Rhetoric & Aesthetics – Page 4

childlike empress · 2018-03-16

Ah, this modern life. When I sat down to eat dinner tonight, I was going to shitpost a Bernie Sanders meme that made me laugh today.

Then Andrew McCabe got fired.

I think that deserves a little symbolic victory, no?

Revolt Against the Modern World

I love this image. I love what it says about nature versus technology. I love how we can humanize the bird with a “dang drones get off my lawn.” I love how I feel like I can swoop right into the action myself.

And I kind of wonder if this photo of a drone being destroyed was itself taken by a drone.

#RECURSION

childlike empress · 2018-02-16

Is this some sort of elaborate “globalist elite” joke? Are we going to find out next week that Bush and Obama are secretly the same person?

Nah.

It’s art–however absurd–and I want to start exploring more about creative achievement on this blog. Absurdity has been on my mind this week.

It’s a prime example of “one of these things is not like the others,” which was done to great effect during Obama’s campaign for president but that didn’t work out quite so well for him afterward.

And looking at that portrait of JFK, it is absolutely possible to stand out–in a good way–without taking a shit all over history.

childlike empress · 2018-02-16

Is this some sort of elaborate “globalist elite” joke? Are Bush and Obama secretly the same person?

Tune in next time on As the World Turns….

Nah.

This is just a perfect example of 1. Clown world in action and 2. One of these things is not like the others.

Sometimes I really do wonder if we’re in the end of history.

childlike empress · 2018-02-16

Is this some sort of elaborate “globalist elite” joke? Are Bush and Obama secretly the same person?

Tune in next time on As the World Turns….

Nah.

This is just a perfect example of 1. Clown world in action and 2. One of these things is not like the others.

Sometimes I really do wonder if we’re in the end of history.

childlike empress · 2018-01-30

I had planned an outfit for this morning. A basic sweater, work pants. A pair of flats to be determined by the weather. Nothing fancy.

And yet, I ended up at work wearing a fine mesh turtleneck with roses all over it and strappy leopard print flats. Plus a cardigan.

You see, the rational part of my brain thought I was making a valid decision. The pants were tight, and so was the sweater, so we needed to swap one of those pieces out for something looser. Like a cardigan. Which naturally needs something to be worn under it and since we can’t wear the top we wore yesterday, let’s go with this floral top, and ooh look right here is a tank to throw underneath to make it work appropriate.

So I ended up at work wearing 1. something sheer that also happens to be a 2. large, romantic floral, with 3. “sexy” leopard print shoes. Also earrings, which are usually the first thing I skip when I’m tired.

All hallmarks of a sexy outfit, adjusted for work.

I suspect what actually happened was that my hormones hijacked my clothing for their own purposes.

It is documented that a woman’s menstrual cycle can impact everything from what she wears to what type of man she’s attracted to. For instance, there’s a study that shows that women wear fewer and more feminine clothes (ie, show more skin) when they’re ovulating. Lots of hormones swimming around.

I would extrapolate that because of the fluctuating nature of the female cycle, many behavioral tendencies are tethered thereupon.

In my own n=1 observations, for instance, everything goes crazy right before my menstrual cycle begins–the rage instinct, sex drive, everything is all jumbled up clouding my judgement.

And influencing me to wear sexy clothes to work.

Spoiler alert: I’m menstruating today.

I’ve noticed this pattern for a while–that I tend to dress up on day 1 of the cycle–but I always chalked it up to overcompensation for being tired.

Today, though, I realized that it wasn’t just overcompensation–it was peacocking.

How about you–do you pay attention to what you wear when? Have your hormones ever goaded you into wearing something crazy?

childlike empress · 2018-01-26

In honor of sitting my parents down and making them watch the interview, here’s a meme for you.

There’s plenty of examples that can illustrate the clash between old media and new media, but this one is especially satisfying.

Not that it was a straight-up victory–because it wasn’t–but it was incredibly obvious what the interviewer was up to. Part of that was the skill that Jordan B Peterson turns the interview back around on Cathy Newman.

It’s getting more and more obvious that the media has an agenda. They can’t help themselves anymore.

The cracks are getting wider, and it will be glorious when the dam bursts.

childlike empress · 2018-01-21

And if so, do you want to?

I’ve decided to seriously pursue the magazine idea. I’ve wanted a non-leftist style-type magazine for as long as I can remember, one that is focused on truth and beauty and actual real ways that actual real people live their lives. Everyday glamour, maybe.

Pretty much the opposite of the “aspirational” paged of Vogue, but with crossover for a lot of content.

Darling has made a good start.

But I also miss the irreverence brought by Sassy and Jane. It’s never worth treating the fashion and beauty industry with too much seriousness.

I’d also like to see a magazine that addresses issues in my own life. How to be a red-pilled gal in a blue-pilled world. How to gracefully tell your hostess that, sorry, you don’t eat food that grew from the ground. How to reconcile your love of pretty shoes with the functionality of the Vibram 5-fingers.

(Don’t get me started on the Vibrams that are designed to have shoe-like design details. Blech.)

I don’t know what that magazine would look like, but I’d like to find out.

So to start, I’m going to take a look at the history, structure, and content of other successful ladies magazines.

First up: the Ladies’ Home Journal.

Remember how recently I went on a giant rant about magazines basically being propaganda?

What I didn’t realize was that magazines have always been this way.

At the turn of the 20th century, the magazine published the work of muckrakers and social reformers…. During World War II, it was a particularly favored venue of the government for messages intended for homemakers…. In March of 1970, feminists held an 11-hour sit-in at the Ladies’ Home Journal‘s office, which resulted in them getting the opportunity to produce a section of the magazine that August.

Magazines: telling you what to buy and what to think since the steam-powered printing press.

So my question is: can you have a non-propagandic magazine? Would someone read such a publication?

Or is a magazine simply a physical manifestation of our desire to believe in something?

childlike empress · 2018-01-20

Continuing a long line of convenient convergences throughout the Trump campaign, the 1-year anniversary of God Emperor Trump’s ascension just happens to fall during the rise of #ReleasetheMemo.

I think we’ve all been reminiscing a little about the past year, and all the victories–big and little–that have been won.

(We’re still not tired.)

The FISA/wiretapping situation is on the front burner again, and people are starting to connect some dots.

Here’s a thread over on r/The_Donald that caught my eye this afternoon:

The deep state was attacking Trump thinking he didn’t know he was being spied on. He knew and to think he didn’t put a show on for them is probably a poor gamble. He’s been playing them while tweeting in a way that would make Sun Tsu proud.

This explains how ‘everyone’ got it so wrong. They were listening to everything, and he was putting on a show for them.

The man has a star on Hollywood Blvd for Christ’s sake.

He’s like, literally an accredited actor

And a very stable genius!

And a WWE hall of famer!

This is the biggest part. McMahon coached the Donald how to “work” and probably helped come up with the character The Donald. This whole thing is a work on the deep state. From the fake tan to the eccentric character.

I’ve held the opinion for a long time that Trump’s hair is a deliberate caricature, a tool that he uses for many different purposes. (I’m working on a post that explains this in more detail.)

I knew that the overly-orange tan, the over-the-top hair, and the overly-New York behavior was something that he did for effect. It wasn’t necessarily his “natural” way of being.

Even the aesthetic of his logo (bold and strong) and the interior decoration in his buildings (a caricature of “rich” style) seem calculated for visual persuasion effect.

What I did not keep in mind was how much of the “Donald J Trump” we know is a character. Like, a deliberately designed and acted character. I figured DJT just acted out of instinct, in the moment. Improv, like in wrestling.

This is probably true, to a degree.

But if we keep in mind that he knew he was wiretapped and was doing things behind the scenes also to build his character, that means the whole thing is part of a lot bigger plan.

Imagine DJT and his team walking into an office that they knew was hot, talking about the weather or real estate. Then DJT gives the nod, and they launch into a conversation about how “Oh no, our polls are down, how will we ever recover” or some such nonsense. Never scripted, but according to plan.

Donald J Trump has taken a WWE wrestling character and made him the President of the United States of America.

When I was 12, the hot topic of conversation was whether the WWE was real or scripted. Well, folks, we have our answer.

WWE is indeed real.

childlike empress · 2018-01-07

What a joke, the Golden Globes “time’s up” protest. Like it’s such a hardship to show up wearing black–nobody has to be too inconvenienced–and nobody’s dressed in a way to deter a sexual predator. Dresses are still plunging to there and slit up to here.

I can’t decide if they’re all idiots who never thought past the initial this-would-be-such-a-good-idea phone call to what such an event would really say, or if they’re maliciously trying to cover their tracks. Either way, they don’t seem to think that we see through their facade.

If they were seriously about protesting sexual assault in Hollywood, they would do something substantial (such as, perhaps, quit in protest or name names other than the disgraced Weinstein) instead of throwing one of their favorite yearly parties of mutual admiration and back-scratching with the a feeble warble of “we’re wearing black look at us we’re protesting.”

Meanwhile, people literally at the event–both attendees and award winners–are known or rumored sexual predators.

THR now interviewing Gary Oldman & kissing his ass. Yes, he won tonight and people applauded. Yes, the same Gary who beat his wife with a telephone in front of their children. The same Gary who cheated on many of his wives with hookers. Did THR ask him any of that? No.

— Enty (@entylawyer) January 8, 2018

And it’s not just the men that have problems.

I see on THR's live feed on Twitter, they are interviewing Elisabeth Moss. Heavens knows they don't want to offend a celebrity so won't ask her any questions about Scientology and their covering up for members accused of sexual assault. They also won't ask her why she worked

— Enty (@entylawyer) January 8, 2018

Elisabeth Moss can say one thing in a Golden Globes speech that is completely antithetical to how she lives her life or who she works with. No one in the media will call her out on it. She isn't alone in this, just using her as an example.

— Enty (@entylawyer) January 8, 2018

It’s one thing to look past differing political views to enjoy a work of fiction. I did that for years with scifi and fantasy entertainment.

It’s quite another to knowingly support an industry that does nothing to police its members, and fails to protect its innocents.

And it’s especially egregious when they put on a show like this pretending exactly the opposite.

“I can’t believe that big bad man leered at me. I mean, I know I’m hot but he just can’t do that!! I’ll wear an even shorter skirt tonight–that’ll sure show him.”

childlike empress · 2017-12-16

One of the words that I’ve learned to hate during my time in higher education is the word “evidence-based.”

It’s basically a flag for intellectual-yet-idiot modern shortsighted rootless science, for values of “evidence” that mean only peer-reviewed scientific studies published under governmental agency oversight after 1900.

Thousands of years of folk medicine? Nah.

Hundreds of similar personal anecdotes? Nope.

Logic applied to physiology? Not possible.

“Evidence-based” medicine will probably help you in the short term, but it’s likely to mess you up in the long term.

It’s a fallacy that we can know everything about a natural system and control all inputs and outputs with no unintended consequences.

That’s why I love that “evidence-based” is one of the words banned from the CDC’s budget proposal this year.

Policy analysts at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta were told of the list of forbidden words at a meeting Thursday with senior CDC officials who oversee the budget, according to an analyst who took part in the 90-minute briefing. The forbidden words are: “vulnerable,” “entitlement,” “diversity,” “transgender,” “fetus,” “evidence-based” and “science-based.”

In some instances, the analysts were given alternative phrases. Instead of “science-based” or “evidence-based,” the suggested phrase is “CDC bases its recommendations on science in consideration with community standards and wishes,” the person said. In other cases, no replacement words were immediately offered. […]

The ban is related to the budget and supporting materials that are to be given to CDC’s partners and to Congress, the analyst said. The president’s budget for 2019 is expected to be released in early February. The budget blueprint is generally shaped to reflect an administration’s priorities.

It’s only the budget, so it helps set the direction for what the priorities of the CDC are. I also find it interesting that the concept of “evidence-based” is not banned, just the phrase.

As we’re rounding out the first year of the Trump presidency, it’s heartening to see some good changes roll out to ancillary institutions.

Still gotta build that wall, tho.

S	M	T	W	T	F	S
« Jun
					1	2
3	4	5	6	7	8	9
10	11	12	13	14	15	16
17	18	19	20	21	22	23
24	25	26	27	28	29	30

Batfort

Style reveals substance

Category: Rhetoric & Aesthetics (page 4 of 7)

Image of the week: Keep America Great edition

Image of the week: Portrait of the President as a bush edition

Image of the week: portrait of the president as a bush edition

Image of the week: portrait of the president as a bush edition

Did you dress yourself this morning? (Or did your hormones?)

Image of the week: Spread the JBP word edition

Can you make a magazine that isn’t propaganda?

Orange Clown Genius

A laughable protest

Banned words list

Categories

Recommended

Tags

Archives

Recent Posts

Archives

Recent Comments

Tags

Meta