Jay Peterson
  • Home
  • Acting
    • Headshots
    • Resume
    • Press >
      • C3 Tweets
    • History
    • Reels
  • The Gruntverse
    • Three briefings before a crisis
    • The Preliminary Report of Marshal Bennett
    • So your kid turned out to be a mage
    • Ghost Light Sample Chapter
    • Gruntverse deleted scenes >
      • Gruntverse-gulls-escape
      • Gruntverse farewell jasmine
      • Gruntverse chittendens insight
  • Jay at Play
    • Nonfiction >
      • A Millenial's guide to inheriting guns
    • Other videos >
      • Just Blanks
      • Tommy That
      • Machine Gun Shakespeare
      • Igor
  • Blog

Last, Best, and Final

11/7/2023

0 Comments

 
So,
On Saturday, SAG_AFTRA got an offer from the AMPTP.
The AMPTP called it their "Last, Best, and Final Offer."

Yesterday, SAG-AFTRA formally responded.


In an email to membership, the negcom said "There are several essential items on which we still do not have an agreement, including AI. We will keep you informed as events unfold."


In the last week or so, a rumor started going around in the trades that if this offer isn't accepted, the AMPTP would walk away from the table until after the first of the year.


I can guarantee you this is a studio-leaked bluff.


And it's aimed at audiences.


Anyone who's been in the industry for more than a year or two knows what a normal production calendar looks like.


In a normal year, most productions would be wrapping around now and in the next few weeks. Execs would be hearing pitches for next fall's TV lineup, some contracts would get negotiated, and the suits would want to take Thanksgiving and Christmas off. Then after the first of the year, pilot season would kick off.


So all of us below the line already know we're probably not going to be working in this industry again until after the first of the year even if a contract gets signed today.


The suits, on the other hand, just had to squirm for another quarterly earnings statement with futures full of chaos. That will only get darker the longer this goes on.


It took the WGA 148 days to secure a fair deal.


SAG-AFTRA is on day 117.


Why are the studios doing this?


Simple economics without taking in the big picture.


The biggest expense of any business right now is people.


Union labor in western countries is expensive.


(It's expensive because they're skilled precision labor and worth what they earn and more, but they're still expensive)


VFX and now AI is largely nonunion (though that's mercifully changing) and can easily be outsourced to any country with a render farm and an internet connection.


The studios do not care if they get the craftsmanship from the Lord of the Rings trilogy.


They just want the box office of the Hobbit trilogy.


Studios want the puppet show.


They just don't want to pay the puppeteers.


And the union is holding their ground and saying "fuck you, no."


The first time I got scanned, I thought, "Oh, so if I get hit by a bus or something, they can get a last-minute insert shot of me. Makes sense."


With the language in the current offer, the studios no longer have to get the consent of dead performers to use their likeness.


(Because they know damn well that the estate of every single performer they try that crap on will show up with lawyers in tow going, "where's my cut?")


That show where I first got scanned?


Test audiences wanted to see more of me.


So I got another scene.


How did that happen?


They brought me back in and they paid me.


Which is currently business as usual.


It was in the middle of a pandemic, so the vibe was kinda weird, but still: They brought me back in and they paid me.


They didn't take that scan and make some overworked tech move my pixel puppet around.


They brought me back in and they paid me.


Now, they don't just want to cut corners, they want to cut whole fucking quadrants.


So yeah, AMPTP.


Fuck your last, fuck your best, fuck your final, and most of all, fuck you.


No.


Day 117.


One day longer.


One day stronger.


Take care of yourselves out there.


0 Comments

Consent and Cryptids

10/24/2023

0 Comments

 
I'm no stranger to horror LARPs, though I haven't done any in well over a decade now.

But I've definitely done my share of creature performing since. So I signed on to perform as the big bad for an immersive summer camp horror event weekend before last.


And to my happy surprise, a lot has changed since my day. In particular, a multilayered consent system that ensures smooth play while not traumatizing anyone.


I've heard some grumbling about such things over the years, but my attitude has pretty much been eh, fuck the grumblers. I was raised right.


We respect hard limits and safewords in this house.


(And if that hasn't been embroidered on a sampler somewhere, it should be.)


One of the layers in this one were different colored tshirts worn by the campers, which indicated comfort levels from "no jump scares please" all the way to "if you can catch me, you can carry my character off into the woods to be slaughtered."


So the game went on, and spooky fun was had by all. On the final night, the surviving campers managed to drive out the evil cryptid that haunted the woods around the camp and it's remaining minions. And since we were all out in the woods in the middle of the night when this happened, the staff and campers all retired to the main lodge with fluorescent lighting to decompress and get pictures with the really cool costumes of the villains that had been after them for the last few nights.


Which is when I doffed the mask and introduced myself for the first time.


A line soon formed to pose for pictures with my minions and I.


And a few pictures in, one in a red shirt very politely said, "I was told I might get carried by a monster this weekend. Can that still happen?"


Challenge accepted.


I'm fairly certain a few got back in line for another go once princess lifts were a known option.


Yeah, I had some sore arms the next morning. I'm not 20 anymore and don't lift as much as I should.


Still glad I did.


Because at least one or two of those asking had a trepidation I'd heard before.


They normally didn't get carried or dipped or that sort of thing.


Always just a bit too tall or a bit too big.


And now there was a seven foot cryptid taking on all comers.


They asked. I obliged.


One of the things I really love about horror fans is that they celebrate being different.


And I love seeing that new horror experiences are letting fans get their thrills on their terms. From a brand-new immersion game all the way up to Knott's Berry farm.


Thrills without Trauma.


Happy Halloween.


0 Comments

How TV *used* to make money

8/4/2023

1 Comment

 
Last week I was talking about the differences between producers, studios, distributors, and the AMPTP.

Today I wanna talk about TV, how that particular sausage traditionally got made, and what big changes have been made lately.


(FWIW, I'm not ~just~ out of work and a little bored. A lot of this is cribbed notes from some acting classes I used to teach. I'm a firm believer in the idea that people who want to make a living in a given industry should damn well know how that industry makes money.)


TV traditionally operated on the "radio" model: the audience gets to watch for free. Advertisers pay for access to the audience's attention. Despite the name, it's almost as old as the "theater" model (control a space, sell access to that space, perform in that space, repeat). Newsreaders in Ancient Rome had words from their sponsors.


How much to charge advertisers requires two bits of info: how many people in general are watching, and what the demographics of those people are. This is why we all notice Super Bowl commercials are stupid expensive.


As you can imagine, when TV first kicked off, the execs finding this info and acting on it were the types that would think Don Draper was too progressive. Advertising was based on a stereotypical suburban home owned by Walter and Wendy Whitebread and their two kids. The rubric went something like: male/young, male/old, female/young, female/old. Not all that accurate then and really inaccurate now, but it's what drove the decision making process, which went something like this:


The early morning has Walter off to work and the kids off to school. There might be news or a kid's program in there. But by 9AM, Wendy's the only one in the house until 3PM, so TV gets targeted to her: game shows, talk shows, soap operas.


By 3PM, the kids are home, so cartoons and similar start running. Walter's home by 5, so the local and national news runs at 6PM. Then prime time kicks off.


7PM-9PM, Sunday through Thursday nights. Everyone's home, everyone's had dinner, everyone's watching TV. This is when a station puts on it's most exciting and popular programming in the hopes that all four watch them instead of another network. Ad space is at a big premium here.


After 9PM, some less popular shows may come on, with another news broadcast at 11PM. Late-night talk shows come on after that, with filler and reruns after that until the morning comes.


So that's a day. There's targets during the week as well. Friday and Saturday nights don't really have prime time, because people are doing other stuff for the weekend. &PM on Fridays is actually called the Friday Night Death Slot, a dumping ground for less than popular shows that aren't quite unpopular enough to be cancelled yet. (There are exceptions to this. 90's kids will remember the TGIF sitcom block that did very well for ABC). Saturday mornings run cartoons for kids who aren't in school. Saturday and Sunday afternoons show sports, old movies, and reruns.


Which brings us to the annual cycle and what Hollywood calls "seasons."


Back in the day, a full season of TV was about twenty-odd shows or even more. If you're thinking about a year, you'll notice that allows for a new episode about every other week for a full year. They get distributed like this:


A station's fall lineup debuts around Labor Day and runs until about Thanksgiving. That's when new episodes start getting pre-empted by holiday specials and sports events. This is the first half of a TV season. (Some people refer to a "front nine and back 13," referring to the number of weeks.)


By the end of this, the production side of things is ramping up when the holidays end. This is called "pilot season," and it runs roughly from New Year's Day to St. Patrick's Day. By the holidays, networks have a good idea which shows they'll renew and which they'll cancel. So producers pitch their ideas for new shows to the networks. Most of these pitches will be shot down, a rare few will see an entire season ordered, and a handful will see a pilot ordered.


So these pilots are written, cast, designed, and filmed, with the hopes of becoming a full season show. This is a particularly exciting time for actors, because being a series regular on a popular show is the closest thing the profession has to a steady, reliable, upper-middle-class income.


Pilots are screened to executives, notes given, and the fortunate few get full season orders. Those start going into production in the spring and are announced as the new fall lineup around May.


Back to New Year's Day. Some shows did so badly they're dropped before the holidays. In which case, the occasional pilot that wasn't picked up the previous spring gets an order for a half season in what's called a midseason replacement. This is why some shows, like Buffy, have a much shorter first season than the other seasons.


Anyways, the second half of the season starts showing around the Super Bowl, and plays that way until around Memorial Day. By then, there's a drop in viewership as kids get out of school and people go on vacations. This is also when mid-season production hiatus happens, as the cast and crew finish filming the first half of a season and get a few weeks off before coming back to film the second half.


So that's how it's traditionally done.


There's been some big changes over the last couple years.


The first was "Peak TV," a high-concept, largely uncensored drama. OZ on HBO was the first one of these. It meant that a showrunner could have the subjects of an R-rated movie with the running time of a series.


The second was TV on DVD. Putting season of TV on video was largely commercially nonviable when at best two episodes would fit on a tape and a season would fill an entire shelf. A few series did this (Star Trek, Highlander), but it usually wasn't a thing until DVD, when HBO released The Sopranos by the season. Now, binging was possible. And immensely profitable.


The third was streaming. Not beholden to a calendar, ratings, or anything but their own subscriber base, once streaming services started producing their own shows, anything was possible. A whole season dropped onto a service at once so audiences could binge? Sure! Six episodes? Eight? Ten? However many it took for you to tell a story! Film a pilot in the middle of autumn? Go for it!


The freedom in both size and subject matter brought a lot of talented directors, writers, and performers over to streaming TV, and a lot of landmarks were made.


But a few big changes have left a lot of people in the lurch.


One, seasons have gotten smaller and smaller.


One of the big milestones of a traditional TV show has been the third or fourth season. That's when a show officially lands between 65 and 100 episodes, enough to sell to other networks as a syndication package. (Over 100 episodes means you can rerun an episode every night of the week for months without viewers noticing).


This has a big impact on the showrunner, cast, and writers. Partly because a lot of the below the line crew work by the day or by the week. Partly because fewer episodes mean fewer guest stars, co-stars, and day players, which are about 80% of the acting roles out there.


Partly because it actively prevents stars from truly becoming stars.


Their contracts are up by the end of the second or third season. And if the show is popular, everyone negotiates for higher earnings, because they're the ones that made it happen.


We're seeing a big trend lately of shows being cancelled at the end of three or four seasons. Enough for the network to make a big splash and make big money, but not enough for the previously-unknown cast and crew to cash in.


(This is a big reason why you see spiking actor salaries for the few top stars that still exist. They know there's no longevity they can control, so they're all trying to make what they can when they can before it all collapses under them.)


Two, nobody knows how popular streaming shows really are.


Netflix keeps that info really close to the vest, as do the other streamers. With traditional TV, Neilsen measures how many people are watching TV at any given hour and what percentage of those are watching a given show. Streaming is a black hole of data that they keep to themselves. They don't have to justify themselves to advertisers (yet). So we only have the exec's word that a given show is popular or not.


Three, your favorite show can fall and die for no given reason.


In the old days, a show that was well liked could live on in reruns. Then even moreso on DVD. Both of which eventually made respectable residual streams.


Direct to streaming shows almost never have a physical release these days. They run from uncommon (the Umbrella Academy) to ridiculous (Wandavision, which is about to get a steelbook release of... nothing. No discs, no download code, just a place for bootleggers to put their copies, sold at a premium).


And now we're seeing that the premise of streaming, that shows would go to the cloud and be available forever, is a lie. They'll be available as long as the service wants it to be. Even if it just released a show six months ago, owns it entirely, and has no plans to sell it, it can just go away.


This was a lot, I get it. But it's a very rough overview of just how much those who work on TV are being asked to do more and more yet earn less and less, with no evidence whatsoever to back up claims that this is the way it needs to be now.


Take care of yourselves out there.


1 Comment

Residuals 101

7/28/2023

0 Comments

 
I got asked by a couple of people about residuals and how they work.

And given that it's a central point of contention for the current strikes, I figure I might as well give a rundown here.


We've all seen the life cycle of a movie release, even if we didn't know that's what we were looking at it.

A movie would come out in theaters, then in dollar theaters, then on video, then pay-per-view, then premium cable channels like HBO and Showtime, then basic cable, then regular TV.


Each one of these stages is called an exhibition. When movies first started having narratives, producers realized the big advantage they had over live performances. Mainly, that the same performance could be played again and again in different times and places.


Each of these new exhibitions pay a licensing fee to the producers of the movie. A cut of ticket sales, a cut of video sales, a cut of the ad revenue during a TV broadcast, whatever.


That FBI warning at the beginning of videos we all laugh at? It's very real. And it points out a very real distinction. You may own the physical object that happens to play a given movie. But buying that object only gave you the right to show it privately in your home.


Of course, the actors and writers noticed that producers were making this money off of their work. And they naturally wanted their cut.


In 1960, the last year the writers and actors both went on strike, both unions wanted increased residuals for broadcasting movies on TV. The AMPTP, seeing moviegoing drop sharply with the increasing popularity of TV, claimed they were bleeding money and couldn't afford it. (Remember this, it'll come up later)


SAG president Ronald Regan (seriously) ended up negotiating a deal that meant movie actors got residuals when their movies (made after 1960) were rerun on TV. Slowly, both actors and writers wound up getting residuals at various stages of exhibition.


Quarterly, producers report what their licenses have sold for to the unions, who distribute the proceeds to the actors and writers.


How much varies widely. A popular show that gets rerun a lot can make some decent money. A flop that nobody watched can make very little. A few years back, I got a residual check from a box office bomb I worked on. It was for the princely sum of six cents.


Now there's streaming.


In 2007, Netflix began streaming. At the same time, Viacom launched a deal to stream episodes of South Park online. At that year's WGA negotiations, the writers wanted video residuals (which hadn't been recalculated since 1985) to go up, while the AMPTP demanded a recalculation to account for the rise of cord cutting.


Remember, streaming was barely a thing. Netflix was the new hotness, but nobody was really sure it was going to be a big thing.


The result, after the writer's strike (which never did get their video residuals recalculated), the "new media" agreements were launched. These covered everything from Netflix to youtube. Since the commercial viability of streaming hadn't been established yet, it gave streaming producers much more favorable residual terms than other exhibitions. On top of that, actual numbers of streaming as far as what's more popular with what audiences, is data that streamers keep very private, as opposed to their subscriber numbers.


Remember the South Park episode where Canada went on strike, demanding more internet money that didn't really exist? That was Parker and Stone ruthlessly mocking the WGA for demanding more money that nobody knew existed at the time.


Now here we are. The unions are demanding streamers show transparency with their numbers and pay out residuals in line with other exhibitors. The AMPTP, claiming a rise in cord cutting and stagnant streaming numbers, say the demands are unreasonable.


Sound familiar?


Take care of yourselves out there.


0 Comments

First book signing

7/27/2023

2 Comments

 
Picture
Had my first-ever book signing for Renfield Blues.
In a meadery.
Successful all around. Sold some books, signed some books, hung out with some people, and there was tasty mead in abundance.
Mostly friends and family, but still, not shabby at all.

If you're in the Atlanta area, check out the Viking Alchemist Meadery. They're a little ways West of Suntrust park.

2 Comments

Non-interchangeable Hollywood terms

7/23/2023

3 Comments

 
So I got a couple questions come in. And as usual, I'm writing an essay rather than repeating myself.

There are subtle difference between "producer" "production company" "studios" and "The AMPTP"


Particularly now that the strike is in full swing and SAG interim agreements are causing waivers to be issued.


I might address those in particular later. But first I have to establish the differences I just mentioned, and a bit about why.


Movies get made in three stages: Production, Distribution, and Exhibition.


It wouldn't be inaccurate to say that what we think of as the big studios (Disney, WB, Paramount, Universal, and Sony) are mostly distributors who dabble in production as a side hustle.


Amazon and Netflix, on the other hand, are mostly distributors that have side hustles in production AND exhibition.


Here's how. Buckle up.


Production operates a lot like it sounds: get the money, then make the movie.


A lot of production companies are really just a producer and their office. Renaissance Pictures is Sam Raimi, View Askew is Kevin Smith, that kind of thing. So when they get a project, they shop around for both funding and distribution. Which means talking to the various People Who Can Say Yes.


(The People Who Can Say Yes are mysterious, eldritch beings with the power to greenlight a movie and sign distribution deals. They know their powers make them highly sought after, and hide behind gauntlets of assistants)


Sometimes a studio, usually with a licensed IP, will decide to produce and fund a movie itself, assigning a studio executive to act as the producer. These are unironically called "studio pictures."


On occasion, a movie star will choose to invest in their own star power and partially fund a movie themselves along with appearing in a lead role. This is why you occasionally see stars listed as Executive Producers.


And on top of all of that, one standard practice is to form a subsidiary of a production company whose sole purpose is to make a single movie. This is done as a liability screen so if disaster strikes, the subsidiary is who loses as opposed to the production company or the studio.


So that's production.


Distribution is the stage of actually getting the movie in theaters. This involved making and shipping actual prints back in the day. Nowadays it's more hard drives. This is also where marketing and publicity happens, with the distributor responsible for posters, trailers, merch, and other tie-ins.


Major studios will not only produce movies, but more often than not they will make distribution deals for movies made independently of the studio. Often the result of a producer having a conversation with The People Who Can Say Yes.


Ever wonder why DVD's have region codes? It's because different distributors operate in different parts of the world. And the distribution rights are sold to different distributors operating in each territory. A studio might own distributors in the US, the UK, and Japan, but they would all operate separately.


Unfortunately this is also where Hollywood accounting runs rampant.


Do you know how much it costs to put posters on a subway?


Me neither.


So the distribution side of a studio can bill the production side of a studio for services rendered, and before you know it, something that made $1B at the box office hasn't turned an actual profit.


This is why smart people ask for percentages of gross receipts off the top instead of net profits off the back.


It is also why studios laugh in the faces of non-celebrities who dare ask such things.


Then there's exhibition. That's the theater chains themselves.


Before the end of WWII or so, Studios used to do all three. Paramount would make movies, Paramount Distribution would market them, and Paramount theaters would show them. And before TV, this allowed studios to rerelease their biggest hits to their theaters every couple of years.


If this is starting to sound familiar, congratulations. You didn't spend all of American History class on your phone.


The Paramount Decree declared this system to be an example of a vertically integrated trust, and ordered the studios to break up.


Pretty much all of them dropped the theaters. They were the biggest loss leaders in people that had to be paid and buildings maintained. This is why concessions cost so much at the theater. They're what keep the lights on. The overwhelming majority of the ticket prices go to the studios.


The weird thing about American antitrust law is that there's holes in it big enough to drive trucks through.

Having an oligarchy that happens "naturally" is all well and good.

It's just engaging in practices that actively prevent competition from happening that will get you in trouble.


Or at the least needing to throw lawyers at it until it goes away.


This was the problem that began the Paramount Decision, with things like Block Booking, where a theater would have to show whatever a studio gave it as opposed to what it wanted to show.


In recent years, I thought the majors were going to run afoul of the Paramount Decree sooner or later. Disney got away with mandating that theaters playing The Last Jedi keep it for a certain number of weeks, whether or not it was selling enough tickets to justify remaining. Theaters that refused would be denied other Disney releases. So theaters in small towns, where everyone who wanted to see TLJ would see it in the first few weeks, would continue seeing it, with the theaters eating the cost of empty seats.


Then in 2018, a Netflix original (Roma) was nominated for an Oscar for the first time. I wondered if sooner or later, a judge would wind up ruling that Streaming would be considered Exhibition for purposes of the Paramount Decree.


Instead, the opposite happened. In 2020, the DOJ put a sunset provision into the Paramount Decision, since the old vertical integration model couldn't be replicated.


Long story short (too late) in a world with only two app stores, nobody's batting an eye at having movie studios in single digits.


So, a lot of us use terms like "the AMPTP," "Producers," "Production companies," and "Studios" interchangeably. But they can be very different, especially in terms of decision-making power.


Take care of yourselves out there.

3 Comments

Day One

7/14/2023

0 Comments

 
Last time SAG-AFTRA and the WGA were both on strike, Eisenhower was in the white house and some cowboy actor called Ronald Regan was president of SAG.

And I'm seeing the first of my lovable cranky old assholes singing variations on the tune of, "Hollywood's been putting out crap for years now and they want more money? Fuck 'em. Stuff in the 80's, 90's, and aughts was better anyway."

Really?

Funny thing about those years.

Even if it took a while between gigs, you could bring in a tidy sum on residuals. Reruns, DVDs, they all added up.

A writer's room had 10 people, working 8-10 months to make a show with 18-24 episodes.

A writer could write a 15 page pitch and the producer could pass or pay to develop.

CGI was the new hotness, and it was letting us tell stories in new ways with every passing year.

What happened?

A few things.

In 2004, Return of the King sweeps the Oscars and makes it cool to be a nerd. The trilogy had two years of preproduction and involved thousands of people.

In 2007, Netflix launches streaming on demand. The studios balk, but soon see it as just another revenue generator.

That same year, The WGA strikes over video and DVD residuals, which hadn't been recalculated since 1985, and over new media compensation, sparked by a deal Viacom made to distribute episodes of South Park online.

That strike ended with residuals left unrecalculated and with a "New media" contract in place, which gave streamers terms much more favorable to producers than they did in traditional film & TV.

In 2008, Iron Man releases with plans for the MCU to accompany it. Marvel bets big on what turns out to be the next level up from a blockbuster: not just a tentpole summer movie that could make a lot of money once, but a string of blockbusters with proven fanbases that can be brought back in every year for years.

In 2009, rendering Devastator for Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen destroys a render farm computer at ILM.

Visual effects, being non unionized and international, increasingly allows competitive bids for portions of film work, resulting in races to the lowest bid.

In 2010, Peter Jackson is hired to direct The Hobbit Trilogy with less than six months prep time.
Ian McKellen would later reveal that the half-assed nature of the production left him in tears.

In 2011, Netflix and the studios start seeing each other as competition instead of mutually beneficial companies.

Netflix starts investing in original content while major studios like WB and Disney plan to launch their own services in-house and keep those fees for themselves instead of licensing them to outside services.

In 2012, Rhythm and Hues Studios files for bankruptcy 13 days before winning their fourth VFX Oscar for the movie Life of Pi. Visual Effects Supervisor Bill Westenhofer's acceptance speech is cut off when he mentions Rhythm & Hues.

Two months later, The Avengers hits theaters. Today, it is the 11th highest grossing movie of all time.

In 2014, CBS All Access launches, merging into Paramount+ in 2020.

In 2015, Amazon launches Spike Lee's Chi-Raq as Amazon Studios' first original movie.

In 2019, Disney+ and AppleTv launch. HBOmax and Peacock launch the next year.

Which brings us to today.

19 of the top 20 highest grossing films of all time were released after 2007. 17 of them after 2010.
And yet they plead poverty.

That writer who could've written a 15 page pitch and gotten it passed or paid to be developed is expected to have an a list director, a list actor, a series bible, and a whole laundry list of shit that used to be a producer's job in order to have a chance in hell of actually seeing production.
And yet they plead poverty.

That writer's room now has 2-3 writers for an 8 episode series working 10 weeks at best.
And yet they plead poverty.

Co-stars, guest stars, recurring guest stars, series regulars in all but name are being offered the bare minimum and actors are being told to take it or leave it.
And yet they plead poverty.

The few stars left who can get a picture made by agreeing to sign on are all in their 70's, 80's, and 90's because they were all stars in an era where that was still a thing.
And yet the producers plead poverty.

The few stars under 50 who exist don't have nearly the decision making power you think they do. And a lot of the ones who might be are burning out instead.
And yet the producers plead fucking poverty.

The AMPTP openly said they want to scan background actors for a day's pay (which is about $150 or thereabouts) and then use that scan with AI in perpetuity.
And yet the motherfucking producers plead fucking poverty.

The movies and shows that you loved and went back to time and again were made by people who were making a living making them.

The ones that you're sneering at were made by people struggling to get by while making some asshole in a mansion a touch richer.

And you want to say fuck us while we're trying to change that?

Think about it.

Take care of yourselves out there.

0 Comments

Gun control happens on the right all the time

3/30/2023

0 Comments

 
It's usually just wrapped up in Law & Order BS.
To the tune of, "we better not let THEM be armed."
I mean, there was a ton of it wrapped up in Jim Crow all over the place. But that's easy pickings.
Just looking at the 20th century?
California's Mulford Act (It's even named after a Republican congressman) prohibited carrying loaded firearms in public. It was explicitly a response to the Black Panthers being openly armed when they patrolled neighborhoods, at one point marching on the capital building of California. It passed with bipartisan support and was signed by Governor Ronald Reagan, who vocally supported it. Thus began the slow descent of California into the neofeudal shithole it is today.
A year later, the Gun Control act of 1968 (publicized as a reaction to the mail-order firearms used to assassinate JFK and MLK) introduced the first four (later ten) federal prohibitions from owning a firearm in the U.S.
Of the four, three were definitely targeted at "undesirable populations."
Number one, felons.
I don't have to go into the ridiculous amount of things we've felonized over the years, do I? Nor go in depth as to who gets convicted more often?
Number two, drug users.
The 1968 version specifically highlights marijuana users.
It was a way to target BIPOC and hippies without coming right out and saying so.
As late as 2011, the ATF declared that holders of medical marijuana cards are automatically prohibited under this law.
Number three, adjudicated a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution.
The DSM included all the LGBT spectrum and all the kinks in 1968.
There are mouth-breathing cousin gropers out there arguing this week that number three should be held against the LGBT community thanks to the Nashville shooting.
If I can say nothing else, I have to say that it's YOUR second amendment too, godsdammit.
Use it if you need to.
Don't if that's your desire.
But do NOT let the assholes try and take it from you.
0 Comments

I've met several varieties of sick fuck in my day

3/28/2023

0 Comments

 
But it takes a special kind of fucking vulture to jump on the fact that the latest mass shooter was from a demographic you already hate.
Seriously, how fucking sick is that?
I mean, the usual gaggle of well-meaning dupes and garden variety morons screaming for more gun control every time like clockwork are annoying, but I can at least see their logic if I turn my head and squint.
But jumping, jumping, at the chance to bury the needle on the Othering meter... that's just dragging humanity down and stomping on its collective head.
0 Comments

Here's hoping

3/17/2023

0 Comments

 
SB 140 (GA's anti-trans kids bill) passed the House and headed to the Senate yesterday.
It's not quite as ugly as the ones in TN and FL, but it still sucks.
My rep and senator are already voting against it, so I called the governor's office to give support for a veto.
Will it happen?
Outside chance.
Most of these bills are the first wave of the GoP trying to gain former Trump supporters without supporting Trump personally. The good thing about Kemp is that he's already proven he doesn't need to. He was one of the first and loudest to openly defy Trump. And he not only kicked his primary challenger's ass, he won a rematch with Abrams when she came back with a bigger war chest and national support.
He governs a purple state and knows it. I know I'd rather take an arrow out of my opposition's quiver rather than throw a bone to a far-right faction that either voted for me anyway or I won without their support. But that's me.
Here's hoping.
(And no, I didn't grind the poor staffer's ear with all of this. I kept it simple.)
Take care of yourselves out there.
0 Comments
<<Previous
Forward>>
    Picture

    Jay Peterson

    Musings on violence, storytelling, and humanity in general.

    Archives

    June 2025
    May 2025
    January 2025
    August 2024
    December 2023
    November 2023
    October 2023
    August 2023
    July 2023
    March 2023
    February 2023
    December 2022
    October 2022
    September 2022
    July 2022
    June 2022
    May 2022
    April 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    December 2021
    November 2021
    October 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    July 2021
    June 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013
    June 2013
    April 2013
    December 2012
    November 2012
    October 2012
    September 2012
    April 2012
    February 2012
    February 2011
    December 2010
    November 2010
    August 2010
    June 2010
    August 2008

    Categories

    All
    2nd Amendment
    Archer
    Armor
    Barbarism
    Blades
    Blanks
    Boobplate
    Book Review
    Chainmail Bikini
    Fight Scene
    Film
    Firearms
    History
    Killology
    Military
    Reality
    Safety
    Set Life
    Shakespeare
    Teacupping
    Theater
    Tucker Thayer
    USMC
    Viking
    War Stories
    Weapon Of The Week
    Workshops
    Wounds

    RSS Feed

Certa Bonum Certamen

Picture