#Racism in Professions

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

* * * * *

Take a breath. Pat yourself on the back. Get back to work. Repeat!

January 30, 2025

Robert B. Hubbell

1. Take a breath. Seriously. Take a deep breath and relax.

2. Pat yourself on the back. The overwhelming outcry from the American people stopped Trump's power grab (for today).

3. Get back to work! We won an important battle, but there is much work to be done.

4. Repeat.

Wednesday was a bizarre day in American politics. Trump attempted to demote Congress to a subordinate role and to deny the American people hundreds of millions in critical funds approved by Congress. The American people spoke out in righteous indignation. The people prevailed. The details matter, but the takeaway is that the people prevailed because they rose up en masse. We must internalize the message and replicate the strategy.

The pace of events on Wednesday was dizzying. Rather than attempt to cover all details, I will focus on the broader narrative while citing sources for underlying details.

Here is the arc of events from the 60,000-foot level:

On Monday, the Office of Management and Budget issued a two-page memo that purported to “freeze” disbursements of all federal grants and loans.

On Tuesday, the seismic implications of the OMB order came into focus. A national outcry arose, and the administration began to walk-back the OMB memo by claiming that certain programs were excepted. See the excellent coverage of details by Jay Kuo in Status Kuo (Substack), The Incompetent Liars.

On Tuesday, a group of plaintiffs filed a lawsuit in federal court challenging the authority of OMB and the president to freeze disbursement and spending of funds previously appropriated by Congress. US District Judge AliKhan issued an “administrative stay” of the effectiveness of the OMB memo until Monday, February 3.

In a separate federal lawsuit, a group of twenty-two state attorneys general requested a stay of the OMB memo. US District Judge John McConnell set a virtual hearing for Wednesday afternoon at 1:00pm.

On Wednesday morning, in response to public outcry, the author of the original OMB memo issued a new memo that purported to “rescind” the freeze.

Later Wednesday morning, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt tweeted that the freeze was still in effect, notwithstanding the purported rescission. Leavitt tweeted,

“It [the second memo] is simply a rescission of the OMB memo. Why? To end any confusion created by the court's injunction. The President's [executive orders] on federal funding remain in full force and effect and will be rigorously implemented." Leavitt also said, “This action should effectively end the court case and allow the government to focus on enforcing the President’s orders on controlling federal spending.”

At the hearing before Judge McConnell, DOJ attorneys defended the freeze by saying, in part, that the lawsuit was moot because the original freeze memo had been rescinded.

The state attorneys general argued that the tweet by Karoline Leavitt proved that the freeze was still in effect.

Judge McConnell agreed with the state attorneys general that Karoline Leavitt’s tweet suggested that the freeze was still in effect. Judge McConnell stated his intention to sign an order temporarily staying the effectiveness of the original freeze memo. See The Hill, Judge signals toward granting Dem challenge to OMB freeze after order rescinded.

In sum, the original freeze memo (a) has been rescinded, (b) is subject to an administrative stay by Judge AliKhan until Monday, and (c) will be subject to a temporary restraining order from Judge John McConnell.

Despite Karoline Leavitt’s claim that the freeze is still in effect, the rescission of the freeze removes the immediate threat of unilateral cuts to previously appropriated funds. Americans can breathe a temporary sigh of relief and enjoy a moment of satisfaction that their outcry made a difference.

But . . . discussion of this story would not be complete without acknowledging the widespread fear, anxiety, and chaos caused by the on-again-off-again status of the freeze. I spoke to readers who feared for their jobs and worried about the ability of their employers to make payroll. Others were concerned about educational and research funds. Others were simply overwhelmed by the systemic uncertainty about who—if anyone—is in charge of the federal appropriations process.

As I wrote in yesterday’s newsletter, emotions are high. Readers feel whipsawed by events seemingly motivated by the twin forces of sadism and incompetence. A few readers wrote emails that radiated white-hot anger. Others said they were crying as they typed. Still, others said they were disengaged because they could no longer tolerate the chaos.

Those emotions are understandable, even reasonable, in the face of such chaos. I won’t say that readers should feel differently than they do. But I will emphasize that sanity prevailed for the expected reasons: The American people will not stand for arbitrary cruelty and gross incompetence. There is a positive, reassuring signal beeping faintly from beneath the smoldering ashes of Trump's OMB memo dumpster fire.

Stay strong. Take a deep breath. We made it through one of the most difficult, bizarre days in American political history. Take satisfaction in that small victory and prepare to fight again tomorrow!

Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth’s initial actions focus on racism, sexism, and revenge

Critics of Pete Hegseth warned that he would pursue an agenda of racism, sexism, and white nationalism in the military. And as a loyal supplicant of Trump, he could be counted on to pursue Trump's prime directive of vengeance. All of that has come true, as predicted by critics.

On Wednesday, Hegseth ordered that the military suspend all observances or recognition of the following holidays:

Martin Luther King Jr. Birthday

Holocaust Remembrance Day

Black History Month

Juneteenth

Women’s Equality Day

National Hispanic Heritage Month

Pride Month

National Disability Employment Awareness Month

Asian American Pacific Islander Awareness Month

American Indian Heritage Month

At the same time that Hegseth is prohibiting observance of nationally recognized holidays, Hegseth is reportedly considering re-naming military bases for disgraced Confederate “heroes” who were insurrectionists and are symbols of the South’s effort to maintain slavery. See HuffPo, Pete Hegseth Hints At Restoring Original Confederate Names Of U.S. Military Bases.

Per HuffPo,

In his first remarks as President Donald Trump’s defense secretary, Pete Hegseth referred to two U.S. military bases by their former Confederate names, appearing to hint that he might possibly restore them.

The message that Hegseth is sending is clear: He is promoting white supremacy in the US military. Nothing could be more corrosive to military readiness, good order, and discipline.

Hegseth is wasting no time to pursue Trump's agenda of vengeance. One of his first acts was to strip General Mark Milley of his security detail and to order an investigation into Milley to determine if he should be demoted (in retirement). See NPR, Hegseth strips Milley of his security detail, orders investigation into his conduct.

Trump hates General Milley, the former Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, because Milley spoke to Bob Woodward before retiring. Per the NPR article,

Before he retired, Milley spoke with Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward for his book about Trump. "No one has ever been as dangerous to the country as Donald Trump," the general told Woodward. "Now I realize he's a total fascist. He is the most dangerous person in this country."

Unfortunately, truth is not a defense in the military proceeding to retroactively strip Milley of his four-star ranking. It will be a shameful day for the military when it bows to political pressure to exact revenge on Trump's behalf.

Where are the lawyers?

At a hearing on Trump's executive order purportedly banning birthright citizenship, the federal judge was gob-smacked that DOJ attorneys could keep a straight face while arguing that the Constitution did not guarantee birthright citizenship. Judge Coughenour said,

I’ve been on the bench for over four decades. This is a blatantly unconstitutional order. Where were the lawyers when this decision was being made?

Judge Coughenour’s plaintive question recognizes the special role lawyers play in maintaining the rule of law—and the lawlessness that ensues when honest lawyers are missing in action.

Four hundred years earlier, Shakespeare made the same point in Henry VI, Part II, when the villainous character Dick describes the anarchy that will follow if their rebellion against the King is successful. Anticipating anarchy, Dick says, “The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers.”

While the phrase is often cited to suggest that Shakespeare was condemning lawyers, the opposite is true: Shakespeare was acknowledging that a precondition to anarchy is eliminating those who defend and administer the law, i.e., “the lawyers.”

Trump's lizard brain has grasped the point that “getting rid of the lawyers” is essential to his lawless agenda. Since Trump can’t literally “kill all the lawyers,” he has done the next best thing: He has corrupted, compromised, and seduced faithless officers of the court who violate their oaths by placing loyalty to Trump above loyalty to the Constitution.

On Wednesday, we saw more evidence of faithless lawyers willing to do Trump's bidding. Attorneys at the DOJ asked the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals to dismiss the indictments against Walt Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira, who are accused of assisting Trump in concealing national security documents that Trump wrongfully retained after he left the White House. See NPR, DOJ wants to dismiss case of 2 men indicted for allegedly helping Trump.

While Trump may have immunity courtesy of John Roberts, his co-conspirators do not. They committed separate crimes, including obstruction of the FBI investigation, that should be prosecuted. There is no legal basis to request the dismissal of the indictments. Rather, the DOJ attorneys are requesting dismissal because Trump told them to do so—a legally insufficient and corrupt reason.

But they have acquiesced in Trump's illegal request, claiming that they are eliminating the “weaponization” of the Justice Department—a code word for any action that seeks to hold Trump accountable for his crimes.

Also on Wednesday, the DOJ moved to drop charges against a GOP former US representative who accepted $30,000 in illegal foreign contributions. The lawmaker lied to the FBI about the contributions. Trump claimed that the charges were “baseless” and involved “a tiny amount of money.” The DOJ attorneys gave no reason for the request to dismiss the case. However, Trump posted a statement saying that the dismissal was necessary to stop the “weaponization” of the Justice Department.

The legal profession is in crisis. Trump's dictatorial agenda is being carried out by hundreds of attorneys willing to break their oaths to the Constitution. Although the profession made some efforts to address the unethical conduct of lawyers like John Eastman and Rudy Giuliani, those actions were excruciatingly slow. The legal profession must do better this time around. It must act more quickly and decisively. It must not be afraid to speak out against actions that are obviously baseless, illegal, and corrupt.

If you are an attorney reading this plea and want to help, I suggest that you check out Lawyers Defending American Democracy. LDAD’s mission statement is simple: A coalition of lawyers united in the defense of our democracy.

Be part of the solution. Help the legal profession reverse the corrosive effect of faithless lawyers on an honorable profession that even Shakespeare recognized was essential to maintaining the rule of law.

Concluding Thoughts

There is much more to discuss, but I have run out of time. I will cover the confirmation hearings of Robert Kennedy and Kash Patel in the Friday edition. I will also address developments in the immigration raids, including Trump's order to create an off-shore, extra-constitutional prison at Guantanamo Bay to hold 30,000 immigrants arrested in the US.

The collision of a helicopter and a passenger jet over the Potomac in Washington D.C. is a tragedy that reminds us that our safety depends on the good work and expertise of millions of federal employees.

If you are experiencing burnout or emotional fatigue, action is the antidote to anxiety. Laura Brill of the Civics Center has suggested an outlet for anxious democrats in her Substack essay, Burnout is real. The remedy is pro-democracy work.

Brill writes,

Yes, it’s been a shocking and disorienting few months. I’m doing my best every day to remember and commit to core values and the mission of my work: to make voter registration part of every high school in America. In the face of all this, though, high school voter registration remains important. Why? Because democracy is important. Because the power to press back against authoritarianism is in our hands. Because genuine progress is possible and individual and collective effort can make a real difference. It’s important because young people are needed in the fight, and it’s on us to help them understand their rightful political influence. It’s on us to embody the ideals of equal dignity and respect that underpin democracy, and it is vital to the future of our country. Young Americans are that future, and they are searching for hope and meaning amidst the chaos. I believe we can provide it.

Registering high school students to vote is a great way to fight burnout and anxiety—because it is a long-term, forward-looking investment in democracy. Our efforts to bring young people into the conversation will bear fruit long after today’s troubles are forgotten.

So, whether it is volunteering to help the legal profession to right itself through LDAD and other groups, registering new voters as they graduate high school, writing postcards, or engaging in collective action, the antidote to the stress of this moment is action—especially action in community.

[Robert B. Hubbell Newsletter]

[neechees]

You already know who I'm complaining about but the white dude from tiktok has been blocking any Natives trying to educate him, and I notice he NEVER interacts with any ndns correcting him on misinformation he says about us, no liked comment, no reply, nothing

[sentientsky]

fuck chris chibnall bc how did the doctor go from communist peepaw to “cops are okay actually” in one regeneration????

[larnax]

oh yea i never did post that therion/temenos analysis bc it refused to get under 2k words but the crux of it was that therion is a very passive character to the point that not killing people is about the only choice he personally makes(even in their final argument, darius is the one who starts it and therion is just defending himself for the majority of it), otherwise he's always following someone else's orders, whether it be heathcote or barham and he fucking hates his job. temenos on the other hand is an intj empath with a savior complex who is extremely active, refuses to listen to anyone he doesn't respect which is all but one person who dies before the first chapter is over, and his job is his life's calling.

[naamahdarling]

A person's informed consent doesn't matter if the very concept of consent doesn't apply to that person to begin with.

I found out one of the excuses they use for only doing clinical trials on cis men is that experimental drugs ‘may do harm to a woman’s reproductive tract’. As if there aren’t teratogens that affect sperm. As if that’s a valid reason to never test the efficacy of a substance on AFAB individuals. They really do see us as just a womb and nothing else and see that womb as inherently unknowable and unpredictable.

[missmickiescorner]

Not Free, Not For All: Public Libraries in the Age of Jim Crow

Not Free, Not For All, was a book I elected to read as an aspiring information professional who just happens to be a Black woman. I knew that I needed a reality check and I wanted to challenge myself.

Speaking personally now, I’ve gone the entirety of my life knowing to some extent about the history of segregation, slavery, and racism; I also knew that I, as a Black person, was at one point now allowed in certain places. As you might be able to imagine, once it clicked in my head that the library was also a place that would have denied my entry because I was Black was a devastating blow. In fact it was almost enough to make me give up the dream of working in the library profession all together, because it almost felt like I had been lied to about this place I loved so much.

Going back to the book, I recommend it as essential reading for all aspiring information professionals because it helps to redefine what an individual’s understanding of “access” is within the context of racism. Beginning with the dissection of the given history of the library, the author quickly goes into the history that is more hidden from view, laying the foundation for the argument that “free access” was never about open shelf policies, but rather the historical policy and practice of allowing open access to some patrons and actively and explicitly restricting the access of others.

In reviewing this text, I realize that there is far too much material for me to analyze here, but I would be remiss if I didn’t run down a short list of topics she covered, which includes:

Policies that forced Black communities to create their own libraries with very little funding.

Policies that kept Black readers out of libraries and Black professionals out of positions of power within libraries.

Policies that turned intellectual freedom into a white privilege.

Contradicting uses for the library, which meant intellectual spaces cultivated by white women and social welfare and educational spaces created by Black women.

How white women feminized the library space and profession (this is more linked to low literacy rates in Black men as opposed to librarianship)

Censorship of culturally relevant materials to Black patrons by white library professionals.

In summary, this book truly attempts to tackle the issue of how white supremacy and racist policies played a role in the development of libraries and is essential to understanding how the library has the power to either transform or hinder the communities that they are placed in, because it’s not enough for a library collection to be representative—there is the additional issue of the community who is being represented having access to that representation. (From this book I learned that W.E.B. Du Bois was not allowed to step into a library that had books he had written himself in its collection.)

Quotes to chew on:

“As ‘universities of the people,’ public libraries helped create an African American identity, asserting individual's’ capacity for intellectual labor in an era when the value of a liberal education for blacks remained a topic for debate. Libraries provided access points for black literacy and intellectualism, confirmation that African Americans were reading, reflecting , striving human beings.”

“‘Experience seems to show that [an] adult Negro waits for tangible proofs of the library’s willingness to extend full privileges to him before he takes advantage of it’s service, then he responds to the library service and needs more of it than the library can give….Time is ripe for development of library services for Negroes, but it must not be patronizing or partially informed.’”

“Public libraries designated for the exclusive use of African Americans clearly participated in the construction of blackness. Less obviously, public libraries in general helped define whiteness. On one hand was the public library, with it unannounced restriction on access; on the other was the Negro library, with it’s label of difference sometimes carved into its facade.”

“The U.S. public library was one of many institutions upholding the systemic racism that enabled white supremacy...it is fantasy to believe that the public library was one of the few institutions not implicated in a system of racism or that separated public libraries for African Americans were just an unfortunate exception to the public library’s true democratic nature.”

“More significantly, literary societies gave African Americans an opportunity to position themselves as participants in rather than victims of a democratic experiment whose founding documents revered liberty but whose national economy increasingly depended on slavery.”

“Unlike the white General Federation of Women’s Clubs, the Nation Association of Colored Women did not declare the creation of public libraries a priority. Instead, clubs wove a commitment to books and reading into their social welfare programs and services. Most black clubwomen pursued self-improvement through reading and writing as well as community improvement in a variety of charitable events.”

“The racially restrictive admission policies of southern public libraries ensured that the new public spaces would not challenge white women’s sense of superiority and entitlement nor the white man's sense that white women needed protecting from a threat manufactured by white men themselves.”

“...he did not give away manhood so much as redefine it. Black manhood meant accepting a hard lot in life and making the best of it. In compensation, whites were to recognize what such men had given up and accept the conciliation it represented. Black men’s power lay in their capacity for work, not in their ability to organize and agitate.”

“For the most part, the new southern public libraries were free to all whites. Inequitable access did not disappear with the transformation of libraries from private to public; it merely shifted from an economics basis to a racial one. Inability to pay membership and use fees no longer precluded access to library collections and service. Race did instead.”

“Elizabeth McHenry’s interpretation of the benefits that accrued to members of black literary societies applies equally well to the users of black libraries. ‘The growing number of educated black men and women considered reading and other literary work as essentially to the project of refashioning the personal identity and reconstructing the public image of African Americans...although black women’s clubs were not exclusively literary in nature…a primary impact of the black women’s club movement was the increased production, circulation, and readership of printed texts.’”

“The library was organized around the needs and desires of individual readers. Once the librarian issued them borrowing cards...readers followed their own literary tastes, reading paces, and borrowing patterns. In contrast, literary societies were organized around regular meetings, often opened to non-members as well as members, which featured the public presentation of a paper written before the meeting and discussed during the session and even afterwards. Reading, writing, thinking, and talking were social activities with the potential for political outcomes.”

“A person ventured into the literary society meeting in search of spoken words but traveled to the library in search of printed words. The result at both venues could be a meeting of the minds, but at the library, that meeting was silent and invisible, occurring solely between reader and author.”

“Henry Gaill of New Orleans indicated that his library could not afford to send staff to a library school and their low salaries meant that they would not be able to afford such training themselves. Some respondents said that black librarians and assistant librarians had received training in the main library, apparently alongside whites, who were receiving apprenticeship-style practical instruction instead of attending library school.”

“Several of the librarians asserted that a library school for African Americans was need...If one of the functions of professional education was to socialize students into the customs and practices of the profession, then a southern library school for blacks would need to manage the expectations of students who, as public librarians, could expect to work part time at low pay with little support for collection building or outreach.”

“For the most part, African American library buildings were small, with inadequate collections and funding. Nevertheless, they were significant, both as physical places in the urban landscape and as symbolic spaces in the lives of local black communities.”

“The New South included racial segregation and gender-specific roles designed to create appropriate places for black men, black women, white women, and to keep those places separate from and subordinate to the place of white men.”

“The injection of Carnegie funds and the requisite annual city appropriation for maintenance might have fed into the black economy, providing design and construction projects for African American architects, engineers, contractors, and trades workers. Instead, local black professionals and skilled workers received little or no benefit from these important building projects in their neighborhoods.” 

“Librarians generally seemed to think that they had a responsibility to help children develop the habit of reading, as long as it did not become an obsession, and the duty to lead children from the more sensational and unrealistic to the more refined...they also seemed to understand the need to nurture not only children’s intellectual development but also their emotional life and imagination.”

“African American readers were better served by library staff members who looked like them and who exuded helpfulness rather than hostility. Black librarians would create ‘an atmosphere where welcome and freedom are the predominant elements,’ Harris suggested, implying that white librarians were creating quite a different atmosphere when African Americans entered the building.” 

“The library’s annual report for 1953 noted that, with one exception, all of the African American borrowers returned their books on time. Perhaps the librarian included this information because some white staff members had assumed that black readers would be irresponsible.”

“Bullock was exactly what late nineteenth-century opponents of education for African Americans had feared: a black person who was willing to speak out when treated unfairly, willing to demand the rights due to him as a citizen, a taxpayer, and a human being. He also represented what supporters of education and libraries claimed would happened when blacks were given the same opportunities as whites. They would form a class of hardworking, responsible citizens who paid their taxes and a market of consumers who would contribute to overall economic growth.”

References

Knott, C. (2015). Not free, not for all: Public libraries in the age of Jim Crow. University of Massachusetts Press.

[scarlet--wiccan]

Agatha All Along, the highly anticipated follow-up to WandaVision, begins airing this week on Disney+. Now is the perfect to revisit some important information about both shows and the context in which some of Agatha's new characters are being introduced.

WandaVision primarily followed the character Wanda Maximoff and expanded on her family history by introducing her late parents as well her twin sons, who are born from magic and age rapidly over the course of the series.

In the Marvel comics source material, Wanda is part of a large, multigenerational family of Jewish and Romani characters whose stories frequently reflect the systemic violence and oppression that both communities face-- including Romani Holocaust victims, who are critically underrepresented in both education and media. In the MCU, these identities and histories are completely erased, and the characters are all played by white actors. Alternate versions of these characters also appear in the Fox X-Men films, and are similarly whitewashed.

The Romani people are a racialized minority that originated as a South Asian diaspora, and who face severe systemic oppression in Europe and North America. The modern Romani population is quite diverse, but they are not of white ethnic origin, and despite the fact that Wanda and her family have historically been drawn with white features, they are minority characters and ought to be considered as such.

Depictions of witches and witchcraft are often entwined with antisemitism and anti-Romani racism. In pop culture, witches and fortunetellers are typically portrayed as visual stereotypes of Romani women. In the real world, fortunetelling is a profession born from survival work, one which Romani families are often heavily policed and racially profiled for practicing. While Wanda usually subverts these tropes, they are often played straight elsewhere in the superhero genre, and any story about witches, especially one featuring Romani characters, needs to be critiqued in this context.

Agatha All Along introduces viewers to a new cast of characters, including Lilia Calderu, played by Patti LuPone, and the enigmatic "Teen", played by Joe Locke, who is heavily speculated to be an incarnation of Wanda's son, Billy.

In the comics, Lilia is a member of a prominent Romani family in Wanda's community. Often lauded as the "witch queen of the gypsies," Lilia embodies many racial stereotypes about Romani women. In Agatha All Along, Lilia is depicted as an older Sicilian woman, however, being portrayed as a batty fortuneteller with a tawdry psychic shop, she still embodies an offensive trope. Although Lilia is far from "good" representation, this is not an improvement-- if anything, it's even more exploitative.

Billy was raised in a Jewish American household and places a very strong emphasis on his Jewish identity, in addition to having Romani heritage. His identity as a young gay man is always presented in conjunction with this heritage, not in spite of it. Though there is a significance to Locke being a gay actor playing a gay character, his casting-- if he is indeed playing Billy-- is not authentic. White gay representation should not supersede racial inclusivity, and it is not an excuse for whitewashing or Jewish erasure.

Marvel Studios recently announced that the character Doctor Doom will be played by Robert Downey Jr., who is returning to the franchise after many years in the role of Iron Man. In the source material, Doom is also a Romani character with a very similar background to Wanda's. This identity is central to Doom's character-- although he is written to be both morally and politically challenging, the liberation of his people has always been a primary motive.

Clearly, this type of whitewashing is an ongoing pattern in the MCU franchise. Although "Teen's" identity is still unconfirmed and Lilia may, ultimately, be of little consequence, they are part of a larger problem, and Agatha All Along needs to critiqued in that context.

[blackstarlineage]

Paul Robeson (1898–1976) was an American singer, actor, athlete, and activist who became a prominent figure in the 20th century for his artistry and commitment to social justice. Born in Princeton, New Jersey, Robeson excelled academically and athletically, earning a scholarship to Rutgers University, where he was a standout football player and valedictorian of his class. He later earned a law degree from Columbia University but left the legal profession due to racial discrimination.

Robeson gained international fame for his deep bass-baritone voice and powerful stage presence. He is best remembered for his performances in productions such as Show Boat (notably singing "Ol' Man River") and Othello, which he portrayed on stage in both the U.S. and the U.K. He also had a successful recording and film career.

Robeson was a vocal advocate for civil rights, labour rights, and anti-colonial movements. He criticized racism in the U.S., supported the labour movement, and opposed fascism. His outspoken support for socialism and his association with the Soviet Union during the Cold War led to his blacklisting in the U.S., a significant decline in his career, and heavy government surveillance.

In his later years, Robeson's health declined due to a combination of medical issues and the stress of political persecution. He retired from public life in the mid-1960s and lived out his final years in Philadelphia.

Paul Robeson died on January 23, 1976, at the age of 77, from complications of a stroke. He left behind a legacy as a trailblazing artist and a fearless advocate for equality and human rights.

[frillsand]

hey what racism or speciesm do puppets face. And does wally still get harrased for being a puppet

Second question first

Very rarely do they have bad experiences, Wally coordinates their activities to avoid unwanted interactions. There are still people who disregard puppets no matter the circumstances, so harassment is expected sometimes.

He forgets he has no power out of the studio. Wow some people are something. Luck for Wally, his friends seem to think it’s not anything against them being puppets.

So types of intolerance puppets receive would be almost passive aggressive than anything

They get paid noticeably less than human men and women. Puppets are encouraged to stay in small entertainment, and are pushed from other professions. Though there’s been a good number of puppets who managed to get good paying jobs, but not all. Any police reports made by them are not taken seriously and usually get thrown out. Some establishments take advantage of this to change their rules and prices.

Don’t get me wrong, the majority shows at least human decency and means no ill will.

Should note racism against poc still exists as it is now and laws for puppet equality have not been established yet. Progress is happening, just can’t see it often.

[iww-gnv]

As Fashion Week in New York kicks off on Feb. 9, a growing chorus of hybrid model-actors are drawing attention to the woeful working conditions that models face and are calling for meaningful change. Variety spoke with eight people who have straddled both professions and who argue that the modeling world suffers from a lack of guardrails. Their grievances range from sexual misconduct to racism to an inability for models to own the rights to their own image. All are backing New York’s Fashion Workers Act, which would close a legal loophole that allows modeling agencies to act with impunity. Taking a page from last year’s WGA and SAG-AFTRA strikes that shut down the industry before settling in September and November, respectively, these actors-models believe that it’s time for a reckoning within the fashion industry.

[damnfandomproblems]

Fandom Problem #6783:

I used to like an artist, but now she's on Twitter accusing archaeologists of racism because a recent dig found proof her ancestors practiced human sacrifice 1000+ years ago. She insists the dig was faked to make her ethnic group look bad. it's a lost cause to explain everyone's ancestors practiced human sacrifice at some point. I'm trying to separate the art from the artist, but it's damn hard when she's drawing comics shitting on archaeology as a profession and getting dangerously close to anti-intellectualism.

[kalina-c]

Quite honestly egg discourse is a TERF invention and more people need to recognize this fact

On top of the fact that it's barely removed transmedicalism and assumes violently the importance of preserving cis manhood over transfem existence, there's also the fact that it's regularly deployed by far right and fascist transphobes like Bridget Guilty Gear discourse.

Like quite honestly I've gotten more "egg culture is harmful" mentions from right wingers who are openly anti-feminist and citing TERF rhetoric about biological females and how transition at all is grooming, than I've gotten from hoodwinked gays in my mentions. And while I don't doubt that the latter exist at all, it's extremely telling that the talking point is compatible enough with the kind of right wingers who white knight JKR and get their talking points from Ray Blanchard that it's a regular part of their repertoire.

The interesting thing about this most recent round of egg discourse is that the goalposts seem to have moved from “if you think someone is an egg, don’t ever tell them” to “if you think someone is an egg, you better not”

[yannaryartside]

God I just saw a video essay about the Bear and the guy who made it even recognized that the clairexcarmy scenes that seem to try to makes us care about the relationship and all the other Claire scenes where so perpetually shallow, that she is still a manic pixie “bunny girl” in his own words, but he suggested that she may need her own episode so the audience can get “to know her mind”…🤢

Like, I know is difficult to tell what exactly is so wrong about her, but is interesting that even the people that straight up don’t care about a ship that is two seasons in the making don’t get to imagine is because that’s the intention of the show. Is like those characters that you may not trust but may not completely dislike either.

But this guy also seemed to think that Syd didn’t have a right to move forward from the Bear so…

My biggest problem is I also understand the people that say Syd doesn’t do much, and I am pretty sure that’s her arc, to let her take the wheel of her own life next season once and for all.

There is a lot of racism and misogyny involved in this discussion, but even the people that are not stupid like that, seem to not suspect of Claire (in part because is the shows intention to misdirect them) but also because what they have seen from Syd is not enough for them to root for her. The same way some people didn’t root for Richie until “Forks”

God I am rambling. There is a discussion to have about what makes people care about characters because I rooted for Richie since the phone call in the trip to the store.

I refuse to believe that they haven’t make Claire unlikeable on purpose when Richie was the most obnoxious character and was reddened in my eyes whiting two hours of content while Claire was showcased for two seasons already and is still so shallow. If this was a relationship/character to root for they would have managed to make us care. Shippers or not. She is a doctor for Christ sake, one of the most noble professions in this world and she is still impossible to swallow.

And I rooted for Sydney upon seeing her, because I know what is like to be in an industry you don’t seek to be made for. She is genuine and flawed.

I love her to death. But she frustrates me. She is also stuck in an awful narrative that Carmy is the catalyst for. All her insecurities and fears keeping her in place and I know that’s the intention.

All this to say Storer, you better giver Syd her own episode and it has to be better than Forks and Napkins combined.

[piratecaptainscaptainpirates]

I will never understand where the fanon idea that Ed has "anger issues" came from (yeah I know it's the racism just play with me in this space for a moment).

Because before I got into the fandom and started reading fanon takes, one of the things I loved so much about OFMD is how careful the show is to show Ed as someone who explicitly does not get angry very easily. It would've been so easy to paint this brown man in a hyper-violent profession as a hyper-violent person, but by virtue of his hangups around violence, Ed is one of the least violent characters in the show. We're shown early on that violence in this world is normalized and not treated the same as in the real world (we're expected to love Roach, a guy who is bummed about not getting to torture hostages), and we're told Ed enjoys a good maim, but all his violence that we actually see is so performative. He doesn't enjoy it the way other pirates do.

And every time Ed gets angry, we're beaten over the head with how hard you have to push him to make him mad. He will give people so many chances before he gets angry. Like the racist boat captain - he says "what's that supposed to mean" when the captain started being racist and gross, and only got mad once it was clear he was doubling down. In s1e10 he tries to de-escalate after Izzy starts being aggro, and that's after Izzy says he should've let the English kill Ed.

And literally every time Ed does behave violently, not only does it never exceed what is expected in pirate terms (and we're usually told this explicitly, like when Ed mentions cutting toes off as a part of pirate culture he doesn't like the episode before he does that), it is always very calculated and performative. When Ed reacts with violence, it's almost never a passionate thing, it's very cool and thought-through. He is very obviously a man who does not typically react with violence when he's angry.

It just baffles me. Every time I see takes or read fics that talk about Ed's "anger issues," or act like Ed's somehow destined to become abusive towards Stede, it's like...did we watch the same show?

[jollmaster]

Does your version of Alastor only hunt "bad" people? I think that it would take away from what makes him interesting-if all his victims deserved it then that makes him a hero rather than a villain.

you may have had some misunderstanding, but Alastor's problem in my version isn't that he only killed bad people (there were cases where he killed just suspected ones), — Alastor' problem is that he killed without judgment, out of pride and wrath, out of his own thoughts based on specifics of growing up, environment, racism and misandry

that's why Alastor's first victim was Italian (an outsider to Louisiana people; Italians were very prejudiced in this region, the largest mass lynching in the history of New Orleans was directed towards them), a man who raped a woman (Al was mostly raised by mother, and she was perceived as a fast woman at some point in her life because of her profession and being never married), a woman who was Al's good acquaintance (personal motive, destructive manifestation of wrath), and it didn't matter to him how good that man was outside of this crime

anyway it's incorrect to call him a hero in my rewrite, at best he was vigilante who acted on his own basis, formed over the years; besides, the main meaning of Alastor's name is avenger, but he was also baptized as Alistair, protector

vengeance is a choise; vengeance can be used for protection, but it isn't an only option