#and i’m sure the military does worse but like to specifically trigger someone’s individual personal traumas like come on guys | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

zilllathegod · 3 years

Text

Is Halo 4 aging gracefully?

In a nutshell, yes I think it is. After the release of Halo Reach in 2010, Bungie left the Halo series entirely to Microsoft. 343 industries was the team created by Microsoft at that time to carry on the franchise and in 2012 they released their first game, Halo 4. For a short time, approximately 2 weeks, the game was very popular but could not hold on to a core population when faced with competing against the release of Call of Duty Black Ops 2.

The population dwindled and never recovered even though many updates were released to tweak the game. Eventually, in 2015, Halo 5 was released with improved multiplayer (but a worse single player experience). I can make an entirely different post about the changes made between the two games but it is widely considered that Halo 5 took steps in the right direction to return Halo to some of its mechanical roots while balancing the need for parity with other modern games.

Since its release, Halo 4 has gone on to take a sort of joke reputation in the halo community as the most "Call Of Duty"-esque Halo ever created. Halo 4 did find its way into the compilation game "Halo: The Master Chief Collection" alongside the original trilogy, which means that Halo 4's multiplayer has been made easily accessible for anyone interested in playing the older games. If it had just been left on the 360 it is possible very few people would continue to play the game, especially considering that Microsoft recently announced they were shutting down the 360 halo servers in 2021.

All of that being the case..when I play Halo 4 today what it honestly feels like is a fun, good looking, familiar, game that shares key characteristics with the halo formula. Halo 4 felt foreign when it came out, but after playing other modern shooters and switching over to Halo 4 the game feels good because of a few key design choices.

It is important to note that it is my opinion that Halo 4 is fun and exactly how "fun" it is remains up to any individual to decide for themselves. What I would like to focus on is the fact that Halo DOES feel more like a modern shooter, not if that is a good or bad thing. You could make the argument that Halo should stick to its traditional roots and the fact that 343 making halo more accessible to gamers from other games is not necessarily a good thing. This entirely depends on your values but personally I feel like 343 had no choice and if Destiny or Halo: Reach are any indication then Bungie would've did the same kinds of things, had they remained with the series.

343 did some good things in certain respects and went overboard in other areas that stick out to me after spending time playing games like Destiny 2, Fortnite, Hyperscape, Apex Legends, Battlefield, and Call of Duty. I want to dig into some of the characteristics of Halo 4 that support its familiarity with modern shooters.

Aiming

Aiming is a huge part of every first person shooter. In Halo, aiming was typically assigned to the right thumbstick and would cover the entire screen for certain guns, or not be available for other guns. With the increasing popularity of the Call of Duty series a slightly different aiming system became common called ADS, short for aim-down-sight. The first time I saw this system used was in the early Medal of Honor series, a popular Military shooter that would be the pre-cursor to Call of Duty. You could also make the argument that even earlier games like Doom were the originators of this kind of centered aiming.

This method has the player press the left thumb trigger and actually look down the barrel of the 3d gun when the button is pressed. When the player releases the button their sight returns to normal, simulating the real-time action of pulling a gun closer to your face then quickly moving it back. At first the difference seems stylistic but it has a noticeable affect on gameplay habits and muscle memory. These particular stylistic choices are what make individual games feel unique unto themselves.

Halo 4 actually did not feature ADS but what it did feature was the ability to set a toggle for aiming to the left thumb trigger, allowing a similar button configuration to the ADS method common in other shooters. Basically it controls like other games but LOOKS like Halo. I actually think how Halo 4 handled aiming was a better stylistic compromise than what Halo 5 would eventually do, which completely abandons the old style in favor of more straight forward ADS.

Adding sprint

Up until this point sprinting had never been a part of Halo and had only ever been featured in Halo Reach as a special ability that you could decide to have or not have. In Halo 4 sprint was added as a default capability for players, which was unprecedented. From the player perspective it gives you the ability to at least feel like you can reach engagements quicker or evade losing battles. Many Halo players consider the addition of sprint to be a major detriment to the series because of the perceived negative effect on map design and game flow. I can see some merits to how sprint can alter map design but I largely don't agree that it breaks the game in the way that many say. How can you quantify that? It still "feels" like halo and if you are like me then you would have already been using sprint heavily in Halo Reach (sprint was the go to armor ability in MLG for instance). To me it is actually satisfying to be able to speed up in certain scenarios, a satisfaction that is reinforced in other modern games that would feel jarring not to have in Halo. Adding sprint doesn’t stop the game from feeling like Halo and it is better to just get used to it as a mechanic in modern shooters.

Loadouts/Abilities

Halo followed the classical method of distributing weapons to the player during multiplayer matches by giving the player a default set of weapons, then pushing them to pick up weapons scattered throughout the map. The player could find weapons either from fallen enemies or from pre-determined placements around the map. Understanding weapon spawn locations and timings were a key part of the competitive Halo meta. Another type of distribution became common in other games, especially Battlefield and Call of Duty, where the player had a more distinct, configurable, weapon-set that they could choose prior to the match start that could be different from another players weapon-set. Maybe I choose the long range weapon loadout to optimize for sniping encounters and someone else chooses the machine gun for suppression support. The weapon loadouts open the door for players to express themselves via different roles as supposed to having a more level playing field from the start.

This kind of weapon distribution plays into the core design of the game and meshes well with class-based specializations(sniper vs medic) as supposed to the classical arena archetype that is based on equal-starts and a level playing field. A good example of how this plays out is in Destiny 2 when each player determines the weapons they use personally and there are no weapon pickups at all. This can be compared to a classic Halo match where everyone starts with a pistol and assault rifle and continually fights for map positioning to gain access to the best weapons. Other battle Royale games like Fortnite, Apex Legends, and Hyperscape have renewed a focus on weapon pickups and situational awareness when it comes to weapon choice. Halo: Reach, Halo4 and to some extent Halo 5 (in the warzone mode) all adopt a loadout system for multiplayer matches.

Personally I don't feel like halo has the weapon selection or role specializations that make loadouts make sense HOWEVER the existence of loadouts for weapons does make the game feel familiar. With the addition of weapon cosmetics it is clear there is a push for players to build a more personal connection with specific weapons they use as supposed to weapons feeling like interchangeable tools. Having the player play "favorites" in this way is the core design change that Halo 4 shares with other comparable modern games.

Expanded Movement

Since Halo takes most of its base design from earlier arena shooters like Quake and Unreal, the movement is pretty basic. Like I touched on earlier, in the original trilogy you can't even sprint, the only thing you do is walk around, jump, and shoot. Many new shooters have implemented expanded movement systems for players though, like Overwatch or Destiny where certain abilities allow players to fly or teleport. With the addition of sprint, Halo 4 added abilities that augmented player movement further pushing to expand the way the player interacts with the environment. This was previously explored with the jetpack in halo reach but was more refined in Halo 4. 343 would eventually push the player movement further with default strafing and levitation abilities, among other things, for Halo 5. While not entirely as exaggerated as the hero-based character types of Apex legends, Halo could combine weapon loadouts and abilities to hint at specialization that previously was not present in the series but is currently common in most other FPS games.

Ease of use (feed back)

Basically in a nutshell, Halo 4 feels easy. It feels easier to rattle off kills compared to Halo 3, which many consider to be the pinnacle of the series. To some extent the game feels like its pushing you towards being satisfied faster. When I compare these two games I'm not entirely sure what it is from a game design perspective, it could be something like time-to-kill or hitboxes. One of the things I think is how the battle rifle feels to use. The Halo 3 BR has a smaller reticule and a generally softer sound/feeling. The Halo 4 reticule looks huge to me by comparison and the gun feels heavier. I haven't done any in-depth testing to compare the weapons but they definitely feel very different. In a nutshell the most used most important weapon in the game feels more grounded and easier to use. I'm not saying anything about gametypes or map design just core shooting-killing with the battle rifle and other precision weapons.

There are some areas where 343 went overboard and they have been trending slowly in the right direction. Maybe in a different post I will cover the mistakes they have made but due to some key design changes (that ultimately I feel neutral about ) they have managed to create Halo titles that have some familiarity with other games in the current market. This is important because this familiarity has a positive effect on the franchises long term market viability. The difficulty for 343 is balancing the needs of the market with the stylistic needs of the community. PS: some recent Halo 4 highlights https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_r8GbcE_NVA&ab_channel=ZilllaTheGod

#halo #bungie #343 #microsoft #fps #shooters #xbox

0 notes

firefighterkingdom · 4 years

Text

#3 Fire Fighters & PTSD: What Are The Signs & What Can Be Done For It

Well, Hello everybody. Welcome to another episode of FireFighter Kingdom. We’re on podcast, episode number three. My name is Vince Trujillo, I am the co host along with a professional firefighter and president of the New Mexico Professional Firefighters Association Mr. Robert Sanchez. Robert, how are you doing today?

Robert Sanchez: Good. Welcome all the audience on there from FireFighter Kingdom. We’re happy to have everybody here again, once again, trying to educate the firefighters out there, give them some new information.

Vince Trujillo: Yeah, and we have some really good information coming up today regarding mental health and firefighters. But quickly, before we go ahead and introduce our special guest for today’s topic, just a little bit more about Robert for those of you in the FireFighter Kingdom. Robert has been a proud member of the IAFF for over 19 years, and was the longest serving executive officer at the current Albuquerque Area Firefighters Local 244 Executive Board for the last 16 years. Robert has concurrently served as the president of New Mexico Professional Firefighters since 2019. Roberto, you’ve been with the organization for a long time and have done lots of things, man. Thank you so much for all you do.

Robert Sanchez: It’s my honor and privilege actually to be out there just helping firefighters. To be quite honest, firefighters, in the State of New Mexico, the men and women who are paramedic firefighters they’re the ones that make everything happen. And we’re just happy to be a tool for their resources and their success for sure.

Vince Trujillo: Well, as a member of the public, thanks for everything all of you do. So let’s get on with the podcast for today. We are really honored and privileged to welcome our mental health professional Dr. Troy Rodgers. A little bit about Dr. Rodgers. Dr Rodgers is a police and criminal psychologist based in New Mexico. He has a master’s degree and a doctorate in clinical forensic psychology from the University of Denver. Dr. Rodgers has been the agency director for Public Safety Psychology Group LLC, PSPG, since 2004 and at the present time he works as a consultant psychologist for over 130 local state and federal law enforcement, fire, and correction agencies. Wow I think I got it all out. Doctor, thank you so much for coming on.

Robert Sanchez: Now that’s a whole other podcast I think just-

Dr. Troy Rodgers: I appreciate it.

Robert Sanchez: … the introduction for the doctor.

Dr. Troy Rodgers: I appreciate the time you took, and given the opportunity to talk about the brave folks who are serving New Mexico.

Vince Trujillo: Thank you both! Dr. Rodgers. A couple of things just for personally from my side of things. I was having a conversation with Robert a couple of weeks back in regards to some of the trauma and stressful situations that our firefighters run into. And as we know from military service and trauma exposure is that these things can build up over time and can really affect our first responder and firefighters. And its something that we in the public maybe don’t think about as much. But the first people responding to a car accident, at home accidents, someone having an acute health crisis like a heart attack, even things like abuse, neglect, pretty much any number of different types of high intensity calls they may get on a consistent basis and have to deal with emotionally or mentally. And that’s why there are great people like Dr Rodgers who help them manage this. And that’s what we’re hoping to talk a little bit about more today. Talk about PTSD a little bit and then also talk about some of what you have to offer, and some recommendations for our firefighters out there. Robert,

Robert Sanchez: So great. So doctor, it’s been an honor working with you for the several years that you’ve been assisting firefighters. Obviously, you do a great job. On a consistent basis we use you, and we see a lot of successful results in our firefighters. And I want to thank you for that and I appreciate that. There’s times where I’ve called you at midnight, or one in the morning and ask you that you would assist us. Firefighters are seeing the public at their worst, and you come and assist and benefit our members tremendously. First thing I want to talk about is you hear about the exposures? You have the one incident exposure, and then you have the chronic exposure. Can you tell me what the difference to that is?

Dr. Troy Rodgers: One of the things that most folks don’t realize about public safety careers is that on a daily basis, folks are exposed to both ends of the spectrum when it comes to events. You’ll sit around and be bored for two, three, four hours, and then all of a sudden you’re dealing with a life and death situation. Or you’re seeing something that the general public is not exposed to, or they’re not aware of. Or they see it on TV, but they can turn the TV off. Public safety professionals aren’t allowed to do that. I often use the example that when you go through the Fire Academy you’re given a backpack. And that backpack you’re going to carry with you throughout your entire career. Every time you take one of those calls, one of those calls that’s difficult.

Dr. Troy Rodgers: That involves a child, that’s a death, that’s something along those lines. You throw a little rock in that backpack. First three, 400 rocks don’t weigh a whole lot. But when you get to three 4,000 rocks, that backpack weighs a ton. It has this cumulative effect. And that’s the buildup we talk about. A lot of folks can understand that one traumatic recall. But they don’t recognize that in addition to that one call, you’re carrying that backpack every day with that exposure that just continues, and is almost routine after four, five, six years of doing this.

Robert Sanchez: There’s one specific exposure that could cause you to have PTSD correct and be… So when you guys recommend someone they have PTSD, they’re diagnosed rather is a good word, and then there’s that one incident that could happen. Is there several exposure incidents that you might not know what’s affecting you and then it is.

Dr. Troy Rodgers: A lot of times folks will go through events, and they’ve learned how to compartmentalize, or to box it off, put it away and do their job. Folks are trained in a moment. “I’ve got to get things done. I’ve got to save people, I’ve got to help people.” So they may experience something, and not even realize that that experience was traumatic, or potentially traumatic, or contributed to potentially creating PTSD. And so they’ll go through two, three weeks, four weeks, and not realize that they haven’t been sleeping well, they haven’t been interacting well, they’re more irritable with family. So that event may have set the stage for another event to come, which compounds that makes it worse.

Robert Sanchez: So the more rocks in the backpack.

Dr. Troy Rodgers: More rocks in the backpack, and the more of those backpack, or more of those rocks that trigger that person. I always tell folks that stress is something that we all experience, but it becomes traumatic if it’s too personal. If it’s too similar to our own life, it’s too overwhelming and we can’t process it. So the more of those rocks you throw in, and the more the big rocks that come in, the more likely folks are to get PTSD.

Vince Trujillo: Doctor, just to interject real quick here, as far as the detecting is concerned, How do you detect it, and or how does the firefighter detect it, and what is the process in regards to treatment? How is it treated?

Dr. Troy Rodgers: How does it come around? A couple of things. One of the things I really emphasize when we talk with firefighters and first responders, many times, is that changes in behavior are a great indicator. If somebody was a very social person, and all of a sudden they’re isolating, they’re not talking with friends. If somebody was a happy person, and all of a sudden they’re irritable and angry. If somebody was slightly cynical, but now they hate everybody and they’re cynical in all their interactions. Those are all warning signs, and we encourage folks to talk with significant others, family, friends, spouse, so that they can give them that kind of feedback. Number one reason-

Vince Trujillo: I would guess that maybe it’s the people closest like family and friends that notice it more so they are the ones that sometimes raise concern first?

Dr. Troy Rodgers: Hundred percent. Yeah. Saying that the number one reason why we get first responders calling us for some sort of intervention, or some sort of counseling is because a family member’s usually said, “I’m concerned about you.” I always tell a story years back at an individual I worked with, and the first phone call I ever got was him. Was a voicemail and he left a voicemail saying, “Hey doc, my wife says I’m an asshole. I need to come see you.” And that’s all he said. We actually started talking about it we realized that it was stress, trauma, depression coming in that was leading to irritability at home.

Vince Trujillo: And then once detected and someone has raised their hand and said there is an issue and need help, what are the next steps?

Dr. Troy Rodgers: There are a lot of different treatments. There are different ways to address it. One of the first things is actually coming into the office, sitting down with either myself or another clinician who’s familiar with the culture, the background. And getting a feel for what is the source of the problem, how severe is it, how many rocks are in that backpack per se. So we can quantify it. And then there are a lot of different approaches. One could be just talk therapy coming in once a week for the next six weeks. There’s other trauma treatments called EMDR, which is a specific protocol which addresses trauma and reprogramming the way the memory sees that trauma. We do other things like activity based work. One of the first things I assigned to most of my clients is you got to start doing sports, or running, or CrossFit, or those sorts of things because that physiologically will help the body.

Dr. Troy Rodgers: Other things we start looking at is what are the habits. Has the person who’s experiencing some of this trauma develop bad coping habits like drinking alcohol. And alcohol in and of itself is not a problem. But when you’re drinking a fifth of vodka, and a six pack of beer to go to sleep at night, we got to talk about that. And I’ll get firefighters that say, “So is a half a fifth of vodka okay.” We can’t that but we got to have that discussion.

Robert Sanchez: So that’s how firefighters are they want to know an exact amount, so they can measure it out. Be precise.

Dr. Troy Rodgers: Right, exactly.

Vince Trujillo: Now how do you see treatments and going through the process helping?

Dr. Troy Rodgers: In terms of cure rate? It’s a tough one to answer that question, or to respond to that question. But let me give you a little bit of an answer that will help relate to your folks is. I always tell folks everything that they’re going to experience, those sort of things we can manage. We can deal with coming in to that first step. We just learn how to cope with it better, how to work through it, how to manage the symptoms. Now, is it going to go away a hundred percent? Probably not. Some of the hypervigilance that folks experience, which is that being hyper aware loud noises, triggering them, those things. We can’t unlearn some of that, but we learn to manage it. We learn to have outlets that deal with it. We learn to process it. And going back to our backpack analogy, we learn to empty the backpack so that it’s not so heavy.

Dr. Troy Rodgers: It doesn’t have that burden. I had a first responder call me about a month ago, and thank me because he had done some work with one of my staff. And during our conversation he said he had one regret and I said, “What was that regret?” And he said, “I regret I didn’t call you guys three years earlier because I wasted the last three years being miserable when I didn’t have to be.” So a lot of it’s just learning to get through it, and manage it so you can get to a better place.

Robert Sanchez: And leading into that doctor, I want to talk about I hate to say it, and just being a firefighter myself. And knowing several men and women in the fire service that we deal with on a daily basis. Sometimes we all have that macho attitude, like it’s going to happen to me where I’m not going to show my weakness, or I’m not going to be that so-called person that has the problem. So we have that stigma in the fire service. And what can you talk about overcoming the stigma, and having a stigma in the fire service? Today’s day seems like it eases up a little bit on it, but there’s still that stigma and how do we get over that?

Dr. Troy Rodgers: One of the hard parts with mental health related issues is that we can’t see them. And because we can’t see it, it’s not like a broken leg, or a broken arm, or something where we can say, “Oh, that’s a problem.” So a lot of times we like to dismiss it, we like to move beyond it. Folks are trained in their academies push through this get stronger, those sorts of things. So one of the first ways to get beyond that is to teach folks the difference between something hurting and something being injured. I’ve been a coach for 20 years, and one of the first things I teach kids is that something that hurts that we’re going to work through, or is that something that’s injured that we need to fix? And if we look at mental health the same way it becomes less stigmatizing. This is something we can address, we can deal with, we can get through and get you to a better place. Because one of the things that public safety folks do a lot of times is they have the rule of three is what I always describe it.

Dr. Troy Rodgers: I’ve got to have three ailments before I’ll go to the doctor. I can’t just have a broken leg and a cold. I have to have a broken leg, a cold, and I’ve got an arrow in my forehead. Now it’ll justify me paying the 20 bucks to go for the. We got to get to where folks are dealing with it proactively ahead of time, and not seeing it as weakness.

Vince Trujillo: Why is it that some Firefighters may see some real issues more quickly than others. I’m assuming that is normal and therefore something that shouldn’t be compared from one person to another in that way?

Dr. Troy Rodgers: There are a lot of factors that contribute. People respond differently to different stimulus based upon their life experience. How they grew up, what kind of skills they were trained as kids, how much resiliency they’ve developed. Their personality style. You’ll meet some folks that are real happy, go lucky. Nothing tends to bother them. Some things just roll off their shoulders, whereas some folks worry a lot. They were raised in a household where mom was always worried. They were always hyper aware of things, and they take on that characteristics. And so a lot of what we see in terms of how the job affects people is their life experience will guide how they deal with things. They may view them differently. It may change their perceptions. I make a joke because I’ve got a 16 year old son at home, and he learned very early in his life that very few things in life are crises.

Dr. Troy Rodgers: You’re not potentially going to die as a result. And so he’s becoming a little bit awake, cynical in his perception and those sorts of things. But he’ll come home and he’ll say, “Hey dad, people at school were all worried about this crap. Nobody’s going to die. It’s not that big of a deal.” So his resilience based on what we’ve taught him is going to help him in the future. So a lot of it comes back to, what people were trained, what skills they have from when they were growing up.

Robert Sanchez: And most firefighters as you know doctor they retire early. So what I’ve seen happen quite a few times. They can go, 19 or 20 years and not have an incident until on their 21st year. Or there can be firefighters that’s in their first year they’re having a incident, or six months in. I guess that’s beyond me that’s up for the doctors to deal with.

Dr. Troy Rodgers: A lot of it’s luck or bad luck, however you want to put it. I’ll deal with folks that within that first year they’ve got a major traumatic incident. And then another one two years later, and then another one three years later. So some of it is just the cards you’re dealt, and how that affects you. Some of it is your ability to then manage those cards. One of the things that we actually see a lot of is folks do a really good job for those 20 years managing all those rocks. And then when they retire, and they’ve got time to think and time to, basically, relive everything they went through. That’s when it actually hits them. We’ll see that right after firemen a whole lot.

Robert Sanchez: So it could possibly trigger even after you’re retired then.

Dr. Troy Rodgers: Right.

Robert Sanchez: That’s interesting.

Dr. Troy Rodgers: We actually see a pretty good amount of folks that do great their whole career, no major mental health stuff. And then three weeks after they retire, they’re in a pretty bad place because now they’ve got time. Now they’re bored. Now they’ve their identity in some way.

Robert Sanchez: We’re fortunate enough doctor as you know, I think a couple of years ago you helped testify in committees on our PTSD bill. So we’re lucky just not this session, but one before we were lucky to pass a House Bill 324 it’s now an Act. And we’re fortunate to do that. Can you explain? Knowing about that bill, again we talked about the chronic exposure and the one incident exposure. I know that before this bill took place and workman’s comp issues, if you had an exposure that you identified. And you reported it through the chain of command up to the workman’s comp level there’s treatment for it, and they’ll possibly pay for what they needed to pay for. Similar like breaking your ankle. So there was one time exposure, and it’s no different than a brain injury, or PTSD. But now we have the chronic exposure. Have you had any running’s with this bill and how we could change to the next legislature because I know there might be some issues.

Dr. Troy Rodgers: Well, the big issue that we’re running into in this particular bill right now is this idea of, okay, now we’re equating PTSD with a lot of these medical issues, which is great. That’s movement in the right direction. We’re de-stigmatizing it, we’re understanding it. We’re seeing it’s real. One of the problems that we’re running into though is we don’t really have a comparison early on in the process to say, “Okay, did the job contribute to this or not?” So we’re getting a lot of folks who are saying, “Okay, did you have this when you came in, or did this develop over time?” So that’s one of these kinks we’ve been trying to work out. Okay, do we start looking at it at higher, so that we have a measure to compare 15 years from now, and say this person has changed based upon that cumulative exposure. So that’s one of the first issues we’re going to have to wrinkle out at some point.

Dr. Troy Rodgers: And then I think we’re also going to have to look at not just PTSD, what other things eventually are we going to equate with that. Like depression that comes from this, or other types of anxiety. So I think this is the starting point for a lot of this.

Robert Sanchez: Well, and I’m glad you brought that up about, kind of like a starting to… I guess when firefighters or first responders, or actually apply for the job, they get hired they take these psychic examinations. Is there going to have to be some type of examination for PTSD? So it would help in the workman’s comp issue of the proving to say that they didn’t have it before they got hired. Would you even recommend that, or do you think the bill should be, we should change the legislature?

Dr. Troy Rodgers: I’ve had a number of chiefs come to me and say, what do we do with this and how do we do it? And I said, I’ve been fairly straightforward at this point I said, “If the bill stays the way it stays, then we’re going to have to go to this approach where we’re doing a pre hire testing, so you’ve got a baseline.” So if the bill stays that way that’s going to be my recommendation. If we adjust it to look at things differently then maybe we don’t require that. But at this point that’s going to be a tough one because where workman’s comp is going to come in is they’re going to say, “How do you determine if the job is what contributed to this?”

Robert Sanchez: Absolutely. And again, being fortunate enough to represent the New Mexico Professional Firefighters or advocacy in the legislature, I look forward to working with you in the next coming sessions to see if we can change it where it actually benefits firefighters. But not only does it benefit the firefighters, it benefits their families.

Dr. Troy Rodgers: Right.

Robert Sanchez: So thank you again for anything. Is there anything that you’d like to add? And again, it’s an honor with me working with you in the past years. And thank you for your constant giving back to firefighters, and it’s always a pleasure.

Vince Trujillo: Yeah, we have a few minutes left. What would you like to leave the firefighters with who are watching this right now doctor.

Dr. Troy Rodgers: A couple of simple things. Just one, thank you for what you do and what you do helps everybody because of the availability, that resource, that safety net for societies. That’s the first thing. Second thing that I want to leave with is just a reminder to the firefighters out there to take care of themselves. It’s very difficult to take care of other people when you’re not taking care of yourself, and so everything else will be compromised. Watch for those warning signs preemptively come in. I had a gentleman I worked with years back that used to call his sessions with me check-ins. He would call them, basically, he was maintaining his-

Robert Sanchez: Preventative maintenance.

Dr. Troy Rodgers: Preventative maintenance. He actually equated it to a car. One time he’d come in about three or four times, and he’d come in about every five or six months. And after the third one I asked him, I said, “Hey, why are we meeting every five or six months?” He looked at me and he goes, “You see my truck outside your window?” And I said, “Yeah, I see your truck and he goes, that truck is 25 years old. And it runs like the day I bought it.” And I said, “Okay, I’m not quite getting what you’re saying to me here.” “Well, you know why it runs like that.” And I said, “Why?” And he goes, “Because every six months I take it in. I get tires rotated, I get it checked, I get all this stuff.” He goes, “So doc, I see you as my maintenance.” And I said, “Well, as long as you don’t tell anybody I’m changing your oil we’re good.” And I said, “We’ll keep doing it every six months.” He did that for the rest of his career.

Robert Sanchez: Well, that’s good to know. One thing I want to leave here is firefighters we’re human too. Sometimes we don’t think we are. And I know sometimes the public don’t think we are, but we have to deal with life issues just like everybody else. And that includes PTSD, depression or whatever the case that the job might bring with it.

Vince Trujillo: Yeah. It certainly does bring things down to reality. Especially, for a layman like me in regards to my public perspective is concerned. We don’t realize that quite frankly, that we expect our firefighters and our first responders to be superheroes, which in my head they are. But we forget about that human element. So thank you as far as I’m concerned for what you do for our firefighters. We couldn’t exist without them, especially during these crazy times right now. So I want to thank you, Dr. Troy Rodgers for participating today. Thank you for volunteering to come and do this podcast for our five firefighters out there. Please keep up your good work, and you stay healthy too.

Dr. Troy Rodgers: Will try.

Vince Trujillo: Thank you so much. And then on behalf of the Firefighter Kingdom and our outstanding host, Mr. Robert Sanchez, we’re going to be singing off now. Thanks so much for listening and hope everyone got some great information on PTSD and how it affects our firefighters. If you’re listening and enjoyed this, please subscribe to the podcast on ITunes & give us a review there. It really helps get the message out more. And share it with someone you know who could use the help. Firefighters thank you so much for everything you do. Robert…

Robert Sanchez: Again, it’s always an honor to do what we can to assist firefighters. And just looking forward to these podcasts. I think they’re more information, more informational to the firefighters. And don’t forget to give feedback on what else you would like us to have on here and to benefit firefighters. And again, peace out Firefighter Kingdom. Until next time, we’ll see you.

The post #3 Fire Fighters & PTSD: What Are The Signs & What Can Be Done For It appeared first on FireFighter Kingdom.

from FireFighter Kingdom https://ift.tt/3cEPgkM

#FFK

0 notes

fapangel · 7 years

Note

Since I first issued my dire predictions of civil violence in the not-so-distant future, I’ve been looking, exhaustively, for evidence I’m wrong. III Have you considered this angle: The traditional media's hyping that up? I mean, we know in the early/mid 60's the newspapers and cameras focused on the small number of violent protestors during anti-war protests and made them out to be the majority. If the media has no shred of integrity left, why are you looking at them for evidence of integrity?

That’s just the thing - I’m not. I’m looking at people. at the “man on the street” and in both my personal life (as in actual meatspace, not online) and in actual journalism (some people still do it, outside and inside the mainstream establishment,) I’m seeing a decidedly worrisome tone.

We all remember “literally shaking” on Twitter the night of the election, but there were other words going around quite a bit - sick, disgusted, afraid, scared, etc. Twitter - as it’s used by the majority - gives a quick insight into the personal emotions of the people using it. (This is why PR uses that bank on the presumed intimacy - like Trump’s twitter - tend to be more successful, and more careful, sterile treatments, like the Clinton campaign that took 12 staffers and 10 drafts to compose a single tweet, typically lack traction.) Sure, us seal-clubbin neocons and tree-hugging liberals had a good giggle at the triggered snowflakes breathlessly predicting the Right Wing Gestapo emerging from the woodwork to bash the gays - but then a friend of mine told me it’d actually happened, post-election, to a friend of his, and that’s when my laughter stopped.

As was explained to me, the LGBTQ folks feared that Trump’s election would be seen as “permission” by all the knuckledraggers, and it seems it was. So it’s time to ask yourself the question - how did the knuckledraggers get that impression to begin with? Maybe - just maybe - it had something to do with the media screaming, 24/7, for months, that Trump was literally Hitler and that he was going to oppress all the gays and Jews and Muslims and fluffy bunnies. “Of course he’s Our Guy,” the Illinois Nazis said with glee, “the entire news media keeps screaming about it!”

Also consider that the media’s reinforcing the left wing’s narrative, which makes people on the left wing much more likely to believe it since it’s validating their own beliefs. Vox.com has an excellent article on the Russian conspiracy blitz and why it’s playing so well with Democrats, and the author is neither a Trump fan or apologist (as is abundantly clear from the article itself.) It’s worth reading entire, but this quote stands out:

“Misinformation is much more likely to stick when it conforms with people’s preexisting beliefs, especially those connected to social groups that they’re a part of,” says Arceneaux. “In politics, that plays out (usually) through partisanship: Republicans are much more likely to believe false information that confirms their worldview, and Democrats are likely to do the opposite.”

The article accurately compares the current phenomena to the entire “birther” movement on the right - it’s the exact same psychological phenomena, so unsurprisingly you see it manifesting with human beings on both sides of the spectrum. A lot of politics falls into that category, and it’s where most of that “political common ground” I keep talking about can be found. The difference is that the Left controls the lion’s share of the communication media and in turn, our culture. Hollywood - a cultural engine if there ever was one - is extremely left wing and has been since before McCarthy’s day. The modern telecommunications and internet media, which lives and breathes in Sillicon Valley, is likewise invested in the left wing; Erich Schmidt, chairman of Alphabet (Google’s parent company,) founded a PAC to give Hillary’s campaign IT support during the election, and we all remember how the CEO of Mozilla was hurled out of office because he dared to cast a private, anti-revolutionary vote. The next time you hear leftists talking about how “de-platforming” is legitimate, remember that the leftists literally own the fucking platforms. Nobody’s gonna find your conservative site if Google de-lists it. This is the problem - both sides have their lunatics willing to swallow any shit they’re being shoveled, but only one side has a massive megaphone that’s actively colluding - complete with sticky-handed twitter high-fives - to push the same narrative across the board, and cross-validate it.

Hilariously, the Vox author (Kevin Drum) doesn’t see it, making the article a self-demonstrating one:

Luckily for the Democratic Party, there isn’t really a pre-built media ecosystem for amplifying this like there was for Republicans. In the absence of left-wing Limbaughs and Breitbarts, media outlets totally unconcerned with factual rigor, it’s much harder for this stuff to become mainstream.

… except he does see it, because he goes on to name some examples (and some tweets) of people chugging the kool-aid… but all of them Democratic politicians or DNC staffers who should know better, not the media itself. He’s clearly intelligent and well-balanced, he’s standing in the middle of a bullshit cyclone he knows is bullshit, but he’s only just now starting to smell the rot and he hasn’t even noticed objective journalism’s decaying corpse yet, despite standing in its ribcage. If someone like him can be so stymied, how do you think That Guy - you know, [the bitter old man |the aging hippie creep] who always [ sits on his porch yelling at birds | shuffles around Trader Joe’s in grungy sandals comparing kale prices] and blames everything on [ dat gal-dern Mooslim Obongo | the military-industrial-jew-lizardman-complex] is going to react?

Some people do actually believe this shit and they are mostly Democrats - hell, here’s a Gallup poll with the numbers if you doubt my analysis. And to re-iterate, they’re inflaming extremists on both sides of the spectrum, because the more violence antifa commits, the more the Illinois Nazis will croon “see, we were right all along!”

The traditional mass media engaging in this shit is much, much worse than the right-wing “alternative news ecosystem,” the blogs, the talk radio hosts, infogiggles, etc. They’re all personality-based and those personalities differ and disagree (if they didn’t, how would they offer content distinct from what the others offer?) This is natural, because conservatives argue. They argue a lot. It might surprise some of you given how often the media portrays the NRA as triple Satan, but there’s gun rights groups that exist specifically because some conservatives think the NRA is too wussy. You’ve got social conservatives, business/free market conservatives, REEE TAXES conservatives, etc., and they rarely see eye to eye. Ann Coulter - the Screeching Enchantress herself - once wrote that “Republicans can’t put together a two-car funeral without writing six books denouncing each other.”

You don’t see this on the left - not in the media, at any rate. There’s more to this than just the obvious mainstream media collusion; the back-slapping and twitterwank, although their deliberate and conscious effort plays a huge part. There’s also how the left wing thinks.

If you’re old enough to remember the Bush years, you’ll remember how often the left would attack Rush Limbaugh - even though an entire ecosystem of conservative, national talk-radio had sprung up by then, so he was no longer The One And Only Conservative Voice In Mass Media. Liberals treated - and attacked - him as the de facto leader of the right wing, and this puzzled conservatives no end, because a pundit, however clever, is not a goddamn politician or leader.

The left wing, however, thinks differently. Unlike classical liberalism, which is mostly concerned with balancing the inherent rights of individuals with the rights of every other individual in a social contract, the leftists (communism/socialism/etc.) focus on the collective as the central, essential point, and move from there. This is why “virtue signalling” exists; leftists care very much about what others think of them. Emmet Rensin’s essay on smugness in liberalism, which I’ve mentioned many times, showcases it well; while describing his subject, he also illustrated the mechanisms by which it manifests - left-wing culture. Everything he described - the virtue-signalling to others that you know the correct facts, the knowing, even the “Eye roll, crying emoji, forward to John Oliver for sick burns,“ exemplifies it. This Mother Jones writer’s reaction to his piece has a telling line:

“I’ve long since gotten tired of the endless reposting of John Oliver’s "amazing,” “perfect,” “mic drop” destruction of whatever topic he takes on this week.”

They key here is John Oliver. When leftists look at Rush Limbaugh, they see a conservative John Oliver - in short, a demagogue. Demagogues and cults of personality have always been of prime importance with the left wing - remember how Obama was lionized by the left during his first campaign? To say nothing of the Kennedy’s being immortalized as “Camelot.” Yes, conservatives liked Reagan a whole lot, but we don’t vote in entire fucking royal dynasties, which is why Low-Energy Jeb is cooling his heels right now. And these demagogues, you’ll note, are all on the same page when it comes to ripping into conservatives… and their epic, wicked put-downs then become The Big Joke that the left wing retweets and reblogs and parrots to each other ad nauseum. Remember Tina Fey’s mockery of the only working mother leftists have ever despised? I’ve seen people on facebook quote “I can see Russia from my house” fully believing that Sarah Palin herself said it - the Tina Fey skit is the reality, for them. Truth is lost around the twentieth re-tweet, or so.

And these “comedians” - in truth, pundits and opinion columnists - base their jokes on whatever quote-unquote “revelations” aired in the mainstream media’s news broadcasts that morning.

If you’ve ever noticed how quickly a new catchphrase or word gets onto every leftist’s lips - like “fake news” - this is how it’s done. It’s not just the mass media moving in lockstep co-ordination to get the message out; it’s how the phrases become the newest “in-thing” with the entire leftist culture, that then get bandied about in the social sphere, on and off-line. After the cruise missile strike on Syria, I watched, on /pol/ alone, about thirty different varying interpretations, everything from “Assad and Putin are unironically heroes shove omfg I love facism Trump why u blow them up” to “I HOPE HE DROPS A MOAB ON RUSSIA NEXT FUCK THE REDS NUCLEAR WAR NOW” to a bunch of “he’s really playing 64 dimensional chess check this shit just you wait” that covered everything in-between. And that’s just on /pol/, which is so full of bullshit and jokes they literally made a fucking containment board for the containment board - called /bantz/. You don’t see this in the leftist blogosphere - the opinions all align the same way and vary only in magnitude of gibbering lunacy. And the John Oliver quotes don’t just define the conversation, they define the fucking language - for instance, “Drumpf.”

Do not, for one second, think that the media doesn’t know how all this shit works. They may be delusional, but they don’t control and run vast media empires because they’re stupid. And a lot of them have been at this for a long, long time.

#donald trump

13 notes · View notes

mastcomm · 4 years

Text

‘There Are Too Many Minefields’: Readers on Swiping and Dating in the Trump Era

At a time when politics have become so intensely personal and divisive, how are people navigating the topic in the already fraught world of online dating?

With President Trump’s impeachment trial underway, and the race for the Democratic presidential nomination picking up, we asked readers who use online dating what they look for politically in a potential match and how they signal their own views.

More than 200 people responded, many echoing the sentiments of one woman who had been open to dating people with different political views but who changed her mind in the current climate. “Now, your political beliefs are a referendum on your entire life, with all your values aligned neatly under a single label,” Kristine Kinsey of Knoxville, Tenn., wrote.

While some said they didn’t think politics was important in the dating calculus, far more thought the subject was crucial in evaluating possible partners, often sleuthing for subtle profile clues that might indicate their values.

Here is a selection of the responses, which have been lightly edited.

Taking an upfront approach

Image

Credit…David Tulanian

I don’t really make a conscious effort to either screen people out or in based on their political beliefs. What I have found, sadly, is people boldly announcing, “No Trump-Republicans need apply.”

I like to keep an open mind, so I don’t want to avoid a whole group of people who may not share all my politics.

Before, I would never dream of informing everyone about my politics. But as time goes on, I’m starting to declare that I support Trump! — David Tulanian, 59, Las Vegas

•

All of my bios specifically state something like “No Republicans,” “No Trump supporters” or even, “If you don’t care about politics, I don’t care about you.”

I’ve also been known to send the first message to all of my matches asking if they’re Republican.

This has produced some memorable conversations with offended conservatives and also gotten me some dates with like-minded swipers. — Alyssa Parssinen, 33, Manchester, N.H.

•

I just come right out and say I’m progressive politically and that I’m an atheist. These things are too important to leave out.

At least one conservative and one middle-of-the-road guy have argued with me that I’m not being open-minded, and aren’t liberals supposed to be open-minded? — Susan K. Perry, 73, Los Angeles

Deciding what not to say on your profile

I think I might prefer to date someone with different political ideologies.

I intentionally leave off my conservative affiliation because I live in New York. I’m having a hard time getting matches online as it is.

There are people of good and bad character across the political spectrum. If we start segregating ourselves romantically based on politics, well, that’s not going to help society get to a better place, is it? — Curtis Chou, 27, New York

•

I’m an evangelical Christian. I leave that off the profile because there are too many minefields that can get triggered if that stuff is in a profile.

Disagreements on all individual issues are fine with me. I’ve been close to people who don’t trust government to do away with gun violence. I’ve dated women who believe abortion is murder. I’ve been close to girls who think immigration is too high.

But say the “T” word and I’m out, without explanation, without exception, without the slightest deliberation. — Winston Steward, 48, Los Angeles

Branching out

We were getting cozy on the couch, and I can’t remember why now, but I said, “Wait a second, you didn’t vote for Trump, did you?”

And he said, “Um, I was in the military and I grew up in the South.”

And I was like, whoa. WHAT THE [expletive]?!?! It totally turned the night on its head.

But we got past it and had a pretty decent open conversation about it a couple of days later when he took me to a diner where every TV (and there were a lot of them) was tuned to Fox News. — Christina Galante, 47, Long Island

•

I went out on a limb with a guy who said he was “Christian,” which I would never normally swipe “yes” on. He described his beliefs as “I don’t necessarily believe in a God. I don’t believe in heaven.” With my strong understanding of Christian beliefs, I knew he wasn’t really a Christian. So we went out.

And now we’re official and have fun theological conversations that I never expected! — Laurel Westendorf, 32, Bend, Ore.

•

The few times I tried to talk to someone conservative it ended in an argument.

One guy basically told me he didn’t care if people’s rights were being taken away because his 401(k) was amazing. Also another guy argued that global warming was not real and created so scientists could make money.

While I was very hesitant online to match with someone who voted for Trump, I did end up meeting my current boyfriend through friends and he did vote for Trump but will not do so again. We don’t agree on many things politically, which can be challenging, but we are able to have good discussions and challenge each other. — Heather MacLachlan, 31, Lakewood, Ohio

When Trump enters the equation

In the past, I was more open to dating a conservative Republican. In the age of Trump, though, I’ve learned it’s best not to go there. We simply aggravate each other, and that’s no way to start a relationship.

I’ve had several conservative men tell me that they like dating a liberal woman, that they think it’s “spicy” and “exciting.”

I am no man’s hot sauce, that’s for sure! — Felicia Lowery, 58, Tucson

•

I am a conservative Trump supporter, BUT I value hearing other opinions. If a poster (on Tinder) says “Trump supporters swipe left,” I swipe left because that is a close-minded person.

I value dialogue and learning from others and having others learn from my views. My views are firm, but subject to change by learning! — Kamal Hamid, 58, Denver

•

At 20, I dated the man who would become my husband (and later, my ex-husband), knowing he was a Republican.

In the early ’90s, the world was less polarized and politics still seemed at least a little noble, so you could respect a different perspective and even sleep with it.

Now, your political beliefs are a referendum on your entire life with all your values aligned neatly under a single label.

My ex was a liberal by the time I married him, but 20 years later, I made sure my next partners were already my flavor, politically. — Kristine Kinsey, 49, Knoxville, Tenn.

•

I’d date someone indifferent, but I couldn’t date someone who supports impeachment.

Politics is not actually that important, but it’s a fun topic. — Peter Gormley, 24, New York City

•

Image

Credit…Megan Reilley

I try to be open-minded, but the fact is, a vote for Trump means a vote against my family.

I have a trans kid and I won’t spend time talking to or meeting someone who either doesn’t believe in human rights for everyone or doesn’t think about the far-reaching implications of their vote.

I need to keep my kid safe, which means I screen potential dates. I signal my values by stating simply that I am not conservative in any way.

Surprisingly, many men interpret this as a reference to my sexual predilection. — Megan Reilley, 47, Hagerstown, Md.

Leaving politics out

I don’t screen dates on their political beliefs. I don’t knowingly signal my beliefs.

A person’s politics when dating is a three out of 10 on importance, where a 10 out of 10 is very important. — Thomas Liquet, 28, the Bronx

•

I find politics interesting, but it’s just not something I find fun.

While I probably would consider myself fairly liberal, I don’t give any indication of that on my profile because, frankly, I’m not interested in dating someone who would form their opinion of me based on that (for better or for worse). — Jonathan Pascale, 25, Houston

Lara Takenaga contributed reporting.

A note to readers who are not subscribers: This article from the Reader Center does not count toward your monthly free article limit.

Follow the @ReaderCenter on Twitter for more coverage highlighting your perspectives and experiences and for insight into how we work.

from WordPress https://mastcomm.com/life-style/there-are-too-many-minefields-readers-on-swiping-and-dating-in-the-trump-era/

#Life style

0 notes