#I recognise that as a massive privilege

[lesbianslovenamari]

This whole thing about Americanisation is really important I’m glad some people here have explained it so well

DO NOT LET SOCIAL MEDIA TURN YOU INTO AN AMERICAN

[irlplasticlamb]

some hotd succession au headcanons… i beg…

so! none of the hotd characters in this u are 1-1 equivalent to the succession ones, more of amalgamations of certain character traits/plot points/tropes hahah

— aegon ii is majorly roman coded ofc as in: terrible sense of humour, NO moral backbone, sex issues, daddy issues, mummy issues, issues in general, he doesn’t want to be the ceo, he just desperately wants daddy to be proud of him. he’s also kendall coded as in suicidal, with massive addiction problems, in and out of rehab constantly. but also a little bit of connor coded as in “i am the (eldest) first son. i AM the first son and i’m not considered”. a failure tbh, he lashes out a lot because he wants people to pay attention to him (LOOSEEEER). his relationship with alicent is a bit similar to kendall’s with caroline, aegon wants that deeper connection but it’s very hard for both of them to communicate. his relationship with larys is very romegerri coded.

for miscellaneous, aegon’s an annoying microinfluencer who gets cancelled every other week. he can’t dress for shit. sunfyre is his gigantic dog who drools EVERYWHERE. he’s a bit trans fem in the „i’m probably trans but i have a company to take over so can’t think of that rn” way.

— rhaenyra is majorly kendall coded as in: groomed to be the ceo and promised the position since she was a child, which OF COURSE messed her up a little (a lot). if she doesn’t end up the ceo then who is she? suddenly her position is compromised after the targtowers are born and she’s majorly FUCKED. she loves her siblings somewhat but she resents them for existing at the same time. rhae’s also shiv coded because she’s a woman in power (but not ENOUGH power) and she’s privileged enough to ignore feminism unless it is in her advantage. a little bit naomi pierce coded but her „scandalous” past is based in many messy romances and kids out of wedlock.

for miscellaneous, she’s a part time model, a very fussy eater and a passenger princess. she’s also a bit trans masc in the „i’m probably trans but i have a company to take over so can’t think of that rn” way.

— alicent is A BIT stewy coded in context of rhaenyra because they were inseparable homoerotic coke snoring (yeah, her religious conservatism happens later in this story as a coping mechanism) best friends slash lovers in high school, until she got forced by otto and groomed by viserys to marry him. yeah, the terrible age gap is still there and she has aegon when she’s seventeen* because i feel like early motherhood is a very important part of who alicent is and becomes. she’s miserable as always. she’s also marcia coded in the “you’ve been careless of me” way, she tries very hard at the beginning to be a perfect little wife and mother. it eventually breaks her.

for miscellaneous, she used to be a model, HATED it. wanted to become a writer but it never came to fruition because of how quickly she got married. she’s a good cook but rarely gets to cook anymore.

** the rough timeline is: she has aegon at 17, helaena at 18, aemond at 20 and daeron at 22. aegon is 32 in this au, hela is 31, aemond is 29 and daeron is 27. alicent is 49, viserys is 70, rhae is actually 47 because i want to close the gap between her and the targtowers at least a little bit. rhaenyra and alicent still went to the same class together because rhae started school 2 years later than she „should’ve”, let’s just say viserys didn’t want his little girl out of the house as quickly because he was so shaken after losing aemma, or they went travelling when she was a kid and that put her two years behind, or smth. idc!

— aemond is uhhh a mix of everything. “i AM THE ELDEST BOY” kendall coded, spit and desperation everywhere, because i think in this au his reliability and skills would get somewhat recognised by viserys and by the company, and it would GET IN HIS HEAD HARD. he’s definitely the parentified son like connor. but he is not the eldest boy. he’s the fucking fourth kid. he knows, not matter his skills, his diligence, his discipline, the position will never be his. he kills a kid like ken (rip lucerys drowning in a nasty ass body of water once again). shiv coded because of his cunty ass bob. roman coded because of possible ed issues (actually i think all of them struggle with food and body image to certain degree because that „summer of competitive eating disorders” line in the succession script book never left my head ever).

for miscellaneous, he’s a part time actor, he trained ballet for a while and loved it but was very quickly forced to switch to fencing and shooting lessons. he makes a mean cup of coffee and refuses to ever buy it. has a minor coke problem but is VERY good at hiding it.

— helaena is a hard one. a bit willa coded when it comes to her love for arts and creative expression. a bit connor coded as in secluded, living on a ranch, not partaking in the business side of the family unless necessary. she sees the unnecessary pain this fight for the ceo position brings to her siblings and wants nothing to do with it. alicent tries very hard to include her, quite forcefully at times but it never works for long, so she’s mostly left to her own devices. helaena probablymhzs the best relationship with rhaenyra out of all the siblings because rhae doesn’t see her as a threat.

for miscellaneous, she trained ballet with aemond, then switched to gymnastics. now very into pilates and yoga. she makes her own wine and jam, has an extensive herb garden and is a little insane about naturopathic medicine.

— daeron is kinda stewy-ish? he’s good with business, he knows his stuff and he usually makes VERY good choices but he doesn’t take it as seriously as his siblings. then again, because daeron’s the youngest, he doesn’t get to make a lot of big decisions anyways. that takes a lot of pressure of his shoulders! he’s also stewy level of loyal, „i’m team aegon baby!” even though he knows how messed up his older brother is about this whole business stuff.

for miscellaneous, he’s VERY into street racing. that gives alicent a gigantic headache. he’s allergic to cats but owns one anyways. never cooked in his life.

[llyfrenfys]

Xenophobia in Celtic nations' independence movements: A guide to the red flags

This is something I've wanted to write about for a long time - I want to go over this in more detail when I can. But for now a short guide to the most egregious red flags is warranted imo.

'Celtic nations' refers to the modern regions where Celtic languages are still spoken, namely Ireland, Wales, Scotland, Isle of Man, Cornwall and Brittany. Its important to know that these places are called Celtic not because of who lives there, but because of the languages which have survived there. Its a common error to think 'Celtic nations'= Celtic people. In my field (Celtic Studies) Celtic is generally only applied as a descriptor in the sense of language family.

Because of the popular misinformation 'Celtic nation' = 'Celtic' population, xenophobia rears its ugly head in multiple corners of the various Celtic nations' independence movements. Left unchecked, this xenophobia develops into outright racism. Which is why it's important to recognise these red flags when you see them.

'Acceptable Targets':

The reason why some of the xenophobia goes unchecked (and develops into worse kinds) is because a lot of xenophobia in the Celtic nations is aimed at 'acceptable' targets - which no-one bats an eye about when this rhetoric is deployed. But were it deployed against any other nationalities, it would immediately obvious that it isn't acceptable. Now, I will preface this with that there's nuance with these nationalities and there's something to be said about whether some of it is 'punching up'. However, because of how accepted it is to be casually xenophobic against these privileged groups, it is signalled through that that it's okay to be xenophobic in general to less privileged groups. I feel its important to address the first rung on the ladder before tackling any higher up.

Without beating around the bush, I'm talking about the English (and French. But I know more about the English so that's where my focus will be).

Yes, pro-independence anti-English memes and jokes can be funny. Most of them do stay on the side of punching up and many raise important points on the effects of English imperialism on the Celtic languages. However, there's a fine line between punching up and voluntarily using and wielding xenophobic arguments and rhetoric to get one up on the English. This, in my view, only paves the way for worse kinds of xenophobia and to me is a canary in the coal mine situation. But I also cannot talk about this without also making it clear that it is possible to recognise that sometimes a line is crossed without validating English persecution complexes à la 'you can't even say you're English these days' or similar nonsense. Both things can be true at once: Casual xenophobia against the English does exist, however, its existence should not be used to validate English persecution complexes. On the contrary, we should fight that also.

The reason why this canary in the coal mine has gone unnoticed is because of the reluctance to actually point out xenophobia against the English in pro-independence movements due to fear of accidentally validating the claims Englishness as a concept is under threat or due of fear of ostracism from Celtic nationalist movements. There is little danger of actually validating the former sentiment, however, because of a crucial fact. The people in the Celtic nations being casually xenophobic and the English with persecution complexes have one massive trait in common: they're both xenophobic in incredibly similar ways. If it's hard to tell apart an English nationalist from one in a Celtic nation if you were to swap the target of their ire, congratulations, your movement has a xenophobia problem /s.

English nationalist: We should tighten controls on our borders to keep all those foreigners and immigrants out. Make England English again.

(Xenophobic) Celtic nationalist: We should fight for our independence so we can tighten controls on our borders to keep all those foreigners and immigrants out. Make [insert Celtic nation] [nationish] again.

Many Celtic nationalists will also present ahistorical facts or manipulated versions of history in order to seem more valid or legitimate. It's a massive red flag when someone's grasp of history seems more emotional than grounded in historical fact. Using Welsh history as an example, I've seen this type of Celtic nationalist blatantly lie about historical figures, literally deface ancient castles in Wales based on a poor grasp (and respect for) history and conflate modern English and Welsh identity with ancient entities which do not map neatly 1:1. The ahistory presented by individuals or groups fancying themselves as leaders in their respective movements are unquestioningly accepted by others in the Celtic nationalist movements. This creates a manufactured mythology, belief in which confers in-group status and out-group status. A mythology which reinforces beliefs already present in the movement - such as the right to be casually xenophobic as long as it's against the 'right people' and as long as it is done in the name of protecting or advocating for their nation.

It was never going to stop at English people:

Once casual xenophobia is established as being tolerated, expected or even encouraged in the various independence movements, it enables xenophobes to be bolder in their rhetoric. Because casual xenophobia against 'deserving' nations like England is dismissed as 'just banter' and not taken seriously, it sends a signal to everyone in that movement that xenophobia is okay if its used against the 'right groups. While it may roll like water off a duck's back to the average English person, other, more vulnerable people do not fare so well.

To use an actual example I've seen out in the wild, some people will claim that you can't be considered Welsh unless you were born in Wales. Many people won't question this or interrogate the implications. Firstly, this comes back to how Celtic nationalists can often sound exactly the same as English nationalists (blood and soil nationalism is common to English and Celtic nationalisms). Secondly, this rhetoric also simulataneously invalidates several ostensibly Welsh people, such as Saunders Lewis (born in Liverpool) and Jan Morris (born in Somerset). In most cases, anyone who lives in X country / is a citizen of X country can or should be able to describe themselves as Xish.

The perennial anxiety of Celtic nationalists is that because most of the Celtic nations (excepting the Republic of Ireland) are constituent parts of a state (either the UK or France) and not independent entities in their own right, there is no control over borders and there is no system by which someone can be made a Welsh, or Breton or Cornish etc. citizen - and thus no way to control [nation]ness via those means. When Celtic nationalists agitate for independence, it's important to interrogate their motivations. If they are motivated primarily by a desire to control who is considered Xish and who isn't, that's a red flag.

English nationalists have this citizenship problem too, since England is not an independent nation, but a country within the UK. However, most English nationalists overlap heavily with British nationalists in general, so most agitation for 'sovereignty' gets channelled into British nationalism. This is one of the key differences between English and Celtic nationalists - the former is usually very fond of the United Kingdom, the latter detests it and wants to secede. This leaves Celtic nationalism in a tight spot - there is a desire for self determination which is currently impossible to achieve or enforce. And that makes a lot of Celtic nationalists anxious. And that anxiety leads to feeling like they need to prove their commitment to the cause by performing xenophobia, which validates their in-group status while simultaneously establishes the out-group.

A person born in England but who lives in Wales, perhaps speaks Welsh or considers themself Welsh will, in general, be mostly unharmed by 'you have to be born in Wales to be Welsh' rhetoric. But you know who might be? So many immigrants who consider themselves Welsh who make Wales a great place to be. Immigrants in Wales (especially nonwhite immigrants) may feel excluded by such rhetoric. It's almost on par with "where are you really from" sentiments. And this is an entirely self-defeating kind of rhetoric for Celtic nationalists to take up. Here we have thousands upon thousands of people who willingly want to live and work in Celtic nations - many of whom will also learn the language - undoing centuries of English and French propaganda that diminished the worth of Celtic nations and their languages* - and Celtic nationalists want to exclude these people from claiming the nationality of their adopted nations because... they didn't happen to be born here. Got it.

Xenophobia, once established, cannot be contained:

Xenophobia ripples outwards. Once it is established it is okay to be xenophobic to certain groups, other groups begin to be included in the xenophobia. This then has the potential to expand into outright racism. In Ireland, for example, there's significant amounts of antiblack racism present in the nationalist movement. Very recently, due to the actions of the UK government over the Rwanda Plan, the Republic of Ireland has gotten frustrated at the amount of immigrants attempting to reach their shores after abandoning attempts to claim asylum in the UK (out of fear of being sent to Rwanda). There's a "we don't do that here" attitude in many Celtic nationalist movements with regards to English imperialism, xenophobia, racism and anti-immigration. But not only do we do that here - it's worryingly integral to some people's visions for their nation's independence! You end up with complacency because many will take a literal no true Scotsman approach to Celtic nationalism and pretend that such people aren't really part of the movement. The problem is, is that they are here and regularly hijack otherwise unproblematic movements.

There are many routes through which Celtic nationalists can get radicalised into becoming massively xenophobic in order to fight for their respective nation's independence. All of them stem from real, legitimate problems in each nation whose cause has been misidentified.

One way is through opposition to second homes. On all counts, a noble goal and a very legitimate problem which I myself am invested in fighting. But the ways in which this problem is addressed often veer into questionable territory. If the focus is on "how dare those people from over there come over here" instead of "how dare a very small group of people monopolise housing for holiday lets at the expense of locals" there's a problem. The problem isn't people not from [place] holidaying there, it's the people who monopolise housing for their own profit which reduces housing available for locals and destroys community. In Aberystwyth I've heard some appalling sentiments against people from the Midlands - borderline if not outright classism around their appearances, mannerisms and accents. Sneering at random families visiting the beach isn't going to help anything and only exposes thinly veiled bigotry in whoever is making such remarks.

As already mentioned, another way radicalisation into xenophobic Celtic nationalism can occur is through mythologised 'history' which has been manipulated to suit the needs of the person or people making the claim. Lately, I've been seeing a rise in Welsh 'history' groups rife with disinformation and outright misrepresentation of historical events which are so designed to keep people angry about historical injustices against Wales. There are plenty of real historical injustices which can be talked about - but the 'history' presented in these groups is often fabricated or twisted to make things worse than they were or are stripped of nuance which perhaps paints certain historical figures less favourably than the authors would have liked. Not to mention superimposing modern nationalism onto ancient peoples is also just accepted as fine to do. Here is a screenshot of a Welsh 'history' group shared in a Welsh learning group I'm in. I can and will do a deeper dive into this topic in particular when I can. For now I'll mention the most important things to notice:

As mentioned in one of my other posts on this topic - the term 'native' is frequently misused in a Celtic context. Here, it sets up the basic in-group/out-group dynamic from the start and creates a setting in which members of the group are privy to the 'real' history while others are not. A brief glance at posts in this group makes that quite clear. The flag in the image is a representation of Y Groes Naid - supposedly a piece of the True Cross kept at Aberconwy. Now, there are ways to depict this cross which aren't so dogwhistley - so I'm immediately suspicious this image was chosen on purpose. Right down to the fact there's plausible deniability if anyone tries to point out how much the flag looks like the white supremacist Celtic Cross symbol, since it's Y Groes Naid, right?

I will wrap this up with that as a Celticist, I see far too many people uncritically supporting certain Celtic nationalist movements simply because they are pro-independence. Turning a blind eye to 'acceptable' xenophobia and choosing to believe ahistorical versions of history because it better suits their politics. This must be resisted - we can advocate for the independence of Celtic nations which desire it without relying upon these means. It can be done, I promise. But the path to that means dismantling systems of oppression which exist within Celtic nationalist movements. Awareness of the problem in the first place is a good place to start.

Reblogs and comments are welcome on this post to raise awareness of the issue and actually talk about these things.

Diolch am darllen!

[wistfulcynic]

it’s more than a little disturbing to me how many people loudly proclaim how much they hate or don’t care about Nate and his character journey, while with the same breath proclaiming how much they love Jamie’s. “Oh boo hoo, Nate has daddy issues,” i’ve actually seen adult people actually say. “So does Jamie and look at him!” 

Similarly: “Nate’s gonna be saved by the love of a woman? How boring and cliche!” 

Or: “Nate doesn’t have to be such a jerk. He has Ted as a role model. He should know better!” 

to anyone capable of saying that, you’re absolutely right. You don’t care about Nate or his journey and that couldn’t be more obvious. What’s interesting though is why. 

because here’s the thing about Jamie, and also about Ted. Two things they have in common--a massive ego and a rock-solid sense of self. 

remember Jamie in like the second episode of the whole series? “Coach, I’m me. Why would I want to be anything else?” 

yes, Jamie has a shit dad and he’s had a shit time of it in many ways because of his shit dad. But what Jamie has never had to face is a crisis of identity. He knows who he is and he knows his value. He can take hits and come back from them, he can acknowledge his mistakes and learn from them because at his core he still and always has that knowledge that he’s a superstar. 

then there’s Ted. Anyone who doubts that Ted is a full-fledged egomaniac, ask yourselves how much confidence it takes to preface every single useful thing you have to say with a meandering, folksy anecdote and be absolutely certain that every single person you speak to is going to not only put up with that but actively listen. That’s the kind of confidence that can only come from a particular kind of privilege, and while Ted also has been through tough times and experienced trauma he's a white man from a place where white men are at the top of every ladder and he has very clearly never doubted who he is or the value he possesses. 

Nate can't be Jamie and he can’t be Ted. Not just because it’s ridiculous to expect different humans to behave identically in situations that are only vaguely similar, but because Nate’s core problem isn’t that his dad withholds love or that the hostess at a restaurant is snide to him. 

his problem--which incidentally we’ve been shown from the absolute very beginning--is that he doesn’t have any confidence. He doesn’t know who he is, and the who that he thinks he is, is a who he doesn’t especially like. Nate can't be Jamie because to him every mistake he makes reduces his worth, and he doesn’t have that superstar core to shore him up. Nate can’t be Ted because the entirety of his lifetime experience has assured him that no one wants to listen to anything he has to say. Nate can only be Nate because he is Nate, and the only thing that he or any of us can be is ourselves. 

and yeah, who Nate is isn’t always especially pleasant. He’s shown he can be mean and he can be spiteful. So what? He’s flawed, as all the characters are. As all humans are. Plenty of us have meanness and spite in us, that doesn’t make us irredeemable monsters. Nate’s journey is about realising his value and finally receiving recognition for it. He’s a clever, capable strategist and a talented coach. Now that he’s finally seeing and being seen for that, he’s finding in himself the capacity to recognise and work on his flaws. Which he is doing. It’s not about getting the girl or finding redemption through the love of a woman. It’s about having the confidence to trust that another human is going to see him and like him for who he is. 

Nate isn’t flawed in a sexy asshole way like Jamie or a folksy wholesome way like Ted. He’s flawed in an uncomfortably human way that probably hits too close to home for many people. Jamie and Ted are larger-than-life characters. Nate is one of us. So in a way i guess it’s understandable that people have a harder time forgiving him his trespasses or “caring” about his redemption. 

on the other hand, however, you all might want to ask yourselves why you’re so willing to extend endless grace to the hyperconfident white men while offering the anxious brown one none at all. 

[ruinofchimera]

I think it’s also clear that Snape is Voldemort’s exception when it comes to class and blood status. He has underprivileged minions like Greyback who operate on the fringes, but there aren’t exactly a whole lot of other dirt poor half bloods who’ve made it into his inner circle, and there’s a reason why Bellatrix distrusts him far more than any of the other Death Eaters who claimed they’d been under the Imperius curse, and it’s because she doesn’t consider him as one of them.

Lily, as a beautiful and charming Gryffindor who is beloved of the very well connected Slughorn and the headmaster and the wealthy pureblood James Potter, actually seems to have more room for social mobility than teenage Severus as they look towards adulthood despite him being nominally more privileged as a half blood. All dependant on patronage of course, so that’s problematic in itself, and patronage won’t save anybody from terrorists in the end. Lily to her immense credit recognises this in joining the Order when she could’ve kept her head down. But that tension isn’t nothing when it comes to unpicking their dynamic.

There’s a reason I’ve been steering clear of the whole Snape and Voldemort dynamic, despite how relevant it would be to just about every discussion I’ve had about Severus. See, if there’s anything in the series that haunts me—keeps me tossing and turning at night—it’s that twisted, enigmatic relationship between Tom and Severus. Not just what’s written plain as day in the books, mind you. I’m talking about what’s lurking beneath, the things left unsaid. Because Snape is indeed Voldemort’s exception, and not only in being let into a circle that’s usually locked tight for purebloods. No, Tom crosses lines for Severus over and over again, bending his own rules. I refuse to chalk that up to bad writing; there’s something deliberate about the way their interactions stand out. Voldemort’s treatment of Snape falls right out of step with the essence of Tom’s character. That alone not only leaves acres of space for interpretation—there’s a bloody demand for it. In any other fandom, their relationship would’ve been taken apart a hundred ways already—fanfiction, art, endless headcanons. But here, Snape’s entire existence got reduced to Lily Evans, and fans call it a day. Meanwhile, his massive, fascinating dynamic with Voldemort just sits there, untouched, quietly shaping the entire outcome of the story. As I said at the start, once I get going, there’s no reining me in. So, hands up—I’ll stop myself here. Maybe one day I’ll dive into the complexity of their relationship in a proper meta, but for now, I’ll spare you from my rambling about that deliciously controversial relationship.

Now, as for Severus and Lily, the tension between them isn’t just part of the story—it is the story. Brutal, unforgiving, and about as tragic as you can get. Their mutual raw emotional wreckage is the precise reason why it works so damn well for me. If someone (or a horde of someones) wants to water that down to the sob story of a certain ginger flower’s suffering—fine by me, really. I’ve said it all on that sensitive matter. Be that as it may.

[queenofthekings]

ᴘʟᴀʏɪɴɢ ᴡɪᴛʜ ꜰɪʀᴇ, ᴘᴀʀᴛ ɪ (ꜱᴇʀɪᴇꜱ ʜᴇʀᴇ)

Summary: You are part of the biggest girl group on the planet, Eddie is the face of the biggest rock band of the century. A chance meeting at Coachella sends both of you into what would be the biggest love affair in music history; if only people knew about it.

Pairing: Rockstar!Eddie x K-Pop Idol!Reader

Author's note: My love for K-Pop and Stranger Things/Eddie Munson in one fic? It's more likely than you think. If you don't know much/anything about the K-Pop world, not to worry, I'll be going over some of it in this fic! I'll try to keep the Korean honorific names to a minimum but I do wanna try to keep things as plausible as possible.

Disclaimer: In this fic, I have specified that Reader is not Korean or Asian. As someone who is white; I didn't feel it was right to write a POC character. Please be respectful.

CW: 18+, mentions of unhealthy eating habits, obsessive fan behaviour, toxic work environments, swearing, a little NSFW content, sexting, no use of Y/N but Reader's stage name is Luna.

Tagging: @munsonsbtch @impmunson @binickmiller @ali-r3n @stevesjockstrap

Word count: 2.6k

Any hate will not be tolerated, constructive criticism is welcomed.

APRIL 2019

Coachella was the biggest music festival in the world and playing there was an honour and a privilege; and while Eddie knew this, he found a lot of the hype around it insufferable. He never felt like his band belonged up there with the lights of Beyonce and Justin Bieber, even when Corroded Coffin had exploded with popularity, the larger venues they’d play out would never compare to the smaller shows.

Disliking Coachella when you perform there is one story, disliking Coachella and ending up in the crowd of one of the most talked about acts of the whole festival another matter entirely. But somehow, Gareth had convinced him to leave the tour bus to watch one performance. Only one.

“Why are we even here?” Eddie yelled into Gareth’s ear, trying to make sure he was heard over the screaming and cheering fans that surrounded them. The show hadn’t even started yet but the crowd was already at deafening levels.

“I thought it was high time you experienced a new genre of music,” Gareth yelled back, giving him a smug grin. “Plus, I hear one of the members of the group is a fan of ours.”

Eddie shrugged, knowing that Gareth was right in saying it was time to experience some new music outside of his usual comfort zone. And given the way the stage was set, the flags and lightsticks people were waving and demographic of the crowd; this was definitely outside of his comfort zone. “Who even are they?” he asked, grabbing his phone from his pocket.

Before he had a chance to type a single letter into Google, Gareth took his phone and pulled up a Wikipedia page for the group. “This is them. And before say anything, don’t judge the group before you listen to them.”

Eddie raised an eyebrow at his bandmate before looking at the page, giving Gareth even more of the side-eye.

Chain Reaction is a South Korean girl group formed by YG Entertainment, consisting of members Yoohyeon, Luna, Dahyun, and Yuqi. The group debuted in August 2016 with the digital single “Whistle”.

“K-Pop? Really, Gareth?”

“I said not to judge!” Gareth shrugged, just as the music began starting, causing both of them to look up. Eddie’s ears were already beginning to ring from how loud the fans were screaming; he was used to hearing fans through his in-ear during shows, but this was on a whole other level. Eddie didn’t pay much attention until he noticed the cropped t-shirt on one of the members, recognising the design and logo.

His heart skipped a beat, his mouth dropping open as he looked at Gareth who took the words right out of his mouth, leaning over to shout directly into his ear. “Yup, that’s a Corroded Coffin shirt, she’s a massive fan.”

Eddie chuckled a little to himself, shouting back into Gareth’s ear. “Maybe this won’t be so bad.”

After a couple of songs, the group began their introduction, all speaking in perfect unison and bowing to the still screaming audience. “Hello, we are Chain Reaction!”

A girl with dyed dark blue hair spoke up first, clearly showing her leader position. “Hello, Coachella, my name is Yoohyeon and I’m so thankful you all came out to see us!”

The crowd screamed as a response, causing the group to laugh and clap long. Then you spoke up, your long blonde hair making you stand out against the other members. “Hello, everyone,” you began, and Eddie’s heart instantly melted at your soft voice, especially at your accent. “My name is Luna, and I hope you enjoy the show.” You bowed a little, pulling down your shirt a little to make sure it wasn’t exposing too much.

As the other members introduced themselves, Eddie could hardly focus on them, he was far too interested in staring at you. He vaguely knew Yuqi had natural dark brown hair and Dahyun had dark purple hair – the only way he knew he could remember to tell them apart, probably a move from their manager so people could tell the difference.

Gareth noticed him staring, giving him a nudge. “Somebody’s got a crush.”

He glared back. “I just think she’s cute, completely not my type.”

Gareth gave him the look of “yeah, we’ll see about that”, already knowing that Eddie would at least attempt to hook up with you after the show. It was inevitable, it happened at any event or show he attended. The only thing Eddie Munson loved more than music, was women. It was rare if his hotel room didn’t have a groupie in it; and being the biggest rock band in the world meant there was an abundance of them wherever they went, Eddie would always have one on his arm by the end of the night.

Although the idea of you and Eddie together was adorable – a rock legend and a pop princess together? You’d be media darlings – although Gareth knew it would be like playing with fire. The fans of both of your groups would rip both of you and the relationship apart, the constant invasion of privacy from fans and the press alike would be almost unbearable.

But that’s the downside to being a public figure and dating someone just as well-known as you are.

Eddie wasn’t known for long term dating, either. The longest relationship Gareth had ever seen him in was his “high school sweetheart”, Chrissy Cunningham, only ended up lasting less than a year. Every other girl he’d been with wouldn’t last longer than a few weeks, he’d always blame it on his career, but Gareth knew that in reality, Eddie just didn’t want to be tied down to one person.

You, on the other hand, had no public relationship history. Being a K-Pop idol left almost no time for dating or even much of a social life outside of groupmates; and if a female idol was seen with a male idol outside of activities, fans would go wild and instantly assume they’re dating and usually boycott the idols for “betraying” them.

Once the group finished their final song; the crowd screamed and cheered, causing almost every member to look as if they were ready to burst into tears of happiness. The four of you joined hands to bow towards the audience as a thank you before you spoke up. “Coachella, we have been Chain Reaction; thank you very much and goodnight!”

Eddie kept his eyes on you, almost unable to take his eyes off you. You gave one last smile to the crowd, waving as you turned to lock eyes with Eddie. Even through the pandemonium that surrounded both of you, it all seemed to dissolve as if you were the only ones there.

You had to be almost dragged off the stage by your bandmates otherwise you would’ve spent all night just staring at Eddie. But even while you were being dragged off stage, you were desperately trying to find Eddie’s eyes again. You hoped you would be able to properly talk to him, even if you had to do it behind your manager’s back.

Backstage, the staff were cheering and applauding you and the band, giving their congratulations, and offering fans and water. You sprinted towards Yoohyeon, wrapping your arms tightly around your senior. The pair of you hugged tightly as you both broke down in floods of tears.

“This is all we ever dreamed of, unnie,” you sobbed, taking a tissue from a staff member to dab at your eyes, being careful not to ruin your makeup. Yoohyeon took the tissue from you and began trying to stop your tears. “I’m so proud of you.”

Yoohyeon laughed through her own tears, not caring if they ruined her makeup. “I’m proud of us, we’ve worked so hard for this, and you were perfect.”

You laughed a little through your tears, turning to the other two members and motioning them to come over and join in a group hug. Although there was only about a month between the two of you; Yoohyeon was definitely the older sister and mother of the group, and you were the baby sister who needed looking after and a lot of hugs.

You’d always been extremely close, even since your trainee days. Every night, you would tell each other that you’d debut together, no matter how hard you’d have to train or what you had to sacrifice.

But every member had sacrificed so much even to just get past the first audition; you’d given up school, friends, family, any chance of a normal life for one tiny shot at making it. But in that moment, all four of you knew that all the blood, sweat and tears you’d all poured into training was worth it. You’d all made it.

Walking arm in arm with Yoohyeon, the pair of you walked down the stairs to the artists area away from the stage, always looking back every few moments to check your younger bandmates were following behind both of you. You tapped Yoohyeon’s arm to stop her to let your members catch up, so all four of you could give your manager, Steve a celebratory hug.

As soon as you stepped into the artists area and saw Steve, you couldn’t control the excitement and relief of the performance; you screamed and sprinted towards him, jumping into his arms, and barely giving him enough time to catch you. You got on well with Steve, he became like a big brother to you and your fellow band members, even if he was a little strict with the four of you, but it certainly came out of a place of love and wanting the best for all of you.

“You were amazing out there,” Steve hugged you tightly, pressing a kiss to the side of your head as he slowly let you down out of his arms and handed you a water bottle with a straw in the top.

“Think we won ‘em over, boss?” You asked, smirking as you placed the straw in the side of your lips.

“Won them over? You guys have done more than that, Twitter is exploding, you’re the top five trends on Naver, you guys are all anyone’s talking about,” Steve grinned.

“We’ve made it!” You shouted in unison with your band mates, before all of you laughed and hugged. Sure, Chain Reaction was very successful in South Korea, but this was a whole new level of success and recognition. All eyes were on your group and despite that new level of pressure, you all thrived under it; the challenge was exciting to all of you.

Your bandmates took their seats and chatted excitedly amongst themselves, while you leaned against the wall, taking in every moment around you. You hadn’t even realised you’d zoned out until Eddie was stood in front of you. “I know I’m beautiful, but you could at least take a picture if you’re gonna look that much,” he smirked.

You blinked a million times in a second, partly to snap yourself out of your zoned out state but also partly because you could hardly believe your eyes that Eddie Munson – the Eddie Munson – was stood in front of you. You’d been starstruck almost ever since you arrived in California several days beforehand, but this was on a whole other level.

The memories of listening to Corroded Coffin late at night during your trainee days flashed through your mind a million miles an hour, how much their lyrics kept you going when you thought you might quit and how you’d spend so much of your free time watching their performances, hooked on Eddie’s stage presence.

And now he was here in front of you, talking to you.

It was all so surreal.

You blinked again, clearing your throat. “Sorry, I completely zoned out.”

Eddie laughed, nodding his head. “Happens to a lot of people, did you wanna get out of here? Go somewhere a little quieter?”

You nodded and before you could even say a word, Eddie took your hand and led you out of the area and around the back of the crowds of staff and tents, towards Corroded Coffin’s tour bus. You somewhat wanted to protest but you weren’t about to stop this once in a lifetime chance to talk with Eddie, so you kept your mouth shut as he opened the door for you to get inside before following you inside.

“Don’t worry, everyone else is enjoying the festival, they’re not gonna be back for a while. Can I get you a drink?” He asked, moving past you towards a small fridge.

You bit your bottom lip as you walked through the bus, taking a seat at the table. “Just some water… or a Coke if you have it.”

“Lucky for you,” he pulled the fridge door open and pulled out a water bottle and a small can of Coke, placing both on the table before sitting down opposite you. “I have both.”

You smiled softly as you took both drinks, taking a long sip of the cold water. “I suppose I haven’t really introduced myself; everyone calls me Luna,” you held out your hand towards Eddie.

Instead of shaking it, he took it and pressed a kiss to the back of your hand. “And what’s the name your mother gave you? Not the name the company gave you.”

Blushing darkly, you whispered out your birth name. It had been so long since anyone had even asked your real name that “Luna” more or less became your real name. But Eddie seemed to actually want to get to know you, the kiss on the hand was just a cherry on top.

“Beautiful name,” he mused. “It suits you better than the crappy stage name they gave you. How’d you even allow it to happen?”

You laughed softly as you took your hand back, wrapping it around the Coke can. “I was sixteen and very naïve when I came to Korea.”

“You were only sixteen?”

You nodded. “I auditioned for the company when I was about sixteen and then I moved to South Korea a few months later, it all happened pretty fast when I look back at it. I debuted when I was twenty.”

He sat back in the chair. “Looks like we debuted at the same age, I was twenty when our first album came out.”

“I never realised that! I listened to you guys throughout my whole trainee period, it really helped keep the passion for music alive for me.”

He smiled softly. “Well I’m glad it helped at least one person, that’s all that matters honestly. So… tell me more about you.”

You smiled back at him, leaning forward in your chair to get closer to him, beginning to babble about yourself, all the while he just looked at you with such care in his eyes, hooked on your every word.

After almost an hour, talk got to your company and just how hard it was being an idol. “Under contract, we’re not allowed to; drive, buy a car, smoke, drink, date, go clubbing, get plastic surgery, get tattoos, travel for a holiday, write and produce our own music, have control over our own money or our image. We can’t even show our faces in vlogs our friends have made.”

He raised his eyebrows. “I’m pretty sure that’s slavery.”

You laughed, shaking your head. “Trust me, this is heaven compared to how contracts used to be.”

He chuckled a little, placing a hand over yours. “Listen, I should let you get back to your members or your manager might have my head, but could I get your number and we could do this again sometime?”

You smiled, nodding. “Of course.”

[ghostofbambifanfiction]

I just thought about what you said that Sirius and Skylar are similar in the way that they both have massive ego and they want to be the most important person in the (metaphorical) room. And I think that's true, but it's also interesting how differently it shows.

Sirius appears to be more secure in himself. He self reflects enough to know himself and to recognise this trait, and he doesn't shy away from asking for attention when he needs it, sometimes it comes across as rude but he is honest about it. He knows his place in the lives of people who are important to him, that he is loved, his opinion matters to them yet he doesn't really has the need to push his narrative when they don't necessarily follow his advice, he can step back when asked and despite his protectiveness over this small group of important people he can accept new ones too. I'm sure he loves attention from other people like fans of the podcast or many people he meets irl, but ultimately, he doesn't care so much and doesn't seem to let it bother him.

Skylar, on the other hand, seems to care more about the attention of "random" people. She likes to be the influencer online and offline. She is also confident in herself, her lifestyle, and her opinions, but therefore, she kind of thinks she can be this guru for people who didn't really needed and/or asked for it. Of course we only know her from James pov, but it got me thinking why did she fixate on him so much. He can't be the only one who was more interested in somebody else, or is this more about how open he is about his yearning for Lily while Skylar is not even on the same scale (because at this point his scale IS Lily)? Or is she in the dms of a few other people and leaves mysterious passive aggressive comments on their ig posts too?

Sorry this was too long, I had time and thoughts😅

Skylar fixated on James because he's hot, or she found him hot, so she offered him sex and he said no and she was fine with that because she's secure in how desirable she is to so many people... but at the same time, there was part of her that was like, what needs fixing in this guy? Because surely it can't be her, surely she has universal irresistable appeal, so he must have some sort of issue that she, Skylar, can help him fix. Sirius bored her almost instantly because he's obstinate and unyielding and rude. But the more she got to know James, the more she saw how easygoing he was, and how he was willing to try new things (like the acupuncture) and that's the kind of person she likes to have in her life. Pliable people. People she can mentor and shape. As I imagined her and her siblings, and how she was raised... she 100% grew up with parents who don't believe in telling their children no and freely allowed them to impose themselves upon other people since infancy. So that is what she knows. And while she is naturally inclined to truly care and to want to help people, when you take the previous successes she has had, combine them with her slavishly devoted, forever adoring online followers, and mix that with an already massively privileged existence, you get Skylar.

[darael]

Regarding Imane Khelif and Angela Carini

I originally made a version of this post in response to one about how Angela Carini wasn't to blame for the massive wave of nonsense that has been directed at Imane Khelif; about how her perfectly reasonable emotions (and some actions based on those that she regrets) were being used to make her an icon of a hate movement she does not support. About how both of them were victims of misogyny in this situation.

This is gonna be a long post, folks, so buckle in.

The problem is, there's reason to believe Angela Carini fully intended what she sparked, and is not sincere in her apology. Before we get into that, though, I want to emphasise some things:

Even if I am right and Angela Carini is some combination of racist, intersexist, transphobic, and/or willing to exploit these bigotries for her own benefit, that will not justify misogyny towards her. We can criticise her actions and inferred intentions without relying purely on sexist or misogynistic tropes and slurs.

Defending one woman by tearing down another is a dynamic that's been used misogynistically many times in the past, but

Talking about "white women's tears" is not actually that when the thing described actually fits another pattern seen in racial-justice circles: white people, but especially white women, do often weaponise crying and claims of injury (whether physical or emotional) to get disproportionate harm done to people of colour and especially Black people. This results from an intersection of racism and patriarchy, in which white women are treated as fragile and inherently in need of protection from "savages" and men. The underlying premise is misogynistic but women with the requisite privilege can still weaponise it.

The attacks on Imane Khelif are transmisogynistic (because they rely on the trope of the predatory, violent trans woman), intersexist (because they rely on claims that she's intersex, and that this would make her more prone to violence), and racist (because the denial of women of colour's femininity, the making of their access to the social class of "womanhood" conditional, has been a long-standing part of white supremacy). These things are true even though Khelif is not trans and is not known to be intersex, because bigotry doesn't care if its direct victims are actually the ones intended. She is a cisgender, likely-perisex woman of colour who is experiencing misogynoir, intersexism, and transmisogyny.

Got it? Good.

Now, then. First, some background:

At the Olympics, in the 66kg women's boxing, Imane Khelif from Algeria was up against Angela Carini from Italy for her first match (in the second round; she got a bye from the first due to seeding). Khelif had formerly been disqualified from a 2023 tournament run by the International Boxing Association (IBA) under… suspicious circumstances. Despite having passed "gender testing" the year before, she was suddenly re-tested and disqualified mid-tournament after she beat a Russian boxer. It is worth noting that the head of the IBA is Russian, and under his leadership the Association's only sponsor is the Russian fossil-fuel company Gazprom, and that the IBA has been barred from participation in the Olympics due to rampant corruption (the Olympic Committee handled qualifiers directly since there wasn't an alternative association to turn to) — so you can see why this is suspect. The IBA claimed that Khelif's testosterone was not tested, but "another recognised test was used", the nature of which the organisation refuses to disclose. The head of the IBA said on Telegram that Khelif had XY chromosomes, but he is hardly a trustworthy source and the organisation has not confirmed his claim. Even if it's true, Imane Khelif was assigned female at birth, raised as a girl, and has passed all the (transphobic and intersexist) Olympic committee's medical eligibility tests; she categorically does not have a meaningful sex-derived advantage over other women.

Angela Carini was injured from her first-round fight, but chose to take part in the second round anyway. After taking two blows in her fight against Khelif, she withdrew. The match took 46 seconds, which is certainly short, but not fantastically so. She broke down in tears and said something that could be translated as "it's not fair!" or "it's not right!", but this could be construed as frustration over her Olympic dreams (and especially a promise she apparently made to her father that she'd go all the way) being broken. Similarly with the way she refused to shake the hand of the woman to whom she'd just conceded a match. She also made comments to the effect that she'd never been punched so hard. In response to this, transphobes, intersexists, and racists accused Imane Khelif of some combination of being trans, being intersex, and faking her gender (though of course they did not use these terms; their claims were that she was secretly a man). As mentioned above, there is zero reliable evidence that this is the case, but that hasn't stopped bigots from running with it.

Here are the things I wish to point out about Angela Carini's behaviour:

Before the match, she put out a (now-deleted) tweet calling Imane Khelif un uomo — "a man":

This suggests she was cozying up to those seeking to disqualify Khelif on racist grounds well before the match actually started.

Since the match but before her apology, her coach has described her as seeing herself as "a paladin" for a cause:

This suggests she actively embraced the transphobia and intersexism that was promoted in her name.

She's also boasted about how since the match she visited Italy's vehemently transphobic, and indeed outright fascist, leader, who "welcomed her like a daughter", which certainly isn't conclusive but isn't a great look. I don't have the source for this one on hand, sorry.

But Carini apologised, right? Well, kind of. She apologised for refusing to shake Imane Khelif's hand after their bout. She said she'd embrace her. She also said "if the IOC said she can fight, I respect that decision" — which might appear reasonable on the surface but also actively plays into the idea that there's some reason the IOC might not have said she could fight. She also also said "It could have been the match of a lifetime, but I had to preserve my life as well in that moment", which could be a genuine expression of an athlete's need to take care of their body, but also feeds neatly into the "this freakishly strong brute could have killed Angela Carini!" narrative that her allegedly-unwanted supporters were already using. Further, the closest she came to apologising for anything other than refusing to shake Imane Khelif's hand is "all this controversy makes me sad", which is… not actually an apology. All quotes in this paragraph were from Carini via the linked Ground News post.

I have seen allegations, but I'm not claiming this to be the case because I haven't examined the evidence, that Carini has a history of faking an ankle injury to end a fight against a stronger boxer in 2022. I mention this for completeness, but it's also worth saying that even if true, while this might suggest a propensity for exaggerating the extent of an injury, in the match against Imane Khelif she was visibly bleeding when she withdrew, and her broken nose from her previous match would also have been difficult to fake.

In my conclusion: it is my belief that Angela Carini was a willing participant, not an innocent pawn, in the racist, transphobic, intersexist, and plain misogynistic (not to mention baseless!) allegations made against Imane Khelif. I acknowledge her partial apology, but it strikes me as an attempt to evade being held responsible for what her actions caused rather than a genuine one. Even if she is sincere, it seems to me that this would represent a thought process along the lines of "this got out of hand" rather than "I did something wrong". You don't have to agree with me, of course. What evidence I have is now in your hands, and you must make up your own mind.

[apas-95]

You know, I almost would have thought this would have brought about some self-awareness. Like, this analogy is almost too good, right? The Incredibles is such an obviously and easily-recognised reactionary work that it's impossible nobody would point it out.

Like, even just visually, the fact its creator is a massive Ayn Rand fanboy comes through so strongly - that's not even getting to the fact that the literal and direct plot is that a stubby ginger called Syndrome who's angry at the genetically-superior Ubermensch decides to universally improve the world by introducing technology that would make everyone's lives better, with the only downside of said Ubermensch no longer having a privileged position over society, and the fact that this is presented as unquestioned evil without need for justification.

Like, how do you watch this scene as an adult human, see the evil villain's plan being simply 'use technology to expand the benefits of your abilities to everyone, massively improving their reach, with the only possible downside being that you're just like everyone else now' and go 'Yes! That's my enemy! I am the victim here!'

[comtedelafere]

So I just read this afternoon that Ray Stevenson has died at the age of 58 (which is absolutely no age, the poor fella, what a shock).

I'm not gonna pretend to know much about his back catalogue of work or say I was an especial fan or anything disingenuous like that, but I do really want to talk for a quick moment about the one role I really know and love him for - Porthos in the 2011 adaptation of The Three Musketeers.

Now, I know and you know that this version of The Musketeers is massively unpopular for a whole host of reasons - most notably the silly airship storyline (personally, I have such a well-trained suspension of disbelief that I can 100% deal with the airship aspect of it, but I totally get why it's an unpopular addition to the story) - but I will happily die on the hill that it is the closest combination of writing and portrayal of the Core Four yet (sorry, BBC version). Logan Lerman's d'Artagnan was a cheeky 19-year-old rascal who thought he was all that and a bag of chips and didn't care who knew it. Matthew Macfadyen's Athos was sullen and morose (but in a really hot way obvs, cos yknow - Athos) and didn't waste a word of dialogue. Luke Evans' Aramis was quiet, sober, extremely spiritual and didn't go around trying to seduce everything that moved the whole time.

But Ray Stevenson's Porthos? Oh. Oh this was sublime. Up until this adaptation, Porthos had more often than not been played as the comic relief: the large, overweight, affable drunk of no fixed IQ whose prowess at fighting was more down to luck and subtle slapstick than his good judgement. This version of Porthos couldn't have been further away from those portrayals.

He was a quick-witted, smart, physically powerful and agile fighter, whose hand-to-hand combat skills were so notorious that he never needed to use his sword. My absolute favourite moment that showed this fact so beautifully was at the end of the big fight scene with the Red Guards ("Four against FORTY? And you beat them like a drum?! *snort*!" oh, Louis!) when the Guards were reeling a bit, and trying to decide whether to go another round. At that point, Porthos casually pushed his sword from the scabbard with his thumb by about 2 inches - and that was enough to send the Red Guards running for the hills!! I screamed!! Perfect characterisation!! Porthos to an absolute T!!!!!

Not only that, but his version of Porthos was an unashamed yet impoverished dandy, a dedicated follower of fashion who took his time to choose exactly the right cut of new clothes in exactly the right colours - while his rich, married lover happily picked up the tab for him. He understood the way the right clothes and the right combination of appearance and demeanour in any given scenario could give him the upper hand, not only in fighting but also in all of his interpersonal relationships and encounters.

This is the Porthos I had wanted for years. This is the Porthos I cheered and applauded for when I finally saw the version that had lived in my head all those years had finally made it to the screen.

Don't get me wrong, of course the BBC Musketeers owns a huge part of my heart and soul and I love so much about them - but the 2011 Musketeers was so special because for me it was probably the very first time I finally got to see the Musketeers as the book described them, rather than just as the standard accepted carbon copies that had been passed down by Hollywood over the decades, and which bear little to no resemblance to the actual characters in the book. I have no idea if I've actually seen any of Ray's other performances or not, to be honest. Porthos may not be his finest hour onscreen, I really don't know. It may not be the part he's best known for. But if nothing else, Ray finally gave the world a Porthos that Dumas would have recognised.

Despite the fact the film as a whole was received poorly, his portrayal was a genuine gift, and I am privileged to be able to remember him as having given this Musketeer fangirl the abject joy of finally seeing Porthos played as he should have been all along. Not as a large, loud drunk who was just there to be big, strong and funny - but as a highly skilled, intelligent, audacious soldier with a sharp sense of humour and an even sharper dress sense; and who, rather than simply bringing up the rear as The Other Guy or the Big Fella, showed that he was quite possibly the Musketeers' MVP.

Thank you, Ray. Goodnight, and rest well.

[dieinct]

saw your hpv vax status post and had to do a double take because in my country the vaccine has been part of the kid-vaccination program for like 20 years now…recognising the massive privilege of public health care but also the idea of putting it on a dating app is so funny to me. bio like "i'm 6ft//polio☑︎measels☑︎" what a world

i mean me too, i got vaxxed as a youth but many people my age whose parents were more conservative were not vaxxed as kids, which means that if they then got vaxxed as adults they're statistically likely to already have at least one strain of hpv (and, frankly, some tweens/teens also already have a strain of hpv, whether or not they're already sexually active at that age - lots of ways to get those bad boys!)

and while that's still a protective vaccine for ppl in that situation, sharing that you are vaxxed isn't really useful information to share - it doesn't necessarily indicate that you're 'clean', it doesn't help partners decide what kinds of sex acts they're interested in performing with you... it's just not really giving information to potential partners that will impact their behavior. so it's just putting your health information on a hookup app for no reason.

[enbycrip]

Been digging into things on Canadian/British, United States/British and South American/Spanish history recently and the notable thing that has come up on both - in all three cases, the European settlers were the ones actively engaging in genocide of the indigenous population. It was not the active policy of the European government.

In all three cases the European government actually passed protective legislation for the rights of indigenous subjects at the request of either indigenous people themselves travelling to Europe to make these representations, or not-entirely-awful Europeans passing on what was happening to them. They weren’t *incredible* protections in any of the three cases, but they at least recognised that indigenous people were *people* with actual basic rights. Like “not being automatically murdered or enslaved”.

But then European settlers went *batshit* at this legislation. The entire idea of “No Genocide” policies provoked enormous settler backlashes in all three cases. It was even a material, if not enormous, factor in why the US declared independence.

And the European governments in question just…rolled over. Made no real attempt to enforce this protective legislation. And it *certainly* was *not* why Britain sent in troops when the US declared independence. The Founding Fathers just viewed even the fact they had been *asked* to not murder indigenous people as an outrage.

None of this is to excuse European colonial states today of our responsibility to pay reparations and lobby for protections for indigenous people (and BIPOC in general) in our ex-colonial states. We’ve benefitted so much, especially on mass resource plundering, that reparations are a responsibility we cannot shirk.

(I just finished a biography of Charles Hapsburg and how he frittered away *massive* silver imports stolen from South America on European wars. That huge resource injection was pretty vital to the beginning of European international capitalism in the 16th-17th centuries. Before that, states just kept coming up against insufficient metals for currency, especially ones with the intermediate value of silver that let a critical mass of lower-level transactions happen.)

What it is, however, is an examination of the different ways states can be responsible for genocide, eugenics, and other crimes.

It does not need to be active policy for a state to be responsible. Even passing protective legislation doesn’t prevent a state’s responsibility if they don’t take measures to enforce that legislation, and, particularly, *if they give in to loud backlash from privileged parties who see it as an infringement of their privilege for people they are oppressing to be given some basic rights.*

I am not a proponent of “history repeats itself”. Context *always* matters, and every different situation has a different context. However, history itself provides an incredibly important and *necessary* context for situations we face now. And these facts are *incredibly* relevant to *many* situations we are currently facing.

[the16thtower]

Harry Potter: be born with privilege or you're fucked

(Backstory: I was chopping garlic when the 'crush it, don't cut it' instructions from the Half-Blood Prince were beamed into my head out of nowhere and suddenly, I was wondering how the fuck Snape even got the chance to learn that. It then escalated to a 90 minute rant at my poor partner about this topic)

I'll preface this by saying that I'm sure this isn't the first time someone has made this point and I doubt this is a unique point of criticism. I’m also debating how accessible I make this, since this is probably going to be more interesting to those who are unfamiliar with the writing in the Harry Potter series. That being said...

Joanne has this weird tension throughout the entire series where textually, she'll say that characters are dictated by their choices and are capable of becoming whoever they want to be, but subtextually, characters’ opportunities and identities tend to remain static, determined either through legacy/inheritance or innate talents and qualities.

The biggest offenders

Obviously, the epitome of this is Harry:

Inherits the Invisibility Cloak from his dad that allows him to succeed over and over again

Inherits both Grimmauld Place and Kreacher from Sirius, giving him both a safehouse and the means to find out what happened to the locket Horcrux

Is an innately good Quidditch player, a quality that characters attribute to being inherited from his father

Gains Parseltongue and a telepathic connection with Voldemort as a result of becoming his Horcrux (not strictly genetic/familial inheritance but he has it for nearly all his life so I think it counts)

The goddamn prophecy stating that he as a baby will take down Voldemort (and don't start on Neville, I'll get to him)

Inherits the large fortune of the Potter family

He gets to keep the Marauders' Map in the epilogue of the Prisoner of Azkaban because Remus thinks he deserves to inherit a creation of his father's (plus he got it in the first place from Fred and George)

Is protected by Voldemort via the blessing from his mother that requires him to live with blood relatives to be perpetuated (quick sidenote: I'm doing a lot of research to clarify some of my points because it's been a long time since I've read these books and the specifics on how that blood charm functions are vague as hell, to the point where it feels like it's just there to justify placing Harry with abusive biological family)

The whole Boy Who Lived persona - for practically his entire life, Harry receives celebrity status for surviving and killing Voldemort as an infant

Inherits the Resurrection Stone and the Sword of Gryffindor from Dumbledore

His initial wand being a "twin” to Voldemort’s due to both sharing the same phoenix feather core, which triggers the Priori Incantatem effect that allows Harry to escape during his duel with Voldemort in the Goblet of Fire. The wands being connected allows Harry's wand to act on its own accord in The Deathly Hallows, spitting out golden fire at Voldemort during the Order of the Phoenix's effort to move Harry permanently out of Privet Drive.

Kills Voldemort not through skill but because the Elder Wand recognised him as its rightful master (after a massive game of telephone surrounding who rightfully gets to inherit it post Dumbeldore's death), allowing for Voldemort's spell in the final duel to be rebounded back at him

Voldemort is fairly similar, which makes sense as he's one of Harry's main character foils.

Being a descendant of Salazar Slytherin allows him to inherit Parseltongue and access the Chamber of Secrets

He's also a descendant of one of the Peverell brothers of the Deathly Hallows, allowing him to inherit the Resurrection Stone as the Gaunt family ring

The whole "being unable to love due to being conceived under a love potion" thing

He’s a magical prodigy from a very young age, before he’s even given access to a wand, and is capable of spellcraft that others cannot achieve. He's basically the strongest wizard in the world aside from Dumbledore, and is good at everything from reading minds to dueling to potion making. God, I'm reading through the Wiki page right now for all of his powers and it really just boils down to "everything". He's created a shit tonne of spells too.

Snape is a lesser offender but my observations on him catalysed this "essay":

He's described as being more skilled at the dark arts at 11 than most seventh years and created a long list of his own spells - again, another prodigy

He also created his own variations on potions that allowed someone like Harry (who's been reiterated as mediocre with potion-making) to succeed in Slughorn's class – he’s implied by Slughorn to be the best potions expert seen within the series as a teenager. As an adult, he’s responsible for brewing the potion that keeps Dumbledore alive after being cursed in the sixth book and for brewing the draught that keeps Remus’ wolf form docile in the third, potions that don’t appear to be brewable by any other character.

Hermione is another prodigy who, while not having a lot going for her in terms of legacy/inheritance, is also earmarked as innately special. Intelligence and magical ability aside, her access to the Time Turner as a 13 year old is fucking buckwild. Especially since McGonagall had to write to the Ministry for her to use it and receives approval because Hermione is seen as a responsible enough person. This clearly isn’t a privilege that’s awarded to dedicated students either, this is just her being special.

This next bit isn't really the strongest bit of evidence supporting my cause but I'm putting it in here because it weirdly fits in with everything else: Scabbers/Peter Pettigrew is introduced into the story via Ron inheriting him from Percy. Whether a proper Chekov's gun or a plot point that Joanne came up with later, it still fits this ever-present idea that you have to be born into being important.

2. Magic only works when you're good at it...

This next bit may be more of a consequence of the series having a more soft-magic approach than hard magic (soft magic having little to no rules/limitations on how magic functions vs hard magic being very specific on how it can be used). However, because Joanne never really describes how new spells get created or elucidates on what makes certain spells harder to perform than others - the method to become an Animagus or creating Horcruxes come immediately to mind - new and/or difficult spells only get performed by characters who have been marked as special from the get-go.

Hermione, Snape, Dumbledore, and Voldemort are some of the only characters we met that we see creating their own spells and are all described as geniuses one way or another. Others like Sirius and James are also well-established as talented students to help justify why they're capable of creating items like the Maurauder's Map.

3. The genetics of magic

The idea of the Squib (non-wizard born to a wizard family) is  an under-discussed concept within the series - disciplines like Herbology, Potions, and Magical Creature Care don't appear to require wand usage yet Squibs are still barred from attending Hogwarts. We only meet two Squibs within the entire series and both are elderly people who are treated unfavourably by Joanne (Filch is a pathetic curmudgeon ridiculed by students and Arabella Figg is barely in the plot and doesn’t seem to actively participate in wizard society). Again, another instance where Joanne makes it clear that if you're not born in the right circumstances, you're fucked.

This goes without saying but it's also worth repeating in this context: there's a lot of blood quantum and pedigree within the series in regard to wizarding blood, and being pureblood is still seen as highly prized at best and neutral at worst depending on the social context, despite the highly implied inbreeding and pervasive supremacist attitudes associated with these lineages. Meanwhile, while being Muggleborn doesn’t carry stigma in mainstream wizard society, it’s not uncommon for wizards to be ignorant and condescending in Muggle matters. There’s multiple times where Hermione as our main Muggleborn character is embarrassed or ridiculed intentionally or otherwise for having a different upbringing to conventional wizards. Or, vice versa, where her lack of upbringing in wizard culture puts her at odds with other characters. S.P.E.W. is the biggest example where her pointing out and trying to remedy a genuinely heinous part of wizard society is treated both in-universe and by Joanne as her just being bossy and overbearing as per usual.

A brief aside: from memory, I can’t remember a major Muggleborn character aside from Hermione. Most of Harry’s classmates are either pure or half blood.

When it’s comparatively rare to get a wizard from Muggles and it’s rare to get a non-magical person from wizards, it does stress the point that how you’re born/your lineage is a big deal.

(Just looked up Muggleborn characters and apparently Joanne stated in a 2007 webchat that Muggleborns are descended from Squibs… my point stands. And in terms of notable Muggleborn characters, we have Lily Potter, the Creevey brothers, Moaning Myrtle, and Colin Finch-Fletchley. The term “notable” is doing a lot of heavy lifting here.)

4. Wizard culture sometimes gets pointed out as fucked up and then no one acknowledges it again

The existence of Slytherin House is a big example of when Joanne says one thing but means another: Harry being a good fit for Slytherin according to the Sorting Hat initially comes across as somewhat subversive in that the hero possesses conventionally negative traits and implies that the demographic for Slytherin is much more diverse than we've been led to believe. But between the book never having a single heroic or even positive Slytherin student and Harry's Parseltongue being from Voldemort, that undermines any semblance of nuance. The existence of Peter Pettigrew as an "evil" Gryffindor similarly compounds this, since Joanne makes it clear that Pettigrew has been a pathetic dude his whole life, riding on the coattails of more competent men like James and Sirius.

And before this gets brought up, both Regulus Black and Snape still became Death Eaters, with Black dying without making meaningful change and Snape being motivated by selfish reasons to become a double agent for Dumbledore and never really renouncing the views that led to him becoming a Death Eater in the first place. They both did a lot of bad before their betrayals of Voldemort, and can’t be seen as solely heroic or just.

The Sorting Hat explains in-canon that it places people based on where they’d be the happiest or excel the most but these assignments received at 11 years old become the greatest signifiers of identity for wizards even as adults. House assignment and blood status are two of the common pieces of information we receive about a character to the point where, if you go through the Harry Potter wiki, you can find out that exact info about minor characters who maybe have had one line or been mentioned by name alone.

The distinction between your most prominent qualities and what qualities you should embrace becomes meaningless anyway - the most conflict we see between a character and their house is in Harry in the second book, and it’s based mostly off him being the suspected Heir of Slytherin. There is an argument to be made for Neville as well, but he stands up to Harry, Ron, and Hermione at the end of the first book and his character arc for the rest of the series is slowly proving more and more how well he embodies Gryffindor’s ideals until it culminates in him pulling the Sword of Gryffindor.

Pivoting to the wizarding world at large, there’s a lot of humanoids within the series that Joanne toys with giving sympathetic treatment before ignoring them and returning to the status quo because “hey, they’re not wizards.” Obviously, first to mind are the goblins and house elfs (not going to touch on the anti-Semitic nature of the goblins, more qualified people have covered this) but the centaurs are also a problem. They’re briefly humanised through the character Firenze, who saves Harry in the first book and eventually takes over Divination classes when Trelawney is fired, but he’s explicitly an anomaly to the rest of the centaurs, who end up brutalising Umbrage. Similarly, we get Grawp (Hagrid’s half-brother) who’s meant to humanise us to the giants, but the series still returns to the idea of the giants as a violent, primitive monolith and they end up siding with the Death Eaters in the Second Wizarding War.

5. Joanne’s not really one for character arcs

This next bit is more to do with the series' genre, being essentially a boarding school mystery more than strict fantasy, but characters don't often actively change in the series - instead, characters are typically reframed via new information.

1st book: Quirrell (secretly Voldemort), Snape (he's actually good)

2nd book: Hagrid (not the heir of Slytherin), Tom Riddle (he's Voldemort), Gilderoy Lockhart (fraud and plagiarist)

3rd book: Remus (werewolf), Sirius (didn't betray Harry's parents/kill Peter), Peter Pettigrew (didn't die, actually betrayed Harry's parents)

4th book: Mad Eye Moody/Barty Crouch Jr

5th book: Umbridge (sent the dementor after Harry)

6th book: Tom Riddle/Voldemort again (backstory)

7th book: Snape again (he's still 'good'), Dumbledore (had fascist leanings as a young adult, knew Harry needed to die to kill Voldemort for good)

After a while, this trend reinforces this idea of innate quality that sooner or later characters must return to. No significant change is really permanent because Hagrid wasn’t actually the Heir of Slytherin, Sirius didn’t really betray his friends, Dumbledore wasn’t caught off guard and murdered in cold blood, Ron doesn’t mean to abandon his friends for as long as he does in the hunt for the horcruxes....

And often when characters do change in meaningful ways, we aren’t shown what happened to initiate this, like with Peter Pettigrew betraying the Potters or when Lily started dating James despite his cruelty. That last one is especially egregious, since the jump between James torturing Snape and James and Lily getting together is waved away by Sirius going “yeah, he was a bit of a dickhead but he grew up”.

If we looked at each major character's arc over the series, what can we genuinely say is different about them now? Maybe that Ron is a little less stubborn and obnoxious than he was as a pre-teen and Draco is not as much of a wizarding supremacist as his father. Draco doesn’t get much of a real redemption – he doesn’t ID Harry to the Snatchers, preventing him from getting turned over to Voldemort, but then he still tries to stop him in the Room of Requirement so that becomes a moot point. Also, he still marries Astoria Greengrass, a pureblood, so it's not like he's really evolved.

Neville probably had the most significant changes within the series, growing from an awkward, clumsy kid into a confident adult, but so much of this is him becoming in essence what he was always meant to be. His actions in supporting the wizarding resistance mirror his parents' work as Aurors and members of the Order of the Phoenix. He still fulfils the prophecy in beheading Nagini, the last Horcrux, helping to defeat Voldemort, a prophecy that previously could have applied to either him or Harry.

The epilogue really just drives home the whole point that Joanne sees everyone as born into specific roles: everyone is paired up with the member of the opposite sex that they were associated the most with in high school (forgive me, I’m an ace tranny and pointless match ups are a sin to me). But more to the point, they’ve taken their parents’ place and their kids are all analogues for them at the same age. Despite everything that happened, everything’s exactly the same or as it should be. They’re still separate from Muggles despite how wizard supremacy drove the previous conflict (and a lot of previous conflicts in-universe), Harry works in the government as an Auror despite being targeted by two different administrations (one of which wasn’t Voldemort-controlled), and known (presumably former) Death Eaters like Draco are still showing their faces in public. Almost identical to how things were at the start of the series.

No one is capable of change. The heroes are good, the villains are bad, and status quo is king.

As my partner pointed out while I was nearly hysterical ranting about this, it’s very much a middle class fantasy: you are born into a certain level of privilege that is owed to you and your success is practically guaranteed. Circumstances may change but the status quo inevitably keeps everyone in their rightful place, because don’t worry: you’re special.

In light of Joanne’s politics, particularly what she’s expressed in recent years, it’s interesting to see how this motif manifests in her writing.

[jordanianroyals]

24 September 2024: King Abdullah II called on all countries to join Jordan in enforcing an international Gaza Humanitarian Gateway.

Delivering Jordan’s address at the 79th Session of the United Nations General Assembly, His Majesty said the gateway would be “a massive relief effort to deliver food, clean water, medicine, and other vital supplies to those in desperate need”.

“Humanitarian aid should never be a tool of war,” the King continued in his speech, attended by His Royal Highness Prince Hashem bin Abdullah II.

His Majesty noted that almost a year into the war on Gaza, the world has failed politically, “but our humanity must not fail the people of Gaza any longer”.

The King urged the international community to establish a protection mechanism for the Palestinians across the occupied territories.

Turning to the dangerous developments in Lebanon, His Majesty said the escalation in Lebanon has to stop, stressing that no country in the region benefits from escalation.

“Our United Nations is facing a crisis that strikes at its very legitimacy”, said the King, stressing that the harsh reality many see is that some nations are above international law.

This Israeli government, His Majesty said, has killed more children, more journalists, more aid workers, and more medical personnel than any other war in recent memory.

The King stressed that the unprecedented scale of terror unleashed on Gaza is beyond any justification.

His Majesty warned of extremists who are taking the region to the brink of an all-out war, including those who continue to propagate the idea of Jordan as an alternative homeland.

“We will never accept the forced displacement of Palestinians, which is a war crime,” the King affirmed, noting that consecutive Israeli governments have rejected peace and chosen confrontation instead.

His Majesty stressed that Palestinians have borne more than 57 years of occupation and oppression, but the brutality of the war on Gaza has forced the world to look closer.

Over the past years of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, the King said the global community had taken the path of least resistance, paying lip service to the two-state solution

“My father was a man who fought for peace to the very end. And, like him, I refuse to leave my children, or your children, a future we have given up on,” His Majesty concluded.

Following is the full text of His Majesty’s speech:

“In the name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful

Mr President,

Mr Secretary General,

Your Excellencies:

Over the past quarter-century, I have stood at this podium amidst regional conflicts, global upheavals, and humanitarian crises that have profoundly tested our global community.

It often feels that there was not a moment when our world was not in turmoil. And yet, I cannot recall a time of greater peril than this.

Our United Nations is facing a crisis that strikes at its very legitimacy and threatens a collapse of global trust and moral authority.

The UN is under attack—literally and figuratively.

For nearly a year, the sky-blue flag flying over UN shelters and schools in Gaza has been powerless to protect innocent civilians from Israeli military bombardment.

UN aid trucks sit motionless just miles away from starving Palestinians. Humanitarian workers who proudly wear the emblem of this institution are disparaged and targeted. And the rulings of the UN’s International Court of Justice are defied, its opinions disregarded.

So it’s no surprise that both inside and outside this Hall, trust in UN’s cornerstone principles and ideals is crumbling.

The harsh reality many see is that some nations are above international law, that global justice does bend to the will of power, and that human rights are selective; a privilege to be granted or denied at will.

We cannot stand for that, and we must recognise that undermining our international institutions and global frameworks is one of the gravest threats to our global security today.

Ask yourselves, if we are not nations united in the conviction that all people are equal in rights, dignity, and worth, and that all countries are equal in the eyes of the law, what kind of world does that leave us with?

Your Excellencies,

The attacks of October 7 on Israeli civilians last year were condemned by countries all over the world, including Jordan, but the unprecedented scale of terror unleashed on Gaza since that day is beyond any justification.

The Israeli government’s assault has resulted in one of the fastest death rates in recent conflicts, one of the fastest rates of starvation caused by war, the largest cohort of child amputees, and unprecedented levels of destruction.

This Israeli government has killed more children, more journalists, more aid workers, and more medical personnel than any other war in recent memory.

And let us not forget the attacks on the West Bank. There, since October 7, the Israeli government has killed more than 700 Palestinians, among them, 160 children. Palestinians held in Israeli detention centres exceed 10,700, including 400 women and 730 children—730 children. Over 4,000 Palestinians have been forced from their homes and lands. Armed settler violence has surged. And entire villages have been displaced.

And in Jerusalem, flagrant violations of the historical and legal status quo at Muslim and Christian Holy Sites continue unabated, under the protection and encouragement of members of the Israeli government.

To be clear, this is in the West Bank, not Gaza.

Almost 42,000 Palestinians have been killed since October 7.

So is it any wonder that many are questioning, how can this war not be perceived as deliberately targeting the Palestinians?

The level of civilian suffering cannot be written off as unavoidable collateral.

I grew up a soldier, in a region that is all too familiar with conflict. But there is nothing familiar about this war and the violence unleashed since October 7.

In the absence of global accountability, repeated horrors are normalised, threatening to create a future where anything is permitted anywhere in the world. Is that what we want?

Now is the time to ensure the protection of the Palestinian people. It is the moral duty of this international community to establish a protection mechanism for them across the occupied territories. This will guarantee the safety of Palestinians and Israelis from extremists who are taking our region to the brink of an all-out war.

That includes those who continue to propagate the idea of Jordan as an alternative homeland. So let me be very, very clear—that will never happen. We will never accept the forced displacement of Palestinians, which is a war crime.

No country in the region benefits from escalation. We have seen that clearly in the dangerous developments in Lebanon over the past few days. This has to stop.

For years, the Arab world has extended a hand to Israel through the Arab Peace Initiative, offering full recognition and normalisation in exchange for peace. But consecutive Israeli governments, emboldened by years of impunity, have rejected peace and chosen confrontation instead.

Impunity gathers force. Left unchecked, it gains momentum.

Palestinians have borne more than 57 years of occupation and oppression. During this time, the Israeli government has been allowed to cross one red line after another.

But now, Israel’s decades-long impunity is becoming its own worst enemy.

And the consequences are everywhere.

The Israeli government has been accused of genocide at the ICJ. Expressions of outrage at its conduct are echoing around the world. Cities everywhere have seen mass protests, and calls for sanctions are growing louder.

International frustration with Israel has long been mounting, but it has never been more exposed.

For decades, Israel has projected itself as a thriving Western-styled democracy in the Middle East.

But the brutality of the war on Gaza has forced the world to look closer.

Now, many see Israel through the eyes of its victims. And the contradiction, the paradox, is too jarring.

The modern, advanced Israel admired from afar, and the Israel that Palestinians have experienced firsthand simply cannot co-exist. Israel will eventually be entirely one or the other.

That is the choice its leaders and its people will have to make. To live by the democratic values of freedom, justice, and equality for all, or to risk further isolation and rejection.

Over and over, we have watched Israel try to achieve security through military means. Each escalation is followed by a pause, until the next, deadlier one.

And for years, the global community has taken the path of least resistance—accepting the status quo of the ongoing military occupation of Palestinians, all the while paying lip service to the two-state solution.

But it has never been more evident that the current status quo is untenable. And, as the International Court of Justice’s advisory opinion underscored two months ago, it is unequivocally illegal.

The Court’s opinion bears a moral imperative to us all. The obligation it carries is one that our nations cannot afford to ignore—for the sake of our world, as well as the future for Palestinians and Israelis alike.

Because both peoples deserve to live their lives in dignity, free of violence and fear.

And the only way to achieve that is a just peace, one grounded in international law, justice, equal rights, and mutual recognition.

That is something we, as nations and people everywhere, can and must unite around.

Your Excellencies,

The world is watching, and history will judge us by the courage we show.

And it’s not just the future that will hold us accountable, so will the people of the here and now.

They will judge whether we, as the United Nations, will surrender to inaction, or will fight to uphold the principles that anchor this institution and our world.

Right now, they are asking whether we will stand by as parents watch their children waste away, as doctors watch their patients die for lack of basic medical supplies, and as more innocent lives are lost, because the world failed to act.

This war must end. Hostages and detainees must return home. But every day we wait is one day too long for far too many.

So I call on all countries to join Jordan in enforcing an international Gaza Humanitarian Gateway—a massive relief effort to deliver food, clean water, medicine, and other vital supplies to those in desperate need. Because humanitarian aid should never be a tool of war.

Whatever our politics, one truth is undeniable—no people should have to endure such unprecedented suffering, abandoned and alone. We cannot surrender the future to those who thrive on division and conflict.

I urge all nations of conscience to unite with Jordan in the critical weeks ahead on this mission.

Almost a year into this war, our world has failed politically, but our humanity must not fail the people of Gaza any longer.

Echoing the words of my father from 64 years ago, at the 15th session of the General Assembly, I pray that this community of nations may have the courage to decide wisely and fearlessly, and will act with the urgent resolve that this crisis and our conscience demand.

My father was a man who fought for peace to the very end. And, like him, I refuse to leave my children, or your children, a future we have given up on.

Thank you.”

The Jordanian delegation at the 79th Session of the UNGA included Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Ayman Safadi, Director of the Office of His Majesty Alaa Batayneh, and Jordan’s Permanent Representative to the UN Mahmoud Hmoud.

[hazardous-waste-containment]

I feel like to many people don't recognise fascism because they think fascism will arrive selling oppression and tyranny, but if you're part of the privileged group fascism is selling you safety, normalcy, and tradition

With regard to this (see also that Michael Rosen poem), it’s one of those very basic, inchoate, vibes-based misconceptions about fascism to the point that it feels almost silly or missing-the-point to try and correct it with definitions and history – I don’t know if OP even has a specific meaning of fascism in mind, and the sentiment being expressed isn’t without merit as it applies to the wider authoritarian right – but it should be addressed somewhere because when people hear this they’re at least vaguely thinking of the Axis.

–

The most direct counter here would be that the movement of squadrismo that primarily carried Mussolini to power in 1921–22 was one of insurrectionary terror which lionized danger and youthful rebellion and daring acts of violence, openly aiming to annihilate the Socialists, establish a dictatorship, and throw out the liberal politicians. There was a bit of tradition and romanità to their aesthetic (like the fasces or the neologism duce) but ‘safety’ and ‘normalcy’ could not be further from the ethos of what was in 1922 the most politically decisive part of the Fascist movement.

Other factions included the national syndicalists who organized Fascist unions and wanted a social revolution to, if not overthrow the bourgeoisie, at least give workers a genuinely equal and independent share in political power, and the more marginal futurists, on a perpetual quest for radical new horizons. No safety, normalcy, or tradition here, though it’s also true that both camps, national syndicalists in particular, didn’t explicitly want to create a tyranny either and styled themselves as democratic and progressive. The point is less about the status quo vs tyranny dichotomy than about the status quo vs radicalism in general: in either case, the Fascists were not trying to look safe or normal.

To the right of the original Fascists, Alfredo Rocco’s Italian Nationalist Association likewise hated Liberal Italy and promoted a total end to parliamentarism, but also preached law, stability, and a controlled transformation from above with no change to the social hierarchy, had closer links to the establishment but little popular support, and did not merge with the PNF until 1923, though of course it then came to massively influence Fascism’s more conservative character in power.

–

National Socialism is more ambiguous because NSDAP messaging was wildly diverse and often very opportunistic – e.g. Hitler was clear about the need for massive territorial expansion to the east in Mein Kampf, yet the Nazis still mobilized significantly on the slogan that “National Socialism means peace!” Nazism promised young people a bold new world and independence from stifling family life, even while it promised their parents a staunch defense of Christian family values (both were kind of true, both were kind of lies). In some places virulent antisemitism was integral to mobilization, in others it was downplayed as too frightening. And so on.

It is true that Nazi electoral support (which was more important than in Italy) came mostly from the dislocated Protestant middle class, who had abandoned the mainstream liberal parties and saw the NSDAP as a patriotic anti-Marxist movement that would rebuild the economy and restore traditional values. But even so, there’s the unavoidable fact of the SA, a violent mass militia based in the working class, which beat up leftists but also resented the bourgeoisie and scared elite circles as too unruly and extreme (hence it was briefly banned along with the Red Front by the right-wing Brüning government).

–

The Spanish Falange was a movement of radical university students influenced by Italian national syndicalism, very marginal and esoteric prior to the outbreak of civil war precisely because of the experimentalism of their ideas; it was the mainstream conservative CEDA that successfully presented itself as a defense of stability and tradition. In a sense the balance of support was reversed in Hungary and Romania, where the deep unpopularity of the ruling conservatives (plus the absence of the left) opened space for the Hungarists and Legionaries to build mass movements by promising revolutionary changes to their countries’ impoverished lower classes. Of the above the most ‘traditional’ were the Legion who strongly upheld the peasantry’s religious culture and agrarian way of life, but this was within the wider context of plans for radical land reform and mass insurgency.

I could go on, and every individual case is nuanced and different appeals were used at different times, but I think this bit in The Brown Plague captures the point really well, even if what I’m suggesting goes further than Guérin would have:

“You see, we’re pitted against each other. Our passions are so white-hot that occasionally we kill each other, but deep down we want the same thing...”

“Really?”

“Yes, the same thing, a new world, radically different from today’s, a world that no longer destroys coffee and wheat while millions go hungry, a new system. But some believe adamantly that Hitler will provide this, while others believe it will be Stalin. That’s the only difference between us.”

And that’s why in the barracks, before the lights went out, an old vagabond road song which the Nazi intoned with as much conviction as the Socialist or Communist would resound from some fifty sonorous breasts:

As we walk along side by side / And sing the ancient airs / Which the forests echo back / Then, we feel, it has to happen:

With us will come new times! / With us will come new times!

The unanimity was barely shattered by the discord of three antagonistic cries shouted in unison as if to say goodnight or issue a final challenge:

“Heil Hitler!”

“Freiheit!”

“Rotfront!”

[the-travelling-witch]

HOLLY LISTEN!

Massive brainrot came over me when I was supposed to study (a dustofthedailylife classic right here).

But anyway... Imagine

IDOL Modern AU with Childe (because he kinda strikes me as the type of guy to be one) or the Anemo crew since they're essentially a boy and already.

Maybe you're leading a small shop in your local town (coffee shop/bakery maybe?). And he comes to your town as part of his tour, then slowly falls for you and happens to come by your shop more often, telling himself it's because he likes what you offer but secretly just wishes to see you. And you're a big fan of him but need to try your hardest to keep your cool when he swings by.

Also also, this is totally an excuse for more tattooed/pierced Childe and Xiao. Totally don't mean to further enable those thought for you /s

I'm trying to get into writing modern AUs and this just randomly hit me and because Anemo boys and Childe were involved I was like "I gotta tell Holly this!)

no, dust, you don’t understand i‘ve already been thinking about how to rope childe into my little modern au and fr, idol!childe was one of the top thoughts the amount of fanart i see for this concept oh boy

oh the constant struggle of writing my phone number on his order or not… am i bold and potentially scare him away bc i‘m too dense to pick up on his hints or do i shy away from the thought and miss my chance; after all, idols only stay in one town for so long

but the privilege to be one of the only people who get to see his genuine smile, one that lights up the blue of his eyes and crinkles the skin around them… i‘d swoon more than i already did before!!

oohhh imagine him coming in in disguise -like black cap, sunglasses and mask- and at the register he pulls down his sunglasses a little to wink at me~ even though i already recognised him the second he set foot into the shop

*banging my head onto the desk* this is NOT helping me focus on what i really should be writing hnghhh

no, of course not, you‘d never enable me, pfff what are you even talking about

seriously, modern aus are so fun