Things I find a tad exasperating v.3

[KevShmev]

I don't know enough about that genre to speak of that, but it felt like they were trying to keep everyone happy last night. Beyonce got the EDM/Dance award, Taylor got the music video award, Adele got the pop solo award, Lizzo got record of the year, Styles got album of the year.  They are all huge stars and were all there, so they all got to win something.

[Stadler]

I don't know enough about that genre to speak of that, but it felt like they were trying to keep everyone happy last night. Beyonce got the EDM/Dance award, Taylor got the music video award, Adele got the pop solo award, Lizzo got record of the year, Styles got album of the year.  They are all huge stars and were all there, so they all got to win something.

Participation prizes.  Wha, wha.   

[Stadler]

This feels like the thread to put this:

Beyonce set the record last night for most Grammys wins ever last night, but according to some, the Grammys are racist because she has still never won Album of the Year.  Right, the Grammys, that just had a ceremony that was practically a love letter to genres dominated by persons of color, are racist.

You can't make this shit up.

Yes, it is exasperating.  Beyonce wins left and right, and some are still never happy.

Such bull.  There have been three African American winners of the Album of the Year since 2008:  Herbie Hancock, Bruno Mars, and (last year) Jon Batiste.   The quick math show that to be about 14%, which exactly mirrors the make up of the general population.  This year, five of the ten candidates for AotY are of color (50%), and last year it was I think 6 out of 10 (not sure who "Doja Cat" is), or 60%.  "Racism" is now a synonym for "my guy/gal didn't win".   

[XJDenton]

Beyonce set the record last night for most Grammys wins ever last night, but according to some, the Grammys are racist because she has still never won Album of the Year.  Right, the Grammys, that just had a ceremony that was practically a love letter to genres dominated by persons of color, are racist.

You can't make this shit up.

Yes, it is exasperating.  Beyonce wins left and right, and some are still never happy.

Who exactly are "some"?

[Stadler]

Beyonce set the record last night for most Grammys wins ever last night, but according to some, the Grammys are racist because she has still never won Album of the Year.  Right, the Grammys, that just had a ceremony that was practically a love letter to genres dominated by persons of color, are racist.

You can't make this shit up.

Yes, it is exasperating.  Beyonce wins left and right, and some are still never happy.

Who exactly are "some"?

Clearly those adhering to the false "racism" narrative.

[hefdaddy42]

That kind of chatter is definitely happening, but it's mostly from the diehard Beyonce fans.  I suspect they are trying to come up with a "reason" to rationalize why Queen Bee didn't win any of the big big awards.

It's more pathetic than anything.

[XJDenton]

Clearly those adhering to the false "racism" narrative.

I meant specifically.

[Stadler]

Clearly those adhering to the false "racism" narrative.

I meant specifically.

Bob Smith
Carol Rafferty
Marinda Stockholm
James "Hootie" MacAlfey
...


??  You really need names? 

[pg1067]

Clearly those adhering to the false "racism" narrative.

I meant specifically.

Bob Smith
Carol Rafferty
Marinda Stockholm
James "Hootie" MacAlfey
...


??  You really need names?

I went to high school with Hootie MacAfey!

Maybe Twitter and Instagram handles... @queenbeebiggestfan and @unstabletrollforbeyonce123 ?   

[XJDenton]

Bob Smith
Carol Rafferty
Marinda Stockholm
James "Hootie" MacAlfey
...


??  You really need names? 

Given I've not heard of any of them, apparently its not going to help.

[KevShmev]

I also saw it being complained about by:

Hugh Jass
Mrs. BJ Smegma
Hercules Hochuli

[Ben_Jamin]

That kind of chatter is definitely happening, but it's mostly from the diehard Beyonce fans.  I suspect they are trying to come up with a "reason" to rationalize why Queen Bee didn't win any of the big big awards.

It's more pathetic than anything.

Yup. And it's further proof that people are utilizing the term of "Racism" as an excuse.

To downgrade a bit...David Draiman of Disturbed has the best response for the Grammy's so far...

https://loudwire.com/david-draiman-praises-satanic-grammys-performance-set-bar-for-everyone/

"Lol, I don’t want anyone ever saying that Hard Rock/Heavy Metal live performances are too 'extreme' for the @RecordingAcad telecast… Because @samsmith just set the bar for EVERYONE last night."

Now let us see a performance by a Black Metal band, that is if they even go that far. 

[KevShmev]

Sad to say, people crying racism are now by the boy who cried wolf, and that sucks because there still are legitimate cases of it, but so many scream it now over everything that it's lost all meaning.

It reminds me of a lady I worked with many, many years ago who would complain to the managers about every little thing.  Probably one of 10 things were legit, but she complained so much that they just tuned her out, and it feels like that is what many of us now do with cries of racism, and, again, that sucks because there are still legit examples, but how are we supposed to know which ones to acknowledge when seemingly everything these days is racist? 

[Lethean]

I spent some time reading a little about this, and I don't think it's all that simple.  Of course there's no "proof" that it's racism; maybe it is, maybe someone has a beef with Beyonce for other reasons, maybe each time it was truly what the voters thought was "the best."  But I kinda doubt it's ever the latter - or at least it rarely is.  Part of me thinks it's a little silly that anyone should think one specific album is the only choice to win, but I don't think the outcry is just people making up reasons that their favorite didn't win either.

[pg1067]

Sad to say, people crying racism are now by the boy who cried wolf, and that sucks because there still are legitimate cases of it, but so many scream it now over everything that it's lost all meaning.

It reminds me of a lady I worked with many, many years ago who would complain to the managers about every little thing.  Probably one of 10 things were legit, but she complained so much that they just tuned her out, and it feels like that is what many of us now do with cries of racism, and, again, that sucks because there are still legit examples, but how are we supposed to know which ones to acknowledge when seemingly everything these days is racist?

This is WAY too sane and logical a post for the internet.

[Stadler]

I spent some time reading a little about this, and I don't think it's all that simple.  Of course there's no "proof" that it's racism; maybe it is, maybe someone has a beef with Beyonce for other reasons, maybe each time it was truly what the voters thought was "the best."  But I kinda doubt it's ever the latter - or at least it rarely is.  Part of me thinks it's a little silly that anyone should think one specific album is the only choice to win, but I don't think the outcry is just people making up reasons that their favorite didn't win either.

But the one doesn't mean the other.  Meaning, just because it's not EXACTLY the record people thought the best doesn't therefore mean it's "racism".  Preference happens all the time.  When something like "best" - an inexact term even when a clear standard is set forth - is used, it's frivolous and self-serving to try to guess at the motives of some stranger (whom you've likely never met).

[XJDenton]

Sad to say, people crying racism are now by the boy who cried wolf, and that sucks because there still are legitimate cases of it, but so many scream it now over everything that it's lost all meaning.

It reminds me of a lady I worked with many, many years ago who would complain to the managers about every little thing.  Probably one of 10 things were legit, but she complained so much that they just tuned her out, and it feels like that is what many of us now do with cries of racism, and, again, that sucks because there are still legit examples, but how are we supposed to know which ones to acknowledge when seemingly everything these days is racist?

This is WAY too sane and logical a post for the internet.

Alternate hypothesis: all of these things were in fact problems of varying degrees, and the issue was people's capacity to care while participating in a system that has a tendency to burn through people's empathy.

[Stadler]

Sad to say, people crying racism are now by the boy who cried wolf, and that sucks because there still are legitimate cases of it, but so many scream it now over everything that it's lost all meaning.

It reminds me of a lady I worked with many, many years ago who would complain to the managers about every little thing.  Probably one of 10 things were legit, but she complained so much that they just tuned her out, and it feels like that is what many of us now do with cries of racism, and, again, that sucks because there are still legit examples, but how are we supposed to know which ones to acknowledge when seemingly everything these days is racist?

This is WAY too sane and logical a post for the internet.

Alternate hypothesis: all of these things were in fact problems of varying degrees, and the issue was people's capacity to care while participating in a system that has a tendency to burn through people's empathy.

Again, though, NOT RACISM.

[XJDenton]

That was a response to Kev's anecdote about the office specifically. It's certainly possible the decisions made by the voting bodies of the awards and the systems in place exhibit some racial bias, no matter how many "love letters" they do to black music. I don't think its an unreasonable discussion to be had.

[hefdaddy42]

I listened to a podcast of critics about this, and while they didn't single out racism, they definitely thought Beyonce should have won a couple of those (I thought she would as well) and gave some reasons why they think it didn't happen.  They stressed "traditionalism" instead of racism, but whatever.

The voters are limited to their specific fields for the most part (so that Bluegrass people aren't voting for Best Hip-Hop album, and vice versa), except for those biggest awards, where EVERYONE gets to vote.  Which means that when you've got mostly pop-style artists nominated, but then you get a bunch on non-pop-style voting, you may not get the results you expect.  Couple that with the fact that some of those bigger awards have expanded from 5 to 10 nominees means the possible splintering of votes becomes more exaggerated.

The puzzling thing for me is not that Beyonce DIDN'T win album of the year, but that Harry Styles DID.  That was a fairly milquetoast, by-the-numbers pop music album.  Certainly nothing groundbreaking, or even all that interesting.  Beyonce would definitely had my vote over that.

[Harmony]

On the flip side, check out Liz Wheeler's Twitter post about how the Grammy's promote satanism which is coming for us all apparently.

Her numerous posts are chalk full of people literally fretting about Satan poisoning their children through music.  It is very reminiscent of the Parents Music Resource Center in the 80s.

I guess turning the channel never occurred to them.

[Lethean]

I spent some time reading a little about this, and I don't think it's all that simple.  Of course there's no "proof" that it's racism; maybe it is, maybe someone has a beef with Beyonce for other reasons, maybe each time it was truly what the voters thought was "the best."  But I kinda doubt it's ever the latter - or at least it rarely is.  Part of me thinks it's a little silly that anyone should think one specific album is the only choice to win, but I don't think the outcry is just people making up reasons that their favorite didn't win either.

But the one doesn't mean the other.  Meaning, just because it's not EXACTLY the record people thought the best doesn't therefore mean it's "racism".  Preference happens all the time.  When something like "best" - an inexact term even when a clear standard is set forth - is used, it's frivolous and self-serving to try to guess at the motives of some stranger (whom you've likely never met).

Of course it doesn't mean that it is - it doesn't mean that it isn't either.  It could be a combination of things or it could be none of it.  But I just don't think people who think it is are all acting in bad faith.

[KevShmev]

Of course it doesn't mean that it is - it doesn't mean that it isn't either.  It could be a combination of things or it could be none of it.  But I just don't think people who think it is are all acting in bad faith.

But that just goes back to the main problem of just assuming the problem is x and shouting about it every time.  There being the possibility of anything is not a good enough reason, otherwise we can denounce anything and everything because "anything is possible." 

[Lethean]

There are always going to be people shouting about something. I tend to ignore the short and sweet shouty tweets whether it would be about this, the Oscars, how their favorite team got robbed, or whatever.  If someone gives more of an argument as to why it was racism or nepotism or favoritism or how their team got robbed, I'll read it and give it more thought.  In a situation like this, it would probably be ridiculous of me to read something and decide yes, it's racism 100%. But whereas in the past my knee jerk reaction might have been to roll my eyes and sigh, now I'll consider it.  I think it's a possible factor.  And me and others entertaining that possibility I think is generally a good thing.  It might make us look at our own behaviors and decision making more closely.

I get that this can be annoying, but I think it's probably more annoying on the flip side of it.

[Cool Chris]

On the flip side, check out Liz Wheeler's Twitter post about how the Grammy's promote satanism which is coming for us all apparently.

Read an article along those lines, or started to till I got annoyed.

I tend to lean right on many issues, and it seems whenever I start to feel good about conservatism and where it can lead our country, I come across something like this and just think "Really? This is where conservatism is at in 2023?"

Passed by a church on the way to school drop-off today, the sign said "If you want to try to be happy more often, try to be offended less often." Maybe paraphrasing, but I liked the sentiment.

[Stadler]

That was a response to Kev's anecdote about the office specifically. It's certainly possible the decisions made by the voting bodies of the awards and the systems in place exhibit some racial bias, no matter how many "love letters" they do to black music. I don't think its an unreasonable discussion to be had.

ANY discussion is reasonable to have, AS LONG AS WE DEAL IN FACTS, OBJECTIVELY, AND NOT FEELINGS.  It's almost as if some of these pundits WANT there to be racism.  I FEEL like it's there, therefore it MUST be, because I'm me, my feelings are important, I matter and whatever. 

Look, BE CONSISTENT.   If the Grammy's MIGHT be racist, because, well, anything is possible, then isn't it just as possible that, oh, I don't know, Trump ISN'T racist, but it just happened that all his business decisions were legitimately made on business decisions?  Of course.  Anything is possible.  Now, I've written in the past that I DON'T think Trump is the raging racist that his naysayers need him to be in our absolute universe of good versus evil (I honestly think he doesn't care enough about anything other than himself to be a real racist) but I think most people see a predominance of behavior that seems to be rooted in an intent to prejudice.

And that's the rub.   These organizations, this aspect of the notion of "systemic racism" is nonsense. It's ascribing a motivation, an intent, to an entity that really only has ONE motivation: EYEBALLS.  They are going to promote who puts viewers in the seats, full stop.  When that was Bruno Mars, Bruno Mars won.  When that was Adele, Adele won.   Beyonce is starting a tour, go fucking figure, and she wins a handful of awards.  Harry Styles is as popular as ice cream on an August night, so they threw him a bone and gave him Album of the Year.   This isn't rocket science, this isn't confusing, and race isn't 1,000 miles from these decisions.   MONEY IS.

[Stadler]

I spent some time reading a little about this, and I don't think it's all that simple.  Of course there's no "proof" that it's racism; maybe it is, maybe someone has a beef with Beyonce for other reasons, maybe each time it was truly what the voters thought was "the best."  But I kinda doubt it's ever the latter - or at least it rarely is.  Part of me thinks it's a little silly that anyone should think one specific album is the only choice to win, but I don't think the outcry is just people making up reasons that their favorite didn't win either.

But the one doesn't mean the other.  Meaning, just because it's not EXACTLY the record people thought the best doesn't therefore mean it's "racism".  Preference happens all the time.  When something like "best" - an inexact term even when a clear standard is set forth - is used, it's frivolous and self-serving to try to guess at the motives of some stranger (whom you've likely never met).

Of course it doesn't mean that it is - it doesn't mean that it isn't either.  It could be a combination of things or it could be none of it.  But I just don't think people who think it is are all acting in bad faith.

Well, see what I wrote above; they kind of are.  No matter what the "acting" is, if it's not in bad faith, then it should be objective, documentable, and in keeping with the facts of the matter at hand.  HALF the potential albums this year were from artists of color.  SIX OUT OF TEN were last year, and an African American won the award.  Since 2008, about 14% of Album of the Year winners were persons of color (guess what the racial makeup of the United States is, rounded to the nearest whole number).   Unless Beyonce is all of a sudden of her own race, I'm at a loss here how over the arc of the last fifteen years, there is documentable, provable, bias against artists of color.   Now, METAL artists, let's talk. 

[Stadler]

There are always going to be people shouting about something. I tend to ignore the short and sweet shouty tweets whether it would be about this, the Oscars, how their favorite team got robbed, or whatever.  If someone gives more of an argument as to why it was racism or nepotism or favoritism or how their team got robbed, I'll read it and give it more thought.  In a situation like this, it would probably be ridiculous of me to read something and decide yes, it's racism 100%. But whereas in the past my knee jerk reaction might have been to roll my eyes and sigh, now I'll consider it.  I think it's a possible factor.  And me and others entertaining that possibility I think is generally a good thing.  It might make us look at our own behaviors and decision making more closely.

I get that this can be annoying, but I think it's probably more annoying on the flip side of it.

And there's noting wrong with that.  I'm the one that is usually arguing that all arguments should be put in the crucible of ideas, and I stand by that. Let's talk about it. Let's consider it.  But again, the crucible is a fact-based, reality-based, objective measure.  Give me something other than "Beyonce didn't win, Beyonce is a woman of color, ergo she didn't win because she's a person of color".  That's not analysis. That's subjective opinion.  I'm not interested in subjective opinion when it flies in the face of the data we have, or when it's used to trump more objective, fact-based hypotheses.

This smacks of the gun argument. "I know guns are in there somewhere, so...."

[Stadler]

There are always going to be people shouting about something. I tend to ignore the short and sweet shouty tweets whether it would be about this, the Oscars, how their favorite team got robbed, or whatever.  If someone gives more of an argument as to why it was racism or nepotism or favoritism or how their team got robbed, I'll read it and give it more thought.  In a situation like this, it would probably be ridiculous of me to read something and decide yes, it's racism 100%. But whereas in the past my knee jerk reaction might have been to roll my eyes and sigh, now I'll consider it.  I think it's a possible factor.  And me and others entertaining that possibility I think is generally a good thing.  It might make us look at our own behaviors and decision making more closely.

I get that this can be annoying, but I think it's probably more annoying on the flip side of it.

Harry Styles took a rash of shit for saying "people like me" in his speech - meaning a poor kid from a single mom, making it big - because everyone assumed it was about race.   For fucks sake, stop forcing your narrative on everyone. We hate it when it's religion, we hate it when it's conservatism, why is it so acceptable here?

[KevShmev]

Harry Styles took a rash of shit for saying "people like me" in his speech - meaning a poor kid from a single mom, making it big - because everyone assumed it was about race.   For fucks sake, stop forcing your narrative on everyone. We hate it when it's religion, we hate it when it's conservatism, why is it so acceptable here?

Can you imagine the reaction if Styles had had the unmitigated gall to, gasp, enjoy his victory on stage, similar to how Lizzo did?  My gosh, the outrage would have been unreal. 

And for the record, I have no issue with winners at these awards shows enjoying it, so long as they don't do it obnoxiously.  You might only win one of these ever in your life, so enjoy it and live it up (gracefully).

[El Barto]

Beyonce set the record last night for most Grammys wins ever last night, but according to some, the Grammys are racist because she has still never won Album of the Year.  Right, the Grammys, that just had a ceremony that was practically a love letter to genres dominated by persons of color, are racist.

You can't make this shit up.

Yes, it is exasperating.  Beyonce wins left and right, and some are still never happy.

Who exactly are "some"?

I want to hit on this because it's important. "Say's who" is the first thing I though, as well. The answer is invariably "some random nobodies on Twitter that nobody's ever heard of." This happens time and time again. The outrage is essentially nonexistent until the media decides to make it so, and then people run with it. Right now Leonardo DiCaprio, 48, slammed over ‘romance’ with Eden Polani, 19, Says a bunch of nobodies.

If you hate that everybody is upset about this or that, and/or you hate that everybody needs their own opinions validated, maybe stop playing ball. It's a self-perpetuating problem only so long as people fail to recognize that they're the ones perpetuating it. Seems like I've been dumping on Kev all morning, and that was certainly not my intention, but bringing these things up only continues the cycle. If nobody talks about it then these random nobodies stop mattering.

If I were trying to teach critical thinking to kids, one of the very first lessons, and it'd be a big one, is to ask "says who" about every single thing they hear. If everybody would do this we'd all be better off.

And I'll point out that this is the very reason talk radio exists, and the reason I hate it so much.

[cramx3]

When it's a slow news day, just make a story out of something someone said on the internet.  Works every time 

[Stadler]

Beyonce set the record last night for most Grammys wins ever last night, but according to some, the Grammys are racist because she has still never won Album of the Year.  Right, the Grammys, that just had a ceremony that was practically a love letter to genres dominated by persons of color, are racist.

You can't make this shit up.

Yes, it is exasperating.  Beyonce wins left and right, and some are still never happy.

Who exactly are "some"?

I want to hit on this because it's important. "Say's who" is the first thing I though, as well. The answer is invariably "some random nobodies on Twitter that nobody's ever heard of." This happens time and time again. The outrage is essentially nonexistent until the media decides to make it so, and then people run with it. Right now Leonardo DiCaprio, 48, slammed over ‘romance’ with Eden Polani, 19, Says a bunch of nobodies.

If you hate that everybody is upset about this or that, and/or you hate that everybody needs their own opinions validated, maybe stop playing ball. It's a self-perpetuating problem only so long as people fail to recognize that they're the ones perpetuating it. Seems like I've been dumping on Kev all morning, and that was certainly not my intention, but bringing these things up only continues the cycle. If nobody talks about it then these random nobodies stop mattering.

If I were trying to teach critical thinking to kids, one of the very first lessons, and it'd be a big one, is to ask "says who" about every single thing they hear. If everybody would do this we'd all be better off.

And I'll point out that this is the very reason talk radio exists, and the reason I hate it so much.

Well, most of that is true, but the "says who" has to be qualified.   The idiots on January 6th were essentially saying "says who".   If you're going to ask that question, it's got to be measured, and it's got to be part of the dialogue, and it's got to be a complete back and forth.    I know for me, I bring it up here, because there ARE people here that by their own admission are "those people" in concept if not reality. There are lengthy threads here about the presence (or not) of "systemic racism", and you remember, Bart, I got called a "racist" (though not to my face) by a coward that couldn't fathom that I might disagree with that concept on intellectual grounds. 

I know for me, I'm still getting the feeds from the "paid Democratic operatives" (that's sort of a joke, intended so you know who I'm talking about not to make a statement) and I just don't bother.  I'm not giving them the satisfaction of telling them they are wrong.  Twitter is not a debate, it's not a discussion, it's a jousting match and/or a business.  It's not important that they (and it's not just on the left) be right, it's that they be provocative.   That's not conducive to unification or bipartisanship.   

[El Barto]

Beyonce set the record last night for most Grammys wins ever last night, but according to some, the Grammys are racist because she has still never won Album of the Year.  Right, the Grammys, that just had a ceremony that was practically a love letter to genres dominated by persons of color, are racist.

You can't make this shit up.

Yes, it is exasperating.  Beyonce wins left and right, and some are still never happy.

Who exactly are "some"?

I want to hit on this because it's important. "Say's who" is the first thing I though, as well. The answer is invariably "some random nobodies on Twitter that nobody's ever heard of." This happens time and time again. The outrage is essentially nonexistent until the media decides to make it so, and then people run with it. Right now Leonardo DiCaprio, 48, slammed over ‘romance’ with Eden Polani, 19, Says a bunch of nobodies.

If you hate that everybody is upset about this or that, and/or you hate that everybody needs their own opinions validated, maybe stop playing ball. It's a self-perpetuating problem only so long as people fail to recognize that they're the ones perpetuating it. Seems like I've been dumping on Kev all morning, and that was certainly not my intention, but bringing these things up only continues the cycle. If nobody talks about it then these random nobodies stop mattering.

If I were trying to teach critical thinking to kids, one of the very first lessons, and it'd be a big one, is to ask "says who" about every single thing they hear. If everybody would do this we'd all be better off.

And I'll point out that this is the very reason talk radio exists, and the reason I hate it so much.

Well, most of that is true, but the "says who" has to be qualified.   The idiots on January 6th were essentially saying "says who".   If you're going to ask that question, it's got to be measured, and it's got to be part of the dialogue, and it's got to be a complete back and forth.    I know for me, I bring it up here, because there ARE people here that by their own admission are "those people" in concept if not reality. There are lengthy threads here about the presence (or not) of "systemic racism", and you remember, Bart, I got called a "racist" (though not to my face) by a coward that couldn't fathom that I might disagree with that concept on intellectual grounds. 

I know for me, I'm still getting the feeds from the "paid Democratic operatives" (that's sort of a joke, intended so you know who I'm talking about not to make a statement) and I just don't bother.  I'm not giving them the satisfaction of telling them they are wrong.  Twitter is not a debate, it's not a discussion, it's a jousting match and/or a business.  It's not important that they (and it's not just on the left) be right, it's that they be provocative.   That's not conducive to unification or bipartisanship.

Well, most of that is true, but the "says who" has to be qualified.
I'd suggest that it needs to be qualified in its answer. There are plenty of people whose opinions I'd want to hear. Perhaps because I agree with them. Perhaps because they'd offer up a perspective that I hadn't considered. Perhaps because I respect them and I'm curious what they think. If the "outrage" comes from Tom Brokaw I'd like to hear about it. If it was 12 Twitter nobodies who were selected because they were perfect for supporting the narrative that "people are outraged" then nobody should even be giving them the time of day. I suppose it comes down to motivation. Is there an actual outrage, or are you just trying to create and perpetuate one.

[Stadler]

That's true; I was more referring to the notion that "says who" can be misinterpreted not as real inquisition, but rather a rejection of authority (that's why the reference to January 6th).  "Hey Bart, there's this thing called COVID, please wear a mask."   Some people said "says who?" and went off and researched the real science.   A whole bunch of people said "says who" and coughed in your face, picked their nose, shook your hand and walked away.   There's a difference there in the intent of "says who".  I like your version, I don't like that latter version.  We don't need more of that we need less.

If we're not willing to put our ideology aside - if the "says who" is rooted in partisanship and ideology - we're wasting our time.