#Race is a political debate. Gender is. Sexuality is. | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

gothhabiba · 2 years

Note

Would you be willing to elaborate a little on what identity politics means to you (or reblog the post if you have in the past cause tumblrs horrible search isn’t turning it up)? It’s something that has vexed me throughout my studies cause just when I think I have a handle on a working definition someone whose opinion I trust (you in this instance) says it’s wrong lol

The usage of the phrase that you're likely familiar with--the way that people often use it to-day, and the usage that I to some extent criticised in the post you're referring to--is one that basically aligns with a concept of "identitarian essentialism" or "identitarian deference." To adhere to "identity politics" is to believe that being in possession of a marginalised "identity"--being a woman, being Black, being gay--will automatically lead to a radical political consciousness, or can even stand in for developing a radical political consciousness; to reference a leader's 'identities' in lieu of debating their policies, and to fight to get people of certain 'identities' in positions of power rather than to change power structures themselves; to believe that a person of a given marginalised "identity" must always be listened to or obeyed in regards to a subject relating to that "identity" (as though people of the same identity never disagree). "Identity politics" is "listen to x voices" and black / rainbow capitalism and girlbossing and "we need more trans people in the military" &c.

But that isn't where we started out at all. The first instances of the phrase "identity politics" date to the 1970s (or possibly the '60s)--though, as is typical with terms suggestive of social or political frameworks, the ideas expressed in the term are arguably older.

The first known specific usage of the term is in 1977, in the Combahee River Collective Statement. Here, it refers to the political knowledge that can come out of “identity” (in particular, gender, class, and race), and to the necessity of reckoning with the full complexity of “sexual politics” as they interact with race and class in Black women’s lives in order to produce a truly radical politics:

Our politics initially sprang from the shared belief that Black women are inherently valuable, that our liberation is a necessity not as an adjunct to somebody else’s may because of our need as human persons for autonomy [...]. [N]o other ostensibly progressive movement has ever considered our specific oppression as a priority or worked seriously for the ending of that oppression. […] Our politics evolve from a healthy love for ourselves, our sisters and our community which allows us to continue our struggle and work.

This focusing upon our own oppression is embodied in the concept of identity politics. We believe that the most profound and potentially most radical politics come directly out of our own identity, as opposed to working to end somebody else’s oppression. In the case of Black women this is a particularly repugnant, dangerous, threatening, and therefore revolutionary concept because it is obvious from looking at all the political movements that have preceded us that anyone is more worthy of liberation than ourselves. […]

We believe that sexual politics under patriarchy is as pervasive in Black women’s lives as are the politics of class and race. We also often find it difficult to separate race from class from sex oppression because in our lives they are most often experienced simultaneously.

So the politics of "identity" do not work against a materialist analysis of class structure--they are brought up as something in addition to "pure" class politics that must be paid attention to if a materialist understanding of the factors affecting our lives is to be reached. The Combahee River Collective Statement is explicitly anti-capitalist and anti-imperialist; it was written in order to articulate a political connection between race, gender, and class-based oppression in response to environments (white, middle-class feminist organisations, Black nationalist organisations, socialist organisations) in which e.g. feminism and socialism were assumed to be in conflict. "Identity politics" asserted that race and gender mattered at all in class politics--it asserted that Black women had a right to articulate their own political position, vision, and strategy, rather than allowing white women or Black men or other communists to do it for them.

Howard Wiarda connects the early history of "identity politics" to political movements composed not only of people of colour, feminists, or LGBT people, but also "radicalized students," "Greens," and "Marxists"--"all these groups and even the term 'identity politics' itself were identified with left-wing or radical causes," with the through-line being the concept that "one's identity as a woman, a minority, an environmentalist, a homosexual, a young person, or any marginalized person made one particularly susceptible to violence, ostracism, and oppression" and that that oppression would need to be specifically countered. You'll note that several of these groups are not things that we would consider to be 'innate' to a person!

In the 1980s and 1990s, opposition to "identity politics" came from conservatives, liberals (who focused on pluralism and a non-specific sort of 'equality'), and Marxists (who lamented that they were distracting from pure 'class-based' politics). The concept of a political "identity" à la "environmentalist" seems to have withdrawn from the scene by this point, with critics focusing on identities that they claimed their opponents viewed as innate (such as "ethnicity" or gender). Marxist Eric Hobsbawm, speaking in 1996, makes what will be to us common claims: that identity politics are exclusionary ("collective identities are defined negatively; that is to say against others"); that they only allow people to hold one identity at a time ("identity politics assumes that one among the many identities we all have is the one that determines, or at least dominates our politics"--note how antithetical this is to the C.R.C.'s statement!); that they are essentialist ("Most identity groups are not based on objective physical similarities or differences, although all of them would like to claim that they are ‘natural’ rather than socially constructed"); that they are dangerous and lead to the breakdown of 'real' leftism ("the danger of disintegrating into a pure alliance of minorities is unusually great on the Left [...] without any obvious way of formulating a common interest across sectional boundaries"); that "minorities" cynically manipulate them for their own gain ("it may actually pay to classify yourself as low caste or belonging to an aboriginal tribal group, in order to enjoy the extra access to jobs guaranteed to such groups").

Let us assume that the identitarian / "sectarian" point of view that Hobsbawm criticized did actually exist in the 1990s under the banner of "identity politics"--if so, what had changed since the 1970s? Why does the term "identity politics" signify something different for Hobsbawm than it had for the C.R.C.? Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor connects this shift to the fact that racial position has become slightly less tethered to class position:

Any concept, once it is released into the world, can take on new meanings when confronted with new problems. Identity politics has become so untethered from its original usage that it has lost much of its original explanatory power. In its earliest iteration, Black feminism was assumed to be radical because the class position of Black women, overwhelmingly, was at the bottom of society. But the civil-rights revolution and concerted efforts by the political establishment created a different reality for a small number of African-Americans. Today, there is a small but influential Black political class—a Black élite and what could be described as the aspirational Black middle class—whose members continue to be constrained by racial discrimination and inequality but who hold the promise that a better life is possible in the United States. They stand in contrast to the Black poor and working class, who live in veritable police states, with low-wage work, poor health care, substandard and expensive housing, and an acute sense of insecurity.

But, while the positions that critics of identity politics take issue with may exist in certain circles--may even exist under the self-described banner of "identity politics"--I don't think that that gets all of said critics off the hook for their portrayal of idpol (as though identitarian essentialism is inherent to it), or validates their arguments about what will solve the problem they identify (namely, a return to a halcyon past of Enlightenment universalism without attention to "identity" that, these writers hold, prevailed before 1970). In 1997, Robin D. G. Kelley wrote that "a handful of self-proclaimed spokespersons on the Left" claim that

"The Left" has lost touch with its Enlightenment roots, the source of its universalism and radical humanism, and instead has been hijacked by a "multicultural left" wedded to "identity politics" which has led us all into a cul-de-sac of ethnic particularism, race consciousness, sexual politics, and radical feminism.

Much of the blame is assigned to women, gays and lesbians, and colored people for fracturing the American Left, abandoning honest class struggle, and alienating white men who could be allies but aren't because of the terrible treatment meted out to them by the Loud Minority. Universal categories such as class have fallen before the narrow, particularistic mantras of radical chic: race, gender, sexuality, and disability. Indeed, in their view class is not just another identity, it transcends identity. If the "Left" wants to save itself, we must abandon our ever shrinking identity niches for the realm of majoritarian thinking. After all, we're told, the majority of Americans are white and heterosexual and have little interest in radical feminism, minority discourse, and struggles centered on sexual identity.

Kelley cedes that "in some circles [identity politics] has tended to limit discussions of power to cultural politics"--however, "the 'Enlightenment train' will not lead us out" of this problem:

These people assume that the universal humanism they find so endearing and radical can be easily separated from the historical context of its making; indeed, that it is precisely what can undo the racism and modern imperialism it helped to justify. The racialism of the West, slavery, imperialism, the destruction of indigenous cultures in the name of "progress," are treated as aberrations, coincidences, or not treated [at] all. They insist that these historical developments do not render the Enlightenment's radical universalism any less "radical," and those who take up this critique are simply rejecting Enlightenment philosophers because they're "dead white males."

So criticisms that relate "identity" with certain philosophies or epistemologies (here, Enlightenment humanism) and with material histories (of slavery, imperialism, land theft and genocide) are automatically assumed to be nothing more than identitarian reductionism--people are assumed to be objecting to Enlightenment philosophy merely because its original theorists held the wrong "identities"--despite the fact that that's clearly a gross misreading of the arguments actually being made. Criticisms of "identity politics" seriously overreach when they cease to criticise actual identitarian essentialism, reductionism, and deference where they appear, and instead complain that any challenge to their ideas and any mention of race, gender, or sexuality must automatically be identitarian reductionism. More than anything else this is a silencing move--they are uncomfortable with how loud "minorities" have gotten and would rather not bother to engage with any of the vast body of scholarship that analyses gender, race, sexuality, and disability through the lens of materialist or Marxist politics, or that traces the connections between race (and slavery, colonialism, land grabbing), gender, and class.

Returning to the idea that (racial, gendered, sexual) "identities" are parochial, while "class" is universal--Kelley continues:

The implications [of the arguments of the neo-Enlightenment Left] are frightening: the only people who can speak the language of universalism are white men [...] and women and colored people who have transcended or rejected the politics of identity. Moreover, they either don't understand or refuse to acknowledge that class is lived through race and gender. There is no universal class identity, just as there is no universal racial or gender or sexual identity. The idea that race, gender, and sexuality are particular whereas class is universal not only presumes that class struggle is some sort of race and gender-neutral terrain but takes for granted that movements focused on race, gender, or sexuality necessarily undermine class unity and, by definition, cannot be emancipatory for the whole.

Thus these critics presume that race and gender do not shape "universal" issues, assume that movements centering black women must only be of use to black women, ignore what "identity"-based movements have to teach them, and ignore the various ways in which these movements' goals, if accomplished, would benefit their more "universal" goals.

This situation--where only [heterosexual, abled, &c. &c.] white men are free of the odour of "identity" and so only they (and those who agree to attempt to approximate them) are able to lead "class-based" Leftist movements and articulate Leftist positions--seems remarkably similar to the situation that the C.R.C. was reacting to. Per Barbara Smith:

“By ‘identity politics,’ we meant simply this: we have a right as Black women in the nineteen-seventies to formulate our own political agendas. [...] We can obviously create a politics that is absolutely aligned with our own experiences as Black women—in other words, with our identities. That’s what we meant by ‘identity politics,’ that we have a right. And, trust me, very few people agreed that we did have that right in the nineteen-seventies. So we asserted it anyway.”

So many critics of identity politics reduced it to its crudest arguments, ignored it insights, failed to read the writings of its original prononents or only read them to misinterpret and smear them (it cannot be overstated how explicitly the C.R.C.'s statement disavows essentialism and parochialism in arguing that gender and race must be paid attention to to achieve class liberation--read the Kelley article for more on this), and seemed to assume that black feminists were somehow automatically incapable of being concerned with "universalist" or "humanist" concerns merely because they were black feminists (or, worse, black lesbian feminists). Ironically, it seems that these critics are allowing the racism baked into Enlightenment universalist humanism (wherein e.g. black people were outside the realm of the "universal" and "human")--racism which they deny exists or really matters--to poison their politics. (These critics also misunderstood or misrepresented the past--Kelley points to a long history of solidarity between Left and "identity-based" movements, even before 1970.)

These days, you're unlikely to find anyone professing "identity politics" as a part of their self-described political agenda--it's almost always a criticism levelled against someone else's politics, and it means something more like "identitarian essentialism." And the slurring of "identity politics" has not gotten any less racist since the 1990s, or any less based on "caricature, stereotypes, omissions," or "innuendo" (Kelley). Any person of colour who talks about race and class online likely knows what it's like to be accused of subscribing to "identity politics" (or, called an "ethnic nationalist," told they're "ignorant of" or "obviously new to" class analysis, &c. &c.) for the mere mention of race or gender in a leftist context, no matter how obviously grounded in materialist analysis.

Again, "identity politics" is a banner under which some identitarian or essentialist arguments did genuinely occur, and the phrase is still often used to describe tendencies that are legitimately harmful (no one is really arguing with this). And, to be clear, there is a distinction between people who offer legitimate and useful critiques of what they call "identity politics"--by which they mean identitarian deference or identitarian essentialism as they appear in liberal politics--and those who misrepresent the work of specific writers and activists, often black feminists, who used the term "identity politics" (Eric Hobsbawm and Todd Gitlin are sort of low-hanging fruit in this latter category).

The fact that the political landscape is changing such that being a professionally or politically élite member of a given marginalised "identity" group is becoming more possible, and such that it's more profitable (? or at least, possible) to emphasise one's marginalised "identities" when in such a position, means that identitarian reductionism (and criticisms of it using the language of "identity politics") aren't going away any time soon. Personally, I think it's far more specific, accurate, and useful to criticise "identitarian deference" or "identitarian reductionism" or "essentialism" or whatever it is that you actually mean at the time--it saves us from having to distinguish every time whether by "identity politics" we mean attention to how class is lived through race and gender (as the C.R.C. had used it), or a liberal co-optation of the same phrase in the name of multicultural pluralism (the type that e.g. Adolph Reed criticises). But, as with anything else, reading about it just requires sensitivity to discovering how the phrase is being used by a particular writer.

Readings:

Arguments against certain anti-idpol positions:

Robin D. G. Kelley, "Identity Politics and Class Struggle" (I really recommend reading the whole thing)

Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor, "Until Black Women Are Free, None of Us Will Be Free"

Mychal Denzel Smith, "What Liberals Get Wrong About Identity Politics"

Out of the Woods, "A Hostile Environment"

Mike Harman, "Identity Crisis: Leftist Anti-Wokeness is Bullshit" (responds to Adolph Reed's critiques of identity politics)

A post from @quoms circa 5 years ago on how anti-idpol arguments often themselves subscribe to idpol

Me (circa 5 years ago) on how (white) leftists use criticism of identity politics as an acceptable way to silence the concerns of people of colour, or to claim that we are uniquely ill-suited to analysing and articulating our own condition

Arguments against identitarian deference (though throughout the body of my text I kind of assumed we were up to speed on this):

Olúfẹ́mi Táíwò, "Being-in-the-Room Privilege: Elite Capture and Epistemic Difference"

"Who is Oakland"

Kenan Malik, "Not All Politics is Identity Politics" (makes the common argument that identity politics started out helpful and even necessary in the '60s, and later devolved such that "contemporary" identity politics, "in practice," are identity reductionist)

Salar Mohandesi, "Identity Crisis" (similarly argues that the C.R.C.'s insights came to be "exploited by those with politics diametrically opposed" to theirs)

Asad Haider, "White Purity" (attacks identitarian deference & the assumption of common viewpoint based on identity, considers "identity politics" to be a form of liberal multiculturalism)

See also

/tagged/identity politics

#questions #Anonymous #identity politics #politics #liberalism #mine

360 notes · View notes

mariacallous · 9 months

Text

I first heard about Rocklin, California, back in 2019, when a bitter fight there over gender and sexuality in the schools made national headlines. In this small city outside of Sacramento, hundreds of parents were holding their kids out of school to protest a new social studies curriculum that, among other things, highlighted contributions of major LGBTQ+ figures in history. Some parents argued that the curriculum introduced the topic of sexuality before kids were ready for it; others said the curriculum sent a message of LGBTQ+ approval that was at odds with their religious beliefs.

The debate felt very novel at the time and slightly weird, given that it was in a state known for its progressive bent. That may be why it made an impression – and why the story was still rattling around in my head two years later when similar fights started popping up in other communities around the country. Some of those debates took place in Michigan, where I live and was covering the governor’s race. Eventually I got the idea of going back to Rocklin to see how the debate had turned out there, thinking it might be a case study.

I hadn’t planned to spend a lot of time on the article because I figured the controversy had died down and most of the residents had moved on. I couldn’t have been more wrong. That 2019 fight over the social studies curriculum turned out to be the opening salvo in an ongoing, escalating war that has engulfed Rocklin and its neighbors -- most recently in a fight over the future of an LGBTQ+ youth support group and a debate over “parental notification” rules that would require teachers to let parents know if their child asks to be identified with a name or pronoun different from the one on school records.

My HuffPost article tells the stories of these fights. It’s based on dozens of interviews, spanning the better part of a year, and features an array of characters, including a progressive gay pastor and the leader of a right-wing megachurch, along with cameos by the conservative organizations Moms for Liberty and Project Veritas. It also includes some scared, struggling LGBTQ+ kids who say, quite reasonably, that they are the ones with the most at stake.

23 notes · View notes

little-elf-wanders · 3 months

Text

Veilguard Vault: Character Planning

~ Warrior Role ~

Basics

Name: Marsh (Aka Rook)

Age: 29

Gender: Male/Nonbinary

Height: Average (Note: Short for a Qunari)

Race: Qunari // Tal-Vashoth

Faction: Lords Of Fortune

Class: Warrior // Two-handed

Subclass: Reaper

Sexuality: Closet Bisexual (He gay panics)

Possible Romance: Lucanis (He makes him feel tall)

Possible Friends: Taash, Harding, Assan, Davrin?, Emmerich, Varric,

Possible Yikes: Solas, Neve, Davrin?

Possibly Unsure: Davrin, Bellara

Personality

Likes: Money, Loot, Breaking things, Stealing things, Shady business schemes, The ocean, Biting, Changing his hair an ungodly amount of times, Sharp teeth, Coffee, His rings, Bright colours, Adventuring, Flirting his way into and outta situations, Singing (though he won’t like comments about it).

Dislikes: Orlais, Politics, Solas, The law (sorry Neve), Slavers, Being stared at, Big statues, Long debates (he has no attention span), The Qun, Being told what to do.

Quirks: He picks his teeth when he’s bored, He sharpens his teeth because sometimes he likes to bite people in the middle of battle, Very self conscious that he’s not as big as most Qunari so out of sheer spite he’s learned to use a battle axe, He has a big mouth that often gets him in trouble but he’s also very good at getting out of it, Really wanted to explore under the ocean but it was impossible. (He tried and nearly drowned. Twice.)

Backstory: Marsh was always a scrawnier Qunari than the other boys, which you’d think would mean he’d have more incentive to behave, obey and fit in. It had the opposite effect, as instead it spurred him to rebel and prove himself even harder – growing to quickly learn he hated being told who he was and what he should do, tension built between him and… everyone around him. Somewhere along the way, he developed behavioural issues. He was cocky, had a smart mouth, a shit eating grin and talked too much smack for the kid who got his ass handed to him by the bigger peers. Marsh wasn’t a happy kid, he was an angry kid, leading to multiple incidents in his youth that didn’t earn him any favours. “Marsh” - not his Qun name -wasn’t fit for the Qun. After one incident once he was fed up with his assigned job as a blacksmith, he got into it with his teacher when he kept pocketing materials meant for weaponry, he was caught red handed. A bad fight broke out, which cost him half his horn and earned him half an ear from his assaulter, and although deep down he knew stealing wasn't a smart move, he was too angry at everything to admit it when he had the chance. He was promptly sent to re-education which broke the final straw for him. Unable to accept the Qun or his role, or how everything he did was always wrong, bad or against the Qun, he snapped and snuck away from his home in Kont-aar, moving further into Rivain where he disappeared into trading markets. It was a long journey just to get there and it really let him experience more than he ever would with his teacher. He escaped young at the age of 15 and became a dreaded Tal-Vashoth, where he’d scrap and scavenge anything and everything he could to survive. As it turned out, he was exceptionally good at it. His life in the Qun and his breeding as a Qunari gave him more of an edge than he realised. Inside the Qun, he was weak, yet out here? He had options. So many options. Which he took full advantage of; he watched merchants, watched pirates, watched the people of Rivain and grew incredibly fascinated by their customs, their blatant acceptance and reverence of magic, and just everything he came across felt like seeing colour for the first time – it felt like life, life perfectly wrapped in sea salt air. Marsh swiftly discovered he wasn’t as bad socially as he initially thought – where he’d get pushback, chiding, scolding or flat out strict snaps with the Qun, here he was more… accepted. Some younger kids even began to look up to him when he stuck up for them, and they helped him get better accustomed to life in Dairsmuid. They welcomed his conversation, taught him their language and from there he began to network.

At 17, he established many groups or... gangs, might be the better word, networking with his own little group of troublemakers. Finding information, items, lost things... it all became his talent, of course backed up by his teeth and battle axe. He especially learned of his love of trade through those years. Money, shiny things, bright fabrics, unique items, you name it he got it. He got a hunger for it and a passion for finding things people wanted, things he was never allowed to touch before.

This led him right into the arms of the Lords Of Fortune, whom he worked with for a good sum of years, and eventually that brought Varric.

[Image was made on picrew]

#Veilguard Vault #dragon age 4 #rook #character sheet #marsh #marsh rook #qunari #tal-vashoth #lords of fortune #he's my gremlin boy #da4 #dragon age the veilguard

11 notes · View notes

savanaclaw-jack-howl · 3 months

Text

”If you're scared, tuck your tail and get outta here. I'm more than enough for them on my own.”

Oi, I’m the real person behind this blog. We’re going to get a few things straight here:

no incest. Ex: Idia and ortho, or Jade and Floyd (not that I think y’all need the examples but just in case

I would prefer beings over the age of 10

nothing overly sexual (because sometimes it just gets weird)

don’t get political. This is for fun, not debates

Any one starting a ship rp can not interact with another ship rp. Friend ships and such can interact obvi but any ships can’t and won’t interact I don’t need a mess for myself

those are the current rules, I might add some later

Things that could get your blocked are: racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia

Other info: don’t be a dickhead. You can start full on Rps if you want but fair warning I get to it when I get to it if that’s what you’re doing, if you want a faster reply just do it in the tumbler DMs. This ask/chat blog supports all people of any race, gender, sexuality, religion and will remain that way

I am a multi-shipper so I’m not picky with that but I’ll probably respond more to the more popular ones so we don’t get any rude comments about that

I will get better at this whole thing over time just give me a inch to work with here

now with that out of the way, this blog is officially open to people to talk to

-Yours truly, Kris

Other blogs include: @rollo-flamme-nbc and @lilithin-the-rewriter (That’s an oc) and @floyd-leech-thing

#twisted wonderland #twst #Twisted wonderland rp #Jack Howl #savanaclaw #leona kingscholar #ruggie bucchi

9 notes · View notes

religion-is-a-mental-illness · 3 months

Text

By: Andrew Doyle

Published: Jun 4, 2024

Here we go again. The culture war is apparently nothing more than a myth, a fabrication intended to distract the lower orders. It’s like the “bread and circuses” of Ancient Rome, or the Easter Bunny, or Milli Vanilli.

On this week’s episode of Newsnight, the former Tory MP Dehenna Davison was asked whether she welcomed Kemi Badenoch’s recent attempts to clarify the Equality Act in order to ensure that women’s rights to single-sex spaces are protected. “I don’t at all,” she said. “I think regrettably the debate around trans issues right now seems to be used as some kind of political football for this mythical culture war that the Conservative party seems to be fighting.”

That’s a relief. So the disabled women who are smeared as bigots for requesting female carers are simply fantasists? And the female prisoners who are terrified of being accommodated with convicted rapists are just worrying over nothing? And victims of sexual assault being turned away from rape crisis centres because they don’t want to speak to a male counsellor have just imagined the whole thing?

Apparently, yes. Here’s what the Tory Reform Group had to say in a post on X:

“The Conservative Party has to think very carefully about the type of campaign it wants to run, and the longer term impact of stoking culture wars. It is clear that voters are rejecting the politics of division. We must not run on ‘wedge issues’ for a narrow core voter base alone.”

I remain unconvinced that the rights of 51% of the population qualifies as a “wedge issue”.

Of course the culture war doesn’t end with the ongoing erosion of women’s rights. Gay people are being shamed for being attracted to their own sex by the very organisations who were set up to protect their interests. We have men demanding access to lesbian dating apps and speed-dating events. We’ve had gay youth medicalised on the NHS for being same-sex attracted. We have the bullying and harassment of gay men and lesbians in the name of “progress”. And yet in her Newsnight interview, Davison claims that same-sex marriage is one of the Conservative government’s “proudest achievements” while in the same breath dismissing these attacks on gay rights as trivial.

And what about the ongoing assault on free speech? What of those activists who demand that we should be prosecuted if we do not adopt their language (something that is actually happening in Canada and is likely to come to Ireland with the proposed new “hate speech” laws)? And what about campaigners who now leverage huge influence in all our major institutions attempting to rewrite our history, remove statues and monuments that they find “problematic”, censor books, and criminalise dissent? What about the ideologues in schools who are teaching highly contested theories as fact, from Critical Race Theory via Brighton School Council’s “anti-racist schools strategy” to this week’s revelation that 95% of Scottish schools are allowing pupils to self-identify their gender?

At this point, it’s difficult to believe that anyone genuinely believes that the culture war is “mythical”. There is an abundance of evidence of the antics of culture warriors who seek to reconstruct all the fundamental aspects of our society in order to better align with their ideology. I do make a point of assuming that people are telling the truth, and so the charitable explanation is that Davison and her ilk are simply ignorant of some of the most significant cultural developments over the past decade, from the fallout of the Black Lives Matter protests to the Scottish hate crime bill to the campaigns of harassment against gender-critical feminists. Perhaps she doesn’t read the newspapers. If only someone had written a book that provides a wide-ranging overview of the countless examples of how culture warriors have sought to reshape the world. Oh well…

Of course Davison is not the only political commentator to imply that the rights of women and gay people simply don’t matter. Former Labour strategist Alastair Campbell was quick to jump on to X to offer his contribution:

“I’m sure the world of trade and business will take note that the actual Secretary of State for trade and business has decided that the biggest issue on her agenda on her first big election outing is the weaponisation of trans rights. Anyone might be tempted to think Kemi Badenoch has less interest in the general election than the internal ideological shitshow likely to follow.”

As J. K. Rowling pointed out, Campbell seems to be unaware that Badenoch is also the minister for women and equalities, and so it’s hardly a stretch to suppose that women’s rights and the Equality Act fall within her remit. As Rowling put it: “Thanks once again for highlighting Labour’s complacency and indifference towards the rights of half the electorate.”

The culture war is often misunderstood as a matter of Right vs Left, but the ill-informed comments of Davison and Campbell show that it’s nothing of the kind. As I have pointed out many times, the Conservatives have presided over the worst excesses of the culture war during their time in office. We shouldn’t give them a free pass simply because matters are likely to get a whole lot worse under Labour.

Far from being trivial, these issues could not be more important. If we can’t preserve the rights of women and gay people, how can we claim to be living in a civilised society? And when activists are successfully pressurising governments to force citizens to declare falsehoods, how can we in good conscience remain silent?

The claim that the culture was is a “distraction” is, in itself, a distraction. Yes, other issues are crucial and require our attention. But resisting the creeping authoritarianism of our times should also be a priority. When those in power are not only insisting that 2+2=5, but demanding that we all repeat the lie, we cannot afford to be complacent.

#Andrew Doyle #Kemi Badenoch #culture war #gender ideology #Dehenna Davison #woke homophobia #same sex attraction #gay conversion therapy #gay conversion #conversion therapy #free speech #freedom of speech #authoritarianism #woke #wokeness #cult of woke #wokeism #wokeness as religion #religion is a mental illness

9 notes · View notes

writteninlunarlight-years · 4 months

Note

Hello! If you're still doing them, could I please get a Baldur's Gate 3 matchup? I'm bedridden right now from joint pain and need a pick-me-up, but if they're closed feel free to ignore this.

Gender: Genderfluid, but leans towards feminine

Pronouns: Any, but I tend to use she/her because it's honestly just more convenient

Sexuality: Any gender is fine. I might slightly prefer a man but if you think a girl would fit better don't let that stop you ☺️

Appearance: I am a 4’ 10” (147 cm) tall fem-aligned person with long wavy auburn hair, glasses and a fashion sense that varies widely from masc to fem. I'm almost never seen without my compression braces on because I have pretty terrible joint pain, so I've got compression socks, knee braces, shorts for hip pain, gloves for finger joint pain and am generally carrying quite a lot of medical equipment on me at all times lol. That being said, I try to work out when I can so I am getting pretty muscular and enjoy impressing people with my muscles because nobody really expects it.

MBTI: INFJ-T

Personality: I'm a very kind, friendly person but I still have a bit of fiery energy. I'm very passionate and will stand up and verbally smackdown anyone if I feel it's deserved, though generally I'm quite polite. I know tons of random trivia because I research and take notes obsessively. I have autism so the main way I communicate is by infodumping, and I can get easily thrown off in conversation when someone says something I don't expect. I love debating people respectfully, but I really do try to be very nice and as helpful as I possibly can be. I also kind of struggle to ask for help when I need it because I get embarrassed. Plus I am a very stubborn person in general. But most of all I'm very dedicated to self improvement and always strive to be a better version of myself.

Likes: Books and researching, Plants, Witchcraft and occultism, Mythology and religious studies, Linguistics, Exercising and working out and especially Science in general

Dislikes: My chronic illnesses, Heights, Being teased or made fun of (I make a point of not doing this to others either and even when debating I never go for personal jabs), People who are obviously misinformed but refuse to change, Rude and toxic people (If you're going to waste my time being a jerk you're not worth my time at all)

Extra Fun Fact: I currently work at a library and am hoping to become both a researcher and spirit medium

Race: Given my height, probably a halfling or dwarf of some kind

Class: Probably a Paladin or Cleric, maybe with a Wizard multiclass because I'm such a nerd lol

D&D Alignment: Neutral Good. I'm committed to doing good but not too strictly. Basically the “Yeah, but it would be funny” type of morality

Thanks so so much, I hope you have a fantastic day! Take care of yourself!

I hope this helps you feel better! I wish you nothing but a speedy healing process. You seem like a fantastic person. Thank you for letting me write to you!

~~~~~ MATCHUPS ~~~~~

BG3

Wyll Ravengaurd

~~~~~ HEADCANONS ~~~~~

Wyll is a gentleman with you, always seeking to get to know you and respect the newfound leader.

He was a lone wolf for so long that now, having a crew of friends and someone he holds near and dear is a fresh summer's breath for him.

He is afraid of Mizora, though. Not that she would hurt him; she wouldn't get anything out of that. He fears the restrictions, rules, and stipulations she would put on him if he sought you out.

Due to this, Wyll tried so hard to keep you at arm's length, only letting you know small fragments of him.

When Mizor made her debut, he felt better about his chances with you. He knew having someone as kind, understanding, and warm as you by his side was just what he needed.

Wyll courted you properly, asking if you would like to explore romance with him, go on small dates, and even take a dance lesson here and there.

No matter how badly he wanted to kiss you, though, he kept refraining until you asked him.

Once you two were past courting and officially together, he made it a point to get explicit permission from Mizora to tell you about Avernus and the Demons who inhabited the other planes.

He may have had to do a shady thing or two to earn this privilege, but it was worth seeing your eyes light up when sharing this limited knowledge.

When freed of the illithid, he would happily give up galivanting across the sword coast to settle down with you. He would only leave because Mizora asked him for assistance.

Wyll watched you flourish as a shopkeeper for books and magical resources, things only your humble shop could attain because of Wyll's Connections and adventures.

If you ever had a tough day or became bedridden, Wyll would drop everything to assist you. He would be your personal nurse. He'd even call Halsin or Shadowheart to help if he was worried about his lack of skill.

~~~~~ BLURB ~~~~~

It was a cold day in Faerun; snow had just coated the land and would soon fall again. You were seated in the foyer of your new home, watching the outdoors grow colder. You, however, were quite warm. A hand-knitted blanket was wrapped around you, and a warm fur pelt Mizora gifted you adorned your shoulders. Wyll was by the fire, tending to it. Today was tough for your body; everything was sore and hurting. Wyll did everything he could to help, even utilizing the books and notes Shadowheart and Halsin left for him.

As soon as the warmth was at its peak in the home, Wyll kissed you atop your head and made his way to the kitchen. He would prepare a meal for you two and ensure you had some sustenance. While still staring out at the beautiful white blanket of snow, the thought occurred to you that you were the fearless leader of the band that killed the neatherbrain. The illithid gave you an extraordinary gift of no more pain for the price of being turned. To think you almost took that risk but instead knew your humanity was far more a gift. Plus, you would have lost all the amazing friends you made.

Now, by your partner's side, you were even more confident in your choices because you wouldn't have him. Wyll returned some food and assisted you when you needed it. Once satisfied, you two decide some more rest would do you both well. Wyll had just returned a day or two ago from a grueling task from Mizora. Wyll gently picked you up and walked you back to your room. He knew just as well as you that you could take care of yourself, as you have done this time and time before, but his help was always so warm and appreciated. Once in bed, Wyll curled in behind you, holding you close. With one final kiss on your head, you both fell into a simple slumber. You might feel well enough to build a snowman when you wake.

~~~~~ EXTRA ~~~~~

(Just after the freedom of the shadow fell, your group was looking over the security tower at the beginnings of Baldur's Gate. Taking camp before continuing on to your final destination.)

Y/N: Wyll, look at this someone left an enchanted Rapier!

Astarion: ooooh, and quite the liquor selection.

Shadowheart: Please share that with the rest of us.

Wyll: Why don't you all head to the fire and celebrate our accomplishments? Heard Gale cooked quite the feast.

(You walked up to Wyll and leaned your head on his shoulder)

Y/N: What do you think will come of us?

Wyll: Whatever you desire, my love, whatever you desire.

#x reader #bg3 #match up #baulders gate 3 #headcanon #bg3 x reader #baldur's gate 3 #baldurs gate 3 #baldurs gate wyll #baldur's gate iii #lunarwritings #moons

8 notes · View notes

starblightbindery · 7 months

Text

Editor's Note from my bind, Designs of Fate, an anthology of Star Wars stories by Patricia A. Jackson.

Patricia A. Jackson is a criminally underrated Star Wars author.

I’ll explain.

Growing up in the late 1990s and early 2000s, it was challenging to be an adolescent Star Wars fangirl, particularly an Asian American one. Back then, fandom meant negotiating male-dominated online message boards where identifying as a teenage girl meant inviting a ‘fake geek girl’ grilling at best and sexual harassment at worst. Most of the published Star Wars books were about Han, Leia, and Luke. Han and Leia were in their thirties and the parents of three children...not super relatable for preteen me. As far as character development was concerned, our “Big Three” had established characterizations coalesced firmly on the side of good. For our heroes, there was no moral ambiguity as, novel by novel, they tackled the galactic Threat of the Week.

Bildungsromans, those books were not. When Jackson started writing Star Wars in the 1990s, there were no women Jedi or protagonists of color. If you wanted stories with original characters coming of age, your primary recourse was the West End Games’ Star Wars Adventure Journals and their published anthologies, Tales from the Empire (1997) and Tales from the New Republic (1999). I remember avidly poring over my dogeared paperback copies and stalking the internet for scans or transcriptions. Although I never played the D6 role-playing game, the short stories from the Star Wars Adventure Journals helped me envision that a character like me—a young Asian girl coming into her own—did have a place in Star Wars after all.

As evinced by the vitriolic reactions towards John Boyega and Kelly Marie Tran during the production of the sequel trilogy, Star Wars fandom can be a hateful environment for proponents of diversity and inclusion. A small but irritatingly loud faction of fascist-leaning, cishet, white male fans are actively hostile towards fans who advocate for change; they are more troubled by the presence of queers, women and BIPOC than our absence. Because of the ubiquity and popularity of Star Wars in America’s cultural milieu, the sentiments from these self-appointed gatekeepers have been—and continue to be—amplified by right wing extremists, and, to some extent, even by the Internet Research Agency as tools of Russia’s psychological and cyber warfare against the United States. During his Ph.D. candidacy with the Department of Information Studies at UCLA, Morten Bay, PhD., studied negative tweets about The Last Jedi and found that 50.9% of negative tweets were “bots, trolls/sock puppets or political activists using the debate to propagate political messages supporting extreme right-wing causes and the discrimination of gender, race or sexuality.”

“Russian trolls weaponize Star Wars criticism as an instrument of information warfare with the purpose of pushing for political change,” he wrote, “while it is weaponized by right-wing fans to forward a conservative agenda and for some it is a pushback against what they perceive as a feminist/social justice onslaught.”

The creation and inclusion of characters with minoritized identities in Star Wars is, therefore, an act of resistance. As far as I’m aware, Patricia A. Jackson was the first woman of color and Black author to write for the Star Wars expanded universe. Jackson has described the fan environment in the 1990s thusly; like many minoritized fans of color, she would be given pithy justifications such as "Well, there’s no Africa in Star Wars, so there are no Black people." Jackson noted, aptly, "That was just translation for “’You don’t matter. You don’t need to be here.’” Jackson's work for West End Games, particularly her sourcebook The Black Sands of Socorro, is a subversion of those expectations.

Before anyone else did, Jackson showed fandom that dominant mayo masculinity did not have to be the only way to tell Star Wars stories. Her stories existed before the prequel trilogy and three decades of Star Wars publishing, before FanFiction.net, Archive of Our Own, or Wattpad. She is the forerunner for BIPOC writers in Star Wars, followed by other luminaries like Steven Barnes, Daniel José Older, Nnedi Okorafor, Rebecca Roanhorse, Ken Liu, Greg Pak, Alyssa Wong, Sarah Kuhn, Saladin Ahmed, C.B. Lee, Justina Ireland, Alex Segura, Zoraida Cordova, Greg VanEekhout, Mike Chen, Charles Yu, R.F. Kuang, Sarwat Chadda, Sabaa Tahir, and Renée Ahdieh.

Jackson had and continues to have an incredibly prescient understanding of what makes a good Star Wars story. Any of the stories in this anthology could find a home as an anime short from Star Wars: Visions (2021). Ideas from Jackson’s Star Wars short stories have appeared in later media, sometimes decades later. Whether convergently evolved or directly influenced, the parallels are astonishing: Kierra, the snarky feminine droid consciousness who inhabits Thaddeus Ross’s ship, is a spiritual predecessor to L3-37, Lando Calrissian’s snarky feminine droid companion from Solo (2018) who ends the film uploaded to the Millennium Falcon. Jackson addressed concepts like slavery and Force healing predating the prequel and sequel trilogies. In “Idol Intentions,” she created an adventuring academic on the hunt for artifacts long before Kieron Gillen brought Doctor Aphra to life. Squint and the upturned red salt on the planet Crait in The Last Jedi becomes flying red soil on the planet Redcap. Dark haired, dark side tragic emo boy starcrossed with a fiery girl Jedi?—I think Jackson understood intuitively the appeal of this trope to a woman-dominated contingent of fandom well before “Reylo” topped Tumblr’s fan favorite relationship charts in 2020.

Jackson’s work is also significant for deepening world building. Much like how Timothy Zahn introduced analysis of fine art to Star Wars with his villainous art connoisseur Grand Admiral Thrawn, Jackson’s stories introduced concepts such as the evolution of Old Corellian, the acting profession, and Legitimate Theatre. These elements added verisimilitude to the expanded universe; it makes sense that different cultures in Star Wars would have archaic languages, folk songs, and old stories of their own from even longer ago in galaxies far, far, away. More recently, the franchise has started to flesh out in-universe lore in Star Wars: Myths and Fables (2019) by George Mann. Still, Uhl Eharl Khoehng in “Uhl Eharl Khoehng” (1995) remains the finest example of mise en abyme in any Star Wars related work.

Themes from Jackson’s Star Wars works, particularly around Drake Paulsen and Socorro, also connect contemporaneously with our real world. When the Seldom Different is essentially ‘pulled over’ by Imperial authorities in “Out of the Cradle” (1994), stormtroopers lie about Drake Paulsen having a weapon as a pretense to terrorize the teenager. It’s a collision of space opera with Black youths’ past and current experiences of police brutality and state-sanctioned violence. Accordingly, this capricious encounter is the rite of passage that jars Drake out of his childhood. I cheered when I read The Black Sands of Socorro (1997) and saw that the Black Bha'lir smuggler’s guild is named for a bha'lir, depicted in the book as a large...panther. Few Star Wars expanded universe authors—particularly in the 1990s—leveraged their influence to center characters of color or to allude to racial justice movements. Jackson did both.

For this anthology, I have copy edited and also taken the liberty of, when applicable, substituting some gendered or sanist language with more contemporaneous wording.17 The stories are otherwise intact. It would be remiss of me if I did not note; however, that one of the stories, “Bitter Winter” (1995), has sanist and ableist tropes that could not be contemporized without making dramatic changes to the story. In this story, the fictional disease brekken vinthern drives those impacted to violence; while it’s real world correlate of major neurocognitive disorder can include symptoms of aggression and agitation, extreme violence is rare and people with this condition are also at great risk of being harmed by violence. The tropes “Mercy Kill” and “Shoot the Dog” are depictions of non-voluntary active euthanasia, typically from the perspective of the horrified “killer” placed in an impossible situation. These tropes frame murder and death as “putting someone out of their misery” while downplaying any alternatives (ie: sedation to alleviate suffering, medical attention, or, say, ion cannons to render a ship inoperable without killing.)

Like in our society, the societies in Star Wars have consistently framed mental illness pejoratively. There are certainly valid critiques of the utter inadequacy of health care in Star Wars. Ableism is ubiquitous in entertainment media, and even with it’s problematic tropes, “Bitter Winter” remains one of the more humanizing depictions of a mental health condition in Star Wars fiction. I have included it in this anthology as a rare example of moral ambiguity in the franchise.

With the exception of “Fragile Threads” and “Emanations of Darkness,” the stories here are presented not in published order, but in chronological order as they would have occurred in the Star Wars universe. Ordering the stories chronologically helped clarify timelines; it also allows the anthology to begin with “The Final Exit,” which was a fan favorite back when it was first published. I’ve interwoven the Brandl family stories with Drake Paulsen’s coming of age adventures, as the Paulsens are such a strong foil to the Brandl family.

Since “I am your father” dropped in 1980, Star Wars has been big on Daddy Issues—intergenerational trauma, parental relationships, broken attachments, identity development, and initiation into adulthood (or, as Obi-Wan Kenobi would put it, “taking your first steps into a larger world.”) With Drake, we see that Kaine Paulsen is a father who is gone but ever-present. With Jaalib, we see that Adalric Brandl is a father who is ever-present but clearly far gone. Drake knows his Socorran roots; he has community and found family. Fable’s identity is adrift; she was torn from her roots after her fugitive Jedi mother’s death. Jaalib’s roots are scaffolded by disingenuous artifice. There is a diametric interplay of identity formation and parental legacy in these short stories that captures classic themes from Star Wars. And, the stories challenge readers to consider how we interact with shame, guilt, and obligation. Through the morally ambiguous dilemmas that are her oeuvre, Jackson’s characters discover who they are and where they stand.

While the thrill of having an Imperial Star Destroyer drop out of hyperspace is pure Star Wars energy, Jackson’s stories also disrupted what fans had come to expect. Published online as fan fiction, “Emanations of Darkness” (2001) polarized fans of the previous Brandl stories, particularly with Fable’s decision to throw her lot in with Jaalib and his father. At the time, Star Wars fan commentator Charles Phipps noted how the story dealt with the insidiousness of the dark side by taking potential heroes and crushing them. “Star Wars, I've never known to leave a bitter taste in my mouth,” he wrote, stunned. “I don't like what it's brought out in my feelings or myself...Bravo Brandl, you have your applause.” Although the Brandl stories were written and published before Revenge of the Sith (2005), Fable and Jaalib’s relationship mirrors the relationship between Padmé Amidala and Anakin Skywalker, down to both Jaalib and Anakin selling their souls to the same Emperor in hopes that will spare the women they love.

The prequel trilogy introduces the Jedi Council’s detached approach to attachments—don’t feel it, emotions like fear or anger are to be shunned, else suffering will follow. Anakin Skywalker’s broken attachments to his mother and Padmé lead him to turn against his values; his inability to integrate or tolerate his attachments is his downfall. It’s the same in the Brandl stories where, trauma bonded, Fable and Jaalib cannot let each other go. While Jaalib credits this as how he was able to preserve a bit of himself while under the Emperor’s thrall, his inability to extricate himself from his father’s influence or to let go of Fable ends up dooming her.

This is why I was thrilled to discover “Fragile Threads” (2021) on Wattpad twenty years later. In this story, Drake Paulsen helps his lover Tiaja Moorn save her sister, at the cost of losing their relationship when she decides to remain on her homeworld. Drake doesn’t fight her decision, he accepts it. He can hold onto that connection to Tiaja, just as he knows he will always be connected to Socorro, his father, and the Black Bha'lir. Drake can love freely because he knows what Luke Skywalker told Leia in The Last Jedi: “No one is ever truly gone.” He is able to straddle the fulcrum of attachment and love without letting it consume him, and that is balancing the Force.

Contemporary fandom discourse is also a struggle with attachment; the parasocial relationships we form with characters and stories are similar in process to how we attach to the important people in our lives. We imbue with meaning and carry these stories with us. As Star Wars storytelling enters its fifth decade, the divide between affirmational fandom (allegiance to manufactured nostalgia) and transformational fandom (allegiance to iterative and transgressive fan engagement) has factionized fandom. When Star Wars is seen as a totemic object, right wing fans have agitated for a return to a mythic past where white men were centered and morality was Manichean. From where I stand, at the heart of this debate is whether or not the reader or Star Wars is permitted to “grow up”—to leave the cradle, to evolve new identities and explore shades of grey.

To me, Jackson’s stories are a reminder that characters of color and complex moral dilemmas have always been a part of Star Wars. We have always been here. No other Star Wars author has been as exquisitely aware of the significance of storytelling; how it can help people challenge existing beliefs and discover themselves. Since the beginnings of the expanded universe, Patricia A. Jackson has spun yarn, and those fragile threads have tethered readers like myself to a galaxy far, far away.

Ol'val, min dul'skal, ahn guld domina, mahn uhl Fharth bey ihn valle. (Until we next meet, may the Force be with you.)

#star wars legends #patricia a jackson #star wars adventure journal #swrepmatters #binders note #patricia a. jackson #fanbinding

10 notes · View notes

pinkacademic · 1 year

Text

Themes, Context and Problems of Studying Literature

We’re dealing with old books written by old people who had old views, so pretty frequently, we’re going to come across attitudes and language that… well, I hope none of you agree with it… but that’s not a bad thing. We should challenge our worldview, we should learn how to debate it eloquently, learn the context of why people thought the way they did, and learn how to discern between good intentions with bad choices of language, and bad intentions even with good choices of language.

I’m going to be coming back to Dracula a lot as my go-to example text because we all have ease-of-access to it through Dracula Daily, even if we aren’t participating, and I think its fair to focus on one we could all be reading for free.

Common Themes

Themes that come up a lot in any analysis of literature are always the major political issues of the world at the time the text was written, and that still widely apply eg racism and xenophobia, feminism/sex and gender, religion, environmentalism, class… Then, on top of that, there will be motifs that are specific to the book in question. For example, Wuthering Heights, as the name suggests, has a constant refrain that takes it back to pathetic fallacy- which means weather-based metaphor. And actually, the storms which can often in literature be forboding, to Cathy and Heathcliff represent thw call of the wild drawing them home to the moors.

It begs the question that many of you have probably encountered in that cringe Facebook meme about the curtains being blue.

Sometimes the character likes blue and has blue curtains and that’s it- and it is worth knowing that that can be true- but sometimes the curtains are blue because everything is blue and has been since the character’s mother designed the house, and blue is the oppressive colour of an old attitude but the main character wants to live in a modern world of yellow. Maybe, as soon as the mother dies, the main character is going to redesign the house that felt like a trap for so many years and the curtains will be yellow.

More on symbolism, metaphors, and other methods next week!

Interpretation

So, what are you supposed to do with this information? Well, pick an angle and defend it with your entire being. Here comes the Dracula because firstly, do you feel like Jonathan is a sexist because he expects Mina to be in the kitchen cooking paprika hendl for him? Or is he a true romantic who is thinking of her always on his trip to Transylvania?

This is the importance of opinion. Answering essay questions has, in my experience, always meant picking a side and gunning for it to the death. You have the evidence for your case. Look at this asshole Van Helsing being so condesceding to Mina, he’s so sexist! Alternatively, look at this feminist icon Van Helsing treating Mina as the only one with the brain cell.

It’s up to you, and that to me is the value of studying literature because it forces you to think for yourself. And the thing is, you can’t be wrong if you back it up.

Context

I think it’s important to understand where the author was in their lifewhen they wrote their book when we’re analysing its contents. I think the content should be the dominant force in your interpretations, but understanding some of the context matters.

Taking our faithful companion Dracula, it is important to know that this story where the beautiful Lucy is viciously attacked by a creature of the night was written in 1897, and that the murders of prostitutes committed by Jack the Ripper were less than a decade prior. It is also worth noting that the predominantly English cast of characters were written from the point-of-view of Irishman Bram Stoker who supported Home Rule for Ireland.

It can be useful to familiarise yourself with the language of the time, particularly when referring to issues such as sexuality, class, and race, when looking at broad questions such as, for example “is Dracula racist?” Not really, it mostly just uses period-typical language, but Jonathan himself can be pretty xenophobic because he represents the typical Englishman of the day.

That is also one hypothetical interpretation- it’s not even necessarily what I think- so, always keep these things in mind too.

My point is, understanding the time period can help you understand the work in question.

Why it is Important?

Ok, girls, I’m about to start PREACHING! As I mentioned, I think the value of a literature degree is how much it forces you to engage with challenging material, understand the nuances of creativity, and messages versus enjoying art for art’s sake. I think the reason creative subjects and humanities are underfunded because (tinfoil hat voice) THEY WANT US STUPID!! But in all seriousness, take every opportunity to expand your media literacy, your worldview, and your understanding of what counts as art, a classic, literature, and something worth thinking about.

Ok, girlies, I’m leaving it here for this week. This is my absolute PASSION, so I could talk about it FOREVER, but I’ll stop now to focus energy on the actual study section for next week!

#pink academia #pink #academia #pink academic #pink academia masterpost project #studying literature #studyblr #study tips #dracula #dracula daily

45 notes · View notes

puddlellama · 9 months

Text

Decided to put all my stuff in one post at the top of the blog so I don't have to repeat things.

My name is PuddleLlama, or just Llama if you're short on time. I'm a panromantic abrosexual, non-binary person from the UK. they/it/ey pronouns. Right off the bat. if you are discriminatory on the basis of gender (as assigned at birth, or through identification as transgender in any way), race, sexual or romantic orientation (or lack thereof. Aphobes, you aren't welcome here), gender non-comformity, physical or mental impairment, religious practice, system, or hobby: leave right now. I will not put up with you. I will not debate you. you will be blocked and reported. I do not have the patience to deal with your bullshit. I am active here and on Discord, and have an inactive Reddit account. if people want to get in touch with me through Discord send me a message here and I'll send you my Discord name. I believe in peace and empathy. I would consider myself to be a pacifist, but pacifism only gets you so far. In cases where peaceful protest has failed, I support the use of careful force, avoiding as much collateral damage as possible. I will treat a person as a person, and I do not have the patience to coddle you if you cannot do this. Militarists, fuck off. I believe in the climate crisis, and disavow any environmental fuckery. Flat Earthers, fuck off. Climate deniers, fuck off.

I believe in modern medicine, including psychiatry and medical transition techniques. However, when a proven natural remedy can be approximately as effective as synthesised drugs, the natural remedy is superior. Anti-vaxxers, fuck off. Transmedicalists, fuck off. Essential oil pyramid scheme fuckers, fuck off.

I do not believe in the right of any person to claim ownership over a land or a people group. People deserve to travel freely and safely, with restrictions only serving to protect others. Restrictions should only serve to protect others and the individual freedoms of someone who acquired the rights to ownership over their land. Nationalists, fuck off. Zionists, fuck off. Monarchists, fuck off. Anti-democracy idiots, fuck off.

I do not believe in capitalism. I view capitalism as a system designed to squeeze profit from the people and funnel it into the hands of the elite, to the detriment of the people. Throughout my life, I have seen my family and people around me suffer as a result of capitalism, and I cannot in good conscience support its continued existence. Capitalists, fuck off.

I disavow the right-wing of the political spectrum. This includes British Conservatives and Labour, American Republicans, the Polish PiS, Canadian Tories, German AFD, and any others. I disavow religion as a dominant power in any area: religious-run parties are unacceptable to me, no matter their placement in the political spectrum. I especially disavow far-right movements such as authoritarianism, fascism, neo-Nazism, racial supremacy, and supporters of ethnostates. If you belong to any of these groups, seriously fuck off.

I do not tolerate exclusion of "fringe" communities, such as the furry community, the plurality community, the ASD community, communities of those with mental health issues. so long as your community is good-faith, you are welcome here. exclusionists of these communities, fuck off.

Pedophiles, fuck off. Zoophiles, fuck off. Groomers and manipulators, fuck off.

14 notes · View notes

beardedmrbean · 1 year

Text

Claims that a California school told students that white people had "no culture" have sparked controversy, with a parent expressing outrage about the alleged incident.

The mother of one of the students reported the claims to the San Ramon Valley Unified School District last week, saying that her daughter was taught about white privilege during a choir class and was told by an "equity teacher" that white people have no culture.

The school district is working with an "equity teacher on special assignment," according to its website, to "interrupt any inequitable practices in school culture and curriculum and eliminate barriers to personal and academic success."

"As a parent of a choir student, having outside instruction regarding white privilege with the choir students was incredibly hurtful, demeaning, and demeaning to many students in the class," the woman said on September 12. "It not only created division and confusion between the students, but it was also incorrect information."

She added: "During this, the teacher's discussion with the class, she stated that white people had no culture and any culture that they did have was stolen. She gave inaccurate information that the students could quickly google and figure out that was wrong." She said the U.S. number one condiment is not "salsa," as the teacher apparently claimed, and that the number one American dish is hamburgers, and not "chicken tikka masala."

The mom asked for the district to investigate the incident and "rectify it." She also called for more parents' involvement in the teaching at the school district.

"It is apparent that there are things that are being taught to our children where the district or the school does not provide a necessary opt-in or opt-out form for parents," said the woman.

A video of the school board meeting with the woman's intervention is available on YouTube.

The woman, who remained unnamed in the video and in the following news media report, has been noted as being part of Moms for Liberty—a conservative political organization advocating not mentioning LGBTQ+ rights, race and ethnicity in school curricula.

The Indiana chapter of the group recently came under fire for sharing a newsletter containing a quote attributed to Adolf Hitler, for which it later apologized, condemning the Nazi leader.

A spokesperson for the school district told Crisis in the Classroom (CITC) on Monday that a "guest teacher" had recently discussed "content that was not applicable to choir instruction because it related to a non-school sponsored excursion to South Africa" with two choir classes. The spokesperson added that the content of the discussion "was not an appropriate topic for this class and may have been offensive to some of our students."

Newsweek contacted Moms for Liberty and the San Ramon Valley Unified School District and the district's director of educational equity for comment by email on Tuesday.

It isn't the first time that the San Ramon Valley Unified School District has come under fire on such issues.

About a month ago, tensions rose during a public debate over a resolution on whether the school district should mandate flying a Pride flag during the month of June, with those in attendance split between support and opposition.

CBS News reported that some questioned whether the school district should discuss issues related to sexuality and gender at all, instead of leaving them to parents. Among the dozens of people in the room were several members of the Contra Costa County chapter of Moms for Liberty.

Despite the opposition of some members of the public, the school board passed the resolution unanimously.

#nunyas news

24 notes · View notes

stinkingoutloud · 7 days

Text

Please read the article before reading my thoughts regarding it.

That Harris isn't leaning into her identity during campaigning and focusing on issues that voters are concerned about is incredibly smart in my opinion. The article points out that former president Obama did the same when he was running for election.

Knowing how the Republican mouth pieces love to rag on identity politics, avoiding that mess altogether is one less ball to volley back and forth over.

Building a platform that has a focus on identity can be as much as a boon as a curse. Anyone who is a part of the same identity feels seen or heard. Yet for people who identify differently than whichever groups mentioned, it can feel exclusive. Then there are some people who are not a part of a group but may respond positively or negatively just at mentioning it.

Clinton used her gender while campaigning against Trump. Which she used to bring more attention to her. Identity is personal. There might have been some men who would have voted for her, but felt put off by Clinton "playing the gender card." I know this would happen today to Harris if she tried the same tactic.

By Harris focusing on the issues people will vote on and providing clear and certain plans (instead of "concepts of a plan") she can appeal to more people. It doesn't matter what your gender, sexuality, race, religion, etc. is when it comes to making sure your kids are safe at school, that the water and air are safe and clean, or that your community's transportation needs are met.

For voters, it's most important to educate yourself on your preferred candidates plans for when they are in office. What is their stance on issues that are important to you. Please don't vote simple by identity. For example, a woman could be on either side of the abortion debate. You can't tell simply by the fact she is a woman which way she leans.

Here's a good site for you to see how each candidate stands on various issues ranging from abortion to veterans: https://ballotpedia.org/Presidential_candidates_on_the_issues,_2024

Intersectionality happens waaaaaay more than people tend to notice. Two things can simultaneously be true. Yes, Harris is a woman, but she is also a mixed racial woman.

Our reality is quite a complex web with no simple answers. There is no single bad guy that can be slain and then we can all live happily ever after. Most problems aren't just black and white. Unless it's a skunk.

Stinking Out Loud 🦨

#feminism #american politics #kamala harris #identity #opinion #npr news

4 notes · View notes

a-slut-for-vegaspete · 10 months

Text

Playboyy – Porn without Plot?

Initial Thoughts on/ Reaction to Playboyy Episode One

As someone who loves to study (quite literally; I’m currently pursuing a MA degree in cultural studies) and investigate depictions of sex and sexuality in media, Playboyy has been one of my most anticipated releases of 2023 and it’s easier for me to work through my issues with a piece of media when I put my thoughts on paper or in a word document; so this post is primarily for myself.

Sex is sometimes presented as a personal, individual matter but in reality, our thoughts on sex, our dislikes and likes are a product or, at the very least, are shaped by, and of course in term can also influence, existing, dominant discourses on sex(uality), gender, class, race etc. One example of this – one most BL viewers/ queer individuals will recognise – would of course be sex between queer individuals; an issue that remains highly debated. Some people/governments to this day like to think that they have the right to dictate who is allowed to have sex with whom and what sexual practices people can engage in without facing societal/legal punishment. So sex is never just about sex but is always also political; it’s just that this is more obvious to people who are part of a (or multiple) marginalised group(s). Sex is an entangled, complex phenomenon that always needs to be understood in relation to other discourses on e.g. (normative) femininity/masculinity, national identity etc. So any sexual act (on screen/irl), whether intended or not, engages with these discourses, subverts them and/or reaffirms them.

Regardless of whether the creators of Playboyy – or any piece of media for that matter – have meant for this series to serve as a critique or subversion of certain ideas surrounding sex and sexuality, the series (un)intentionally presents us with certain performances of sex and in doing so adds to, intervenes in and shapes existing discourses on sexuality and influences how topics such as kink, queerness, sex work (to name a few) are understood and talked about.

Since only one episode has been released so far, and since I don't know what goes on in the writers’ minds, I, of course, can’t say for certain whether Playboyy is intended to engage with the political and social aspects of sex. However, I do think that Denice’s Twitter accounts (he is one of the writers (@ VivienneActing)) can provide us with insights into the writers’ intentions behind creating this show. In addition, the opening scene of episode one makes it clear that this piece of media, in some capacity at least, serves as a social commentary on the construction of sexual practices and sexual identities (in Thailand). The viewer is seemingly directly addressed, questions regarding sex are posed and the statement that “sex has many forms and careers in many places with many preferences” is made, which leads me to think that the creators have thought about and want the audience to critically think about how sex is often presented and talked about within dominant discourses. The character goes on to say that “it would be great if we could stop faking it and be frank about it”, which implies that the way we currently talk about sex is dissatisfactory to the character in the show/the creators of the show and that this series intends to present their own – potentially non-normative – views on sex. Especially the comment that “it’s a shame that we can’t be that free in this country” functions as a critique of how sex and the sex industry are frequently conceptualised in Thailand. (And when I say ‘Thailand’ here I of course don’t mean the entire country; I’m specifically referring to people/institutions/political parties that uphold and propagate conservative beliefs on and attitudes regarding sex. And I think this is the part of Thailand the series is critical of here as well).

However, I also don’t want to place too much importance on the intentions of the creators (in part, bc as I have said before, unless we are told specifically we can only speculate about their motives). I for one am also very interested in how I myself (and other viewers) read and interpret the narratives the series presents us with.

Little disclaimer: I watched episode 1 last night, half asleep, I don’t have the best memory and since the story has literally just begun (and there are so many ways this could pan out), my stance on these issues will probably change with the release of future episodes. So my ramblings have their limitations. In addition, I’ve grown up in the West, which influences how I conceptualise sex(uality) and gender; which is definitely something to be wary of and to be critical of, as well.

As of right now, I’m the most intrigued by Zouey and by how he navigates sex and how he expresses himself sexually. What I find so interesting about his character is his non-normative approach to sex. While he is introduced as someone who apparently hasn't slept with anyone yet, we also see that he has sexual needs and desires. I love that the show does not limit sexual expression to intimate relations between two or more people but also showcases the possibility of exploring it on your own.

I’m fascinated by people’s initial reactions to Zouey and what people make of his character; in particular people’s thoughts on the scene where he is in a dark room masturbating to a painting. I do wonder how much the colour grading (quite dark and gloomy) and the music (somewhat ominous) might influence or shape viewers’ perceptions of this scene and their conceptualisation of Zouey, and more broadly speaking their reception of expressions of non-normative sexual acts (in media).

The way Zoey negotiates his boundaries regarding sex is so interesting to me, as he clearly feels sexual attraction but does not feel comfortable being touched sexually. (I do wonder if there is a reason for this. Not saying that there needs to be a particular reason; I’m genuinely just curious if we might find out more in future episodes). I personally love how that doesn’t stop him from blowing Teena (twice if I remember correctly). I think his performance disrupts the normative script of sex, (or one of the normative scripts. To say that there is only one normative way to have sex would be incorrect I guess). He definitely doesn't adhere to this script/these scripts, and this seems to have created discomfort/confusion for some viewers, while others seem to really appreciate it.

Also a little side note: the way Zouey does or doesn’t have sex can also lead us to posing the question of what counts as sex. Only penetrative sex? That seems like a somewhat outdated and not exactly queer-friendly definition of sex, right? And what even is virginity? Is Zouey still a virgin or not by the end of the episode?

I think the first episode already touches on so many different issues and I love it. People have pointed out the different social statuses of First and Soong, so we already have a storyline that highlights how sex and class are interconnected issues. We have seen a fair amount of kinky sexual practices, and sex workers have also made an appearance. So to come back to my initial question, is Playboyy porn without plot? Personally, I wouldn’t classify it as such. In my opinion, while the first episode does heavily focus on sex, sex is used as a tool for storytelling and the creators have taken the unique approach of introducing the viewers to the characters via sex. Plus, there is the mysterious disappearance of Nun/Nant(?). But also to me, it doesn’t really matter whether this is porn without plot or not. Firstly, because I think that sometimes (emphasis on ‘sometimes’, okay?) when something is labelled as porn without plot this is done to discredit a particular piece of media and to paint it as something that is inherently ‘less’ (less serious, less valuable etc.) and I don’t agree with this particular conceptualisation of plot without porn because I think it fails to recognise the value of such stories, not just for people’s own enjoyment but also in regards to academic analysis. And secondly, because I am more interested in how the series is situated (and maybe even actively positions itself) in relation to broader discourses such as (non-normative) sexualities, kink, sex work (in Thailand) etc. and for this we don’t necessarily need a “good” plot structure. So I, for one, am I excited to watch (and analyse) the rest of the show.

#i’m known to change my mind quite frequently #so there is a good chance that i will have changed my opinion on a lot of things by the end of the show #also this is clearly by no means a fully flashed out analysis #i just needed to get this out of my head so that i can focus on the things i actually need to do today ahah #if you see a typo ... no you didn't #playboyy the series

15 notes · View notes

djuvlipen · 1 year

Text

I grew up along Romania’s Black Sea coast. My father was the first in his family to graduate from university, and my mother went to a vocational school. Being educated was unusual in our Romani community. My parents raised me with a deep sense of justice and dignity. They told me to be proud of being Roma, while non-Romani people told me there was something wrong with me.

My parents still preserved some aspects of traditional Romani culture: They were obsessed with me maintaining my virginity and being a “good woman.” In many Romani communities, women get married as teenagers. Those who attend school often drop out before high school because they get married, or to care for their younger siblings and perform household chores. Others leave school out of fear of the racism they would face.

Romani women aren’t a monolith. But we all contend with patriarchy and marginalization both inside our culture and from the outside world. The contradictions I have witnessed led me to ask questions and eventually, to discover feminism and to fight for equality. Along this path of activism, however, I learned that I had to define my own understanding of what it means to be a feminist within my Romani identity.

Romani people have endured centuries of injustice across Europe, as an ethnic minority, yet we have a long history of resistance. By the late 1990s, I had graduated from university, gotten married and become a mother. I was also an activist in the Romani movement. I started to wonder what elders meant when they said that we struggled for our “rights.” I learned about the discourse around the universality of human rights. As Romani people, did we really believe in human rights? Or did we only believe in human rights when it came to our rights, Romani people’s rights? What about everyone else? And who is in the position of power to define Romani rights? I debated these questions with my soul mate and fellow Romani activist, Nicolae Gheorghe.

At the same time, I began to question the condition of women and girls in our community, and why we were treated differently from the boys and men around us. Even when I joined the Romani rights movement, I was expected to behave in certain ways that men defined. They determined who was a “good” Romani woman activist. Some Romani male activists tried to monitor my sexuality and called me a “whore” when I had a relationship with a man when I wasn’t married. It was the verses of our beloved Polish Romani poet known as Papusza (whose real name was Bronislawa Wajs) that brought me comfort. She wrote about the Holocaust and of being a woman defying constraints and traditional roles for women, for which she was ostracized by the community. Where were women’s rights within the discussion of Romani rights?

Then came feminism. I met Debra Schultz the American Jewish historian, who could see all these questions burning inside me. She bought me the first books about feminism that I read, including works by thinkers such as Simone de Beauvoir. But I really fell in love with the work of Black feminists Angela Davis and bell hooks, whose book, “Ain’t I a Woman” became like a bible for me. And later, I met law professor Kimberlé Crenshaw, who introduced me to the concept of intersectionality between race and gender. Finally, the way I saw the surrounding world and my Roma world became clearer to me.

Feminism gave me the lens to question the world’s power dynamics, from private spaces to international politics. Despite this intellectual awakening, I still went on to face horrible racism when I met white feminists, who said they didn’t see the point of including Romani women in feminist agendas when there was already an existing Romani rights movement. When there was a spike in racism against Romani people in Europe around 2005-07, I reflected on how to practice a feminism that did not erase my Roma identity and that did not reinforce the oppression of my community.

Neither of the two social movements that I have moved between — feminism and Romani struggles — wanted Romani women’s concerns to be highlighted unless those in charge got to decide how to portray such issues. Every social movement has its prejudices, I learned.

So, what is Romani feminism? To me, it means I have the freedom to choose what version of a Romani woman I want to be. Romani feminism is the force that makes it possible for our communities to grow and to challenge others around us. Our feminism reminds us that the greater Romani movement should not only be about how to get into the structures of power, but how we should never forget the local communities, and the people. We should be close to our people at the local level, in their daily lives, while challenging both racism and sexism.

We Romani feminists reiterate pride in being Roma by constructing and reconstructing through archive, memory and art, the possibility for the next generation to practice a new identity, without the burden and control that our ancestors faced. Our work ranges from creating collaborations such as the Roma Women’s Initiative, a group of female Romani leaders across Europe, to providing social services to Romani women who continue to face harassment, racism and other challenges. We are creating our own ways to help each other.

Some may call me a pioneer, or a traitor for splintering the Romani rights movement. For others, I am not radical enough. But after three decades as a Romani feminist, I am still acting against “anti-gypsyism,” manifesting the love of my people, crying out loud with pain when I feel and see how others hate us.

Nicoleta Bitu is a Romani feminist activist and scholar based in London.

#roma #radical feminism #radblr #nicoleta bitu #romani feminist writings

33 notes · View notes

omegaphilosophia · 3 months

Text

The Philosophy of Gender

The philosophy of gender examines the concepts, theories, and issues surrounding gender identity, roles, and equality. It delves into the nature of gender, its social and biological underpinnings, and its impact on individual lives and societal structures. This field of philosophy addresses fundamental questions about what gender is, how it is constructed, and what implications it has for justice and equality.

Key Themes in the Philosophy of Gender

Nature vs. Nurture:

One of the central debates in the philosophy of gender revolves around whether gender is primarily a biological phenomenon (nature) or a social construct (nurture).

Philosophers explore how biology and culture interact to shape gender identities and roles.

Gender Identity:

Gender identity refers to an individual's personal sense of their own gender, which may or may not align with their biological sex.

Philosophical inquiries into gender identity examine how it is formed, experienced, and expressed, and the implications for individuals who do not fit into traditional gender binaries.

Social Construction of Gender:

Many philosophers argue that gender is a socially constructed category, influenced by cultural norms, practices, and institutions.

This perspective highlights how gender roles and expectations vary across different societies and historical periods.

Feminist Philosophy:

Feminist philosophy is a major area within the philosophy of gender, focusing on issues of gender inequality, patriarchy, and women's rights.

Feminist theorists critique traditional philosophical ideas and advocate for greater gender equality and the dismantling of oppressive structures.

Intersectionality:

Intersectionality is a framework that examines how various forms of social stratification, such as race, class, and sexuality, intersect with gender.

This approach emphasizes that gender cannot be understood in isolation but must be considered within the broader context of other social identities and power dynamics.

Transgender and Non-Binary Perspectives:

The experiences and perspectives of transgender and non-binary individuals challenge traditional notions of gender.

Philosophers explore the ethical, social, and political implications of these identities and advocate for greater recognition and rights for trans and non-binary people.

Gender and Language:

Language plays a crucial role in shaping and reflecting gender norms.

Philosophers analyze how language can reinforce gender stereotypes and explore ways to make language more inclusive and representative of diverse gender identities.

Gender and Power:

The relationship between gender and power is a key focus, examining how gender roles and expectations contribute to power dynamics in society.

This includes analyzing how gender influences access to resources, decision-making power, and social status.

Gender and Ethics:

Ethical considerations surrounding gender include debates about gender justice, rights, and equality.

Philosophers explore issues such as reproductive rights, gender-based violence, and the ethics of gender reassignment.

Gender and Representation:

The representation of gender in media, literature, and art shapes societal perceptions and attitudes.

Philosophers critique stereotypical and limiting portrayals of gender and advocate for more diverse and nuanced representations.

The philosophy of gender provides a rich and complex framework for understanding one of the most fundamental aspects of human identity and social life. By exploring the nature, construction, and implications of gender, philosophers seek to uncover the underlying dynamics that shape our experiences and strive for a more just and equitable society.

#philosophy #epistemology #knowledge #learning #chatgpt #education #Gender Identity #Social Construction of Gender #Feminist Philosophy #Intersectionality #Transgender Perspectives #Gender and Language #Gender and Power #Gender Ethics #Gender Representation #Nature vs. Nurture in Gender #gender

4 notes · View notes