#That oppressed people and those who oppress them may free each other

[foreverpraying]

Homeless Jesus by St. Barnabas Episcopal Church, Bay Village

"That oppressed people and those who oppress them, may free each other:

That those who are handicapped and those who think they are not, may help each other:

That those who need someone to listen may touch the hearts of those who are too busy:

That the homeless may bring joy to those who open their doors reluctantly:

That the lonely may heal those who think they are self-sufficient:

That the poor may melt the hearts of the rich:

That the seekers for truth give life to those who are satisfied they have found it:

That the dying who do not want to die may be comforted by those who find it hard to live:

That the unloved be allowed to unlock the hearts of those who cannot love:

That prisoners may find true freedom and liberate others from fear:

That those who sleep in the streets share their gentleness with those who cannot understand them:

That the hungry tear the veil from the eyes of those who do not hunger after justice:

That those who live without hope cleanse the hearts of their brothers and sisters who are afraid to live:

That the weak confound the strong and save them:

That violence be overtaken by compassion:

That violence be absorbed by men and women of peace:

That we may be healed:

These things, good Lord, that we pray for, give us grace to labour for.

Amen."

Give Us Grace to Labour: A Prayer of Therese Vanier

[hadesoftheladies]

“that’s just war” is what i keep getting told. women get raped and butchered? that’s just war. children get bombed and buried? that’s just war. when i read stories of the hamas hostages and the frustration and pain of jewish families caught up in the war, what do online politics offer? “that’s just war.” that’s just the price of resistance. when i tell my dad while watching the news on palestine “thousands more children were bombed by israeli forces this week” all he can say is “that’s just war.” if a man pointed a gun at you wouldn’t you want to have a gun, too?

were the allied soldiers better than the nazis? depends on who you ask. they bombed, raped, sabotaged the planes of women in their own army. nazis were terrible. did that make allied soldiers saints? we weep for the mass graves in 20th century concentration camps across the world. then when we grow up we learn that those black and white photos were actually grey all along. the victims had also victimized others. male prisoners could rape as the soldiers did.

“ignore war men will be men” some women say. “they’ll find a way to keep killing each other. let them have at it.” is it feminist action to bask in our own self righteousness as women? do people sleeping while sirens go off in their city have any choice other than to wake up and run? can they ignore such a thing?

where should i stand? will the white women online help me if their president ordered a siege of my country? my country’s history is riddled with blood. the resistance gave me freedom. I can walk on my own land. go to school and own a car. I can dress myself without dressing a white mistress first. I can farm for myself and not for some smelly englishman. that’s good, isn’t it? but they also killed scores of setttlers, the resistance. they raped white women and girls. slaughtered white children and dumped their bodies in pits for their husbands and fathers to find. wasn’t that bad? but wasn’t it the black kikuyu children and women that bent their backs over white fields? wasn’t it the white people who put them in camps and exacted harsh curfews. didn’t white men shove broken glass up black detainee’s private parts? which white women came to free them? didn’t they laugh at the same racist jokes as their husbands did? didn’t she smile and pour tea for him as he told her about work? didn’t she love having such a wide sprawling estate? wasn’t that bad?

“so you stand with the evil black men that raped white women just because they could? you think their rape served a purpose?” no, but— “so you stand with white women who were okay ordering your people to be shipped, slaughtered and starved?” no! these questions are like asking me which bullet i’d prefer to be shot with. the answer is i don’t want to die. i am not comforted by the rape of women or by the enslavement of my people. why would either be something i want?

what this all is, ultimately, is a question the entitled never like to hear. in regard to the oppression of women by men, blacks by whites, the indigenous by the colonial, the one question at the heart of it all is this:

who has the right to self defense?

why is the woman that killed her rapist jailed? why is the slave that killed his master himself killed? by what means and to what extent do we rule an act of violence as self-defense or something monstrous?

the answer is even more uncomfortable: to the extent that we view the aggressor as human.

it’s not an answer that really solves anything. it doesn’t change what happens in war. it won’t stop any war.

but in these scenarios, my way has been to accept that there is rarely such a thing as moral purity in a human, and for this reason, our default attitude may need to be humility, the acceptance that we can be hypocrites. that we aren’t exempt from tragedy or more special than another life. that we’re as alike as we are different, even if we may not be equally guilty of certain acts. because if we are open to the humanity and dignity of the life of others (and I do extend this to animals as well, because they have the capacity to suffer and the will to live), we are bound to be less prone to repeat the cruelties we decry.

and maybe that’s more of a solution than a neat, easy answer or a casual dismissal like “that’s just war” might be.

[trans-androgyne]

Sorry if this is an irritating ask or anything, but could you please explain to me what people find wrong about the term transandrophobia? As far as I’m aware it’s literally just a word to describe trans men’s oppression. I’m not against the idea that it might have something wrong with it (as a transmasc person), but through all this fighting I’ve never once seen someone clearly explain what the problem is.

I’ve seen people claim that transmascs keep throwing transfems under the bus, but the only thing I’ve ever seen is actually the OPPOSITE way around, and only when I go searching for it (but that might just be because I make an effort to keep my dash free of that kind of thing) again I’m not saying it doesn’t happen, I just… don’t quite understand all this.

Sorry abt this rambly ask, I’m just tired and frustrated and I HATE that we’ve been pitted against each other

I will do by best to genuinely present and respond to the main arguments I have heard made against using the term. Apologies in advance for the length.

The most common in my experience is that “androphobia/misandry doesn’t exist,” or “men aren’t oppressed for being men,” based on the terms transandrophobia and its origin, transmisandry. It feels like a non-sequitur to me, completely bypassing the actual meaning of the term. Some people do include androphobia or misandry in their definition of the term, but many more don’t and just use it to describe the intersection of transphobia and misogyny in the lives of transmascs or even just “transphobia against transmascs.” I personally do believe androphobia exists in a literal sense—the fear of men that has serious consequences—but not in the way they mean it. They are attempting to paint us as MRAs, but nobody who gets any eyes on them using the term has ever argued that women oppress men as a class. MRAs are antifeminist, and the transandrophobia conversation is very much a feminist one.

The simplest is just that transmascs just “don’t need a word” to talk about their oppression. Our experiences are called “just transphobia” or “just misogyny” based on whatever they think applies most in the moment. Our theorizing is painted as useless infighting or just being jealous that trans women have a word to describe their oppression. I vehemently disagree with this one, I think everyone deserves language to describe their experiences. I think it’s impossible to ignore the way that both transphobia and misogyny interact to affect us in a new way (the very definition of intersectionality), and that we deserve to recognize and describe that intersection. Even the coiner of the word “transmisogyny” appears to agree with us on this.

Other people will focus on the term’s perceived origins. They frequently call the person who changed the term “transmisandry” to “transandrophobia” a “lesbophobic transmisogynist” and rape fetishist. From everything I’ve been able to put together on the matter, it seems to be that they’re referring to him having engaged in someone else’s detrans kinks as a sex worker on a private blog. I’ve heard from others he may have harassed people, absolutely cannot verify that. To me, it feels like another case of accusing trans people with kinks others find unsavory of being a sexual predator/sex pest, which people generally recognize as transphobic. In any case, even if every single part of their outrage was true, I do not think the behavior of a person who didn’t even come up with the ideas means that transandrophobia theory is inherently transmisogynistic.

In regard to “throwing trans women under the bus,” I think a lot of those ideas come from oppositional sexism. It’s assumed that what we’re saying is true of men must be the opposite for women. Trans women, including the woman who coined “transmisogyny,” have been using trans men’s perceived “opposite” experiences to prove their points for many years. They try to make a claim for transmisogyny by saying trans men don’t experience similar issues (violence, sexualization, demonization, safety issues, misogyny, trouble passing). But the reality is, trans men do experience those issues — some to a lesser extent, some in a different form, some just less visibly due to our chronic erasure — and have other issues of their own that trans women don’t face (like abortion rights issues). An attack on the idea that trans men have it easier is seen as an attack on transmisogyny as a concept. But it isn’t!! Transmisogyny is so blatant and oppressive of a system that it doesn’t need to compare itself to transandrophobia/trans men’s issues to have ground to stand on. Trans people are all harmed by transphobia in different, complex ways and none of us have gendered privilege.

Very few people engage with the actual meat of transandrophobia theory. We have really bad optics, I’ll give them that. It’s hard to like a word with “androphobia” in it, talking about men’s issues puts people on edge due to MRAs, and there are TERFs actively trying to recruit us. (The last part is used against us when it shouldn’t be, they try to recruit transmascs of all stripes for detransitioning and are only using us in particular because so many transfems have been awful to us because of the term. They are trying to widen that divide while most of us discussing transandrophobia are trying to close it.)

We (people who use “transandrophobia”) are often characterized as a unified movement that hates trans women (like in that post that blew up in the wake of predstrogen’s banning). We are not a movement any more than “transmisogyny” or “exorsexism” are. We don’t all believe the same things, the only thing we share in common is that we feel transmascs have a specific kind of oppression and deserve a word to describe it. And, obviously, we are doing our best not to perpetuate (trans)misogyny! The number of disclaimers I have seen people put on their post to make it exceedingly obvious to the piss on the poor website that they’re not talking about trans women is absolutely astounding. I’m sure our circles do have some transmisogyny in them, everywhere does! We do our best to combat it and I know my personal spaces have a couple transfems in them that help keep us in check. If we were being genuinely transmisogynistic, I would ask people to actually point to what they’re seeing that’s harmful instead of just dismissing all of us as evil bigots.

I think what contributes to the backlash the most is simply that trans men do not fit into current understandings of feminism well. People have gotten it into their heads that men are gender oppressors and not gender oppressed — which doesn’t shake out so well when you put being trans into the equation. I grew up hearing “ew men are gross” “I hate men” “kill all men” sentiments due to being in LGBT spaces. Some people really, really do not want to let go of the idea that men are bad and icky and dangerous and women are good and pure and safe, especially when it benefits them as non-men. Many transmascs themselves have internalized the idea that they are gender oppressors, traitors to feminism, more likely to be dangerous/predatory/misogynistic, and take up too much space because they are men/mascs. I sure felt like that before finding these conversations! I sincerely think that as we grow our transfeminism and heal from our gender essentialism a little more, this rhetoric will be left in the past.

[decolonize-the-everything]

Hi, I saw you other post and wanted to contribute to the discussion if that's cool.

I'm white, grew up middle class in the suburbs. My parents were both first generation immigrants. I grew up connected to their culture, their parents were Catholics from Northern Ireland who came to the US with their kids during the Troubles due to the violence there. But both of my parents were also pro assimilation; they taught me about my family history, but I wasn't meant to talk about it with others outside of our culture. I didn't understand that as a child, but I later learned that it's because they were afraid of being judged and were worried that it may decrease their social standing.

They are both conservatives, always voting red, and they constantly talk about how immigrants do harm and are terrible for this country to others, acting as though they themselves aren't the children of immigrants. Their parents fled violence and discrimination, yet they judge other people for doing the same. They see themselves as the exception. They're white, and see themselves as entitled to all of the benefits of that.

When I was in middle school, I started becoming aware of the contradictions present in the house I grew up in. I realised I was queer, I started experiencing more misogyny, and I started making friends and finding support in punk/anarchist spaces in my hometown. When I started to push back against my parents, I was met with anger and indignation. How are I not want what their parents "fought so hard" to get? Why couldn't I just accept the privilege and be happy with it? How could I find kinship and community outside of the spheres of whiteness? Why couldn't I just be cishet, and follow those rules to preserve my family's "dignity"?

What was especially crazy to me is that though they felt a "connection" to their Irish culture, the moment I began supporting Irish republicanism and Irish socialists/communists, I was suddenly a traitor. I was somehow a traitor for opposing the oppression that Britian wrought, entirely because I was applying that to other people. They want Ireland free from the British Empire, but they are against Landback in the US, Palestinian sovereignty, and other movements against colonialism arcoss the world. Basically - its not okay when they do it to us, but its okay when we do it to others. They also support kicking the brits out of Northern Ireland, but don't support the destruction of the capitalist policies that have hurt and killed thousands of people. Their people too!

When I got kicked out, I was taken in and supported by the punks, antifascists, anarchists, and communists of my community; a support that I had never seen before. The suburbs were always lonely, cut off from the rest of the town, and people there would rather die than ask others for help. The difference was insane. I'm broke now, disabled, uninsured, and struggling financially, but I have, like, actual friends. I have a community. We all pass the same $20 back and forth to each other to make ends meet, we pool money to buy things in bulk so we all have enough, we go all in on one Costco membership every year to make it easier. I have support here, even if I don't have the same degree of "comfort".

What I gathered from all this is that white immigrants and their children occupy a very weird place in American whiteness, especially those who came to this country fleeing poverty and/or violence. They're traitors to other immigrants, in thinking that they're somehow "more superior" due to their connection to whiteness. They're willing to throw anyone and everyone under the bus to further their own social standing. They feel especially entitled to it, believing that other white people just had it handed to them rather than having to fight for it, but are also terrified of other white people realising that. They put on a great show of whiteness in the hopes that being accepted into this group will makes them safer, while beating down others looking for safety.

I think Irish Americans are especially guilty of this, specifically Irish Catholics. They use the very real oppression and violence that their parent/grandparents faced to deflect from their own shittiness, while also keeping that under wraps around other white people, lest they be seen as less American.

The difference is insane. I don't know how they live like that, genuinely. They're so wrapped up in their privilege and their identity as white that they deprive themselves of real human connection. They beat others down with glee while exempting themselves from the same rhetoric.

I don't have a nice, clean end to this ask, this is more of a collection of observations than anything else. I think international solidarity is required to fix the problems in this world, but I genuinely don't know how to reach some of these people. They have a death grip on whiteness at the expense of their own humanity.

I never responded to this because I didn't know how or what to say; anon said it all already and there was nothing to add.

I am constantly thinking about the things being said here.

"we pass the same $20 back and forth to each other to make ends meet" and "they're so wrapped up in their privilege and their identity as white that they deprive themselves of real human connection" live in my head rent free

[soulessjourney]

Ashes of Panem

Part 1 Part 2 Part 3

Paring: (young) Coriolanus x Reader

Word count: 2.9k

Summary: Coriolanus Snow and Y/N Ashcroft had trained together since their entry into the academy. However, when their names were drawn, they found themselves pitted against each other and twenty other children in these games. As Y/N became a symbol of rebellion akin to her great grandmother, who vanished shortly after Panem's liberation, the looming threats of war and the approaching games forced Coriolanus and Y/N to forge an alliance. Amidst these challenges, they had to learn to trust and support one another in order to break free from Coin's oppressive regime.

Warnings: None

A/N: Eat up kids, this is girl dinner and my best friend helped me deicde what course of action to take at the end. She's a long one but I hope this feeds you until I can plot how the next couple of drafts will go.

Selection day—the one day of the year that turned into everyone’s personal hell. With the recent changes, you found yourself wearing a knee-length red velvet dress that stopped just below your knees, its collar reaching midway up your neck. One perk was that it had pockets, one of the best inventions for a dress. Your hair cascaded in soft curls, its length falling over your shoulders, stopping just below your shoulder blades.

Navigating through the dense crowd, you moved towards the outskirts, finding solace just off to the side. The conversations with the various district representatives had grown tiresome, feeling more like you were selling yourself rather than seeking aid to stay alive. It left you feeling sick, as if you were begging these people to save you, a sensation that made you feel as pathetic as you appeared.

Startled, you jumped when a glass came into view right in front of your face. Following the hand holding it, you relaxed at the sight of Coriolanus. Despite your indifference for him, you were relieved it was him and not another district official. “You look like you’re about to pass out, drink some water,” he urged, offering the glass again, smiling as you took it. “You look beautiful, by the way. I haven’t had the chance to tell you that tonight.”

“You ditched me the moment we walked in here, Snow. Also, you’re not one for giving out compliments, so what do you want?” you questioned, raising a brow. It was a fact—he didn't usually dole out compliments unless there was something he wanted or someone he wanted to involve in some scheme, and you suspected it wasn’t the latter.

“I don’t want anything. I just enjoy being right. Red is definitely your color, Snowflake. It brings out those eyes of yours,” he shrugged, taking a sip from his glass. “I saw how you were earlier, looking as if you wanted to tear their heads off their shoulders when they tried to touch you,” he continued, drawing your attention back to him. “I won’t let them hurt you, Snowflake. They’d be foolish to even try,” he said, smiling down at you. A blush dusted your cheeks, prompting you to awkwardly turn away from him in an attempt to hide it.

Before you could respond, the Capital anthem started playing through the speakers, signaling the arrival of Cassius Coin, President Coin’s grandson. He walked forward, reaching the end of the balcony that overlooked the room. Soft claps welcomed him, though your classmates appeared mildly annoyed, preferring to be fighting in the arena than standing here in that moment. Raising his hands, Cassius silenced the room, commencing the same speech he gave every year.

“Good evening, students and representatives from the districts. I hope you've been enjoying your evening thus far. As we all know, this is an important evening marking the seventieth year of the Capital Games. Selection night holds historical significance. Many may perceive it as a punishment when, in fact, it is quite the opposite. This is an opportunity for all of you to display your loyalty to New Panem by entering the arena, striving to emerge victorious. In this new world, we've learned that only the strong can survive,” Cassius declared.

Beside you, Coriolanus scoffed. “This has to be the most morbid thing I've ever heard,” he muttered, keeping his gaze forward. Sensing your confusion, he continued, “Saying we should be happy to meet our deaths, I mean. We’ve proven our loyalty throughout our time in this academy, so why do only the games matter?” he grumbled, shifting his gaze down to you. “Some of us don’t deserve this fate,” he whispered, his eyes fixed on yours.

"Now, it is time to announce our selected students for this year's games," Cassius announced loudly. "I would like to start by unveiling a new change. As of this year, we will not be drawing names," he declared, as the screens on either side of him illuminated with a list of twenty-two names. Your heart skipped a beat, and Coriolanus drew in a deep breath. Somewhere off to the side, a cry echoed through the room. It was your class rankings, precisely in the order displayed after your evaluations. "Congratulations to those of you who fought for these spots and demonstrated your loyalty to the Capital!" Cassius shouted enthusiastically.

The glass you held slipped from your grasp and crashed to the ground, the shards pooling around your feet and cutting into your ankles. Stumbling back, the world began to spin, and bile surged up your throat. Coriolanus reached out, but you brushed him off, staggering out of the room and down the hall. Flinging the doors open at the hall's entrance, you fell to your knees, retching into the nearby bushes. Footsteps hurried toward you, but you ignored them. Your breathing became rapid, struggling to draw air into your lungs. It felt like you were suffocating, an inability to fill your lungs.

Someone attempted to speak to you, but the words sounded muffled, lost amidst the ringing in your ears. Clutching at your chest, you felt your heart racing. Tears streamed down your face, unnoticed in your frenzy. Cool hands cupped your cheeks, forcing your gaze upward to meet Coriolanus's blue eyes, ones you usually avoided. His lips moved, but the words eluded you, drowned out by ringing in your head. Covering your mouth, you retched again, feeling his hands soothingly pat your back and brush your hair away.

Sitting up, you found Coriolanus gently holding your face, his touch a stark contrast to his usual impatience. "Focus on me, Y/N. Just focus on me," he urged softly, locking eyes with yours.

Coriolanus was hardly known for his patience, but his demeanor now surprised you. In the academy, he exhibited a short temper, particularly when things didn't align with his desires. But this was different. He wasn't berating you for crying or falling apart. Seeking answers in his gaze, he enveloped you in a tight embrace, anchoring you in his arms. "You're going to be okay, Snowflake. Everything's going to be okay," he whispered. As your sobs gradually eased, he pulled away and peered at you, a faint smile gracing his lips. "There you are."

Wiping away your tears and streaked eyeliner, he cupped your cheeks. "Here's the plan, Snowflake. We'll go back in there and present ourselves to the districts," he said, anticipating your disagreement. "No, listen. We'll act as they expect us to—like the puppets they want us to be. We'll interact with the representatives together and aim for District One or Two. They have more resources. Fix your makeup, and meet me back in the hall. Understood?" He pressed, his thumb tracing your jawline, awaiting your response. When you hesitated, he shook you gently and repeated, "Understood?"

Unable to trust your voice, you nodded in agreement, observing the relieved smile that graced his face. "Good, that's good. Freshen up, and I'll be waiting inside for you," Coriolanus said before making his way back into the building, leaving you sitting there, feeling the cool air nip at your nose and cheeks.

---

It took you less than twenty minutes to freshen up your appearance before returning to the hall. Students conversed among themselves, their attention fixed on the screens displaying your class ranks. The sight itself made you queasy. In the frenzy of those destined for the games fighting for representatives' attention, the crowd parted, in a way that reminded you of those novels you read when you were younger, revealing Coriolanus making his way toward you, his gaze unwaveringly locked on you.

Coriolanus halted in front of you, his blue eyes briefly scanning the area behind you. Extending his arm, he looked at you, pressing his lips into a thin line. "Follow my lead, Snowflake. You'll need to act that little heart out," he said, wearing a broad smile as he approached two figures. "Mr. Larue, this is my girlfriend Y/N, whom I mentioned earlier," he announced. Girlfriend? You weren't sure if he was joking, delusional, or both, because clearly, you missed something between the time he left you outside and your return to the hall.

"Ah, Y/N, you're just as beautiful as he described. What are the odds that you're both paired together for this year's games?" the older gentleman remarked, appearing no older than 70. His frail skin and patchy white hair gave him a delicate appearance. "Mr. Snow mentioned your admiration for District One, and I must say, it's refreshing to hear someone who knows her stuff," he continued, flashing overly white teeth.

Chewing on your lip, you glanced up at Coriolanus, who waited for you to falter in the act he had imposed on you. "Well, Mr. Larue, I didn’t know my boyfriend decided to boast about my interests, but he's right. I do admire what your district stands for. It would be an honor to have your sponsorship, demonstrating not only my loyalty to the capital but also my appreciation for your work," you responded, eliciting a proud smile from Mr. Larue.

He let out a laugh and gently patted Coriolanus' arm. "You have quite the charmer here, Mr. Snow. She's a keeper. It's almost a shame that I have to watch such a lovely couple fight in the arena," he said, frowning, just as Coriolanus chuckled, a sound you'd do anything to hear again.

"I suppose we'll have to show you just how powerful our alliance is," Coriolanus said, reaching over with his free hand to squeeze your hand resting on his arm. He looked down at you, his gaze soft along with his smile. Anyone who didn't know him would think that he was in love with you, and honestly? He almost had you convinced. "I'll give you time to think it over, Mr. Larue. Meanwhile, how about a dance, Y/N? Why not enjoy what time we may have left together with something so intimate?" he asked.

You felt your brow twitch at his words. He was overdoing it with that final phrase, but it seemed like the older gentleman was utterly captivated by Coriolanus' words. "A dance sounds amazing. If you'll excuse us," you said, turning to give Mr. Larue a respectful nod before walking off with Coriolanus in tow. "Out of all the things to make me do, you went for the idea of having me be your girlfriend?" you snapped your head to look at him.

Coriolanus shrugged, a smug smile on his face. "I want to do the most if we're going to our deaths," he said simply, causing your jaw to drop. Pulling you onto the dance floor, he placed a hand on the small of your back and gently held your hand. "Close your mouth, Snowflake. It's unbecoming for a lady to stand with her mouth open," he teased, earning him a scoff in response. Placing your hand on his shoulder, the two of you began to move around the dance floor with the other pairs.

"I won't let you die in there, Y/N. I will do everything in my power to make sure that we make it out alive. I heard rumors that they'll let two of us live as long as it's two individuals of the same pair," he murmured, lowering his head to speak near your ear. "I won't be letting you out of my sight for a second anymore."

Rolling your eyes, you caught sight of other district officials watching both of you. Now you knew why he wanted you to wear red so badly. You two stuck out like a sore thumb against the other students who wore black or white. Coriolanus knew how to play the game, and he would ensure that both of you won.

---

After what felt like hours, the gala came to an end, leaving you utterly exhausted. You and Coriolanus managed to secure a sponsor from District One after winning over Mr. Larue with your act. Rolling back your shoulders, you turned your head to gaze out the window. Snow had begun to fall, lining the sidewalks in a soft sheet of flakes. You turned when the material of a jacket rested on your shoulders, and Coriolanus looked down at you with tired eyes.

"Coryo, it's cold out, you need your jacket." You hadn't even noticed the nickname that slipped from your lips, but he did. He was well aware of what you called him, and he loved it.

"You're going to need it more, that dress will do nothing to protect you from the cold," he remarked, moving to lean against the wall next to you, watching the snow fall outside. "Things are going to be hard from here on out. We have to learn how to trust one another, especially if we're paired to keep one another alive for as long as possible."

"You haven't necessarily given me a reason to trust you, Snow. You don't exactly make it easy," you said, tensing when he looked at you, his gaze piercing your soul. He raised his brows in question, prompting you to continue. "You're not exactly the talkative type, and if you are, it's only because you want something from me. So, how can I trust someone who only sees me when they want something from me?" You pulled his coat tighter around you, seeking some solace from his penetrating stare.

"I've always seen you, Y/N. Don't think for a second that I haven't seen you because I have. In fact, it's almost annoying how much I see you," he replied. It was your turn to raise your brows. "It doesn't matter. Why don't we head back? It's getting late, and I doubt that your parents want you out too late. Come on, I'll walk you home."

The both of you walked out of the building, with you trailing slightly behind him. Coriolanus Snow was a mystery to you. From his words to his actions, you couldn't make sense of him. You wanted to demand that he make up his mind about how he treated you, but you knew it wouldn't lead anywhere.

Quickening your pace, you moved to catch up with him. "If you want me to learn how to trust you, then tell me about you. What makes you Coriolanus Snow?" you asked. You could see his jaw clench as he contemplated how to respond. Coriolanus was always one to talk, except when it was about himself. He often reminded you of a captivating but complex book that was hard to read. You refused to put down his book; you wanted to learn about him, to understand his character, and establishing trust was the first step. "In return, I'll tell you my deepest, darkest secret," you teased, nudging his shoulder in an attempt to lighten the mood.

"Is there something that defines who I am?" he asked, though it sounded more like a question directed at himself. "Sometimes, I find myself pretending to be someone I'm not," he began. "At the academy and even when I'm with you, I feel compelled to embody this controlled and calculated persona. I refrain from revealing my true self because I fear you might flee. This facade I wear keeps me in good standing at the academy and in proximity to you. It keeps me close enough so that I never have to worry." His words sent a chill through you. They carried an air of possession.

"Snow, you won't scare me away. It takes more than a facade to scare me off. We're being trained to fight to the death against twenty other children; I believe I can handle occasional outbursts from you." You attempted a reassuring smile, but he abruptly halted, turning to gaze at you.

"You don't get it, Snowflake. I don't wish to share you with anyone else. You kept yourself distant from others out of fear of loss. Knowing that made me content, content in the knowledge that no one else stood by your side to snatch you away," he whispered, leaning in until his breath nearly met yours. "I want to shield you from the world, from the games where no one can have you." His confession widened your eyes, prompting a step back as you struggled to comprehend his words.

Clearing your throat, you shook your head, observing your breath forming mist in the cold air. "That's not what you want, Snow. Trust me. You won't find happiness with me. In fact, if you knew the concealed parts of me, you'd be the one fleeing." You noticed a spark in his eyes, perhaps a reflection of the shared darkness within both of you, fighting to break free.

Just as you near the gate leading to your home, Coriolanus seized your wrist, halting your movement. "Why do you hide from me, Snowflake? You want me to see you, so why keep yourself hidden? I can't see you if you won't let me." He drew you closer, his hand caressing your cheek, the warmth contrasting with his cold touch. He exuded warmth, emitting a scent of roses that intoxicated. Interpreting your silence as an answer, he leaned down, lightly brushing his lips against your forehead before retracting, his thumb grazing your lips.

Stepping away, you retreated and closed the gate behind you. Turning to glance at him from the other side, you noticed how he stood taller, his curls framing his eyes. Snowflakes fell on his eyelashes, accentuating the rosy hue on his cheeks due to the wintry air. "I hide because I'm nothing but poison, Coriolanus. Poison you shouldn't get entangled with. I'd do more harm than good, so don't be greedy and try a taste. You'll only end up hurting yourself in the end," you stated, casting one final glance before pivoting on your heel and entering your home.

Tags:@notyourwildestdream

[beirarowling]

I believe a woman is a human being who belongs to the sex class that produces large gametes. It’s irrelevant whether or not her gametes have ever been fertilised, whether or not she’s carried a baby to term, irrelevant if she was born with a rare difference of sexual development that makes neither of the above possible, or if she’s aged beyond being able to produce viable eggs. She is a woman and just as much a woman as the others.

I don’t believe a woman is more or less of a woman for having sex with men, women, both or not wanting sex at all. I don’t think a woman is more or less of a woman for having a buzz cut and liking suits and ties, or wearing stilettos and mini dresses, for being black, white or brown, for being six feet tall or a little person, for being kind or cruel, angry or sad, loud or retiring. She isn't more of a woman for featuring in Playboy or being a surrendered wife, nor less of a woman for designing space rockets or taking up boxing. What makes her a woman is the fact of being born in a body that, assuming nothing has gone wrong in her physical development (which, as stated above, still doesn't stop her being a woman), is geared towards producing eggs as opposed to sperm, towards bearing as opposed to begetting children, and irrespective of whether she's done either of those things, or ever wants to.

Womanhood isn't a mystical state of being, nor is it measured by how well one apes sex stereotypes. We are not the creatures either porn or the Bible tell you we are. Femaleness is not, as trans woman Andrea Chu Long wrote, ‘an open mouth, an expectant asshole, blank, blank eyes,’ nor are we God’s afterthought, sprung from Adam’s rib.

Women are provably subject to certain experiences because of our female bodies, including different forms of oppression, depending on the cultures in which we live. When trans activists say 'I thought you didn't want to be defined by your biology,' it’s a feeble and transparent attempt at linguistic sleight of hand. Women don't want to be limited, exploited, punished, or subject to other unjust treatment because of their biology, but our being female is indeed defined by our biology. It's one material fact about us, like having freckles or disliking beetroot, neither of which are representative of our entire beings, either. Women have billions of different personalities and life stories, which have nothing to do with our bodies, although we are likely to have had experiences men don't and can't, because we belong to our sex class.

Some people feel strongly that they should have been, or wish to be seen as, the sex class into which they weren't born. Gender dysphoria is a real and very painful condition and I feel nothing but sympathy for anyone who suffers from it. I want them to be free to dress and present themselves however they like and I want them to have exactly the same rights as every other citizen regarding housing, employment and personal safety. I do not, however, believe that surgeries and cross-sex hormones literally turn a person into the opposite sex, nor do I believe in the idea that each of us has a nebulous ‘gender identity’ that may or might not match our sexed bodies. I believe the ideology that preaches those tenets has caused, and continues to cause, very real harm to vulnerable people.

I am strongly against women's and girls' rights and protections being dismantled to accommodate trans-identified men, for the very simple reason that no study has ever demonstrated that trans-identified men don't have exactly the same pattern of criminality as other men, and because, however they identify, men retain their advantages of speed and strength. In other words, I think the safety and rights of girls and women are more important than those men's desire for validation.

J.K. Rowling

[3c0ra-zon3]

Content Warning: Talks about eating disorders/disordered eating, just mentions, but I figure it's better to be safe! :]

I saw someone say food is freedom in One Piece, and like. Yeah. Even in this world, food is freedom, isn't it? So allow me to ramble about why One Piece's message, or at least how interept it, is so very important to me.

I think the reason One Piece hits and hurts so hard, for me, is because of how it talks about and what it insinuates about food and loneliness and freedom. The way those who love food have such a freedom to them, the way food brings so many together. I've struggled my entire life with loneliness, then I began to struggle with the freedom to be myself, and then I began to struggle with food. I lost my freedom again, just in a new and confusing way. I have found the freedom to be myself, but I still struggle greatly with food. Honestly, I've relapsed rather hard into my eating disorder lately. A bit before my relapse, I began watching One Piece and I think it didn't register with my how important food is in the OPverse but as I go on I begin to realize it more and more. Luffy's love for food, Luffy's kindness and willingness to give help to the ends of the earth when that food is shared. I think at first I found it a bit odd, but really, it makes sense. These people often struggle under an oppressive government or in deep poverty, and despite that, they are kind enough to share with someone who's hungry. It's almost a way to show that, though they aren't free, they have not lost the free will. And then, after the fight, once these people have gained their freedom, a giant feast the size of which they likely have no indulged on in so long is had. They dance and eat and enjoy each others company and bask in their freedom.

Or when Ace joins the Whitebeard pirates, his last conversation with Marco before officially joining, he is offered a meal despite all he's done. He's felt he was was being backed into a corner, so he snarls and shows his teeth, he shows them his worst. He tries to kill their captain for christ sake! But, still, they offer him food. I think food hold a lot of importantance towards Ace as well.

And, dear God, the thesis I could write on Zeff and Sanji's relationship with food. I could make an entire blog full of different eating disorders/disordered eating habits I headcanon Sanji with. But, I'll condense it a bit. Sanji's self-worth and his relationship with food is a symbolism I will never get over. I'm sure there is a part of him that battles with whether he is deserving of food or not, especially pre-WCI. I imagine Sanji is always the last to eat if he eats at all. A lot of what I have to say with Sanji's relationship with food is not canon or how interept it, so I'll just say. I think after WCI, when he truly has his freedom, he seems lighter. I've not made it all the through, but I think there is a sort of new willingness to allow himself food, from what I've seen and imagined.

I could honestly ramble about it all day and night, One Piece and food and freedom, but I'm at work on my break and I think if I were to go back on the floor sobbing, I may get a concerned look or two. So I figure I should conclude this with:

In One Piece, food is freedom, and everyone deserves freedom so therefore every deserves food. Food brings people together in a way that no other thing really can. I resonate with those ideals in a way that I can not begin to express properly. I wish that knowing that made me feel worthy of food and recovery, I wish knowing and seeing all that made me reach out, but it hasn't yet. So, I hope that one day, I will experience something close to what I imagine Sanji did. Realizing I worthy, beyond just hearing or saying it, but truly and wholeheartedly knowing I am worthy of companionship and food and freedom. I could honestly write a whole thesis on food and One Piece, I might, maybe it will help me truly realize these things, but who knows?

I honestly wish I could find the post again, but it's lost in my likes 😭 I would love to read more posts about it, so if anyone who sees this recalls any posts please tag the author post so I can read it!!! Apartently, "One Piece food symbolism" is too specific/niche a topic for Tumblr search bar to find many posts.

[dailyanarchistposts]

A.2.11 Why are most anarchists in favour of direct democracy?

For most anarchists, direct democratic voting on policy decisions within free associations is the political counterpart of free agreement (this is also known as “self-management”). The reason is that “many forms of domination can be carried out in a ‘free.’ non-coercive, contractual manner… and it is naive… to think that mere opposition to political control will in itself lead to an end of oppression.” [John P. Clark, Max Stirner’s Egoism, p. 93] Thus the relationships we create within an organisation is as important in determining its libertarian nature as its voluntary nature (see section A.2.14 for more discussion).

It is obvious that individuals must work together in order to lead a fully human life. And so, ”[h]aving to join with others humans” the individual has three options: “he [or she] must submit to the will of others (be enslaved) or subject others to his will (be in authority) or live with others in fraternal agreement in the interests of the greatest good of all (be an associate). Nobody can escape from this necessity.” [Errico Malatesta, Life and Ideas, p. 85]

Anarchists obviously pick the last option, association, as the only means by which individuals can work together as free and equal human beings, respecting the uniqueness and liberty of one another. Only within direct democracy can individuals express themselves, practice critical thought and self-government, so developing their intellectual and ethical capacities to the full. In terms of increasing an individual’s freedom and their intellectual, ethical and social faculties, it is far better to be sometimes in a minority than be subject to the will of a boss all the time. So what is the theory behind anarchist direct democracy?

As Bertrand Russell noted, the anarchist “does not wish to abolish government in the sense of collective decisions: what he does wish to abolish is the system by which a decision is enforced upon those who oppose it.” [Roads to Freedom, p. 85] Anarchists see self-management as the means to achieve this. Once an individual joins a community or workplace, he or she becomes a “citizen” (for want of a better word) of that association. The association is organised around an assembly of all its members (in the case of large workplaces and towns, this may be a functional sub-group such as a specific office or neighbourhood). In this assembly, in concert with others, the contents of his or her political obligations are defined. In acting within the association, people must exercise critical judgement and choice, i.e. manage their own activity. Rather than promising to obey (as in hierarchical organisations like the state or capitalist firm), individuals participate in making their own collective decisions, their own commitments to their fellows. This means that political obligation is not owed to a separate entity above the group or society, such as the state or company, but to one’s fellow “citizens.”

Although the assembled people collectively legislate the rules governing their association, and are bound by them as individuals, they are also superior to them in the sense that these rules can always be modified or repealed. Collectively, the associated “citizens” constitute a political “authority”, but as this “authority” is based on horizontal relationships between themselves rather than vertical ones between themselves and an elite, the “authority” is non-hierarchical (“rational” or “natural,” see section B.1 — “Why are anarchists against authority and hierarchy?” — for more on this). Thus Proudhon:

“In place of laws, we will put contracts [i.e. free agreement]. — No more laws voted by a majority, nor even unanimously; each citizen, each town, each industrial union, makes its own laws.” [The General Idea of the Revolution, pp. 245–6]

Such a system does not mean, of course, that everyone participates in every decision needed, no matter how trivial. While any decision can be put to the assembly (if the assembly so decides, perhaps prompted by some of its members), in practice certain activities (and so purely functional decisions) will be handled by the association’s elected administration. This is because, to quote a Spanish anarchist activist, “a collectivity as such cannot write a letter or add up a list of figures or do hundreds of chores which only an individual can perform.” Thus the need “to organise the administration.” Supposing an association is “organised without any directive council or any hierarchical offices” which “meets in general assembly once a week or more often, when it settles all matters needful for its progress” it still “nominates a commission with strictly administrative functions.” However, the assembly “prescribes a definite line of conduct for this commission or gives it an imperative mandate” and so “would be perfectly anarchist.” As it “follows that delegating these tasks to qualified individuals, who are instructed in advance how to proceed, … does not mean an abdication of that collectivity’s own liberty.” [Jose Llunas Pujols, quoted by Max Nettlau, A Short History of Anarchism, p. 187] This, it should be noted, follows Proudhon’s ideas that within the workers’ associations “all positions are elective, and the by-laws subject to the approval of the members.” [Proudhon, Op. Cit., p. 222]

Instead of capitalist or statist hierarchy, self-management (i.e. direct democracy) would be the guiding principle of the freely joined associations that make up a free society. This would apply to the federations of associations an anarchist society would need to function. “All the commissions or delegations nominated in an anarchist society,” correctly argued Jose Llunas Pujols, “must be subject to replacement and recall at any time by the permanent suffrage of the section or sections that elected them.” Combined with the “imperative mandate” and “purely administrative functions,” this “make[s] it thereby impossible for anyone to arrogate to himself [or herself] a scintilla of authority.” [quoted by Max Nettlau, Op. Cit., pp. 188–9] Again, Pujols follows Proudhon who demanded twenty years previously the “implementation of the binding mandate” to ensure the people do not “adjure their sovereignty.” [No Gods, No Masters, vol. 1, p. 63]

By means of a federalism based on mandates and elections, anarchists ensure that decisions flow from the bottom-up. By making our own decisions, by looking after our joint interests ourselves, we exclude others ruling over us. Self-management, for anarchists, is essential to ensure freedom within the organisations so needed for any decent human existence.

Of course it could be argued that if you are in a minority, you are governed by others (“Democratic rule is still rule” [L. Susan Brown, The Politics of Individualism, p. 53]). Now, the concept of direct democracy as we have described it is not necessarily tied to the concept of majority rule. If someone finds themselves in a minority on a particular vote, he or she is confronted with the choice of either consenting or refusing to recognise it as binding. To deny the minority the opportunity to exercise its judgement and choice is to infringe its autonomy and to impose obligation upon it which it has not freely accepted. The coercive imposition of the majority will is contrary to the ideal of self-assumed obligation, and so is contrary to direct democracy and free association. Therefore, far from being a denial of freedom, direct democracy within the context of free association and self-assumed obligation is the only means by which liberty can be nurtured (“Individual autonomy limited by the obligation to hold given promises.” [Malatesta, quoted by quoted by Max Nettlau, Errico Malatesta: The Biography of an Anarchist]). Needless to say, a minority, if it remains in the association, can argue its case and try to convince the majority of the error of its ways.

And we must point out here that anarchist support for direct democracy does not suggest we think that the majority is always right. Far from it! The case for democratic participation is not that the majority is always right, but that no minority can be trusted not to prefer its own advantage to the good of the whole. History proves what common-sense predicts, namely that anyone with dictatorial powers (by they a head of state, a boss, a husband, whatever) will use their power to enrich and empower themselves at the expense of those subject to their decisions.

Anarchists recognise that majorities can and do make mistakes and that is why our theories on association place great importance on minority rights. This can be seen from our theory of self-assumed obligation, which bases itself on the right of minorities to protest against majority decisions and makes dissent a key factor in decision making. Thus Carole Pateman:

“If the majority have acted in bad faith… [then the] minority will have to take political action, including politically disobedient action if appropriate, to defend their citizenship and independence, and the political association itself… Political disobedience is merely one possible expression of the active citizenship on which a self-managing democracy is based … The social practice of promising involves the right to refuse or change commitments; similarly, the practice of self-assumed political obligation is meaningless without the practical recognition of the right of minorities to refuse or withdraw consent, or where necessary, to disobey.” [The Problem of Political Obligation, p. 162]

Moving beyond relationships within associations, we must highlight how different associations work together. As would be imagined, the links between associations follow the same outlines as for the associations themselves. Instead of individuals joining an association, we have associations joining confederations. The links between associations in the confederation are of the same horizontal and voluntary nature as within associations, with the same rights of “voice and exit” for members and the same rights for minorities. In this way society becomes an association of associations, a community of communities, a commune of communes, based upon maximising individual freedom by maximising participation and self-management.

The workings of such a confederation are outlined in section A.2.9 ( What sort of society do anarchists want?) and discussed in greater detail in section I (What would an anarchist society look like?).

This system of direct democracy fits nicely into anarchist theory. Malatesta speaks for all anarchists when he argued that “anarchists deny the right of the majority to govern human society in general.” As can be seen, the majority has no right to enforce itself on a minority — the minority can leave the association at any time and so, to use Malatesta’s words, do not have to “submit to the decisions of the majority before they have even heard what these might be.” [The Anarchist Revolution, p. 100 and p. 101] Hence, direct democracy within voluntary association does not create “majority rule” nor assume that the minority must submit to the majority no matter what. In effect, anarchist supporters of direct democracy argue that it fits Malatesta’s argument that:

“Certainly anarchists recognise that where life is lived in common it is often necessary for the minority to come to accept the opinion of the majority. When there is an obvious need or usefulness in doing something and, to do it requires the agreement of all, the few should feel the need to adapt to the wishes of the many … But such adaptation on the one hand by one group must be on the other be reciprocal, voluntary and must stem from an awareness of need and of goodwill to prevent the running of social affairs from being paralysed by obstinacy. It cannot be imposed as a principle and statutory norm…” [Op. Cit., p. 100]

As the minority has the right to secede from the association as well as having extensive rights of action, protest and appeal, majority rule is not imposed as a principle. Rather, it is purely a decision making tool which allows minority dissent and opinion to be expressed (and acted upon) while ensuring that no minority forces its will on the majority. In other words, majority decisions are not binding on the minority. After all, as Malatesta argued:

“one cannot expect, or even wish, that someone who is firmly convinced that the course taken by the majority leads to disaster, should sacrifice his [or her] own convictions and passively look on, or even worse, should support a policy he [or she] considers wrong.” [Errico Malatesta: His Life and Ideas, p. 132]

Even the Individual Anarchist Lysander Spooner acknowledged that direct democracy has its uses when he noted that ”[a]ll, or nearly all, voluntary associations give a majority, or some other portion of the members less than the whole, the right to use some limited discretion as to the means to be used to accomplish the ends in view.” However, only the unanimous decision of a jury (which would “judge the law, and the justice of the law”) could determine individual rights as this “tribunal fairly represent[s] the whole people” as “no law can rightfully be enforced by the association in its corporate capacity, against the goods, rights, or person of any individual, except it be such as all members of the association agree that it may enforce” (his support of juries results from Spooner acknowledging that it “would be impossible in practice” for all members of an association to agree) [Trial by Jury, p. 130-1f, p. 134, p. 214, p. 152 and p. 132]

Thus direct democracy and individual/minority rights need not clash. In practice, we can imagine direct democracy would be used to make most decisions within most associations (perhaps with super-majorities required for fundamental decisions) plus some combination of a jury system and minority protest/direct action and evaluate/protect minority claims/rights in an anarchist society. The actual forms of freedom can only be created through practical experience by the people directly involved.

Lastly, we must stress that anarchist support for direct democracy does not mean that this solution is to be favoured in all circumstances. For example, many small associations may favour consensus decision making (see the next section on consensus and why most anarchists do not think that it is a viable alternative to direct democracy). However, most anarchists think that direct democracy within free association is the best (and most realistic) form of organisation which is consistent with anarchist principles of individual freedom, dignity and equality.

[theresattrpgforthat]

THEME: Revolution

This week’s games have to do with rising up against oppression and tyranny! A very important note: while the tone and tenor of the following games vary in severity, it is a good idea to use safety tools for your table when running these kinds of games, as it is easy to fall into territory that can be uncomfortable to your players. I recommend you check out tools such as the X Card, by John Stavropoulos, and Lines & Veils, by Ron Edwards.

When the Guilds Pay in Copper, Crime Pays In Gold, by Andrew J. Young.

Ostentia is a city of wealth, magic, and incredible disparity. The city's alchemy guilds hold all the power, with squads of street-level enforcers and an army of mercenaries playing the guilds off each other. The common folk are hired by the guilds to serve in alchemy rituals, draining life from their bodies, paying them their purse of coppers, and sending them home until the next day.

What the city needs is a revolution, but the best you can do is retribution. And distribution. Thwart the guilds' exploitative plots and steal as much gold as you can. And when the job is done, go back to your family, friends, and familiar haunts. Spend your gold to improve your character and use downtime to help your community.

When the Guilds Pay in Copper, Crime Pays in Gold is a two-page tabletop RPG designed to be played with 2 or more players, one of whom should take on the role of a Story Guide to facilitate scene setup and NPC actions and dialogue.When the Guilds Pay in Copper, Crime Pays in Gold's system uses dice pool mechanics with d6s.

If you’re interested in Blades in the Dark but want less pre-defined setting, less rules, and more magic, you might want to check this game out. The players of this game are fighting back against guilds using underhanded methods, but the gold they manage to steal goes into community help, rather than a retirement plan. If you want to hit the bourgeoisie where it hurts without having to read too many rules, and if you want a lighter feel to your game, you might want to check this game out.

And You Shall Shatter Temples, by Anna Landin.

They may be gods, but you are done being faithful.It's time to burn their kingdom down.

Sing songs with the words they could not take from you. Raise the banner woven from the flags you stole back from them. Arm yourself with the swords you forged from their discarded bones.

And You Shall Shatter Temples is a game about rising up against an overwhelming power that is trying to crush you. All you have is what you carry with you, and those who rise up by your side. Together, you can turn the tide. Together, you can dethrone a god.

This is a GM-less game that uses playing cards and d6s to help determine what you do and where the story goes. The main premise is that there are gods, but you get to decide what kind of world they have ruined, and how you bring them to their knees. The game brings you through three stages, with each stage bringing you closer and closer to dethroning a god. The creator offers the text-only version for free, and encourages that you support real-world causes that fight oppression instead!

Hunting Billionaires for Sport, by Vex Chat-Blanc.

It's exactly 1 year since people first started hunting billionaires for sport. In that time the sport has grown at an extraordinary rate, giving rise to both the Extrajudicial Means Distribution Union and Nero.tv. Nations around the world have enacted a total ban on firearms and ammunition sales, as well as dedicated buyback schemes for existing guns. Science and arts have seen a simultaneous market boon, and their advances have integrated seamlessly into daily life. Welcome to 2023.

A game for 1 session runner and 2-5 hunters. It's easy to pick up, simple to explain, provides a quick reference sheet for those new to the rules. It contains interesting and variable character advancement, and a progressive and gentle introduction to more advanced rules. World-building, character background, collaborative action, and character retirement are all tied together mechanically.

If you want to see a game where Billionaires’ greed is what allows for the revenge of the masses, this is the game for you. The setting is incredibly tongue-in-cheek, and the characters are both powerful and competent. Character skills are classified as either Limelight (flashy) or Lowlight (concealed), and can be Active, Passive, or Reactive. You’ll also have Beats that drive your character forward and tie you into the fiction, as celebrities on a high-profile streaming service. If you like the idea of turning modern capitalism back onto itself, this might be the game for you!

Compromise / / Empire, by Swamphen.

The forces of the Empire, the forces of totalitarianism and exploitation, are invading. They have secured a foothold, and want complete control. Their soldiers trample the land, their spies and diplomats are in your places of power, time is limited.

You represent a faction. One of the factions who are working to resist the Empire. As a representative you must extend a hand and form whatever alliances you can with the other factions at play. Resisting the Empire will cost you, and your faction. Compromises must be made.

Compromise//Empire is a GMless roleplaying game for 2-3 players about forming temporary alliances and resisting empire. Each player takes the role of a faction forced into an unlikely alliance. You must represent your agenda while making compromises to fight against the forces of empire.

This is another game that allows you to decide exactly what kind of world you’d like to play in. Crises will arise over the course of the game, and you will attempt to find a solution that makes you and your allies happy. Success is not guaranteed in this game - you may find a way to work together, but your plans may also fall apart. If there is a setting or game you’d like to set-up for, this is an excellent option! 

Voidheart Symphony, by UFO Press.

here’s a wound in the world, a rot eating at hope and community and empathy. You’ve seen it in dark alleyways and gleaming boardrooms, gifting terrible power to those who will use it to hurt others. You’ve had enough. You’re going to dive through that wound into the nightmare castle on the other side. You’re going to find the avatar of the one bringing you misery, and strike them down.

But what’s next, once you’ve stolen their power and ruined their ambitions? Will you return to your daily grind? Cherish those who are close to you? Or revel in the power you have taken from the void? Because within that wound, the castle waits, and it is hungry.

Voidheart Symphony is a tabletop roleplaying game about mundane people diving into a demon-filled labyrinth to save the ones they love. Based on Apocalypse Worldand Rhapsody of Blood, it’ll fill your story with dramatic choices and dynamic action. Your rebels each have a core strength – they may be an Authority, a Provider, a Watcher. But your enemy is far too great for you to face alone. 

If you’re interested in the Persona series, this game is probably up your alley. Shadowy powers lurk behind everyday folks, and your rebellion may not ever make it to the front page. You are heroes behind the scenes, fighting for the freedom of folks who may never know to thank you. If you like the idea of being unsung heroes in the modern day, you should check this game out!

Spire: The City Must Fall, by Rowan, Rook & Decard.

Spire is a mile-high impossible city, older than anyone can remember. Two hundred years ago, the high elves – or aelfir, strange and beautiful masked creatures from the far north – took it from the dark elves by force. Now, they graciously allow dark elves, or drow, to live in the city if they perform four years of service to an aelfir lord once they come of age. Spire is crumbling from within and without; it is ancient, and has been built and rebuilt countless times, and at the centre of the mass there is a jagged, weeping hole in reality called the Heart. It is a nightmarish, dizzying place of perverse luxury and widespread destitution, where drow labourers toil in vast gardens and sweltering factories to produce treasures for their masters.

Spire is a roleplaying game about desperate revolutionary dark elves caught up in a secret war against the high elves, or aelfir, who rule the towering city of Spire. The world of Spire is a brutal one, and players can expect to see their characters suffer at the hands of their oppressors, or their rivals; bodily harm, psychological scarring and reprisals against their allies are commonplace. But for those willing to do what it takes, Spire is on the brink of full-scale rebellion, and you are poised to push it over the edge.

This game uses a D10 system that uses dice pools to determine success -  the highest number indicates whether or not you are successful, and how successful you are. The rebellion in this game is dark and vicious; the characters are pushed to do terrifying things in the name of death, vindication, and revenge. This is a fantasy game through and through, but make sure to bring some safety tools to the table, as a game of Spire can easily turn bloody and grim.

If you are interested in this setting but want a game about dungeon-delving instead, you can try Heart: The City Beneath, by the same company.

Previously advertised games that fit this theme:

Balikbayan: Cyberpunk Elementals escaping enslavement. Brinkwood: Brigands fighting against Vampires. Rising Tide: Eco-Justice pirates hitting Corporations at sea.

[asma-al-husna]

Allah’s name Al-Hakam— The Judge, The Giver of Justice, The Arbitrator— occurs on one occasion in the Quran. He is the One who always delivers justice, in every situation, to everyone. Al-Hakam never wrongs anyone and is never oppressive, He is the only true judge; no one can overturn His judgment and no one can ever appeal His decree!

The Giver of Justice, The One Who Arbitrates

Hakam comes from the root haa-kaaf-meem, which refers to the attribute of judging, being wise, passing a verdict, and preventing or restraining people from wrongdoing.

This root appears 210 times in the Quran in 13 derived forms. Examples of these forms are hakama (to judge), al-hukm (the command, wisdom, judgement), hikmah (wisdom), and Ahkamu (Most Just).

Linguistically, hakam and hakeem are from the same root; hakam is a verbal noun and emphasizes the act of delivering justice whereas hakeem refers to the essential nature of the possessor of wisdom. Al-Hakam refers to the totality of Allah’s power to judge and arbitrate with perfect justice and immense mercy, which cannot be compared with the judging and arbitrating of any other created being.

Al-Hakam Himself says: Then is it other than Allah I should seek as judge while it is He who has revealed to you the Book explained in detail? [Quran, 6:114]

The best of judges

Al-Hakam deals with all the affairs of creation— isn’t that amazing? He beautifully says: All those who are in the heavens and the Earth ask of Him; every moment He is in a state (of glory). [Quran, 55:29]

Al-Hakam makes certain deeds lawful and other deeds unlawful; He instructs us to do certain things and prohibits us from doing others. He has complete legislative power and His discree can’t be overturned by anyone, because He says: His is the creation and His is the command. [Quran, 7:54].

Whatever Al-Hakam legislates for us is never burdensome and never unfair. He laid down the perfect rules to protect the rights of everyone— men and women, the righteous and the sinner, the believer and the unbeliever.

Beautiful justice

When someone converts to Islam, Al-Hakam forgives all of his previous sins and evil deeds. A man called Amr came to the Prophet Muhammad and said, Give me your right hand so that I may give you my pledge of loyalty. The Prophet stretched out his right hand. Amr withdrew his hand. The Prophet said: What has happened to you, O Amr? He replied, I intend to lay down a condition. The Prophet asked: What condition do you intend to put forward? Amr said, That Allah forgives my sins. The Prophet said: Didn’t you know that converting to Islam erases all previous sins? [Muslim] This is the beautiful justice of Allah ‘azza wa jall. Alhamdulillah ‘alaa ni’matul Islam— Praise be to Allah for the blessing of Islam.

How Can You Live by This Name?

1. Trust in Al-Hakam at all times.

Take comfort in the fact that even if people are unjust, you will get your justice from Al-Hakam! Don’t despair, and fully rely on His judgment. Al-Hakam says: Follow what has been revealed to you, and be steadfast until Allah’s judgment comes. He is the Best of Judges. [Quran, 10:109]

2. Be motivated to do good deeds.

Al-Hakam is wise. He is the ultimate Judge, and He decreed that you don’t have to bear the sin of another. You’ll never ever be wronged by Al-Hakam; you’re never punished for more than the sin you commit, nor will any good deed go without a reward.

This is the justice-system of Al-Hakam: Whoever brings a good deed shall have ten times the like thereof to his credit, and whoever brings an evil deed shall have only the recompense of the like thereof, and they will not be wronged. [Quran, 6:160]. Let this motivate you to take each chance to do a good deed; benefit from your health, wealth and free time by using them wisely.

3. Make the Quran and sunnah your guides.

You should take the Quran and the sunnah for guidance in all matters, in all areas in your life. How many people refer to non-Islamic legislations only when it comes to divorce, inheritance, and the like? You should make the Quran and sunnah your guidance between right and wrong in everything you do, to guide you in your personal life, your community, your society, your interactions with others, your business, etcetera.

4. Remember Al-Hakam and stand up for the truth.

Remind yourself that you will stand before Him one day to be judged by Him. Make this your motivation to mind your actions in this world. Always stand up for truth and justice, even if it’s against yourself. Strive for a positive verdict from the One and only judge.

5. Always be fair and equal in judging others!

Whenever you’re in a position to judge between parties, for example a family affair, always be equal and just. Al-Hakam says: Behold, Allah bids you to deliver all that you have been entrusted with unto those who are entitled thereto and whenever you judge between people, to judge with justice. [Quran 4:58]

6. Never object to the decree of Al-Hakam.

Whenever Al-Hakam decrees something, He does so with perfect wisdom. Never object to the decree of Al-Hakam by complaining about your fate and questioning Him (e.g. oh, why do I have to go through this?) Only people who don’t understand Allah’s names and attributes will question Him, so make it a striving to study al Asmaa ul husnaa.

7. Ask Al-Hakam for protection and guidance.

Ask Allah Al-Hakam to protect you from injustice at the hands of others and ask Him to make you just toward others. Ask Al-Hakam to make you adhere to whatever He’s legislated for you.

O Allah, Al-Hakam, we know You are the Perfect Judge. Aid us to adhere to your legislation in our daily lives, make us of those who are equal and just to others and of those who always stand up for the truth. Protect us from the injustice of others, adorn us with reliance upon You and Your justice at all times, ameen!

[blessedarethebinarybreakers]

Don't you think there's better ways of showing support for Palestinians/Israeli Christians than by perpetuating the "Jesus was Palestinian" myth that people constantly try and use to deny Jewish indigeneity. Allegory or not, it's not a great look for someone who purports to be against that kind of erasure and supercessionism. Also, having 1 line about how his death was the Empire's fault so don't blame the Jews is meaningless when in this allegory, the Empire (Israeli government) *is* Jewish

(anyone curious about what anon's referring to, I believe it's my poem here)

Hey there anon, thank you for your feedback. In this situation where various marginalized peoples are being pitted against each other (and/or conflated with political groups), I've been struggling to make sure my words don't add to the misinformation and harm. So whenever someone takes the time to remind me of that danger, I'll take the time to re-examine my words — even if I end up standing by them, as I mostly do in this case.

I can't promise to say and do all the perfect things, because there isn't time to waste getting my words just right before saying something — people are dying right now (and yes, anon, that includes those Israelis who are still hostages of Hamas, who are also endangered by Israel's continued attacks.)

I have been spending much of my free time these past few months learning more about Israel and Palestine, and I still don't feel I'm even close to knowing enough! But I've listened to those who are actually in the midst of the violence who say that all of us across the world must join their cry now, not letting our ignorance be an excuse. That means there have been a few things I've said that I then had to re-consider after learning more.

...

Just a few days ago, I was actually trying to look into the origins of the statement that "Jesus was a Palestinian Jew." (Btw if anyone knows the origins of this statement, please hit me up!)

Arguments against it note that the term "Palestinian" didn't exist in Jesus' day. Looking into the accuracy of that statement is still on my to-do list; I did skim over this article calling it a myth but yeah, still digging. Regardless, sure, I don't think Jesus called himself a Palestinian in his lifetime.

That doesn't necessarily mean that the statement is useless, however. I do very much believe that if Jesus were born today, in the same place, he'd be born to a Jewish Palestinian family, not an Israeli one.

That does not erase his Jewishness; it confirms God's "preferential option for the poor," God's choice to side with and become one with the most oppressed and discarded. It also does not assert that Jewish persons don't "belong" in the region — only that the modern nation/colony Israel isn't necessary for them to live and thrive there.

All that said, if anyone has more info on the statement that "Jesus was a Palestinian" — its origins, how it's been used over the years — I would absolutely like to examine it further. For now, I stand by the phrase, with an openness to re-considering that with further education.

...

I feel more confident in talking about Empire — how I used it in my poem, versus how you've interpreted it. I'm genuinely grateful to you for bringing your reading of it to my attention, because it's shown me that my words weren't clear enough there!

In these verses from my poem:

"...And now, as then, some may blame Jesus’s death on his own Jewish people — but resist this lie! Now as then the crime is Empire’s and those of us who would cast stones should ponder first what our nations gain from genocide. ..."

You interpret Empire as being Israel.

My intention was that Empire with a capital E is a much larger network of all imperial forces on earth. Israel is entangled in that, and directly backed and funded by those forces. My own country, the United States, is one of the nations at the helm of Empire.

So when I talk of Empire being to blame, I'm not saying just Israel — honestly, I'm personally more concerned with the US's complicity, because I feel as a US citizen I can help demand they stop.

So I'm going to rework that bit to better express what I mean by Empire, so it doesn't sound like I'm focusing only on Israel. Empire is so much bigger than any one state, colony, or government.

...

Okay, I'm out of steam. I'm going to link a few pieces that have been helping me frame all that's going on right now to resist pitting marginalized groups against each other:

This art piece naming "contradicting truths"

This article by Rabbi Danya Ruttenberg also naming seemingly contradictory truths

Since I didn't really get deep into this part of your ask, I also appreciate this article discussing the question of indigeneity. It discards the "need" to figure out "who was there first" in favor of exploring intersecting histories.

Oh also, because you claim that the Israeli government "is Jewish," I think discussions on how Israel isn't actually a safe haven for all Jews, only those that fit into their goals, are vital.

[sposha]

Okay, I’m breaking character here, but this is important.

What is going on in Palestine is Genocide. To call it anything else is to be complicit in the downplay of this crisis.

But we already knew that. I’m not going to dwell on what the Palestinian people there are going through; others do that very well, and you should inform yourselves (but not to the detriment of your hope and mental health).

We already know that corporate entities have their hands in this; McDonalds, Starbucks, Disney+, Hewlett-Packard, and PUMA all have supported the Israeli Occupation in one way or another, and are now the targets of a global boycott.

We already know to call our governments and express our opposition to their support of Israel’s Apartheid. We also know that they aren’t going to listen, and will employ the same tactics as they did under the USA PATRIOT act to suppress our cries for peace for the sake of imperial interests around the globe.

We already know that the Canary Mission is being used to create a blacklist of people who have expressed support for Palestinian Liberation. (Again, patriot act.)

We know enough to inform our positions and our strategies. Now is the time to act.

So what then are we to do?

Under the security of anonymity, we must organize ourselves, and plan to raise the voices of dissent and opposition in such numbers that it becomes impossible to discern from whence our cries originate.

We must continue to put pressure on our politicians. Hold your vote as a ransom! Even then, know that this is far from the most effective of avenues through which change can happen.

Those of us with access to unions and their representatives would do well to contact their leadership and urge them to boycott the handling of Israeli goods and propaganda. Without our labor, the great and terrible machines of imperialism will grind to a halt.

Those of us with access to money would do well to find reputable funds and charities through which to support Gazans. Ensure that they can communicate with us, do not let their voices fall silent.

We must work to establish community and build solidarity with oppressed peoples, both in our own lands and in those abroad. We share more in common with the common folk than with our leaders. We must be kind to each other and ourselves, and do what we can to help all according to their need.

Finally, with all these things in mind, we must act. We must hope for the best of the situation, but prepare for the worst. We must abandon the misconceptions that hold us back; individual actions may not have much of an effect, but they have effect nonetheless. It is for this reason that solidarity, community, and organization are of the utmost importance, as together we can halt the gears of oppression and violence.

To those reading: please reblog with relevant and reputable resources. I will work to add them as well. We cannot act if we do not know what we can utilize. Anyone who can translate these words is also highly appreciated.

Organize yourselves against the coming storm, and be safe.

To Gazans, I affirm that you are heard, despite those that try to silence you. There is public outcry against your oppression across all the world. It grows stronger every day, and I do not believe it will stop until you are free.

From the river to the sea, Let Palestine be free.

[lillyanne4writes]

JJK/Gege Akutami appreciation post

Yeah, you read that title right. I get it that the entire fandom is upset with the latest leaks but I've seen so many angry/hateful comments toward Gege and it's making me sad. So here's a post to highlight some things I like about JJK. :)

This is in no way a complete list, so feel free to add on with your own takes too! Also, it's a long post, so I'm putting the meat of it under the cut.

The characters & their dynamics

Jjk has a huge cast, and yet every character is so unique and compelling. The reason I got into this anime (and later the manga) despite not really being into anime in general was how charming the main four characters were. Yuuji, Nobara, Megumi and Gojo immediately hooked me; I could probably watch 10 seasons of a slice of life show that's just them getting into shenanigans.

Fun interactions aside, my favourite thing about the characterisation is how everyone in this manga is allowed to have their own view on the world, especially on what it means to live a good life and die a good death. The narrative allows those views to clash without preaching about who is "correct". Characters disagree and learn from each other and their views develop organically (not necessarily in a positive direction, but always dynamically in a response to the situations they find themselves in - Yuuji's arc on how he views himself and his goals comes to mind). That stuff is really hard to write.

And it's not just the main cast either. The supporting characters are very memorable too; even minor ones have distinct personalities and clear motivations and often a backstory to explain why they are the way they are. My personal favourite background characters are Mai, Noritoshi and Tsumiki.

The worldbuilding

Can we talk about how creative the concept of curses and cursed energy is? Negative emotions accumulating into physical manifestations of things that people fear, hate, etc. is a hell of a cool idea. This is why the curse villains are my favourites in the series: from Mahito as a representation of the worst of humanity in his childish glee and sadism and cowardice to Jogo's philosophy of curses as "true beings" because they don't hide their nature and Hanami's almost sympathetic care for nature are all interesting explorations of how we view the world around us that would not be possible in a different kind of magic system. Add to that the array of creative techniques that sorcerers possess, the cursed objects, and the grade system that conveniently allows us to keep track of the danger levels of all this - you get an impressively complex magic system that still remains understandable (and fun to watch even if you don't want to keep track of the nitty-gritty and are just here for the spectacle).

Not to mention that jujutsu society is, well, a society. We get a sense of who the powerful and the oppressed are in this community, how their powers factor into that, how different characters feel about this, what they are doing to change it or on the contrary, to keep the traditions going... Every character exists in the web of a clear power structure which they interact with, influencing it and being influenced in turn. This results in a super interesting dynamic where certain characters can be enemies one moment (for example when the Kyoto students try to kill Yuuji during the exchange event on Gakuganji's, and by extension the higher-ups' orders) and allies the next (when it's time to pull together against a curse).

I'm reserving my judgement on the plot, themes and overall character arcs for now, because those things can only be really analysed once the story is complete. But even if I'll be unhappy with the ending, I'll still be very grateful for this unique world and its loveable inhabitants.

Of course, you might disagree with me on all this, and that's fine. Dropping the manga because you don't like the direction the story took is fine. Choosing to live in fanfiction delulu land is also fine. Gritting your teeth and sticking it out till the end despite disliking the plot because you're too invested to quit is also fine. Criticism and jokes are fine. The one thing that isn't fine is hating on the creator for the way they are choosing to tell their story.

Thank you for coming to my ted talk.

Tl;dr: If you're upset about the direction JJK is taking, please try to remember why you cared so much about it in the first place. And remember that Gege is just a person sharing a story with us, and disliking someone's story is not an acceptable reason to hate on them.

[nixthemagicdragon]

Transphobia kills

This is the first time I'm going serious, but I feel like I need to do this.

In a world where acceptance should reign supreme, the stories of Nex Benedict, Brianna Ghey, and Jacob Williamson are a powerful reminder of the grim reality faced by many who dare to live as their true selves. Their lives, though cut short, carry a deep message that speaks to the fundamental right of every individual to be recognized, respected, and loved for who they are.

Nex Benedict, Brianna Ghey, and Jacob Williamson, like countless others, bravely embraced their true selves despite the societal pressures and prejudices that sought to constrain them. They stood tall in the face of adversity and defiantly challenged the narrow-mindedness and bigotry that infects our communities. Tragically, their journeys were cut short by transphobia - a force that continues to claim lives and shatter dreams.

Their stories are a powerful reminder that the fight for equality and acceptance is far from over. Transphobia, in all its forms, is a plague that not only threatens the lives of transgender, non-binary, and gender-nonconforming people, but also undermines the very foundation of our society. It fuels fear, division and injustice, creating barriers to understanding and compassion where empathy and solidarity should flourish.

We live in a world where celebrating authenticity in theory is often condemned in practice - a world where the mere act of being oneself can be met with hostility and violence. It's a sobering reality that demands our collective attention and action. We cannot afford to remain passive bystanders in the face of such injustice. The deaths of Nex Benedict, Brianna Ghey, and Jacob Williamson serve as a call to action - a call to dismantle the systemic inequalities and prejudices that continue to plague our society. It is up to each of us to challenge the status quo, to confront discrimination and hate wherever it manifests, and to create a world in which every individual can live freely and fully without fear of oppression or persecution.

Most importantly, we must never forget the lives and legacies of those lost to transphobia. We must honor their memory by continuing the work they started - by standing up for justice, equality and human rights for all. Nex Benedict, Brianna Ghey, and Jacob Williamson may no longer be with us, but their spirit lives on in the struggle for a more just and equitable world.

Transphobia kills, and that's not okay. But together, through our collective action and unwavering solidarity, we can strive to create a world where love prevails over hate, and where all people are free to live authentically, without fear or prejudice. This is the legacy we must honor. This is the future we must build.

[warningimboring]

Reading about what is happening in Palestine is like being hit by a grief that is so absolute it renders me speechless. But remaining to stay silent in the face of it would be like I was being complicit in what is happening. Multiple times I have seen footage and read news from the past week and I've been kicking myself for not being a doctor. For not somehow being there to help. But all I am is an aspiring poet, and a shitty one at that. So I'll use the craft I have with me and hope that it makes a difference.

What is happening in Palestine is genocide. Plain and simple. We can use fancy words and what-aboutism all we want but that doesn't take away from the reality of it. It is erasing people who have been there for generations. It is imprisoning them for decades, treating them like subhumans and then condemning them whenever they take a stance, however that may be. It is slandering them and blaming them for their oppression. It is reducing a person into a number, a mere statistic.

Notice how in the first paragraph I gave you tiny little idiosyncrasies about myself? When you read about the 1000 dead children (which in itself is a truly awful phrase) what I need you to understand is that the implications of it are far more deep than just those 1000 lives lost. It is the families, the communities who have lost them. It is doctors who have had to pronounce infants dead. It is parents who have had to bury their young. It is an identity, wholly unique to itself- someone like no one else, lost.

Life is hard. This whole blog is dedicated to the angst of existence, the hope of existence, the pursuit of existence. Those people who were killed, all of them, they had lives too. They had existences that they clawed into being. They had hopes and dreams and fears. They had names. They had families. They were human. They bled and cried and laughed and probably made horrible jokes that no one laughed at and had favourite stories and opinions and tiny little quirks that made them just weird enough to be real.

They had the right to exist. They had the right to be free. Free of fear. Free of oppression. But they were denied those rights. And instead of condemning this great loss, we have splintered into a mass of rioting opinions. The shards are sharp with hate. This atrocity, this continuing atrocity, is justified, supported, celebrated. Oh, how we condemn ourselves.

This is wrong. Plain and simple. This has got to stop immediately. They have been denied safe passage away from the rain of outlawed chemicals and missiles and bombs. They have been denied humanitarian aid. They have been denied basic human necessities including food and water. The medical systems that they have is being crippled. Their hospitals are being bombed at. The places they shelter in (including UN camps) are being bombed at. The people who bring their stories to the world are threatened, held at gun point and killed. What Israel is doing is wrong.

But this is not all they are. These people have dug themselves out of the rubble the world buried them in. They have bled and cried and broken bones and they still stretch an arm to help each other. I am not glorifying their suffering, I am just in awe of it. They are doing their part and we have to do ours. If this is to continue it would be another great stain on humanity's soul. Like the holocaust. Like the atom bombs. The weight of it would be all of ours to bear.

I know me saying this here probably means nothing. I'm a nobody with pretty much no audience, but even if there's no one in the forest to hear me, I must fall. What is happening is horrendous and if I'm powerless to change it, the least I could do is bear witness. The least I could do is speak about it.

May God make it easy for the Palestinians. May God help us all and guide us to that which is right.

[skelechuuchuu]

Angels in Bungou Stray Dogs.

〈Manga spoilers〉

Each of the Decay of Angels aims to bring destruction to whomever they consider to be “angels.” This idea is centralized in the fight between Fukuchi and Tachihara, wherein Fukuchi details that the “angels” are “those who hold the reins over the people. Never dirtying their own hands, unstained by mud… sending those below them to the battlefield, taking fortune and pleasure, but none of the responsibility. A lofty presence, ever out of reach” (Ch. 91).

Essentially, angels are those who stand above society, and control others through such power. The Decay of Angels aims to destroy this power, one way or another.

I believe we can take each of the Decay member’s goals and attach them to this ideal.

Fukuchi

Fukuchi stated that politicians were the angels he was after. It is unclear if this is his true motive, since Fukuchi (later on in the same chapter) replied to Tachihara, who asked if that was truly his motive, “For now, it is. By next year, it’ll be the prologue of my autobiography, thanks to the Page.” So, we can’t truly say for certain that his underlying motive is truly to kill politicians (and some of his actions even contradict this, I may argue, but that’s for another time), but that’s what we’ve been told thus far.

Dostoevsky

We are led to believe that Dostoy is after ability users. Although less canonically secretive than Fukuchi’s, I say “led to believe” because Dostoy is, essentially, a little bitch, and I don’t trust him. But his motive in canon has remained consistent in the scenes where he appears. I have previously theorized that his motives to abolish ability users is because they are allowed to wield enough power to functionally place them on another plane from non-ability users (cue Ranpo and others saying an ability user is always stronger than one without an ability) (also the entire concept of Aya, which I feel might be related to all this… anyways!). Dostoy may well wish to kill ability users because they stand above and often control and oppress non-ability users. Having read Crime and Punishment, this potential motive would somewhat fit with similar themes in the novel. There are other possibilities, and of course this isn’t confirmed anywhere, but it sounds cool to me personally thanks bye.

Gogol

Gogol desires freedom over his own soul (and sometimes mentions all homo-sapiens? so maybe he wishes to prove the existence of free will for everyone? who knows), which entails that something is currently controlling it. In this case, to put it shortly and highly simplistically, the entity controlling Gogol is his own emotions and primal instincts/desires. In joining the Decay, Gogol is able to break free of the oppression his own brain has over him.

Sigma

This one is perhaps simpler. Sigma wants to not be used or controlled by anyone else. It’s sort of his whole thing. His goal in joining the Decay is to end the oppression he himself has faced, and to create an environment wherein no one can ever control him again.

Stoker

Bram’s goals are slightly amiss, because he didn’t choose to be a part of the Decay of his own volition. The only times we ever really see a drive to action shine through is in regards to Fukuchi’s control over him, and ending that control. He’s already aided Aya in this goal several times in the vampire outbreak arc. Basically, Bram desires to stop the forces controlling him.

Some extras on angels

I think we can push this idea of angels being above others and having control over others a bit further.

Yosano, for instance, is deemed the "Angel of Death" due to her ability being able to control the death (or lack thereof) of soldiers during the war. Her power was used to sway the tides of the war, in a sense, controlling the outcome.

The play in Untold Origins is another example, which details a group of angels cast out of heaven. The play mentions ability users in the play, and commonly equates them with angels. I'm fuzzy on the details (haven't read the LN in a while) and I can't be bothered to look rn.

In the prison escape arc, Dazai mentions how an angel whispered in his ear to relay information. He's most likely either referring to the Time Cat Lady or Ango, both of which would fit into this angelic narrative. Time Cat Lady is an ability user, and specifically is using her ability to relay such information to Dazai, whereas Ango is a politician, who is actively using his power as a government personnel to communicate with Dazai.

That's all bye.