喵 retweeted
in my culture, beating children has literally been around for thousands of years. it's part of the culture and it gives people a sense of community and purpose. the fact that you would even suggest stopping the beatings betrays your western-centric colonialist mindset.
喵 retweeted
ELIZABETH HOLMES: of course it worked. the lights turned on. it was on the cloud
NATHAN FIELDER: ok. but you know what feelings are, right? like you have them?
WEIRD COCAINE HUSBAND: [watching youtube at 2x speed] babe it says here the mitochondria is the powerhouse of the cell
喵 retweeted

R.Сам 🦋🐏@Logo_DaedalusOct 18
United States
United StatesConnected via United States App StoreAccount-level information, not a live location or per-post device.
Elizabeth Holmes is guilty of her fraud becoming legally fraud due to not continuing long enough— in the world of venture capital, the whole point is saying stuff like “we can make self-driving cars” & the proviso being “granted that we can continue to raise funds toward that end.” That whole world is about utilizing fraud (fictitious capital) toward scaling a speculative fiction to the degree that it “becomes real.” She’s not in some subjective sense lying, as she believes “in the idea” of that possibility being brought into reality through herself (this is the sense of herself she imposes upon herself after being raped as a freshman in college). She devotes her whole life to this idea & this is her sense of self— so what’s interesting about the film is that she does not lie, but she does lie (silently) to herself about the people around her that she has chosen to offload “pragmatic concerns” to— that enables her to be “clean” of these things, but “it’s not about the money”, moreso it’s about maintaining this absolute faith in the concept she has of her destiny in life etc. Most cult leaders believe in the fraud they commit— to preach the messianic age is to say “this will be true for everyone someday.” The problem with these types is that they enable their shields to get away with anything. She holds loyalty to the cause above her own concerns. It’s a very tragic situation— as she’s also almost definitely on the spectrum to some degree— so her whole adult life is this performance, to herself, of being self-composed & devoted to her quasi messianic mission of saving the world etc. If this belief collapses, her entire psyche would shatter into a million pieces. She is both the femme fatale & the dead girl in one person— this is what makes it such a compelling film noir. It’s beautiful that she will never give up on her quest, her faith, her belief etc— if she truly believed herself to be a fraud, she’d have taken a plea deal.
Replying to @yunggravy
@yunggravy when you turn 50 are you going to be Old Gravy
喵 retweeted
Where are the damn parapolitics nuts when you need them? Why does Billy trust Liz, and why does her father trust Billy? They can't say "Because our families are devoted to the same political faction of the American ruling class."
喵 retweeted
i came away feeling more certain that elizabeth is calculated and benefits from offloading accountability to partners who like to control her. its a symbiotic relationship.
something i've learned about unclear communication: true accidental vagueness usually cuts both ways.
someone who’s just bad at words will often be unclear in ways that cost them, but her words always kept her in the light - that asymmetry is how you tell that she is deliberate in what she says. her sentences have always been technically true but arranged to mislead, which is why she can tell herself that she has never lied before.
喵 retweeted
one thing i find fascinating upon rewatching YCSE is that it's entirely plausible that Holmes doesn't explicitly *lie* about a single thing in the film.
in the beach patio scene, when Nathan grills her on whether she's ever lied, she defines lying as "intentionally saying something that is untrue."
paired with the linguistic sleight of hand she stands by wrt the "this device CAN...", her (ostensible) confusion around the "Who's on first" bit, and her (alleged) ignorance of the Billy/A24 deal... it's not out of the realm of possibility to say that she's carefully constructed her reality (and/or memory; assuming she has lingering trauma) to only include True information that supports her narrative/case
the rest is up to Billy and whoever the fuck else wants to pick up the pieces, and you can see her lean on Billy to (messily) defend her, continually keeping her hands clean. she slips through the interrogations like sand
喵 retweeted
it’s very cool how by the end of the movie both Lance Oppenheim and Amanda Seyfried have clocked that Nathan is a compromised narrator (and clearly Nathan does to) due to being drawn in by Elizabeth Holmes’s doe eyed vulnerability shtick, but frame it incredibly well in film.
喵 retweeted
What people misunderstand about Elizabeth Holmes is— an effective manipulator does genuinely believe what they’re saying, and does genuinely believe they’re doing nothing wrong.
And a REALLY effective manipulator is kind of right.
Replying to @SlamDunkThat
what. there is documentation of elizabeth’s assault in 2003 & she was 19 when she started dating sunny at 40. these facts don’t require Holmes’ fathers corroboration to put together that she might be fucked up in intimate relationships
喵 retweeted
one of the fun meta-easter-eggs is that when this sequence appears in the final film, it's with alternate shots in a totally different order
one of these versions is lying to us about this conversation, which means they both are
seems certain that she manipulated powerful male investors, but I don’t see we’re seeing that behavior in her professional relationships translate to her personal ones. what does she gain from having the public perception that the father of her children is a coked up jackass

















