I'm looking at a lot of posts and sighing "You want to write about that?"
- Anthony Vicino (SF Signal) wanted to know why where are all the People of Color (PoC) in science fiction and fantasy is still being asked. Tobias Buckell responds in a comment there and expands on the subject.
All I'm going to say here is that:- A piece of this is marketing "wisdom" which is actually a lot of ossified "rules" from the late nineteenth/early twentieth century, usually couched in "tend to" language. Survey results sometimes budge a few of the assumptions of marketing a millimeter or so, but the process takes years and meantime the old "guidelines" are in effect. Marketers tend to (see what I did there?) prefer highly stratified markets because it is easier to "tailor" the message of "You wanna buy this for [emotional or status reason]" rather than actually extolling the product. For example, cigarettes. Nobody born after 1975 has any reason to believe smoking makes one "cool." Very few people would respond to "Cigarettes! Because respiratory/pulmonary ailments are so much fun!" But because humans have a basic bias toward not doing what we're told, cigarettes are currently touted as A Choice one can make as an adult, knowing the dangers. You know, like
suicidebungee jumping. And that message is subtly tailored to various demographic groupings, including the teenagers that are not supposed to be targeted because underage and illegal. (Whooops! Rant!) - Spend a day on the New York City subways and then tell me PoC don't read sf/f. (Of course the people who need to do this won't. Cowards.)
- A piece of this is marketing "wisdom" which is actually a lot of ossified "rules" from the late nineteenth/early twentieth century, usually couched in "tend to" language. Survey results sometimes budge a few of the assumptions of marketing a millimeter or so, but the process takes years and meantime the old "guidelines" are in effect. Marketers tend to (see what I did there?) prefer highly stratified markets because it is easier to "tailor" the message of "You wanna buy this for [emotional or status reason]" rather than actually extolling the product. For example, cigarettes. Nobody born after 1975 has any reason to believe smoking makes one "cool." Very few people would respond to "Cigarettes! Because respiratory/pulmonary ailments are so much fun!" But because humans have a basic bias toward not doing what we're told, cigarettes are currently touted as A Choice one can make as an adult, knowing the dangers. You know, like
- When I saw this item, my first thought was Purple Rain. Guess it's time for a rewatch. Let's get nuts!
- Cerberus at Sadly, No! on a reaction to the Boy Scouts' decision to allow gay adults to serve as leaders:
And we end with the usual Scott Lively bullshit and calls for violence, but yeah, it runs a little hollow when you try to claim the moral high ground after claiming it is only “natural” for you to lust after some 12 year old girl, because that’s “not really pedophilia”. I’m sorry, you can’t spout that shit and then expect to come off like the sober defender of values. You just can’t.
And it is amazing that losing so many battles against feminists and queer rights activists is revealing you “traditional culture enthusiasts” for what you are and burning away the little pockets you like to hide in to cultivate your victims. And so, I say shine the sun bright into your little troll holes and kill traditional culture so dead that no other child needs fear some fucker who thinks “sexual urges” are so powerful that the natural result of an adult and a child together must be rape.
And then let us cleanse it all with fire. - Scott Lemieux on John Roberts (Chief Justice of the Supreme Court John Roberts, that is) efforts to hollow out the Voting Rights Act. Lauren Kelley at Rolling Stone interviews Ari Berman on his new book which traces the history of the Voting Rights Act. (PS: There are more unicorns in Nebraska than there is voter fraud in the United States.)
- Zandar on Democratic party internals.
The really weird part is that nowhere in the entire piece do I see the words “Debbie Wasserman Schultz” who, as chair of the DNC, would ostensibly be the person in charge of the election strategies and GOTV tactics that Greenfield is complaining about, but I guess Greenfield has never met her or something.
And of course I have to wonder why that is.
Also, there is the small matter of the impressive number of Democrats who lost by running as far away from Barack Obama as possible in 2010, 2012, and 2014 but no, the problem is of course Obama.
That’s the Beltway wisdom, and it will be for a very, very long time. - Avedon's Sideshow's latest is chock-full of informative links, so just go there. You should do that anyway.