Of course I’m worked up. I love art, I love doing art, i have multiple friends and family members who work with art, and art is the last genuine thing that’s left in this economy. So yeah, obviously I’m angry at people who don’t get it and celebrate this bullshit just because they are too lazy to pick up a pencil, get good and draw their own shit, or alternatively commission what they wanna see from a real artist. Art was already PERFECT as it was, I have a right to be angry that tech bros are trying to completely ruin it after turning their nose up at art all their lives. They don’t care about why art is good? Ok cool, they can keep doing their graphs and shit and just leave art alone.

I’m not really comfortable with how Mastodon works. Bluesky really seems like a very comfy, cool environment and I really like the feeds function. And I mean, Tumblr was always perfect for me anyway.

And they CLAPPED BACK. Love that.

Ever heard the criticism about some movie villains being “comically evil and unrealistic”? Well, tell those critics you’re sorry. Like even the MCU villains are realistic enough at this point. Matter of fact, Obadiah Stane is the perfect representation of one of these evil motherfuckers. That’s why he’s the scariest villain in the whole franchise.

“Free speech for me, not for thee”. God, I’m THIS close to deleting my account there and just migrating back to Tumblr and bluesky. There are just too many users I love that haven’t moved anywhere else yet.

Oh yeah, for sure, I’m not saying gnc cis woman face the same amount of oppression as trans women. What I’m saying is, by shoving people into very restrictive, hyper-specific boxes, we end up excluding people who by definition shouldn’t be excluded. Like the cis athlete who was excluded from competing because she naturally produces more testosterone than the others. While being cis, again. Or like, all the cis gnc women who get attacked or murdered because transphobes think they’re trans when they’re not.

My point is, women aren’t all the same. Also, women who are naturally prone to packing muscles can and sometimes do go toe to toe with men in terms of height and strength. But they’re still cis women, and should compete as cis women.

But all of this is pointless anyway: this is a BEAUTY contest, and excluding trans women in this historical period is basically like saying trans women have “unfair advantages in the field of beauty” which I mean, could be, but it’s very much a self-report. There’s also the objection that “trans women do surgeries to look the way they look” which yeah, true, but cis women who participate in Miss Italia also very much do get surgery to look the way they look. Matter of fact, there have been multiple scandals about Miss Italy winners having gone through plastic surgery to win. So I mean, everything goes.

Can you be more specific though?

“Internal stuff”? What do you mean? You mean like men have more organs than women or something…? What kinda statement is this

Except they do. Literally look at any picture of a trans woman before and after transitioning. Their bodies literally change in every sense.

You’d be surprised.

I think this is where it makes sense to go. Like wrestling, right? Just make every sport competition divided on gender if it’s that important, and then divided on the basis of body mass. Although frankly I think that would make every sport ten times more boring than it needs to be. Like smaller athletes usually need to figure out a way to still compete, and that’s where part of the fun is, both in competing and watching. If an athlete feels disadvantaged, they’re just lazy and not training well or enough.

Then again, I do think sports should be less owned by massive corporations and media companies, and move more to their dimension of play, admiration for each other and self-improvement. Not saying sports shouldn’t be jobs and not have money go in and out, but they should center that dimension a lot less.

I mean… some cis women are born thicker and taller than others which might be an advantage over other women, biologically. Yet, nobody disqualifies those women from competing. It just means everyone else has to be twice as competitive and work around their physical limits. Sports are largely about overcoming one’s performance limits. Like, a shorter basketball player can still play basketball and be really good at it, it’s all about how they train, what they focus on and how they play. And it’s about how good they are at dealing with the space around them and controlling their body. This was always the case, always in the history of sports. Being a stronger athlete was never a problem before, and now suddenly it is? It doesn’t make any sense, and it’s just an excuse for bad athletes who don’t wanna git gud to demand special treatment. I’m speaking as a cis woman who’s bigger than most other women around me. Not my fault that I can accidentally throw other chicks to the bleachers without even being aware of them, and I’m still a woman no matter how other people see me. So yeah, this whole discourse affects me too, because trans people being targeted also targets any person who was born intersex or just different.

What’s your idea of what a trans woman’s body looks like, exactly? Like, do you think a trans woman is just “a man in a dress”? Because that’s just straight up inaccurate in every way. HRT changes trans people’s bodies and how those bodies work. That’s why we say “trans women are women and trans men are men”. Like, would you think making someone with the body of Buck Angel compete in women’s competitions would be fair? Google Buck Angel, look at him and then come back at me.

Ok, hold on, why would you forbid trans women from competing? Because of “unfair advantages”? First off, trans women who completed their transition don’t have a male body. They have a female body. And some athletes are naturally better at some sports than others. Like, shorter basketball players are naturally disadvantaged at basket, which is why they need to train twice as hard as taller players or switch to another sport. Also, every whiny white woman complaining about trans women doing better than them always forgets to mention the athletes winning are still the cis ones, which destroys the idea that trans women have an advantage.

The point never held up either in sports nor anywhere else. And it was never about sports anyway.

Except production companies have just said they’d like to pay an actor for a day to copy their likelihood and then use those images to make movies without paying actors ever again. A lot of people are already prompting whole novels written by AI and selling them. This shit is ALREADY dystopic as shit. And it’s already here. No need to “give it a chance”, it straight up has to be murdered and be made illegal. It needs to flop as hard as NFTs did.

You absolutely get it. Like, right now all art is owned by corporations and shit is already bad as it is, if it’s made by machines that means the death of any kind of shred of human thought and empathy. It disgusts me to my core. It’s the goddamn world from Matrix, except some people are even INVITING IT IN. Like, I’d rather get a frontal lobotomy than see “art” made by AI.

You said that actually. In many more words, but the point of what you said is exactly that. If you want an AI to make the show you want and if all of us thought the way you’re thinking, what do you think writers, directors, actors etc would do?

Also, you’re not considering the fact that art is not made for the public. Art is self-expression. The fact that we like movies others have made is that something about them resonates with us, but the reason those movies were made is not that. And only humans can do self-expression. A machine has nothing to say, a machine feels nothing, a machine is artistically nothing. You’re standing up for the “artistic” equivalent of Matrix soup as replacement for real food cooked by real people.

Do you think a hammer and a nail could do anything on their own, without a hand picking them up guiding them? Because that’s what a computer is. Nothing wrong with using a computer to paint or write or record songs or create something, but it has to be YOU creating it, using the machine as a tool. It’s also in the actual definition of the word: art is made by humans. Which explicitly excludes machines. Period. Like I’m fine with AI when it SUPPORTS an artist (although sometimes it’s an obstacle because sometimes I don’t want to be autocorrected, I want the thing I write to be written exactly as I wrote it, for whatever reason). But REPLACING an artist? Fuck no. There is no excuse for making a machine do the work and then to take the credit just to make a quick easy buck on the backs of actual artists who were used WITHOUT THEIR CONSENT to train a THING to replace them. Nah fuck off my guy. I can clearly see you never did anything creative in your whole life, otherwise you’d get it.

Courts already expressed themselves, and what they said is basically copyright can’t be claimed for the throw up AIs come up with, which means corporations can’t use it to make money or sue anyone for using those products. Which means generated AI products are a whole bowl of nothing legally, and have no identity nor any value. The whole reason commissions are expensive is that someone has spent money, time and effort to make the thing you asked of them, and that’s why corresponding them with money is right.

Also, why can’t AI be used to automatize the shit jobs and allow us to do the creative work? Why are artists and creatives being pushed out of doing the jobs only humans can do? Like this is the thing that makes me furious: that STEM bros are blowing each other in the fields over humans being pushed out of humanity. Without once thinking AI is much more apt at replacing THEIR jobs, but I’m not calling for their jobs to be removed. This is just a dystopic reality we’re barreling towards, and there are people who are HAPPY about humans losing what makes us human and speeding toward pure, total, complete misery. That’s why I’m emotional about this: because art is only, solely made by humans, and people create art to communicate something they have inside. And only humans can do that - and some animals, maybe. Machines have nothing inside. They are nothing, they are only tools. It’s like asking a hammer to write its own poetry, it’s just insane.

Why not? Hollywood is full to the brim with people suing for copyright infringement. And sometimes they win. Why should it be different for AI companies?