While Americans still have not adopted mask-wearing as a general norm, were wearing masks more than ever before. Mask-wearing is mandated in California, and in many counties masks are near-universal in public spaces. So I have started wondering: Does wearing a mask change our social behavior and our emotional inclinations? And if mask-wearing does indeed change the fabric of our interactions, is that one reason why the masks are not more popular in the U.S.?

When no one can see our countenances, we may behave differently. One study found that children wearing Halloween masks were more likely to break the rules and take more candy. The anonymity conferred by masks may be making it easier for protesters to knock down so many statues.

And indeed, people have long used masks to achieve a kind of plausible deniability. At carnival festivities around the world people wear masks, and this seems to encourage greater revelry, drunkenness and lewd behavior, traits also associated with masked balls. The mask creates another persona. You can act a little more outrageously, knowing that your town or village, a few days later, will regard that as a different you.

Read more:
OPINION EXCHANGE | Why Americans are having an emotional reaction to masks - Minneapolis Star Tribune

I dont watch a lot of basketball. If Im a fan of any team, its the Indiana Pacers. I watched them all the time when Reggie Miller was at his peak and I was dumb enough to believe they ever had a real shot at winning a championship. Now I just watch the playoffs and finals. I dont even know 90% of the players in the league anymore, I just like big sports spectacles with stakes and tension.

The absolute grossest thing about watching the NBAs television product right now is the jersey ads. I didnt even know it was a thing that happened until I turned on a playoff game a few years ago and all of a sudden the Cleveland Cavaliers had a Goodyear logo on their chest. The Pacers were among the very last to adopt a corporate sponsor of their jersey, but they eventually slapped on a big ugly Motorola logo.

Thereve been talks for a while now about the MLB doing something similar and turning their jersey sleeves into sellable ad-space. Despite how much baseballs cultural relevancy has declined, the idea of ancient teams like the Yankees, Cubs, or Reds sporting a fat RAGU CHUNKY SAUCE logo is just obscene.

There hasnt really been anything tangible pointing to the NFL doing jersey ads, but if basketball has already done it and baseball is planning and hoping for it, you can safely assume its on footballs mind.

The NFLs reach is so massive. Its viewership so entirely eclipses all other sports in America that selling ad-space on jerseys would be the most visible (and, for the advertiser, expensive) incarnation of the jersey ad in the country. Football teams covering uniforms in ads wouldnt feel quite as nothing is sacred as if and when baseball does it, but it would be one of the most blatant expressions of greed in sports history.

When the NBA started making their players living, breathing, dribbling commercials, it was under the guise of the companies that pay for the privilege of helping to elevate the leagues and individual teams brands. This is obviously not reality. Based on my painstaking research method of living in Indiana, Ive determined Motorolas Pacers partnership has added a grand total of zero new Pacers fans.

The ads arent even aesthetically nice. They couldnt make them blend more seamlessly because then people might not notice them. Instead, you end up with trashy messes like the Thunder with a bright yellow and red Loves Travel Stops logo.

There isnt a corporate jersey sponsorship that would significantly increase the NFLs permeation of American culture. It feels like were already at critical mass there. So making Patrick Mahomes a literal billboard would be a cynical money-move with legitimately zero benefit for fans. Yet, it feels inevitable that at some point during the Chiefs upcoming 10 consecutive championships well be watching them hold up the Lombardi with everyones last names replaced with CHEEZ-IT SNAPD.

Sports is ultimately a business, and money means more to these leagues than anything. I get that. I wont even get that annoyed if and when the NFL tarps off the lower sections of stadiums and replaces seats with advertising signage. Id rather not be inundated with even more corporate logos during football games, but it somehow feels slightly less unappealing than watching games played in front of empty seats.

But the alternative to having ads on uniforms is to just not have ads on uniforms. Which is ultimately what makes the NBA already doing it and the MLB wanting to do it so gross. These arent leagues that need those ads to survive. So theyre selling space on their players bodies for no reason other than money-worship.

Hopefully the NFL has had a rare moment of self-awareness and realizes the money-grubbing image of selling jersey ads isnt worth the extra cash theyd bring in. But its difficult to imagine the NFL ever being self-aware, so thats probably a doomed hope.

When I was a kid and played Babe Ruth League baseball, our league functioned on the company-sponsored teams model. I didnt play for the Tigers or Bears, I played for McDonalds, Lynch Construction, and Pizza King. Granted, that was Babe Ruth League and not a professional enterprise, but it is an example of when jersey ads are not only palatable but ultimately beneficial.

McDonalds was the exception in my towns Babe Ruth League. Most of the teams were sponsored by local businesses or small local chains. Any funding they provided went into the league itself and the players and their families got discounts or free food from the business that sponsored their team. A pretty even exchange that had some benefit for everyone involved.

If you expand that concept from youth leagues to the pros, the smaller semi-pro and pro leagues that dont have nearly the exposure of the NBA, MLB, NFL, etc. can actually use the money they get from selling jersey ads. It still feels a little gross to see it on TV, but the players feel a bit less like living NASCAR stock cars when theyre not playing in a multi-billion dollar league.

Ads arent fun. Thats all this really comes down to. Ads arent fun, and putting them on a human when you already basically have infinite money tiptoes on the borderline of evil. Its that particular brand of capitalistic evil that weve been so drunk on for so long we think its normal.

It wont make me stop watching, but I will feel really slimy and rotten when I see Mahomes execute his first no-look pass wearing a glowing, digital neon visor sponsored by BAR HARBOR CLAM JUICE.

View post:
The Unnecessary Grossness of the Jersey Ad - Chiefs Digest

DUBLIN, July 2, 2020 /PRNewswire/ -- The "Diabetes Care Devices Market by Type (SMBG, CGMS, Lancets, Insulin Pumps, Insulin Pens, Insulin Syringes, Mobile Apps), Patient Care Settings (Hospitals & Specialty Clinics, Self & Home Care), and Country (Brazil, Russia, India, China) - Forecast to 2025" report has been added to ResearchAndMarkets.com's offering.

The diabetes care devices (BRIC) market size is projected to reach USD 4.3 billion by 2025 from USD 1.7 billion in 2020, at a CAGR of 16.2% during the forecast period.

The growth in this market is primarily attributed to the sharp increase in diabetes, increasing awareness of diabetes management due to the rising number of diabetes awareness campaigns and screening camps, favorable national health strategies, and government-led endorsement of medical devices.

By type, under the insulin delivery devices segment, insulin pens to hold the largest share during the forecast period

Within the type category, the diabetes care devices (BRIC) market has been segmented into blood glucose monitoring systems, insulin delivery devices, and diabetes management mobile applications. Within the insulin delivery devices segment, insulin pens held the largest share in the market. The increasing affordability of insulin pens, convenience, ease-of-use, and technological advancements in these devices that promote integrated diabetes management support the growth of this segment.

By end-user, the self/ home healthcare segment is expected to grow at a higher rate during the forecast period (2020-2025)

Based on end-user, the diabetes care devices (BRIC) market has been segmented into hospital & specialty clinics and self/home healthcare. The self/home healthcare segment is expected to grow at a higher CAGR due to the increasing awareness of self-management of diabetes, increasing portability of diabetes care devices, and technological innovations that provide real-time insights for patients and healthcare providers for decision-making regarding diabetes control and treatment planning.

India is projected to grow at the highest CAGR

China is expected to account for the largest share of the diabetes care devices (BRIC) market in 2019. The large share of this region can primarily be attributed to the sharp increase in the diabetic population in the past decade and endorsements of medical devices by the government. On the other hand, India is expected to witness the highest CAGR during the forecast period due to the increasing government investment in the medical devices industry, high prevalence of type 1 and gestational diabetes cases, and increasing diabetes awareness creation through campaigns and screening camps.

Key Topics Covered:

1 Introduction

2 Research Methodology

3 Executive Summary

4 Premium Insights 4.1 Diabetes Care Devices Market Overview 4.2 Diabetes Care Devices (Bric) Market: Geographic Growth Opportunities 4.3 Diabetes Care Devices (Bric) Market: Country Mix (2020-2025)

5 Industry Insights 5.1 Industry Trends 5.1.1 Growing Demand for Hybrid Closed-Loop Systems/Artificial Pancreas Device Systems 5.1.2 Smart Glucose Meters Enable Integrated Diabetes Management Solutions 5.1.3 Smart Insulin Pen Synchronization with Glucose Monitoring Systems Promotes Diabetes Data Sharing 5.1.4 Innovative Insulin Delivery Systems 5.2 Regulatory Analysis 5.2.1 China 5.2.2 India 5.2.3 Brazil 5.2.4 Russia 5.3 Covid-19 Impact on the Diabetes Care Devices (Bric) Market

6 Diabetes Care Devices Market, by Type 6.1 Introduction 6.2 Blood Glucose Monitoring Systems 6.2.1 Self-Monitoring Blood Glucose Monitoring Systems 6.2.1.1 Technological Innovations to Drive the Growth of Self-Monitoring Blood Glucose Monitoring Systems 6.2.2 Continuous Glucose Monitoring Systems 6.2.2.1 Increasing Collaborations, Partnerships, and Agreements Between Companies to Develop Integrated Cgm Systems to Drive the Growth of This Market 6.2.3 Test Strips/Test Papers 6.2.3.1 Shift Toward Non-Invasive Methods for Blood Glucose Monitoring to Restrain the Growth of This Market during the Forecast Period 6.2.4 Lancets/Lancing Devices 6.2.4.1 Rising Focus to Reduce the Chances of Infection and Accidental Pricking to Increase the Popularity of Safety Lancets during the Forecast Period 6.3 Insulin Delivery Devices 6.3.1 Insulin Pumps 6.3.1.1 Insulin Pumps Integrated with Continuous Glucose Monitoring Systems Offer the Benefits of Data Integration and Diabetes Management 6.3.2 Insulin Pens 6.3.2.1 the Convenience of Use of Insulin Pens and Increasing Affordability could Drive the Growth of This Segment during the Forecast Period 6.3.3 Insulin Syringes and Needles 6.3.3.1 Safety Concerns and Increasing Awareness of Affordable Alternatives in the Market could Restrain the Growth of This Segment during the Forecast Period 6.4 Diabetes Management Mobile Applications 6.4.1 Growing Adoption of Blood Glucose Tracking Apps and Increasing Awareness of Diabetes Among Patients to Drive Market Growth

7 Diabetes Care Devices Market, by Patient Care Settings 7.1 Introduction 7.2 Self/Home Healthcare 7.2.1 Increasing Affordability of Self-Monitoring Systems and Insulin Delivery Devices Has Fueled the Preference for Self/Home Healthcare 7.3 Hospitals & Diabetes Specialty Clinics 7.3.1 Rising Demand for Poc Testing in Hospitals Boosts the Market Growth

8 Diabetes Care Devices Market in BRIC Countries 8.1 Introduction 8.2 China: Diabetes Care Devices Market 8.2.1 Introduction 8.2.2 Market Drivers 8.2.2.1 Sharp Increase in Diabetes in the Past Decade 8.2.2.2 Favorable National Health Strategies 8.2.2.3 Government-Led Endorsement of the Medical Device Industry 8.2.3 Market Restraints 8.2.3.1 Traditional Chinese Medicine As an Alternative 8.2.3.2 High Cost of Advanced Diabetes Management Devices 8.2.4 Market Opportunities 8.2.4.1 Significant Advancements and Leveraging of Artificial Intelligence and Big Data 8.2.5 Market Challenges 8.2.5.1 Lack of Adherence of Patients to Recommended Diabetes Treatment Guidelines 8.3 India: Diabetes Care Devices Market 8.3.1 Introduction 8.3.2 Market Drivers 8.3.2.1 High Prevalence of Diabetes 8.3.2.2 Government's Make in India Campaign to Encourage Local Manufacturing of Medical Devices 8.3.2.3 Diabetes Awareness Campaigns and Screening Camps 8.3.3 Market Restraints 8.3.3.1 Lack of Accessibility to Healthcare 8.3.3.2 Inadequate Health Insurance Coverage 8.3.4 Market Opportunities 8.3.4.1 Rising Adoption of Mhealth 8.3.5 Market Challenges 8.3.5.1 Shortage of Healthcare Professionals in Diabetes Management 8.4 Brazil: Diabetes Care Devices Market 8.4.1 Introduction 8.4.2 Market Drivers 8.4.2.1 High Prevalence of Diabetes 8.4.2.2 Favorable Government Policies 8.4.3 Market Restraints 8.4.3.1 Lack of Awareness of Diabetes Care 8.4.3.2 High Prices of Advanced Diabetes Care Devices 8.4.4 Market Opportunities 8.4.4.1 Increasing Penetration of Smartphones and Rising Focus on Digital Health to Drive the Growth of Diabetes Management Platforms and Diabetes Management Mobile Applications 8.4.5 Market Challenges 8.4.5.1 Strict Regulatory Guidelines and Regulatory Process for Medical Devices 8.5 Russia: Diabetes Care Devices Market 8.5.1 Introduction 8.5.2 Market Drivers 8.5.2.1 Rising Elderly Population 8.5.2.2 Increasing Rate of Obesity 8.5.3 Market Restraints 8.5.3.1 Large Number of Undiagnosed Diabetics 8.5.4 Market Opportunities 8.5.4.1 Government Spending on Healthcare 8.5.4.2 Rising Investment of Pharma Market Players to Establish Local Manufacturing Plants 8.5.5 Market Challenges 8.5.5.1 Low Adoption of Glucose Monitoring Systems

9 Competitive Landscape 9.1 Overview 9.2 Product Benchmarking 9.3 Geographic Reach of the Top Market Players (2019) 9.4 R&D Expenditure: Key Players in the Diabetes Care Devices (Bric) Market 9.5 Market Share Analysis 9.5.1 Brazil: Diabetes Care Devices Market Share Analysis 9.5.2 Russia: Diabetes Care Devices Market Share Analysis 9.5.3 India: Diabetes Care Devices Market Share Analysis 9.5.4 China: Diabetes Care Devices Market Share Analysis 9.6 Competitive Situation and Trends 9.6.1 Partnerships, Collaborations, and Agreements 9.6.2 Product Approvals, Launches, and Upgrades

10 Company Profiles 10.1 F. Hoffman-La Roche Ltd. 10.2 Abbott 10.3 Ascensia Diabetes Care Holdings Ag 10.4 Dexcom, Inc. 10.5 Medtronic Plc 10.6 B. Braun Melsungen Ag 10.7 Becton, Dickinson and Company 10.8 Acon Laboratories, Inc. 10.9 Arkray, Inc. 10.10 Sanofi 10.11 Novo Nordisk A/S 10.12 Terumo Corporation 10.13 Ypsomed 10.14 Sinocare, Inc. 10.15 Agamatrix Holdings Llc 10.16 Lifescan 10.17 Sd Biosensor, Inc. 10.18 Microgene Diagnostic Systems Pvt. Ltd. 10.19 Dr. Morepen 10.20 Bionime Corporation 10.21 Rossmax International Ltd.

For more information about this report visit https://www.researchandmarkets.com/r/tbnrlb

Research and Markets also offers Custom Research services providing focused, comprehensive and tailored research.

Media Contact:

Research and Markets Laura Wood, Senior Manager [emailprotected]

For E.S.T Office Hours Call +1-917-300-0470 For U.S./CAN Toll Free Call +1-800-526-8630 For GMT Office Hours Call +353-1-416-8900

U.S. Fax: 646-607-1904 Fax (outside U.S.): +353-1-481-1716

SOURCE Research and Markets

http://www.researchandmarkets.com

Excerpt from:
$4.3 Billion BRIC Diabetes Care Devices Industry to 2025 - India is Projected to Grow at the Highest CAGR - PRNewswire

'The Order' is perfect pandemic escapism

Dan Gentile

June 29, 2020Updated: June 29, 2020 4a.m.

Despite the thousands of adults who self-identify as Hufflepuffs, Harry Potter is still undeniably a story written for children. As an aging fan of the series, I understand the nostalgia, but today's hellscape makes it hard to look back on the adventures of some wand-fizzling pre-teens and feel the same sense of dread at a villain whose name isn't spoken aloud. That said, magic is still tight. There's nothing more appealing right now than pure escapism, but given the assault of bad news staring up at me from my phone, keeping my attention requires a show that's a little bit ... savage. Let me introduce you to that series, which is currently blazing up Netflix's top 10 charts: "The Order."

RELATED: How HBO Max's new Anna Kendrick rom-com could revolutionize streaming

Read the original:
This chart-topping Netflix show is like an R-rated Harry Potter - SFGate

Moments in golfs recent history have taken important steps toward making the game more inclusive of the LGBTQ community. Two examples: TPC Harding Park hosting the inaugural Pride Open, organized by Greg Fitzgerald, the first out, gay male PGA teaching pro, and the USGA raising Pride flags at its headquarters in June and sharing an image of the flags on the organizations social-media account. To help make you and your course more welcoming, we asked the advice of leaders in the LGBTQ golf community. One of the most encouraging aspects of this education was finding that big change can start with small, deliberate efforts.

Train employees on inclusive terms and language

As a golf club, its important to educate your staff members, to make sure they know to be inclusive and nonjudgmental, says LPGA Tour pro Mel Reid. Educating and communicating with their members is another big thing.

Part of that education is in how players are greeted when they arrive at a course. For example, asking a woman if shes going to be playing with her husband when she arrives at a course reveals the assumption that she is straight. Simple substitutions, like using the word partner instead of husband or wife, can make a big difference.

You are using an unsupported version of Internet Explorer. Please upgrade to Internet Explorer 11 or use a different web browser.

You dont know that these really subtle things that you say can make a person feel not safe, or make them feel like they dont belong, says Molly Gallatin, Senior Director of Brand and Content Strategy at the PGA of America. Just like you dont want to assume someones playing ability when they enter a golf course, you dont also want to assume what their lifestyle is.

Put a Pride symbol at your course

Fitzgerald talked about this idea with us first at the Pride Open in 2019, and we spoke about it again for this story. The LGBTQ community is finally feeling accepted in the golf industry, getting out and about and playing and practicing, Fitzgerald says. Whats really helping is feeling accepted and seeing theres some show of invitation or acceptance from golf courses, public or privatethings like a little sticker in the window or a Pride flag on their websites do wonders to make LGBTQ golfers feel welcome. Well be active and looking for those symbols at golf facilities.

Every leader in the LGBTQ golf community we spoke to for this story agreed that this is a critical step to welcoming LGBTQ golfers to a course.

It signifies safety to a lot of queer folks, says former Symetra Tour player Maya Reddy.

Courses could even have employees show a sign of support for Pride, says Tisha Alyn Abrea, a pro golfer and trick-shot artist whom you might have seen on Instagram. If I saw something so small, like the guy at the front desk rocking a little rainbow ribbon on his hat, I would immediately know, being part of the LGBTQ community, that makes me feel so much better, Alyn says. Id feel much more comfortable to say, My girlfriend and I would love to play a round today, or hold her hand, just be a more comfortable environment.

Pride stickers are available at thewelcomingproject.org.

Make your course known to the LGBTQ community

Gallatin says that listing your course online with a local LGBTQ community center is a good way to let LGBTQ golfers know they are welcome.

If someone, lets say, in the LGBTQ community is looking to play next weekend with some friends, and theyre wondering to themselves, theres that fear in the back of their heads, Is this a safe space? Is this a course where were going to catch some flack? Gallatin says. There are little things you can do as a businessyou can engage ahead of time with an LGBTQ community center in your area. Theyre easy to find, and typically they have lists of business that support and are LGBTQ-friendly. When I moved, that was the first thing I looked up. Get your business listed.

Increase self-awareness in interactions with playing partners

Tour pro Tadd Fujikawa says that not all homophobic comments are obvious to people, and sometimes not even intentional. But he says golfers need to become aware that things said, even if intended in jest, can have detrimental effects on players around you.

Most of the time when homophobic remarks are made, theyre not really directed at a person, its maybe even directed at themselves, Fujikawa says. It can be very triggering. Its something we need to be aware of. Just a small comment, saying something jokingly, you dont realize how hurtful that can be to someone. You hit a bad tee shot or hit a short tee shot and say, That was so gay. They can feel totally excluded from the sport.

Make an evening at your course open to all golfers

Lots of courses have a mens night and a womens night. Fujikawa and Gallatin suggest creating space for LGBTQ golfers by having a night where all golfers are welcome.

Courses could acknowledge an LGBTQ day, where obviously everyone is welcome regardless of race, gender, sexual preference, etc., Fujikawa says. You could get the message out that way and totally welcome everybody regardless of who they are and really just bring everyone together as one.

Gallatin agrees, adding that you could call it New Player league, or do an All Families Welcome league.

Dont just celebrate LGBTQ golfers during Pride Month

As it stands right now, when athletes of marginalized identities are included in the conversation, its in response to a social movement, to a certain holiday, to a tragic event that may have happened, Reddy says. And while, yes, its good to speak out around those times, it does send the message that athletes of marginalized identities are only valuable in specific moments and not the entire year.

See the article here:
How you and your course can be more welcoming to the LGBTQ golf community - Golf Digest

Australians are inclined to wonder whether there is real understanding in the United States of the requirements imposed upon America by its world leadership, wrote historian Gordon Greenwood in Foreign Affairs magazine in July 1957.

At times there has been a tendency in the United States to assume that the essential function of an ally is to accept unquestioningly the American outlook and the American political tactic.

These words could have been written today. Australians are yet again left wondering about the wisdom and self-awareness of American leadership as the US stumbles in the face of public health crisis, prosecutes a trade war with the country that is most of the worlds largest trading partner, and sanctions International Criminal Court officials investigating alleged US and allied war crimes.

The 2020 Lowy Institute Poll, released today, finds Australians feeling unsafe, pessimistic about the economy and anxious about ties with China. These fears may have led to a bump in support for the alliance with the US: 78% of Australians say the alliance is very or fairly important for Australias security, an increase of six points from 2019.

But on almost every other measure trust, warmth and confidence towards our American friends Australian attitudes are at a low point. President Donald Trump remains unpopular with most Australians, with only one in three expressing confidence in him. The only world leaders who are ranked below Trump are Chinas Xi Jinping and North Koreas Kim Jong-un.

Australians are generally supportive of Trumps efforts to reach out to North Korea and build closer ties with Russias Vladimir Putin, but three-quarters disapprove of Trumps America first policies. Criticising the defence spending of allies, withdrawing from the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations and leaving the Paris climate accord all register very poorly with Australians.

Many more Australians aged 1829 years old have confidence in Xi Jinping (30%) than those that have confidence in Donald Trump (18%).

The Australia-US relationship has been under strain before. Many of the shifts in Australian public opinion today were evident in the mid-to-late 2000s. Then, too, Australians were disillusioned with the US and the war on terror, anxious about the climate, deep in a financial crisis. Those sentiments also dissipated with time. And Australias alliance has survived many of these rifts even the Richard Nixon years, when Australias then prime minister Gough Whitlam opposed nuclear weapons and wanted Australia to become non-aligned.

In 2020, warmth towards the US is at the same levels as in 2006. But trust has dropped even lower than that period to record lows only 51% of Australians trust the US to act responsibly in the world. This is more than 30 points below the trust that Australians expressed during the administration of President Barack Obama.

The youngest Australians polled, aged 1829 years, are particularly sceptical of the US. Only a quarter of this generation say Australias alliance with the US is very important for the countrys security, a view held by 57% of Australians over 60. And many Gen Z and Millennial Australians hold equivalent levels of trust in China and the US.

Many more Australians aged 1829 years old have confidence in Xi Jinping (30%) than those that have confidence in Donald Trump (18%).

When asked to choose the more important relationship to Australia, 54% of 1829 year old Australians say China, compared with 30% of Australians over 60. And seemingly more pragmatic, the majority of Gen Z (52%) would allow Chinese companies to supply technology for critical infrastructure in Australia, only a third of those over 45 would do the same. Half of the Boomer generation see foreign interference in Australian politics as a critical threat, compared with 28% of 1829 year old Australians.

Older Australians, who remember life in the Cold War, view China in a particularly threatening light, and seem less disillusioned with the US. The Lowy Poll shows that Australians trust in China is in free fall, and almost all Australians (94%) want to find other markets to reduce economic dependence on China. But the majority of young Australians (54%) say China is the most important relationship to Australia. By contrast, 64% of Australians over 60 say that the US is the most important relationship.

In some ways, much like the fluctuating warmth towards the US, these divides are not new. Unlike American views of foreign policy that are divided between left and right, the generational divide in Australia has been clear in the past on climate change and immigration, and now on great-power competition.

This years Lowy Poll was fielded in March well before the US descended into the depths of a public health crisis. Later polling in April revealed that all Australians were disappointed in the US response: only one in ten Australians said the US had handled the Covid-19 outbreak well, compared with 31% saying China handled it well, and 92% saying Australia handled it well.

Many Australians have been betting on Donald Trump and America first as an aberration that will be rectified at the ballot box. The past few months of pandemic and police brutality have shaken that core belief, particularly for young Australians. The reliability of Australiasgreat and powerful friend has long been a question, but it looms larger in 2020.

See the original post here:
Generation why? Younger Australians wary of United States - The Interpreter

If the current state of the world has you scared, angry or sad, Icant help. But if youre bored and its hard to imagine that boredom is not one mixer in the cocktail of anxieties during isolated lockdown Ican recommend an eerily timely new book, Out of My Skull.

With nary a dull sentence (Harvard University Press editors must have checked diligently to ensure that the authors avoided the most obvious of sand traps here), psychology professors James Danckert and John D. Eastwood trace the facets of a seemingly nebulous and trivial condition, pointing to methods of transcending the titular phenomenon. In this boring season, it feels meta to think about boredom and, paradoxically, not at all monotonous (just as reading about food is not fattening and watching sports does not improve physical health).

Boredom is a wake-up call, a message from your psyche telling you to do something different or just do something. But its not as easy as exhorting someone (or yourself) simply to snap out of it, the writers caution: We would not tell someone who is drowning and unable to swim to simply swim to shore.

Not in itself dangerous, boredom can trigger unhealthy consequences such as depression and anxiety, poor self-esteem, risky choices and a lack of purpose. Trying to escape it, we may fall into a rabbit-hole (internet addiction, excessive gaming, television bingeing), which masks but does not cure the predicament. The trick is to embrace boredom and use it motivationally: make lemonade out of your lemony mood by finding an activity that provides some kind of growth, re-engagement.

In crisp, jargon-free prose calculated to stave off any whiff of ennui amodel of academic crossover writing Danckert and Eastwood explain that when boredom makes us sluggish or restless, we should pay attention to it and understand it. Being bored is quite fascinating and maybe, just maybe, it might even be helpful. We require asense of agency, since When this need is fulfilled, we flourish. When this need is thwarted, we feel bored, disengaged. A call to action, boredom forces you to ask a consequential question: What should Ido?

The book defines boredom in myriad ways. To be bored is to be painfully stuck in the here and now, bereft of any capacity for self determination, the authors explain. It is alack of meaning, a state of disconnection, a time when our mental capacities, our skills and talents, lay idle, our mental capacity under-utilised, accentuated by deficient attention or abreak in the flow of thought. Four telltale signs time dragging on; struggling to concentrate; activities feeling pointless; and lethargy produce the uncomfortable feeling of wanting, but being unable, to engage in satisfying activity.

Psychological studies show that bored people, seeking relief, may be prone to self-harm, drug or alcohol misuse, problem eating and impulsivity. Boredom predicts problematic smartphone use, according to one study: The more bored you are, the more likely your attachment to your phone will be unhealthy and, instead of alleviating boredom, it will likely make things worse in the long run.

At the extreme, violent and psychopathic behaviour may erupt: a German nurse suspected of murdering a hundred people claimed he killed to alleviate boredom. In a study of Danish prison inmates, many reported that boredom and the desire to seek stimulation had landed them in trouble.

Some studies report positive consequences: people may be more philanthropically generous, to recover a sense of meaning that boredom occludes. (Perhaps that is why telethons tend to be so stultifying, the authors conjecture.) But boredom, stimulating a drive to affirm an attenuated sense of identity, may also provoke political extremism and tribalism. To sustain peace, Danckert and Eastwood write, people must be able to author their own lives and find meaning. Otherwise boredom will flourish and, in turn, give rise to a fascination with violence and the glorification of war. Boredom alone will not precipitate war, but it may set the stage: When bored, we cast about looking for something that will make us feel as though our lives have purpose. A peaceful society, conversely, provides plentiful sources of happiness and engagement.

The cultural history of boredom goes back to Seneca, who linked it to disgust: How long the same things? Surely Iwill yawn, Iwill sleep, Iwill eat, Iwill be thirsty, Iwill be cold, Iwill be hot. Is there no end?All things pass that they may return. Ido nothing new. Isee nothing new. Sometimes this makes me seasick [nauseous].

Charles Dickens gets credit for introducing the word boredom into English usage (in Bleak House, obviously). A smorgasbord of other terms and tropes include the German langeweile (literally, long while: interminably stretching time); in Middle English it was spleen, in Latin acedia (which became the sin of sloth, from slow), in Italian pococurante (caring little).

William James wrote of irremediable flatness; Sren Kierkegaard thought boredom was the root of all evil, as it rests upon the nothingness that winds its way through existence. Martin Heidegger describes a continuum from superficial boredom (such as waiting for a late train as time drags on) to profound boredom, which has no object or source. It is timeless and represents a kind of emptiness in which we get a terrifying view of reality. This existentialist morass, Danckert and Eastwood write, spotlights the crux of boredom: the sense that things lack meaning.

Humanists have generated a small but distinguished collection of monographs including Boredom: The Literary History of a State of Mind (1995), by University of Virginia English professor Patricia Meyer Spacks; University of Bergen philosopher Lars Svendsens APhilosophy of Boredom (2005); and Boredom: ALively History (2008), by University of Calgary classicist Peter Toohey. Out of My Skull extends this interdisciplinarity into psychology, although certainly Mihaly Csikszentmihalyis Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience (1990), about happiness, positivity and fulfilling involvement with life, is an influential predecessor.

Indeed, the final chapter, Just go with the flow, uses a Csikszentmihalyian template to explain how we may surmount boredom by finding abalance between what the moment demands of us and our ability to skillfully meet those demands. We need a Goldilocks equilibrium just right so our experiences are not too simple nor too complex, either of which disgruntles. We must feel in control, with clear options and goals that encourage us to throw ourselves into the activity at hand; boredom-prone people are good at procrastinating, talking themselves out of embarking on things.

Our lives flow most effectively when we are focused, not distracted. If bored people are excessively self-aware and anxiously self-doubting, people in a state of flow may find that all awareness of the self dissipates and their experiences, even if they require skill and training, seem effortless. For a bored person, time plods on, but people in the flow feel liberated from time. Interest, curiosity, exploration, even just pleasantly quiet relaxation, all become possible, as they are not to the person suffering from boredom.

Randy Malamud is Regents professor of English at Georgia State University and the author of Email (2019) and Strange, Bright Crowds of Flowers: ACultural History (forthcoming).

Out of My Skull: The Psychology of Boredom By James Danckert and John D. Eastwood Harvard University Press, 272pp, 22.95 ISBN 9780674984677 Published 26 June 2020

James Danckert, a professor in the department of psychology at the University of Waterloo, Canada, was born and grew up in Melbourne, Australia and studied literature and psychology at the University of Melbourne before going on to graduate work at LaTrobe University and then postdoctoral research at the University of Western Ontario.

John D. Eastwood, an associate professor in the department of psychology at York University, Canada, was born and raised in Toronto. After studying psychology at the University of Toronto, he went on to a PhD in clinical psychology at the University of Waterloo and now claims that having one foot in the clinical realm and another in the basic science of cognition shapes my academic career.

Asked what led them to the slightly improbable topic of boredom, Danckert says he feel[s] boredoms sting more than Iwould like and so want[s] to understandit, although adding that his brother sustained a head injury at the age of 19 and, during recovery, talked about being bored and hatingit, which led him to want to know more about how his brain had changed. Eastwood, meanwhile, was drawn to study the unengaged mind because of my curiosity about how the structure of thought impacts feeling, as well as observations of my patients who struggled with unremitting boredom.

As to ways of coping with boredom at a time of social distancing and other restrictions, Danckert suggests that if we can calm down and figure out what matters to us most, Ithink we can conquerit. Eastwood adds that we should focus on internal factors such as emotional avoidance that can thwart our agency from the inside and leave us bored. We have some control over internal causes of boredom, and self-determination is precisely whats at stake when stuck in boredom.

Matthew Reisz

Continue reading here:
Out of My Skull: The Psychology of Boredom, by James Danckert and John D. Eastwood - Times Higher Education (THE)

Last Friday, fans of shock-jockery, giving offenceand early seasons of The Apprentice received a major blow to their existence: Katie Hopkins, the hard-right social media personality, waspermanently suspended from Twitter, the platform upon which she built her international notoriety. While celebrities typically fade into the ether when banned from social media, all was not lost in the case of Hopkins. The former MailOnline columnistappeared to swiftly pivot to a new app, Parler, which claimed to reject Twitters perceived culture of bans and would let hersaywhatever the hell she wanted.

Hopkins' fans downloaded Parler and began following and supporting hernew verified account. She posted that she was considering taking legal action against Twitter, and asked fans if theyd be willing to help fund this.Acolyteseagerly agreed and began donating to a link she posted on the site. But after $500 had been donated, it was revealed that the account was not run by Hopkins at all, but had accidentally been verified despite Parlers allegedly flawlessprocess. The CEO, John Matze, was forced to post a public apology.

The Hopkins fiasco has helped catapult this otherwise low-profile social media app to greater attentionin the UK, with right-wing commentators, Conservative MPs, and jaded Twitter users creating accounts in recentdays. However, in other parts of the world, Parlers existence has been heavily checkered and already holds particular connotations. And while its popularity may not be equivalent to that of Facebook or Twitter, its prominence is rapidly rising.

Parler launched in August 2018 and was billed as the oneunbiased social media platform. It followed in the wakeof Gab, another free speech project, which launched publicly the year before. Like Gab, Parler presented itself as a placewhere no one would be banned, have their content taken down, or even experience a brief suspension. It quickly became synonymous with Trump supporters and home to Twitter-banned icons of the alt-right.

Parler exploded in popularity in May 2019, when Politico reported that Trump campaign manager Brad Parscale was considering setting up an account for the president to pre-empt feared censorship on Twitter. The appalso made headlines a few weeks later when Saudis supporters of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman joined the app over Twitter free speech concerns (the influx wasso largeit temporarily made Parler inoperable).

Instead of retweets, usersgive echos;instead of likes there areupvotes (much like Reddit); and the reach of each post is made publicly available, with a live counter of how manyusers have seen a particular post. Its easy to find anti-Semitic, Islamophobic and pro-conspiracy theoryhashtags and, though community guidelines do exist, the repercussions of breaking them appearto be non-existent.

Endorsements for Parler from popular figures on the left or the centre are nowhere to be found. However, the app does boast the approval ofalt-right starssuch as Candace Owens, Milo Yiannopolousand Gavin McInnes. Parscale has since createdhis own account and met with Parlers chief executivein the White House last summer. And while Trump himself doesnt have an account, several of his children (his close advisers) do.

In the UK over the last week, Parler has become a major political talking point. Right-wing pundits, such as Tories like to party too Brexiteer Emily Hewertson and formerBreitbart UK editor Raheem Kassam, have advocated using the app in lieu of Twitter, and at least 13 MPs appear to have created accounts. Conservative activist Darren Grimes posted on Parler last night: Ive just heard from Parler there have been 200,000 UK sign ups over recent days, using the hashtag #Twexit, the apps reliable rallying cry, which becomespopular every time a new wave of people migratefrom Twitter to use it.

Hewertson tweeted about Parler on Monday afternoon, encouraging users not to use the app as an excuse to be racist. The concept is good, she subsequently posted, Its just a shame that every app has to attract extremists. Would love to see some more people from the other side of the argument on there. Needs balance.

Although Parlers mainstream popularity in the UK is only just beginning, any lingering hope of balance has already been thwarted. Despite its lunges at self-awareness through its branding and message, Parler exists as an echo chamber forhard-right views.

See the rest here:
What is Parler? Inside the pro-Trump unbiased platform - New Statesman

President Donald Trump's re-election campaign is banking heavily on its ability to turn out what it believes is his excited base to defeat presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden. And at the same time, he seeks to depress turnout for Biden by defining him in ways that are unpalatable to the key voting blocs he needs to win.

But Trump keeps shooting himself in the foot and putting his campaign (and the White House) on the defensive. Take the most recent example: Trump's statement at his rally Saturday in Tulsa, Oklahoma, that he had told officials to slow down the testing of Americans for COVID-19. Days later, his campaign and the White House are still doing damage control.

Statements like these leave Trump and his allies unable to go on the offense against Biden. Trump has, for instance, sought repeatedly to question Biden's mental fitness including multiple times last week. However, not only is Biden's health not exactly a major topic of national conversation, but, when it has been, the conversation has also spawned questions about Trump's own faculties.

It all feels very much like the same playbook Trump and his campaign employed to secure their unexpected victory against Hillary Clinton in 2016, down to their repeated claims that there is an enthusiasm gap between the campaigns and that Biden has "zero energy."

Get the think newsletter.

On the surface, Trump is not wrong; his base is far more excited about him than Democrats are about their candidate, just as in 2016. However, Trump and his advisers have seriously misread the electoral landscape in 2020 if they think the metric against which they should be measuring enthusiasm for Trump is enthusiasm for Biden.

Long before COVID-19 devastated Americans and the economy and the horrific public killing of George Floyd, the American electorate was tired and angry. It is tired of the incessant drama emanating from the current occupant of the Oval Office, and it is angry at how this presidency has played out because of that drama.

That is why new voter registration surged before the 2018 midterms and actual voter turnout 53.4 percent was the highest it had been for a midterm election in over 50 years, not because of overwhelming enthusiasm for individual Democrats.

Reliable Republican voters like suburban women and senior citizens have been increasingly drifting toward Democratic candidates in both polls and elections since Trump took office, not because Democrats have been winning them over, but because Trump and Republicans have been losing them. And a recent Fox News poll showing Biden with a 10-point lead over Trump among voters 65 and older only confirms the growing problem for him.

And these are not the voters he can count on staying home and not voting.

Trump and his team's plan to secure a second term by trying to drive down voter enthusiasm for Biden and depressing Democratic turnout is built on a shaky foundation one that rests on a stunning lack of self-awareness and examination. Certainly, Trump broke the mold of how presidents are elected and behave in office, and some Americans love that. But he and his team have failed to recognize how deeply other Americans do not like it, let alone acknowledge those who are fed up with the chaos and commotion.

Voters might not have much of an opinion about or even like Joe Biden, but they are openly expressing their desire to vote for him simply because he is not Donald Trump.

The president's campaign, which is being advised by Karl Rove, would undoubtedly note that, in 2004 and 2012, the challengers to Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama did not benefit from anti-Bush or anti-Obama voters; with relatively low turnout, those voters stayed home in too great numbers, unconvinced of the necessity to turn out or of their own power.

But Trump is neither Bush nor Obama to the voters who have serious problems with him, and that line of thinking fails to account for what Biden represents to millions of voters: stability and tranquility after a years-long Trumpian tempest. He is, unlike John Kerry or Mitt Romney, a reminder of an era of relative calm.

That is why Trump's demeanor and governing style are self-sabotaging his re-election prospects. Look at Evangelical Christians: Trump's support among white Evangelicals has dropped by 15 points since March and now stands at 62 percent. The reasons seem to be his handling of COVID-19 and the fallout from the killing of George Floyd. While the polling reflects white Evangelical voters nationally, rather than in key states like Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan and Arizona, it is such a steep drop that alarm bells should be going off within the campaign.

But with each and every outlandish utterance or tweet, Trump fuels the exhaustion and anger voters are feeling toward him, rather than toward the system, and pushes away voters from key voting blocs that he desperately needs to win. Biden might not have as much enthusiasm from his base as Trump, but Trump certainly is enthusiastically pushing voters toward Biden.

While he and his campaign naively still hope that they will be able to direct the focus on Biden, both the media and voters are not about to ask, in the midst of a pandemic, a recession and a conversation on police reform, "Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"

Original post:
Trump thinks he'll win because voting for Biden is boring. But voting against Trump is exciting. - NBCNews.com

By K. J. Moran

On Monday evening, June 22, 2020, the Board of Flying V Theatre Company terminated Cofounder and Artistic Director Jason Schlafstein following a weekend of sexual misconduct and harassment allegations published against him across social media. At the same time Associate Artistic Director Jon Rubin tendered his resignation.

Just three days earlier, the morning of Juneteenth 2020a day that should have been reserved to honor and celebrate the history and resilience of Black folks fighting against racism in the United Statesa thread appeared on Twitter accusing Jason Schlafstein of sexual misconduct. The anonymous first-person allegation claimed that Schlafstein had abducted her while incapacitated at a party and taken her to a second location without her consent. The thread also alleged he later invited this same woman to audition for the company and asked her out during the audition. Within two hours a screenshot excerpt of this thread was shared in public posts and private groups on Facebook, where the allegationswhich Schlafstein denieswere quickly echoed by others.

For years, working artists have relied on the whisper networks of DC theater to hear which theaters to avoid, which artists were abusive. But as the Facebook posts gained traction, dozens of actors and designers came forward, no longer whispering but screaming, demanding a statement from Schlafstein and Flying V. Multiple stories of Schlafsteins alleged verbal abuse and sexual harassment were shared, some dating as far back as his days the University of Maryland in the mid-aughts. Saturday afternoon Schlafstein responded on his Facebook page in a public statement, in which he apologized for the hurt he caused:

I take complete ownership of these mistakes, for which I have been and remain extremely sorry and ashamed. To be specific and clear, during that time I asked out women who were working for or were connected to Flying V or otherwise expressed my interest in them, and that was and is not acceptable. Im embarrassed that I had to make that mistake and to be appropriately called out to have seen the problematic nature of those interactions and that pattern of behavior. I am absolutely aware now how those actions, however unintentioned, fall into a predatory paradigm While I have never intentionally tried to make anyone feel uncomfortable at Flying V or acted with malice, this does not absolve me in any way of my errors. I do want to state emphatically that while I have been critically unaware of how my position has affected the view of my actions in a moment, I have genuinely never tried to actively use my power or position for sexual or romantic gain. I fully respect and understand my actions have been interpreted and received in that way, which is legitimate, but it is important for me to clarify that has never been my strategy or goal.

The post received extensive backlash and calls for his resignation, and within five hours Schlafstein deleted his account.

The Board of Directors released a statement Saturday night detailing the Boards decision to put Schlafstein on administrative leave:

The result of [the Boards 2017] investigation was a determination that Jason had inappropriately crossed professional and personal boundaries by expressing romantic interest in female members of the community in a way that could reasonably be understood as an abuse of power. After a series of meetings with Jason and other Flying V stakeholders, the Board decided that the issues identified did not warrant termination, but that any future recurrences of similar behavior could alter that decision. This determination was made in significant part due to a serious commitment by Jason to do the work necessary to understand his position of power within Flying V and to avoid actions that could cause any member of the Flying V community to feel that he was using his power for personal gain.

Community members continued to rally in the comments for Schlafsteins resignation or firing, particularly in light of the Boards admitted prior knowledge of Schlafsteins behavior. At a special meeting Monday night, the Board fired him.

Jason did not lose his job or his company because of one mistake or even a pattern of mistakes. The upheaval at Flying V is not solely because of Jasons personal failings or those of the Boardit is a direct result of white and male supremacys hold on nerd culture and American theater. Flying V failed its community this weekend and over the years because it was designed to fail since its inception.

Flying V has held a unique place in the DC theater scene for almost a decade. Since its founding in 2011, it has been the nerdy home of 90s nostalgia, video game tributes to Chekhov, comic book wrestling matches, and all types of theatre for people who dont think they like theatre. Its mission is to disrupt the structures in traditional American theater that have shown us the same tired interpretations of Shakespeare and Ibsen for centuries in favor of creating space for new and devised work. Its vague call for audiences to expect awesome, be awesome represented the quirky, geek theater Flying V became known forwhere high culture met pop culture and, inevitably, rape culture.

Sexism and white supremacy were woven into the DNA of Flying V by the very nature of whose stories were told, and who was chosen to tell those stories over the companys nine seasons. Whether intentional or not, Flying V created a space to share art by and for white men. It was not until the companys fourth season that they included women in director or playwright roles. While there have been a few Black directors and devisers, there has yet to be a full production at the company by a Black playwright. As the company grew, more people of color and women were employed as designers, actors, and even staff, but the people in power remained overwhelmingly male and white. As of January 2020, men comprised 71 percent of the staff, 58 percent of the company members, and 70 percent of the Board of Directors. No women of color are on staff, and no women were in the top three positions of the company until the recent hiring of their first female managing director.

At first glance, these may seem simply like hiring choices, but a choice in hiring or producing does not stand alone: it is indicative of the cultural mores and institutions that uphold those in power, even if they do not deserve to be. Jason is not Flying V, and Flying V is not Jason, but his legacy is deeply entwined with the gender and racial discrimination that was key to Flying Vs commercial and critical success. The thing about whiteness, and the thing about patriarchy, is that they are detrimental to everyone, including the oppressors. Flying V suffered in its first years when their first seasons were primarily written and directed by white men. Commercial success came only when they expanded the voices includedit is no accident that the first writing team to include a woman at Flying V created their highest commercial success to date (You, or Whatever I Can Get).

When I first started working at Flying V, I was struck by how male the community was. I always feel uncomfortable in predominantly male spaces, particularly theatrical ones, because I have survived sexual abuse at the hands of an actor. I asked a friend who had worked with the company before if it was a safe place for me to work. She assured me it wasshe, like me, had never heard anything bad about the men who worked there. The way she put it was, YES, Flying V has dude energy, but its nerd dude energy. Theyre safer than most men. And, like many of us, I assumed she was right.

Yes, I was surrounded by men. But these men were not as harmful as other men. These were men who, like me, enjoyed nerdy pursuits and believed in fighting for a common good. These were not the hypermasculine men to be afraid of. I had come to trust them. I had come to trust Jason, even asking him to be a reference for future theater jobs. I had come to trust Jon as an intimacy director and mentor, already hoping to hire him for future projects. Slowly, I began to feel that yes, this was a male space, but might there be a place for me?

I joined the flock at Flying V during their 2019 seasonfirst as front-of-house manager for Were Gonna Die, then as a writer on the devising team for Crystal Creek Motel in the fall. These experiences were made great largely by the women and people of color on the teams for these shows: Farrell Parker made me laugh and cry nightly in her performance of Young Jean Lees heartbreaking concert-play; Wendy Wrobleski and Zia Hassan slayed as the opening acts for Parker; Kelly Colburns pieces in Crystal Creek Motel were some of the most well-directed and achingly beautiful vignettes I have seen on a Flying V stage; Navid Azeez has taught me more about vulnerability, revision, and leadership than most of my college professors. They were the ones who created home for me and many others at Flying V. Why did it matter which white men were in power if my daily experiences with the organization were overwhelmingly dominated by creating art with women and people of color?

It turns outit matters a lot.

Before my time with Flying V, I was sexually assaulted by another student actor in the department of Theater and Performance Studies at Georgetown University. This man was classically handsome, popular, a former athlete and current frat brofor all intents and purposes, he was an alpha male, and I should have known better, because I had been told by other women to know better. This was not the sensitive creative or intellectual director who had been determined sexually safer by my peers. This was the rich, popular, white boy who went into acting for power and prestige. He was not a Jason.

But I met plenty of Jasons throughout college: soft white boys determined to become playwrights better than LaBute or Mamet, sad white boys who wrote poetry and lamented why women wouldnt date them, wannabe white director boys who analyzed theater and video games and wrestling with the same fervor as Jason, as many of the men in Flying V. These boys were largely perceived to be safer than the men like my abuser, since nerdy interests have historically put these men on the outskirts of society and perhaps made space for them to more readily empathize with other marginalized groups. This was also perceived to be true at Flying VI witnessed firsthand the passion of Jon Rubin, who has dedicated so much of his professional life to intimacy direction and education; Lee Liebeskind, former associate artistic director, who intentionally sought the voices of women and people of color in his curation of Crystal Creek Motel; even Jason, who from the first time I met him emphasized how much he wanted Flying V to be a space for artists of all experiences.

These men were aware of Flying Vs white man problem. They knew their theater was largely made by and for white men, and in the last few years, they had tried to address that head on. Even in this self-awareness, they failed us and so many who uplifted and supported their work. To me, this makes Jasons actions and the complicity of Lee and Jon so much more of a betrayal. They had played the role of the self-aware white man, and they had played it well: I had trusted these men and their word. I had come to the conclusion that Flying V might be growing into a place where all nerds could convene and create theater together, even if it was headed at the time by three white men. I falsely reasoned that men of the nerdy experience might benefit a little less from the power structures that have historically held up other white men, and take substantive action to include nerds and theatermakers of all experiences in their art. But power is a tricky thinga white man still benefits from patriarchy more than I ever can, and the isolation and ostracization of nerds is nothing compared with the structural misogyny and systemic racism entrenched in our society and our theaters. Even though Jason knew of his abuse of power, there is something inherent in the patriarchal structures that allows men to believe they deserve to continue holding power, if only they apologize, if only they are aware of their problems.

I remember being in a playwriting class once where I was the only woman, surrounded by men like Jason and Jon and Lee. Self-aware boys who were educated on their privilege, who knew they were blessed just by nature of their birth. They wrote about aliens taking over the earth, and fantastical versions of Jesus Christ, and dolphins in the Potomac River. I wrote about being raped.

It is a privilege to write from your imagination instead of your nightmare. And Flying V, for a long time, has preserved a space for white men to explore their imaginations while setting into motion nightmares for women, nonbinary folks, and people of color in their own community.

But it is not their community anymore. There have been calls for the dissolution of Flying V in the wake of these allegations, but I believe now is the time for the company to be entrusted into the hands of those in the company who made Flying V a successful and beautiful theater. It is a place where folks like Navid, Wendy, Zia, Kelly, and Farrell should be in chargewhere Black voices are prioritized, where women and other marginalized gender experiences are put front and center, where those in power put in the work to amplify everyone.

Flying V is not the first company where white men abused their power in our community, and it will not be the last. But, it has also been a place in my experience that has started to do the work of uncovering the structures that allowed to keep Jason in place. If we listen to women, if we listen to Black folks, if we listen to people of color, it can be the place where we make an example of how to rebuild a company out of fire. It can be the place where the phoenix rises from the ashes of change and begins to fly in formation again.

K. J. Moran is a DC-based playwright, performer, and writer. A graduate of Georgetown University, she now works as a teaching artist and writer across the District. Her work has been performed at Georgetown University, the Kennedy Center, Flying V, and Theater Alliance.

See the original post:
Why a whisper network turned into a tornado at Flying V - DC Metro Theater Arts