#ALSO I HAVE NOTHING AGAINST AMERICANS IN THEMSELVES THIS IS NOT AN AMERICAN HATE POST

[buttercupbread06]

/genq bc we don't have Thanksgiving in my country

Why? When I was in school, they gave us some short shitty explanation about pilgrims and natives aiding eachother and whatever but that's fake. We know that's fake, right? We know that colonizers took over the natives' land? I haven't even studied that and I know Thanksgiving is a bunch of bullshit?? Why do people still celebrate this? Because I'm Spanish and yes we did colonize, rape, kill and etc in South/Central America, but we're aware of the fact and we don't celebrate dumb shit like this ? Idk I don't get it. What makes you think it's okay? Is it even any fun?

[eretzyisrael]

by Matti Friedman

The failure of Holocaust education has been most sharply observed by the writer Dara Horn, particularly in a prescient essay for The Atlantic last spring and before that in a 2021 book, People Love Dead Jews. After visiting numerous museums and speaking to educators who teach Holocaust curricula, she concludes in the essay, “The bedrock assumption that has endured for nearly half a century is that learning about the Holocaust inoculates people against antisemitism. But it doesn’t.” 

By turning the Holocaust into a generic story about prejudice, Horn argues, Holocaust education left its recipients without any understanding of the specific problem facing Jews—or even much sympathy for real Jews in the present. 

This was the argument she made half a year before the Hamas attack of October 7 and its aftershocks, when any doubts about the accuracy of Horn’s hypothesis were put to rest. The well-meaning donors who’ve footed the astronomical bill for museums, memorials, classes, and films should ask for their money back.

The confusion between knowledge of the how and of the why is illustrated, inadvertently, in the figure of one of the experts interviewed in Evil on Trial, Omer Bartov, a Holocaust historian at Brown who describes himself as a “historian of genocide.” Bartov, who is Israeli, belongs to Israel’s most unfortunate export category—namely, academics who find a home for themselves on an increasingly unhinged Western left by reassuring their comrades that their dark fantasies about Israel are sane. Barely a month after October 7, Bartov wrote a New York Times op-ed accusing Israel of “crimes against humanity” and warning of a possible “genocide” in Gaza, taking the two key terms first invented to describe the Nazis and deploying them against Jews. Then, after visiting one of the college encampments where Zionists are cast as malevolent global villains, he reassured an interviewer from Democracy Now! that he’d seen nothing amiss and that antisemitism on American campuses “does not exist in any significant form.” The protesters may be trafficking in lurid stories of Jewish evil, but the Holocaust professor thinks that this time the stories are true.Prisoner shoes on display at the Auschwitz-Birkenau concentration camp, Oświęcim, Poland. (via Alamy)

One of the blithe assumptions of Holocaust narrative has always been that no one would identify with the Nazis, but this is wrong. They’re villains, to be sure, but also strong figures, men of action. Just as the best character in Schindler’s List is the Nazi commandant played by Ralph Fiennes, the best character in Evil on Trial is Adolf Hitler, acted with deranged energy in the reenactment scenes by Károly Kozma. When I finished the series on Netflix, I saw that I could continue to Hitler’s Circle of Evil, then to Hitler: A Career, and then to five other movies with title screens featuring Nazis. All of this manages not only to bestow upon the Nazis a kind of dark glamor but also to reassure everyone that if you don’t have a red band on your arm and a skull on your hat, you’re fine. 

The Jews, on the other hand, tend to be mostly absent as real characters. They occasionally appear to be marched away with their hands up or shot into ditches in their underwear. But we don’t get a sense of who they are, or why their difference—and particularly their stubborn refusal to adopt whatever ideology is current—has repeatedly turned them into figures of hate. 

The liberal West may believe itself to be post-Christian, but it’s still the world created by an ideological system that co-opted Judaism and then developed a furious resentment toward its continued existence, thus establishing a civilizational pattern that seems destined to repeat forever.

If Holocaust stories treat Jews as props, they miss understanding what the Jews think about what’s happening to them. And what they think is worth consideration, not just out of courtesy.

Judaism is a religion with a very long memory, and Jewish texts include stories of oppression and extermination stretching back to Pharaoh in the Book of Exodus. Europe’s Jews saw the threat as a continuum that didn’t start or end with Hitler. They knew he was a symptom of the problem, not the problem itself. It is this insight, unlike the details of SS hierarchy or the sadism of Dr. Mengele, that has the power to help us make sense of the world we see right now. 

[eowyntheavenger]

Hi! I saw your post on telling Americans to vote, and I was wondering what you think of posts from people from other parts of the world who are calling Americans evil for voting for Biden because of his support for Israel. I've seen a few already. They seem to be completely convinced that Americans deliberately voted for Biden specifically to side against Palestine and no other reason, and spread the general (pretty ignorant and hateful) message of "Americans are evil because of the actions of their government and because they collectively refuse to vote for a president who is good and not simply 'the lesser of two evils'". It frustrates me because they seem to think they're experts on US politics, culture, and society and have all the answers, but it also makes me concerned because it reminds me of the whole Russian bot thing from last time. Like, I'm 99% sure the people reblogging these posts aren't Russian bots (don't know about the OPs though), and they unquestioningly believe this. What do you think of this and how would you go about addressing this issue? Do you think it's possible to get them to understand how little they actually know about the US and how they're actually promoting a message that makes things worse for everyone? I've also seen less scathing posts that are just disheartened and don't seem to believe the democrats are truly better to vote for than the republicans and so it's just two sides of the same coin. To be fair, I think that sort of feeling is only further encouraged because there didn't really seem to be much if any progress made with Biden, not even back to square one after Trump moved the country so far backwards. I think most Americans really wish the elections actually had good candidates and they could pick the best of two goods, but are frustrated and stuck with the current system and don't know how to actually get to the point where there are good candidates. (Though personally I think voting for the one who isn't actively trying to make themselves a king with unlimited terms is a decent start. I can understand the frustration though.)

Hi! Thanks for the ask. This stuff worries me too. I've gotten comments on my posts like that too, telling me/other Americans that we're evil for voting for Biden.

But I've seen a much larger number of comments and posts from people outside the United States BEGGING us to vote for Biden. I literally get tags like that on my posts EVERY DAY urging Americans to vote blue. So I think that's valuable context, even if it doesn't solve the problem of the "I hate everybody who votes for Biden" crowd.

And yes, it's definitely a shitty argument on their part to claim that people voting for Biden are specifically siding against Palestine. Literally every single person I know in real life and online who plans to vote for Biden has been criticizing and protesting his policies on Palestine.

In terms of convincing the anti-voters that they're wrong, honestly, I don't know. They don't listen to reason and they seem intent on spreading despair. Some of Biden's policies have been terrible (Willow oil-drilling project), some of them have been downright evil (military aid to Israel), but I'm a rational person and I know that Trump is worse in every respect.

I've tried debating them. It's been pointless every time. They genuinely don't know how the government works, which scares me. Common takes include: 1) a genuine lack of awareness of how pro-Israel Trump and the right wing are, combined with magical thinking that a virtually unknown third party candidate can win the presidential election, 2) truly impressive mental gymnastics blaming Biden for the overturn of Roe v. Wade, and 3) continuing the mental gymnastics to blame Biden and the Democrats for anti-trans policies...

I guess my advice is to either ignore them and move on, or debunk things when you have time/energy? It's easier said than done, I know. There's nothing more annoying than someone being stupid on the internet, especially when they accuse you of stuff that just isn't true, and especially when they're spreading dangerous misinformation or voter-suppression rhetoric.

Like you, I'm highly suspicious of anyone who advocates AGAINST voting, or against voting blue. And I agree, many of these people are not bots, like you said, but I call them useful idiots, because they're doing the bots' work for them.

The one thing you said that I'm going to push back on is "there didn't really seem to be much if any progress made with Biden." Biden's actually made lots of progress on a variety of issues, and reversed some of Trump’s damage, it just doesn't get a lot of fanfare and it’s unfortunately happening at the same time as Republican gains in state legislatures and while they control the Supreme Court. But Biden and his administration have:

• invested billions in green architecture and clean energy, including making sure federal investments benefit low-income communities

• introduced new fines for companies' methane emissions

• introduced a plan to cut the federal government's greenhouse gas emissions by 65% by 2030 (that includes the military, which is a huge emitter)

• passed a huge bill for improving the country's infrastructure, including bridges, roads, broadband and more

• introduced first-ever national strategy on gender equality and equity and pushed Congress to pass the Equal Rights Amendment

• fought for women's reproductive rights after the overturn of Roe v. Wade

• put more women, people of color, and women of color on the federal bench than any of his predecessors combined

• nominated Kentaji Brown Jackson as the first Black woman to serve on the Supreme Court

• boosted funding to historically Black colleges

• ordered the DOJ to end the use of private prisons by the federal government

• pardoned thousands of people convicted on federal marijuana charges

• created a White House office of gun violence prevention

• passed the Respect for Marriage Act, guaranteeing federal rights and benefits for same-sex couples

• rolled out a series of actions to protect the rights and safety of the LGBTQ+ community, including protecting queer and trans foster youth, improving access to mental health services, and addressing the rise in hate crimes

• challenged discriminatory state bans against gender-affirming care and trans athletes

• called to support trans youth in State of the Union address and restored the White House tradition of recognizing Pride Month

• changed passport rules so that people can obtain a passport with no gender marker

• examined efforts by each federal agency to advance LGBTQ+ rights around the world

• reversed Trump's transgender military ban

• protected the rights of incarcerated trans people

• forgave billions in student debt, repeatedly, and introduced penalties for college programs that trap students in debt

• slashed bank overdraft fees

• expanded guaranteed overtime pay for millions of people

• made union-busting harder

• prevented discriminatory mortgage lending

• made efforts to expand the child tax credit, which could lift hundreds of thousands of children out of poverty

• cracked down on agriculture monopolies to support farmers and small businesses

• made it so the government is going to start taking drug companies' patents away if they don't make affordable drugs

• made over-the-counter birth control pills available for the first time

• lowered the cost of hearing aids and expanded access to them

• spent millions of dollars on students' mental health

• reversed discriminatory healthcare rules

• reinvigorated cancer research

• announced plans to replace all leaded pipes in the next ten years as well as combatting lead exposure abroad

• changed rules for how people can get aid after disasters so they can get more protection and immediate payments more easily

• introduced new data privacy rules protecting people from tech companies

• pushed the federal government to monitor AI risks

• maintained steadfast support for Ukraine in the face of Russian aggression

• maintained steadfast support for Taiwan in the face of Chinese intimidation

• strengthened ties with allies in Asia and the Pacific Islands

• pledged climate change assistance to low-lying Pacific Island countries

• literally IMMEDIATELY after being elected, Biden fortified DACA, rejoined the Paris Agreement, and ended Trump's discriminatory "Muslim ban", ended the Keystone XL Pipeline and fossil duel development in wildlife monuments, (same as last link) rejoined the WHO, strengthened COVID-19 response measures on a variety of fronts, re-included non-citizens in the U.S. census, and passed executives orders on racial equity in the federal government

And I'm sure there's more I left out.

There are also things Biden does that literally don’t make the news, but matter a lot, like funding the Postal Service, and continuing to have a State Department so we can conduct overseas diplomacy (Trump tried to defund the USPS and wants to purge the State Department and fill it with loyalists).

[do-you-ship-it-polls]

I am the first anon who posted about misandry. Thank you for your answer, I understand better why you posted this banner.

I just want to make a distinction between what I'd call feminist misandry and TERF misandry.

My friends are the farthest you can imagine from TERF (a lot of them are even trans). They are misandric because a lot have suffered from cis-men. For them, misandry is a protective instinct: if you meet a group of cis-men, be careful.

They hate cis-men as an oppressive group. They don't take a essentialistic view of masculinity, but a sociological one. Men are a group of power, that can abuse it, and they will protect each other. And of course, they don't include trans women in it. (A lot of the feel waaaaay safer with trans women than cis men).

That has nothing to do with TERFs, who use misandry to say "trans women are oppressors" or "trans women are essentially men"

Anyway, I understand the desire to piss off terfs and radfems. But I'd be sad if the word "misandry" was appropriated by them.

Sorry to bring that discourse, and thank you for the clarification!

genuinely don't understand why people are so deadset on identifying themselves as bigots who think 50% of humanity is out to get them. like, being against the patriarchy means you're a feminist or anti-sexist or ideally just a normal person but idk how many people agree. irrational hatred of men is not the same as wanting to knock the patriarchy down, all it does is just: be irrational hatred against men. when there's discussions like this, it also verges on "trans men aren't real men" territory because for some people, they are the exception. until they go on T and dress in a masculine way, then they're too cis man-like to participate in queer spaces (dunno how common it is, but it does happen!)

english isn't my first language, nor have I grown up in an american culture, so I wonder if it's my use of the word misandry that sets people off? like, is that a loaded word? because the definition of misandry is simply "hatred against men". it doesn't mean you feel uncomfortable with men or are scared of them, it means you hate men. I never thought that I would get so much shit for saying that it's weird to have such a deep, blind hatred for half of humanity. I don't think the word can be appropriated my radfems/terfs because there's nothing to be taken out of context, it means the same thing for anyone who uses the word.

why not just call yourself a feminist, an anti-sexist person, an anti-patriarchy person, etc etc. why do you label yourself as a person who hates all men for being born men and no matter what they do, they can never become a good person because they were born as men? I'm genuinely so baffled. not that anyone is planning on changing their mind about this, atleast not me.

thanks to the comments and asks that confirm to me that I'm not crazy for thinking this lol. also, I'm just some guy behind the screen. you can unfollow, block me, ask me to remove your submissions from the queue, whatever.

Just a fun side note, you know who started this discourse in the first place? All of this about transandrophobia and misandry?

little chihiro over on my queer blog... (I really liked the headcanon so if the person who submitted them sees this, i'm not saying it's your fault at all) just funny that it's this little cute character.

I should probably stop answering asks about his now.

[homestuckreplay]

Webcomics at Day 100 #2: Penny Arcade

Pages read: 11/18/1998 – 8/20/1999 & 4/13/2009 – 8/19/2009 (including accompanying blog posts); about 180 pages

Reason for selection: Penny Arcade is important. The Gamer Webcomic is kind of the archetypical webcomic, and Penny Arcade is its most famous example. But PA has crossed over into the world of mainstream gaming and nerd culture enough that it’s transcended just webcomics, hosting major gaming conventions, pioneering the medium of TTRPG actual play, and running a successful charity. Their projects are known by people who don’t read the comic itself, and they’ve arguably played a role in normalizing video games as a hobby in broader culture.

Current status: Has updated three times a week pretty consistently throughout its entire run. In 2024 the two main characters are still wearing the same shirts they wore in 1998.

Content warnings: misogyny, sexual humor, general period typical humor including slurs

Overall thoughts: Penny Arcade relies so much on references to real-time video games and nerd culture moments that it doesn’t read well as an archive. I enjoyed the 2009 comics more than the 1998-9 comics simply because I understood a lot of the 2009 cultural references while the 90s ones go right over my head. Without that context, reading it feels like sitting on a bus behind two guys who are having a loud and opinionated conversation about their own lives. Playing the same games and running in the same circles as the creators is near essential to enjoy the work.

Penny Arcade doesn’t do anything with the webcomics medium that wouldn’t be possible in print – they primarily make three-panel strips with text and still images, and since 2002, these have been accompanied by blog commentary from one of the creators. Despite or because of this, Jerry Holkins and Mike Krahulik are the platonic ideal of Guys Who Make Webcomics. Cishet white men in their early twenties (when PA began) who didn’t have any formal training in comics or any previous notoriety, but who had internet access in its early days, a sarcastic sense of humor, and strong opinions that they really liked to share. The first few years of strips have their text written in Comic Sans, and an early strip (‘A VERY Special Penny Arcade!’ February 17, 1999) features Mike (‘in character’ as Gabe) proposing to his then-girlfriend Kara.

These early strips are far better preserved than the average 90s webcomic, and I do think that reading the full archive would be a fascinating case study of how the PA brand was built, and more broadly how a creator develops their skills and grows their audience. The art style has become more exaggerated and distinctive over the years, and the lettering looks like a published comic book. Even though there’s no narrative to the strip itself, there’s this classic American Dream, come-from-nothing narrative to the first decade of the comic’s history that I think is compelling to a lot of people, especially to gamers in the 2000s when gaming is still an often ridiculed hobby.

Capturing this, there’s scholarship on the economics of webcomics that discuss Penny Arcade and how its creators managed to turn the comic into a well-paying day job. I hate thinking about money and can’t stand economics as a discipline so I didn’t read these, but I did read Bryanne Miller’s 2007 Master’s thesis ‘Making “Cents” of Subcultural Capital: The Preservation of Authenticity and Credibility in Penny Arcade Subculture,’ a really fascinating exploration which includes interviews with fans talking about their experiences with the comic and community. According to this, PA fans see themselves as a subculture within a subculture, a particular flavor of grassroots gamer who is skeptical of major games companies and journalism. To them, Holkins and Krahulik are the witty spokespeople for their underdog gamer sect fighting against the mainstream.

The thesis also delves into the major controversies PA has been involved in, where they’ve picked fights with more powerful celebrities, as well as their open resistance to advertising even while participating in it. It also discusses Child’s Play, PA’s official charity, set up with the explicit purpose of changing the public perception of gamers at a time where the ‘video games cause violence’ panic was at its height in mainstream media. I don’t know how calculated vs truthful PA’s image of being against corporations and commercialization is, but I have to give them some credit. PA accepts donations and sells merchandise but is entirely free to read, and always has been. This is in contrast to PvP, another popular gaming webcomic of the 2000s, which has fully paywalled its archive.

Finally, ‘two gamers on a couch’ may be PA’s main mode, but it’s not their only mode. In June 2009 they posted the first pages of Lookouts, a fantasy woodland survival adventure, and Automata, a 1920s noir with artificial intelligence. These are formatted more like comic book pages, with distinct art styles, and both of their first pages are effective at establishing their worlds, which are immediately intriguing and honestly both feel like great settings for TTRPG campaigns. Comparing these to a 1999 strip gives me a lot of hope for how much I could improve at writing and analysis in ten years. Also, ‘No Heart, No Soul, No Service’ is a great line.

Relevance to Homestuck: Without Penny Arcade, Homestuck might not exist – the first MS Paint Adventure, Jailbreak, was originally hosted on the PA forums (as was early Sweet Bro and Hella Jeff). The formal ties go further - Penny Arcade is one of around fifty webcomics linked from MS Paint Adventures beneath the heading ‘No Shortage of Good Websites,’ and Andrew Hussie announced in July that their PA fanart will be featured in the upcoming PA book The Splendid Magic of Penny Arcade. I also found this gem in a forum thread from March (s_o is Andrew Hussie) and while I don’t think this directly incited Homestuck, it was definitely prophetic.

Penny Arcade’s writing style, where the writers use unnecessarily obscure and archaic words to suggest intelligence paired with a tone of aggression and self-superior humor, likely influenced Homestuck given that Hussie was a regular, popular user of their forums. I see GameBro magazine as in part a parody of PA’s blog posts and their ‘gamers against mainstream gaming’ perspectives. I wonder if anyone has ever made something like Dave’s GameBro review blog but for Penny Arcade.

Continue reading? I will definitely read more from a ‘learning about internet history’ perspective, but I won’t read this for enjoyment. To be honest, I see enough gamers yelling on the internet without specifically seeking it out in webcomic form. I do think I'll read the short form narrative comics, like Automata, that the creators have made.

[romancerepulsed]

disclaimer: i am american and i can only speak for how it is here, but regardless this post is about online spaces

i have to say it. "romance negativity" is not a thing and you all look like clowns for saying it and placing it right next to sex negativity. sex negativity exists within a large system oppression. its a set of beliefs an individual can have, yes, but those beliefs in and of themselves are nothing without their institutional support. sex negativity, though it hurts queer people the most, negatively affects every person who desires to interact with sexuality in any way. sex negativity is major websites and apps banning porn for the sake of profit. sex negativity is restricting abortion access. sex negativity is absitence-only education. sex negativity is the criminalization of sex work. sex negativity is rape culture.

romance negativity does not exist in this way. the most romance negativity could possibly harm you is it hurting your feelings a bit when an aromantic person expresses their frustrations with amatonormativity. our institutions actively push for romance and partnering. our whole society is structured around it. all of our entertainment is infested with it. there is no significant cultural push to devalue romance the same way there is for sex, and thats why the discussion of the evil repulsed aros who hate romance and hate you for experiencing it is so fucking stupid to me. like, every romance repulsed aro i know is so painstakingly polite and supportive to the alloromantics and romance favorable aros around us. we are constantly gritting our teeth and working through it, because thats what we have always had to do.

ive also seen posts complaining that romance repulsed aros make the community feel unsafe for romance favorable aros, which... i have not seen any of the rumored aro elitism this implies at all. im sure there are some guys out there who exclude romance favorable aros, and they absolutely suck ass. but this is not a widespread problem at all. and i need you to put yourselves in the shoes of a romance repulsed aromantic person right now. someone who has just found the language for what theyve been struggling with all their lives, and theyre excited to find a community for people like them, a community thats supposed to be free from the talons of amatonormativity, only to find out most of the people there are still talking about their partners, their crushes, the romantic things they wanna do with their friends, etc. its isolating. this isnt to say aromanticism isnt a spectrum or that people shouldnt talk about their experiences as romance favorable aros, im just trying to get you to understand *why* repulsed aros can seem so irritable or aggressive at times.

so im sorry that romance repulsed aros expressing their frustration with the very fabric of society being against them hurt your feelings. but i think maybe thats just something youre gonna have to deal with. if you need tips on sucking it up then maybe ask a romance repulsed aro, we're used to it 👍

[rmelster]

Hi my friend 👋, I have a question are you tired of the "Spanish curse" in media? In my opinion, I am tired of it and it is an annoying stereotypical trope. The trope where they cast Brunettes for Spanish roles. Even though Spaniards have blonde and ginger hair. Best example of this Catherine of Aragon. Another trope is that Spaniards are mostly portrayed as villains. To them "Spaniards are nothing but savage, conquering, religious fanatics who wants to dominate the earth". This propaganda still have an effect today causing people to resent Spaniards. People should learn to forgive the sins of the past because this hatred will cause more pain and resentment. Spain is not the only country who colonized nations. Spain might have committed atrocities, but they gave good contributions that still benefit us to this day. Let us learn from history and forgive instead of spreading hate.

What are your thoughts on this, I love to hear it ☺️

Hey! Thanks for asking! I love to contribute to more Spanish oriented posts.

What you call the “Spanish curse”, here we call it “la leyenda negra (antiespañola)”, and we theorise that it was created by the vassals of Elizabeth I of England during the war against Philip II, or similar.

Yes, I am a little tired, not only for the Hollywood deeply typecasting but also for foreign writings, particularly those of Isabel Allende, who I once looked after; she has few Spanish characters, but most of themselves are mad (Eugenia in The Island under the Sea) treacherous (Eugenia’s brother) or absurdly religious (Restrepo in The House of the Spirits). Well, I guess anyone chooses to make their characters how they like…?

Yes, we Spanish have more to us than dancing flamenco or being brunettes (I am brunette though). The people in the north, Galicia particularly, are said to descend from the Celts, so many of them have fair skin and light eyes of hair (my grandma even had green eyes!) the same with Latin Americans: not all of them need to be olive-skinned, and their colour does not make them more or less of a Latin American (saying this from experience, I have visited family in Ecuador twice).

There are many countries in the world and it is difficult for the average citizen to know about them deeply, that is why I mislike the characterisation of many Spanish characters, because I feel it sometimes brings harmful consequences and thoughts on our culture. Fairly, I have travelled a lot in my country and you can tell the differences between the places.

This is what a traditional attire of my city looks like:

That is a “traje baturro”.

[gameshowtrainwreck]

An open letter to right-wing Tumblr

Nobody owes you a debate. Their refusal to interact with you isn't an attack on your free speech. Rights exist in the third-person perspective in ways just as solid and just as established as in when they are expressed in the first-.

What makes your right to say whatever you want without government penalty for having done so (except in a few, well-established, well-defined precedents that any reasonable citizen would agree with) any more sacrosanct than my right to exercise free assembly to say "fuck you, fuck this, I got a better life to live than to spend it listening to the same horseshit being argued over and over again?"

The court of public opinion holds a lower standard because it's ultimately the lowest stakes in anything we have the gall to call 'justice' in this nation-- every case is presented to every individual juror who sorted out their findings based on what they had available to them, and judged them one way or the other. Sometimes the cases reach conclusions like (as an example), "the right is more bent out of shape about trans people while also being really fuckin unwilling to do anything about the chimos operating within their own ranks" and found a reasonable consequence for that finding to refuse to consider conservatives in any other relationship besides adversarial.

If you don't like that, either present better info or find better beliefs. Nobody will hate you for changing your mind, everybody does it. It's okay to admit mistakes, and it actually shows a degree of maturity to accept that and take accountability for them.

(and before you try; fuckin don't. Democrats are just as fucking terrible-- y'all don't think Palestine is being raped hard enough while liberals try to tell everybody a little of it is necessary. Harris lost more than Trump won. Their best idea to run against a brain-damaged rapist was to find a brain-damaged rapist of their own and then bury #MeToo because sometimes presidential candidates are allowed little a rape, as a treat. Don't explain to me how democrats are bad, too, motherfucker, I actually chaired for the shiftless pieces of shit. the point is to be better than the other assholes, not to be even bigger assholes. They keep trying to muscle in on your brand and y'all keep sliding right in response. The matter of Epstein's death matter less than the idea that several powerful people availed themselves to his hospitality and nothing will ever be done about that because Republicans and Democrats both were involved. The majority of CSA cases are by people who the victim knew and trusted but y'all wanna tell everybody you think is too ugly to shit in a public restroom that you know better-- considering how much nuance Jim Bob Duggar found about child molestation when the world discovered he raised his own flesh and blood to be a serial toucher, are y'all just oblivious or trying to smokescreen your own predation? Half of y'all get real bent outta shape about age of consent laws for some reason)

The fact that you feel it in cumulative is on your own fuckin heads, assholes. You don't blame the people for the idea of messages spreading farther, wider, and faster than the time it took you to think not at all about it before you pressed 'post' any more the Democrats can try to blame voters for not supporting someone more unpopular in 2020 than a sociopathic racist CIA Blacksite dickhead (the rat-faced fuck) who tried to force the most cringe-worthy fucking meme of the election cycle before Hillary Clinton's fight song horseshit (no, seriously, look up the high hopes dance and tell me that ain't fuckin pathetic).

I would say better politics start with you, but taking the law of averages and the current state of the Overton window in American politics into consideration, some of you won't make your best contribution to American politics until you leave this world.

[gingerlee-holds]

okay so this is gonna be something different lmao- my beloved @lionkid gave me an idea when i was visiting her and i wanted to make this for her-! its not a tword fic, but hopefully it'll become a good story if i keep at it- its the first chapter, and please let me know what you think!! i cant wait to build on it more heehee

also im sorry its kinda short lmao

the title for this story is Trains out of Tranton! enjoy <3

Chapter 1: Home

Words: 630 Warnings: Post-Apocalypse setting

It all happened so fast. I suppose it's easier to see the danger of a situation afterward when you have all the facts, and to us, it feels like the world that came before was a house of cards just begging to be toppled over. Frankly, it's a miracle that humankind lasted into the 20th Century. The scholar says the current year is 1996; we must take his word for it.

I am Jack Flynn, born to Samuel and Laurie in a world bereft of hope. The collapse of civilization was their childhood, a time of empty stomachs, and they were robbed of their American Dream. Samuel's tribe crossed paths with Laurie's in the ruins of Seattle during the most brutal blizzard in living memory, and my father chose to leave his people and join hers. Two decades ago, I came into this world one year after he made that choice, and with her final breath, my mother named me and promised me warmth.

Samuel Flynn, a natural leader, led our people from the old home in Seattle where wild dogs roam with foaming mouths and monstrous beasts proclaim themselves men. He brought us south from the bitter cold, and we found our new home in Tranton. Before the collapse, Tranton was a mere trainyard, but it took on a new role among the sick, hungry, and miserable survivors of my tribe. I was still in swaddling cloth then, not nearly old enough to form a memory of life before Tranton nor a perception of where elsewhere is. 

The world I know is far smaller than my father's. Tranton is barely three square miles in area, filled with thousands of people desperate for a place to sleep. The rails rust under torrential rain, springing forth moss and weeds between the tracks. Aspen saplings shot from the soil below in a mad frenzy, and the tallest of them stooped over our homes like giants. The boxcars of the old world make for tremendous homes for a tribe of hungry refugees, and the cars harbored two families each. Most importantly, though, those cars that could not be utilized for storage or transportation around the settlement were heaved onto their sides and became the walls upon which our soldiers stood watch against the horrors beyond.

From what our patrols inform us, every can of food for miles around has been eaten or destroyed by the elements. As such, Tranton must import their food from outside, and every week, a mule hauls a freight car into town, the shriek of ungreased axles announcing its arrival. The farms are among the few places unscathed by the collapse, and in return for the goods we can scavenge from the neighboring cities, they share with us their harvests. Well, that's not entirely true - those of us who can't scavenge become tinkerers, forming scrap metal into tools for survival and weapons against marauders. The turbines we've fashioned turn a fierce squall into a warm meal and a well-lit courtyard for my father to speak to our people from. Our home is at the edge of this courtyard, a diesel locomotive too old to turn its wheels but with a commanding presence over the surrounding cars. The roaring hearth I warmed my hands against was the firebox, and it was my father's responsibility to blow the train's whistle at sunrise each morning.

This whistle, choked with age, was what I awoke to every day for as long as I can recall. This whistle was normalcy, home. The whistle was the assurance that humankind had not yet died. The whistle promised that things were alright now and nothing needed changing. I hated that whistle; more than that, I hated the man who blew it.

[philosophicalconservatism]

Response To An Earlier Post

the-psudo

So the freedom to think you're gay or trans or a furry or a socialist or that Israel is committing genocide against Palestinians is a fundamental right. Locke says so. When Democrats make you feel uncomfortable for persecuting those people, they're doing nothing wrong. You're not entitled to an emotional safe space where no one is allowed to call you a bigot, because that censors their freedom of expression.

Philosophicalconservatism

Liberals are not doing anything wrong when they make people feel bad in the name of gender Ideology. They are doing something wrong when they pass laws that punish American citizens (employers, landlords, teachers etc.) for not using pronouns in the prescribed manner, in the name of preventing personal offense ( thus effectively providing safe spaces). Such laws have been established in New York, California, and other U.S. states, as well as in Canada and elsewhere abroad . They are also wrong when they punish students for the same speech crimes. The executive branch of the government is wrong when it conspires with big tech companies to similarly regulate speech in a politically correct manner.

The problem with illegitimately classifying a dissenting view as "hate" or "persecution" simply because you dislike it, is that this ultimately serves as a justification for the kinds of stifling policies I am discussing here. This is exactly what this sort of rhetoric is designed to do. If speech is truly "violence" or something very similar to it, then men and women must be protected from its impact in the same way as they would need to be protected from physical violence. And that is precisely what these laws and policies were created to do.

The idea that all of this Left-wing rhetoric about tolerance is only about people being left alone is dissimulation on the part of the far Left, and either niavete or (far more likely) willful ignorance on your part (you are smarter than that). We have seen this charade before whereby parties on the political Left tell us that all they want is for certain individuals to be left alone in to live their own lives, only to subsequently have a related set of opinions imposed by the force of law upon the public. The Left told us that allowing gays and lesbians to be included within the concept of state marriage was simply about people being left alone to live their own lives; it would not effect anyone else. The next thing we know we see cases like Masterpiece Cake shop v.s. Colorado in which private businesses are required by the state to cater to and accommodate these "private matters" that do not concern anyone else.

And when these policies are eventually enacted we are told that the suppression of our own rights is literally the recognition of the rights of another. A person has the right to be called by a certain pronoun. Individuals have the right to have other people create original products ( not to merely sell them existing products) which celebrate things they themselves do not believe in. When the modern Left stops leveraging this misrepresentative rhetoric about the "hate" and "persecution" of their opponents into policies which restrict the rights and liberties of those same opponents, then we will simply chalk their words up to harmless talk and disregard them.

But they will not do this because they fundamentally do not believe in the distinction between public and private morality; between the public and the private sphere.

".

[pub-lius]

DONT MAKE THIS LAFAYETTE POST AT 3 AM... | LAFAYETTE 3 AM CHALLENGE (scary) (don't try) (gone wrong) (lafayette pt. 4)

i witerawwy making this wafayette post at thwee am guys :0 (im so fucking tired but i hope you enjoy this @thereallvrb0y ) also here's pt. 3

The Conway Cabal *vine boom*

Alright, so last we left off, Lafayette rejoined Washington's staff on October 19, 1777 and Congress named him the commander of his own division. Woohoo!

While at Valley Forge (which is it's own beast to tackle another day), Lafayette worked closely with the aides-de-camp to procure supplies for the troops, but since they rarely ever got their requests fulfilled, Lafayette ended up spending his own money to provide necessities for the men, which is something like barely anyone else did, so this was super cool.

It's around this time that Washington's office became obsessed with the idea of a Conway Cabal (this is like one of my favorite topics of the amrev so I will try to keep this brief).

Lafayette's involvement in this whole ordeal came in the form of another fucking Canada expedition. At first, Lafayette refused because he didn't want to betray Washington, since the order came from the Board of War, which was seen as like a way to usurp Washington. When the order came from Congress (which was more acceptable to a political ally of Washington), Lafayette still didn't agree because he didn't want Thomas Conway, the former Inspector General, as his second in command because he thought he was annoying and dumb. Eventually, with some negotiating, he accepted on the condition that Conway wouldn't be there.

Side note: i will get exasperated several times with America wanting to conquer Canada or get them on their side against the British in some way because this happens SO MANY TIMES throughout the amrev and also 1812 that it is physically exhausting. like Canada wouldn't be any fuck to anyone anyway (no hate to canadians y'all are alright but still useless as hell in 18th century warfare)

When Lafayette arrived at where he'd be stationed in Albany, he was like wtf because he had N O T H I N G. like when I say nothing I mean most of the men he was told he'd have weren't there, there were no supplies like at all, and the men that WERE there were sick and dying and Lafayette had to pay more out of pocket to keep them alive. So, yeah, that expedition DIDNT HAPPEN, and Washington's allies were like "yeah this was definitely doomed to fail".

*DISCLAIMER: Again, I have to give the Conway Cabal Disclaimer (tm), there is no definitive proof that there was an actual conspiracy to overthrow Washington and replace him with Gates, it's more likely that he just had political enemies who had separate schemes against him, and occasionally worked together against their common enemy. Me personally, i don't really give a rats ass if they were actually conspiring against him, I think the events kinda speak for themselves and the conspiracy question is the wrong one to be asking.*

Barren Hill and Monmouth

Remember when I mentioned that Lafayette had established himself as the middle man between America and France? Yeah, that is important because he played a role in the ~French/American alliance~ aka the Treaty of Amity and Commerce, but that isn't really interesting aside from the fact that around the time everyone was celebrating the alliance, Gilbert found out his oldest daughter, Henriette, had died. Whoops!

After he was done sobbing while everyone else partied, he was ordered to find out of the British were actually leaving Philadelphia or just pranking them. Washington stationed Lafayette at Barren Hill with his Virginian detachment (this is where his love of Virginia comes from, along with his besties being from there), as well as some Oneida warriors he befriended while on that "Canada expedition"

Note: there's actually some interesting nuance with the indigenous warriors that played a part at Barren Hill, so I recommend anyone who is interested in that to look into it bc its super cool

Another note: Lafayette would eventually take a young Oneida boy with him to France (along with a Protestant kid who's father died in the war) for a better education, and there's some really interesting racial stuff that shows the attitudes the French court had towards poc, particularly indigenous people, at the time. Basically what had happened was Lafayette wanted to show off the really cool culture but really just ended up humiliating the kid by exploiting and exaggerating his culture for his French aristocratic visitors. it was very not cool and he should have known better!

Anyway, back to Barren Hill.

Washington gave Lafayette specific orders not to stay in one place because it would make it really easy for the British to find his location and attack him. Like really easy. Especially if you made camp on top of a hill and just kinda. chilled there. for an extended period of time. Like the British would find you immediately...

So the British found him immediately because he made camp on top of a hill and just kinda chilled there for an extended period of time. That hill was Barren Hill, if you hadn't already guessed.

Roughly a shit ton (5,000) British shoulders attacked the encampment from three directions, and in doing so, completely fucking Lafayette over. However, thanks mostly to the Oneida warriors, Lafayette and his troops retreated calmly across a low road through the woods, across the Schuylkill river (everything happens here), and successfully eluding the enemy. btw the Americans lost only NINE LIVES. Also another shoutout to the Oneida warriors who were absolute BADASSES and were the last to leave the site to make sure everyone else got out safely :')

Okay now we're getting into the real shit.

So Washington was like "okay so the British are ACTUALLY leaving Philadelphia (thanks laf), let's annoy the shit out of them while they leave" and they did, had a couple skirmishes here and there, but they wanted a real victory, so they planned one for the area near Monmouth Courthouse.

At first, Washington offered the command to General Charles Lee, who was pretty experienced in European warfare and was also throwing a huge hissy fit because he needed attention constantly. Lee never liked Washington or his plans, so he declined the command at Monmouth, so Washington gave it to Lafayette.

However, Lee was a petty bitch who clearly had no father figure so he threw another fucking tantrum when he found out that Lafayette would be in command instead of him, so he appealed to Washington and got the command back based on seniority.

During the battle, Lee was pushed back by Cornwallis' troops, and ordered a retreat, however he did not go about this in an orderly fashion, and did not give specific directions on who was retreating and where, so the troops were just running around in confusion while getting shot at. Lafayette, who was on the front lines, sent a note to Washington who arrived ASAP, and tore Lee a new asshole in front of everyone and it was super embarrassing.

The battle continued for the rest of the day (with Lafayette leading troops at the front and Lee at the rear) and eventually the British withdrew, making the battle a technical draw, but a moral victory for the Continental army.

Lee slandered many of the officers, including Washington, von Steuben, and Washington's aides-de-camp, which is the reason John Laurens shot his ass. His career never recovered.

Also, we have the records for Lee's court martial, and they're very interesting to read if you have the time. Laurens' testimonies are very funny.

The Newport Campaign

Good news: France finally sent naval support in the form of a fleet under Admiral d'Estaing, which arrived in Rhode Island. More good news: d'Estaing quickly befriended Lafayette. Even better news: the French and Continental forces were planning a campaign against the British fortifications at Newport, RI.

Bad news: the Americans chose General John Sullivan as commander of the Continental troops for the Newport campaign. And he. Hates. French people.

The American and French officers planned a joint land and sea offensive against the British and Hessian troops, and they were really riding on Lafayette's ability to ease the tension between the French and Americans, but things were still strained since Sullivan and d'Estaing both wanted the military advantage of attacking first.

Without consulting d'Estaing, Sullivan decided to attack a day early. This was really stupid because he wouldn't have naval coverage but he did it anyway. D'Estaing felt betrayed by this, and dispatched his fleet from Newport Harbor to pursue British ships without consulting Sullivan, so Sullivan had even less naval coverage bc the ships were just gone.

This left Lafayette trying to mend relations between these two assholes. He begged d'Estaing to come back and that the Americans thought he was being dramatic, but d'Estaing refused until strong winds destroyed his ships and he had to go into port to repair his ships, which he said he'd leave immediately after that was finished. He sailed for Boston with his repaired ships, and Sullivan accused him of desertion, cowardice, or treason. He put his accusations to paper and sent it ahead of d'Estaing so that the Bostonians wouldn't want anything to do with him.

Lafayette. lost. his. shit. He was infuriated that Sullivan would insult the French, though he didn't condone d'Estaing's behavior. In fact, he was so enraged that he decided not to update Washington because he didn't want to risk insulting the Commander in Chief. Eventually, he broke and talked to Washington, who handled the situation diplomatically.

"Would you believe that, forgetting the general obligations owed to France and the services specifically rendered by the fleet, the greater part of these people here allow faded prejudices to revive and speak as though they had been abandoned, almost betrayed." -Lafayette to d'Estaing, August 24

Note: the next post might take even longer than this one lol because I have to take more notes from my sources to get my timeline together for laf's participation in the french revolution, but while I'm doing that, i'll be posting an actual timeline of the frev on here, so i'll still be making posts. also, even tho my account will be focused on frev for a little bit, im still actively doing research on the amrev, so any questions about either, or other historical figures/events, are still just as encouraged as normal! love y'all <3

[wileycap]

Alright, my algorithm content is filling up with crazy people whom I've been dutifully blocking (don't judge me sometimes I want tumblr to feed me pictures of cats like I'm a small baby bird) which, you know, we all know why it's happening in an American election year.

So I'd like to caution you against one of the more insidious types of posts they have.

The Reasonable Post.

I'm going to be using the words Cats and Dogs to describe any (false) dichotomy that these people want to push. Why? Because this shit is as depressing as a single lost candy in a tin of sewing supplies. Obviously most people can see what the following examples are patterned after, but this sort of thing happens with any number of groups. Creating dichotomies and conflating different groups of Others (i.e. harnessing existing hate towards Group A by suggesting that they are all also members of Group B, with Group B being the real target) is the bread and butter of information warfare.

Imagine the following post:

"Not all Dogs are bad and we shouldn't prejudge every single Dog."

That is a Reasonable Post. Everyone can agree with it and usually they should. There is nothing wrong with that post, it really is just a very uncontroversial statement that the vast majority of people should be able to agree with. It is deliberately ignorant of any social context or the framework in which these discourses happen, but it's not wrong.

But let's consider the framing. The post exists as part of a blog, which, by unfortunate happenstance, also has other posts in it.

So, We Can't Classify Every Dog As Evil (good post, 3000 notes) exists within the same space as classics like...

Cats complain, Dogs do.

The purpose of a Cat is to stay indoors and protect the house from pests. This is one of the hardest jobs out there, and Cats should be praised!

A Dog has to HUNT. Cats will never understand this. (A/N: if you google "are cats predators" this will become a Very Funny hypothetical post from a nonexistent blog discussing a nonexistent dichotomy.)

Dogs: "Alright, human, today I've helped you with hunting, tracking and herding sheep! If there's anything else you need me to do, I've still got energy!" Cats: "Today I laid around doing nothing. Where's my food? Also my bed is bad so I stole the Dog's."

Oh, look, 5 Cats who committed Cat Crimes. I wonder if they'll receive a fair and proportionate punishment...

Et cetera, et cetera. The posts will continue to escalate, from seemingly harmless to outright hateful. They will attack existing social structures to frame them as favoring the Other. The Reasonable Post acts like the funnel theory in sales, reaching a large audience and sucking as many of them in as possible until only a few "sales" happen - but it also serves as a shorthand for likeminded people (a dogwhistle, if you will) via its framing and content that this is a blog that promotes the ideology they want to see.

*I've also noticed that a lot of these blogs have "traditional" or "vintage" pinup art. This could just be a matter of personal preference (after all, I like old timey boobs as much as the next girlie), or it could be another funnel, where people who would like to see More Boobs click on the blogs and find some boobs, but also the other stuff. Not that this has ever happened to me.

After the blog establishes some sort of following, they're usually free to engage in more extreme discourse. The Reasonable Post can then be used as a shield: "I was only saying what I've been saying all along: you shouldn't judge all Dogs. I'm sorry if that offends you."

There is also a highly desireable side effect for the Reasonable Post - it can drive people to disagree with what really is an uncontroversial, widely accepted opinion. Of course, the people disagreeing are usually (a) crazy themselves, (b) fourteen, (c) directing their interactions at the wider framework of their post, not the uncontroversial statement itself or (d) a combination. They might even be sock puppets. But these interactions are extremely valuable to these kinds of blogs. All of a sudden, they have an Enemy - an unreasonable person who probably wants to kill all of the Dogs!!! This is what we're fighting against! Rally!

And then the screenshots of those interactions can be fed into Facebook for easy outrage, or a "meme account", or any number of places where they can gain traction. They are used to reinforce existing ingroup loyalties and to bolster hate against outgroups. They are used to muddle the waters, to make extremist ideas seem like reasonable discourse and to provide plausible deniability. They are used to discredit "the opposition". Remember: fascism always requires an enemy that is both strong and weak.

Many fascist and extremist movements in the age of social media use these same tools to recruit and to advertise, and this post - while long - barely scratches the surface.

However, there is a very good way to limit the damage. Think critically about posts you see, this one included. (I should state that I'm, like, a huge leftist, and all that that implies) Familiarize yourself with common dogwhistles. Vet the blogs you see - a quick glance is usually all it takes. Block the user and don't interact with the post. Don't give it visibility.

And remember: you are not immune to propaganda.

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

What Future Historians Say Will Shock You | Real Time with Bill Maher

And finally, New Rule: Someone, maybe AI, has to figure out a way to slow down time. Because what everyone has been saying to me lately is, "I can't believe it's May." Oh, Americans, we do nothing but bitch about everything under the sun, but damn it, life goes by too fast. It's Memorial Day in a week? Christ, I might as well start my Christmas shopping.

But it is, it's May. A month I have been anticipating for a long time because my book comes out next week. A book I have waited my whole career to write. One that is based on collecting the creme de la creme of these end of the show editorials and reimagining them, but also cover some virgin territory.

For example, I'm kind of obsessed with the idea of what historians of the future will say about us. Imagine it's the year 3024, and you're living in a colony on the planet Musk, formerly Mars. What will the historian say about the Americans of 2024? Well probably, that we were self-absorbed, algorithmically enslaved, on drugs and worshiped a god named Apple.

But what they won't do is write about the very thing that consumes us: our petty squabbles. In the myopia of the present our partisan differences make each side believe they're nothing like the other side. Libtards and deplorables. Historians will disagree. They won't see red on one side and blue on the other. You're thinking of Jaws 3D.

But historians see the character of a people as a whole. The Scots were clannish, the Spartans stoic, the Mongols expansionist, the Greeks were too into anal. And for us, it will be no different. Historians will say, we're also too into anal.

But also, the other thing. They will see us as a singular people with the same pathologies and unappealing traits on both sides. Traits that simply manifest themselves differently. For example, I believe, they will say, Americans of our era were unscientific. One side thought, climate change was a hoax. One thought, gender was a construct. One warred against Mother Nature. One against motherhood. One doubts Evolution, one wears masks when they're alone in the car. Which is kind of like wearing a condom to jerk off.

In medical schools now, professors are so fearful of being labeled transphobic, they have to apologize for saying words like male, female and pregnant woman.

Katie Herzog writes, "Some of the country's top medical students are being taught that humans are not, like other mammals, a species comprising two sexes." "The notion of sex, they are learning, is just a man-made creation."

Okay, but generally, the people with breasts and vaginas who give birth are the women and the ones with the penis, hogging the remote are men.

Historians will say that as a people, Americans lost our rationality. They'll say, we were conspiracy theorists. The right wanted to believe that Obama was born in Kenya. The left wanted to believe in Trump's pee tape. We have January 6th Truthers but the Washington Post reports that there are also now October 7th Truthers who believe Hamas never raped anybody and the hostages all died of natural causes. Now, does the right do conspiracy more? I think they do. QAnon and Jewish space lasers. Hillary's pedophile ring, microchips and the vaccine, Sandy Hook didn't happen, the election was stolen, Jews are trying to replace us. Yeah, but of course, on the left… Jews are the Nazis now. Somehow even enemies always find a way to agree to blame everything on the Jews.

I think, future historians will see us as a sad people, saddled with a genetic predisposition to always break into factions and then be consumed with the hate that engenders. Each side in America right now considers the other an existential threat. To the point where both camps literally collaborate with foreign enemies over fellow Americans.

Republican news channels use Russian talking points. Their voters wear t-shirts that say, "I'd rather be Russian than Democrat" and their leader sides with Putin. When today's Republican watches Rocky IV, they root for Ivan Drago.

Meanwhile, on the left this happened. Americans chanting death to America. College professors and their students exhilarated by aligning with a theocratic murderous terrorist group with values fundamentally opposed to our own.

Finally, I think, the people of the future will ironically be puzzled by our common desire to live in the past. On Fox News they're always pining for 1950, to make America great again. And in The Huffington Post it's always 1619, and nothing has changed.

For people so being into the moment, nobody seems to wanna live in the year we're living in. Trump's entire shtick is to return America to some idyllic time when the traditional family was a husband, a wife, a couple of kids and a porn star on the side. A time when America was the only Superpower and you could drink at work. When a cheeseburger cost a dime and a girl brought it to you on roller skates and she liked it when you complimented her ass. Nikki Haley says, "America was never racist." And then there are voices on the left saying racism has never been worse.

And the normies in the center say, "how hard is it to meet in the middle and just not be stupid about shit?" And that's who my book is for. People who don't wanna be stupid about shit.

[dandelionh3art]

In June of 1967, at the same time as Israel was starting to enact its military dictatorship over the West Bank and Gaza, the biggest athlete of his time and one of the most famous and recognizable icons of his era, Muhammad Ali, was sentenced to five years in prison for his refusal to join the US military and serve in the Vietnam war.

Two months earlier, on April 28th, his boxing license was suspended, and he was stripped of his heavyweight world champion title and arrested: 3 times his name was called at a Military Entrance Processing Station in Houston, and 3 times he would not step forward.

Before and after that day, he was active and speaking against the war to American students in universities, in rallies throughout the country, in press conferences, and interviews.

He never once buckled under pressure, and crafted some of the most memorable and popular quotes of the Vietnam era like "I ain't got no quarrel with them Vietcong", or

"Why should they ask me to put on a uniform and go 10,000 miles from home and drop bombs and bullets on Brown people in Vietnam while so-called Negro people in Louisville are treated like dogs and denied simple human rights? No I’m not going 10,000 miles from home to help murder and burn another poor nation simply to continue the domination of white slave masters of the darker people the world over. This is the day when such evils must come to an end. I have been warned that to take such a stand would cost me millions of dollars. But I have said it once and I will say it again. The real enemy of my people is here. I will not disgrace my religion, my people or myself by becoming a tool to enslave those who are fighting for their own justice, freedom and equality. If I thought the war was going to bring freedom and equality to 22 million of my people they wouldn’t have to draft me, I’d join tomorrow. I have nothing to lose by standing up for my beliefs. So I’ll go to jail, so what? We’ve been in jail for 400 years."

-

Choosing wisely, the American state did not destroy Ali. Ali came back to the ring after 3 years of forced absence, reclaimed his title, and, beating all the best heavyweights of the time, created an unmatched legacy in all of sports history.

-

Almost 60 years after that, it is impossible to even imagine, say, Lebron James or Stephen Curry talking with anything similar to that clarity and conviction about, say, a certain genocide and their country's support for it. It's inconceivable. They see themselves as nothing but earners and entertainers.

I often think about the timeless greatness of Ali, being not only the greatest boxing champion of all time but a great formidable political spirit as well. Ali who did not succumb to fear and pressure and risked his career, freedom, many millions of dollars, and even his life (in a country notorious for lone assassins) by consistently refusing to join a war the American public was still overwhelmingly for at the time.

And what do we have today? Complete craven silence. All the great athletes, rock stars, actors - deafening silence.

Not one of them has as much to lose as Ali did, at the height of a singular career in global sports. Not one of them risks jail time, fierce public hate, or financial ruin. Still, they find no courage to speak up.

They all count their dollars and likes in the dark, psychologically broken, and morbidly anxious stars of nothingness.

-

Nearly 6 decades after he willingly put everything on the line for his principles in a spectacular act of real-time political nonconformity, The Great One still shines as a huge beacon of light in a sea of rancid complicity. An inspiration and a role model like no other.

-

The absence of an Ali-like figure of our times tells a sad and uniquely poignant story about the triumph of capitalism and conformity over the human spirit in America in the post-Vietnam era; it also tells us how much of a giant Ali really was.

Alon Mizrahi

[xxoxobree]

Here’s Proof of me being baited and bullied and gaslit for days by your favs simply because I said I wasn’t an Anon😊 Enjoy.

Honestly I knew this was gonna happen because they were being shady in the discord for days I just didn’t say anything. They were attempting address me not being from “the hood” and trying to say my fics were bad but it wasn’t directed and I didn’t respond. Later this same tactic was used to attempt to “bait” me into responding to them. Here’s other screenshots of them trying to gaslight me in the discord cursing in Spanish after I tried to defend myself and I was told “I don’t want to go there with Talia.”

The night I was accused of being an anon in Honeys inbox I went and posted this. Not aimed at any of them I was meaning the hateful anons and the weirdos that read Miles smut. They said they never accused me of anything so I thought we were good. But of course they were accusing me and gaslit me into thinking I was crazy so they took offense to my post.

Miss Dalia who I do not know and do not follow liked this post because , they were scoping my page to find anything to have the green light to attack me to “bait” me into responding to them. When she liked it, it confirmed they wanted problems for whatever reason, because prior to them saying I was the anon we never had any issues and by we I mean me cause we’ll find out later they never liked me. After she liked I posted this because we never interacted before or anything so why now and I put 2&2 together that they wanted an issue but was too pussy to actually say anything, directly that is

This was her response

Again literally no reason to say this because nothing was said to me directly and I thought we were all good , y’all said nothing was directed toward me . This was bait. But I didn’t respond. So another 🤡 posted bait.

A friend of mine responded to it because I spoke to her and let her know how I was being gaslit and the whole situation. Also it was so obvious that they were meaning me because DAYS prior it was a discussion about “people using the hood for cosplay” . And they still tried to gaslight her. Here’s her still going on TO THIS DAY! about the Hood Princess bs! I’m not white passing at all 👀🤣🤣 and the natural blonde was a joke from tik tok but you’re tryna slander me anyway you could. I’ve never cosplayed anything “the hood” isn’t exclusive to the United Stated and I live in a black nation. People hate black people and black culture and demonize the hood culture when it’s just black people authentically being themselves and I find that so amazing and the “hood princess.” Was just me appreciating being black and the impact we have on the world and us being authentically black. Also I have a large black American following why would I not use aave ? It’s called communication 👀 they wouldn’t be able to understand my Bahamian dialect.

You were meaning “white people.” But if it’s off tumblr keep it off tumblr and you “don’t want anyone’s mental to be messed up”. Which one is it ? 🥴 Talia brags about this all the time btw how she doesn’t go after people because she doesn’t want anyone’s mental to be messed up, (she said this about you miss Mayearies but you’re her lap dog so you don’t care.) acknowledging the fact that she uses tumblr as some type of power dynamic, she knows people will follow her and do and say messed up things. They have a pattern of collecting data and whatever else they can use against you and attack you.

Now as a logical thinking person did I not have a right to defend myself? Especially when I did NOTHING TO YOU! Just said that I was not the anon and I didn’t appreciate being called the anon because I know that I would be attacked by everyone and my point was proven!

Here’s the confession of them conspiring against me. To get me to respond and everything else to prove I’m the villain they so desperately wanted me to be also the confession of never liking me even tho I thought we were cool.

Now they continued to tell me I have multiple personalities, call me Oscar the Grouch, I’m insecure and all the 3rd grade ass insults they could come up with about some damn weave 😂😂.

They also accused me of being anons in their inbox. I never ever got into anyone’s inbox cause that literally makes no sense. We’re already going back and forth why be on anon ? But here’s the countless threats and insults from them in my inbox. (The one that told me to off myself is ash btw after she tried to call me out about some death threats.)

They also tried to call me out about some damn fics and what I wrote in a fic. Calling me an alcoholic clearly you don’t know what that means.

But this same person literally made this fic 🤣

Btw this is the fic they had a problem with , what was me just stating baby names, I feel like that’s so normal being young and in love and writing your name with your bf last name type stuff nothing sexual or anything, but ofc they needed something to grab at.

As for being labeled “ableist” I’m not that at all and if my comments were offensive I APOLOGIZE WHOLEHEARTEDLY! With that being said I think that should be the same label given to anyone that said I was an alcoholic considering they were discriminating against “alcoholism.” Which is a disease

So in the end I was never liked and conspired against bullied and insulted because I dared! To stand up to Talia and the others and tried to clear my name of any wrong doing because i didn’t want to be attacked.

[marta-bee]

Entering (or Leaving) the Garden

Let's talk about Anathema and Adam's first meeting in Good Omens (the book). I mentioned it when talking about Pepper earlier, but as I said, this really deserves its own post.

Adam has come from reenacting his own version of the Spanish Inquisition. He doesn't actually see what's so wrong with witches, in spite of God being "dead set against" it, and the whole inquisition thing seems more like a bit of fun to fill a summer day. But still, Adam's coming away from that feeling like he was just getting into a good rhythm that would fix this witches problem properly and so be for the greater good (though he's not exactly clear on why or how), when his parents punish him for ruining Pepper's sister's dress, and he gets a bad case of the grumblies.

This is just the kind of emotional landscape that gets people to lash out at an easy target. I'm thinking American nativism and racism where people lose their jobs and attack the immigrant they perceive as having stole it, rather than the true culprits. Or the hate crimes against Asian-Americans during COVID though you're Asian-connected neighbors of course had absolutely nothing to do with it, even if a few Chinese scientists did (which, you know, is far from proven). You can probably think of other situations like that. The point is, Adam feels wronged and a the woman he thinks is responsible for that wronging should make a mighty enticing target.

She is one, of course (or nearly), but she doesn't look the part:

"They just better not come running to me when ole Picky is turned into a frog, that's all," muttered Adam.

It was at this point that two facts dawned on him. One was that his disconsolate footsteps had led him past Jasmine Cottage. The other was that someone was crying.

Adam was a soft touch for tears. He hesitated a moment, and then cautiously peered over the hedge.

To Anathema, sitting in a deck chair and halfway through a packet of Kleenex, it looked like the rise of a small, dishevelled sun.

Adam doubted that she was a witch. Adam had a very clear mental picture of a witch. The Youngs restricted themselves to the only possible choice amongst the better class of Sunday newspaper, and so a hundred years of enlightened occultism had passed Adam by. She didn't have a hooked nose or warts, and she was young . . . well, quite young. That was good enough for him.

For her part, Anathema is there looking for exactly who Adam is. She's meant to... what, diffuse some threat about him? Bear witness? Make sure a prophecy is fulfilled in some way? I'm not 100% clear, actually, but she's probably meant to find him. She's in tears because she's lost the Book that would point to him. And there he is, peeking over the hedge at her. But he's also not what she's been primed to suspect, even of the neighborhood ne'er-do-well.

"Hallo," he said, unslouching.

She blew her nose and stared at him.

What was looking over the hedge should be described at this point. What Anathema saw was, she said later, something like a prepubescent Greek god. Or maybe a Biblical illustration, one which showed muscular angels doing some righteous smiting. It was a face that didn't belong in the twentieth century. It was thatched with golden curls which glowed. Michelangelo should have sculpted it.

He probably would not have included the battered sneakers, frayed jeans, or grubby T-shirt, though. "Who're you?" she said.

"I'm Adam Young," said Adam. "I live just down the lane."

"Oh. Yes, I've heard of you," said Anathema, dabbing at her eyes. Adam preened. "Mrs. Henderson said I was to be sure to keep an eye out for you," she went on. "I'm well known around here," said Adam.

"She said you were born to hang," said Anathema.

Adam grinned. Notoriety wasn't as good as fame, but was heaps better than obscurity.

"She said you were the worst of the lot of Them," said Anathema, looking a little more cheerful.

Adam nodded.

"She said, 'You watch out for Them, Miss, they're nothing but a pack of ringleaders. That young Adam's full of the Old Adam,' " she said.

 Side-note: Huzzah for Neil and Terry, on that "worst of the lot of Them" line. A++ wordplay, that...

Also: "Full of the Old Adam"? If only; better that than the anti-Adam, really.

But getting back to my main point, I can't imagine Anathema being turned off by him being a hellion. Antichrist, sure, but punk with a reputation of getting the local busybodies' panties in a twist? That seems just the type she'd gravitate toward. He's more sympathetic than even that, though, isn't he? "Like a prepubescent Greek god. Or maybe a Biblical illustration.", indeed.

So not only is she primed to sympathize with him for stirring shit up, he's genuinely charming and beautiful and just plain young. I wonder if Greasy Johnson had come bumbling down the lane, with all his heft that suggests bully even as he seems pretty kind-hearted and gentle for an eleven-year-old boy, how she would have reacted. He seems to fit the stereotype of what Anathema's looking for much more easily. I don't think she would have disliked him for that, but probably also much less intrigued by and friendly toward him. Adam is the Bart Simpson to Greasy's Nelson Muntz, and we can't help but love him for it. At least I can't, and I suspect Anathema couldn't either.

Odd how our expectations and assumptions so easily work against us.

 .......

The really interesting question for me is if reality's better or worse for this chance meeting (as they say in Bree). If it had been Greasy who was the antichrist, if they'd been polite enough or even frigid and gone about their day, if it hadn't been Adam who'd been charming and considerate and been invited in. Because something really quite dangerous happens that afternoon beyond Anathema being comforted (to a point): Adam's not only educated a bit about things like the dangers of nuclear power and the lack of space ships in such facilities *g*, his imagination is also awakened a bit.

An eleven-year-old boy playing inquisitor the same way he might play pirate, dunking his friend's kid sister in the water, Monty Python-style, and asking if thyme is a sufficiently witchy herb is pretty cute. Having the actual antichrist think the Spanish Inquisition is all a game – you know, the thing that expressed such terrible feats of imagination it sent Crowley to drinking – then turn around and awaken said imagination by exposing him tl all sorts of knowledge he'd been too hemmed in by his parents' ordinariness to be aware of before?

That's just terrifying; Someone save us all.