(no subject)
Sep. 22nd, 2025 08:03 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shadowkatFeeling much better today - so apparently I was right, and this may have been caused by medication. I've learned the hard way to police my own medication and not count on doctors and pharmacies to do it for me.
Endo - was perfectly okay with what I chose to do. Cardio - wants to see me, but has no openings until January of next year. Foiled by his own scheduling conflicts. The dermatologist - that the primary care ordered me to see this year, can't see me until June of next year. I told this to mother, who giggled. Then ordered me to get my will and living will notarized, signed, witnessed and in place pronto. (Apparently she has a friend whose daughter is on life support in NY, and they can't remove her because she didn't have a "do not resuscitate order in place". Life would be easier if it was the opposite? If you want to be resuscitated - you have to say so, not the opposite.
Breaking Bad hates doctors and refuses to see them - avoiding them like the plague. I told him that my aunt did that - and died of a blood clot to the brain at the age of 59. He handwaved that right off the bat. (He is 70).
He also thinks I'm on too much medication - so do I, so we're in agreement on that.
I actually could focus. And Breaking Bad thanked me for my clear and concise analysis of the work we'd done on our end.
So, I made myself useful. Took a few short walks.
Went home - and hunted for Gluten Free Cookie Dough - but none was to be had at the local Met Fresh. Damn them. Probably for the best. My blood sugar is happier without it. If I still want it by the weekend - I'll get some from the health food stores on Courteylou.
***
The news irritates me. And it's becoming harder to avoid.
Jimmy Kimmel is back on, and Disney has basically told Sinclair Media to go frak themselves, since Disney cares more about their liberal image and their subscribers than their affiliates who pay them next to nothing in revenues. [I honestly think it was the Disneys and Eisner who persuaded them to change their minds.] In reality - Sinclair Media is the problem (my mother's cousin pointed out that they were a major problem way back in 2014) and sigh, the FCC (who has been a problem since their inception - people thought they needed to regulate what was on television and the radio, kind of similar to what they wanted to do with the internet and keep trying to do, but fail miserably at - because it is the internet and global and the US didn't put restrictions in place quickly enough and it doesn't serve Google et al's best interests if they do). Both are both much harder to fight - because they are more hidden and insidious in some respects, and the FCC really doesn't care what you or I think. Sinclair - you could possibly go after the advertisers? But you'd have to find them first.
The FCC has always been a problem. People have been fighting censorship wars with the FCC since its inception.
George Carlin on the FCC in 1973
The difficulty with human rights and freedoms - is if you want yours, you kind of have to put up with people you despise getting theirs. It can't just go one way, that's not how it works. People don't seem to understand this? I keep trying to explain it to folks but they ignore me. I swear SSEAS is kind of viral.
More Carlin on Time and well everything - this may be the longest uninterrupted rambling routine I've seen.
He's among my favorite stand-up comedians. Controversial at times, and not always...ahem politically correct, but he makes me laugh for the most part for his word-play.
**
I got a comment from Ao3 on a Meta that I wrote over ten years ago, and can't remember that well. The comment:
"I find it interesting that you mentioned Clarissa's Lovelace, but not Pamela or Lord B. If we're going all the way back to Richardson, I think some discussion of Pamela and Lord B. is in order. Why do you think Lovelace and Lord B have such different arcs?"
I didn't respond - because as a general rule, I no longer respond to any comments on Ao3, regardless of the content. I don't trust Ao3, every time I interact with it - it attempts to remove my content. So I don't add content, and I don't respond to comments. Note my content for the most part is NOT fanfiction. So if you just contribute fanfic to Ao3, no worries.
The other comment I got was from someone named Flossie, who is a frustrated comic book artist hunting a collaborator and spamming folks on Ao3.
Commentators on Ao3 bewilder me. They tend to be rude. If you make the mistake of responding to them - they report you. Or they are spammers.
I've learned to ignore them. Breaking Bad told me today to ignore emails I didn't know what to do with - if I ignored them, they had a way of disappearing on their own.
Also, I've nothing nice to say to this person. So it's kinder to ignore them like I ignore everyone else on Ao3.
If you want to know why I didn't discuss Richardson's other works? It's because I forgot they existed, never read them, and have 0 interest in them. The essay wasn't about Richardson. The commentator clearly superimposed their own interests onto the essay (I'm guessing they were looking for an essay about Richardson - got excited when they found mine, and ignored the fact that it was in the Buffy fandom) - a common mistake made by people. Instead of figuring out what the writer's intent is - they get caught up in their own desires and what they want from the writer or work, and want the writer to cater to them exclusively (sigh, SSEAS). The writer can't read their minds, doesn't care what they want nor should the writer - the work is the writer's expression after all and not written for some unknown random reader or scholar or professor, and if they can't find it, then they should write it themselves. I liked what Maya Angelu stated - "the writer isn't writing for you" - if you want a story or a discussion or meta made - do it yourself.
Endo - was perfectly okay with what I chose to do. Cardio - wants to see me, but has no openings until January of next year. Foiled by his own scheduling conflicts. The dermatologist - that the primary care ordered me to see this year, can't see me until June of next year. I told this to mother, who giggled. Then ordered me to get my will and living will notarized, signed, witnessed and in place pronto. (Apparently she has a friend whose daughter is on life support in NY, and they can't remove her because she didn't have a "do not resuscitate order in place". Life would be easier if it was the opposite? If you want to be resuscitated - you have to say so, not the opposite.
Breaking Bad hates doctors and refuses to see them - avoiding them like the plague. I told him that my aunt did that - and died of a blood clot to the brain at the age of 59. He handwaved that right off the bat. (He is 70).
He also thinks I'm on too much medication - so do I, so we're in agreement on that.
I actually could focus. And Breaking Bad thanked me for my clear and concise analysis of the work we'd done on our end.
So, I made myself useful. Took a few short walks.
Went home - and hunted for Gluten Free Cookie Dough - but none was to be had at the local Met Fresh. Damn them. Probably for the best. My blood sugar is happier without it. If I still want it by the weekend - I'll get some from the health food stores on Courteylou.
***
The news irritates me. And it's becoming harder to avoid.
Jimmy Kimmel is back on, and Disney has basically told Sinclair Media to go frak themselves, since Disney cares more about their liberal image and their subscribers than their affiliates who pay them next to nothing in revenues. [I honestly think it was the Disneys and Eisner who persuaded them to change their minds.] In reality - Sinclair Media is the problem (my mother's cousin pointed out that they were a major problem way back in 2014) and sigh, the FCC (who has been a problem since their inception - people thought they needed to regulate what was on television and the radio, kind of similar to what they wanted to do with the internet and keep trying to do, but fail miserably at - because it is the internet and global and the US didn't put restrictions in place quickly enough and it doesn't serve Google et al's best interests if they do). Both are both much harder to fight - because they are more hidden and insidious in some respects, and the FCC really doesn't care what you or I think. Sinclair - you could possibly go after the advertisers? But you'd have to find them first.
The FCC has always been a problem. People have been fighting censorship wars with the FCC since its inception.
George Carlin on the FCC in 1973
The difficulty with human rights and freedoms - is if you want yours, you kind of have to put up with people you despise getting theirs. It can't just go one way, that's not how it works. People don't seem to understand this? I keep trying to explain it to folks but they ignore me. I swear SSEAS is kind of viral.
More Carlin on Time and well everything - this may be the longest uninterrupted rambling routine I've seen.
He's among my favorite stand-up comedians. Controversial at times, and not always...ahem politically correct, but he makes me laugh for the most part for his word-play.
**
I got a comment from Ao3 on a Meta that I wrote over ten years ago, and can't remember that well. The comment:
"I find it interesting that you mentioned Clarissa's Lovelace, but not Pamela or Lord B. If we're going all the way back to Richardson, I think some discussion of Pamela and Lord B. is in order. Why do you think Lovelace and Lord B have such different arcs?"
I didn't respond - because as a general rule, I no longer respond to any comments on Ao3, regardless of the content. I don't trust Ao3, every time I interact with it - it attempts to remove my content. So I don't add content, and I don't respond to comments. Note my content for the most part is NOT fanfiction. So if you just contribute fanfic to Ao3, no worries.
The other comment I got was from someone named Flossie, who is a frustrated comic book artist hunting a collaborator and spamming folks on Ao3.
Commentators on Ao3 bewilder me. They tend to be rude. If you make the mistake of responding to them - they report you. Or they are spammers.
I've learned to ignore them. Breaking Bad told me today to ignore emails I didn't know what to do with - if I ignored them, they had a way of disappearing on their own.
Also, I've nothing nice to say to this person. So it's kinder to ignore them like I ignore everyone else on Ao3.
If you want to know why I didn't discuss Richardson's other works? It's because I forgot they existed, never read them, and have 0 interest in them. The essay wasn't about Richardson. The commentator clearly superimposed their own interests onto the essay (I'm guessing they were looking for an essay about Richardson - got excited when they found mine, and ignored the fact that it was in the Buffy fandom) - a common mistake made by people. Instead of figuring out what the writer's intent is - they get caught up in their own desires and what they want from the writer or work, and want the writer to cater to them exclusively (sigh, SSEAS). The writer can't read their minds, doesn't care what they want nor should the writer - the work is the writer's expression after all and not written for some unknown random reader or scholar or professor, and if they can't find it, then they should write it themselves. I liked what Maya Angelu stated - "the writer isn't writing for you" - if you want a story or a discussion or meta made - do it yourself.
no subject
Date: 2025-09-23 07:54 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2025-09-23 12:27 pm (UTC)That said? I was trying to get this simple concept across to a woman who was forty-six years of age at the time (I was thirty-eight). And... was hitting a brick wall on the human rights concept (she thought we had too many of them, and only her rights mattered), until I stated that the only problem with restricting human rights? Is it only works if you agree with everything the restrictor believes in and wants and are in complete lockstep (which is impossible of course), and it won't last, because it's more than likely they'll suddenly decide to outlaw dog ownership for example. That hadn't occurred to her. Unfortunately, it didn't change her mind, but I tried.
no subject
Date: 2025-09-23 06:29 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2025-09-24 01:05 am (UTC)