Kris Kristofferson, born on June 22, 1936, in Brownsville, Texas, left an indelible mark on the world of music and cinema over the course of his storied career. Sadly, Kris Kristofferson passed away on September 28, 2024.  Raised in a military family, Kristofferson graduated from Pomona College and attended Oxford University as a Rhodes Scholar. However, his path would take a sharp turn after serving as an Army helicopter pilot. He chose to pursue songwriting instead, moving to Nashville in the mid-1960s and working various odd jobs while trying to break into the music industry. Despite personal struggles, including financial The post Complete List Of Kris Kristofferson Albums And Songs appeared first on ClassicRockHistory.com.

Books book culture Where Do Genres Come From? Sure, there’s marketing involved, but it’s also about certain foundational texts creating demand, and readers trying to recapture specific feelings… By Charlie Jane Anders | Published on October 1, 2024 Photo: Jaredd Craig [via Unsplash] Comment 0 Share New Share Photo: Jaredd Craig [via Unsplash] We spend a lot of time discussing how genres work, where to draw the lines between genres, and which tropes and motifs are essential to a particular genre. But I haven’t seen as much chatter about where genres come from and why they exist. If anything, I usually see people saying things like, “Genres are marketing categories.” Which is true, as far as it goes—except that it doesn’t address why those marketing categories matter, or why they’re so effective. So here’s my working theory for why genres exist in the first place. Basically, somebody reads a book and really likes it. And then they want to read more books like that one, so they go looking for books that are similar to the one they just enjoyed. Maybe that book was Lord of the Rings, in which case they want more epic fantasies featuring quests, plucky heroes, and elaborate worldbuilding. Maybe that book was Dune or Foundation, in which case they might go in search of complicated politics in outer space. Maybe it was Neuromancer, in which case they’re gonna crave cyberpunk. See also: Harry Potter (ugh), Twilight, Hunger Games, Fourth Wing. Y’all get the idea. There’s usually one book or one series that tons of people embrace, and it leads them to track down other books that have similar characteristics—not just tropes, but also style and ethos. So yes, genres are marketing categories—but they usually work because they address a real demand on the part of readers, who really liked something and are hungry for more of it. (This is an important distinction, because a lot of the time marketing is about getting people interested in something that they might not care about as much, like one brand of soap over another.) If you accept the notion that most genres have one (or a few) foundational texts, whose extreme popularity fueled demand for more of the same, then the question of what belongs in a genre really comes down to how much “the same” it needs to be.  I did some research on the history of epic fantasy for an episode of Our Opinions Are Correct, and the received wisdom seems to be that at first, authors stuck pretty closely to the template laid down by Tolkien. Lester del Rey started publishing other epic fantasy novels in 1977, and the earliest ones were somewhat closely modeled on Middle-earth. (Again, we talk about this a lot in our podcast episode, I’m summarizing.) Over time, it seems like epic fantasy diversified in style, subject matter, and the sort of people whose work was centered in it. At this point, an epic fantasy no longer needs to feature a quest, a band of adventurers, or many of the other elements that mostly defined post-Tolkien high fantasy. What remains is a propensity towards maps, some notion of huge sweeping events that may or may not involve a war, the fate of kingdoms… and a hefty page count.  My sense is that a lot of genre labeling and identification comes down to vibes, or know it when you see it, much like porn. Nobody read The Hunger Games and thought, “I need to read more books about a teenage girl who fights with a bow and arrow and eventually wears a pin with a bird on it.” Nobody even came away craving more teen death sports. What many people who loved that book wanted—myself very much included—was more of that feeling we got from it. Speaking for myself, I was dying to read more YA books that had that level of disdain for entrenched hierarchy, the state use of violence to crush resistance and placate/entertain a complacent population, and an entertainment-industrial complex that all too often dehumanizes people in the pursuit of pandering.  In fact, I’d argue that a genre only really becomes healthy when it outgrows its foundational text and starts appealing to the spirit, rather than the letter, of its influences. Another example: after George R.R. Martin’s Westeros books hit big, I read some grimdark fantasies that felt like they were trying to recapture that same magic—but I’ve gotten more of the same feeling I got from A Clash of Kings by reading fantasy books that share few of the same plot devices but have a similar respect for the characters and showing the consequences of their choices. So when I approach a genre, or a particular work that I’m influenced by, I try to think about why I love it, and how it made me feel—rather than the specific elements I could lift from it. (Of course, those two things often blur together quite a bit.) In the case of my YA space-opera trilogy, I thought a lot about why I love space opera, both on the page and on screen. I especially thought about space battles—not because I felt like something can’t be a proper space opera without pew-pew-pew, but because I really, really love a good space battle. I love cool tactics, taunting speeches over viewscreens, ambushes, and one commander trying to get inside the head of another. At one point I went on Twitter (RIP) and asked people about their favorite space battles, and what made them so good. The answers predictably involved Wrath of Khan, BSG, and Galaxy Quest, but also a few others I didn’t expect. I worked really hard to make every battle in my trilogy pull its own weight narratively and feel like a real turning point in the story—but also made sure it was as cool as I possibly could make it and as different as possible from the other ones in the trilogy.  That trilogy is instructive in a different way, though. In earlier drafts of Victories Greater Than Death, I struggled a bit to balance the Star Trek framework of a captain and experienced officers with young-adult fiction’s expectation that teens will be on their own with no adult supervision. I knew the obvious thing was to have a group of teenagers steal a starship and go off on an adventure alone—basically like the first season of Star Trek: Prodigy, which didn’t exist yet. But I wasn’t so interested in that, for various reasons. Nor did I want to magically give my protagonist Tina all of the experience of a seasoned captain right off the bat, which absolutely was on the table with the premise I had set up—because I felt like that made her less interesting as a teen protagonist. In the end, Victories Greater Than Death plays with the tension between those two modes, the Star Trek story and the teen adventure. That let me kind of play up Tina’s identity crisis, and her struggles over whether she needs to murder people in order to be a galactic hero. Plus I got seriously attached to Yatto the Monntha, a former movie star turned officer. The second and third books of the trilogy lean much harder in the direction of “teens on their own” and away from the Lower Decks-type thing of having my teen characters be cadets/ensigns on board a ship full of older officers. This partly came from listening to the characters, at least half of whom were not interested in joining the Royal Fleet after their first adventure. But I also feel as though, ironically, getting further away from the direct influence of Star Trek in the second and third books helped me come closer to capturing the spirit of what I love about Star Trek. I don’t think I’m alone in caring more about the feelings that a book gave me than about the specific widgets it used to conjure those feelings—in fact, I would imagine I’m not the first to say any of this. We do live in an era where people are more highly aware of specific tropes they like or don’t like, thanks to things like TV Tropes and Archive of Our Own among other things, but I still get a strong sense that it’s about the feelings those tropes evoke rather than simply having that trope be present.  In other words, I think genre labels are immensely useful, but we should all remember they’re mostly vibes and feels, rather than a set of prescriptions.[end-mark] This article was originally published at Happy Dancing, Charlie Jane Anders’ newsletter, available on Buttondown. The post Where Do Genres Come From? appeared first on Reactor.

FIRST ON THE DAILY SIGNAL—Wyoming’s governor removed a doctor from the state’s board of medicine because the doctor supported a law banning “gender-affirming care” for minors. The doctor is suing, and his lawyers filed a motion Tuesday asking the court to reinstate him on the medical board. His legal team also revealed that more than 5,000 Wyoming residents have signed a petition asking the governor to reinstate him. “I was removed from the Wyoming State Board of Medicine because I took a stand to protect the children in our state,” Dr. Eric Cubin, a radiologist, told The Daily Signal on Tuesday. The nonprofit law firm Liberty Justice Center is representing him. The center is best known for representing Mark Janus in the 2018 Supreme Court case Janus v. AFSCME, in which the court protected government employees’ First Amendment right of free association to refuse to financially support a union they wouldn’t join. “I am proud to stand with the Liberty Justice Center and fight this violation of my First Amendment rights,” Cubin added. Chloe’s Law Cubin supported Senate File 99, also known as “Chloe’s Law,” which Gov. Mark Gordon, a Republican, signed in March. The law, named after “detransitioner” Chloe Cole, went into effect on July 1. As a minor, Cole had surgery to try to appear more like a boy, including having her breasts removed, and a few years later, detransitioned back to identifying as her actual sex. The law prohibits doctors from prescribing experimental “transgender” medical interventions for minors, specifically banning so-called puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and surgeries that remove healthy breasts or sex organs. Internal documents from the World Professional Association for Transgender Health, a pro-transgender activist group, revealed that WPATH leaders knew about various side effects of “gender-affirming care,” including cancer in teens and reduced sexual function, as well as the lack of informed consent for procedures with lifelong impacts. These medical professionals endorse the experimental treatments anyway. But some doctors have gone on record opposing such treatments. Back in 2023 in Florida, many doctors testified in favor of a rule that would prevent Medicaid dollars from funding “gender-affirming care.” The doctors—including psychiatrists, endocrinologists, neurologists, and a former WPATH leader—testified that these interventions are experimental and may do more harm than good. Cubin, a member of the Wyoming Medical Society, sent a letter in February to every member of Wyoming’s Legislature to set the record straight after the society (a voluntary association for medical professionals in the Cowboy State) had opposed Chloe’s Law. (The society’s magazine attacked Chloe’s Law in 2023 and its executive director testified against the law that year. Cubin claims the society also opposed Chloe’s Law in 2024.) “I had been misrepresented by the Wyoming Medical Society and had no choice but to speak up for what I believe to be right,” the doctor told The Daily Signal. “I urged our legislators to be circumspect about the information they were being provided and cautious about what they allow physicians to do to kids in our state—something that is now the law across Wyoming.” The Governor Fires Cubin So why did Gordon, who signed Chloe’s Law, remove Cubin from the board of medicine? It seems unlikely someone who supported the legislation would move against a doctor for supporting the same bill. First, Gordon only grudgingly signed Chloe’s Law. “I signed SF 99 because I support the protections this bill includes for children; however, it is my belief that the government is straying into the personal affairs of families,” the governor said at the time. “Our legislature needs to sort out its intentions with regard to parental rights. While it inserts governmental prerogative in some places, it affirms parental rights in others.” Gordon had also expressed disapproval for a bill preventing biological males from participating in girls’ sports in public schools. In March 2023, he allowed the bill, SF 133, to go into effect without his signature (refusing to veto it but also refusing to sign it). He said the bill “is overly draconian, is discriminatory without attention to individual circumstances or mitigating factors, and pays little attention to fundamental principles of equality.” Gordon announced his intention to remove Cubin in an April 22 letter. While Gordon acknowledged the doctor’s free speech right to express his opinion, he insisted that the five-member board of medicine must remain impartial. The board is responsible for issuing and renewing licenses for physicians and other medical practitioners in the state, along with overseeing medical regulation, compliance, and discipline. “I have been made aware of your email to the members of the House of Representatives during this last legislative session regarding SF0099, in which you strongly encouraged the members to pass this legislation and criticized the Wyoming Medical Society’s opposition to the bill,” Gordon wrote. “I believe your comments on this particular legislation could give doctors, who are licensed by the board of medicine, a reason to be concerned that you might use your position to advocate for a particular position when considering matters that should be considered absent an agenda or prejudice,” the governor added. “I am certain you would understand that while you certainly are entitled to your First Amendment right to free speech, as an individual member of the board, you would not be entitled to speak for the board unilaterally,” Gordon wrote. He suggested that Cubin had chosen to “express personal beliefs in a way that can be construed as speaking for the [board as a whole],” and therefore he was removing the doctor. Screenshot Cubin’s Response Cubin’s lawsuit offers a thorough rebuttal of Gordon’s claims. The radiologist did not decide to support Chloe’s Law publicly for no reason, and he did not present his support as representative of the board of medicine. Cubin only decided to reach out to the House of Representatives himself because the Wyoming Medical Society, which had opposed Chloe’s Law, refused to clarify to the Legislature that its opposition to the law did not represent all doctors who are members of the society. According to the lawsuit, Cubin emailed the society’s executive director, Sheila Bush, on Feb. 21, expressing his concerns about the society’s opposition to the law. “Cubin thought it unlikely that WMS’s stance reflected the views of the vast majority of its members, and asked whether WMS could present physicians’ views on both sides of the issue regarding Chloe’s Law,” the lawsuit states. Bush responded to the doctor by reiterating the society’s position but did not address his request for a more balanced position. The president of the society’s board of trustees also emailed Cubin, restating the position. Cubin responded with an email to the society’s board, once again asking that the society conduct a poll of its members on the issue. According to the lawsuit, the radiologist repeatedly asked the society to fairly represent doctors who support Chloe’s Law, and the society repeatedly refused. The doctor then sent his email to the Legislature, and in doing so, he “made very clear … that he was representing himself, and not [the society] or the Wyoming Board of Medicine.” “Dr. Cubin’s email to the Wyoming House of Representatives as a private citizen did not cause any disruption to the normal functioning of the board in carrying out its official duties and obligations under Wyoming law,” the lawsuit states. Cubin also claims that previous members of the state board have testified before the Wyoming Legislature on controversial issues, and “never received similar retribution from the governor.” The lawsuit notes that Rene Hinkle, then a board member, testified before the Wyoming Legislature against giving life-saving care to infants born alive after botched abortions, and Gordon reappointed her to the board of medicine afterward. The Lawsuit The radiologist sued the governor on Aug. 29 in the U.S. District Court of Wyoming, alleging that the governor retaliated against him for expressing his First Amendment rights of free speech and to petition the government. He also alleged the governor violated the Wyoming Constitution, which also protects free speech and petition rights. Gordon filed a response to the complaint, contesting Cubin’s claim that he did not intend to speak for the board of medicine in sending his letter. On Tuesday, the Liberty Justice Center filed a motion for a preliminary injunction, asking the court to order Gordon to reinstate Cubin until the case is decided. Cubin’s term had been set to expire in 2028. The Liberty Justice Center also announced that Honor Wyoming, a Cowboy State nonprofit, delivered more than 5,300 petitions to Gordon, asking him to reinstate the radiologist. “What Gov. Gordon did to Dr. Cubin has become a major grassroots issue in Wyoming,” David Scheurn, director of grassroots and coalition development at Honor Wyoming, said in a statement first provided to The Daily Signal on Tuesday. “People are tired of political elites of all stripes abusing their authority. The level of support we’ve seen for Dr. Cubin has been unparalleled.” “We are honored to be hand-delivering over 5,300 petitions by Wyoming residents asking Gov. Gordon to reinstate Dr. Cubin,” Scheurn added. “I think this reaction is a real testament to the character of this state and to its citizens’ refusal to be bullied by elected leaders.” Cubin-ComplaintDownload The post EXCLUSIVE: Wyoming Doctor Booted From Medical Board for Opposing Transgender ‘Treatments’ Asks Court to Reinstate Him appeared first on The Daily Signal.

New: US Warns Iran Ballistic-Missile Attack on Israel Coming 'Imminently'

Port Strike Could Be a Disaster for America, and For Kamala

Who ever said you can't save a few species on the way to de-extincting a mammoth?

Quicksilver is a flashy name for a very dangerous pollutant.

Archaeology never looked so fun.

Radio host Mark Levin ripped apart an absurd FCC decision to waive a national security review of leftist billionaire George Soros’s foreign-backed purchase of radio giant Audacy.  On the Sept. 24 edition of The Mark Levin Show, guest Federal Communications Commissioner Brendan Carr reminded Levin that the decision would effectively hand America’s most notorious billionaire de facto control of stations carrying a “number of conservative outlets” including several that carry Levin’s show.  Levin was well aware, as one of Audacy’s stations with an enormous (50,000 watt) reach, Talk Radio 1210 WPHT Philadelphia, had already dropped his show.  Levin referred to Soros’s acquisition of over 200 radio stations as “a way of pushing and silencing voices.” Carr added that big investments in local radio stations are extremely rare and agreed that Soros may have a motive other than profit for buying Audacy.  “This is a free speech issue and this is an attack on conservative talk radio,” Levin told Carr. “The Democrats have sought to compete against conservative talk radio, particularly the big hosts when there was Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, my show, Bongino, others. We're really the targets here,” he continued. Levin theorized that the Soros empire was trying to get this done before the election so that “if they lose the election they still have these 220 stations and if they win the election they've created a precedent.” Earlier this year, Soros Fund Management purchased $400 million of Audacy’s debt — roughly a 40 percent stake in the company — taking over 16 radio stations that Audacy features or streams, each also with a massive 50,000-watt broadcasting range. Following Soros’s move, Media Research Center President Brent Bozell warned the FCC on two separate occasions not to bend the rules to help the leftist billionaire spread propaganda nationwide.  In April 2024, Bozell wrote to the FCC: “The Communications Act does not contain a special Soros shortcut. And the FCC should not countenance this request for one.” Bozell also noted that the Soros group purchasing Audacy has admitted that foreign ownership of Audacy will exceed the legal limit of 25 percent following the purchase. In a Sept. 18 decision, published on Sept. 30, the three Democrat-appointed FCC commissioners outrageously gave Soros precisely that shortcut in an election year, eliminating a potential year-long review. Carr also denounced the decision in a post on X after it was made public. “The Commission’s decision today is unprecedented,” Carr wrote.  The commissioner continued: “Never before has the Commission voted to approve the transfer of a broadcast license—let alone the transfer of broadcast licenses for over 200 radio stations across more than 40 markets—without following the requirements and procedures codified in federal law. Not once.” NEW The FCC just released the text of its 3-2 decision to approve a Soros backed group’s purchase of 200+ radio stations. The Commission’s decision today is unprecedented. Never before has the Commission voted to approve the transfer of a broadcast license—let alone the… pic.twitter.com/gnMbl2z8Jb — Brendan Carr (@BrendanCarrFCC) September 30, 2024 Conservatives are under attack! Contact ABC News (818) 460-7477, CBS News (212) 975-3247 and NBC News (212) 664-6192 and demand they hold Soros to account for his enormous influence over American media.

Senator Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) introduced the Be Gone Act on Tuesday, which, if passed, would require federal immigration officials to prioritize the deportation of the more than 15,000 illegal alien sex offenders residing in the United States.The bill's text, obtained by the New York Post, seeks to prioritize the removal of noncitizens convicted of sexual assault and aggravated sexual violence.'These violent criminals never would have entered America in the first place if we had real border security.'Ernst announced the bill in response to a bombshell disclosure from Immigration and Customs Enforcement revealing that there were 662,566 noncitizens with criminal histories on its national docket as of July.Last week, ICE's deputy director and senior official performing the duties of director Patrick Lechleitner responded to a request from Rep. Tony Gonzales (R-Texas) in March for information regarding the number of noncitizens convicted or charged with crimes on the agency's docket. — (@) Of the over 600,000 with criminal histories, Lechleitner stated that 435,719 are convicted criminals and the other 226,847 have pending charges.Lechleitner's response letter included a breakdown of those convictions, charges, and whether the individuals were in ICE custody.The national docket data on convictions included more than 64,000 assaults, roughly 2,200 commercialized sexual offenses, nearly 16,000 fraudulent activities, approximately 13,000 homicides, and over 15,000 sexual assaults.Lechleitner addressed the issue of sanctuary jurisdictions that prevent local law enforcement cooperation with federal immigration officials."ICE recognizes that some jurisdictions are concerned that cooperating with federal immigration officials will erode trust with immigrants communities and make it harder for local law enforcement to serve those populations," he wrote. "However, 'sanctuary' policies can end up shielding dangerous criminals, who often victimize those same communities."Lechleitner noted that from October 2020 through July 2024, ICE lifted 24,796 detainer requests, stating that 23,591 of those were declined by local law enforcement agencies. Over that same period, ICE's Enforcement and Removal Operations issued 2,897 declined detainer requests.Ernst stated that her proposed bill aims to protect the country where Democratic presidential nominee and Vice President Kamala Harris has failed."Since Border Czar Kamala Harris won't protect this country, then I will," Ernst stated. "These violent criminals never would have entered America in the first place if we had real border security, but now that they're in our communities, we need to identify, stop, and deport them."Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!