#New Education Paradigm

[blacknarrative]

"Justice for @BrotherAbdul Muhammad: Reclaiming Honor, Unveiling Truth" https://www.youtube.com/live/Pmk75G1Uaak?si=vKmfmI8f-Je-lisQ

#neweducationalparadigm #PublicSchools #Education #BlackYouth #Farrakhan #Islam

[in-sightpublishing]

Dr. Nasser Yousefi and Baran Yousefi on the Peace School

Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen Publication (Outlet/Website): The Good Men Project Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2024/08/16 The Peace School is new in Canada, founded and accredited by the Ontario Ministry of Education in 2023. Currently, the school has five children with a capacity for 120 and is well-financed and supported by the parents whose children attend. The school’s pedagogy has…

[shamballalin]

Light Energy ~ You Are Light ~ You Are Love

Imagine a glass of water filled to the brim on a table in front of you. Now try to add more water to the glass. The glass cannot contain any more water without spilling, but you try anyway to force the glass to take on more water. Water spills out of the glass and onto the table as you attempt to do this. There are reasons 18-year old students graduate and leave home to pursue further studies.…

[trans-axolotl]

ID: Intersex activist Max Beck standing in front of the American Academy of Pediatrics with a sign that says Silence=Death.

On October 26th, 1996, the first ever protest for intersex liberation in America took place when activists from Hermaphrodites With Attitude took to the streets to protest the American Academy of Pediatrics. Later memorialized as intersex awareness day, this important action was a milestone for the American intersex movement. Max Beck, one of the intersex activists from HWA, documented the entire protest and later published their recollection in the Intersex Awakening Issue of the Chrysalis Journal. The full piece is pasted under the cut.  

"But we’re here today to say we’re back, we’re no longer lost, and we’d like to offer some feedback. We’re here to say that the treatment paradigm for “managing” intersexuals is in desperate, urgent need of re-examination. We’re back to say that early surgical intervention leads to more than “just” physical scars and sexual dysfunction. We’re back to say that the lack of education and counseling for intersexuals, our families and the community at large does not lead to a blissful, healthy, well-adjusted ignorance. Rather, it too often leads to a life-threatening shroud of silence, secrecy, and self-hatred. 

I’m here representing over one hundred fifty intersexals throughout North America. One hundred fifty intersexuals are saying: Please! Listen! You doctors, you pediatric endocrinologists and urologists treating intersexuals, you nurses interacting with intersexuals and their families, listen to us! We understand intersexuality, not because we have studied the medical literature — although many of us have — not because we have performed surgeries, but because we have been grappling with intersexuality every day of our lives. We’re here to say that those who would have us believe that intersexuality is rare, cloud the issue by breaking us and separating us into narrow etiological categories which have little meaning in terms of our actual, lived experience. 

We’re here so that other intersexuals can find us — for many of us, finding others like ourselves has been a lifealtering, even life-saving, experience. We’re here to reach parents before their intersex child is born. We’re here to elicit the help of other sympathetic professionals. We can take a stand as openly intersex adults without being crushed by shame! And we did!" 

Hermaphrodites With Attitude Take to the Streets: By Max Beck, 1997

In late October of 1996, Hermaphrodites with Attitude took to the streets, in the first public demonstration by intersexuals in modern history. On a glorious fall day, the like of which you can only find in New England, under a crackling, cloudless sky, twenty-odd protesters joined forces to picket the Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Pediatricians in Boston. Deeply aware of the historical and personal significance of the action, and — correctly — surmising that a notebook diary would not be practical on such a whirlwind, windy week-end, I took a small hand-held tape recorder with me. What follows are excerpts from the resulting transcript.

October 24, 1996 2:45 PM, Atlanta’s Hartsfield International Airport

The trip has only just begun and I am already exhausted. Hot. Starving. Fifteen minutes until take-off. Every businessman boarding the plane looks like a pediatric endocrinologist, Boston-bound. Silly thought, testimony to what? My anxiety? My fear? My giddy anticipation? If these bespectacled, suit-and-tie sporting men were pediatricians, would they be flying coach on Continental, with a layover in Newark? I’m headed for Boston, for the Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Pediatricians (AAP). Tens of thousands of pediatricians. I’m not a pediatrician, though, nor am I a nurse; in fact, I barely managed to complete my B.A. I’m a manager of a technical laboratory. We don’t work with children, and the AAP certainly didn't invite me, so why am I going?

With the plane taxiing toward take-off, this is a lousy time to reassess. I’m going. I’m going because I am intersexed. I’m going because the doctors and nurses who treated me as an infant and a child and an adolescent, and those who continue to treat intersexed infants and children today, consider me “lost to follow-up.” I was lost— that’s part of the problem. Now, I’m back.

9:02 PM: Boston’s North End

I’m comfortably ensconced in Alice’s warehouse condo in Boston’s North End, a renovated warehouse with a view of the city skyline, ceilings easily twenty feet high, exposed beams and brick, gorgeous tile floor. As I speak, my hostess is preparing an absolutely phenomenal meal. The aroma of roasted peppers permeates the entire space. Tomorrow, the work begins; my project this evening is to unwind and enjoy this wonderful meal. Easier said than done. I’m feeling excited, enervated, I feel very alive, something I don’t feel very often, I feel very present and aware. It could be my exhaustion, it could be the Chardonnay. But I think, rather, that the excitement is anticipation about what we are about to do. Being here, finally being prepared to raise a voice, to be heard, to be seen, a vocal, out, proud hermaphrodite who is standing up to say, “Let’s rethink this, this isn’t working, we’ve been hurt, stop what you’re doing, listen to us!” I’m really looking forward to meeting Morgan at the airport in the morning; it’s always amazing to make eye contact with someone else who has been there.

October 25, 7:38 AM Boston Commons

En route to my encounter with the AAP, walking the approximately two miles from my hostess’ domicile to the Marriott Hotel at Copley Square, I pause in the Boston Commons to enjoy a park bench, to sip my Starbuck’s decaf, and to watch a group of senior citizens performing Japanese swordsmanship on top of the hill beneath a monument to some forgotten general. The city is cool this morning, but clear, and it promises to be a beautiful weekend. That’s good: we won’t be rained out. I’ve got a stack of about ninety ISNA brochures in the bag at my side, crammed in the inside pocket of my leather jacket. If I want these pamphlets to get inside, I’ve got to get to the site of the Nurses’ Panel at the Marriott before they close the doors. Then it’s back out to the airport, to pick up Morgan. My feet are already killing me.

October 26, 9:15 AM: North End

Morgan and I are sitting at our hostess’ breakfast table, pulling our thoughts together. In a few minutes, we’ll have to leave to pick up Riki at the airport. The logistics of pulling together an action are mind-boggling. There’s no describing the thrill, though, of all that work, all those phone calls, all those miles. Riding a clattering subway on a Saturday morning, seated beside another living, breathing, laughing, swearing intersexual, hugging near-strangers at unfamiliar airports, then riding back, together, defiant, determined, organized, to the heart of so much of our pain, so much of our anger, so much of our need. We gathered in front of the huge Hynes Auditorium, pamphlets and leaflets in hand, and met the AAP attendees as they left the convention center for lunch. The next hour-and-a-half was a blur, as we positioned ourselves in strategic locations before the Hynes, held signs and “Hermaphrodites with Attitude” banner aloft, distributed our literature, engaged AAP members and passers-by in conversation and debate, spoke to microphones, to cameras. In all that time, I recorded only one fragment of a breathless sentence. 

Saturday, 12:20 PM Outside the Hynes

We’ve got all the exits covered, and it’s an incredible, incredibly empowering experience. I remember the words I spoke to the TV camera, if only because I had scribbled a rough outline on the airplane, pirating mightily from Cheryl’s press release. And because the moment was so salient, so real. Me, Max, bespectacled, with blisters on my feet and chapped lips, speaking out to untold numbers of invisible viewers (and a few bewildered pediatricians behind me.)

"When an intersex child is born, parents and caregivers are faced with what seems to be a terrible dilemma: here is an infant who does not fit what our society deems normal. Immediate medical intervention seems indicated, in order to spare the parents and the child the inevitable stigmatization associated with being different. Yet the infant is not facing a medical emergency; intersexuality is rarely if ever life-threatening. Rather, the psychosocial crisis of the parents and caregivers is medicalized. 

Intersexuality is assumed to be a birth defect which can be corrected, outgrown and forgotten. The experiences of members of the intersex support groups indicate that intersexuality cannot be fixed; an intersex infant grows up to be an intersex adult. This hasn’t been explored, because intersex patients are almost invariably “lost to follow-up.” The abstract of a talk that will be given at this very conference by a doctor who treats intersex infants concedes that “the psychological issues surrounding genital reconstruction are inadequately understood.”

Part of the problem is that we were lost to follow-up, and there were reasons for that. But we’re here today to say we’re back, we’re no longer lost, and we’d like to offer some feedback. We’re here to say that the treatment paradigm for “managing” intersexuals is in desperate, urgent need of re-examination. We’re back to say that early surgical intervention leads to more than “just” physical scars and sexual dysfunction. We’re back to say that the lack of education and counseling for intersexuals, our families and the community at large does not lead to a blissful, healthy, well-adjusted ignorance. Rather, it too often leads to a life-threatening shroud of silence, secrecy, and self-hatred. I’m here representing over one hundred fifty intersexals throughout North America.

One hundred fifty intersexuals are saying: Please! Listen! You doctors, you pediatric endocrinologists and urologists treating intersexuals, you nurses interacting with intersexuals and their families, listen to us! We understand intersexuality, not because we have studied the medical literature — although many of us have — not because we have performed surgeries, but because we have been grappling with intersexuality every day of our lives. We’re here to say that those who would have us believe that intersexuality is rare, cloud the issue by breaking us and separating us into narrow etiological categories which have little meaning in terms of our actual, lived experience. We’re here so that other intersexuals can find us — for many of us, finding others like ourselves has been a lifealtering, even life-saving, experience. We’re here to reach parents before their intersex child is born. We’re here to elicit the help of other sympathetic professionals. We can take a stand as openly intersex adults without being crushed by shame! And we did!

7:20 PM: Boston’s North End

Goddess, this is so sweet, so liberating! I was so reluctant a week ago, having my Jesus-in-Gethsemane experience, reluctant to accept — not an onus or responsibility but — to accept who I am. And here’s where the hard work really begins. I’m exhausted when I think of the road before us. But then, it’s nothing like the road behind us. 

Max Beck, 1997.

[autball]

Part 1 of a 5 part series about the ways harmful practices are being made to sound more appealing through the co-opting of language and how to spot the differences between helpful and harmful approaches.

The language of the Neurodiversity Paradigm is soooo hot right now. Everyone from ABA centers to social media creators are adopting it to sound like they’re safer and more knowledgeable than they are.

But you can’t just pop some neuro-word in place of “autism” and stop picking on a couple of Autistic traits and call yourself “Neuro-affirming.” That’s the low-hanging fruit of #neurodiversitylite.

REAL Neuro-affirming practice comes from a complete shift in mindset, unlearning all the harmful things you once thought were true, and learning about all the things you never even knew you didn’t know. It’s also an ongoing process, not just something you can learn from reading an article or taking a single training.

ABA practitioners are probably the worst offenders right now, mainly because they know they need to rebrand as more and more people learn about what ABA really does to people, but also because their practices in particular are THE furthest away from being Neuro-affirming compared to any other discipline.

They are not the only ones, though, so be wary of #neurodiversitylite in ANY resource aimed at autistic people that appears to be saying all the right things, including: OT, speech, play/talk therapy, early intervention, education, your favorite parenting expert or social media personality who just discovered the world of Neurodiversity, etc.

Look beyond someone’s use of the “right” words or symbols. Do they talk about teaching people to fit into the normative world, or how to more safely and authentically navigate a world not made for them? Do they talk about making the person easier to deal with, or making life easier for the person? Do they concentrate on external behaviors, or are they more concerned with internal experiences? Does most of what they know come from people who studied autistic people from the outside looking in, or from actual autistic people who can speak from lived experience? And are they even using the words right??

The good news is that there are SO MANY resources out there BY autistic and otherwise Neurodivergent people for anyone who wants to learn how to make their practice *actually* more Neuro-affirming. SO MANY!! Three such resources are featured in the second panel from Autism Level UP, Neurowild, and Kieran Rose-The Autistic Advocate. (Big thanks to them for letting me include their work in the cartoon!)

EXPLANATION OF WHAT’S WRONG IN THE “FAKE” PANEL:

- The phrase “individuals with neurodiversity” misuses the word “neurodiversity” and utilizes person first language. The Neuro-affirming phrase would be “neurodivergent people,” or “autistic people” if they specifically meant autistic people.

- Getting rid of puzzle piece stuff is merely a surface level first step, not an end point.

- Not forcing eye contact and allowing hand-flapping are also only surface level first steps. The fact that they still target other stims means they do not understand the importance or functions of stimming, making them incapable of being Neuro-affirming.

- Social skills training aimed at ND people usually centers NT social skills as the “right way” and frames ND social skills as the “wrong way,” making them shame inducing and not at all affirming.

- “Tolerating distress” most often means “suppressing distress.” Neuro-affirming practice would concentrate on identifying and avoiding triggers, helping the person stay regulated, and teaching the person how to accommodate and advocate for their needs so that they are not distressed in the first place.

- “Sensory desensitization” is not a thing that can be done to someone without harm. It is usually done with exposure therapy, which should not be done TO someone who cannot consent. It is also inappropriate for sensory issues, which tells us they don’t understand sensory processing differences at all.

- The posters: Whole Body Listening is based on neuronormative expectations; “They say I’m neurodiverse” is incorrect usage of the word “neurodiverse” (it should be “neurodivergent”), and “but I say I’m perfect” insinuates that being “neurodiverse” is a bad thing, while the use of the rainbow infinity symbol with such a non-affirming message adds to the dissonance; the ABC’s of Behavior is an indicator that ABA/behaviorism will be used, which is the opposite of Neuro-affirming practice.

EXPLANATION OF WHAT’S RIGHT IN THE “REAL” PANEL:

- The person accurately explains what Neuro-affirming practice looks like, without needing to use (or misuse) any Neurodiversity “buzzwords.”

- Bumper, A Whole Body Learner, is a resource created by Autism Level UP that encourages people to discover what it looks like for them to be ready to learn, acknowledging that there is no one right way to appear attentive.

- The poster by Neurowild indicates that they value difference and neurodiversity and that they know there is no one right way of being.

- They use the Advoc8 Framework, a resource created by Kieran Rose, The Autistic Advocate. Using this framework means they want to help the people they work with achieve Agency, Autonomy, (Self) Acceptance, and Authenticity.

[transmutationisms]

hello! im just finishing up my read of structures of scientific revolutions, which has genuinely been very useful and shifted my understanding of science in a way being around people doing scientific research all day really didn't! i don't have a liberal arts education so i would love to get a sense of (a) what else of the philosophy / history of science canon is worth reading in the original (b) standard review papers or introductory textbooks and (c) critiques of the canon. i understand this is a big ask ofc, so feel free to point me to good depts / syllabi from good courses. thanks :)

yessss such a fun question >:) so, the thing that was so great about 'the structure of scientific revolutions', which i'm sure you've picked up on, is that kuhn pushed historians and philosophers of science to challenge the positivist model of science as a linearly progressive search to 'accumulate knowledge'. the idea of a 'paradigm shift' was itself a paradigm shift at the time; it was an early example of a language for talking about radical change in science without giving into the assumption that change necessarily = 'progress' (defined by national interests, mathematisation, and so forth). this is still an approach that's foundational to history and philosophy of science; it's now taken as so axiomatic that few academics even bother to gloss or defend it in monographs (which raises its own issue with public communication, lol).

where kuhn falls apart more (and this was typical for a philosopher of his era, training, and academic milieu) is in the fact that he never developed any kind of rigorous sociological analysis of science (despite alluding to such a thing being necessary) and you probably also noticed that he makes a few major leaps that indicate he's not fully committed to thinking through the relationship between science and politics. so for example, we might ask, can a paradigm shift ever occur for a reason other than a discovered 'anomaly' that the previous paradigm can't account for? for instance, how do political investments in science and scientific theories affect what's accepted as 'normal science' in a kuhnian sense? are there historical or present cases where a paradigm didn't change even though it persistently failed to explain certain empirical observations or data? what about the opposite, where a paradigm did change, but it wasn't necessarily or exclusively because the new paradigm was a 'better' explanation scientifically? how do we determine what makes an explanation 'better', anyway, especially given that kuhn himself was very much invested in moving beyond the naïve realist position? and on the more sociological side, we can raise issues like: say you're a scientist and you legitimately have discovered an 'anomaly'. how do you communicate that to other scientists? what mechanisms of knowledge production and publication enable you to circulate that information and to be taken seriously? what modes of communication must you use and what credentials or interpersonal connections must you have? what factors cause theories and discoveries to be taken more or less seriously, or adopted more or less quickly, besides just their 'scientific utility' (again, assuming we can even define such a thing)?

again, this is not to shit on kuhn, but to point out that both history and philosophy of science have had a lot of avenues to explore since his work. note that there are a few major disciplinary distinctions here, each with many sub-schools of thought. a 'science and technology studies' or STS program tends to be a mix of sociological and philosophical analysis of science, often with an emphasis on 'technoscience' and much less on historical analysis. a philosophy of science department will be anchored more firmly in the philosophical approach, so you'll find a lot of methodological critique, and a lot of scholarship that seeks to tackle current aporias in science using various philosophical frameworks. a history of science program is fundamentally just a sub-discipline of history, and scholarship in this area asks about the development of science over time, how various forms of thinking came into and out of favour, and so forth. often a department will do both history and philosophy of science (HPS). historians of medicine, technology, and mathematics will sometimes (for arcane scholastic reasons varying by field, training, and country) be anchored in departments of medicine / technology / mathematics, rather than with other faculty of histsci / HPS. but, increasingly in the anglosphere you'll see departments that cover history of science, technology, and mathematics (HSTM) together. obviously, all of these distinctions say more about professional qualifications and university bureaucracy than they do about the actual subject matter; in actuality, a good history of science should virtually always include attention to some philosophical and sociological dimensions, and vice versa.

anyway—reading recs:

there are two general reference texts i would recommend here if you just want to get some compilations of major / 'canonical' works in this field. both are edited volumes, so you can skip around in them as much as you want. both are also very limited in focus to, again, a very particular 'western canon' defined largely by trends in anglo academia over the past half-century or so.

philosophy of science: the central issues (1998 [2013], ed. martin curd & j. a. cover). this is an anthology of older readings in philsci. it's a good introduction to many of the methodological questions and problems that the field has grown around; most of these readings have little to no historical grounding and aren't pretending otherwise.

the cambridge history of science (8 vols., 2008–2020, gen. eds. david c. lindberg & ron numbers). no one reads this entire set because it's long as shit. however, each volume has its own temporal / topical focus, and the essays function as a crash-course in historical methodology in addition to whatever value you derive from the case studies in their own right. i like these vols much more than the curd & cover, but if you really want to dig into the philosophical issues and not the histories, curd & cover might be more fun.

besides those, here are some readings in histsci / philsci that i'd recommend if you're interested. for consistency i ordered these by publication date, but bolded a few i would recommend as actual starting points lol. again some of these focus on specific historical cases, but are also useful imo methodologically, regardless of how much you care about the specific topic being discussed.

Robert M. Young. 1969. "Malthus and the Evolutionists: The Common Context of Biological and Social Theory." Past & Present 43: 109–145.

David Bloor. 1976 [1991]. Knowledge and Social Imagery. Chicago: University of Chicago Press (here is a really useful extract that covers the main points of this text).

Ian Hacking. 1983. Representing and Intervening: Introductory Topics in the Philosophy of Natural Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Steven Shapin. 1988. “Understanding the Merton Thesis.” Isis 79 (4): 594–605.

Steven Shapin and Simon Schaffer. 1989. Leviathan and the Air-Pump: Hobbes, Boyle, and the Experimental Life. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Mario Biagioli. 1993. Galileo, Courtier: The Practice of Science in the Culture of Absolutism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Bruno Latour. 1993. The Pasteurization of France. Translated by Alan Sheridan and John Law. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Margaret W. Rossiter. 1993. “The Matthew Matilda Effect in Science.” Social Studies of Science 23 (2): 325–41.

Andrew Pickering. 1995. The Mangle of Practice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Porter, Theodore M. Trust in Numbers: The Pursuit of Objectivity in Science and Public Life. Princeton University Press, 1996.

Peter Galison. 1997. “Trading Zone: Coordinating Action and Belief.” In The Science Studies Reader, edited by Mario Biagioli, 137–60. New York: Routledge.

Crosbie Smith. 1998. The Science of Energy: A Cultural History of Energy Physics in Victorian Britain. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Chambers, David Wade, and Richard Gillespie. “Locality in the History of Science: Colonial Science, Technoscience, and Indigenous Knowledge.” Osiris 15 (2000): 221–40.

Kuriyama, Shigehisa. The Expressiveness of the Body and the Divergence of Greek and Chinese Medicine. Zone Books, 2002.

Timothy Mitchell. 2002. Rule of Experts: Egypt, Techno-Politics, Modernity. Berkeley: University of California Press.

James A. Secord. 2003. Victorian Sensation: The Extraordinary Publication, Reception, and Secret Authorship of Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation. Chicago: University Of Chicago Press.

Sheila Jasanoff. 2006. “Biotechnology and Empire: The Global Power of Seeds and Science.” Osiris 21 (1): 273–92.

Murphy, Michelle. Sick Building Syndrome and the Problem of Uncertainty: Environmental Politics, Technoscience, and Women Workers. Duke University Press, 2006.

Kapil Raj. 2007. Relocating Modern Science: Circulation and the Construction of Knowledge in South Asia and Europe, 1650–1900. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Schiebinger, Londa L. Plants and Empire: Colonial Bioprospecting in the Atlantic World. Harvard University Press, 2007.

Galison, Peter. “Ten Problems in History and Philosophy of Science.” Isis 99, no. 1 (2008): 111–24.

Daston, Lorraine, and Peter Galison. Objectivity. Zone Books, 2010.

Dipesh Chakrabarty. 2011. “The Muddle of Modernity.” American Historical Review 116 (3): 663–75.

Forman, Paul. “On the Historical Forms of Knowledge Production and Curation: Modernity Entailed Disciplinarity, Postmodernity Entails Antidisciplinarity.” Osiris 27, no. 1 (2012): 56–97.

Ashworth, William J. 2014. "The British Industrial Revolution and the the Ideological Revolution: Science, Neoliberalism, and History." History of Science 52 (2): 178–199.

Mavhunga, Clapperton. 2014. Transient Workspaces: Technologies of Everyday Innovation in Zimbabwe. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Lynn Nyhart. 2016. “Historiography of the History of Science.” In A Companion to the History of Science, edited by Bernard Lightman, 7–22. Chichester, UK: Wiley Blackwell.

Rana Hogarth. 2017. Medicalizing Blackness: Making Racial Difference in the Atlantic World, 1780–1840. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.

Suman Seth. 2018. Difference and Disease: Medicine, Race, and the Eighteenth-Century British Empire. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Aro Velmet. 2020. Pasteur's Empire: Bacteriology and Politics in France, its Colonies, and the World. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

i would also say, as a general rule, these books are generally all so well-known that there are very good book reviews and review essays on them, which you can find through jstor / your library's database. these can be invaluable both because your reading list would otherwise just mushroom out forever, and because a good review can help you decide whether you even need / want to sit down with the book itself in the first place. literally zero shame in reading an academic text secondhand via reviews.

[vivacissimx]

some course correction on visenya targaryen

Current Visenya discourses are flawed because they presuppose forms of patriarchy that didn't exist yet & project it backwards (a trick Fire & Blood actually uses itself, in fact makes it cartoonishly obvious, because that's a mechanism of creating history. Ex. 'Baelon was the natural successor to Aemon and everybody definitely agreed' only for the issue to continue being debated for years to come). So the language of 'usurpation' is used for Visenya when the story that ultimately weaves into the usurpation of a female claimant is only beginning.

The Visenya who crowned Aegon beneath their brand new family heraldic banner, who publicly took on worship of the Seven despite privately continuing to observe Valyrian rites & rituals, is part of a trio who are participating in Westerosi cultural practices so as to legitimize themselves in the eyes of their subject. We are not coming as foreigners who will threaten your ways, it purposely says. These are compromises willingly made but they do not indicate that the Conquerors viewed themselves as within the paradigm of Westeros entirely. Does that even need to be said? They were quite literally a polygamous incestuous union! Their banner is a three-headed dragon, three parts to a whole, not one single dragon to rule them all (and one dragon is what we later see Aegon II use as his banner when he usurps Rhaenyra— indicating that unlike Aegon the Conqueror, he views himself as the one king, & there are no equal partners to him least of all in the form of pesky sisters).

The Visenya who equally participated in military campaigns, lawmaking, judgement, progresses, & holding of Dragonstone/King's Landing did not view herself as being usurped. Neither did this same Visenya show interest in having children until she absolutely had to (with Rhaenys dead and one single sickly heir remaining). The equipoise of the post-Conquest pre-Rhaenys' death years seems to be that Aegon & Visenya were not too fussed about having a child together because thankfully Rhaenys existed between them, Rhaenys who was much more interested/interesting wrt the matter which kept the two elder siblings in peace. As it goes, Rhaenys' death coincides with the fracturing of the Aegon & Visenya relationship. Nonetheless after Rhaenys dies Visenya takes several steps to protect their fledgling dynasty such as military invasion of Dorne for vengeance and to discourage further rebellion, establishing the Kingsguard to protect Aegon who she viewed as perhaps less capable than her, and, yes, getting pregnant herself. When Visenya did have a child, everything she did with Maegor can be viewed in the sense that she was reproducing herself for the next generation. Like Visenya, Maegor's education was a martial one. Like Visenya, he should wield Dark Sister. Like Visenya, he should be part of the heir-apparent-structure by marrying Rhaena (later the Black Bride). Like Visenya, he must show strength when the family is weak, and be in service to their House (by making peace with the Faith by marrying Ceryse Hightower, by putting down rebellion when Aenys couldn't, by returning from exile when Aenys died). Like Visenya, he was allowed to enter a polygamous union (indeed Visenya presided over that ceremony).

[And there are points to be made regarding the Visenya archetype, how Maegor explicitly rejected it in pursuit of his father's legacy, but that's a different round-up.]

Whether Visenya initially foresaw a trio for Maegor, that he'd be a first husband for Rhaena but that perhaps Rhaena could also marry a son of Aenys, brings up a really interesting question as to the nature of plural marriage (whether polyandry was also legitimated by acceptance of Targcest, which had not yet been codified as monogamous by Jaehaerys who notably did not marry both of his sisters— and this question is subtly brought up again mockingly with Saera, more seriously with Rhaenyra). But that's not the point of this post! The point of this post is to say that the nature of the Conqueror trios roles & responsibilities was much more fluid than the language of 'usurpation' allows for. Did Visenya's positioning set the stage for what would ultimately snowball into Rhaenyra's usurpation, a process which relied on Visenya, and Rhaena, and Alysanne, and Rhaenys TQWNW, and so on's circumstances to unfold the way it did? Of course. It's a lineage. But it's an error to say 'things were always that way.' Nothing is ever so flat as that. The point is more that 'one thing led to another.'

[hyperlexichypatia]

What some of y'all call "recovery" and "healing" is just... growing up.

The theme I keep coming back to, the theme I keep writing about over and over, is the inextricability of ableism (specifically neurobigotry) and ageism.

The pathologizing of youth. The infantilizing of disabled adults. The structuring and micromanaging of childhood leading to ever more opportunities for "deviancy" to be classified as "disordered." The "neurological" push to raise the age of majority. The constant framing of disabled parents and caregivers as "unfit" or "bad influences" on children. And on and on.

Ageism and neurobigotry are such an interconnected tangle loop mobius strip that people are using the "healing"/"recovery" framework for basic human maturation.

When you were little, you uncritically accepted the worldview of your parents and other adults in your life, but now that you're older and "recovered," you see it differently?

That's called growing up. You grew up.

When you had less information and experience informing your worldview, you saw things one way, and now that you've "healed," you see things differently?

That's called learning. You learned new information and changed your perspective accordingly.

Look, learning and change and growth and maturation are (or should be) lifelong processes with no endpoint, and one of the cultural factors making people so weird about "maturity" and age of majority issues is the assumption that a "Real Adult" is in their fixed final form. So people think "If I've changed and grown in the past 5 years, that means that 5-years-ago Me was Still A Child and should not have been allowed to make major life-altering decisions," and also think that once they reach An Endpoint, they can or should stop changing. And that's a problem.

But. But. Changes in one's relationship to oneself and one's family of origin are especially common during times of major transition. That's not pathological. That's not even abnormal. If you see the world differently than you did before a major life transition, that does not mean that you went from a diseased state to a nondiseased state ("recovery"), or from an injured state to an uninjured state ("healing"). Time passed. You got older. Everyone else got older. You changed. Other people changed. Your family changed. The social context in which you live changed. The pathology paradigm has no place in this phenomenon.

People are out here saying that "People should heal themselves before they have their own children," and then when asked, what they mean by "heal themselves" is "learn how to effectively communicate with children." That. That is a skill. Learning a skill is not "healing." Lack of a particular skill set is not a disorder you have to "recover" from. You just have to learn the skill.

But that's also why when we say "You don't have to recover from your disabilities, recovery isn't a moral obligation," people say things like "You want to use your disability as an excuse not to change and grow."

My good bitch, what does change and growth have to do with recovery?

And this isn't even a new observation, because people have talked about how parents of developmentally disabled children will credit "therapy" and "recovery" for their children's natural developmental trajectory (if your child gained a skill after a year of intensive therapy, that doesn't mean "the therapy worked," that means they got older and developed the maturation to acquire that skill). A lot of the rhetoric around early childhood education does the same thing (the reason your 6 year old can hold a pencil now and he couldn't last year is because his bones got stronger and his fine motor skills improved, not because his high-quality preschool made him ready to compete).

But this. This is adults doing it to themselves! And it's so very original-sin-coded. You are born Unhealthy, but through continual effort and right practice, you can Recover and Heal.

No! You just grew up!

[misfitwashere]

We thank you, Joe

Tonight is for you

Robert Reich

Aug 19, 2024

Friends,

Tonight’s opening of the Democratic National Convention in Chicago will be an opportunity for the Democratic Party and the nation to take stock of Joe Biden’s term of office and thank him for his service.

He still has five months to go as president, of course, but the baton has been passed.

Biden’s singular achievement has been to change the economic paradigm that reigned since Reagan and return to one that dominated public life between 1933 and 1980 — and is far superior to the one that has prevailed since.

Biden’s democratic capitalism is neither socialism nor “big government.” It is, rather, a return to an era when government organized the market for the greater good.

The Great Crash of 1929 followed by the Great Depression taught the nation a crucial lesson that we forgot after Reagan’s presidency: markets are human creations. The economy that collapsed in 1929 was the consequence of allowing nearly unlimited borrowing, encouraging people to gamble on Wall Street, and permitting the Street to take huge risks with other people’s money.

Franklin D. Roosevelt and his administration reversed this. They stopped the looting of America. They also gave Americans a modicum of economic security. During World War II, they put almost every American to work.

Subsequent Democratic and Republican administrations enlarged and extended democratic capitalism. Wall Street was regulated, as were television networks, airlines, railroads, and other common carriers. CEO pay was modest. Taxes on the highest earners financed public investments in infrastructure (such as the national highway system) and higher education.

America’s postwar industrial policy spurred innovation. The Department of Defense and its Defense Advanced Research Projects Administration developed satellite communications, container ships, and the internet. The National Institutes of Health did trailblazing basic research in biochemistry, DNA, and infectious diseases.

Public spending rose during economic downturns to encourage hiring. Antitrust enforcers broke up AT&T and other monopolies. Small businesses were protected from giant chain stores. Labor unions thrived. By the 1960s, a third of all private-sector workers were unionized. Large corporations sought to be responsive to all their stakeholders.

But then America took a giant U-turn. The OPEC oil embargo of the 1970s brought double-digit inflation followed by Fed Chair Paul Volcker’s effort to “break the back” of it by raising interest rates so high that the economy fell into deep recession.

All of which prepared the ground for Reagan’s war on democratic capitalism. From 1981 onward, a new bipartisan orthodoxy emerged that markets functioned well only if the government got out of the way.

The goal of economic policy thereby shifted from the common good to economic growth, even though Americans already well-off gained most from that growth. And the means shifted from public oversight of the market to deregulation, free trade, privatization, “trickle-down” tax cuts, and deficit reduction — all of which helped the monied interests make even more money.

The economy grew for the next 40 years, but median wages stagnated, and inequalities of income and wealth surged. In sum, after Reagan’s presidency, democratic capitalism — organized to serve public purposes — all but disappeared. It was replaced by corporate capitalism, organized to serve the monied interests.

**

Joe Biden revived democratic capitalism. He learned from the Obama administration’s mistake of spending too little to pull the economy out of the Great Recession that the pandemic required substantially greater spending, which would also give working families a cushion against adversity. So he pushed for and got the giant $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan.

This was followed by a $550 billion initiative to rebuild the nation’s bridges, roads, public transit, broadband, water, and energy systems. He championed the biggest investment in clean energy sources in American history — expanding wind and solar power, electric vehicles, carbon capture and sequestration, and hydrogen and small nuclear reactors. He then led the largest public investment ever made in semiconductors, the building blocks of the next economy. Notably, these initiatives were targeted to companies that employ American workers.

Biden also embarked on altering the balance of power between capital and labor, as had FDR. Biden put trustbusters at the head of the Federal Trade Commission and the Antitrust Division of the Justice Department. And he remade the National Labor Relations Board into a strong advocate for labor unions.

Unlike his Democratic predecessors Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, Biden did not reduce all trade barriers. He targeted them to industries that were crucial to America’s future — semiconductors, electric batteries, electric vehicles. Unlike Trump, Biden did not give a huge tax cut to corporations and the wealthy.

It’s also worth noting that, in contrast with every president since Reagan, Biden did not fill his White House with former Wall Street executives. Not one of his economic advisers — not even his treasury secretary — is from the Street.

The one large blot on Biden’s record is Benjamin Netanyahu. Biden should have been tougher on him — refusing to provide him offensive weapons unless Netanyahu stopped his massacre in Gaza. Yes, I know: Hamas began the bloodbath. But that is no excuse for Netanyahu’s disproportionate response, which has made Israel a pariah and endangered its future. Nor an excuse for our complicity.

***

One more thing needs to be said in praise of Joe Biden. He did something Donald Trump could never do: He put his country over ego, ambition, and pride. He bowed out with grace and dignity. He gave us Kamala Harris.

Presidents don’t want to bow out. Both Richard Nixon and Lyndon Johnson had to be shoved out of office. Biden was not forced out. He did nothing wrong. His problem is that he was old and losing some of the capacities that dwindle with old age.

Even among people who are not president, old age inevitably triggers denial. How many elderly people do you know who accept that they can’t do the things they used to do or think they should be able to do? How many willingly give up the keys to their car? It’s not surprising he resisted.

Yet Biden cares about America and was aware of the damage a second Trump administration could do to this nation, and to the world. Biden’s patriotism won out over any denial or wounded pride or false sense of infallibility or paranoia.

For this and much else, we thank you, Joe.

[streets-in-paradise]

Hello sweetie ^^

First, I hope you're fine, that's the most important thing.

Second, I don't know if you're taking request or anything right now but my mind was wandering and that's what came by itself:

How would Achilles reacts to a girl who's considered by everybody as a freak? Kind of like Belle in Beauty and the Beast?

If you feel like writing something, or just voice me your opinion, I'm pretty curious to see what you think about that.

I wish you a lovely day,

Val 🌸

Welcome back, dear Val !!

I'm fortunately fine, recovering from a cold ( can you believe that i catched a cold twice on the same month? Damn climate change lol). The worst part of it is over because at least the fever stopped, so I don't feel misserable anymore, only very congested.

First of all, let me remind you that Troy requests are allways open. I keep this special treatment for it on my blog because it's the one thing I write about that I know can't be found easily elsewhere. Since the very first reason why I started writing fic was finding no Troy fics, I never close requests for Troy.

Now is the time when I have to tell you that our minds are working as one, cause I have thought so much about this Idea you sent me before.

Would you believe me if I tell you that I requested this very same thing to another (now sadly deactivated) blog a few months ago? I never got to see it, because the blog deactivated before getting to my request, but the point is we got the same Idea!!

I'm gonna do this as a headcanon list followed by a short fic.

Mycenaean civilization was prior to the invention of books, most of the knowledge was passed trough oral transmission, usually by men, and the writing they did was mostly in clay tablets. So, I'm going to keep the curious dreamer bookworm aspect of Belle adapted in ways that would fit with the period.

*clicks play on a Beauty and the Beast soundtrack playlist and starts typing with excitement*

Achilles reacting to a Belle-like town's freak:

Headcanons

-As a start, let's not forget that in Greece he is an invincible warrior and, among the myrmidons in particular, the greatest hero that has ever been.

-He is esentially in the position of Gaston, but without most of his negative traits ( like the anti-intellectualism and chauvinism making him an unlikable dick). Aware of being admired as a paradigm of masculine perfection, he gives the people what they want to see in order to make his legend grow.

-Sure, his arrogance can be insufferable sometimes. The cocky bastard walks in knowing the world worships him, but despite of how badly he enjoys it that's part of his hero acting.

-To a Belle-like girl, he would initially appear like a Gaston given the image that his surface projects. All men wanting to be him, all women wanting to have him, and her looking at the whole thing from afar wondering why.

- Very few close friends and family know him privately ( Patroclus, Eudorus, Odysseus and, of course, his mother). For the rest, he remains a mistery. People adoring him think they know him, but they get to see only what they seek from their celebrity.

-The truth is that he is also a bit of a freak, just no one notices because he is the hero of the place. Achilles may be the most popular guy arround, but he is not a comformist and he loves girls that break the mold. ( canonically in the film, Briseis won him over yelling in a room full of men and cuestioning his morals, remember?)

-Yet, everyone in Phthia is quick to judge you as the great local mistery. Girl in age to find a husband, commented to be the most beautifull maiden in the land, but of undeniable strange ways.

-If you would be found following artists, healers, scribes or travellers, it was never on the hope of finding a husband.

-What you wanted was stories, news and knowledge. In his youth, your father had gone in tons of trade trips and his stories inspired you curiosity for the outside world from an early age. He had educated you by himself through the culture a trader adquires with many years of experience in the profession.

-You had a way with words, and to a sweet look of yours and a kind ask many men were willing to instruct you in whatever topic you would want to know about. Some of the few educated men on the city valued your curiosity and showed themselves genuinely friendly to you and your crave for learning.

-Given that Phthia was famous on the country as a land of warriors, this ocassional bonding with a few intellectuals arround was not enough for you to not be perceived as an outcast. The city lammented behind your back how such beauty was wasted in a weird girl whose fingertips were allways stained of wet clay from all the writing.

-Favorite topic of gossiping on the market, or among the groups of women doing laundry near the river shore, you had became infamous as the small town's rarity. People felt bad for your father, claiming he would end up burdened with a spinster till the end of his days, and attributed the blame to the lack of a feminine presence in the home.

-Everyday their stories grew bigger in their attempt to understand you. Stares would follow you everywhere, expectant for the next strange occurence of yours they would get to witness.

-At some point you began to embrace it and seek to confuse your neighbors on purpose. Whenever they would bring up the unconfortable topic with insidious hypocrite subtility, you would respond cheerfully with some more unapologetical rambling you knew that would bore them so they would leave you be.

-Comments lead Achilles to you, since the ill-famed tales of the scandals your reactions cause are the perfect contrast of his celebrated feats.

-The stories he heard did make you look like weirdo, but he could tell you weren't neccesarily the city's calamity. Just a clever, curious girl wanting to be listened. Patroclus confirmed that assumption admitting when asked that you were the first one showing interest in the verses he had been composing and you both have been sharing poetry ocassionally since then.

-Always keeping his cousin away from it under your expressed request, he even defended you from the unfair accusations whenever he could.

-Achilles is thrilled, and soon starts searching for you because he is very curious about meeting you.

-The noises of a crowded market in the morning don't warn you of his arrival like the merry sounds of girls softening the tone of their voices saluting his name in hopes of being noticed.

-Thinking he would stop there, you ignore that and continue your walk, but a strange panic takes over you when you notice he didn't.

-What could he possibly want from you? Was it perhaps because you were the only young girl who wasn't abandoning her daily duties to mindlessly stare at him passing by? His usual admirors were staring daggers at you, unaware that their disbelief was yours too.

-He is not stopping, so you turn back to confront him first and within the very first face to face encounter he is already giving you THAT smile.

-Not the cocky one of when he is about to repeat for a hundred time the story of one of his victories. The softer, more welcoming one.

Blurb

What you considered a defensive attitude was hilariously sweet to him. Achilles knew he couldn't expect any less from the beggining given how used you were to being judged by everyone, but that didn't disencourage him.

Arms crossed and a glance of annoyance, only awaiting for an explanation for his not so subtle irruption.

" May I help you?"

Tales failed to accurately describe your beauty, and anger suited you better than what he could forsee. He almost felt bad for spoiling your morning, if that was how you felt about him.

" Indeed, i'm looking for a talented local poetress whose work I got recommended. "

His young cousin being the only attentive audience of your ramblings would someday bring you trouble, and the day seemed to have arrived.

" I don't do epic poetry, my poems are about the simple realities of common people and I nurture my inspiration on the everyday life ... with brief incursions on romantic poetry. In either case, I doubt it would be good enough for the amusement of a great warrior like you. "

He knew exactly what you were trying to do: extending your explanation in a convulsive language hoping he would get bored and leave.

" I like how you speak, I think I could sit at some quiet spot on the beach to hear you talk all day."

The flirting was becoming more obvious, but you trusted in your capacity to politely get rid of him.

" And what could we possibly talk about, may I ask? At risk of hurting your infamous pride, I must say battle stories don't interest me that much."

Being underestimated hurted his pride, but he understood that to get your attention he would have to leave it behind.

" How about history, art, religion, medicine, poetry, music? I play lyre, but I rarely do it in public. What's your favorite instrument? "

The crushing subversion of your expectations made you feel very ashamed. It's not like you actively wanted to misjudge him, but the arrogant man parading across the city that was his typical public self usually left little space for imagination.

" Actually, I have never been taught how to play any. "

Achilles tucked a golden stand of his hair behind his ear like if he would be seeking for an even better visual range to glance at you.

" We can fix that, If you want. "

Exquisitely polite, and you couldn't believe your ears.

" I would love to! ... But I insist in repaying the lessons teaching you something else in exchange. "

He suspected that the mere sight of excitement in your beautifull face as you would explain deep into a topic that interested you would be more than enough payment for whatever he could show you.

" Polymele once described in horror to me what you told her about the strange mortuary rituals of the egyptians. I suspect she didn't transmitted it with accuracy, because you lost her in the evisceration part. "

You chuckled, facing your guilt.

" Do you really want me to describe it again for you?"

In a subtle move seeking proximity, he offered to pick the small basket you carried to see if you would be receptive of his company.

" Why not? Do you sincerely think it could gross me? Or that I could care for the loosing of your lady-like ways? You natural self seems way more interesting that whatever facade the people reclaims you to try fitting in. "

It made you smile and, to his surprise, you took his free hand in clear acceptance for the proposition.

Becoming the envy of every girl for being seen with him didn't matter to you at all, because you couldn't deviate at any moment your focus from the excellent conversation you were having.

Achilles was full of surprises and he made you crave to keep discovering more.

[gothhabiba]

Metaphors are pervasive in the language of science. Scientists regularly engage in analogical reasoning to develop hypotheses and interpret results, and they rely heavily on metaphors to communicate observations and findings (1). In turn, nonexperts make sense of, and contextualize, abstract ideas and new knowledge through the use of metaphors. While indispensable heuristic tools for doing, communicating, and understanding science, metaphors can also impede scientific inquiry, reinforce public misunderstandings, and perpetuate unintended social and political messages (2). For these reasons, it is especially important for scientists, science communicators, and science educators to acknowledge the conceptual, social, and political dimensions of metaphors in science and adopt critical perspectives on their use and effects.

[...]

Embodied cognition perspectives shed light on the imperative of metaphor in scientific thought and communication. Conceptual frameworks and theoretical models in science are rooted in the same embodied understandings of the world as those unconsciously employed in other day-to-day physical and social interactions (6). Scientific reasoning, then, is situated in what Gerhard Vollmer (21) refers to as the mesocosm, or the “section of the real world we cope with in perceiving and acting, sensually and motorically” (p. 89). Building on Vollmer’s work (as well as Lakoff and Johnson’s conceptual metaphor theory), Niebert and Gropengießer (17) argue that, because the human perceptual system is not well suited to interpreting macrocosmic (e.g., the biosphere, solar systems, galaxies) and microcosmic (e.g., cells, molecules, atoms) phenomena, scientists regularly turn to metaphors, grounded in mesocosmic experiences, to make sense of observations and communicate ideas. They explain:

Though the use of metaphorical language in science has been historically criticized by some philosophers of science and scientists on the grounds that metaphors are figurative, ambiguous, and imprecise, their generative potential cannot be ignored. It is, in fact, metaphor that makes theory possible, and a great number of scientific revolutions have been initiated through novel comparisons between natural phenomena and everyday experiences (3).

Limitations of metaphors in science communication

Metaphors in biology and ecology are so ubiquitous that we have to some extent become blind to their existence. We are inundated with metaphorical language, such as genetic “blueprints,” ecological “footprints,” “invasive” species, “agents” of infectious disease, “superbugs,” “food chains,” “missing links,” and so on. While we may not be able to conceptualize, or communicate, abstract scientific phenomena without employing such metaphors, we must also recognize their limitations, as well as their potential to constrain interpretations of natural processes. In many ways, the metaphors we rely upon may uphold and reinforce outdated scientific paradigms, contributing to public misunderstandings about complex scientific issues.

–"On the Problem and Promise of Metaphor Use in Science and Science Communication." Cynthia Taylor* and Bryan M. Dewsbury. J Microbiol Biol Educ. 2018; 19(1): 19.1.46. Published online 2018 Mar 30. doi: 10.1128/jmbe.v19i1.1538.

[beatmyfeet]

Committing to Change, Embracing the Gynarchic Wedding Ring

In a world not so distant from ours, the societal understanding of relationships has undergone a drastic evolution. Traditional paradigms of relationship dynamics have given way to a more inclusive and diverse understanding of love, commitment, and responsibility. In this evolved world, gynarchic relationships have gained prominence and acceptance.

Under a radiant sun, Anna and David stood at the heart of the town square, the location of the new amphitheater dedicated to weddings. Surrounded by friends, family, and onlookers, they were ready to publicly declare their commitment. The officiant began, "In this new world, where love knows no boundaries and where we understand that power dynamics are a natural part of human relationships, we gather today to witness the gynarchic marriage of Anna and David."

David, with palpable sincerity, stated, "Anna, I commit to respecting you and following your guidance, to support you in every decision, and to value the unique dynamic we've chosen. I commit to serving you devotedly, always placing your wishes and needs at the core of our union." Anna, with a voice both strong and gentle, replied, "David, I commit to guiding you with wisdom, to protect you, and to be the stabilizing force in our relationship. I will cherish the trust you place in me and will always ensure that our relationship remains balanced and nourishing for both of us."

The ceremony, though untraditional by historical standards, was not unique in this society. Gynarchic relationships had become commonplace. Men openly expressing their submissive tendencies, and women taking on dominant roles, were simply another accepted form of love and commitment.

This transformation didn't happen overnight. It began with grassroots movements and communities where individuals felt free to express their desires and relationship dynamics. Gradually, the media took interest, portraying gynarchic relationships in movies, series, and literature, thereby promoting their acceptance.

Educational institutions played their part by introducing courses on diverse relationship dynamics, ensuring that younger generations grew up with an open-minded perspective. Celebrities and influential figures revealing their gynarchic relationships also advanced the narrative, making these relationships both contemporary and aspirational.

Of course, challenges arose. Many feared this shift, believing it undermined traditional values. But as more and more people understood that these dynamics were simply expressions of love, mutual respect, and consent, the apprehensions faded. Over time, the essence of a relationship shifted from who held power to mutual understanding, trust, and compatibility.

Exiting the amphitheater hand in hand, Anna and David were cheered by the crowd. Their union was not only a testament to their love but also a symbol of societal progress. Men wishing to be submissive were no longer confined to the shadows. They could be open with their spouses and society without fear of judgment.

In this reimagined society, people recognized that the true strength of a relationship didn't lie in dominance or submission, but in the ability to understand, respect, and cherish one another's desires. The world had learned to value the diversity of human relationships, and in doing so, had become a place where love truly knew no limits.

[dailyanarchistposts]

FIGHTING FUTURORITY

1. Futurority is the promise of civilization that the human species will continue.

2. Moreover, it is the promise that the 'right' human species will continue.

3. Beyond the promise, it is also the force that it MUST continue.

4. It is white, cis, and hetro; it is the nuclear family and 2.5 children- the house in the suburbs, and the promise of university educated grandchildren to blast into space.

5. Futurority is another way in which we are forced to live forever.

6. It is the legacy of humanity, but also it is the legacy of individual beings, therefore it involves applying force not only to societies reproduction but also to the reproductive capacities of individuals.

7. The force to reproduce civilization and its disciples is applied differently to different individuals but wherever it exists, it is always forced.

8. Sometimes reproducing civilization implies sterilization (for undesirables such as drug addicts, trans people etc), and other times it implies forced reproduction (denial of abortion, heterosexual indoctrination in schools, assimilation of queer sexualities into reproductive logics etc).

9. Historically and currently, this force is disproportionately applied to women and gender non conforming people; placing responsibility of reproduction and maintenance of life squarely in their hands, or wombs.

10. The program of severing women from the knowledge of herbal abortives[6], the rape and forced impregnation of black women during chattel slavery[7] (in order to produce more slaves), and the extraction of genetic materials and then sterilization of trans "patients" are all examples of this force.

11. Abortion is still illegal in many countries worldwide, and even when it is accessible rigid state guidelines are applied and the possibility to abort outside of the medical industrial complex is almost universally illegal; likewise infanticide is universally criminalized.

12. Individuals are separated from their own bodies, from the right to self determine their reproduction (or especially their non reproduction). Sexual organs capable of reproducing, are ultimately the property of the state- whether or not it chooses to exercise its ownership in a given moment.

13. The negative connotations imbued in such desperate characters as the lonely childless old women, the evil solitary gay men, and the pathetic street transsexual are all folklore troupes which (re)enforce the psychic pressure to reproduce rather than die alone or in shame.

14. A perhaps esoteric though none the less real example of the application of this force can be seen in the numerous Reddit threads and National Geographic 'exposes' on "natures worst mothers". Panda infanticide, for example, occurs in an extremely high number of pregnancies (Panda mothers regularly produce 2 infants during a pregnancy and in this case will kill or abandon at least one[8]), yet we are constantly bombarded with the idea that conserving Panda life is a worthwhile cause- the 'cute' panda bastion of conservationists worldwide, bestower of great revenue to domesticators and zoo keepers alike may also provide a shining light in exposing the application of force inherent in futurority; after all whoever heard of a forced breeding program for the Lichen Weevil[9]?

15. Civilization reproduces that which is of value to it and destroys all life which is not.

16. The continuum of futurority always implies the absorption of each new life into the horrors of domination, every new individual born is the property and product of domination, the new recipient of safety, the next candidate for immortality- the latest lamb to the slaughter.

17. Perhaps dominations cleverest tactic, has been to deny simultaneously self determination, and selectively prevent the reproduction of specific communities/groups- making reproduction appear (and in some cases genuinely be) an act of resistance- this paradigm continues to provide civilization with all the bio and necro political material it needs for its own manifestation.

18. When standing on the edge of a precipice between the seeming certainty of the collapse of the current epochs form and the horrific new world which may rise in its ashes- it is sometimes incomprehensible as to why individuals reproduce at all.

19. In the spiraling collapse, the decomposition, the apocalypse (however you choose to name the moment humanity currently finds itself at the center of) the potential for lines of fractious conflictuality to appear in the sphere of reproductive futurority seem infinite and alluring.

20. Yet thus far, the discursive and practical possibilities contained within world ending are ignored in favor of clinging to the idea of survival (and by extension reproduction).

21. The technophiles and modern day prophets of climate change denial dream of emergent colonies on mars, humanist expansion with technological aid, new life born off planet but inside the same civilization[10]; whilst a haphazard brigade of similarly dreamy ideologues on the so called left[11] fight an increasingly meaningless discursive battle against extinction- preaching moderation and 'ecology' in the name of continuing the species.

22. In the end both sides, though they may posture and present themselves endlessly in conflict are merely two sides of the same civilized coin.

23. Whether Eco-fascism or Techno-fascism will rule the next phase of decomposition changes little, the force of reproduction will inevitably remain under either condition though perhaps with mildly different parameters (the co-facists for example will likely place restrictions on the number of beings one can (re)produce especially on those inhabiting the 'global south'[12], whilst the Techno-fascists will likely see greater benefit in having those same persons (re)produce an endless supply of workers for Martian extractivism or other dangerous and brutal off planet projects[13]).

24. Though these realties may sound far off, extreme, or polarized, signs of there becoming already appear in the here and now and are far from 'extreme' when one considers the whole history of civilization in all its horror.

25. These gruesome yet moderate/modest continuations of 'business as usual' under new flags or ideologies will prove little more meaningful than rearranging chairs on the titanic- and ultimately both exist within the same sinking ship of 'civilized' humanity.

26. Of course, reducing all the future possibilities of domination to a dichotomy between Eco and Techno fascism is a somewhat reductive and lazy analysis- there are perhaps myriad other ways futurority may choose to articulate itself in the order of the civilized, though in this moment the two aforementioned incarnations of terror seem the most dominant of those vying for a position in or after the ashes.

27. The desire to analyse the future trajectories of terror, does not negate the fact that the present is also terrifying and horrific.

28. Even if it were possible to imagine that the future could be better, freer, or without domination; the terror of the present still presents adequate reason to reject futurority, to reject (re)production where and when possible.

29. To knowingly inflict the suffering of the now onto new life is a choice, a choice to domesticate another life inside the furnaces of civilization, a choice for which on must ultimately take responsibility if he is in a position to choose it.

30. At the same time, and paradoxically; the (re)production of those lives undesirable to futurority may be a form of resistance to domination- a resistance which carries great violence, pain, and suffering, but a resistance none the less.

31. When faced with this brutal double bind one is forced to choose between a resistance and an ending.

32. The unspoken blasphemy for those wishing to live beyond the walls lies in the total refusal of futurority (personal or societical).

33. The (re)production of society at large may be inescapable (since it is also non consensual) except in moments of direct conflict with it (society), but the personal refusal of futurority is perhaps, in moments, more likely achievable.

34. Staring extinction squarely in the face, perhaps even welcoming it; refusing reproductive futurority, accepting that there is No Future.

35. A mass 'die off' is likely approaching the human species; the task for radicals in this epoch lies in communizing this die off to include the insides of western civilization instead of merely allowing its unchecked continuation outside of it- to communize the 'die off' is to deny futurority.

36. To face and embrace a reality in which one is amongst the final generations of 'humanity' may be the closest thing to hope those struggling against the existent can expect.

37. If futurority falls civilization may crumble.

38. The end of futurority is the end of humanity, but not necessarily the end of individual projectualities.

39. The human being and it's reproduction are the social constructs and material realities of civilization, but the existence of wild beings and their proliferation outside the walls are something yet to be known.

40. Against ideologues who claim the future.

41. And tyrants who enforce tomorrows.

42. Against state ownership of reproductive capacity.

43. And the brutal taming of wild life.

44. Towards the fall of civilization.

45. And the death of futurority.

[yermes]

PAC: 🧸

I’ve been so poor and so broke the past few years, and now that I have an income Idk how to act or what to spend money on because in my head I am still in such an act of fight or flight. Like I kinda want to buy a cute back to school fit, I kinda want to new crochet needles, I kinda want new bedding and I just am so indecisive abt it. IF YOU STRUGGLE WITH THE IMPOSTER SYNDROME OF HAVING MONEY AND HAVE FINANCIAL ANXIETY PLEASE THIS IS FOR YOU.

Disclaimer: please take what I say with a grain of salt and not as the gospel. I just want to share some ideas of practicing and giving advice using the medium as often as I can with school, work, and my own personal studies and practice. I know you all were NOT FEELING PARADIGMS AND AEONICS BUT I SWEAR I WILL DELIVER!! Liking and sharing does a lot and feel free to follow me else where as well 🫶

Socials: TipJar | Follow me!

Pick a meme

1 2 3

The cards

I DID A STUPID AND HAD TO DIG THROUGH MY DECK TO REFIND THESE MF FORGIVE ME I HAVE NOT BEEN AT MY BEST!

Truce 🧸

Four of Swords, Jupiter in the 3. of Libra, Chesed through Air

YOU ARE THE REASON YOU CAME INTO WEALTH DO NOT DOUBT IT. You saw the issue of what made you so poor and you solved it. Use this comfort to reflect on why you are so anxious. If you stay anxious you just deprive yourself from your victory.

The Fool 🃏

Pisces going to Aries, Uranus and Mercury, Air, Kether going to Chokmah

You never had any kind of wealth like this before and now you don’t know how to act and theres a lot of stress because there’s many different paths you can go down. Theres endless possibilities but some of them can have negative repercussions do not dive in blindly.

Valour 🪄

Mars in the 3. of Leo, Netzach through fire, seven of wands

You are being set up or your setting yourself up to face a challenge that will only make you stronger. (Saving for big investments like a house, higher education, moving in hopes of a better life.) This will fundamentally change you because it will be so hard but so worth it. You’re in a fighting state but it will be rewarded. The risk will be nothing comparable to the reward.

Extras:

Story/vent:

GOD is good I got an interview at my campus c:

Edit

I just want to say I literally embody all these so again please do not feel called out if anything these all are self roasts.

But let me tell you this anxiety has saved my ass I got a $200 book for $50 bc my ass can get a book foe CHEAP

[gear-project]

2024 Guilty Gear Calendar

[JANUARY] Jan 1st: Anji Mito (New Year’s Day) Jan 16th: Happy Chaos/ Tyr (National Nothing Day/Appreciate a Dragon Day) Jan 28th: Zato=ONE/Eddie (Daisy Day) This Month’s Jellyfish Pirate: Janis, the Cat and Mascot of the Jellyfish! [FEBRUARY] Feb 8th: Jam Kuradoberi (Bubble Bath Day) Feb 9th: Chipp Zanuff/ Mizuha (Static Electricity Day) Feb 14th: Valentine (Saint Valentine’s Day) This Month’s Jellyfish Pirates: Febby who does the Laundry, Accounting, and Book-keeping! Also Leap the Administrative Director and Cook! [MARCH] Mar 5th: Baiken (Multiple Personalities Day) Mar 14th: Bedman (World Sleep Day) Mar 18th: Nagoriyuki (National Supreme Sacrifice Day) Mar 28th: Raven (Something on a Stick Day) Mar 31st: (World Backup Day) This Month’s Jellyfish Pirate: March, head of Communications (despite the fact she doesn’t talk much). [APRIL] Apr 7th: Robo-Ky (National Robotics Week) Apr 20th: Millia Rage (Easter) This Month’s Jellyfish Pirate: April, Helms-woman and ace pilot of the Airship! [MAY] May 5th: May (The day Johnny found her) May 9th: Testament (Lost Sock Memorial Day) May 11th: Alternate Timeline Day (Twilight Zone Day) May 12th: Fanny (International Nurses’ Day) May 14th: Sol Badguy (Guilty Gear Foundation Day) May 31st: Sin Kiske (International “No Tobacco” Day) This Month’s Jellyfish Pirate: May, the Powerful Princess and 2nd in Command of the Jellyfish! [JUNE] Jun 3rd: Ramlethal Valentine (Repeat Day Repeat Day) Jun 8th: Ariels/Chronus (‘Big Brother’ is Watching Day) Jun 15th: Zappa (Power of a Smile Day) This Month’s Jellyfish Pirate: June, the Desk Manager and Aristocrat of the Jellyfish! [JULY] Jul 1st: Leo Whitefang (Creative Ice Cream Flavors Day) Jul 26th: ALL OR NOTHING! Day Jul 28th: System Administrator Appreciation Day This Month’s Jellyfish Pirate: July, sword expert and combat professional! [AUGUST] Aug 3rd: Izuna (National Watermelon Day) Aug 14th: Daisuke Ishiwatari/Chimaki (Summer Romance Day) Aug 21st: Dr. Faust (National Senior Citizen’s Day) This Month’s Jellyfish Pirate: Augus, strong melee and grappling expert extraordinaire! [SEPTEMBER] Sep 2nd: Justice (National Blueberry Popsicle Day) Sep 8th: Answer (International Literacy Day/Bury the Hatchet Day) Sep 9th: Kliff Undersn (Chrysanthemum Day) Sep 12th: National Video Games Day Sep 25th: Toshimichi Mori (BlazBlue Creator Day) This Month’s Jellyfish Pirate: Sephy, the Ship’s Kind Doctor! [OCTOBER] Oct 9th: Goldlewis Dickinson (International Beer and Pizza Day) Oct 16th: Leopaldon/Gig/Judgment (National Boss Day) Oct 18th: Potemkin (Health and Sports Day) Oct 24th: Johnny/Venom (National Billiards Day) Oct 25th: National Comic Book Day Oct 26th: Bridget (Coming Home Day) Oct 31st: Slayer (Halloween) This Month’s Jellyfish Pirates: Octy, Crow’s Nest Navigator specialist! And of course don’t forget about Johnny, the Captain! [NOVEMBER] Nov 6th: Giovanna (National Redhead Day/National Nachos Day) Nov 9th: CHAOS NEVER DIES! Day Nov 10th: Asuka R. Kreutz (Forget-Me-Not Day) Nov 11th: Dr. Paradigm (National Education Day) Nov 20th: Ky Kiske (Feast of Christ the King Day/Absurdity Day) Nov 25th: I-No (Elimination of Violence against Women Day) This Month’s Jellyfish Pirate: Novel, the Ship’s Engineer and Weapons designer! [DECEMBER] Dec 5th: Kum Haehyun (Prohibition Repeal Day) Dec 13th: Jack-O'Valentine/Aria Hale (National Cocoa Day) Dec 17th: A.B.A. (Paracelsus’ Birthday) Dec 25th: Axl Low/Dizzy/Elphelt Valentine (Christmas Day) This Month’s Jellyfish Pirate: Dizzy, the Ship’s Administrative Coordinator (on indefinite leave). PLEASE NOTE: –As always NEW Characters may be announced as the Year goes on, Dates may be altered/adjusted as information is revealed! –Characters that have no Birthdays may get one, and Characters with Birthdays may have theirs corrected as needed! –Other Holidays are just personal fun/preference/Optional! –Also Note that this List may not go in to effect until after it is posted! Meaning some holidays will go in to 2025!

[youkaigakkou-tl]

The principal still has his exorcism powers not as strong as before but still pretty strong so it’s understandable why onis would try to overthrow the principal through economic and political means instead of outright killing him.

him having exorcism powers/previously being an onmyouji probably isnt public knowledge, i'd guess that, to youkai, he just has some kinda vague powers

and it's appropriate of him, as the nurarihyon, the youkai that slips into homes unnoticed and has such an aura of confidence about him that he's mistaken for the lord of the house, don't you think? from the onis' perspective, who have spent the past untold years eating humans and doing as they wished, for this former human to come strolling in and asserting himself as some sort of authority, educating the youkai that the onis thought of as "lesser" and defeating whoever went against him physically.

(irl, the way the modern nurarihyon came about is just as appropriate. originally starting as just the uninvited houseguest, without any of the "leader of youkai" parts, then in the 1960s it appeared in gegege no kitaro, making the unsupported and grand claim to be the commander of youkai, before actually becoming a leader of youkai as the manga progressed and needed an antagonist. the "leader of the hyakki yagyo" part of its description came about even more recently, possibly codified by the manga nurarihyon no mago in 2008. just an endless chain of showing up unannounced and asserting itself as an authority. source)

the principal almost always having some sort of bodyguard aside, perhaps it's not he himself these oni that are so pressed are against, rather the paradigm shift he brought, this new world that was no longer might makes right and onis aren't simply "superior by birthright". he's just the figurehead, and most troublesome is that he clearly has supporters who believe in what he's accomplished, so just taking him down probably won't cause society to crumble and return to how it was 1000 years ago like they hope it will.