B1ue

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GdzVETcLUCk If they actually hit a club, here's an alternate selection. Actually, looking up Queer as Folk's soundtrack might prove a worthwhile if there will be many club scenes. It was playing then, and there were a *lot* of scenes in Babylon.

I find this to be an interesting character point for Matt. On the one hand, I don't like seeing him beat himself up over being different from Will. Will's tendency to glomp isn't always the best way to go about life, certainly not always the best way to go about starting a relationship. But, in fairness, Matt's approach isn't always for the best either; it is shown to not always even the best for Matt. On the other hand, perhaps this is signaling an incoming change to Matt's character? Possibly not, but if he perceives it as a problem, I have no doubt he will try to work on it, to what ultimate result I cannot guess. Also, I find it interesting that he's having this moment *after* he's starting to move on from Wade. Perhaps the pressure of being in a relationship, even if it was just in his own head, was preventing him from really thinking about this before now?

As Kitt says, getting smashed in order to have fun is part of our culture. I don't agree with it, as I don't like being drunk, but it is certainly expected when you are younger.

And by wildlife they mean "algae." I'm trying to not be too hard on you, since, you know, it's not your idea, but it faces quite a bit of cultural pressure from those of us who have grown up here, and many who've even just lived here for a time. So much pressure, in fact, that I am begrudgingly impressed that they have even gotten this far. Whole generations of Angelinos have been born here thinking of the LA River as "the world biggest toilet." The idea of that becoming something we might willingly visit is, well, the kindest term I can come up with is "paradigm shift." Not to mention that many of us from LA proper associate "parks" with "never, ever, enter after dark or alone." Since you've originally brought it up, I've been sounding out the people I work with to get their thoughts too. Most are from out of state, but a solid minority grew up in the LA area, so I figured they'd be a good cross-sample, even if they are all railroaders of some degree. However, the skepticism that has greeted my explanation of the LATC yard proposal has so far been universal, aside form those who have begun to calculate how we might profit off such a project going up in flames.

No. I grew up in a forest. Idle greenery does not impress me. Meh, whatever. It's their river. They can do what they want with it. As long as it's kept up with city funds instead of county, and that disaster-waiting-to-happen railyard aspect does not go through, then I'll quit whining.

A group dedicated to making what I consider ill-conceived changes is using lies and scare-tactics to create that change. These lies are about something that has directly and indirectly benefitted me my entire life. If this group succeeds, it has the potential to complicate my professional life at the same time that it damages the place I've chosen to live. And, apparently, it's working.

I would hope not. That was appalling to read, both as someone who lives here and someone that works in that industry. I'll be honest, I wasn't really excited by your initial synopsis, but now the whole thing is tainted after reading that one page. Parenthetically, Tim's comment reminded me of something from my childhood. "Arroyo Seco" was pointed out to me by my dad when he was explaining to my sisters and I the difference between Spanish vs. English noun-adjective placement. Which is probably why "seco" is one of the words in Spanish I don't have to think about to translate.

I work at one of the bigger railyards in Los Angeles county. My job title is extremely vague, my duties are many and varied, but my biggest responsibility is planning freight trains. I tend to not talk about it, but I could have sworn I at least mentioned I worked at a railyard.

Wait. Hold the f up. Do you not realize what I do for a living? Furthermore, do they have any idea what an active railyard does to the ground beneath it? Also, the website linked has several slanted comments and at least three flat out lies. AND I'VE ONLY READ ONE PAGE. Although this: "Union Pacific did test a two-mile long [560 containers] train, but found that no sidings in the L.A. Corridor could accommodate it." I remember that one. And oh wow did they get in trouble for that one, although even that line is inaccurate. The train in question was actually closer to 3 miles (1500 ft., including locomotives if I remember correctly). And it shut down everything until they managed to get it into the desert and away from high density population areas. I was pretty entertained by all this, because it wasn't my fault. Not for my boss's lack of trying, mind, but the important thing is I didn't have a thing to do with that one. Freight trains that are actually two miles long (or, more accurately, 10438 ft., but what's 122 ft. between friends?) are relatively routine for the LA corridor. While it is true that no sidings can contain those beasts, the SOP is simply that you accept that they aren't getting put in a siding.

No.

Well, seeing as a "restored" LA river would quite possibly knock me out of a job, nah, I don't really advocate for it. I'll save judgment until I read the full articles, but off the top of my head, I would not guess it to be environmentally sound. We already drain *several* rivers dry to maintain our current water supply. The hell we going to have to do in order to create something that will have long-term effects on our city ports? To paraphrase from the book Good Omens, almost the entire drive of human history has been to get away from nature. And, on a personal level, my entire adult life has been one long charge away from the encroachment of the wilderness. I do not approve of someone whose closest experience of the great outdoors is a couple weeks CAMPING digging up a perfectly serviceable (if admittedly ugly) flood channel and slotting in something that will not do as it is told because they are carried away by the romance of it all. I especially do not approve of this happening a couple blocks from my apartment. Okay, maybe about half a mile, not quite a couple blocks, but still!

I liked the remake, I watched it for the first time a couple days ago. Granted, I already liked Julianne Hough's music, and Kenny Wormald is cute, so I was predisposed to like what I saw no matter what was on screen, but I genuinely liked a lot of it. It's cliché to have the preacher's daughter to enjoy sex, but still, her character reminded me of a few people from back home. Also, remember way back when you wondered if it's possible for someone to give the impression of being taller while they are sitting? The gentleman in question is 5'5".

This will not be a happy post. In fact, some may come away from it thinking that I am attacking them, even if I name no one by name. They...won't be entirely wrong. I've been reading this morning some articles on diversity in Fantasy. Specifically, ones related to the Pathfinder Campaign setting, which has made a genuine effort to be inclusive and diverse, on several levels, in their characters. While the articles themselves have not upset me, the comments. Oh, I made the mistake of reading the comments. And while my rage has burned off, the bewilderment has not cooled. A step back. I do not pass for White. I never have. Because of this, I have always been othered, to the extent I am now genuinely comfortable standing out in any group of people. I have embraced my square peg status, and know that the instant I open my mouth, or even just walk in a room, I have separated myself from my peers, such as they are. But I was not always so calm about it. And it's not like I like that I am made to feel strange no matter what crowd I am in. So those rare moments when I see someone like me, or even close to me, in media, I am unnaturally enthused. I watched Teen Wolf for three solid seasons because both the titular character, and the actor that plays him, is half-Hispanic and a California native. I forgave that show a lot because that was true, and it's only now that the actor himself has made a blunder I cannot forgive or get passed that I have dropped it. Paizo's Pathfinder is one such product that made that attempt. Really, it's pretty awesome how diverse it's characters are depicted both in its main sourcebooks and the smaller sidelines that they continually release. I think it's awesome anyways, and several others have pointed out how awesome it is. I was reading those articles, because I needed something to salve my rage over an idiot claiming that females intrinsically have different personalities than males, even in a fantasy setting where our real world gender constructs don't necessarily apply. But, then, I made the mistake of reading the comments. Apparently, not everyone feels this is awesome. The comment that sent me into a blinking, gesticulating rage was this pair of doozies from the same person: And And, wow, I just pissed myself off again rereading them. So I can say with full honesty that my initial reaction is somewhere along the lines of, "go fuck yourself. No, really. Get that shovel and really work yourself over." As it would do little good to actually tell the person this, seeing as the comments were made two years ago and the commenter in question was making a genuine effort to be honest, sincere, and non-confrontational with his overall posts, I suppose I can let it go. However, if you fail to see what's wrong with those comments, let me tell you a couple of things. Thing 1: Privilege. It's a thing. It's not just thinking that everyone can relate to straight-white-males, it's the far more dangerous thought that everyone should. That it is acceptable for that to be the default, because everyone natively feels included when stories are about that subgroup of humanity. While this thought is genuinely accepted, even codified within our language (ever think about why male pronouns can be universal, but female ones can't?), it is a lie. It is a construct; something unnatural, something that is forced and jammed and reiterated over and over until it's not worth arguing about anymore. I won't fight it. I don't blame anyone else for not wanting to. But I will point it out for the lie that it is. And I acknowledge that it hurts people, albeit not intentionally. Thing 2: I find it remarkable that this commenter has no problem stepping into the role of a dwarf, or elf, or dragon-slayer, but a Black person is going too far. And, actually, I don't find it remarkable. Just very, very annoying. Thing 3: And this is the big one. Do you have any idea how frightening this kind of thinking is? I was reading another article recently, pointing out that the lack of diversity in dystopian literature, when encountered, is a bit chilling for the diverse. Because it forces us that don't see ourselves within that world to wonder if we've all been killed off. Of course, with some stories, I think that's exactly the conclusion we're supposed to reach.The Giver, for example. A Handmaid's Tale for another. I don't have any solutions, and offer no wisdom. But please, keep in mind that not everyone looks at the world the same way. Some of us see every middle-aged White man as a possible threat, knowing they are far more dangerous than we could ever be. Because the world relates to their story, not ours.

My mistake. Although that brings up a different point. If will won't get bent out of shape regarding Zach's previous injury to him, why would he John's? It was my impression that he'd forgiven and moved past the mistake for both of them. I think it is a pretty big leap, or I wouldn't be so bothered by it. While Zach isn't as selfish as Gathan saw him, he's not selfless either. Besides, it's not like Will goes into a Tony induced rant every other day, where it really is an unhealthy obsession. Tony is merely dead to him, and Will only gets irritated when someone tries to make him deal with it. It is arguably unwise that Will only has two categories for people: dead-to-him and clasped-to-his-bosom, and I definitely don't mind seeing Matt especially trying to expand Will's horizons. It just seems a weird thing for Zach to try and do. I guess it doesn't really matter, although I wonder if we're going to see this expanded upon in later characterizations of Zach. Does he generally just let things go? It might fit, especially if he really is as smooth an operator as Gathan initially presented him as. Maybe this is his inner Clara and Wally talking through him, as Henson alluded to? By the way, I don't mean to seem like I'm arguing with you Kitt, I'm just trying to think out loud, using your points as a basis. If I'm coming across like that, I apologize.

Actually, Marie and Matt did not hurt Will in the same way. They hurt him as one family member to another, not as one lover to another, which is the crux of the problem that Will is having at the moment, and the thrust of Matt's advice. If Will is going to allow Tony back into his life with any emotional equanimity, he's going to have to start seeing him as a family member, not as an ex. Mind, this isn't a universal constant for everyone. Matt, in particular, does not usually need to maintain physical distance in order to maintain emotional distance, which makes the cases that he does, Wade for example, all the more poignant. But Will's default angry reaction seems to be to cut the focus of his ire off, in contrast to Brad's need to confront that person in as loud a manner as possible, Wade's strategy of finding some lever on which to maneuver them, and JP's instinct to eliminate the problem in a more permanent fashion. Getting Will past that reaction might be nice, but I'm not sure how realistic a goal it is. I've found those responses to be the hardest to train yourself out of, and even harder to eliminate in someone else without their eager cooperation. But all that is kind of beside my main point. Even if Will needed to hear this, it's still odd that Zach is the one that said it. What motivation does Zach have for Will to settle things with Tony? We see, in this scene, that he's jealous of the relationship Will and Tony used to have, and with quite a bit of justification. I will argue, as Matt does, that Tony should be considered family to Will, but Zach would have no reason to feel that way. I can't remember if he's even met Tony. He has no reason to want to see Will allow Tony back into his life, and every reason to want Will to keep Tony at a distance, especially now that he himself is going to have to keep Will at arms length.

I think Matt might have been able to get away with it, Will was already listening to him, and Claire's family could probably pull it off as well (in fact, this sounds like something John or Marie might say) but you're quite right. My objection wasn't that someone said that to Will, more that Zach did.

I stumbled over this line. I would not have expected Zach to say that, at that time, in that way, to that person. With the exception of JJ, I would have expected almost any other character to be more likely to say that to Will, possibly even including Elizabeth Danfield. I'm not quite sure why. Maybe it's just the specific phrasing? I'll have to think about it. But that line was a discordant note in an otherwise interesting scene. Adjusting Will's worldview is shaping up to be a full-time hobby for Matt. It's cool to see him acting like an older brother to Will, as well as JJ.

Just out of curiosity, but how far does this go? Taken to its logical extreme, does this mean that Rosa, who I have imagined as Aida Linares Has all this time been played by Lynda Carter?

I'm not certain what you mean by nostalgia picks, but I suspect you don't mean quite what I did. There seemed to be an uptick in covers from 80s and early 90s hits, but that may simply be a result of my remember those songs better. Ooh, Ian Van Dahl. "Castles in the Sky" was played a lot.

You have a curiously naive idea of how sober I was at these things if you think I was paying enough attention to identify when songs started to be rereleased as dance tracks. I think I listed in another thread way back when some songs from the 2001 era. Beyond those, I recommend looking up compilations from that year. If all else fails, pick 80s songs at random, and you're possibly close. Edit: wait, you said gay club. I have no idea then.

Aren't the only unrepentant shit-disturbers in the area at the moment Zach and Will themselves? Is Mary Ellen coming to Claremont?

Also, a couple country singles from that year or earlier: "I Just Want to Be Mad" by Terri Clark "Life Happened" by Tammy Cochron. Although I personally didn't hear this one until much later, it's now one of my favorites. "Ten Rounds with Jose Cuervo" by Tracy Byrd "I Should be Sleeping" by Emerson Drive "Beautiful Mess" by Diamond Rio "Courtesy of the Red, White, and Blue" by Toby Keith. My sisters will frown on my admitting this, but this song has long bothered me, but it has been the anthem of the Red states basically since it came out. Arguably *before* it came out, as Keith had been playing it on his live shows for some time before he released it as a single. And on a sillier note: "I'm Gonna Miss Her (The Fishing Song)" by Brad Paisley And "When God Fearin' Women Get the Blues" by Martina McBride. The song itself is pretty funny, but the video sees that silliness and raises it.

This may surprise some, but I agreed with Will's actions in this latest chapter, and found them to be unusually mature of his character. Sometimes, it really is the correct action to raise hell and make big noise, my previous objections to him doing that with Wally and Clara stemmed from his not thinking through the consequences first. This time he did, and JP also found a way to try to open his mind to the possible pitfalls of his actions without making him defensive. If he follows through with Zach, and tries to talk to him about what he's doing and why, that would be even better. Although I could see Zach not quite realizing that he's using Will to divert attention away from himself.

This was probably my favorite part of the chapter. Bring "right" doesn't protect you from consequences, and I like that someone made that point to Will in a manner he will get. Regarding Brent, I can't really see Will at this time sleeping with him either. However, has Zach admitted to being with Will yet to his family? I'm sure they've all put two and two together by now, but has Zach actually made his feelings clear yet? I can see Brent trying to hook up with Will, possibly with more intent to wind Zach up than to actually go through with it.

Well of course I can imagine making someone that pretty a bi-oh, wait. You said emo bitch. Never mind. More seriously, knowing a lot of veterans and active duty soldiers, yes, I can easily imagine someone that looks like him not being able to deal with his own emotional instability. Since you haven't read the book, I don't want to get into specifics, but Book 3 Four seemed to me to be a natural progression of his character throughout the series. Granted, I always described him as a whiny bitch waiting to happen, although he did seem to have his emotions well repressed while "on the job." Which also rang true to me, given both the nature of his job as trainer and the extra risks he ran being who and what he was. But he only ever repressed those emotions, he never dealt or moved on from them. In fact, that seems to be his preferred survival tactic. Which, it must be said, is also the preferred survival tactic of Dauntless as a whole. That's why, stuck in that environment and among those people, his fears never moved until he met Tris and had her example to follow. Once he had that example, and trusted her enough to let her do the thinking for both of them, he began to break down, and then put himself back together. An important thing to keep in mind when reading the Divergent trilogy is that Four is never the example to which Tris must live up to, he's the reward for her good behavior. The movie version actually makes him more important than he was in the book, showing her how to properly pass while divergent. She only thinks he is what she needs to be, but this is quickly proved false, and then quickly proved critical. Four could never do what Tris does, on several levels, but that doesn't mean his abilities don't prove important either. I mentioned last post that I enjoyed the ending of Allegiant, him being, and acting, like an emo bitch is important for how the final resolution plays out. If he'd been like Tris, it wouldn't have worked. And if Tris had been like him, Divergent would have ended very different.