#Silencing

[vyorei]

Tumblr needs to be held accountable for the complete suppression of the pro-Palestine tags. You cannot hide what's happening, pretending it's not trending isn't going to work, we are here and we are speaking and we are ANGRY.

The global attempt to silence people speaking out against genocide is inconceivable, one would find it more realistic in a film, much like everything else that's been happening.

We aren't going to be silenced, we don't support genocide, and we won't bow to the will of a colonial force attempting to ethnically cleanse over 2 million people.

Staff should be ashamed of themselves for their actions, and I hope it haunts them.

✊🇵🇸

[epitome-the-burnkid-viii]

[elmacheteillustrated]

[gwydionmisha]

The political prosecution of opposition politicians have begun. Republican politicians are allowed to call for the literally lynching, murder, etc. of Democratic colleagues, but an obvious fight metaphor about protecting democracy counts from obvious abuses by an unelected dictator, as a death threat somehow.

[fkasocks]

i have been banned for truth

hi everybody. as you may be aware, i was banned for speaking my truth on twitter. tomorrow night, 7pm est, i will go live and discuss the undisclosed details of my censorship. i have been silenced but i will still speak my truth + elden ring invasions twitch.tv/fkasocks twitch.tv/fkasocks twitch.tv/fkasocks twitch.tv/fkasocks #JoinTheConversation

[gettothedancing]

The subtext [Let People Enjoy Things] image is a fourfold confession: 1) “I do not want to feel judged for my consumption choices”; 2) “I want to silence people who disagree with me about this particular piece of media by making them feel like they are cheerless or judgmental”; 3) “I recognize an aspect of this piece of media that is worthy of criticism, and I am defensive of this;” and (4) “I do not want to think critically about the things I consume, and if I absorb any criticism about the things I consume it will magically ruin my enjoyment of them.”

Kate Wagner, Don't Let People Enjoy Things

[eaglesnick]

“Since when do we have to agree with people to defend them from injustice?”  (Lillian Hellman)

 ‘In a dramatic escalation of tensions over the role of juries in criminal trials, a Crown Court Judge has referred 24 people, including doctors, a priest, an Olympic Gold medallist, a retired Detective Sergeant and a former Government lawyer, to the Attorney General for contempt of court for holding up signs outside court. If prosecuted and convicted the 24 could now face up to 2 years’ imprisonment.’

The signs in question simply stated:

 “Jurors have an absolute right to acquit a defendant according to their conscience.”

This message is simply quoting a plaque in the Old Bailey commemorating the historic decision in the Court of Common Pleas that judges “may try to open the eyes of juries, but not lead them by the nose.” This  case “established the right of juries to give their verdict according to their convictions”.

So, although there is a plaque within the precincts of the Old Bailey for ALL to read, a judge has deemed it unlawful for the same words to be held up on placards outside the Old Bailey!

Why would a judge feel so strongly about this?

Back in February –March this year, three climate change protestors were given prison sentences. Serves then right, some would say – blocking the roads, causing a nuisance, disrupting ordinary peoples everyday business they deserve to be punished. Maybe, maybe not, but that wasn’t what they were imprisoned for.

They were imprisoned not for protesting, but for refusing to obey the judges ruling that they could not tell the jury WHY they were protesting, The judge refused them the right to explain to the jury that CLIMATE CRISIS was their motivation for protesting. When they ignored his instructions they were imprisoned for contempt of court.

It is a very sad day when a defendant cannot tell a jury the motives behind his or her actions.

 It is even more worrying when holding up a sign quoting words on display within the Old Bailey itself also becomes a criminal offence.

I am usually not a great believer in conspiracy theories but you have to wonder why climate crisis protestors are forbidden to explain their motives to a jury when being prosecuted.

[epitome-the-burnkid-viii]

[lili-home-to-embraces-and-hugs]

The Batcave has a “Do Not Talk To Me” couch. It’s sacred. It’s unspoken. It’s real.

okay so. picture this:

the batcave has one couch. it's in the corner. it’s hideous. it’s like beige or green or something equally offensive to every one of their aesthetics. no one likes the couch.

and that is exactly why it became sacred.

because one night jason just. drops onto it. full gear. bleeding. absolutely done with life. says nothing. doesn’t even take off the helmet. sits there in silence for 3 hours and then leaves.

next week tim uses it. sits there post-mission. face in hands. someone tries to ask if he’s okay and jason throws a batarang at them.

and thus it began.

Rules of the Do Not Talk To Me Couch:

You sit there? No one speaks to you.

You cry? No you didn’t.

You eat cold noodles off your chest at 4 a.m.? That’s sacred time.

If someone tries to comfort you? They are excommunicated for 12 hours.

Dick (sitting on the couch):

Damian: Grayson, are you—

Jason (from across the cave): HE’S ON THE COUCH.

Jason: I don’t make the rules.

Steph: You LITERALLY made the rules.

Jason: And I am the defender of the rules. There’s a difference.

one time damian storms in. covered in blood. absolutely furious. 10/10 rage goblin energy. throws his sword. marches to the couch. sits. arms crossed. steaming.

tim takes one look at him and goes: “i’m making tea.”

jason: “that’s acceptable. tea is allowed. talking is not.”

bonus:

once bruce sits on it.

and the ENTIRE CAVE goes silent.

tim literally freezes mid-typing. cass stops mid-flip. jason just mutters “oh shit.”

they all leave. immediately.

the couch is not ready for bruce.

extra bonus:

alfred vacuums around the couch. never says a word. leaves snacks in a silent offering. once placed a weighted blanket gently on jason’s shoulder. that’s different. he’s allowed.

[resonancewitness]

How to tell a real anti from someone who gets mislabeled as such

Not everyone who gets called an "anti-fan" actually is one. There's a big difference between genuine anti-fan behavior and thoughtful engagement that gets mislabeled to shut down discussion.

Here's how to tell them apart:

Critical engagement questions specific practices, not the person's fundamental worth. Anti-fan behavior attacks the celebrity's character and value as a human being.

Critical engagement focuses on systems and patterns - like how industry pressures work or how certain fan practices might be problematic. Anti-fan behavior obsesses over personal flaws and failings.

Critical engagement aims for positive change and growth. Anti-fan behavior aims for diminishment, harm, or destruction.

Critical engagement maintains recognition that celebrities are full, complex human beings. Anti-fan behavior reduces them to villainous caricatures.

Critical engagement holds space for complexity and nuance - understanding that situations can be complicated. Anti-fan behavior simplifies everything into black-and-white narratives where the celebrity is always wrong.

The problem is that fan communities sometimes weaponize the "anti" label to silence anyone who raises questions. It becomes a false choice: either you agree with everything or you're against us. Legitimate concerns get dismissed as "hating" so nobody has to address them.

What gets mislabeled? Suggesting certain fan practices might cross ethical lines. Asking about industry conditions. Presenting complex perspectives. Wondering how fan behaviors affect real people. These often come from genuine care, but they get treated like attacks.

Real anti-fans want to tear down. Critical thinkers want to build up — they just think we could do it better.

[catpower407]

Remember when we went to Montauk?

[alunah-lalunah]

Those who reject the victim are not truly judging her pain — they are fleeing from their own. She has become a mirror held too close, reflecting everything they’ve spent their lives burying: the betrayals they minimized, the silences they endured, the compromises that slowly eroded their integrity.

Projection and Guilt Avoidance

Those who reject the victim are not truly judging her pain — they are fleeing from their own. She has become a mirror held too close, reflecting everything they’ve spent their lives burying: the betrayals they minimized, the silences they endured, the compromises that slowly eroded their integrity.

Her suffering threatens to unearth the truths they’ve locked away. And so they attack not her, but what she awakens in them.

The deeper horror is this:

people do not attack evil — they attack reflection.

Victims are hated not for being wrong, but for remembering what others have repressed.

They are shunned because they disturb the collective denial.

Existential realization:

In a society of denial, memory is criminal. You are hated not for lying — but for remembering.

[chloeworships]

👀❗️🇬🇧

The hands came out of what felt like no where. I mean this is the heir to the throne. THE AUDACITY 😳😳😳

Now I will say this, sometimes if we are being reckless with our tongue, God will come through and tell us to be silent. 🔇 Our mouths can do just as much damage as a weapon.

Please pray about this and let the LORD reveal whichever circumstances this is.

SN: Princess Diana was my first role model until Pres. Obama. That tells you alot about how much she impacted me as a little girl so my heart is fond of the princes and their families 🥰 She lives on in them 🩵💙

[frothytundra]

The Scold��s Bridle

The Scold’s Bridle, sometimes called the Gossip’s Bridle, or the Brank’s Bridle, was a form of punishment and public humiliation in the 16th, 17th, and 18th centuries. It was a device placed over the face and into the mouths of women whose words offended men. 16th-century Scottish branks, Wikipedia They were brutal instruments. Sometimes they were an iron framework and sometimes they were a…