quick reflex on goin private on twitta

Quick relfecx on going private

I went private because I am getting bored on twitter and I haven’t done it before thought id try it out

So here’s some quick thots:

  1. I get no RTs now. That’s a weird thing to ‘give up’ I guess? Idk.
  2. I behave 100% no different as private (so far) but maybe that’s bc its still all the same old followers? Mine is not a tiny account for gripes and stuff mostly I have escaped attention through Bayesian flooding – too much noise to make sense of any one thing that might “get me in trouble” with anyone I guess?
  3. Tons of my friends have no got multiple thousands of followers, even 10s of thousands, and sometimes that’s being a hassle. I said I was happy with my 1900 and I also wanted to see if that really was the case, whether “swearing off” the social-audience-growth elements of a twitter account would mean a “loss” to me in any way???? Can the “exclusivity” of a highly followed private acct do anything a public account can’t in terms of cultivating an audience – or a niche????
  4. I have been disengaging a bit from twitter for a while, just from exhaustion and boredom – a confluence of being overworked and mad stressed, and also from kind of being bored of twitter having the same arguments, the same kinds of engagements, the same slightly misconstrued miscommunications. I guess I’m getting a little tired of the knee-jerkyness of twitter sometimes too. Like maybe this is part and parcel of me trying to do really deep thinking in my thesis and twitter is not really helping that habit/desire/need etc.
  5. going private means NO ONE who doesnt follow you will see tweets you send to them. in one sense this encourages disengagement but in ANOTHER sense I now want to tweet shit at people and only my followers will see it?? prviate jape???? (theres potential here but idk what it is)
  6. Plus, god I hate saying this I love you all, but fuckin hell I follow some iditios on titter
  7. What is my theory of social change? Ann Deslandes asked this on twitter a while back and I guess I don’t have a good idea, but I guess I thought (think?) it involves some kind of role for myself as a public person, public intellectual, well what if there isn’t room to do that justice on tiwtter or in public anywhere in the parts of public life that correspond to Jodi Dean’s description of ‘communicative capitalism’ stuff – endless circulation, all content, no message ever responded to??? (but even that is a particular critique only applies to, I guess, governmetns or states??? Not to individuals and small groups or corporations?? Cf. the Mozilla CEO – Mary Hamilton had the best take)
  8. Graeber argues that the Axial age advent of coinage (and the military/imperial/commercial complex that grew up around it) as having the effect of somehow giving birth to, or encouraging materialism is really fucking disturbing and giving me the heebee jeebies. Its like putting on the glasses in They Live and seeingthe ideology, but it’s also strangely, what I’ve been trying to conclude in my thesis and its really just leaving me with MORE questions about my role, my thinking, my aesthetics and what I do in practise…

Sam Allen on ‘what misandry means to me’

i hate men doesn’t mean i hate you. it means i hate your position in this world. it means i’m not obligated to like you. it means i don’t have to talk to you if i don’t want to. it means i get to have my space and i don’t have to dance for you, smile at you, or soothe you. and you can put up with me being wary of you, can’t you, because the world has a fucking red carpet waiting for you wherever you go.

Incredible, moving stuff, and the kind of thing that it took to really get through to me back-in-the-day. I do feel bad tho, knowing how many people out there just will not get this, and will not understand it, will not comprehend the depth of meaning and the nuance and, above all, i guess something like the literary character of this piece… that’s not to say that it’s only to be read literarily, or as an allegory or something – i read it as entirely sincere. but there’s a performative element, and element that maybe derrida would jizz over and say was “unrepreesntable” or something like that god fucking dammit why does everyone have to be so literal, so bloody minded all the time idk idk idk sping around three times and touch the ground bags not it.

its a worthy piece.

Latour on trains/travel/compression

Both quotes from Latour’s Aramis: which I skimmed a bit just now because I’ve spent so much time on trains and other transportation devices lately:
“At a time when efficiency has the status of dogma, we are all subject to its discipline, and in our stressed-out state, before and after work, we all have to put up with physically exhausting compressions in uncomfortable spaces and annoying waiting periods owing to breakdowns in the traffic flow. This is the paradox of antisocial behaviour in a society that would like to see itself as social.” p.31
“Every time I was squeezed in the metro at rush hour, I now knew that this was the RATP’s way of adapting the supply of transportation to the demand. What an economic function its elasticity is the flexibility of my body!” p.95

on teen girls

One of the most popular ways people like to hate teenage girls is to complain about their “insane” crushes on boy band members. Now, let me fucking tell you something: those big dumb crushes are what helps a teenage girl develop her sexuality in a safe environment that she can control. In her world, she can listen to One Direction and hear all these songs about how great she is, and how much these cute non-threatening boys want to make her feel special. Why is this so important? Because no one is pushing them. There’s no fourteen year old boy shoving his clammy hands down your shirt without your consent. These fantasy boys are not convincing a girl to send naked pictures, only to show all their friends and call her a slut. In the fantasy land of boy bands, the girl has all the power. And we need to stop judging them for wanting to escape into that.

Go read the whole essay.



Screen Shot 2014-03-07 at 4.10.02 pm

But, there’s one tiny issue with setting Matthew McConaughey up as our next great Christian idol. And, the problem is the movie he won the Oscar for. And pretty much every other movie he’s ever made.  (Anyone remember a little film called Magic Mike?) According to pluggedin.comDallas Buyer’s Club opens with McConaughey’s character having sex with two girls at the same time in a rodeo stall.  That’s only the beginning of the explicit sexual content in the movie.  In addition to the nudity, masturbation, and pornography, the film contains over 100 f-words and God’s name is used as a curse word over 20 times. Read more: http://www.uproxx.com/filmdrunk/2014/03/matthew-mcconaughey-hero-christians-thanking-god-blog-lady-says-fast/#ixzz2vFc7qEkh

Two ways to weaponize your Facebook comments

  1. When your post on a page attracts stupid or ignorant comments in a threaded reply, delete your own comment. The replies go with them. (Bonus points if you can set and execute a ‘honeypot’ for terrible comments!)
  2. When someone replies to your comment on a non-threaded post, delete all traces of your input. At the very least, you will confuse someone.

Your comments are your private domain in hostile territory. Practise comment autonomy today: delete your comments.

Demonstrate you recognize the politics of space and remove yourself.

This is the best academic piece i’ve read åbout climate change aesthetics

Michael Ziser and Julie Sze’s Climate Change, Environmental Aesthetics, and Global Environmental Justice Cultural Studies. From the conclusion:

As the [Global Climate Change] phase of environmental discourse develops, it will be crucial to ensure that the original ecological and social goals of traditional environmentalism and environmental justice are not swept aside in favor of a counterproductive emphasis on national, cultural, and racial difference on scales at which no biological and community justice is practicable. We suggest that environmental justice aesthetics ought to reject the sublime scale invoked by some GCC narratives and instead remain focused on the human, ecological, and social jus- tice dimensions of environmental change.32 The proper response of the humanities to the GCC crisis is not to find aesthetic equivalents to late capitalism’s radically posthuman environmental effects, but rather to produce narratives, like Up the Yangtze, that make palpable the largely ungraspable complexity of contemporary environmental and economic networks. The strengths of institutionally and methodologically separated enterprises like ecocriticism, environmental justice, cultural studies, and globalization theory must be combined to counteract the forces of a potentially reactionary style of climate discourse and to develop a representational model and analytic framework for climate politics that accounts for individuals, communities, and cultural and racial contexts as much as for net emissions, capital flows, and global trade.

I’m about to watch Up The Yangtzee, it’s available on YouTube.

ok so

something clicked last week and i’m done.

i’m done, but the thesis isn’t. yet.

the change is imperceptible, largely mental, and completely crucial. before the thesis was something i was terribly invested in, it was close to me, it was right here; felt.

today? it’s a million miles away, its on the other side of the ocean. i’ve divested of all but The Work left to finish it up to a point where it Doesn’t Suck Enough such that I can live with it.

mark the meaningless milestone

i wash my hands of this thing