#Equal Protection Under the Law

[puppetmaker40]

Today is Juneteenth. Where the federal government informed the enslaved people they were free.

This is a big deal and is a federal holiday finally.

It is the beginning of equality for all that we needed to push over the finish line.

I do what I can to help. I believe in Martin Luther King Jr. speech “I have a dream”. I believe we can achieve it.

Maybe not in my lifetime which I find sad, however it will happen

[poeticlostsoul]

Never to blame

Lilith was damned for being an equal

Eve was punished for being a victim

Adam was a MAN so he's not to blame

Hera was made to feed her husband betrayal

Medusa was used like a toy

but she's the one to blame

Cause Poseidon was a MAN

MAN, MAN, MAN

"It's just their nature" they said

"She was asking for it"

" She was wearing a dress"

See?

This is a world that we live in

You can simply look at him and than forever be a slut

cause you weren't dressed like a nun

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

By: Carl Campanile

Date: Jan 17, 2024

Asian parents filed a federal discrimination suit against the New York State Education Department Wednesday — claiming their kids are being unfairly kept out of a STEM summer program in favor of black and Hispanic students.

The state-funded Science and Technology Entry Program (STEP) admits around 11,000 7th-to-12th-grade students a year for classes at 56 participating colleges and medical schools statewide.

The pre-college enrichment program aims to “increase the number of historically underrepresented and economically disadvantaged students prepared to enter college and improve their participation rate” in math, science, tech and health fields, according to its website.

But while black, Hispanic and Native American students can apply regardless of family wealth — Asian and white schoolkids need to meet certain low-income criteria, the lawsuit filed in upstate New York federal court claims.

“In other words, the Hispanic child of a multi-millionaire is eligible to apply to STEP, while an Asian American child whose family earns just above the state’s low- income threshold is not, solely because of her race or ethnicity,” the filing states.

The allegedly biased admissions criteria have been in place for nearly four decades, the suit claims, adding: “Thirty-nine years of discrimination is enough.”

Plaintiffs include New York City-based Yiatin Chu of the Asian Wave Alliance, who said she was stunned when she first heard of STEP’s policy a few weeks ago and decided to join the suit, which also names Education Commissioner Betty Rosa as a defendant.

[ Asian parents filed a federal discrimination suit against the New York State Education Department, claiming their kids are being unfairly kept out of a STEM summer program. ]

“This is outright discrimination against Asian-American students pursuing the STEM [Science, Technology, Engineering and Math education] field,” said Chu, an advocate for merit-based admissions at the city’s specialized high schools.

“The program should be for all students or for low income students. The state is choosing which race is eligible,” she told The Post.

Other plaintiffs include the Chinese American Citizens Alliance of Greater New York, Inclusive Education Advocacy Group and Higher with Our Parent Engagement.

Attorneys from both the Pacific Legal Foundation and the anti-affirmative action group Equal Protection Project of the Legal Insurrection Foundation are representing them in the case.

The EPP has filed other lawsuits and civil rights complaints with the US Education Department against New York colleges for allegedly promoting discriminatory racial-preference admission policies for academic programs.

[ While black, Hispanic and Native American students can apply regardless of family wealth — Asian and white schoolkids need to meet certain low-income criteria, the lawsuit filed in upstate New York federal court claims. ]

“The time has come to correct and end discrimination against students throughout the state,” said EPP’s president and director William Jacobson, a Cornell Law professor.

The Equal Protection Project (EqualProtect.org) is proud to team up with Pacific Legal to challenge discriminatory standards in the STEP program so that students do not miss out on educational opportunities because of their skin color or ethnicity,” he said.

In 1985, New York lawmakers passed legislation aimed at boosting interest in science, technology, and healthcare among low-income and underrepresented minority students — resulting in the creation of STEP, which earmarked public funds to 56 colleges, universities and medical schools statewide to instruct the younger students.

[ Plaintiffs include Yiatin Chu of the Asian Wave Alliance, who said she was stunned when she first heard of STEP’s policy a few weeks ago which also names Education Commissioner Betty Rosa as a defendant. ]

Colleges host and operate STEP initiatives for 7th-to-12th-grade students that include instruction, exam preparation, hands-on and research training, college admissions guidance and career-focused activities such as field trips and college visits.

But racial-preference programs — aimed at correcting historic injustices or underrepresentation of African Americans and other minorities — have come under the microscope after the US Supreme Court last year struck down college affirmative action programs aimed at boosting minority representation as discriminatory.

“If the government wants to fund educational opportunities for children in need, it can do so. What it can’t do is use economic need as a way to treat applicants differently based on their race,” the Pacific Legal Foundation said in a statement.

“STEP’s expressly race-conscious application process blatantly violates the Constitution’s equal protection guarantee.”

The Education Department had no immediate comment.

==

Just think about that. If Oprah had children, they could apply, no questions asked. But a moderately middle class Asian or white family would earn too much to qualify.

By all means create programs to benefit underprivileged kids, such as those with low-income, or those in poorer boroughs... regardless of race. Or, take off the income test entirely and let any kid apply... regardless of race.

The fact we have to say in 2024 that racial discrimination is wrong shows how broken people's morality has become.

[nypdparking]

Location: 84th Precinct Complaint: 636 Response Time: 1 hr 7 mins "The Police Department responded to the complaint and determined that police action was not necessary." ---------- Complaint: 637 Response Time: 1 hr 32 mins "The Police Department responded to the complaint and determined that police action was not necessary." ---------- Complaint: 638 Response Time: 54 mins "The Police Department responded to the complaint and determined that police action was not necessary." ---------- Complaint: 639 Response Time: 1 hr 13 mins "The Police Department responded to the complaint and took action to fix the condition." ---------- Complaint: 640 Response Time: 54 mins "The Police Department responded to the complaint and determined that police action was not necessary." ---------- Complaint: 641 Response Time: 39 mins "The Police Department responded to the complaint and determined that police action was not necessary." ---------- Complaint: 642 Response Time: 13 mins "The Police Department responded to the complaint and determined that police action was not necessary." ---------- Complaint: 643 Response Time: 6 mins "The Police Department responded to the complaint and determined that police action was not necessary." ---------- Complaint: 644 Response Time: 22 mins "The Police Department responded to the complaint and determined that police action was not necessary." ---------- Complaint: 645 Response Time: 50 mins "The Police Department responded to the complaint and determined that police action was not necessary." ---------- Complaint: 646 Response Time: 19 mins "The Police Department responded to the complaint and determined that police action was not necessary." ---------- Complaint: 647 Response Time: 1 hr 22 mins "The Police Department responded to the complaint and determined that police action was not necessary." ----------

[mylovedwasteland]

The Pretty World

This world is not for me

The pretty world with blue eyes 

The world with blonde hair 

The world with girls that are between 5’5 to 5’6 with slim thighs and big lies

The world which leaves me 

The one that beats 

Its trapping vines consume me shaping me 

Its fire sickening me 

Burning me 

this world world is not for me

This world with grass thats so dark green 

With lush forests of of tall manly trees 

But all of this could not have been possible without my rain 

Without my sisters’ reign

There would be nothing but a barren wasteland of thoughtlessness 

A desolate place of antagonism 

But yet 

This pretty world which is our design leaves us 

Its beats us 

The vines we took so much care to grow 

Traps us, yells at us, engulfs us, shaping us to its own similar and thoughtless design 

We are not similar

We are not thoughtless 

We are wild  

We are free 

We are the storms that they see with a scared expression 

We thunder beyond that polluted sea on the horizon ready to rain down upon the world to help it grow 

To bring back the the bright flowers, the technicolor butterflies, the lush jungles and so much more 

We are not part of the pretty world anymore 

We are part of the absolutely divine one 

That is our design 

As we light the way for future storms 

We in turn light the way for ourselves 

For each other in unity 

[sharkspez]

Badge: 🚫 🚫 🚫

My right to 💀 life is being 🌊 submerged. I won't fight for freedom that I don't have.

[protecthimdocumentary]

[kassiopeiaturtle]

As a straight cis person I really don't get why my identity should be more valid than other people's. Everyone, please stay safe and healthy the way that's right for you! Never ever listen to haters, they don't deserve even a second of your life!

Reblog if you respect trans identities. Reblog if trans women are women and trans men are men and non binary people are valid as fuck. Reblog if you support aroace, aroallo, alloace people regardless of their gender or gender expression. Reblog if the A in LGBTQIA is NOT for "ally". Reblog if being queer isn't determined by the oppression olympics.

Reblog if your account is a safe space for anyone and you're not a hateful, nasty, transphobic ass.

Reblog if that kind of hateful rhetoric will NEVER be seen on your blog

[arcanevalor]

At least once a week, I get a new reminder that the inequity fight isn't over. Watch this reel about Edward Blum trying to kill the Fearless Fund, and talk to your representatives, an email should suffice if you don't want to talk directly.

https://www.instagram.com/reel/Cy3za8OuUhb/?igshid=MTc4MmM1YmI2Ng==

[liberaljane]

Women's Not So Distant History

This #WomensHistoryMonth, let's not forget how many of our rights were only won in recent decades, and weren’t acquired by asking nicely and waiting. We need to fight for our rights. Here's are a few examples:

📍 Before 1974's Fair Credit Opportunity Act made it illegal for financial institutions to discriminate against applicants' gender, banks could refuse women a credit card. Women won the right to open a bank account in the 1960s, but many banks still refused without a husband’s signature. This allowed men to continue to have control over women’s bank accounts. Unmarried women were often refused service by financial institutions entirely.

📍 Before 1977, sexual harassment was not considered a legal offense. That changed when a woman brought her boss to court after she refused his sexual advances and was fired. The court stated that her termination violated the 1974 Civil Rights Act, which made employment discrimination illegal.⚖️

📍 In 1969, California became the first state to pass legislation to allow no-fault divorce. Before then, divorce could only be obtained if a woman could prove that her husband had committed serious faults such as adultery. 💍By 1977, nine states had adopted no-fault divorce laws, and by late 1983, every state had but two. The last, New York, adopted a law in 2010.

📍In 1967, Kathrine Switzer, entered the Boston Marathon under the name "K.V. Switzer." At the time, the Amateur Athletics Union didn't allow women. Once discovered, staff tried to remove Switzer from the race, but she finished. AAU did not formally accept women until fall 1971.

📍 In 1972, Lillian Garland, a receptionist at a California bank, went on unpaid leave to have a baby and when she returned, her position was filled. Her lawsuit led to 1978's Pregnancy Discrimination Act, which found that discriminating against pregnant people is unlawful

📍 It wasn’t until 2016 that gay marriage was legal in all 50 states. Previously, laws varied by state, and while many states allowed for civil unions for same-sex couples, it created a separate but equal standard. In 2008, California was the first state to achieve marriage equality, only to reverse that right following a ballot initiative later that year. 

📍In 2018, Utah and Idaho were the last two states that lacked clear legislation protecting chest or breast feeding parents from obscenity laws. At the time, an Idaho congressman complained women would, "whip it out and do it anywhere,"

📍 In 1973, the Supreme Court affirmed the right to safe legal abortion in Roe v. Wade. At the time of the decision, nearly all states outlawed abortion with few exceptions. In 1965, illegal abortions made up one-sixth of all pregnancy- and childbirth-related deaths. Unfortunately after years of abortion restrictions and bans, the Supreme Court overturned Roe in 2022. Since then, 14 states have fully banned care, and another 7 severely restrict it – leaving most of the south and midwest without access. 

📍 Before 1973, women were not able to serve on a jury in all 50 states. However, this varied by state: Utah was the first state to allow women to serve jury duty in 1898. Though, by 1927, only 19 states allowed women to serve jury duty. The Civil Rights Act of 1957 gave women the right to serve on federal juries, though it wasn't until 1973 that all 50 states passed similar legislation

📍 Before 1988, women were unable to get a business loan on their own. The Women's Business Ownership Act of 1988 allowed women to get loans without a male co-signer and removed other barriers to women in business. The number of women-owned businesses increased by 31 times in the last four decades. 

Free download

📍 Before 1965, married women had no right to birth control. In Griswold v. Connecticut (1965), the Supreme Court ruled that banning the use of contraceptives violated the right to marital privacy.

📍 Before 1967, interracial couples didn’t have the right to marry. In Loving v. Virginia, the Supreme Court found that anti-miscegenation laws were unconstitutional. In 2000, Alabama was the last State to remove its anti-miscegenation laws from the books.

📍 Before 1972, unmarried women didn’t have the right to birth control. While married couples gained the right in 1967, it wasn’t until Eisenstadt v. Baird seven years later, that the Supreme Court affirmed the right to contraception for unmarried people.

📍 In 1974, the last “Ugly Laws” were repealed in Chicago. “Ugly Laws” allowed the police to arrest and jail people with visible disabilities for being seen in public. People charged with ugly laws were either charged a fine or held in jail. ‘Ugly Laws’ were a part of the late 19th century Victorian Era poor laws. 

📍 In 1976, Hawaii was the last state to lift requirements that a woman take her husband’s last name.  If a woman didn’t take her husband’s last name, employers could refuse to issue her payroll and she could be barred from voting. 

📍 It wasn’t until 1993 that marital assault became a crime in all 50 states. Historically, intercourse within marriage was regarded as a “right” of spouses. Before 1974, in all fifty U.S. states, men had legal immunity for assaults their wives. Oklahoma and North Carolina were the last to change the law in 1993.

📍  In 1990, the Americans with Disability Act (ADA) – most comprehensive disability rights legislation in U.S. history – was passed. The ADA protected disabled people from employment discrimination. Previously, an employer could refuse to hire someone just because of their disability.

📍 Before 1993, women weren’t allowed to wear pants on the Senate floor. That changed when Sen. Moseley Braun (D-IL), & Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) wore trousers - shocking the male-dominated Senate. Their fashion statement ultimately led to the dress code being clarified to allow women to wear pants. 

📍 Emergency contraception (Plan B) wasn't approved by the FDA until 1998. While many can get emergency contraception at their local drugstore, back then it required a prescription. In 2013, the FDA removed age limits & allowed retailers to stock it directly on the shelf (although many don’t).

📍  In Lawrence v. Texas (2003), the Supreme Court ruled that anti-cohabitation laws were unconstitutional. Sometimes referred to as the ‘'Living in Sin' statute, anti-cohabitation laws criminalize living with a partner if the couple is unmarried. Today, Mississippi still has laws on its books against cohabitation. 

[saintkevorkian]

this is a rather more cogent expression of something ive tried putting into words before

People spend a lot of time arguing about whether this or that use of "fascist" or "socialist" is excessively broad or excessively narrow, but regardless, these words get thrown around a lot. On the other hand, a word that I think gets less discourse than it should is "totalitarian."

A big distinction between authoritarianism and totalitarianism is that an authoritarian system doesn't care about the political commitments of its subjects, or rather, it doesn't want them to have any. "Leave politics to the people in charge, keep your head down, do what you're told, and you'll be fine." By contrast, a totalitarian system considers having no political commitments to be somewhere on the spectrum between disreputable and criminal. It demands ideological commitment even in private life.

When you have this framing in mind, it is hard to miss the totalitarian tendencies around you. On the one hand, the religious right (now sometimes fronted by people who aren't even religious, a la Chris Rufo) has always had totalitarian tendencies. And what else would you call making it a firing offense for a teacher to refer to her wife in casual conversation, or the attempt to ban people from choosing which books to read at the library, or allowing coaches to coerce student athletes into prayer sessions?

But the puritanical left is also like this. Not (currently) in the sense of using the law to compel ideology, but in the sense that they take "the personal is political" to an extreme. The idea that one might be allowed to just enjoy books or games without considering whether their content serves the needs of social justice is anathema to them. What is one to call the accusation that its some sort of obscene privilege to want to occasionally take a break from thinking about politics, because of the false premise that members of marginalized populations never have the opportunity to do so, if not "totalitarian"? (The absurd take that atheists lean right-wing is downstream of this; "atheism plus" is the totalitarian impulse to say that nothing can ever be about anything else except "social justice" as defined by its totalitarian adherents.)

This tends to get branded as people "making their politics their personality," which isn't necessarily incorrect, but also wildly understates how frightening it should be to have people like that in positions of power.

[talisidekick]

I don't care what nationality you are. US, UK, French, German, anyone in Europe, please do me the grandest of favours and spread this around. Steal the link, make your own post, I don't care; just get it to the eyes of your viewers because if they're Canadian, I need your help.

This petition ends May 26th 2023:

What is this about?

"Whereas:

The world is becoming increasingly hostile to transgender and nonbinary individuals;

Transgender and nonbinary people's rights to live as themselves are being restricted and removed in many places;

This includes the so-called "Western democracies" which have historically been presumed safe;

More than a dozen American states have enacted or are considering legislation eliminating or criminalizing gender-affirming care; and

Canada has prided itself on being an inclusive, tolerant, and welcoming society for everyone regardless of gender identity or gender expression.

We, the undersigned, residents of Canada, call upon the House of Commons to extend to transgender and nonbinary people the right to claim asylum in Canada by reason of eliminationist laws in their home countries, whatever country that may be."

It's better to give people an exit plan, and just hope they won't need it, then to do nothing and assume they'll be fine. Help us keep making Canada a positive place for everyone. I hope you'll sign if you're Canadian, and if you're not, I hope you'll help us make some positivity by sharing this around.

(Edit: A bullet point in the petitions description has been removed from this post, but remains on the petition. It's removal is due to misinformation around the UK's Equality Act 2010 only providing protection for those seeking sexual reassignment surgery. And while the Equality Act 2010 does explicitly state this, the Equality and Human Rights Commission has released an Equality Act 2019 Code of Practice document that specifies all transgender people are protected under the protected characteristic of "gender reassignment" regardless of desire to undergo the specific surgery initially identified in the Equality Act 2010 document. There has been, as of this editation, no direct quote or statement of plans to remove these protections from discrimination to the public.

I'd also like to add that there do exist protections already for 2SLGBTQIA+ folk to seek asylum in Canada, and the MP who made this petition has apparently been made aware of this, however, due to certain restrictions on that act, Canada currently lists the US as a safe country for 2SLGBTQIA+ folk because as long as there is one safe place(state, province, or territory) in the country for queer folk, the ability to seek asylum is denied. This petition clearly states a need to make a more specific clarification regarding this and open up assylum if any discriminatory laws pop up at all within a country, no matter if it's regional laws, or country wide. Specifying this because there's been a reblog or two calling this petition pointless and because I'm already clarifying UK law misinformation, might as well tackle misinformation from my own country as well. ♡)

[nypdparking]

Location: 76th Precinct Complaint: 841 Response Time: 3 mins "The Police Department responded to the complaint and determined that police action was not necessary." ---------- Complaint: 842 Response Time: 3 mins "The Police Department responded to the complaint and determined that police action was not necessary." ---------- Complaint: 843 Response Time: 2 mins "The Police Department responded to the complaint and determined that police action was not necessary." ---------- Complaint: 844 Response Time: 1 min "The Police Department responded to the complaint and determined that police action was not necessary." ---------- Complaint: 845 Response Time: 1 min "The Police Department responded to the complaint and determined that police action was not necessary." ---------- Complaint: 846 Response Time: 2 mins "The Police Department responded to the complaint and determined that police action was not necessary." ---------- Complaint: 847 Response Time: 3 mins "The Police Department responded to the complaint and determined that police action was not necessary." ---------- Complaint: 848 Response Time: 3 mins "The Police Department responded to the complaint and determined that police action was not necessary." ---------- Complaint: 849 Response Time: 1 min "The Police Department responded to the complaint and determined that police action was not necessary." ---------- Complaint: 850 Response Time: 10 mins "The Police Department responded to the complaint and determined that police action was not necessary." ---------- Complaint: 851 Response Time: 3 mins "The Police Department responded to the complaint and determined that police action was not necessary." ---------- Complaint: 852 Response Time: 11 mins "The Police Department responded to the complaint and determined that police action was not necessary." ---------- Complaint: 853 Response Time: 1 min "The Police Department responded to the complaint and determined that police action was not necessary." ---------- Complaint: 854 Response Time: 8 mins "The Police Department responded to the complaint and determined that police action was not necessary." ----------

[lemurchick]

Today russian government banned "childfree propaganda" with the law fining non-complying citizens up to equivalent of 4k dollars and non-complying organizations up to 51k dollars.

This law prohibits any public (for now; soon it could be used even for DMs) statements where childless life seen as a better or even equal lifestyle to having children. It forbids saying that it's okay for women to have abortions. It bans any advices to not have children if women don't have enough space, money, health (!) or any other reasons (like going-on war hello?) except when you're talking about monkhood celibate.

This is in line with Putin's signed order "to save and protect traditional values" which already led to banning any mention of LGBT people and had people arrested and sentenced just for organising private gay events or heavily fined for posting a photo of you with your same-sex partner holding hands or screenshot of tv characters kissing. Two female police officers friends were fired because they left messsages under each other photos "showing simpathy" (not even flirting).

And now this. Of course it's not going to affect men who proudly say online how women with children are second sort or calling mothers protecting their children crazy "butI'mAMother"s (popular derogatory term), or advocate to cancel child support, or doing anything else that actually turning women away from considering motherhood. It's going to affect feminists first and foremost because it is us who relentlessly advocate how marrying men and having children in this society is a trap.

And they plan to ban feminism next (they were tryng to do this for years at this point) and also... eh... egoistical lifestyle propaganda whatever this means.

Crazy times but I think we will prevail. Soviet feminists refused to keep silent and were called dissidents and extradited. For now not one feminist channel, podcast, page or community I know is planning to close.

[autolenaphilia]

God, this is so weak. Sarah McBride just caving immediately to Republican transmisogyny with this bathroom law. Like we knew she was pro-Israel, but that didn't surprise me, most democrats elected to congress are, but i expected her at least to defend her own human dignity. Like, to paraphrase The Big Lebowski, "I mean, say what you want about the tenets of zionism, at least it's an ethos.", this is just spineless cowardice.

To be fair, I doubt this was entirely McBride's decision, i'm sure she spoke with the Democratic Party bigwigs and got told to just cave, because they wouldn't back her in resisting this. But that just further implicates the Democratic Party.

Like someone with a backbone would see this as an opportunity to do some civil disobedience and disobey this rule. Make a statement, resist. But, no, the Democratic Party is so tied to law and order that they see no room for even peaceful civil disobedience.

At least not in the case of trans women's rights. The Democratic Party elite already has been talking this past november that the reason Harris lost the election was because she wasn't transphobic enough. So the democrats might have decided to just let this outrage slide in the hopes of getting more votes.

Violating transmisogynistic bathroom laws is something ordinary trans women do everyday to survive, entirely without the privileges Sarah Mcbride has as a congresswoman.

In fact, that's exactly the women she is screwing over by not using that privilege to fight. As quoted in Erin Reed's article linked above: "Transgender advocate and Harvard Clinical Instructor Alejandra Caraballo emphasized the broader implications: “This isn't just about her. These rules apply to trans staffers and interns who do not have the protections and privilege that she has.”

Women who unlike Mcbride, don't have a private toilet connected to their office to use (every congressperson has their own office with its own toilet).

And as Erin Reed quotes in her article:

"Ash Orr, a transgender organizer in West Virginia, was equally critical: “Rep. McBride’s messaging essentially suggests that if a federal ban is enacted, trans people should simply comply. While I understand the difficult position she is in, she holds a position of immense power and privilege. She should be using that power to defend and protect her community, not falling in line. Trans lives are at stake.”

Clearly the #resistance against the coming second Trump adminstration is off to a great start /s

[marcskywalker]

alright alright

Merlin has made a habit of laying protective charms and spells on Arthur's armor. The man is a big liability (king or not, Merlin will say it as it is). Running into danger head first, without thought or concern, is his top favorite activity.

It's what makes Arthur Arthur; his courage in the face of death.

So yes, it's become a necessity for Merlin to charm his armor for strength and endurance.

He decides to charm the King's new set of armors in his royal chamber in the middle of the day, while Arthur is away presumably listening to another one of mind numbingly boring reports from his knights.

What is a safer place for Merlin other than this room? Where else can he walk in as he pleases? Move about as he pleases? Leave a mess, jest around, lock the door and loiter as he pleases?

Within these walls, no one would dare to question him.

The King's trust is loud enough.

So, Merlin lays out all the metal on the floor and begins. He holds the cold, sharp chestpiece in his hand. Imagines Arthur under it; Arthur's beating heart and his warm, soft, breakable skin.

His magic flows out of him without command or permission, desperate to erase all the images of his mortal king bleeding and weak.

Oh, protectors of Earth and Magic! Cradle him as you would cradle your son.

His eyes are ember, words still on his lips, the shimmer of magic over the metal, when door swings open.

"Leon is one of my oldest and closest friends, but by Gods he makes me miserable," Arthur lets out a long breath, as if to blow out all the air in his body, looking right at Merlin as he does so.

The gold finally fades from his eyes but Merlin is frozen in place, his bones and breath refusing to move, watching Arthur's face scrunch in confusion, a myriad of feelings flashing through his face before settling on stern eyes and pursed lips.

"Mingling with the druids a lot now, are we?"

"Arthur, I-"

"I know, I know!" he sighs, commanding his face to neutrality, stepping over Merlin and metal towards his desk, "They are my people, too. You're allowed to trade and learn from each other."

Despite his resigned tone, Merlin knows how hard Arthur has worked to ensure a place for Druids in Camelot. Writing in stone, clear as day, that he is more than his father's son; he has claimed them as citizens of Camelot, opening the doors to courts and trade and provisions equally for all in the Kingdom.

Watching Arthur grow into the prophesied will be Merlin's greatest pride. Even if magic is still prohibited to practice under the law, magic users aren't hunted like animals for existing. And Merlin has all the faith in his King that when the time is right, he will bring magic back into the land. Until then, he's happy to live in half shadows.

"I'm allowed to learn magic?" he can't help the skepticism and shock bleed into his tone.

"Well, no! I'm not allowing you for anything, Merlin. But I'm not stupid enough to believe that that's about to stop you."

"So," he draws out the word, unsure of how to step out of the conversation. Unsure if he should even be stepping out of the conversation. "I can learn more magic?"

"You know how I feel about this. The price I have- we have had to pay for it. If you still find yourself curious, do what-" gestures to the laid out armor on the ground, "-ever this is. I only ask that you be careful."

"I'm enchanting it. To keep you safe."

"In exchange for what, Merlin?"

"Nothing-", Merlin loses his grip on the conversation faced with the frightened heartbreak on Arthur's face; the courageous bones bending in unfamiliar ways. "I swear. Nothing. It's not any big magic. The druids do it all the time, we won't have to pay a price for this, Arthur."

"We'll see."