bisexuality is just too threatening, I guess. They would never show him realizing that about himself and having to deal with what that means for him. They sure as hell wouldn’t write them all getting in bed together, and seeing where that takes them. That would take guts. There’s so much we don’t know about him still. What does he do in his time off? We have never even seen him in casual clothes. Did he ever become politically involved anywhere, given he leans left and it’s the sixties? What was his childhood like?  What about that Clio? We just don’t know! They used him as comedy character for the whole season and turned on a fucking dime into tragedy the last minute. Do they want us to feel bad for laughing? I don’t get it. If they wanted to build to a breakdown then they had to actually BUILD to it. He seemed fine for five episodes and all of a sudden he’s cutting off pieces of himself. Why not show his nerves getting worse? Why not have him freak out and barricade himself in his office, and they call 911 because, hey, one guy already killed himself at this agency? Why not have him seek mental health help voluntarily, because he knows that things are getting worse and he doesn’t know what to do? Why not make him bipolar or OCD or anything? Instead they checked off a list of shitty “crazy” cliches. Paint by fuckin numbers. Is the only mentally ill person Weiner and co have ever heard of Vincent  Van Gogh?? And we won’t get to see him heal. We won’t get to see him rebuild his life and get better. That’s only for main characters (by which I clearly mean Don). Not Michael Ginsberg, who never really mattered anyway.  I will never watch another Matt Weiner helmed show again.


The English-born nose gives The Sephora Glossy a peek into her creative process.

Louise Turner didn’t always aspire to be a perfumer, but she followed her nose. “My family lived in Ashford in the U.K., just near a fragrance factory—the factory site was quite smelly,” she says. As fate would have it, she got a job in marketing research at the company by chance. “Only then I discovered the fascinating industry of perfumery. I was hooked.” She has since created over 30 perfumes, including MAISON MARTIN MARGIELA’s feminine floral fragrance, Lazy Sunday Morning. Here, Turner gives us the inside scoop on the life of a perfumer. Take note. RENEE TRILIVAS

What exactly does a nose do?
Somehow, a nose tries to create other people’s dream. I try to interpret what I think people want to smell like. The creations are always personal, but as I am working for people I do not know, the creations are very abstract. I create, and then I adjust and readjust according to what the customers want.

Where do you find inspiration for fragrances?
I find inspiration from many different places, but more in nature. The English country garden is an easy way to get inspired and I definitely love flowers. Nature has got something we do not do as well, in terms of diffusion, trails, blooming, etc. For example, I have a great honeysuckle in my garden and it smells fantastic. I still can’t manage to do a honeysuckle that I am satisfied with in perfumery! There’s always a challenge to do better. You need to be perfectionist. 

What is the biggest challenge of a nose?
The success rate of a perfumer is very low: Only one creation out of ten is approved on average. My challenge is to stay equally motivated, despite the success or the failure of my creations. I cannot predict which projects will work and which won’t, so I put all my heart in everything I do, no matter what. 

What’s the best part of being a perfumer? 
I think my favorite part is when I smell someone wearing my perfume in the street. I can get very proud! It is a real boost for me when someone has chosen to wear the perfume I created. Being a nose is a fantastic job. It is a tough environment, but the industry is fascinating.

Is creating a fragrance as romantic as it seems? 
Perfumers have a lot of constraints with prices, regulations, and so on. Finally, the success rate is very low. But it doesn’t remove the dreamy aspect of being a nose. Hopefully, someone is going to fall in love with your perfume, and that is something almost magical to me. 


F***ing Grey2k

So first off this is gonna be a super long post but it’s something I feel strongly about. I’ll probably lose some followers for this but I don’t really care at this point. Yesterday I found out that grey2k may get another successful win in Arizona this year by ending greyhound racing here. Myself and many of my greyhound adoption agency friends are absolutely devastated. Before you stop reading and hate me for this please read why in this message I sent to grey2k today before making your decision…

“Specifically I would like to know why you are destroying a breed that is nearly 3000 years old by banning greyhound racing. I am a huge admirer of the greyhound and own one myself whom I would sacrifice anything for. I live in Arizona and currently you are trying to ban racing here and close to winning. Once greyhound racing ends the greyhound as we know it will cease to exist aside from akc greyhounds that have been distorted from what the greyhound was meant to be and do. (The akc destroys dogs including greyhounds but I don’t see you guys fighting them) The greyhound is known for their speed and agility and the awe they inspire in people who see them. The racing industry is one of the few industries that breeds the greyhound purely for their functionality which keeps them a healthy dog breed in general. I will admit that the racing industry does have its flaws but why not try to enforce better regulations on the care of the dogs vs trying to destroy the industry? I have visited a greyhound kennel myself and although it’s sad that they do spend much time in a kennel (granted most greyhounds can easily spend 20 hours a day sleeping anyway), much of what u say and promote is not true in many cases. What I saw at that kennel and the other ones here in Arizona is a couple of people who love their dogs and do their best to keep them safe. They gave them treats, played with them and most certainly did not feed them what you guys say they feed them, they checked them for minor injuries, massaged them and gave them health checks and vet care regularly. They were great people who truly did care about their dogs. Since I visited their kennel I became a part of their online community that includes kennels from around the country and for every race they take part in they wish each other a "fast and safe” race and I think that is what you should be aiming for instead of lying and deceiving people in order to end the legacy of the historic and magnificent greyhound. You guys have truly broken my heart… I know you are not likely to respond to this as I know you don’t want to acknowledge someone’s opinion that differs from your own but I just felt truly devasted at what you guys are doing here in Arizona as well as in other places. Myself aside I know there are many people in the greyhound adoption group I volunteer for that feel the same as well. I hope maybe one day you guys will figure out you are making very poor decisions…“

How’d Trump Win

I’ve some friends fall into a state of existential despair since the election results, and I thought I’d throw some ideas out there regarding how this happened.
It’s the Republican’s Cycle

In US politics, it’s common for the two parties to trade back and forth every election cycle. We just had a Democrat president, so everybody blames the bad details of the last decade on the Democrats. This is also why they lost a bunch of Congress and Senate seats. So when it’s time for a party to lose, they have the tendency to throw a candidate to the wolves.
You notice how, other than Bernie who’s not actually part of their establishment, only Hillary competed in the primaries? Well, it’s because running for president is expensive, and if you lose it’s pretty devastating financially, emotionally, and politically. Often, if someone loses a bid for presidency, they fall into the background of politics, retiring to serve the lobbies, write books, or whatever. That means that when the party is liable to lose, the party may let a person run who they feel can be sacrificed. For Clinton, she was getting old, she hasn’t been super popular anyway, and she would likely step out of front-line politics soon anyway.
Of course nobody expected Trump to be the Republican nominee, which brings us to…
The Republicans Opened the Door to Financial Corruption and Paid for It
Trump became the nominee in the first place because the Republicans abolished laws and rules prohibiting the amount of money they could take from any one donor. Consequently, they had an insane number of establishment candidates running in the primary because each one had the backing of some rich person with an agenda. The trouble with this is that, while having access to all that extra money is great in a general election, it’s bad news in a primary where your voters are more involved and aware of what you’re doing.
If just one establishment candidate had funding from all the rich donors, it might have been a different story, but instead they split the votes and the attention, and here was Trump calling them all jackasses - and that’s the thing. They were being jackasses. There were other factors at play, but I think having teens of candidates on the field vying for power with financial favors to repay really annihilated the mainstream’s ability to function.
The Inevitable Hillary
I remember reading about the “inevitable” Hillary Clinton after she lost the primary to Obama, and one commentary being made was that her attitude really turned a lot of people off. She spoke as though she was predestined to win, and this has two negative effects on a campaign. First, it implies hubris, which irritates people and causes them to walk away from you. Second, it tells your potential voters that there’s not even a need to go to the polls, because you’re already guaranteed to win.
I saw a lot of this again during Clinton’s campaign this year. In fact, when talking to my family, they expressed anxiety about both candidates, but were more nervous about Trump. They were hoping Hillary would win, I think - I can’t speak for them because they were noncommittal, but Hillary was the more stable option - but they also said they weren’t sure if they were going to go to the polls at all. Usually my family votes, but for this cycle I think general disgust kept some people at home. You may not have wanted Trump to win, but you also weren’t excited to vote for HIllary, so you didn’t, and you assumed Trump couldn’t really win anyway.
Meanwhile, Trump was telling his supporters that they had to vote. He was saying the system was rigged, that Hillary would cheat. His supporters were saying the dead would vote for Hillary, that 130% of a city’s population would turn out to the polls this year. They were saying you didn’t just need to vote, but you had to vote in droves, or else Trump was doomed. And they voted! They went to the polls and voted, while people leaning grudgingly towards Hillary didn’t.
Trump supporters won’t like me saying this, but part of his victory is thanks to ignorance and the way the internet has supplied us with information. I try to stay in the middle of the road and avoid clearly biased material, and consequently I spent a lot of time not really understanding why people were supporting Trump at all. I think a lot of plain, bald-faced information about Trump indicates we may have some corruption scandals in the near future, but I talked to one of his supporters and was stunned when I realized he knew nothing about Trump except the positive things Trump was saying about himself.
The most outstanding quote, as I recall, was, “Well Trump is a financial genius, so although he’s really crass, at least he has a lot of ingenuity”. Meanwhile, my impression of Trump was that he’s one of those people who makes messes so huge people let him off the hook because they don’t know how to properly clean them otherwise. Based on some of the stories surrounding some of the bankruptcies he was involved in, I also didn’t understand the financial genius thing.
But this is what the internet has done for people. It’s let us get into boxes, and instead of presenting us with information we haven’t seen, it says, “You enjoyed this. Would you like to see more of the same?” Hence we’re all buried alive in reaction channels and garbage that tickles the fancy of the SEO algorithms. Some people on the far right were actually NOT hearing the compelling negative rhetoric about Trump’s history and personal abilities. Which is madness - the presidential election is usually when you learn everything that’s terrible about both candidates. That was why “Jibjab” came to exist when I was a kid - because you could make entire songs about the retarded, awful things both candidates were doing.
The Economy
And of course, this can’t be understated. On the surface, Clinton came out saying that she wasn’t going to be supporting Wallstreet or the behavior that led to the Great Recession, but behind closed doors it was made fairly clear that she owed her success to those people and had their backs. I don’t think many honestly believed that she was genuinely going to block the TPP or do anything about the alarming growth of wealth disparity in the US. Her spat with Bernie Sanders also didn’t win her much love from the far left.
Meanwhile, a lot of red states and states that switched to red this year had lost a lot of jobs when they shipped overseas. Environmental regulations from the Democrats also cracked down on coal and other industries, which meant States like Kentucky weren’t going to vote Democrat in this generation because they relied on those industries to eat. These are people who had their cars and homes repossessed, and Clinton, promising four more years of Wall Street support, certainly didn’t sound like a move towards the better to them.
Trump, on the other hand, has been promising everywhere he goes that he’s going to get the jobs back and stop illegal immigrants from soaking up all the money. Of course, this requires a crucial misunderstanding of the entire economy, and analysts are pointing out that even if Trump brings industry back, it’s going to return in a highly automated form and not produce nearly as many jobs. Also, illegal Latin immigrants aren’t really doing the harm the right says they are, and most DO pay taxes because it keeps the IRS from poking around and asking questions.
We actually need some crucial reforms to a lot of things. Healthcare being one, because it’s currently the largest and most crippling aspect of government spending and we could reduce it significantly if we would actually pass laws to prevent some of the rampant abuses we’ve been seeing. There’s no one easy fix, though, and the thing is that many of our largest problems are so severe that we’d need long-term cooperation in politics to achieve the necessary changes.
But in Any Case
The internet did say Trump would make anime real. So if it’s any consolation, the death toll from all the explosions and magic will be terrible, but the Gundams will be really cool. I meant to go out and buy some hard liquor as I realized Trump was going to win, but my state has really harsh liquor laws and the stores were closed, so the system’s already falling apart goddamnit.

anonymous asked:

Hi so this is in regards to your post reply to that post making an analogy to the whole sex trade "industry" and Walmart. Although I agree with you 100% that that's a terribly analogy I do believe that there are many faults within the sex trade industry, for lack of better word I'll refer to it as that for now, and this is coming from someone who is a sex worker themselves. I am completely comfortable with what I do but that doesn't mean that all sex workers are, that many people within...

different fields of the sex trade industry are coerced into doing things against their will. It urks me a bit personally when I see other sex workers who like myself are comfortable with what they do but who don’t acknowledge the fact that just because they enjoy what they do and just because they’re in control of it that not every sex worker out their is. I feel like a lot of the problem lies within the fact that like you said it isn’t so much an industry, I believe that all fractions of…

The sex trade “industry” need to be regulated properly, do you agree with this? Although it may not solve some issues entirely unfortunately, things like human trafficking (I think it would help with that though) I do believe it would be a step in the right direction, do you agree with this?

What makes you think I am comfortable with what I do?  What convinced you that I love my job, and I do it because it’s exactly what I would like to do, despite having loads of other options that would meet my needs?  Where did you see anything that supported that?  The desire to advocate for the rights of sex workers to work free from violence and fear is not inherently a desire of the privileged, empowered worker.  How condescending and terrible is that?  To say that, if you envision a better world for yourself and your colleagues, you must be some carefree choosy-choice person?  What does that say about the more marginalized and oppressed among us?  Are you suggesting that they’re incapable? Or that they don’t care?

That post  keeps getting circulated, and clever-clogs like you turn up in my inbox thinking that they’re the first person to say to me “did you ever consider that maybe some sex workers don’t want to do sex work?”  ignoring the four and half thousand pieces of writing on my blog (not to mention that the actual content of that post has exactly nothing to do with liking sex work) dealing almost exclusively with sex work that maybe just might provide some shred of context, some tiny piece of evidence that maybe, gasp, sex workers are very well fucking aware that we experience exploitation, violence, and coercion as a result of our work, and there just might possibly be a discussion already happening about what to do about it. As a sex worker, know that your colleagues are all around you, working on this shit.  Get involved, if you have the resources, k?

Now that that’s out of the way. Let’s answer your actual question. 

It drives me up a wall when I hear this constant, constant rhetoric about regulation as a means to combat abuse in sex work.  First of all, the state is the primary perpetrator of violence against sex workers, period.  It’s not clients who get us evicted, it’s not managers who arrest us, and, according to some (really fucking thorough) surveys, cops themselves are twelve times more likely to actually assault sex workers than  anyone else.  The idea that regulation by the state is going to be a boon to sex workers is a farce, and it’s one that could only reasonably be believed by someone who is, as you describe, “comfortable” in their work and more or less shielded from the consequences of criminalization, and from the violence of poverty.  Because, as I constantly tell rad fems who want us to die, regulation targets specifically the sex workers who are most at risk of violence and exploitation – licensing laws and restrictions on how to work only serve people who have the resources to jump through those hoops.  

This does not mean that sex work should be some magical free for all where anything goes. Sex workers, when we are left to our own devices, when we are free from fear of criminalization, are more than capable of combatting the abuses in our industry.  We’re out suing strip clubs for breaking civilian labor laws, we’re forming collectives to provide legal aid and health services, we’re sharing safety information and best practices ideas, we’re finding ways to provide support services for one another so that we don’t have to rely on abusive civilian bosses. We’re choosing the safer sex methods that work best for us.  We police our own communities of clients with blacklists and alerts.  Sex workers are the ones who can and should fix the problems within the industry, with the support of our communities, not the state.
I don’t care about me. — Vaping Stories
I’m an eliquid manufacturer in the vapor industry. Well, I used to be, until today, when I became a tobacco product manu…
By Ian Firth

I don’t care about me. I’ll be fine.

I do care about 9 million vapers though, and more importantly, 40 million at-risk smokers.

They won’t be fine.

In 90 days, all technological advancement in the industry will grind to a halt.

No new mods.
No new atomizers.
No new tanks.
No new flavors.
No new anything.

This is so well written, I absolutely love it.  Please read and share this around. 


Who could have possibly seen this coming? Obamacare premiums set to skyrocket

To the surprise of no one who pays attention, the premiums of those on Obamacare are about to go up…again.

From the WSJ:

Major insurers in some states are proposing hefty rate boosts for plans sold under the federal health law, setting the stage for an intense debate this summer over the law’s impact.

In New Mexico, market leader Health Care Service Corp. is asking for an average jump of 51.6% in premiums for 2016. The biggest insurer in Tennessee, BlueCross BlueShield of Tennessee, has requested an average 36.3% increase. In Maryland, market leader CareFirst BlueCross BlueShield wants to raise rates 30.4% across its products. Moda Health, the largest insurer on the Oregon health exchange, seeks an average boost of around 25%.

All of them cite high medical costs incurred by people newly enrolled under the Affordable Care Act.

Under that law, insurers file proposed rates to their local regulator and, in most cases, to the federal government. Some states have begun making the filings public, as they prepare to review the requests in coming weeks. The federal government is due to release its rate filings in early June.

Insurance regulators in many states can force carriers to scale back requests they can’t justify. The Obama administration can ask insurers seeking increases of 10% or more to explain themselves, but cannot force them to cut rates. Rates will become final by the fall.

Read the Rest

The feds can “ask” insurance companies not to raise rates but they can’t force price controls on them (apart from being wildly unconstitutional, that fails every time it’s tried). Notice it doesn’t say that the administration can’t bribe, blackmail or otherwise do some arm twisting to get private companies to do what they want. Sheesh.

Anyway, this should surprise exactly no one. While the economy as a whole is a complicated organism that is impossible to fully understand, there are certain general rules that everyone is capable of grasping. For instance, generally speaking, the price of an item will increase as the scarcity of that item increases. Similarly, the price of an item will increase as the demand for that item increases. And as competition increases, the price of an item tends to go down while the quality, variety and availability of it goes up, etc. These are not (or shouldn’t be) controversial concepts. They are axioms. They are realities that even children in grade school are capable of understanding. 

But for some reason, a large segment of the population suspends its understanding of these truths when it comes to government. They’ll tell you that adding layers of government bureaucracy to an industry will magically lower the price of that item or service – and people believe it! It’s truly amazing.

It’s one thing to understand the inevitable negative economic effects of mountains of government regulation but still be in favor of the regulations for other reasons, however misguided. It’s quite another to suspend economic understanding altogether and actually believe that government intervention is somehow going to actually lower prices. That is utter nonsense. It comes as a result of being blinded by pro-government (or anti-liberty) bias and it’s intellectually dishonest. You might love yourself some Obamacare and think it’s helping for reasons X, Y and Z, but don’t tell me that it’s going to lower costs. That’s like asking me to believe in magic.

anonymous asked:

with cloud atlas they actually did hire a bunch of actors of color too, who often play roles both cast to their race and not, same as the white actors

I do understand your point, but I think I’d have to disagree with it.

I assume that you’re referring to the fact that Halle Berry played, for example, a white woman:

and you’re right. The whole idea of actors of one race playing characters of another race was not limited to white actors playing Asians, like Hugo Weaving here: 

So, I do see where you’re coming from.

However, the reason that the idea of white actors being made up to look Asian really makes me uncomfortable is that this practice has a history in Hollywood. Yellowface, just like blackface, has been used ever since the beginning of the age of film to reduce Asian characters to stereotypes. It’s a shameful tradition, but it’s a very real one. The best known example is probably the 1961 film Breakfast at Tiffany’s:

For people who haven’t seen this film, the character Mr Yunioshi - played by the white actor Mickey Rooney - is an incredibly offensive stereotype of an East Asian man, right down to the racist mannerisms and speech patterns. He’s not so much a character as a caricature; his entire role within the narrative is to provide comic relief based upon his behaviour as that of a demeaning stereotype. 

Even when Asian characters played by white actors are not used merely as comic relief, the historic issue of yellowface is still incredibly problematic. Quite apart from the actual nature of the depiction of the characters, it also has roots in Hollywood’s refusal to give roles to PoC in high budget films. 

A good example of this is the 1937 film The Good Earth, which is a film entirely about Chinese farmers. All principle characters are Chinese, and the characters are sympathetic; they aren’t just stereotypes (although there is of course an element of viewing the East through a familiar Western lens). However, the two main roles are played by white Americans, Luise Rainer and Paul Muni, made up to ‘look Chinese’:

The background to this particular instance of yellowface is slightly convoluted: the studio had already hired Paul Muni, a white man, to play the male lead role, and due to the industry regulations enforcing segregation, this meant that they had to hire a white actress to play his love interest. The only role offered to a Chinese-American actor was that of the main antagonist, and the actor who was offered the role (Anna May Wong) turned it down, stating that she didn’t want to be responsible for making a film in which all the protagonists were played by white people and the antagonist wasn’t, despite all characters being of the same race.

So, to me, the idea of Cloud Atlas taking white actors like Hugo Weaving and Jim Sturgess and making them ‘look Asian’ is not appropriate. There’s too much history behind this act for it to be permissible. It’s been used for decades to erase Asian cultural identity and replace it with an offensive stereotype, and to deny Asian actors roles in favour of slapping some eye makeup on a white actor and telling them to speak in a different accent. 

I do genuinely understand where Cloud Atlas was coming from, and I have read all the creators’ explanations about souls transcending physicality and race, but I’m not convinced that this is justification enough for yellowface. To be honest, I’m not convinced that it’s justification for any of the race and gender alterations they made to their principle actors - if the soul was supposed to transcend physicality, then I don’t really understand why they had to use the same actors; there would probably have been a better way of showing that it was the same ‘person’ without having to use drag or yellowface, such as using different actors to portray the same character in their incarnations of different genders and races, but using repeated motifs or symbols. It just doesn’t sit well with me, I’m afraid.

Edit: bisexualzuko’s comment is also very relevant and I’m going to add it here: even if it didn’t have a history, things like race and gender are not a costume.