Just Surviving, Not Vibing

Most of the original text is from this post by @redwooding

Re-did the Pride & Prejudice one to look more tabloid-y and changed John Thorpe's caption to the funny version. Note: gigs during the regency period was a type of carriage.

It also has a lot of different kinds of stitches you can do that make different densities of fabric.

I was surprised that I’d never heard of it though. It’s older than knitting and crocheting and even though it’s been done all over the world it’s super relevant to Nordic culture and my grandmother and I are both into keeping in touch with our roots a bit so I’m surprised I’ve never heard of it.

It’s also a lot easier to freehand and adjust as you go than crochet or knitting and you mostly go by inches instead of rows and number of stitches so a large number of accessories like stitch markers or whatever isn’t really necessary.

The downside as a beginner is that undoing mistakes is more time consuming than with knitting or crochet. You’ve gotta like sew your mistakes out backwards. Disadvantages of making a really sturdy fabric I guess.

I like the feel of this bone needle though and don’t think I’ll be trying the wooden or metal ones.

Also I think I’m gonna have to get good at doing Russian joining if I decide to get good at nalbinding because I don’t have wool yarn and the ends won’t felt together if it’s not at least 50% wool. A small price to pay for using big bone needle though.

From my experience, I see a lot of "you are vulnerable to propaganda" and other such posts fly around on occasion, but not many posts actually describing the mechanisms of propaganda and the effect of those mechanisms. So here's a little bit of info that I have picked up.

Before continuing I want you to ask yourself, "am I experiencing any strong emotions right now, and if so what are they." Make a note of them. I am going to include strong emotions check ins at regular intervals, please take a moment to assess any changes to your emotions, why my wording or inclusion of statements might have caused them, and why that might or might not be intentional.

Propaganda Mechanisms: The Preamble

I am not ignorant of the timing of this post and it was conceived in relation to the puppygirl discourse, both the essays (there are multiple and I recommend you read all of them) and the responses.

Strong emotions check in. On edge? Defensive? Intrigued? Other?

The nature of the social platform is double edged, one side is scrutiny and amplification, the other is obfuscation and censorship. Both edges can happen simultaneously to the same event or statement.

The scrutiny is used to intuit a persons meaning and assess if their intentions or meaning are harmful or helpful to us. This is a good mechanism. It allows us to further our community and solidify our understanding of each other. This happens most readily to those nearest to the epicentre of an event or statement. Those who engage firsthand within the context of the event.

Beyond that firsthand experience the obfuscation comes into play. The message and intention is diluted and removed from context, sometimes to beneficial effect, removing bloated information that added minor specific context only relevant to some of the firsthand audience. Other times to harmful effect, removing essential information that alters completely the meaning and intention of the event.

We see this in a microcosm with the "piss on the poor" reading comprehension posts. Sometimes a person uses piss on the poor to point out a readers obfuscation of facts directly visible in the source material, leading to a contradictory reading. Sometimes piss on the poor is used itself as an obfuscation removing the validity and respect of a persons analysis. See also r/lostredditors and r/lostlostredditors for another form of this.

This situation of firsthand obfuscation is almost always innocent and unintentional.

The second dichotomy is the one of amplification/censorship.

An event or statement may be amplified after scrutiny with people echoing the statement to each other and spreading it around. This can happen for both positive and negative reasons which will be the crux of my post on propaganda. That amplification naturally leads to obfuscation as the message is diluted and reinterperated with each retelling. You may recognise this from the childs game of telephone.

As the event spreads from the epicentre, further discussions, those adding to or criticising the initial statement, are drowned out by the more widely spread initial wave of amplification from the epicentre. By this mechanism censorship occurs.

There is an argument to be made that this censorship can be positive, protecting the more vulnerable from bad faith intentions being further expanded upon. I do not believe this argument holds up to scrutiny against the negative effects, namely the silencing of thought development from the actors in the event.

When the event is deemed by scrutiny to be beneficial, expansion and development of that is muted and lost unless it itself becomes an event. When the event is deemed harmful by scrutiny, then constructive critiques, adjusted meanings and valuable additions are silenced in favour of outrage and offense.

That was a lot of reading, time for an emotions check, have strong emotions surfaced? If so what? Do you think those emotions are protecting you from something I said? Do you think they need to or is there some reason that they might be overzealous in their protection? Do you think I've worded this check in in a way to affect your emotions? Why? Why did I word this check in differently from the last?

Propaganda Mechanism: The wound

All propaganda uses different weapons, not all of them harmful. The purpose of propaganda is to affect a persons frame of reference and thereby affect their point of view.

The one commonality in how this is achieved is the wound that propagandas weapon inflicts. This wound is emotional response, and why I have been including emotional check ins.

Speaking of, how has that statement affected your emotions? Is that going to alter how you receive and process the rest of the essay? do you want to be affected like that? if not, take a break, and try to alter your emotions to a state you are more comfortable receiving and processing this essay.

You might be familiar with this concept, you might have seen right wing media sensationalising immigration, "woke" mobs, "benefit scroungers"

These narratives pushed often illicit fear, anger and disgust to predispose the reader to take a contradictory position against minority and vulnerable groups. However it is also utilised by left wing and liberal (in the progressive sense) reactionaries to sow distrust of right wing media, and galvanise the population, You, into acting against these narratives.

Others of you may be aware of this mechanism used in charity to illicit sympathy and pity; images of starving people, destitute neighbourhoods, disabled children looking sad. This is for the purpose of raising funds to help vulnerable and minority groups.

Few of you are probably conscious of the use of this mechanism in entertainment, although you might know it happens, you probably don't acknowledge it as, or immediately after, engaging with it. narratives of success, achievement, security and safety told in stories that make you feel comfortable and provided positive emotions, chilling your desire to move into action and easing the suffering of existence in capitalism.

Sidenote: I'm sure that some essayist has explained somewhere how media has become the new religion or drug of the people. I can't remember who or where and I'm sure someone more versed in theory can provide that information.

Emotions check, I have only explained factual use of emotional manipulation in modern society so how, and why has it affected your emotions, if at all?

Unfortunately, this emotional manipulation is easy to succumb to and hard to resist. Unfortunately, this emotional manipulation is often unconscious on the part of the manipulator. Unfortunately, this emotional manipulation is not a wholly bad thing and is useful to us as individuals to parse information. Unfortunately, this emotional manipulation can be utilised, again unconsciously, by individuals against individuals, even by the self against the self. This emotional manipulation is what was described in the puppygirl essay, on an interpersonal level.

The puppygirl essay was propaganda and used the mechanism described to illicit emotions to frame a response, the puppygirl in the essay was using this mechanism to illicit emotions to frame a response, my essay now is using this mechanism to illicit emotions to frame a response.

The essay did not account for the amplification of itself, by that oversight, the essay did not account for its obfuscation caused by it's amplification, the essay did not account for what its function as propaganda was outside of its initial event.

This is a small failing of Tara Knight, the author, but not a fatal one and not one deserving of vitriol. This is where my discussion of her essay will end as I don't want this essay to be about that essay, I intended only to use it as an example.

Okay, hot topic, controversial topic, so time for an emotions check. are your emotions influencing your reading of my essay? Are you open and receptive to what I'm saying, even if you disagree? Are you becoming defensive to my words? Are you becoming closed and unreceptive to what I'm saying, even if you agree?

The next one is a big punch so please take a moment to settle yourself.

Propaganda Mechanism: The Scar

Each piece of propaganda we are exposed to, regardless of how successful it is in affecting us, leaves us scarred, by virtue of the Mechanism I have described.

This includes interpersonal use of the mechanism.

Sidenote: I will not call interpersonal use of the mechanism propaganda because the term is loaded with malicious baggage that should not be assigned to a person simply interacting, often interacting in a way informed by their own scars from such mechanisms.

As we go through life, we expect ourselves to become more and more adept at identifying and defending our personal worldviews from propaganda.

We are wrong.

The false nature of this assumption can be seen in the elder generations. The common joke is, boomers said don't believe everything you read online and now they believe whatever fox-news states on twitter or aunty Ethel posts on facebook. This is not a failing of boomers to internalise their own advice, nor is this due to a lack of exposure to education on propaganda.

This is because after years of experiencing the Propaganda machine that is society, after years of being wounded repeatedly by the mechanisms of Propaganda, when someone wields the mechanism again, the old wound flinches, it's easier to open, easier to give in, until fighting it is too hard. the wound has grown too big and we cannot close it.

I mentioned that the mechanism is used in interpersonal situations, and the wound is present there too, it makes it easier for the mechanism to be utilised as interpersonal, even when the wielder isn't doing so.

Finally, the last check. how are you feeling? why are you feeling like that? do you think I intended to do that with my words?

Propaganda Mechanism: Conclusion

So, what is the conclusion. great question, I started this many hours ago, I am not doing a second read because my life is imperfect and I cannot summon the energy to do so. I have been affected by the mechanism. no matter how hard you fight to keep your defenses high, it will get you. if you are aware of it, you will mourn your loss, until eventually it becomes easier to forget, to be ignorant.

There are two things you can do to insulate yourself

most importantly, check your emotions, when reading news, when scrolling media, when talking to impassioned people. What are you feeling? Why are you feeling that? How is that changing your view? Be especially careful when the emotions relate to a figure from a disenfranchised group.

step away. sometimes that wound just needs to heal, step away, literally insulate yourself from the mechanism.

don't think about how stepping away to "heal the wound" opens the wound up in a different way, or you'll go mad with the awareness

yeah

To recover, you literally need to manually learn skills that most people learn as a toddler

You need to learn what makes your body uncomfortable, and what to do to fix it

If you are high-masking, that usually means that you have learned to ignore every distress signal your body sends unless it is a distress signal that a neurotypical person would recognize. People have likely been unintentionally gaslighting you about your lived experience your entire life

If you feel bad or panicked for no reason, stop and try to pay attention to your body. Are you tense? You are likely feeling physical pain somewhere. If you've been gaslit about your pain your entire life, you might not be able to identify it.

Go through a sensory checklist.

SIGHT: Try closing and covering your eyes. If this gives you relief, the lights are probably too bright. You may also need differently-colored lights

SOUND: Cover your ears. Does this give you relief? If so, you may need earplugs or noise canceling headphones. You may also benefit from a neutral or pleasant background noise, like soft music or brown noise.

TOUCH: Are your clothes uncomfortable? Your chair? Your body? Do you feel greasy, like you need a shower? Do you need softer, sensory-friendly clothing?

TASTE: Do you need to brush your teeth or tongue? Would chewing on something help?

SMELL: Is there a strong or unpleasant smell in the room? Do you need to clean or empty a trash can? Would an air purifier help? Would a pleasant smell like a candle help?

INTEROCEPTION: Are you hungry? Thirsty? Tired? How is your posture? Are any of your muscles tight or sore? Scan your body slowly from head to feet, tensing and loosening each group of muscles. Going for a walk or doing a series of quick stretches may help a lot.

Learning how to do this stuff is not intuitive, if you've had an entire lifetime of gaslighting telling you that everything hurting you isn't a big deal and you're being dramatic over nothing.

This takes time, it takes work, it's not intuitive, and it's hard. Most people forget how hard it is, because they learned this as toddlers.

the literalism was also a problem when I was applying for aid for the Cosentyx, because the person organizing my case had to first check off that everything else had been tried before resorting to a biologic immunosuppressant. and one of their questions was "have you tried taking over-the-counter anti-inflammatories (like Advil) to solve the problem?" and I answered no, because I was in pain every minute of every day, and if I was just popping Advils like Tic Tacs my liver would turn to sludge.

but what they were actually asking was "has Advil not been a solution for you", in which case I could've answered 'yes'. anyway, because of this fuck-up on my part, my claim got denied twice in a row, and the third time it was only accepted because the person assisting me said very wearily "maybe Advil gives you stomach aches, and that's why you can't take it" and I finally cottoned on and was like "yeaaaaah......yeah, that's it."