Immigration makes the whole country wealthier. An immigrant's success doesn't harm you. Making America an undesirable country to work in harms you. A rising tide raises all boats.
Your loss. One of the most beautiful works of literature and short. Is the depiction of gay people that distressing to you? I read books about straights all the time.
Unfortunately activists have done a fantastic job turning gay into a broad political issue encompassing a lot of ideologies that many people find off-putting. So when you see a plot like this, your first thought is that 1) the author has a self righteous agenda and 2) the award is not deserved but rather given to signal sides in a culture war.
Neither of those things may be true. And that’s tragic because a lot of great work is going to be written off under these pretenses.
> 2) the award is not deserved but rather given to signal sides in a culture war.
This is psychological projection from a debased information environment.
She has been studying classics, writing, and winning awards since at least 1975!
Quote:
Carson is known to be reticent about her private life, and discourages autobiographical readings of her writings.Information about her in publications is often limited to the phrase: "Anne Carson was born in Canada and teaches ancient Greek for a living." While not a confessional poet, her work is considered personal. Carson has said that in her work, she uses her life democratically as just one set of facts among others in the world.
You should be less online so you don't lose your whole self to bottomless cynicism.
The Nobel Prize in literature is given for a body of work, not for a specific publication. The book OP quotes does have gay characters but Anne Carson's body of work is hardly about LGBT issues specifically. Writing it off because of one sentence in an antagonistic comment is a bit strange. The Guardian article lists many other quotes of people describing what's compelling about her work.
When YOU see a plot like this. And that YOU see this says a lot more about YOU and your preoccupations with another person's sexuality. If you would just be honest and say "i don't like LGBT people", we'd save a lot of time.
> Unfortunately activists have done a fantastic job turning gay into a broad political issue encompassing a lot of ideologies that many people find off-putting
This is true of almost everything nowadays. I recoil at almost anything religious for similar reasons, even though I know not everybody that goes to church is a militant anti-abortionist christian nationalist. Nonetheless I will watch `The 10 Commandments` as it's still a very good example of the golden age of Hollywood epics.
I wouldn't call it "distressing", but we are entitled to like some genres and dislike others. Not everything should be for everyone. And generally some genres are over promoted by the big labels and imo have worse quality on average.
A system is also composed of its pieces. There's plenty of blame to go around. Trying to blame entirely the system and absolve the company of its immorality is nihilistic. Stop thinking that companies aren't to blame just because they take advantage of a bad system.
It's incredibly ambiguous. There are very few sets of people who agree on the list of ongoing genocides, much less historic ones. The only places where there is even a semblance of agreement is in Europe and urban America, and that's largely due to deferral to our institutions.
> There's no ambiguity as to what Israel is doing
I agree. That doesn't mean it's beyond discussion or debate. I think it's a genocide. I also think that term has been mangled, particularly online, to the point that it's virtually meaningless. (One of the problems with the term is it's grammatically odd. A homicide is a completed murder. Attempted murder is different. A genocide, completed, is an extermination or annihilation. But we give the ongoing project the same grammar as, in other cases, an act.)
>A genocide, completed, is an extermination or annihilation.
Which is why zero armenians remain after the armenian genocide
oh wait no nevermind, your definition is just bullshit. Only one set of people define what is or isn't a genocide: historians. The ICC only covers crimes against humanity. Historians are also in wide agreement (except for the Israel aligned ones) that it is a genocide in Gaza.
The legal definition of genocide is precise and includes an element that is often hard to prove: "intent."
Determining whether a situation constitutes genocide is factually and legally complex. It should only be made following a careful and detailed examination of the facts against relevant legislation.
This examination is carried out to establish State responsibility or individual criminal responsibility for the crime of genocide. It must be done by a competent international or national court with jurisdiction to try such cases, after an investigation that meets appropriate due process standards.
Correct. If no such court case has delivered a verdict, then by definition no one can rightly claim genocide has occurred.
As for whats happening, the over represented proportion of male combatant age deaths, the well below average ratio of civilian to combatant deaths in complex urban warfare, the war being in response to an atrocious attack on civilians, stopping for polio vaccines, population numbers remaining stable etc puts a question on the "Only Reasonable Inference" standard.
What would you consider a proportionate response given Hamas's initial charter, the rockets fired over the years, the IRCG commanders statements about a co-ordinated attack from Gaza, southern Lebanon and the West Bank and the abhorrent attack of October 7th?
Major General Gholam Ali Rashid—commander of the Khatam ol Anbia Central Headquarters, which is the highest Iranian operational command level and responsible for all joint operations— expanded on this concept in a May 2024 interview and demonstrated how Iran is continuing to learn from Hamas. Rashid argued that the Hamas attack into Israel in October 2023 highlighted how effective and valuable ground attacks could be.[iii] Hamas’ attack demonstrated, Rashid said, that the Axis of Resistance could destroy the Israeli state by launching surprise attacks from Lebanon, the Gaza Strip, and the West Bank simultaneously—echoing Salami’s comments. Rashid stated that such an attack would need 10,000 fighters from Lebanon, 10,000 fighters from the Gaza Strip, and 2,000-3,000 from the West Bank. Rashid’s interview is particularly noteworthy given his importance in Iranian military decision-making and planning as Khatam ol Anbia Central Headquarters commander.
You know what, it's been a while since I took the piss out of the hasbara, let's have fun.
> the well below average ratio of civilian to combatant deaths in complex urban warfare
Ah, yes, the very urban warfare art of bombing hospitals and refugee camps. Very urban. Much warfare. And you also get to claim that the civilians didn't die from the fighting, merely from the starvation!
>the war being in response to an atrocious attack on civilians
Yep. Nothing happened before October 7. 1947 ? Doesn't exist. Nakba? Probably some arab term that means nothing. Close to a century of warfare, torture, humiliation and putting Gazawis into concentration camps ? Naaaah. Hamas is responsible. Bad Hamas.
> population numbers remaining stable
There has been no accurate population counts for three years. But thank you for being so generous and letting palestinians reproduce while you park them in camps. Very kosher <3
>Hamas's initial charter
No shit, the armed resistance group that was formed to resist with arms against an attacker wants the attacker gone ? Silly Hamas. They should have done like Bibi and kept the actual plan quiet in cabinet meetings.
Hint: armed resistance against an occupier is legal and encouraged under international law.
>the rockets fired over the years
Yep. Israel did nothing. Didn't shoot children in the head, didn't regularly murder palestinians in prisons, didn't conduct raids on Palestinian territories or encourage settlers to colonize more. Poor little Israel.
>the IRCG commanders statements about a co-ordinated attack from Gaza, southern Lebanon and the West Bank
You regularly bomb another country, and you think that the other country is in the wrong for finding literally any way to make you eat shit ?
> the abhorrent attack of October 7th
A regrettable event and a needless loss of life. I'm not fully sure it justifies a retaliation that causes fifty times more death, destruction and horror, nor will the tribunal that will judge you for your crimes against humanity.
It's probably one of the safest places on the planet.
reply