The most basic and the most important task of any technician in both music and theatre production is simply wrapping a cable. It may sound basic, but *how* you wrap a cable can actually determine how long it lasts. Now, most professional for-profit productions do list cable as “consumables”, meaning that they are designed to be thrown out and purchased or manufactured anew if they develop an issue. But you will catch hell by any Foreperson, TD or SM for wrapping cable in a way that damages it.
There is a correct technique accepted by both IATSE and Teamsters production houses, and that is called the “Over/Under” technique. Trying to describe it in words is maddening, and even I have a hard time trying to tell someone what has become a reflex to me over 20 years. But, this video by the London School of Sound perfectly shows the way I learned how to wrap cable.
Now, I know what you are saying if this is a new thing to you, or if you’ve been too embarrassed to ask because some asshole stagehand called you out for not knowing such a “basic” thing (And, if any tech does pull that, they are a bad person and shouldn’t be on the gig, FYI)
“But, WHY?!??! Why do Techs gotta make EVERYTHING so hard and, well, dramatic!!??”
Excellent Question!
It all comes down to how the cable is constructed. The cable itself is actually made up of various different wires (which is why we don’t call a cable a “wire” on a show, because they technically mean two different things). The wires in a cable, such as a balanced XLR cable, are actually wrapped around one another, like this:
Now you see that the wires are actually wrapped AROUND one another! This means that the cable, once covered in shielding, it going to want to twist a certain way, because the cable is tensioned around one another (usually counter-clockwise). This means if you try to wrap it like your extension cord you use for your Christmas lights, it is going to get kinked up, and the wires inside will start binding against one another because by just wrapping it over your arm like a garden hose is going to force those cables to bind and twist in a way that is unnatural.
In short: You end up forcing them against one another until they simply break.
Yep. Wire itself is just thin bits of copper (anywhere from 22 to 10 gauge thick, with the bigger the number being the thinner the wire), and it doesn’t take much to bend them out. Just like when you shove your earbuds in your pocket without making sure they are coiled up nicely.
So, when you wrap Over/Under, you are actually alternating the coil of the cable to match the natural way the cable wants to go (this is called the “lay” of the cable). When you get the over/under technique down, you will feel that the cable naturally wants to coil that way, and it takes no effort. When you wrap a coil just one over the other like a home extension cord, you can feel the cable actually twist and want to fight you.
Also, to know if you got it right, all you have to do is take one end of the cable, and then throw the rest of it out away from your body. If you did it right the cable will FLY out of your hands and land straight and true right on the deck, making you look like a badass stage ninja!
It may take a lot of practice, but eventually you will literally do it in your sleep. Just like any motor action, it just takes practice! And, you will find that many professional houses still have people who cannot coil cable correctly (these tend to also be the know-it-alls who will give new techs trouble, ironically). Master fast, accurate cable wrapping and you will save the band or the venue a TON of money in cable costs, and it will make you more attractive too! Trust me.
me, begging on my knees, sobbing, voice raw, whispering quietly: please dear god let me enjoy something in moderation
brain: OBSESSED OBSESSED OBSESSED OBSESSED OBSESSED OBSESSED OBSESSED OBSESSED
I’m not even much of a fan of genderbends but goddamn am I even less of a fan of getting ordered around about what I should enjoy and how I should enjoy it and being lectured about how ‘problematic’ it is, when the real problem is that they’ve cast the thing in question in black and white and refuse to admit that there’s anything but their narrow framing.
Changing a character to the ‘opposite’ cis gender is a very different thing than making them trans or nonbinary. Insisting that people only change characters to trans is also really damn invalidating, because it implies that being trans is interchangable with being cis. Whoopsie doodle!
I think the real issue here is that a lot of people want to see more trans headcanons, but for some reason think that using sj words while being bossy and rude is the way to go about it. Dress it up in progressive language all you like; at the end of the day you’re still being bossy and rude to get what you want, regardless of anyone else’s valid feelings.
i get really irritated at kids who scream that genderbends are transphobic because they’re completely missing the context and history. they have no idea. it’s like to them, Cis People made up genderbends specifically to thumb their noses at trans people.
rule 63 was originally a guy thing, sexual objectification thing. it states ‘for every male character, there’s a female version of that character’, and not because the dudes who were into it cared about having more realistically rendered female heroes in their media. it was made popular on 4chan and porn boards and comics+gaming forums because you could reduce a manly male character into a sexy tits-and-ass pinup. there were related kinks of sissification, but mostly it was about getting to jerk it to a sexy female version of a previously unappealing, macho male character.
then women got hold of the rule and started going, okay. let’s look at the female version of this male character. let’s talk about being a woman in a man’s world. let’s talk about rorschach’s misogyny, tony stark’s womanizing, batman’s grimness, the fact there’s one girl ninja to every four or five guy ninjas, let’s talk about that in the hypothetical context of these male heroes being women instead. if there’s a girl version for every male character, what does that mean? what’s her story?
and it became this really amazing lens for female fans to interrogate stories through, to examine the effects of sexism and misogyny and masculinity, to introduce another woman into a story with very few, to identify with fully-rendered heroes of the fan’s own gender. and to interrogate the very nature of gender, which led into the development of genderbends where the character’s gender identity didn’t necessarily match their assigned sex, and from there an increasing interest in, and familiarity with, trans characters, trans people, and trans issues.
so like. people now reducing the issue to ‘cis people are gross and hate trans people’ is pretty ridiculous. it ignores basically twenty years of women questioning, confronting and then dismantling the de-facto heteronormative, exploitative male gaze in order to create the radically progressive fandom atmosphere as we know it today on tumblr.
I’d been trying to put into words my issue with the idea that genderbent versions of characters are somehow automatically, innately transphobic, and I think you pretty well nailed it.
Originally, it was called ‘genderswap’ or ‘genderswitch’, which was rightfully criticized for reinforcing a binary view of gender. Hence why it is now ‘genderbend‘. Things can bend in many directions.
Yeah basically.
Rule 63s can be transphobic and gender essentialist, no question, just as m/m slash can be misogynistic, but it’s not inherent to the genre.
The way I see it, rule 63 and trans/nb headcanons are two subsets of what I call “gender AUs”, and they’re not mutually exclusive. Girl!Sherlock Holmes is an example of one, trans!Holmes is the other, and trans woman Holmes is both. All those would be worthwhile explorations.
Yes! And all sorts have their place because all of them are exploring the experience of an under-represented group (or two) in a different way.
Thank you for writing this 🙂 I never want to tell people that their feelings are invalid, but sometimes I think those feelings come from gut negative reactions that deserve to be re-examined. Like in this case, trans people have every right to be wary of something that could – and admittedly, sometimes does – re-enforce difficult gender stereotypes, and they also have every right to say genderbent art/fic isn’t to their taste or ask people to tag it.
But there’s nothing inherently transphobic about art that explores gender – quite the opposite, I think – and that’s what genderbends are about. It can be hugelybeneficial to imagine male characters as female in order to explore roles that aren’t traditionally given to women (I would really love to see a genderbent take on, say, Stacker Pentecost for that exact reason).
i just want to point out that i know at least five trans people who have referred to the place they see a doctor about HRT as “the rule 63 clinic”.
i think genderbent art and fiction is very important as part of our culture’s collective exploration of gender. we NEED to include mutability. we NEED to place known characters in new gender frameworks and see how it changes things.
we need to see things like… (pause for me to think of examples, this is too fun and it’s hard not to get carried away) ok, if superman and supergirl were superwoman and superboy instead, what would change? clarice kent the dorky, earnest reporter and her hotshot little cousin karl. that’d be cute. would clarice date lois, or louis? both fun variations. but then you take someone like wonder woman, whose essential nature is linked to gender, and it’s not so easy. you can’t just go ‘uhhh wonder man from the island of man-azons’ unless you’re making a clumsy joke. the whole framework of greek gods and everything is involved. but you could imagine a counterpart, some avatar of bacchus perhaps, from an island of fauns, and instead of a warrior he’s a partier. an indestructible good-natured joker who just wants everyone to have some fun. instead of a genderbent wonder woman, you’ve got an oc inspired by her world.
that’s the kind of thinking about gender i want artists and writers to be doing. human gender and sexuality are complex and messy and fascinating. the fact that so much of the topic has been taboo for so long is a shame. art needs to be on the forefront of dismantling those taboos.
So this is for you, dear hockey fan, that have to suffer through online streams to watch your favorite teams’ games and suddenly have to google a new one because the hockey gods hate you. I hope this masterpost helps! (and i’ll probably add more links later!)
Clients’ names and personal information have been omitted to retain their privacy.
“That boy ain’t right.”
There’s more to abuse than hitting.
tbh, I was kinda waiting for someone to point this out and yes, you’re absolutely right. Abuse doesn’t have to be physical, it can be emotional and/or verbal.
This comic came about because I‘d read several commentaries comparing Homer Simpson and Peter Griffin, specifically in regards to how they treat their daughters.
Almost everyone I know who takes the time to think critically about The Simpsons or Family Guy hones in on the fact that Peter physically and emotionally abuses Meg, whereas Homer is incompetent, neglectful, and absolutely does not understand Lisa – but he loves her and he tries.
In the commentary about how Peter and Homer treat their daughters, I didn’t really see anyone bring up the physical/emotional abuse of their sons.
To lay it out there – I loathe Family Guy. Fucking hate it.
I grew up watching The Simpsons and can have entire conversations purely through quoting the show. But as much as I love The Simpsons, I think the overall cultural attitude to corporal punishment (physical abuse) has changed enough that it’s time to retire the running “joke” of Homer choking Bart. It may have been a culturally acceptable joke ten years ago, but more and more research is showing seriously negative outcomes for kids that have experienced any form of physical punishment. We need to stop normalizing it.
As for King of the Hill, Hank and Peggy are hardly perfect parents and both have a tendency towards stifling Bobby’s more flamboyant and/or “feminine” behavior. But they both love Bobby; they have both, at different times during the show, been able to connect to Bobby through his various interests. While not perfect, they are a much healthier depiction of a family.
As a queer transgender dude who grew up in Texas and is totally unsuited for Southern concepts of masculinity, I have a real soft spot for King of the Hill and for Bobby. It’sa far more real and complex depiction of family, compared to the pointless cruelty of Family Guy or the lesser cruelties of The Simpsons.
“That Boy Ain’t Right” Hank said this a lot, but if I remember correctly, he’s never said this to Bobby’s face. He doesn’t understand him sometimes, but he’s never treated him like Homer and Peter have.
Another thing on Hank. A big part of the show is Hank learning to be a good father while dealing with his experiences with his own shitty, racist, abusive father. If Hank has a scene where he is extremely uncomfortable, it’s almost entirely with showing emotions. When someone is crying or upset around him (Peggy, Luanne, Bobby, John Redcorn, Bill, etc) he shuts down because that’s what his father molded him into.
And by the end of the series you see him behave differently. He learns to be openly romantic with his wife (even having sex on a freaking train), he deals with his father’s issues, HE DRESSED IN DRAG IN FRONT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD FOR BILL, and most importantly he learns that his son will always be “different” and gets over his own unease so that Bobby can be happy. Hank’s a good dad on the pure measure that he tries and that’s damn more than Peter or even Homer.
But Bob Belcher will always be #1 dad anyways.
I’m glad I searched the notes long enough to find this addition since it’s great and covers all the issues I failed to word myself because I just can’t words sometimes.
Thank you @potbellies for mentioning Bob Belcher. He is #1 dad for sure.
Bob will occasionally jokingly mention that his kids are useless/horrible, but he has never abused them – mentally, emotionally, or physically,- at any point. There have been entire episode plotlines that focused on him bonding with Gene, Louise, and Tina. He constantly and consistently supports them and shows that he loves them unconditionally.
In “Sheesh! Cab, Bob?”, Bob goes so far as to shave his mustache so Jimmy Jr., the boy Tina has a crush on, will be allowed to come to her birthday party. In “The Equestranauts”, Bob reluctantly agrees to learn about one of Tina’s favorite shows and dress up as the show’s parody of a brony to go to a convention so he can take back Tina’s horse figure that she was conned out of by a gross jerk. He has also been shown to resent the idea that Tina is growing up.
In “Carpe Museum”, he accompanies the kids on a field trip and, although he disapproves of Louise’s behavior at first, he eventually has a good time with her and a classmate when they stray from the group (and get into trouble, as Louise usually does). Later, he feels immensely proud because she admits she’s thought about taking over the family business when she grows up.
One of the best examples happens in “The Laser-inth”, when Bob takes Gene to a laser light rock show because he used to love going to those shows as a kid and wants to share that with his son. Partway into the show, Gene gets overwhelmed by the flashing lights and loud music, breaking down in tears. Instead of forcing Gene to sit through the show, Bob immediately removes Gene from the situation, even though he would have preferred to stay. He put his son’s needs before his own, and not once does he make fun of Gene for his breakdown. They sit in Bob’s car and Bob turns on a CD of the band at low volume and leans his and Gene’s seats back so they can have their own smaller version of a show. Eventually, Gene decides he wants to go back to see the end of the real show, so they sneak back in and Bob makes Gene a pair of earplugs so the music from the show won’t be so overstimulating.
These are just a few examples, but this kind of stuff happens all the time on Bob’s Burgers. Bob is an excellent father and loving husband who deserves the most praise out of all these animated dads.
kind of a subtler effect of the eclipse was how it turned shadows into big toenail clippings
Not sure if this is useful to anyone, but I had a big breakthroughs in my idea of self-care recently when I applied a phrase I use to combat negative self-talk – “Would you talk to a close friend that way?” – and reframed it as: “Would you care for a friend that way?”
Imagine my friend came to visit and she got hungry. Would I say, “Wait five hours until I’m done with this project and then you can eat a granola bar?” No, I would not. Would I say, “I’m don’t have time to go grocery shopping for you, so why don’t you spend three days straight eating this years-old Ramen I found in the basement that one of my old roommates left behind?” No, I would not. If her clothes got dirty, would I say, “I’m too lazy to scrounge up some quarters so why don’t you wear these ill-fitting clothes from Goodwill with holes in them?” No, I would not. If she had a day off, would I say, “I can’t be bothered to find something good for you to do; why don’t you just sit on the couch reading depressing internet articles all day?” No I would not. And if I were at a party, and she was tired and feeling uncomfortable and wanted to go home, would I say, “Stop being such an awkward loser, stay here and smile at people so they don’t think you’re rude?” No, I would not. A person I treated that way would be justified in wondering if she was my friend at all.
But, needless to say, I treat myself that way all the time. Once my friend has all her basic needs taken care of, sure, we can go for manicures and massages after. But that’s not the point. The point is making sure she’s fed and washed and clothed and comfortable; and I don’t think I’m the only one who has a whole lot of trouble even getting to that point.
pretentious illiterate (that’s their username, not an insult) on Metafilter (via gazztron)
just moving along like everyone else 