#But like it meaning purity

[toxicyeuriii]

I want to paint Sunday but I have no supplies

[chamerionwrites]

Possibly The most surprising thing I have discovered on the internet is the number of people who will unironically refer to others as "degenerates" without expecting anyone reading this to immediately assume that they are a straight-up fascist

[hinamie]

binding vow

[inkskinned]

one of the things that i think we should pay attention to, socially, about the disney v. desantis thing is that it is really highlighting the importance of remembering nuance.

in a purely neutral sense, if you engage in something problematic, that does not mean you are necessarily agreeing with what makes it problematic. and i am worried that we have become... so afraid of any form of nuance.

disney isn't my friend, they're a corporate monopoly that bastardized copyright laws for their own benefit, ruin the environment, and abuse their workers (... and many other things). this isn't a hypothetical for me - i grew up in florida. i also worked for the actual Walt Disney World; like, in the parks. i am keenly aware of the ways they hurt people, because they hurt me. i fully believe that part of the reason florida is so conservative is because it's been an "open secret" for years now that disney lobbies the government to keep minimum wage down, and i know they worked hard to keep the parks unmasked and open during the worst parts of Covid. they purposefully keep their employees in poverty. they are in part responsible for the way the floridian government works.

desantis is still, by a margin that is frankly daunting, way worse. the alternative here isn't just "republicans win", it's actual fascism.

in a case like this, where the alternative is to allow actual fascism into united states legislation - where, if desantis wins, there are huge and legal ramifications - it's tempting to minimize the harm disney is also doing, because... well, it's not fascism. but disney isn't the good guy, either, which means republicans are having a field day asking activists oh, so you think their treatment of their employees is okay?

we have been trained there is a right answer. you're right! you're in the good group, and you're winning at having an opinion.

except i have the Internet Prophecy that in 2-3 months, even left-wing people will be ripping apart activists for having "taken disney's side". aren't i an anti-capitalist? aren't i pro-union? aren't i one of the good ones? removed from context and nuance (that in this particular situation i am forced to side with disney, until an other option reveals itself), my act of being like "i hope they have goofy rip his throat out onstage, shaking his lifeless body like a dog toy" - how quickly does that seem like i actually do support disney?

and what about you! at home, reading this. are you experiencing the Thought Crime of... actually liking some of the things disney has made? your memories of days at the parks, or of good movies, or of your favorite show growing up. maybe you are also evil, if you ever enjoyed anything, ever, at all.

to some degree, the binary idealization/vilification of individual motive and meaning already exists in the desantis case. i have seen people saying not to go to the disney pride events because they're cash grabs (they are). i've seen people saying you have to go because they're a way to protest. there isn't a lot of internet understanding of nuance. instead it's just "good show of support" or "evil bootlicking."

this binary understanding is how you can become radicalized. when we fear nuance and disorder, we're allowing ourselves the safety of assuming that the world must exist in binary - good or bad, problematic or "not" problematic. and unfortunately, bigots want you to see the world in this binary ideal. they want you to get mad at me because "disney is taking a risk for our community but you won't sing their praises" and they want me to get mad at you for not respecting the legit personal trauma that disney forced me through.

in a grander scheme outside of disney: what happens is a horrific splintering within activist groups. we bicker with each other about minimal-harm minimal-impact ideologies, like which depiction of bisexuality is the most-true. we gratuitously analyze the personal lives of activists for any sign they might be "problematic". we get spooked because someone was in a dog collar at pride. we wring our hands about setting an empty shopping mall on fire. we tell each other what words we may identify ourselves by. we get fuckin steven universe disk horse when in reality it is a waste of our collective time.

the bigots want you to spend all your time focusing on how pristine and pretty you and your interests are. they want us at each other's throats instead of hand in hand. they want to say see? nothing is ever fucking good enough for these people.

and they want their followers to think in binary as well - a binary that's much easier to follow. see, in our spaces, we attack each other over "proper" behavior. but in bigoted groups? they attack outwards. they have someone they hate, and it is us. they hate you, specifically, and you are why they have problems - not the other people in their group. and that's a part of how they fucking keep winning.

some of the things that are beloved to you have a backbone in something terrible. the music industry is a wasteland. the publishing industry is a bastion of white supremacy. video games run off of unpaid labor and abuse.

the point of activism was always to bring to light that abuse and try to stop it from happening, not to condemn those who engage in the content that comes from those industries. "there is no ethical consumption under late capitalism" also applies to media. your childhood (and maybe current!) love of the little mermaid isn't something you should now flinch from, worried you'll be a "disney adult". wanting the music industry to change for the better does not require that you reject all popular music until that change occurs. you can acknowledge the harm something might cause - and celebrate the love that it has brought into your life.

we must detach an acknowledgment of nuance from a sense of shame and disgust. we must. punishing individual people for their harmless passions is not doing good work. encouraging more thoughtful, empathetic consumption does not mean people should feel ashamed of their basic human capacities and desires. it should never have even been about the individual when the corporation is so obviously the actual evil. this sense that we must live in shame and dread of our personal nuances - it just makes people bitter and hopeless. do you have any idea how scared i am to post this? to just acknowledge the idea of nuance? that i might like something nuanced, and engage in it joyfully? and, at the same time, that i'm brutally aware of the harm that they're doing?

"so what do i do?" ... well, often there isn't a right answer. i mean in this case, i hope mickey chops off ron's head and then does a little giggle. but truth be told, often our opinions on nuanced subjects will differ. you might be able to engage in things that i can't because the nuance doesn't sit right with me. i might think taylor swift is a great performer and a lot of fun, and you might be like "raquel, the jet fuel emissions". we are both correct; neither of us have any actual sway in this. and i think it's important to remember that - the actual scope of individual responsibility. like, i also love going to the parks. Thunder Mountain is so fun. you (just a person) are not responsible for the harm that Disney (the billion dollar corporation) caused me. i don't know. i think it's possible to both enjoy your memories and interrogate the current state of their employment policies.

there is no right way to interrogate or engage with nuance - i just hope you embrace it readily.

[novelconcepts]

In watching more interviews with Liv about Van and the escalation of Van's pragmatism to such dark degrees, I find myself genuinely baffled that anyone could ever think Van the bad guy. I mean, I'm perplexed at finding ANY of these girls The Bad Guy. The bad guy is the situation. It's being lost. It's freezing. It's starving. It's being scraped down to the barest bone of being alive. They make choices that might be snippy, or cruel, or hard-headed, sure--Shauna refusing to just hash it out with Jackie; Jackie being too stubborn to come inside; Taissa refusing to discuss her situation plainly; etc--but by the time we reach the end of season 2, it doesn't even matter. Petty bullshit doesn't matter. Jealousy doesn't matter. Those things are still going to be present and complicated, because--for all their choices, for all the distancing they're trying to do--these kids ARE still human beings. But it isn't the point.

The point is survival. Plain, simple, straightforward. Van's pragmatism is survival. It is the difference between living another day with blood on your teeth or dying pretty. It is the difference between fighting forward through the fire and the snow and the hell of it all, and laying down to die. Van knowing, in watching the ritual violence of Shauna beating Lottie nearly the death, that they will be killing and eating one another soon. Van coming up with the cards for the hunt. Van not blinking when the moment comes, Van choosing a weapon that doubles as a tool to bring the body back, Van refusing to apologize for staying alive--it's not evil. It's not Bad Guy behavior. It's purely about survival, because there is nothing else left to her--or to any of them. They can play the pretty little Sweet Angel Girl game and die, or they can get dirty, bloody, horrific and fight. Van chooses the fight. Van chooses to fight for herself, for her lover, for her team, even knowing not everyone is going to make it out...because the alternate path there is that no one makes it out. Van knew the baby wouldn't live. Van knows the rest of them won't, either. Not unless they start making the hard choices.

And, honestly, the fact that Van sees this narrative coming. Comes up with this plan. Brings out the cards. To me, that is the opposite of Bad Behavior. That is as close to justice as anyone can find in the wilderness. If someone else came up with an idea, maybe it would have come down to voting--but that would have had such a human element to it, with bitterness or hostility or whatever ultimately petty shit always comes of humans selecting who to Other. The cards don't leave room for that. It isn't fair, because the situation isn't fair, because Man vs. Nature isn't fair, but it's as close to a just system as they could possibly find. It's the kindest solution to an unwinnable game. Not to bring it back to American Gods again, but all I can think is "it's easy, there's a trick to it: you do it, or you die." Van gave them that.

[menlove]

man the other thing that drives me crazy abt the whole "claiming judaism is an ethnicity and religion is race science just like the NAZIS" is that like....

what the nazis believed in was a mythical race of white europeans who were stronger and better than everyone else. they had 0 scientific, historic, or archeological proof of this. it was just a crackpot theory proposed to explain why white europeans were "better" than everyone else and provided an ideal for them to strive back to bc they thought that "pure" race had been tainted by racial "interbreeding"

jews saying judaism is an ethnicity is not bc it's in the fucking tanakh that they came from judea. it's bc there's MOUNTAINS of historical and archeological proof that jews came from that area. there's historical proof of people encountering jews in the middle east. there's firsthand accounts from jews themselves that survived diaspora that lived in that area. jewish DNA, regardless of other race, has a great deal of similarity w arabic DNA. there's MOUNTAINS of historical and archeological evidence that traces the movement of jews OUT of the area and into the rest of the world and the subsequent movement of jews for the next few thousand years as they kept getting kicked out or murdered

does any of that mean that israel should have displaced the people already living there and subjected them to decades of inequality and atrocity? fucking obviously not. but 1) denying historical and archeological fact to throw around your pet antisemitic conspiracy theory makes you sound like a qanon fuckass and 2) comparing that to white supremacists making up a mythical pure white race is just fucking insane and incredibly deeply antisemitic

like you don't have to make shit up to condemn what israel is doing, I promise you. you can acknowledge the nuance and hardship of history without condoning what israel does. israel doesn't need to be made up of pure europeans for you to criticize it. bc believe it or not, europeans are not the only people on earth capable of committing atrocities or having enough autonomy to do so.

[katyspersonal]

me: I do not really understand the hardcore insistence of some Mohg fans/simps that he could not or must not have done any sexual-incestous crime! Not only it is a reasonable version, but also extremely interesting and intriguing to explore how not all victims of oppressive system are good people! Soulsborne is super fitting for fucked up themes and characters, any Mohg is valid and fun including the darkest you can get, right? Extremely messed-up interpretations of Mohg don't THREATEN other fans in any way shape or form!

fandom clowns: *passively-aggressively shun Mohg fans from the circles, attack Fromsoft for """homophobia""" (wtf), confuse acknowledging the event with enjoying the event, will label Mohg fans as insensitive or danger to real SO/incest victims, fear Mohg as an awful scary taboo to bring up in memes compilations or fanart that could obliterate all fun despite him being part of the canon, demand blacklisting anything about him in their clown Discord servers thus making lore chats weird, shame or block people with flattering interpretations for MeDiA iLiTeRaCy uwu, treat hating Mohg as a moral act rather than personal stance and generally cause a lot of hostility in the fandom, ALL because whereas seeing Mohg's SO as canon they then got mad at this canon instead of either swallowing it or move onto another videogame free of this theme*

me:

me: Nevermind, this fandom is chronically incapable of handling the dark themes and think the fandom owes them sanitised experience.

[chaos0pikachu]

I simply wish that when people did color theory based meta for BL works they did so with the knowledge or acknowledgement that colors mean different things in different cultures instead of solely from an ethnocentric pov

[fandom-hoarder]

Stop fucking saying CP. 'Child porn' is not a thing. That's a harmful, outdated term that implies a child can consent. A child cannot consent. Sexually explicit material that exploits REAL children is CSEM (child sexual exploitation material) or CSAM (child sexual abuse material).

Sexually explicit FICTION is not CSEM or CSAM -- it does not exploit real people of any age to create. That's because it's fiction. Reading it also does not exploit a real person, of any age. It might affect the person that chose to read it, in an emotional/distressing way, and that may feel like harm. But it is not the same as the creator causing you harm maliciously. Dealing with coming across things that distress us is something we all have to learn when we grow up.

Reading or writing underage sexually explicit fiction doesn't make a person a pedophile or a predator. (A lot of you don't seem to actually KNOW what a pedophile is, at that. Frustrating. Words MEAN THINGS.) It's not evidence of being one, or having these desires, either. Yes, I mean even when the fiction portrays things that are horrific IRL. Yes, I mean even when something that would be horrible IRL is treated as romantic and consensual in fiction. And yes, I mean even the stuff that squicks you personally.

When you (general) throw terms like this around incorrectly, loosely, or vengefully, you actually do harm by watering down the meaning of words that describe actual, exploitative, illegal, and terrible real life actions. You do harm by making undue accusations and wasting time and resources that should've been spent elsewhere. You affect real people.

Sometimes people write from their own childhood experiences. Some people just have a fucking imagination for how a situation might play out under certain circumstances. Some people look at two characters and their history and fill in the blanks with all the twists and turns they see lurking in the shadows. Some people have a really fucked up idea they want to explore IN FICTION.

People can have their own squicks and boundaries about it, and that's fine. There's certainly fictional underage material that squicks me, even though I write and read tons of underage fiction. This is what tags, summaries, the back button, and the delete from history button are for.

Thought crime is not a thing. Quit equating it with real life.

[callie-flower]

"proship dni" this, "comship dni" that, "neutral dni" unfortunately the people you don't like are still human and deserve comfort. my fucking god shut the hell up you're just as annoying as they are and protest WAY too much about it. go unlearn your purity morality shit

[daeva-agas]

Casually lurking in Sailor Moon fandom and when I see posts mentioning the Shitennou's knightly titles, I think the translation are off. I don't know if those are just fansubs being wonky, or if even the official ones are not entirely correct...

I've also seen some posts say that "I don't understand what these means". The knightly titles are based on the image and properties associated with each gemstone in Japanese (so, if it has different meanings internationally, it's quite beside the point).

Jadeite: Knight of Resilience 忍耐 and Harmony 調和

忍耐 is often translated as "Patience" in fanworks. 忍耐 is better translated as "resilience", "perseverance", or "endurance". Even when colloquially used to say "be patient", the connotation of it is more along the lines of "endure this". The Harmony one is correct.

"Resilience" is because jadeite jade is the harder jade. "Harmony" because of its traditional usage in spiritual matters, so jade in general has the image of "peacefulness".

Nephrite: Knight of Wisdom 知恵 and Peace 安らぎ

This one makes me kind of laugh because of what Nephrite is like as a character/person. I almost always see 知恵 translated as "Intelligence". It's not wrong per se, but this term here refers to something deeper than just brain smarts, thus "wisdom". Things like wisdom that come from age, or innate perceptiveness, and so on.

安らぎ is peace, as in "inner peace". Basically, "serenity", though it's probably not a good idea to use this word in Sailor Moon for obvious reasons.

Nephrite being the native jade of China, it has been given very sagely meaning to it that persist even in Japanese symbolism. That's why it's like this, for somewhat similar reasons to jadeite's "harmony".

Kunzite: Knight of Virtue 純潔 and Benevolence 慈愛

純潔 can also mean Purity or Chastity. 慈愛 is sometimes translated as Affection, which is also not entirely wrong. It's just that the standard meaning is benevolence or mercy. "Affection" tends to be used in the context of parents and children. In this context probably not the best meaning to use.

This gemstone is associated with the Holy Mother Mary, of all things, that's why it's got very saintly imagery associated with it.

Zoisite: Knight of Purification 浄化 and Healing 癒し

The most straightforward one so I've never seen any wonky translation with this one. Those who are into healing crystals might already know this, but this title is based on the healing and purification qualities that a blue zoisite/tanzanite supposedly have.

[weepylucifer]

Wild to me btw that at some point, to pass on the password for the book club meeting, Steban had some kind of conversation with Call Me Mañana. What in the World does this combination of people have to talk about

[a-star-that-burns-brightly]

I don't know if this still happens cause I'm not too involved with the Fuuta side of the community, but when I was first getting into Milgram I remember being somewhat annoyed at how much I saw Fuuta's murder being watered down to just "Haha twitter user was twittering". And I still feel that way, not because I think Fuuta should be specially punished for his murder, but because in a series full of murders that anyone could commit when placed into their shoes, Fuuta is the character that I think exemplifies the fact that any of these prisoners could be you if you were placed into different circumstances.

[momentsofamberclarity]

If you're putting dni banners or bright dni wording on the bottom of all of your posts in 2024 believing this will actively stop people from interacting then we are on entirely different wavelengths and I'm automatically determining that you do not have critical thinking skills and blocking you regardless of your self-proclaimed stance on anything.

This is the internet. The internet is a free-for-all, always has been, always will be. People are going to interact with content regardless of their age, regardless of their stances vs your stances. In fact, the more you draw attention to not wanting attention the more troll attention you are actively inviting in.

It is up to you to curate your own online experience and use your block button when you are uncomfortable with people interacting with your content. And you are under no obligation to offer an explanation to anyone as to why you've blocked them.

[thevillainsfangirl]

People say they want weird, but then use "weirdo" and "weird" as insults/to describe bad things and "normal" as a compliment/to describe good things.

People say they want weird, but then have the most strict Puritan mindset about art and fictional things.

People say they want weird, but then call actually weird things "cringe" or immoral.

People say they want weird, but they really don't. They want the most tame, mainstream, and socially acceptable "weird" so they can call themselves "weird" and look Different™.

[giantkillerjack]

the average person doesn't expect you to be a perfect ethical consumer, that's not possible for the vast majority of us. but what youre saying is it's better to do nothing at all and choose the worst possible options (sweat shops, overseas shipping waste, idea/product theft, all wrapped up in SHEIN) than to put even the tiniest effort in where you can.

[they are referring to this post]

What I said was "some people are doing literally everything they can to survive and have no extra bandwidth to spend extra time and money on their purchases, and it is cruel and therefore un-punk to gatekeep punkness and add additional shame to these people's lives based on that fact."

I think it's still a good thing to try to ethically consume; I literally never said it wasn't. I had never even heard of SHEIN before. Rather, I am much more concerned about what I saw as arbitrary gatekeeping based on ability and income.

And frankly how dare you claim that I am supporting sweatshops and abuse by saying that this additional work you are demanding (in this case, presumably, vetting every clothing company you buy from) is not always possible for people. It is not a light accusation to accuse me of supporting abuse.

"How dare you say we piss on the poor", Etc. 🙄 this isn't Twitter. You are determined to enforce moral purity, but you are failing to see the nuance.

Because when I say "no extra bandwidth," I mean no extra bandwidth. This is not the "car shows it's on E but actually secretly it has a lot of gas left" situation that abled people constantly assume disabled people mean when they say they are at their limit.

This is "the car has stopped moving, and to move it I'd have to break my body pushing it." This is "at a certain point, people will hit a wall in terms of money and time and energy, and any energy spent after that comes directly out of their life force."

So the argument "okay but just spend a little more time money and energy actually" is not a valid one.

And the argument "if you are not able to do this specific task, then it means you're not doing anything else to make the world a better place" doesn't exactly impress me either. You said yourself that it is impossible to be a perfectly ethical consumer for most people.

How do you know what else people are doing to resist oppression? How many hours per week until your standards are met?What if someone works 3 jobs? Does that mean it's harder to be a good person if you're poor?? Why do you get to decide what specific avenue of bettering the world is the most morally repugnant or acceptable? What kind of proof of goodness and effort would make you satisfied enough to lay off on the shame?? Who are you helping??

Clothing is a fundamental human need, and some of us have to buy cheap fucking clothes quickly. Billionaires are buying their seventh yacht this month. The people who own fast fashion companies are abusing their workers and putting local affordable clothing stores out of business - and this applies for basically every company with price points that low because governments are failing to regulate corporations to enforce basic human rights.

I have $300 to spend on a new wardrobe as my old clothes have fallen apart or become too small. Do you have a way for me to get a new winter coat, 3 flannels, 10 shirts, 3 dress shirts, new sandals, 10 pairs of pants, 5 bras, 12 pairs of socks, and 10 pairs of underwear within that budget and also definitely 100% ethically sourced, with free returns in case it doesn't fit? Or will I simply have to use the cheap stores?

I have about an hour to spend on this per week. Many mainstream stores doesn't make clothes in my size, and I am now in *year 5* of needing an electric wheelchair and being unable to get one; plus I live up a flight of stairs, so I can't even bring my walker out with me - so thrift shopping is not gonna cover this. Should I continue to wear small and tattered clothing until I have the time, money, and energy to meet your standards?

Did you know there are more empty homes in this country than homeless people? If I decide to splurge on only 100% ethically-produced products, and I can't make rent, and I become homeless, are YOU going to be there for me?? Or are you too busy litigating the endless tiny shames of poverty in your own community?

So I ask you again, are you SURE this is where you want to direct your punk energy?

Because there are a whole lot of rich people relying on people like us punching down and to the side instead of looking up to see where the money is going.

Because energy and time, as it turns out, are limited resources. And I would never expect you to secretly have more than you claim to have.