#The antisemitism ALOnE is bad enough but there are yet MORE REASOns

[rotzaprachim]

one of the things I think a lot of goyim esp western based don’t clock about Jews is that a lot of the places we lived before mass immigration to the US&west and the creation of the state of Israel not only often pretty violently killed or expelled us, but were and are sights of continual warfare and dislocation that was and continued to be fucked up by external and internal conflict, by the direct actions of the British ottoman French American and Russian imperialisms….. Jews only became a “western” people through the acts of violent dislocations from our homelands we’d often lived in for hundreds and thousands of years.

We lived in Afghanistan. We lived in Yemen. We lived in Iraq. We lived in Serbia. We lived in Bosnia & Herzegovina. We lived in Belarus. We lived in Ethiopia. We lived in Algeria. We lived in Morocco. We lived in Syria. We lived in Iran. We lived in Kurdistan. And we lived in Ukraine. We often have complicated histories with these places, varying extents to which we identified with them or with the nationalisms that drew their borders, but we lived there, and in so many ways, from our language to stories to food, we carry them with us and are hurt by the loss of their memory in our lives, pushed into the diaspora of the diaspora. None of this justifies the often profoundly violent antisemitisms we found there, nor should it allow for simple rounds of flag waving - our communities were almost always older than the modern states, and many institutionalized Jewishness as something irreconcilable from the modern National Citizen. But we lived there. Inextricably we are a part of their history, just as they are a part of us.

Any simplistic takes about how Israeli jews should just LEAVE AND GO HOME without understanding the contexts of why that isn’t possible not only whitewashes histories of violent antisemitism but also the CURRENT ongoing realities in many of the countries we lived in, and it comes off not only as callous to Jews but to the people who continue to live there, after our links were severed. Any antizionism that doesn’t seriously reckon with these histories is incomplete. “Why don’t you go back to where you came from?” The American goy asks. I think of my friends and community. To Odessa? Or to Baghdad? To Aleppo? Or to Herat? YOU TELL ME.

[bogleech]

Guess I have to make a main thread about this. Someone decided to fight with me in the notes on this post just yesterday about Gaza and made select responses of mine into a callout thread here, where they say my anger towards the IDF is all a cover for antisemitism. This didn't make any sense, because they said they were also against the IDF killing civilians, and I repeatedly said that Jewish people aren't to blame for the IDF or represented by the IDF in any way, putting us supposedly both on the exact same page. What gerry leaves out of their own screenshots, and I'd actually forgotten, is that at first they came at me from an angle that I was disrespecting the victims in Gaza.

So this implies they feel gaza is being subjected to a genocide, and a pretty big one, since they're upset my language made it sound "smaller and tamer." When it becomes obvious that I do in fact consider it a serious genocide, that's when they switch over to saying that my criticism of Netanyahu or the IDF is inherently an attack on Jewish people.

Notice I never actually said "zionists" in this screenshot, even, but that I defined "regular humans" as humans who don't want to kill innocent families. That would automatically include Jewish people since they overall do not wish to kill anyone, but have in fact spent quite a lot more time trying not to get killed. I believe there may be entire books about this fact! I think there's even whole museums about it, if I'm not mistaken?!

So then they pivot to saying I'm an antisemite because I said the IDF and its supporters can "burn in hell," and they say "invoking hell" is an antisemitic dogwhistle, which is definitely news to me?!

So I tried to clarify, again, that I'm only angry at the people who are themselves killing civilians and the "pro-genocide maniacs" who defend the killing of civilians, which they responded to as if I had "lumped them in" with those. You can just see right there that I didn't make any assumption that they were a part of that at all. Thanks to their earlier comments I still thought I was speaking to someone 100% against the IDF's actions, but every time I said that the killers and their advocates alone are bad, they've framed it in some new way as me just not liking anyone Jewish. So now that you have that context:

...In a response to an ask, they finally just say they hated me to begin with and set out with the intention to "bait and sealion" me (their own words!!) into saying something they hoped would be antisemitic, which they believe was successful despite me never saying anything about Jews other than "this isn't their fault." They saw what they admittedly wanted to, so strongly, that they show me saying "this isn't the fault of Jews" as evidence that I blame Jews. But speaking of people "going mask off"

In multiple more recent posts and asks, this person appears to say that they simply do not believe the IDF is really targeting children or ambulances or relief aid, that "none of those are true," and the deliberate targeting of any children is supposedly just a conspiracy theory??? So I guess they did successfully troll me and I feel like a real gullible dumbass, because the only reason I continued responding to this person in the first place was that they said they were in fact against the ongoing massacre. Instead, these comments sound like they think the IDF is being unfairly vilified by dishonest propagandists, and that's why they hated me enough to try and fish for callout fuel. That's the nastiest fucking thing anyone's yet pulled on me about this and it's not one that I'm just going to ignore. I should have smelled a troll early on and just blocked them, but it's SO hard for me to suspect ulterior motives. I always go in thinking people mean well, and that there's just a miscommunication we can work out. I almost feel like this individual noticed that and tried to exploit it?!? Unfortunately I'm sure this kind of thing will happen again simply because I don't intend to obediently shut up about what's being done to Gaza. It's not logistically possible for the death and destruction to all just be accidental collateral damage. Don't let anybody ever fool you into thinking the IDF is the face of the Jewish community or vice-versa, just as you can't let anyone fool you into thinking Hamas represents all Palestinians. Especially don't engage this person, stop doing so if you have been, and block them.

[dicapiito]

Since Black People share zero blame about what happened in the election and why Trump won again; let’s do a master post on who’s to blame as to why Trump won again:

1. White people. They are never to be trusted to actually pay attention to shit so they will believe anything anyone tells them to. If someone is promising to get rid of anyone who’s not white; white people will vote for that candidate. White men vote for violence and white women vote in hopes to be like white men. I mean, Roe V Wade SHOULDVE been important …until I remember those stories from nurses at Planned Parenthood mentioning how obnoxious white women are about the service. White people who are actual allies are very rare and they know if they admitted to being hateful; they’d be all alone watching Fox News.

2. The mainstream media. MSNBC, CNN, Bill Maher, John Oliver, Jon Stewart ( the biggest douchefuck), Chris Hayes, Anderson Cooper, Joy Reid, among others (who I can’t name because I refuse to hate-watch their media). They spent all their fucking time bashing Biden and the Democrats. They let the lunatic leftists have a platform and they treated Trump like he’s no threat until it was way too late. They figured it’s better for their audiences to not take what Trump did in 2016-2020 seriously and just be mean towards Biden, Harris and the Democrats who actually work towards better.

Any one of these jokers could’ve taken an actual stand and report actual news about Biden but once Covid got calmer thanks to Biden and the White House became boring again because the Biden Administration was busy ACTUALLY WORKING; it just wasn’t enough for them. Once they knew leftists also found another cause they could hijack for themselves to “ stick it to the Dems” they also let these fuckers on their show to help spread more lies about the Democrats. But nope! They latched onto the “ Free Palestine” movement and sold that shit, knowing full fuckin well that it’s not America’s problem about the conflict and Biden and Harris were making sure to get a two state solution.

Their buyers remorse media is not cute and they are only doing this because they know they are a major reason why Trump won again. They’re also scared of retaliation so they’re going to act like they “ regretted it” and that Biden “ wasn’t so bad” while not ever really apologetic but their audiences will eat it up.

3. Nonblack PoC. Latino, Asian/ Pacific Islander community ( I’m not even shocked. I’m apart of this group and they love antiblackness), Arab Americans ( Rashida Tlaib is antiblack but because leftists are stupid; they couldn’t see something so obvious). The desperation to be accepted by white people and also the xenophobia in all these communities had them voting for Trump. They have the “ I’m one of the good ones” mentality and well they’re about to see that antiblackness and xenophobia has screwed themselves .

4. Social media websites letting misinformation spread, and I include tumblr since yet again this happened. I appreciate that X has a community note and people tried to fight it but it was just way too great. Too many bots were getting through. Facebook, tumblr, Twitter, TikTok, likely Instagram as well. And once the elections are over; it’s like they treat the election interference shit like it didn’t happen.

5. Leftists. As usual, since they’re bored and rich, they do this protesting “ the establishment” every four years because they don’t want to pay their fair share of taxes. They went right along with the Free Palestine bullshit because it has worked for them before. Susan Sarandon , remember her? She helped fuck over 2000 as well as 2016 and let the GOP into the White House. Since leftist includes being racist/antiblack and antisemitic; it’s a great way to get more stupid white people to not vote or “ protest vote” and help the GOP win. Now that they have; we won’t see the likes of Jill Stein or any third party candidates. They are only around to help fuck over the Democrats and yet this lesson seems to have to keep being repeated and holy fuck it’s fucking annoying.

6. Nancy Pelosi. I know I haven’t said much but she wanted Biden to step down. She wanted an open Democratic primary to get a new candidate and to go right past Kamala Harris. Her bullshit has been known for awhile, especially if you live in the Bay Area. People forgot because of Covid and because of the whack job who attacked her husband. But remember; she’s also Gavin Newsom’s aunt and well…do with that what you will. If Democrats have any chance at getting their base back; Pelosi needs to step aside and let Hakeem Jeffries be Speaker. Pelosi knew damn well if it was not Kamala Harris; Black People would not show up but she is a white woman first so of course she did what she did. And for her to act like Biden was too old when she’s in the same age group was even more moronic since he won against Trump the first fuckin time

7. antisemitism also played a huge part. Remember Second Gentleman Doug Emhoff is Jewish so if it wasn’t antiblackness; antisemitism was also at play here. Even though people won’t say it just like they won’t say their true reasons why they didn’t vote for Kamala Harris. Jewish People were the only allies along with the lgbt community who overwhelmingly voted for Kamala Harris. Every group has knuckleheads but the knuckleheads were extremely smaller than everyone else.

8. The Squad members. AOC, Rashida Tlaib, Jayapal, Cori Bush, Summer Lee and Jamaal Bowman. It’s time to get rid of these idiot DSA morons and the fact that Cori Bush and Jamaal Bowman are out is awesome. They always wanted to fuck over the Democrats because they want to appear like they’re activists while they really just sell “ someday it’ll be better” while making $176K a year. They need the GOP in charge so they can coast in the House. Too bad leftists don’t get that.

So now that we all know who’s to blame; maybe now take some fuckin responsibility and hope to fucking heaven that Trump won’t have SCOTUS overturn shit but who are we kidding? With Elon Musk around; a lot of things will be rolled back but let’s see if people learn anything from it. Oh who am I kidding ?

Oh and thinking of moving to Canada? Lmao Justin Trudeau already went “ AHT AHT”. Best believe other countries are already following suit so y’all are going to be owning up to who you voted for lol.

But ya know, Biden was “ too old” and Harris was “ too joyful”

[flagellant]

if you're sick and tired of talking about the temple passage, just go ahead and delete my ask haha

but this is something i struggle with so much. like yeah the event may very well have not been antisemitic when it happened! but it's been utilized in antisemitic ways so much since, i've heard sermons by my old pastors, i've had jewish friends tell me about the ways it's been used against them. i love church. i love going every week and the stability it brings, i love singing with other people, i love baking for coffee hour, i love working at soup kitchens, i love being with people! but as i've grown more and more aware of the antisemitism and all the other bigotry that seems to be built into its very foundations, it's gotten harder and harder. i go to a liberal church now, but is that enough? are we doing enough as a congregation? am i perpetuating discrimination in some way i don't know yet? can we use the temple cleansing verses in a non antisemitic way or have they been tainted? can the church continue and be a force for good or are its foundations rotten? i know it's probably not a yes or no thing, it's probably complicated... christmas, the perfect time for religious angst

What you're going through right now is what I went through before finally deciding to leave Catholicism, and is at its roots why I studied to become a theologian. I find religion so beautiful in all its forms and reasons; we invent the supernatural to create explanations for the things which exist beyond us. The occult is the place where humanity revels in its inherent nature as contradictory, illogical, and strange.

And Christianity as an institution has, undeniably, been a source of much beauty and good in the world. No one can deny that objectively. The whole of Vatican City alone is a testament to the glory of God in art, and even without acknowledging any charity work done by any church or Christian organization, the kindness and support of parish communities alone cannot be overstated.

But it is also the case that Christianity as an institution has, undeniably, been a source of countless horrific, torturous deaths, systemic abuses and oppressions, and multiple genocides. This, too, is something no one can deny objectively. It exists not as the other side of the coin to the former; it is the same thing. The same good and beauty is fed and feeds the ugliness and the carnage.

What is the capability of an individual person in the face of all that trauma, all that debt of blood? You can't do anything about it. And even if you thought you could, how different does that make you if you still work under Great Man Philosophy? Is anything here worth saving? Is any experience free of the original sin of antisemitism and genocide and imperialism and colonialism?

I don't know. But what I do know is that I find it important that we all think of these things and acknowledge them. Christianity has done horrific things. But by not learning about the good things that the institutions have done, by refusing to recognize them, we forfeit our ability to more accurately define what is bad and why. The Spanish Inquisition is a horrible part of history, but Christianity couldn't have reached that point if it was all Inquisitions.

[zorilleerrant]

I'm so tired of people saying Bruce Wayne only experienced one tragedy in his entire life. no one experiences just one tragedy in their entire life, that's not how life works

and what we know about Bruce is that he grew up neurodivergent, and he was bullied by his peers and abused by his teachers, because that's just what happens to crazy kids. we know this was more than just the outcome of trauma, because he had a dedicated, compassionate, competent therapist since the trauma happened.

we know that he was raised by Alfred, but we also know he had cousins on both sides and that if they'd had anything resembling a normal relationship with him Alfred never would've gotten custody. his remaining family just ignored him for his entire childhood, and maybe that was better, because it's also been established his uncle was willing to kill him. we know there were rarely other people in the house, and we know all the reasons someone would need to keep adults away from a newly orphaned Bruce Wayne.

we know that, of the handful of friends he had as a kid, they all grew up to try to kill him. we know he's not all that rocked by it; when he looks back he can see all the signs. he lived through his childhood friendships knowing that the people closest to him were always going to hurt him, were going to come back and do worse than whatever they had already done.

we know that he's a celebrity. we know that he was just a kid and he hit the front pages on gore and voyeurism, that blood sells papers and no one wanted to leave him alone for years. that he was a famous figure before he was even a preteen, and the kinds of things strangers - even celebrity strangers - say to kids even though they know they shouldn't. what the public says, and even does, every time a famous kid goes out in public.

we know that he's Jewish enough to attract antisemitic conspiracy theories from all sides of the political spectrum. we know he reads as queer regardless of his personal feelings and that he has to deal with homophobic harassment over it. we know he has PTSD but people treat that as a discrete event instead of an ongoing issue, and think it's not allowed to impact the way he interacts with the world.

sure, there are plenty of tragedies he never had to deal with. there are always tragedies one person's had to deal with that another hasn't. but playing oppression olympics with who's allowed to feel bad just reflects the same stance in real life. and saying that he's rich so he's not allowed to have feelings betrays a comfort with dehumanization that makes me real uncomfortable, especially with respect to a character that has such an important place in both Jewish and queer history, not to mention disability politics itself.

but worse, to reduce just one thing to being a single problem, when the very crux of the narrative is all the related problems it draws in? he saw a horrible thing, and he feared for his own life. and he lost his parents. and he learned he couldn't trust authority figures to help him. and he couldn't stop ruminating on all the bad things going on around him, even long enough to sleep. and he lost most of his support structure, the people he was most likely to talk to. and he gained a ton of responsibility he was too young for. and he gained a bunch of blame for not being ready to make those decisions yet.

no single tragedy is just one problem.

[sapropel]

The main things that turned me off of conversion for now were

1. I have alot of shit on my plate and am low income as a result so finding a place that will help might be hard because locally there really aren't any synagogues around

2. The synagogue I did find locally was uhhh...... Hhhhh. Their web page had a huge section about Israel in a positive light..

I love the religion, I love certain values it holds however I refuse to align with anyone who justifies colonialism and bloodshed against another group of people while ignoring past bloodshed done onto themselves. It makes 0 sense to me and is highly hypocritical.

Hypocrisy was one of the reasons I hated Christianity so much. Constantly causing bloodshed, huge present and past history of colonialism, huge present day history of wanting people like me who are gay or trans dead and in the ground.

the difference with Christianity is that there isn't even a present day persecution or justified worry of safety despite the fact that I've seen jack chick esque evangelical fuckers unironically act like they're holocaust survivors whenever a pride parade happens within 1 mile of them.

It makes me sad, I don't see the point in colonizing or maiming a group of people who should be your equals.

It's racist at best, dangerous and actively contributing to more death and violence at worst.

The thing is there isn't really a "point." It creates its own point. Real actionable Zionist sentiment was basically non-existent until the rise of European nationalism. It's literally the exact same brand of nationalism that gave birth to fascist Italy and other great failures of modernity. And when "Israel" was a proto-state basically its entire existence was contingent upon its continued usefulness to Britain as a tool of control over India through the Suez. Zionist claims to the land are super shaky at best and straight up revisionist at worst. Post-facto Israel has tried to give itself legitimacy through fearmongering, genocide, and forging alliances with other imperialist powers. It's doing what America did (and is doing) but it's happening in the age of mass media and we are all watching colonial revisionism happen in real time.

If you are letting the prevalence of Zionism keep you from Judaism, I would say you should keep thinking about it. If you treat Judaism as too thoroughly engulfed in Zionism, you do the work of Zionists for them--you legitimize their claim that Judaism is Zionism is Israel. You legitimize the idea that anti-Zionism is antisemitism which is incidentally exactly how my local rabbis have been fucking me over since June. You are of course totally within your rights not to convert to a religion that doesn't work for you, but I hope you rethink the implication that converting to Judaism is akin to aligning with Zionism.

And yeah, Zionist hypocrisy is a systematic issue within American Jewish institutions in a feedback loop with Jewish populations. Any institutional apparatus is going to have systematic issues that reflect the dominant discourse of the greater cultural framework--mainstream Jewish institutions are going to, both by the nature of maintaining relevancy in America and by the natures of fearmongering and cultural amnesia, have a vested interest in participating in capitalism, imperialism, racism... You are not going to find mainstream insitutions that don't perpetuate them. That's why they're dominant. You are no more aligning yourself with Zionism by going to a synagogue than you are aligning yourself with capitalism by shopping at Wal-Mart. Anything you meaningfully do in public is in some way going to be "problematic" on some level because public space is designed to keep itself alive by those values.

It's exhausting to make yourself never come close to anyone or anything bad at all--refusing to associate with anyone with a problematic ideology is a doomed enterprise. I've been there. A lot of Zionist sentiment is implanted in people's minds with lifelong propaganda and destructive mind control techniques, and it's important to recognize that. That doesn't mean Zionist adults don't have a responsibility to unlearn it, but I think it's possible to have compassion for people who do try to do their best with improving themselves. Most people you meet want to be good and don't want to be willfully ignorant. I try to think about how difficult it is to convince the average well-meaning white American of the merits of decolonization/land back. Most well-meaning Zionist Jews are going to feel the same way about Israel--actual systematic justice and decolonization are not in their lexicons. Decolonization is hidden behind thought-stopping techniques that they have been inundated with from day 1. But most people do have a basic sense of goodness and are willing to sacrifice something for it. Most people are willing to give ground for the sake of human decency. The only way I can survive talking to people I know are Zionists is by understanding that we both want the world to be a better place and if I dwell on the specifics of how I perceive them to be evil, the possibility of us having a working relationship and any hope at productive dialogue drops to zero.

You don't have to be patient with Zionists or Zionist institutions. You don't have to forgive them. You don't even have to be compassionate. But you do need to understand, intellectually, that imposed cognitive dissonance is a very powerful tool of mind control (and I'm not talking about woo-woo shit I'm extrapolating from cult research and personal experience) and that the pathos of Zionism isn't supposed to be logical. Fear trumps hypocrisy. Fatigue trumps informed consent. Charisma trumps logic. Any bigoted ideology is going to fall apart under logical scrutiny, and that's why the only battleground for maintaining bigotry is necessarily charismatic and emotional.

We haven't yet, of course, acknowledged that there are also tons of anti-Zionist Jews and that the concept isn't absurd or fringe, no matter what the dominant Zionist discourse says. It's important for us not to let Zionists be the stewards of Judaism--Zionists do not OWN Judaism. Just like the most Orthodox of Jews also don't OWN Judaism. Judaism is only what you make it to be, and if you leave it alone because you are too worried about Zionism, that is all Judaism is ever going to be for you. Of course, you still have to contend with Zionism, and if you actually are interested in being a Jew, you would have to find a way not to let it kill your Judaism. I've come close (ish) to giving up on Judaism a couple of times because of Israel and Zionism, but I'm glad I haven't. I've stuck it out long enough to give myself to tools I need to separate the two and see the situation with more clarity.

[phriestly]

𝐃𝐈𝐄 𝐏𝐇𝐈𝐋𝐎𝐒𝐎𝐏𝐇𝐈𝐄 𝐈𝐒𝐓 𝐈𝐇𝐑𝐄 𝐙𝐄𝐈𝐓 𝐈𝐍 𝐆𝐄𝐃𝐀𝐍𝐊𝐄𝐍 𝐄𝐑𝐅𝐀𝐒𝐒𝐓 .    ( 𝐆. 𝐖. 𝐅. 𝐇𝐄𝐆𝐄𝐋 )

THEMES APPEARING :    authenticity, Angst and Entwurf. choice. instrumental rationality. sexuality. in short: miranda priestly as a product of modernity and its failures. 

okay so.  here’s another long overdue character study that aims to enunciate the impact of the malaise of modernity, and especially the failure of existentialism as a meaningful philosophy on miranda’s life and how these things shape who she is. she is not an existentialist (moreso a structuralist when it comes to fashion studies), but the emergence of existentialism shapes indirectly her life.

a fair warning before i get to the actual meta itself: it will feature discussion of martin heid/egger’s philosophical work because it is seminal to understanding existentialism and any contemporary continental philosophy.  heidegger was an antisemite. there are no excuses for this anymore, he’s not just the philosopher who made the wrong decisions before and during world war two - the schwarzen hefte are disgusting. it does contaminate his philosophy. still, one can not simply throw away his philosophical work, because he is one of the few na/zi’s that has an ideology / philosophy that does apply to the modern world - it is generalizable outside of the era. it’s not utter garbage. as much as i’d like continental philosophy to be uncontaminated by hei/degger it is simply impossible to avoid him. so. this by way of being clear upfront. if anyone wants to discuss this, my dms are open. 

actual meta under the cut because it’s too fucking long

𝐈𝐍𝐓𝐑𝐎𝐃𝐔𝐂𝐓𝐈𝐎𝐍.

in the end, authenticity can’t, shouldn’t, go all the way with self-determining freedom. it undercuts itself. yet the temptation is understandably there. and where the tradition of authenticity falls for any other reason into anthropocentrism, the alliance easily recommends itself, becomes almost irresistible. that’s because anthropocentrism, by abolishing all horizons of, threatens us with a loss of meaning and hence a trivialization of our predicament. at one moment, we understand our situation as one of high tragedy, alone in a silent universe, without intrinsic meaning, condemned to create value. but at a later moment, the same doctrine, by its own inherent bent, yields a flattened word, in which there aren’t very meaningful choices because there aren’t any crucial issues.

Charles Taylor, The Ethics of Authenticity (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1991), 68.

all of this   [ i.e. the ontological turn from art as imitation to creativity, paralleling that of the turn towards the subject & schiller’s conception of art as higher than morality when it comes to wholeness ]   contributes to the close links between authenticity against art. and this helps explain some of the developments of the notion of authenticity in the last two centuries; in particular, the development of forms in which the demands of authenticity have been pitched against those of morality. authenticity involves originality, it demands a revolt against convention. it is easy to see how standard morality itself can come to be seen as inseparable from stifling convention. morality as normally understood obviously involves crushing much that is elemental and instinctive in us, many of our deepest and most powerful desires. so there develops a branch of the search for authenticity that pits it against the moral.

Ibid., 65. 

𝐀𝐔𝐓𝐇𝐄𝐍𝐓𝐈𝐂𝐈𝐓𝐘, 𝐀𝐍𝐆𝐒𝐓 𝐀𝐍𝐃 𝐄𝐍𝐓𝐖𝐔𝐑𝐅. the principal feature of our modern culture is authenticity and a culture related to authenticity, something existentialist philosophers - and existential phenomenologists like heid/egger have emphasized. this existential comes with a burden however - to be authentic is to live your life, not imitating, but creating. not in the traces of someone else. but as something that is innate to ourselves. it does come with a burden, as the demand of the Entwurf, the grand plan of one’s life is a demanding one.

often, it results in existential angst, a suffocating feeling of having to live an authentic life. angst here is the fear for the nothing, for the irrelevance of our existence, which is always a Sein-zum-Tode/Being-towards-Death. in our realization of our authentic life, the easy choice is to follow the mores prescribed by das Man, the impersonal, plural, ‘they’ that is the driving force behind our societal mores. in the quotes above, the failure of this philosophy is brilliantly demonstrated by Charles Taylor, for in the end, there is a temptation of meaninglessness and morality can be abrogated - it turns violent in the name of authenticity.

this violence does not always have to be bad: it can be a violence of smashing, for example, the gender binary, the patriarchy, or the oppressive structures of religion. but this violence can also go awry, in various forms: an example would be fascism’s nostalgia for the ‘authentic’ past. however, this violence is a spectrum: there is not one mode of being violent and they all differ greatly from each other despite having their origins in the same idea.

miranda’s life is exemplary of the failure of the culture of authenticity exalted by existentialism. it’s not all bad: the only reason she is capable of being editor - in - chief of a magazine like runway is because of the ontological turn of art as imitation to art as creation. authenticity (despite all the fakeness)  is one of its crucial selling points - and she is brilliant at this. yet, as Taylor has pointed out, authenticity demands a revolution.

miranda, as a character, is symbolical for the breaking free of the modern woman from the traditional expectations of housewives. but this breaking free - while not a bad thing in itself, it didn’t occur without some sort of ‘violence’ (as should be clear by now. violence, for me, is subject to broad interpretation), as in that she can’t afford to be ‘nice’,  as is traditionally expected of her.

𝙲𝙷𝚁𝙸𝚂𝚃𝙸𝙰𝙽: 𝚜𝚑𝚎'𝚜 𝚊… 𝚜𝚑𝚎'𝚜 𝚊 𝚗𝚘𝚝𝚘𝚛𝚒𝚘𝚞𝚜 𝚜𝚊𝚍𝚒𝚜𝚝…  𝚊𝚗𝚍 𝚗𝚘𝚝… 𝚗𝚘𝚝 𝚒𝚗 𝚊 𝚐𝚘𝚘𝚍 𝚠𝚊𝚢.

𝙰𝙽𝙳𝚈: 𝚘𝚔𝚊𝚢, 𝚜𝚑𝚎'𝚜 𝚝𝚘𝚞𝚐𝚑, 𝚋𝚞𝚝 𝚒𝚏 𝚖𝚒𝚛𝚊𝚗𝚍𝚊 𝚠𝚎𝚛𝚎 𝚊 𝚖𝚊𝚗… 𝚗𝚘 𝚘𝚗𝚎 𝚠𝚘𝚞𝚕𝚍 𝚗𝚘𝚝𝚒𝚌𝚎 𝚊𝚗𝚢𝚝𝚑𝚒𝚗𝚐 𝚊𝚋𝚘𝚞𝚝 𝚑𝚎𝚛, 𝚎𝚡𝚌𝚎𝚙𝚝 𝚑𝚘𝚠 𝚐𝚛𝚎𝚊𝚝 𝚜𝚑𝚎 𝚒𝚜 𝚊𝚝 𝚑𝚎𝚛 𝚓𝚘𝚋.

however. it doesn’t stop there. which is what i will be discussing next. 

𝐈𝐍𝐒𝐓𝐑𝐔𝐌𝐄𝐍𝐓𝐀𝐋 𝐑𝐀𝐓𝐈𝐎𝐍𝐀𝐋𝐈𝐓𝐘. das rechenende Denken is what hei/degger - but also the mar/xist frankfurter school of philosophy - labeled as the greatest ill of modernity. the devil wears prada is, in part a movie about instrumental rationality, which is the mode of thought that has emerged together with the advancement of science. it is a mode of reasoning that focuses on the most effective means to an end. 

𝙰𝙽𝙳𝚈: 𝚒… 𝚒 𝚌𝚘𝚞𝚕𝚍𝚗'𝚝 𝚍𝚘 𝚠𝚑𝚊𝚝 𝚢𝚘𝚞 𝚍𝚒𝚍 𝚝𝚘 𝚗𝚒𝚐𝚎𝚕, 𝚖𝚒𝚛𝚊𝚗𝚍𝚊. 𝚒 𝚌𝚘𝚞𝚕𝚍𝚗'𝚝 𝚍𝚘 𝚜𝚘𝚖𝚎𝚝𝚑𝚒𝚗𝚐 𝚕𝚒𝚔𝚎 𝚝𝚑𝚊𝚝.

𝙼𝙸𝚁𝙰𝙽𝙳𝙰: 𝚖𝚖. 𝚢𝚘𝚞 𝚊𝚕𝚛𝚎𝚊𝚍𝚢 𝚍𝚒𝚍. 𝚝𝚘 𝚎𝚖𝚒𝚕𝚢.

these betrayals are part of the industry. they are part of instrumental reason - a mode of rationality that has little regard for morality or nigel’s feelings, but only for the outcome. the weberian iron cage dominates. the violence of authenticity in part tied to the iron cage of instrumental reason. one wonders how authentic that individualist conception of authenticity is. 

𝐂𝐇𝐎𝐈𝐂𝐄. another heavy emphasis is laid on choice: 

𝙰𝙽𝙳𝚈: 𝚝𝚑𝚊𝚝'𝚜 𝚗𝚘𝚝 𝚠𝚑𝚊𝚝 𝚒… 𝚗𝚘, 𝚝𝚑𝚊𝚝 𝚠𝚊𝚜… 𝚝𝚑𝚊𝚝 𝚠𝚊𝚜 𝚍𝚒𝚏𝚏𝚎𝚛𝚎𝚗𝚝. 𝚒 𝚍𝚒𝚍𝚗'𝚝 𝚑𝚊𝚟𝚎 𝚊 𝚌𝚑𝚘𝚒𝚌𝚎.

𝙼𝙸𝚁𝙰𝙽𝙳𝙰: 𝚘𝚑, 𝚗𝚘, 𝚢𝚘𝚞 𝚌𝚑𝚘𝚜𝚎. 𝚢𝚘𝚞 𝚌𝚑𝚘𝚜𝚎 𝚝𝚘 𝚐𝚎𝚝 𝚊𝚑𝚎𝚊𝚍. 𝚢𝚘𝚞 𝚠𝚊𝚗𝚝 𝚝𝚑𝚒𝚜 𝚕𝚒𝚏𝚎, 𝚝𝚑𝚘𝚜𝚎 𝚌𝚑𝚘𝚒𝚌𝚎𝚜 𝚊𝚛𝚎 𝚗𝚎𝚌𝚎𝚜𝚜𝚊𝚛𝚢.

choice is fundamental in existential philosophy as it affirms human freedom. the Entwurf, the design can never be realized by someone else. one has to develop authentic life for themselves - Jemeinigkeit: authenticity is an authenticity that is personal, and that has to be realized in one’s own existence. however, for hei/degger the facticity of our human existence and the risk of Verfallen into an average existence or Durschnittlichkeit are omnipresent. They taint the Entwurf. for s/artre however, freedom is radicalized. existence precedes essence: who we are precedes what we are. our choices define our existence. and as we are doomed to human freedom, we have to make choices. andy tries to avoid these - representing the existentialist mauvaise foi, whereas miranda takes full responsibility for them. however, they become meaningless. 

𝙽𝙸𝙶𝙴𝙻:   𝚜𝚘𝚖𝚎𝚝𝚒𝚖𝚎𝚜 𝚒 𝚌𝚊𝚗'𝚝 𝚋𝚎𝚕𝚒𝚎𝚟𝚎 𝚒 𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔 𝚊𝚋𝚘𝚞𝚝 𝚝𝚑𝚒𝚜 𝚌𝚛𝚊𝚙 𝚊𝚕𝚕 𝚍𝚊𝚢.

existentialism fails to recognize crucial issues because nothing is important anymore. the choice of having steak for lunch over pasta becomes as important as say, the choice to save someone from imminent death or not. a larger horizon is needed. which is conspicuously absent . authenticity becomes inauthentic easily enough .

𝐒𝐄𝐗𝐔𝐀𝐋𝐈𝐓𝐘. with all this being out of the way, i want to briefly go over miranda’s sexual orientation vis à vis the fact she has been in the closet her whole life and will likely continue to remain so.  important to recognize, in the case of existentialism, is that there is no prior authentic essence to be uncovered. one does not first sit down and ponder on what is the most authentic mode of life for them, but one simply chooses. and because of the choice one makes as a free human, one is authentic. an existentialist culture of authenticity pushed to the extreme has as its consequence that sexual orientation too is also merely a choice. and paradoxically enough, because of this culture of authenticity, miranda’s choices for ‘this life’ involve choices that are inauthentic, that are part of hei/degger’s Verfallen. because of this, there’s that creeping existential Angst that permeates her life, her sense of not being whole, of not having realised the Entwurf fully.

[thenightling]

Preemptive Strike: Why Delirium is NOT ableist (because I probably will have to defend her when the Sandman series  comes out)

I have a bad feeling that with posts circulating about Wanda being problematic just because she faced Transphobia, and others calling Cain problematic (he’s supposed to be...)  that I might need to write this in advance.

Little Delirium if The Endless is Not ableist.

Each Endless represents an aspect of sentient life.  There are seven in all. Destiny, Death, Dream, Destruction, Desire, Despair, and little Delirium.  Each represents it’s aspect and the direct opposite.  

Delirium isn’t a character created to mock people with mental illness.  Heavily based on the goddess Mania (from Greek Mythology), in fact that was who she was to the Ancient Greeks, Delirium represents the state of delirium.  Delirium is a disorientation or confusion, often associated with hallucinations and incoherence.  It can come about from some forms of mental illness but it can also be the result of intoxication, lack of sleep, or extreme emotional distress. 

As Delirium represents the state of mental delirium she also represents mental clarity, sobriety, awareness.   Each Endless also represents their own opposite.  Destiny = Free will, Death = Life, Dream = Reality, Destruction = Creation (or the balance that is change), Desire = Hate, Despair = Hope.   Delirium = Awareness.    

Delirium used to be Delight so the implication is thousands of years ago her transformation was the result of some unspoken trauma.   

Delirium is not a cruel character, nor is she a parody.  Her condition treated as comedic. It’s simply how she is.   Delirium, in general, is very kind.   During Sandman: Brief Lives you find all she really wants is to be reunited with a lost sibling, Destruction.

Delirium is possibly the wisest of The Endless even if she might need a little help and guidance of her own from time to time.   

The cruelest thing we’ve ever seen her do is when she cursed a Highway patrol officer to see and feel insects crawling all over himself as punishment for yelling at her, being rude, and as she perceived it, mean.   

Delirium is generally sweet, and she does not like people who are rude, loud, or mistreat women.   

I’m only posting this now because I know that someone, somehow, some way will be offended by her very existence. 

I know there’s a weird motto here on Tumblr that “If you have to defend something as not being ‘ist’ it probably is” but here’s the thing.  I’ve seen too many false “Ableist” comments here on Tumblr.

I am visually impaired.  I have very poor eyesight.  It is considered borderline legally blind.  It’s optic nerve based. (Glasses will not help.)  I can read, can detect color very well.  I just can’t read fine print or see distance very well.  I’m very, very near sighted.   I will never be allowed to drive.  

As a child I dealt with some very real ableism.  In Kindergarten I was allowed on the old rusty jungle gym on the playground but for some reason they thought I would fall off the nice wooden one that all my friends played on.    

A song of  “Three blind (My last name here)” sung by other kids became a thing.   And “Oh, say can (my first name here) See…” (to the National Anthem).  At one point my bookbag was stolen and turned up later with the word “Cyclops” sprawled across it in permanent marker.    THIS is Ableism.

Now for what Tumblr does to the term:  

So when I see Tumblr posts ranting that Daredevil (Matt Murdock) is Ableist for calling Punisher crazy I get a little annoyed.   If a blind man calls another man crazy for killing people that’s NOT the blind man being ableist!  “But… But ‘Crazy is an offensive word!”  Pardon the blind guy, who was being chained up by a serial killer, for not being sensitive enough to gently say “mentally ill” at that exact moment.  

Here on Tumblr I was calling Ableist for saying that Rumplestiltskin (who walks with a limp and a cane) in the TV show Once Upon a Time, has a disability.  The reason?   Apparently it’s because the character smashed his own ankle and since he did it to himself that means the character forfeits the right to be considered as having a disability.  And so it’s Ableist to say he has a disability.  

Neil Gaiman was called Ableist on here for correcting the typo of an antisemite who sent him an anti-Jewish rant, somehow unware that Neil Gaiman is Jewish.   HOW the Hell does it count as ableist to correct the typo of an anti-semite?   It’s not just the disabled who make typos and many (with eyesight problems or dyslexia or even learning disabilities) prefer to be corrected, they don’t want mistakes left alone. It’s embarrassing, more embarrassing than being corrected, for most of us.

Guillermo del Toro was called ableist for having the mute character in The Shape of Water end up with the aquatic man (even though he turns out to be a God…)

He was also called ableist for not casting a real deaf girl in the role, even though the character is mute, not deaf, and finding a mute actress who can dance, swim, and has no modern accoutrements to compensate, uses ASL (American Sign language specifically), and fits the physical body type Guillermo del Toro wanted, is pretty rare.  And I have yet to come across an actual mute person complain about this.  Just able-bodied people bitching in self-righteousness on behalf of those who never asked for it and often LIKE the movie.

“But the disabled girl ended up with a monster!”  No, the woman with a disability ended up with a God.   She had no interest in human men.  And it had nothing to do with her disability.    

My point is when you throw around the term this loosely (and it’s usually perfectly able bodied people doing it, thinking they’re doing a favor to those with disabilities) the term starts to get diminished and lose meaning.

So I sincerely HOPE we won’t get “Delirium is ableist!” complaints when the Sandman series starts but I know this site too well at this point…

[airlock]

airlock grades the Gharnef archetype

so, I got a random hankering to start a text post series where I launch myself off on reviews of each character from a certain villainous archetype in Fire Emblem -- and hey, it’s a reasonably nice time of the year to be doing posts like these, what with that new upcoming entry that we learn more about each day, isn’t it?

to kick off the festivities, I’m doing one of my favorites -- let’s see who wore the heavy robes better!

(do note: under cut are spoilers for... everything, and also a significant amount of me criticizing or blamming characters that you might like. you’ve been warned! but if you’d still persist, you childish sword lord, then come along and meet my challenge-)

the man himself

(6/10)

although the execution suffers from myriad flaws -- of which several can be touted to stem from storage space limitations in FE1 and FE3, but are inexcusably retained in the remakes -- it’s not for no reason that this fellow spawned a lengthy line of imitators.

the detail of his backstory and motivation is brillant; he’s a perfectly understandable villain without being remotely redeemable -- a much-needed class in antagonist writing for more recent entries of the series. he’s also effective as a terrifying, genuinely threatening villain, implacable and powerful.

unfortunately, however, his excellently written characterization is largely confined to flavor; it fails to inform his actions or the flow of the plot, and so, he tends to come across as a plot device instead of a character. even his takeover of Khadein is written very powerfully for something that isn’t seen and barely influences any of the game’s events. and although his sheer ambition in withholding Falchion to eventually betray Medeus ends up coming across as a plot action instead of something steeped in his essence. and this all to say nothing of his second appearance, where he fully forgoes being a character and behaves indistinguishably from a non-sentinent madness-inducing talisman.

overall, he’s a splendid concept for a villain that is ultimately laid low in execution, largely because, back in his day, the text wasn’t big enough to comfortably carry him, and the more recent incarnations were ineffective in expanding it despite having more than enough room to do so.

I also docked a point or two for being an antisemitic/anti-roma stereotype in his earlier incarnations, what with the hooked nose and rare darker skintone; the remakes thankfully eschew this by swapping out the nose and making the skintone outright inhuman, but the more recent Heroes design, while an improvement on many fronts, seems to roll back on this one.

church gharnef

(6/10)

unlike the above-mentioned, this one was in a remake that changed a lot of things; I mention this as a healthy preface to the fact that I am only familiar with his more recent incarnation!

like Gharnef above, he’s an unforgivable, but genuine villain; while a lust for power is hardly fresh as far as motivations go, the game does reasonably well at establishing that he’s already powerful and influential, and has fallen to cruel orthodoxy in a bid to eliminate threats to his power at all costs -- in other words, his characterization is timelessly realistic.

unfortunately, however, that much is all text, if not outright fanon; the story proper restricts him to behaving as an unconvincing cacklefiend playing at a kidnap-the-princess plot that the princess in question should’ve been too strong and too smart to fall prey to. making Celica a somewhat willing hostage instead of a helpless captive was a step in the right direction, but it doesn’t cover the distance; it would have been far more interesting if Jedah had gotten the chance to overpower Celica in the arena of genuine manipulation through theological debate -- and on the other coin of things, I’m sure his preying on Celica’s fears would seem a lot more organic if not for how dedicated the game is to telling her that she’s wrong before she even takes the steps across the point of no return.

he’s much like the original Gharnef in being an intriguing concept that falls flat on execution, although with both of those qualities amped up -- even more interesting in theory, even flatter in practice.

discount gharnef

(2/10)

sorry not sorry for nicknaming him that!

I believe I’ve said it a number of times and I’ll say it again: Manfroy is a manipulative villain in a setting full of people who don’t need manipulation to make bad decisions and ruin their own lives. he comes across as a plot device at the best of times, and as a null factor at the worst of times; he brings nothing to any cutscene that he appears in.

Seliph’s visit to the Yied Shrine alludes to his backstory -- that which he shares with the rest of the cult -- but this instance is even poorer than previous examples at establishing a plot presence; it not only fails to inform Manfroy’s choices in any interesting way, but it’s also outright contradicted by his actions sometimes (cfr: withholding the Naga tome, in a move that brings Gharnef’s playbook to mind but makes no sense at all for Manfroy).

points have been docked again for racial stereotyping, also; the sprite alone doesn’t make it very evident but he’s also got a face that can be used as a fishing pole.

irrelevant gharnef

(1/10)

Veld is a step beneath even Manfroy, as yet another pointless manipulative villain -- notorious for stealing a slice of agency from one of the far more genuine antagonists of the setting -- who doesn’t make his presence felt at all. I was halfway tempted to consider Raydrik the actual Manfroy here, even.

he retains one point only for not being a racial stereotype, for once.

the absence of a gharnef

(wha?/10)

Binding Blade, for all its highly repetitious usage of archetypes (being, in fact, arguably responsible for making them a thing in the first place, where they were previously just repetitive Kaga quirks), seems to have eschewed the Gharnef. this actually somewhat works in its favor; although the game’s plot is ultimately one of the shallower ones in the series, the lack of a core manipulative villain puts the focus on the self-interested factionalism that each country suffers from as they fail to mobilize a resistance against the primary villain. so, overall, an approach that would have worked out great in Jugdral.

monsterfucker gharnef

(8.5/10)

where Binding Blade had succeeded in building a plot that doesn’t need a Gharnef, its prequel was successful in the opposite: creating one of the most effective incarnations of the archetype to date, and making him front and center, to boot.

although all Gharnefs thus far have been manipulative villains, Nergal and his cronies are the first ones who show true skill in manipulation -- as in, conning people into acting against their interests, in situations where they otherwise would not have. through this, he cements himself as the primary antagonist and driver of the plot, where his predecessors were content, if dishonest, in serving a greater evil. and he brings very perceptible weight to the position, specially in the scenes where he presses the buttons of the heroes; although he fails to ultimately discourage them from defeating him, it comes across as a result of heroic strength, not of ineffective villainy.

that said, however he shimmers and shines as the heavy, he’s somewhat held back by his backstory -- one that only partially succeeds at informing his actions (however compelling it is when it does manage to do so), and worse, is largely locked to second-playthrough bonuses, where the story would’ve benefitted much more from naturally doling out his secrets along the way.

I also docked a half-point because the pseudo-turban and goatee arguably veer into the racial stereotype territory again, although he at least has the point-for of not having an outright gonk design (even when the turban goes off). I should be clear: it’s not that I oppose having nonwhite/nonwestern elements on an antagonist at all, it just comes across rather poorly when certain elements are only seen on antagonists, and especially if it’s always on the ugly ones.

twink gharnef

(10/10)

Lyon is the apex of plot-driving gharnefs, plain and simple. undeniably sympathetic, but impossible to save, whether he’s too far gone or was never redeemable to begin with -- and in fact, this ambiguity is easily the most brillant aspect of all of the writing in Sacred Stones.

he’s characterized effectively from wire to wire: his appearance, mannerisms and fond flashbacks do an excellent job of disarming the player while setting them up for a staggering plot twist, but the game is also not too hesitant to bring the plot twist to fruition and saves enough time to keep building on him past the point when the big secret is out -- sidestepping a pervasive trap that otherwise often causes plot twists to weaken stories. and all the way to the end, it’s difficult to narrow his character down to one narrative that doesn’t feel strictly like a personal interpretation; there are as many Lyons as there are players, right down to the point where he comes across differently depending on whether you’re playing as Eirika or Ephraim!

there’s also credit to be given to the remainder of the cast that effectively props him up; because he has underlings that behave strongly on their own motivations -- and sometimes beyond even Lyon’s control -- he spares himself from behaving as a plot device to focus fully on serving as the genuine core of the story as a whole. I suppose he’s a good delegator if nothing else, eh?

depression gharnef

(4/10)

unlike the above, Sephiran fails crucially in one regard: he’s set up as an extremely endgame plot twist, which, coupled with a frantic, breathless third act that insuffices to fully explore the implications of the reveals it dishes out, causes his reveal to land closer to shock value than to the completion of an arc.

while his backstory is breathtakingly fascinating, it serves exclusively as a footnote to eulogize him with; it’s not just that his actions don’t seem to be informed by it, but rather that his actions completely lack weight in the plot, making it even somewhat arguable to class him as a Gharnef at all. in Path of Radiance, he only appears as an irrelevant mystery, and Radiant Dawn coming out to accredit him for some number of Ashnard’s deeds fails to budge that one’s sheer weight and doesn’t change perspectives.

it’s quite a shame, because in concept, he could’ve been the next Lyon; but the execution is painfully fragile, and amidst the complex web of characters and plots in Tellius, his greater-scope motions fail to be felt whatsoever until the late chapters of Radiant Dawn’s Part 3.

DIWNLF gharnef

(0/10)

(that’s “dad I would not like to fuck”, incidentally)

it’s not for no reason that this guy is the only major antagonist that Awakening doesn’t let you trip over still alive and kicking somehow. he is 100% plot device, adds nothing to the story or to any single scene that he appears in, lacks in personality, doesn’t present any sort of challenge that isn’t erradicated without fanfare by the protagonists, and doesn’t even have any sort of a backstory.

and he’s a racist stereotype on top of all that, so he doesn’t even get a mercy point like his similarly irrelevant predecessor from Thracia 776.

I have not played the game with this gharnef

(??/10)

I don’t even know if he counts; I see a lot of back-and-forth in that regard.

anyways, what do you all think? “oh my god someone finally said it”, or perhaps “I will kill you but not as hard as you assassinated my favorite antagonist”? if the upcoming Three Houses is to have a Gharnef, do you have any hopes for what they’ll be like? this is all nice and open to replies and reblogs, folks! don’t be shy! yes.... do it... succumb to the temptation.......

[schraubd]

The Problem of "Centering" and the Jews

Note: I wrote this piece quite a few months ago, shopping around to the usual Jewish media outlets. None were interested, and I ended up letting it slide. But it popped back into my mind -- this Sophie Ellman-Golan article helped -- and so I decided to post it here. While I have updated it, some of the references are a bit dated (at least on an internet time scale). Nonetheless, I continue to think a critical look at how the idea of "centering" interacts with and can easily instantiate antisemitic tropes is deeply important. * * * In the early 2000s, Rosa Pegueros, a Salvadoran Jew, was a member of the listserv for contributors to the book This Bridge We Call Home, sequel to the tremendously influential volume This Bridge Called My Back. Another member of the listserv had written to the group with "an almost apologetic post mentioning that she is Jewish, implying that some of the members might not be comfortable with her presence for that reason." She had guessed she was the only Jewish contributor to the volume, so Pegueros wrote back, identifying herself as a Jew as a well and recounting a recent experience she perceived as antisemitic. Almost immediately, Peugeros wrote, another third contributor jumped into the conversation.  "I can no longer sit back," she wrote, "and watch this list turn into another place where Jewishness is reduced to a site of oppression and victimization, rather than a complex site of both oppression and privilege—particularly in relationship to POC." Pegueros was stunned. At the time of this reply, there had been a grand total of two messages referencing Jewishness on the entire listserv. And yet, it seemed, that was too much -- it symbolized yet "another place" where discourse about oppression had become "a forum for Jews." This story has always stuck with me. And I thought of it when reading Jews for Racial and Economic Justice's guidebook to understanding antisemitism from a left-wing perspective. Among their final pieces of advice for Jews participating in anti-racism groups was to make antisemitism and Jewish issues "central, but not centered". It's good advice. Jewish issues are an important and indispensable part of anti-racist work. That said, we are not alone, and it is important to recognize that in many circumstances our discrete problems ought not to take center stage. That doesn't mean they shouldn't be heard. It just means they should not be given disproportionate attention such that they prevent other important questions and campaigns from proceeding. Ideally, "central, but not centered" in the anti-racism community means that Jewish issues should neither overwhelm the conversation nor be shunted aside and ignored outright.

Yet it also overlooks an important caveat. Too often, any discussion of Jewish issues is enough to be considered "centering" it. There is virtually no gap between spaces where Jews are silenced and spaces where Jews are accused of "centering". And so the reasonable request not to "center" Jewish issues easily can, and often does, become yet another tool enforcing Jewish silence. Pegueros' account is one striking example. I'll give another: several years ago, I was invited to a Jewish-run feminist blog to host a series of posts on antisemitism. Midway through the series, the blog's editors were challenged on the grounds that it was taking oxygen away from more pressing matters of racism. At the time, the blog had more posts on "racism" than "antisemitism" by an 8:1 margin (and, in my experience, that is uncommonly attentive to antisemitism on a feminist site -- Feministing, for example, has a grand total of two posts with the "anti-Semitism" tag in its entire history). No matter: the fact that Jewish feminists on a Jewish blog were discussing Jewish issues at all was viewed as excessive and self-centered.

Or consider Raphael Magarik's reply to Yishai Schwartz's essay contending that Cornel West has "a Jewish problem".

Schwartz's column takes issue with West's decision to situate his critique of fellow Black intellectual Ta-Nehisi Coates by reference to "the neoliberal establishment that rewards silences on issues such as Wall Street greed or Israeli occupation of Palestinian lands and people." Magarik's reply accuses Schwartz of making the West/Coates dispute fundamentally "about the Jews", exhibiting the "the moral narcissism in thinking that everything is about you, in reading arguments between Black intellectuals about the future of the American left and asking: How can I make this about the Jews?" Now, Magarik is surely correct that the Jewish angle of West's critique of Coates is a rather small element that should not become the "center of attention" and thereby obscure "the focus [on] Black struggles for liberation." But there is something quite baffling about his suggestion that a single column that was a drop in the bucket of commentary produced in the wake of the West/Coates exchange could suffice to make it the "center of attention". If Magarik believes Schwartz overreacted to some stray mentions of Jewish issues in an otherwise intramural African-American dispute, surely Magarik equally brought a howitzer to a knife fight by claiming that one article in Ha'aretz single-handedly recentered the conversation about the West/Coates feud onto the Jews.

What's going on here? How is it that the "centering" label -- certainly a valid concern in concept -- seems to routinely and pervasively attach itself to Jews at even the slightest intervention in policy debates?

The answer, as you might have guessed, relates to antisemitism.

As a social phenomenon, antisemitism is very frequently the trafficking in tropes about Jewish hyperpower, the sense that we either have or are on the cusp of taking over anything and everything. Frantz Fanon described antisemitism as follows: "Jews are feared because of their potential to appropriate. ‘They’ are everywhere. The banks, the stock exchanges, and the government are infested with them. They control everything. Soon the country will belong to them.” If we have an abstract understanding of Jews as omnipotent and omnipresent, no wonder that specific instances of Jewish social participation -- no matter how narrow the contribution might be -- are understood as a complete and total colonization of the space. What are the Jews, other than those who are already "everywhere"?

Sadly, the JFREJ pamphlet does not address this issue at all. When "central" crosses into "centering" will often be a matter of judgment, but while the JFREJ has much to say about Jews making "demands for attention" or paying heed to "how much oxygen they can suck out of the room", it does not grapple with how the structure of antisemitism mentalities often renders simply being Jewish (without a concurrent vow of monastic silence) enough to trigger these complaints. It doesn't seem to realize how this entire line of discourse itself can be and often is deeply interlaced with antisemitism. JFREJ's omission is particularly unfortunate since Jews have begun to internalize this sensibility. It's not that Jewish issues should predominate, or always be at the center of every conversation. It's the nagging sense that any discussion of Jewish issues -- no matter how it is prefaced, cabined, or hedged -- is an act of "centering", of taking over, of making it "about us." When the baseline of what counts as "centering" is so low, I know from personal experience that even the simplest asks for inclusion are agonizing. As early as 1982, the radical lesbian feminist Irene Klepfisz identified this propensity as a core part of both internalized and externalized antisemitism. She instructed activists -- Jewish and non-Jewish alike -- to ask themselves a series of questions, including whether they feel that dealing with antisemitism "drain[s] the movement of precious energy", whether they believe antisemitism "has been discussed too much already," and whether Jews "draw too much attention to themselves." Contemporary activists, including many Jews, could do worse than asking Klepfisz's questions. For example, when Jews and non-Jews in the queer community rallied against the effort by some activists to expel Jewish and Israeli LGBTQ organizations from LGBT conference "Creating Change", Mordechai Levovitz fretted that they had "promoted the much more nefarious anti-Semitic trope that Jews wield disproportionate power to get what we want." Levovitz didn't support the expulsion campaign. Still, he fretted that even the most basic demand of inclusion -- don't kick queer Jews out of the room -- was potentially flexing too much Jewish muscle. In this way, the distinction between "central" and "centering" collapses -- indeed, even the most tertiary questions are "centering" if Jews are the ones asking them. This is bad enough in a world where, we are told, oppressions are inextricably connected (you can tell whose perspective is and isn't valued in these communities based on whose attempts to speak are taken to be remedying an oversight and whose are viewed as self-centered derailing). But it verges on Kafka-esque when persons demand Jews "show up" and then get mad that they have a voice in the room; or proactively decide to put Jewish issues on their agenda and yet still demand Jews keep silent about them. Magarik says, for example, that Jews "were not the story" when the Movement for Black Lives included in its platform an accusation that Israel was creating genocide; we shouldn't have made it "about us". He's right, in the sense that this language should not have caused Jews to withdraw from the fight against police violence against communities of color. He's wrong in suggesting that Jews therefore needed to stop "wringing our hands" about how issues that cut deep to the core of our existence as a people were treated in the document. Jews didn't demand that the Movement for Black Lives talk about Jews, but once they elected to do so Jews were not obliged to choose between the right's silence of shunning and the left's silence of acquiescence. To say that Jews ought not "center" ourselves is not to say that there is no place for critical commentary at all. We are legitimate contributors to the discourse over our own lives. I'm not particularly interested in the substantive debate regarding whether Cornel West has a "Jewish problem" -- though Magarik's defense of West (that he "has a good reason for focusing on Palestine" because it "demarcates the difference between liberalism and radicalism") seems like it is worthy of some remark (of all the differences between liberals and "radicals", this is the issue that is the line of demarcation? And that doesn't exhibit some sign of centrality that Jews might have valid grounds to comment on, not the least of which could be wondering how it is a small country half a globe away came to occupy such pride of place?). The larger issue is the metadebate about whether it's valid to even ask the question; or more accurately, whether it is possible -- in any context, with any amount of disclaimers about relative prioritization -- to ask the question without it being read as "centering". The cleverest part of the whole play, after all, is that the very act of challenging this deliberative structure whereby any and all Jewish contributions suffice to center is that the challenge itself easily can become proof of our centrality.

But clever as it is, it can't and shouldn't be a satisfactory retort. There needs to be a lot more introspection about whether and how supposed allies of the Jews are willing to acknowledge the possibility that their instincts about when Jews are "centered" and when we're silenced are out-of-whack, without it becoming yet another basis of resentment for how we're making it all about us. And if we can't do that, then there is an antisemitism problem that really does need to be addressed. When discussing their struggles, members of other marginalized communities need not talk about Jews all the time, or most of the time, or even all that frequently. But what cannot stand is a claimed right to talk about Jews without having to talk with Jews. The idea that even the exploration of potential bias or prejudice lurking within our political movements represents a deliberative party foul is flatly incompatible with everything the left claims to believe about how to talk about matters of oppression. West decided to bring up the Jewish state in his Jeremiad against Coates. It was not a central part of his argument, and so it should not be a central part of the ensuing public discussion. But having put it on the table, it cannot be the case that Jews are forbidden entirely from offering critical commentary. One might say that a column or two in a few Jewish-oriented newspapers, lying at the tertiary edges of the overall debate, is precisely the right amount of attention that should have been given. If that's viewed as too much, then maybe the right question isn't about whether Jews are "centering" the discussion, but rather whether our presence really is a "central" part of anti-racism movements at all.

Drawing the line between "central" and "centering" is difficult, and requires work. There are situations where Jews demand too much attention, and there are times we are too self-effacing. But surely it takes more than a single solitary column to move from the latter to the former. More broadly, we're not going to get an accurate picture of how to mediate between "central" and "centering" unless we're willing to discuss how ingrained patterns of antisemitism condition our evaluations of Jewish political participation across the board.

via The Debate Link https://ift.tt/2MjQd84

[cannibalisticshadows]

Dear Evil Heaven (Chapter 1/2)

Wow look at that I actually made and finished a two-shot for once.

Ao3 Link | FF Link 

Fandom: Megamind Relationship: Megamind/Roxanne Rating: T Warnings: brief antisemitic slur

“…And you look like a skank!”

“That’s big talk coming from a bobble head!”

“At least I cover myself!”

“You could walk into an BDSM club and no one would bat an eye!”

“Gah!” The blue supervillain threw his hands up, frustrated with the woman. Seriously, how hard was it to act a little bit scared? They had an audience! Well, soon, anyway. Metro Man was taking his sweet-ass time today, and hadn’t even made his expected appearance at the Park’s reopening yet! Megamind huffed, leaning back into his chair with all his villainous allure. He bet Waaayne was still primping his hair. Fwah!

And to make matters more difficult, his number one kidnappee was being an absolute brat!

“Is that anyway a lady should talk, Miss Ritchi? I’m sure it makes you a ton of free-ends!”

“More friends than you’ll ever make, blueberry!”

Oh, that was low even for her.

Megamind bolted upright, causing his chair to squeak on its wheels as it was pushed backwards most roughly. “Call me that again and I’ll really make you scream!”

“Oh I’m so scared,” Roxanne’s voice dripped with sarcasm as she rolled her eyes, “what in heavens will I do?”

“Yes! Beg for mercy! I’ll show you to never underestimate me again!” He shouted, and actually slammed his fist onto the control panels, causing one of his torture devises to spur into action. Roxanne, clearly thinking she had been in control, actually jolted with surprise as the razor-sharp blade came spinning and whirling down from the ceiling.

He hadn’t intended to let one of his inventions out, but yelped and grappled for the appropriate control to stop the blades—they were so close to her—!

It stopped, finally, after much fuss on his part. He turned, a little bit frightened to find what might be of Miss Ritchi… And thank goodness she was okay.

But apparently it cut a few hairs off her head. Oops.

Minion, who was standing idly by in the background, stared with his jaw open. The razor had been very close to actually touching their hostage.

“Oh my god,” she gasped, looking concerned. For once. “Goodness, Megamind, if I knew that calling you names would rile you up so bad I’d hold back a bit.”

He sniffed. He didn’t want her to know that by calling him blueberry would poke a tender spot. It was a favorite name the kids at school liked to call him.

“No! No, I’m perfectly fine! This is normal me!” Megamind insisted, ignoring Minion’s look of worry. “But you’re better than calling me names shool-yard brats use!”

Her blue eyes had been actuall anxious, before, but once he finished speaking Roxanne shot him a look of—what? Surprise?

“Shul?”

“That’s what I said, damn it!” He threw himself down onto his chair. Great, now she was making fun of his mispronunciation problem. This was turning out to be a disaster before it even begun! He turned to Minion to order him to get the knock-out gas out and cancel today’s evil plot, when—

“I thought I was the only one here—I mean, sure there are others, but—Megamind, I had no idea! Where do—or did—you go?.

One of his brows curled upward. Was she actually surprised he went to school? Wow. Sure, he only went for a few months, but still… “I went to shool like everyone else, Miss Ritchi! And I’m looking right through your nosy reporter skills, so don’t—“

“It’s just I didn’t expect you of all people to be Jewish.”

A look of confusion fell over his face. He spun around in his chair to face her properly.

“Say what now?”

She was looking in her lap with a look of thoughtfulness, an expression he only saw on her when she was reporting a case particularly interesting, with her brows drawn up and her lips curled into a funny little smile. “Did you have a bar mitzvah? What was your parsha?”

“What?”

She laughed, somewhat nervously. This was… unlike her. “Sorry, haha! I’m just—really surprised! I mean, you’re—an alien, right? You’ve never really confirmed that. As a kid I went to an orthodox shul—Sephardic. But after my father passed away, a little bit after my bat mitzvah, my family became more reformed… Megamind?”

She was looking at him, like she expected him to say something—Oh, had he hit his head on something? He wasn’t understanding a word she was saying. Panicking, he shifted his eyes to Minion, who shrugged, clueless as him. What was she talking about?

“Megamind?” She asked again.

“What—what language are you—“ If she had somehow changed languages, he had no clue. That frightened him, because he knew just about every language!

With his words, the report’s shoulders, previously up and attentive, slowly drooped down along with her expression. Her blue eyes became shifty. Worried, almost. “Shul… You know, synagogue? Temple?”

“I—“ Of course he knew was a synagogue was, he wasn’t stupid. But—how did Ritchi get the assumption he was apart of one of this planet’s religious groups? Megamind wasn’t religious himself; he was a man of science. Yet, as a child, he and Minion liked the idea of Heaven—a place where souls go to after a person dies. It comforted him to think his parents still watched out for him, even in death. He hadn’t been around long enough on his home planet to know of its religious aspects, but he was not one to completely dismiss the theological belief of a being greater than man. After all, he believed in Destiny to the point of worship. “I don’t know what you’re talking about, Miss Ritchi. But confusing me will get you nowhere! Minion!” Said henchfish jumped in place. “Plans are canceled! Take Miss Ritchi home!”

Roxanne opened her mouth to speak, looking almost frightened for a moment (wow she was hitting a lot of damsel-worthy expressions today) before Minion brought out the knock-out spray and gave her a reasonable dosage.

They watched the reporter slump in her chair, unconscious. He blinked owlishly and looked to his fishy friend. It seemed they had some research to do on this theology his favorite kidnappee associated herself with.

~.~.~.~

Shit. Shit, shit, shit.

Roxanne groaned as she came to, vision blurry and unfocused.

She’d slipped up big time today, and in front of Megamind of all people! Oh, this could be her downfall. If the station found out—Shit, she was fucked.

Slowly, she rose up from her red couch and stretched, angrily rubbing her eyes. Megamind was always looking for a weakness in her, and today he just found it.

Roxanne remembers her childhood well—Shabbat dinner, making Challah with Mom, the candles, kissing the mezuzah, preparing herself for her bat mizvah—yet that was in the past, when her father was still alive and well, laughing with her and her brother at the table, walking to shul. It felt like a lifetime ago.

Yet her father died, leaving her mother and her brother and herself alone, to a community, though it meant well, couldn’t keep their damn mouths shut with gossip. One little rumor and—oh, poor mama. Roxanne shook her head. Religion, in her eyes, could be good and well, but people—people could just make it shitty.

Still a widow, her mom’s “friends” let one little rumor get to them and—well, they moved away, when the stares and whispers became too much, to a smaller community. It was better, and they made new friends and the rabbi was much more understanding—that actually let to her mom getting remarried, but—Roxanne and her brother David went down two very different paths. He went to yeshiva and studied, while she—well, still bitter from the horrible way their community in New Bergville treated them, she moved away to college and got her first real taste of the outside world and became attached. Roxanne’s love for journalism grew and she learned, graduated, and—

Drifted. Of course she still spoke to her mom and brother—and her step-dad���but her visits home lessened until she could barely remember the morning prayers anymore. She didn’t even have mezuzahs up.

And if—if her boss found out—

”Jews! Filthy, money-greedy rats—never trust one!” Her boss had said, himself, before her and several people. Fuck, she’d so loose her job if he found out—

Vivian, who happened to be Hindu, and a good friend of hers, was “let go” after Joe found out she wasn’t “normal”. Joe had a serious intolerance for religion in general.

And now Megamind knew because she messed up and misheard him.

Fuck.

[incendavery]

gosh, thank you! that is so sweet??? I hope you (and any other of my followers who celebrate!) have/had a very happy Eid!💖 💕

on another note, I’ve finally gotten around to cleaning out my askbox! under the cut is almost every ask I’ve gotten that i haven’t answered in the past.... I’m not sure. it’s been a WHILE though.

as a warning, there’s all sorts of stuff, and it’s all untagged! also also, if you sent one of these asks and want me to remove it, just let me know!

yes!! @fuckaspunk IS super sweet and talented and i AM very lucky to have them! and I’ve heard from reliable sources that the feeling is mutual~~💕

i’m glad my comics make you feel less alone; that’s a rough situation you’re in. i really hope you find yourself in a better environment soon!

thank you!!!💕

thank you for understanding! and yes, aidan is a huge help to me??? even when they’re not answering asks, they’re always supporting me in some way, whether that’s making sure I’ve eaten enough, or talking me through my anxiety, or all the other ways they’re there for me every single day💕💕

ok, my tips are!!:

draw as much as possible! even if it’s just lines and shapes with no meaning, you’re still developing your hand/eye skills

BUT: dont draw if you’re not feeling it! if you’re feeling fried, it’s better to take a break. go on a walk to somewhere scenic, read your favorite book, listen to some new music, hang out with friends, or just take a nap! rest up and find some inspiration! you can come back to your sketchbook when you feel energized again

draw stuff that you like! you’ll improve way faster if you’re passionate about what you’re doing

look at art you like with a critical eye. try to examine the different components and figure out what you think works or doesn’t work. try incorporation those components into your own work

read a lot of tutorials and other resources, but take what they say with a grain of salt

ultimately, remember that the only real rule to drawing is that doing it should make you happy

good luck!! i do my best not to pick, but it’s a real struggle; i have lots of scars from it too. ;v; im cheering for you!!!

ALWAYS!!!! if you do, please show me!! my notifications get real busy, but anyone is welcome to IM me any time!

thank you! i actually get very worried about my style; i tend to admire artists with complex linework and delicate shading, so i often feel my style is far to simple! so thank you!!

that is really high praise????? gosh??!?!?!? best of luck with the next three years; i hope you grow to be someone you like even better than me!

thank you!!

peanut time is the best!! i haven’t gotten to do a proper one in a while though ;-; i’ve mostly been feeding the crows on my way back home from night shifts, when i give them the reject eggs from the continental breakfast.

wow, neat!! chickens are so wonderful; i cont wait until i can have some of my own :>

dont be nervous! i know i can be hard to get ahold of over the internet (bc i get overwhelmed easily) and hard to talk with irl (bc i get so nervous and interacting w ppl doesn’t come naturally to me AT ALL) but honestly i?? love making new friends??!

thank you!!? im thankful every day that someone as radient as aidan is in my life for the long haul

thank you!!!!!!!💕

i completely feel that? its ok to hit rough patches! just do your best!!

i dont remember what i felt bad about but THANK YOU💕💕

honestly its done me worlds of good to share my art?? hearing people talk about how they go through all the same shit i do makes me feel so much less alone, especially on the toughest days! so i guess thank you, and thank you?

youre welcome!!!! :>

huh!! i dont know much about shoegaze (other than thinking abt that post abt the guy who pronounced it like fugazi I THINK ABT THAT EVERY TIME) but thats real neat!! im glad youve found something that works for you!!

hey, neat middle name! and youre very welcome; i hope things have been looking up for you since you sent this?💕

i dont remember when this was from but im currently doing really well with my meds!! i switched to a combination of lexapro in the morning and benadryl in the evening, and its been working super well!✨

thank you??!! ;o; i would love to see all your favorite birds!!

hey, right back atcha!!!

:0

ty!!!

hey. thank YOU

you’re absolutely not bothering me! thank you so much!!

!!!!!!!!!!

hey, nice! im glad you like both me and my music!

gosh thanks?!?!

she is the most beautiful and handsome!!!!!!!!!!!! i love her! thank you from both of us!!!!

aw, gosh! im sure i like you too!!

this was from.... A WHILE AGO.... but youre welcome?? i just wish i could have done more

hey, thank you so much!!!!!

thank YOU and a very very belated merry christmas!!!

that does make sense!! reconciling friendships and crushes is tricky business. the best i can say to you is to be as honest and open with each other as you can

i dont personally get those, but ive heard of people experiencing them as a sideeffect when coming off or switching meds

i think these two are part of the same message? but oh man yeah that sucks when ppl are misgendering you AND hitting on you at the same time. on a different note, ive never heard of using a corset to stim before! neat!

i mean, 1. depression doesn’t care if you have a “””good””” reason and 2. ive literally never met anyone w depression (including myself) who thinks that they do have a “””good””” reason for having it. thats the insidious part of depression, is that it makes you think that theres nothing wrong and that its all just you not measuring up in some way

so i guess that would make you.... someone with depression?

real BAD

💕 💖 💞  💓  💗

not yet haha THANK YOU

hey, im glad you like it!! since this blog has gotten so big, its kinda my happy place to be? (for anyone wondering, my reblog blog/personal is @spinels!

that IS a fun fact!! thank you!

it’s absolutely ok! i get a little bitter when people take my work WAY out of context (for example, straight people removing the caption that says “im just really gay” before tagging their bf/gf) but i am 100% ok and happy with people relating to my work in a different way than i intended (ex: a comic i made about being ashamed of my derma getting reblogged by someone struggling to be ok w their visible burn scars)

hoo gosh, thank you!!

glad to have you here!! im glad people can relate to some of the weirdly specific shit i write about tbh???

i’m sorry its taken so long for me to get back to you; that a terrible situation

if you have a teacher you trust, i would absolutely bring it up to them. that is 100% not an ok thing for those kids to be doing. at all.

im glad you at least have your friends that support you! 

:0 WAIT is this someone i know through ucsc?? :0 :0 :0

HA 

aaaa thank you! that is high praise ;v;

i have no words; this is such a touching message. thank you so much ;v;

this is belated but!! the main creative community i can recommend is kzsc, the radio station! i had a real cool time there, and its a great way to make friends and connect with ppl of all sorts! :0

yeah, its totally normal! ive had roommates ive been super tight with, and roommates who i barely ever hung around with. its natural! i doubt you’ll finish college w/o finding a roomie that you get ~The Roomie Experience~ with though, even if its like a housemate or s/t!! ;0

i’ve never been told that, actually! neat!! (and wow?? i cant believe i inspire ppl.... wow......... what a concept tbh??)

oh yikes... i do hope youre feeling better :( im glad my comics can help a little bit at least!

💕 💖 💞  💓  💗!!!

HUGS

i dont remember what this was in reference to, but good to know?

also good to know!?

i think the crows and jays do! i dunno about the squirrels and other birds. and thank you!!

the youth gang..... i love it..... how good???!

i wrote about getting yuri right here! he’s a southern alligator lizard and i love him to bits. 

heres a pic of the Long Boy doin his thing:

hey neat! i’m glad youve chosen a lame you can be proud of!!💖

ive never heard of that!! wow

what play is this?? :0 :0 :0 im so curious now!!

oh SHUCKS...,,,,,,,,,, ;v;

hahahaha omg thank u

i dont actually have any more of them interacting, unfortunately! the owl isnt one specific person, like a lot of my characters are meant to represent. the owl more represents as a whole all the people i run into in my life that i am very very gay for.

thank you!!!

youre very welcome! im glad you feel better!!!!

aaa gosh thank you!!!

hhhhfgh ive gotten less of it recently BUT YEAH that was bad times™️ 

thanks for the info!!! :0

no problem! a lot of the credit honestly goes to @fuckaspunk, who is always keeping me updated on that sort of stuff.

i didn’t know that! a lot of the symbolism seems to come from multiple sources sometimes, from what ive seen?

aaaa gosh omg thank you ;v;

aw thank you???!!

nice!!! oct 24 bdays go!!!

thank you!! it really does mean a lot actually!!!!!!!

of course?? antisemitism cant be ignored in this fight

aw, thats so cute! id love to hear what headcanons you have tbh???

hey thanks?! this is really cool to hear, tbh. i try to be positive most of the time, but im not going to like,,, kid myself when im not feeling it and im glad that other people can appreciate that too, ya know?

wow!!

(this one!) thank you i love that one too???!

hey, im glad you found your way here!! thank you so much!!!

aaaa ty! 

hmmm i have two leopard geckos, and they made very good beginning lizards for me and aidan! but i would maybe ask someone a bit more experienced than me, like @kaijutegu​ or @wheremyscalesslither​!!

thank you!!

one day at a time! (but seriously, thank you!!)

yummy yummy sauce...... ty!!!

awww, gosh! thank you!?

AAAA TY BOTH I GET SO SELF-CONSCIOUS ABT MY VOICE,,,,, ;o;

:0 i havent watched that, but it sounds rly cool!!

i like that fun fact a lot! ty!!

pae stands for paerlin, which is what @fuckaspunk​‘s internet handle used to be! i used it to refer to them on my blog in secret back when they still didnt know i had a crush on them.... ;//v//;

aaaaa thank you!!!  ;o;

nice nice nice ty!!

>:0 get back down here!! (jk that’s rly neat! highfive!!) 

those are all good words that i like!! thank you!!!!

i dont know anything about him, but i looked him up and i guess i can see it?!

@fishcrow is really cool! ive never really interacted with them, but im p sure were mutuals...? anyway yeah their comics are rly cute and cool!

that is me! thank you; i hope things go well for you as well!

hello to you too!

aaaa ty!!! tbh the number of nice anons i get way way way outnumbers the mean ones <3

thank you! thank YOU for existing!

:0 chocolate croissant, here i come!!!

thank you!!!!!!💕

its literally my pleasure!!!

aaa ty!!! 💕💕

hehe im glad! 

sldf;j;sfjdklfdslfjs thank you so much?????? what a compliment omg gosh

yeah!! i have a hard time on settling what class id be, but i feel like id be a heart player! 

ohh um! im not sure which pens youre referring to, but if you mean the ones I use for my comics, i color them with Winsor & Newton ProMarkers, and I do the lines with a purple fine-point Sakura Gelly Roll Classic pen! i also use micron pens of all different sizes and colors in some of my non-diary comic art!

aww thank you so much!!

:0 :) :0 !!!!!!

ty!!! ive grown to love him very much as well!!

thank you! i hope you are doing well also!!

i love them very much?!! id put a picture but i dont have one with all four of them so instead imagine me lying on the floor crying abt how much i love them bc thats me basically every day

you dont mean......

?!?!?!?!?!?!

awwww ty!!!

HEY WOW

aaa gosh thank you!💕

DOUBLE FOLLOW

gay dragons combine the best of both very good things: gay and dragons. im glad you appreciate them w me tysm ;v;

aaa what a lovely message! ty💕

3rd-shift-working, depression-having, corvid-loving solidarity fistbumnp!!!!

huh! ive never heard of that; ill check it out maybe!!

ah im really glad? tysm!!💕

my understanding is that it helps people who have text-to-speech readers? but im honestly not as well informed on that as i should be! 

hell yeah!!!! 

gosh!!!!!

hnmngnhng youve probably already made a decision but i just gotta say.........shadow rulez

delicious!!

i havent!! i really want to though!

oh man ALL THE TIME. i usually try to either reality check with someone i trust, or to do an activity thats easy and i know i can do, or both!

i love andre and karl!!! its actually a huge influence on me and my art tbh??? 

i had a good (and safe) trip! ty!!!

hey, thank you!!!

oh jeez thats bad :( i think this was in response to when i needed to wait between med refills?

i cant give a precise reason, tbh! when it comes to whats lucky, i just sort of.... go with my gut, ya know?

thank you!! 👍

that sure sounds like insomnia! its almost hard for me to say tbh, bc ive had trouble sleeping for as long as i can remember, so NOT having trouble sleeping is bizarre and unrealistic to me haha... but i think the bottom line is, if its interrupting your daily routine and making it hard for you to have enough energy, then its something you should look into remedies for!

:0 :0 :0

ohhh how nice! ill give it a try! :>

omg,,,, nope, just me!

thank you!!!!!!

honestly? thats such a good way to look at it i love the idea of my blog as a big zine

always!!!!! go for it!!!

hey, thank you so much!!!!!

omg, thats so great! thank you!

im so glad; thank you!!!

thank you so much!💖 (and mexico, neat! i love hearing where people are following from??)

aaaaaaaaaaaa ;//v//; thank you??? i get so happy whenever ppl tell me they like my singing aaaaaaa

aw, hey, no worries! money is all well and good, but in some ways, messages like this mean just as much!

its cool that comic gave you plural feels! im def not a system though :> 

its tricky, isnt it? i still feel like im no good at it lmao

LISTEN,,, there is a 99.9999% chance i wont notice, and a 100% chance i wont judge. reblog away! 

THANK YOU ARENT THEY THE BEST I LOVE THEM SO MUCH

thank you!! i hope you have a good day as well!

aaa ty!!💖

aa ty! (what a cool name!!! im kind jealous ngl!)

awww thank you💖

i do my best! i just worry when im not active, bc i tend to connect my self-worth to my output (;^; )

aaaaa ty!! 💖

!!!!!!!!!!!! omg wow i love being called a pretty boy???? ty???????

hey, neat! crow high-five!

aw, thank you!!! 💖

im doing my best! thank you so much, messages like this really help when im in a place like that tbh ;v;

gosh this is so sweet? thank you so muhc !!?

thank you all!! im sorry that saying thank you over and over sounds so repetitive, but i truely do mean it for every one of you!!!

i am..... one of those things!

well thank you!!

ohoho~✨

thank you! and honestly im sure it does??

hey, cool! good for you!!!!!!! and ty!!

aw gosh thank you!💖

hey, wow! thats super cool; thank you so much!

(i dont follow the first person i followed on tumblr anymore.... they became a hockey blog rip haha)

aaaah, thank you so much!!

almost???

i do!! drunken lullabies is an absolute banger!!!!!!!!!!

i am!!!! thank you!!

aw, ty!!! 💖

hee hee, thank you! 

my biggest tip honestly?? have someone who can be by your side to help you with... basically everything... during your recovery. bc trust me, i was n o t  a v a i l a b l e. i spent a lot of my recovery playing 2048 at the same time as watching tv, bc doing both at once distracted me from how much the bandages itched.

thank you!! (i think this was in reference to getting top surgery!)

how shitty??????? yikes. i hope your supervisor has your back??? bc wow????

hey!!! thank you!!! i draw all my comics traditionally on paper! im not sure what you mean by the writing though? if you mean the word bubbles, i do those by hand on paper too!

I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND THAT FEELING,,,, im so happy ppl talk to me, but i get really nervous about saying the wrong thing. 

when i’m down, i usually crave validation. i like being reminded about things ive done right! i also like gentle reality checks, like, ‘hey: this is the situation, this is what we can do about it. ok? ok’

i unfortunately dont have any!! i had a couple at one point, but they’ve since been lost to the depths of my old laptop. and hey, thank you so much!!

now thats a nifty trick!! im terrible at telling all my white tablets from each other lmao

!!!!!!! ITS ME!!!!!!!!

maybe you just need some space? i know i sometimes temporarily block people i know, if i need some private space or if i dont trust myself to keep cool and solve problems constructively. do what you need to do to feel at ease, and go from there, ya know?

thank you!!!

its,,,, up somewhere above in this monster post lmao i,m so sorry,,,,

thank you so much!!!

WOW NO WORRIES??,,,,,,,,, INCREDIBLE 10/10???????

all four of these came right after i gave myself a hair cut and THANK YOU SO MUCH??? i live for validation and it feels so good to have my actions affirmed ;o;

[d2kvirus]

Dickheads of the Month: October 2019

As it seems that there are people who say or do things that are remarkably dickheaded yet somehow people try to make excuses for them or pretend it never happened, here is a collection of some of the dickheaded actions we saw in the month of October 2019 to make sure that they are never forgotten.

In a really, really mature move proven liar Boris Johnson sent a letter to the EU to request a Britait extension but didn’t sign it, in a feeble attempt to try and say that an official letter from his office doesn’t count if he didn’t sign it and he absolutely should not have to fulfill his promise of claiming he’d rather be dead in a ditch than request an extension

Of course Priti Patel would try and claim the Tories are the party of law and order during her conference speech in spite the minor issue her speech came a week after the Tories were ruled to have unlawfully suspended parliament, because what else did she have other than a strawman about he “North London Liberal Elite” to say for herself?

...although we can thank Geoffrey Clifton-Brown for completely undermining Patel’s speech by his being arrested at the conference due to getting into a punch-up with event security  an hour before Patel even took to the stage

Hapless businesswoman Jennifer Arcuri would look a lot less like she’d been handed a script if she asked what business of ours is it to ask why a six-figure sum of public money ended up in her bank account courtesy of proven liar Boris Johnson, rather than the narrative she attempted to spin asking who we are to ask whether or not he had an affair...because the actual question is a matter for the courts instead of the court of public opinion, as whoever wrote her script knew all too well

In the latest bout of the Liberal Democrats showing how they’re definitely not Tories in disguise, all nineteen of the MPs abstained on a vote to keep the NHS out of Britait negotiations and, in the process, handed Boris Johnson his first-ever parliamentary win over Jeremy Corbyn - which Jo Swinson attempted to defend by squawking “something something antisemitism” in an attempt to distract people from noting the day before she couldn’t stop talking about the handful of Labour MPs who voted in favour of the proven liar's Britait timetable as she continues to try and delude herself and others into believing she’s a kingmaker and not a Tory enabler

...although she’s not alone in that regard, as Gavin Shuker took to Twitter to say how The Independents would do anything in their power to prevent Jeremy Corbyn getting into Downing Street, which only serves to justify him losing a No Confidence vote from his constituents when standing as a Labour MP 

It says a lot about Blizzard that their response to Hearthstone streamer Blitzchung voicing support for the Hong Kong protestswas to boot him out of an upcoming Hearthstone tournament, suspend him from any further Hearthstone tournaments for a full year, and withhold the earnings he had made - and attempting to hide behind their competition rules does not adequately explain why they also ditched the two commentators who happened to be hosting when Blitzchung made the comments in spite their cutting to commercial as soon as he made them, which definitely does not make it look like Blizzard are shit scared of losing the Chinese esports market or anything considering they didn;t do a damn thing to any American players or commentators who subsequently spoke up on Blitzchung’s behalf...

It didn’t take long for the BBC to start gaslighting the public during the election campaign, with Fiona Bruce telling a Question Time audience member that Vote leave was cleared of breaking electoral law in spite the fact that they were found guilty of breaking electoral law, at which point panellists Paul Scully and gaslighter extraordinaire Isabel Oakeshott piled in to continue the bullying somebody who showed more aptitude for journalism than Bruce, Oakeshott and Scully managed between them

I have no idea how Rudy Giuliani managed to give a journalist on the Orange Overlord’s no-no list reason to further investigate the Trump regime leaning on foreign governments to dig up dirt on their opponents when his right buttcheek somehow dialled their number, but what I do know is that it does not surprise me in the slightest that the stop fell into a journalist’s lap because Giuliani was so careless he managed to butt dial them

I’m sure it’s a coincidence that both James Cleverly and Mark Francois both used their Tory conference speeches to threaten rioting on the streets if Britait isn't done, which definitely isn’t a well-worn trope of the Leave camp by this point and certainly not something the police should look into

Isn’t it interesting how Lib Dem staffer Steve Wilson was quick to accuse Dawn Butler of making up incidents of experiencing racist abuse, which not only undermined the Lib Dems’ attempts to portray themselves as anything other than the Tories under a different coat of paint, especially considering the fact that Wilson just so happens to be husband of recent Lib Dem appointee Angela “funny tinge” Smith?

I’m sure we’ll be hearing a lot about how Matt Hancock tried to claim that the 20,000 new police officers the Tories claim will be on the streets by 2025 will replace the 21,000 they have laid off since 2010 in an interview with Good Morning Britain, just as I am sure people will mention he kept repeating his soundbite even when being told that the UK will still be 1000 police officers worse off than they were ten years ago several times until he started to look like a malfunctioning computer

Of course Louise Ellman responded to a vote of no confidence being called against her by her local party by resigning from the Labour party and using the usual “Corbyn is an antisemite” arguments we heard numerous times before from people facing deselection.  It’s passed cliche and is rapidly headed towards high camp at this point

...especially when Karen Pollock of the Holocaust Educational Trust posted a video to her Twitter telling her followers how terrible it is that Labour are looking to have Jo Bird replace Ellman and regurgitated the exact same claims of antisemitism...yet never once deigned to mention that Bird is Jewish, which looks uncannily like the “wrong type of Jews” argument we’ve heard more than once from the Board of Deputies

Of course Anne Sacoolas expressed regret at her reckless driving being responsible for the death of Harry Dunn...after she legged it back across the Atlantic as soon as humanly possible, waiting a few days for the heat to die down, and then issuing a press release saying she regrets her actions but will not actually face consequences for them due to scurrying to hide behind diplomatic immunity in record time

On paper it looked as if WWE had merely given wrestler Jordan Myles a really unimaginative shirt design because the character they gave him is Smiley Guy Who Is Happy To Be Here 708...but the thing is that, on paper, the design didn’t look uncannily like something from a minstrel show, which Myles was particularly vocal about when he saw it - and even more vocal when WWE’s statement in response was the usual ass-covering gaslighting they issue when the company is shown in a bad light 

It appears that the BBC are taking the threats against politicians so seriously that they invited Julia Halfwit Hartley-Brewer onto the Question Time panel little more than a week after she shared the home address of Jo Maugham on her Twitter account so her followers could happily dogpile

You would think that Bethesda would have learned that Fallout 76 has been nothing but a humiliation conga line for them by this point, but apparently not, as they had the genius idea of charging $99.99 (or £99.99, because fuck British players amirite?) for a premium subscription for a game that came out to critical derision and commercial stagnation a year before someone hit on this idea, and if that wasn’t humiliating enough it soon transpired that the supposed benefits of paying $13 a month didn’t work to the point where players paying the premium were losing items while those who weren’t had no problems at all  

Once again it seems nobody told Extinction Rebellion that there’s a way to protest that doesn’t mainly involve being a bunch of dickheads and generally pissing people off with dickheaded stunts, with James Brown taking the prize for most dickheaded act after he climbed on top of a plane at Heathrow, although the bloke at Canning Town getting a shoeing after trying to hold up the train runs him a close second

I have no idea how Roland Rudd imagined his boardroom coup to take over the People’s Vote campaign would have gone, but I’m going to guess the mass walkout of staff when his plan to make the campaign a fully-fledged political party who would position as pro-business “liberals” in an obvious bid to try and split the Labour vote may have had something to do with it

The sheer spinelessness of the BBC was exposed for all to see when it emerged that a solitary complaint from a viewer was all it took for the corporation to reprimand Naga Mulchetty for suggesting that Donald Trump saying non-white congresswomen should go back where they came from, yet when Brendan O’Neill saying people should take to the streets and riot if Britait isn’t delivered received over 600 complaints no action was taken.  And as if that didn’t make it any clear, when Priti Patel was called out by Andrew Marr for smirking through an interview when a list of businesses facing bankruptcy due to Britait drew a couple of hundred complaints, the corporation issued a grovelling apology that said they should not make light of Patel’s natural facial expression, even though there’s a wealth of evidence that smirking is not her natural facial expression

Funny how the dogwhistling boneheads have nothing to say about Jess Phillips’ mental flub during an interview when she claimed she'd knocked on the doors of 25,000 doors in the previous two weeks when she meant to say 2500, yet have spent the past two years continuously howling about the one time Diane Abbott flubbed her sums in an interview.  Hmm, I wonder why the white middle-class Phillips gets better treatment than the black working-class Abbott...

Luckily for Rebekah Vardy it isn’t exactly difficult to do a disservice to the image of footballers wives, but her being caught out leaking stories that Coleen Rooney planted on her Instagram to find out who was leaking stories to The Sun wasn’t the logical defence of trying to claim that The Sun hacked Rooney’s phone as they have previous in that regard but to reel off ever-more spurious attempts at a denial and threatening legal action

In a desperate bid for attention Tracy Ann Oberman accused Jeremy Corbyn of stalking her at her place of work by posting a selfie of herself standing near a table where Corbyn, his wife and Shami Chakrabarti were having a cup of tea at a theatre in Corbyn’s constituency, and to prove she’s definitely not unhinged this soon degenerated into her getting into the usual vicious Twitter spats that occur when her behaviour is called out

Pity poor Savid Javid for having to endure the pain and humiliation of Hugh Grant not shaking his hand at a film premiere.  Of course, maybe if Javid didn’t publicly dismiss the concerns of those who have been victims of press intrusion, maybe he wouldn’t be in a situation where a victim of press intrusion such as Hugh Grant would not want to shake his hand at a film premiere...

It was finally revealed how mug salesman Steven Crowder looks borderline informed when in debates with other people.  It’s because his father prevents him from taking part in debates against opponents who will show him up as the ill-informed blowhard that he is.  Yes, really

Sentient testicle Toby Young decided this month’s dogwhistling about Meghan Markle would be how she obviously can’t be depressed as the rich and famous are never depressed, which plumbed new depths of ignorance even for him 

Britain’s most triggered man Piers Moron Morgan thought he was being clever when asking Good Morning Britain viewers to vote in a poll about whether he should be fired or not.  The look on his face when 56% of voters said he should be sacked revealed how clever he actually is... 

And of course, what would a month be without Donald Trump being utterly moronic, on this occasion saying it’s okay for the Kurds to be attacked as they didn’t help the US in World War II in spite the act that a.) They did, and b.) KURDISTAN IS NOT A COUNTRY.  But then again, he does seem to be running out of material as the best he can say about Joe Biden is “But his text messages!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!”

[ixvyupdates]

Roseanne Isn’t the Only One Who Needs to Be Cancelled

America could really use some role models and yet somehow, time and time again, entertainment and media find a way to reinvent and elevate the mean-spirited and the unhinged. Roseanne Barr is no exception. But she’s hardly alone.

Author and poet Maya Angelou famously said, “When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time.”

ABC made the conscious choice not to follow that advice when it decided to launch the Roseanne reboot and while being lauded by many for quickly deciding to pull the plug on the show, it’s hard to defend their decision to hire her—again—in the first place.

Long before her racist tweet about former Obama advisor and friend Valerie Jarrett, Roseanne had revealed herself as someone willing to say hateful—and yes, crazy—things in a public forum. She has been showing us who she is for decades and it’s hard to understand how or why we would elevate her to a place of prominence for any reason.

“Mom, isn’t that the lady who screamed the national anthem, then spit and grabbed her crotch?”

“Why yes, yes it is. And now she has her own show. Again.”

“The people who are upset with NFL players kneeling during the anthem must have been really upset about that, right Mom?”

If only.

The truth is, Barr isn’t conservative or liberal, Democrat or Republican. She is a conspiracy theorist who can’t get enough of Jill Stein one minute and Donald Trump the next and who has no qualms about being unabashedly xenophobic.

Right leaning cable news host S.E. Cupp rightly describes Barr this way:

This is a woman who was an early supporter of Birtherism, has compared Muslims to Nazis, took to Twitter regularly to attack citizens both private and public, floated wild conspiracy theories and bullied Trump opponents with racist, homophobic, and antisemitic insults. She infamously dressed up as Hitler in a photo shoot and posed with burnt ‘Jew cookies’ and has promoted anti-Semitic personalities.

And if her xenophobia wasn’t enough, her conspiracy theories must have been.

From JJ McCullough at National Review just last month:

Barr has never met a conspiracy theory she didn’t love. She’s a 9-11 truther who believes that “Bush did it,” and she has called the Boston Marathon bombing one of many “false flag terror attacks” perpetrated by the Obama administration to “remove” the Second Amendment. For good measure, she also believes that the old man Bush killed JFK.

ABC knew about all of this before they decided to re-launch the show. So remind me again why we are applauding ABC?

To quote S.E. Cupp:

As risks go, Roseanne came with a ton of them. How did ABC think this was going to go? Suddenly becoming a network star again would put the crazy back in the bottle?… You either knew what you were getting or you hoped no one would care.

But this isn’t new. Keith Olberman was just hired—again—by ESPN. Just after calling the secretary of education a “motherf*****” on Twitter and spending the year tweeting profanity laden rants about the president—and plenty of time before that personally attacking prominent women with whom he disagrees— ESPN decided to bring him back into the fold.

It’s hard to imagine there aren’t more noble and kind people who could do the job better, and with more integrity, than a jerk like Keith Olberman.

This Hate Isn’t New

Many believe that the election of Donald Trump has led to a coarsening of our discourse and an emboldening of those who hold nationalist, nativist, and yes, racist, views. I agree with that assertion.

But we are kidding ourselves if we think that our way of treating one another was anything to be proud of prior to the election of our current president. It was bad then and it’s worse now.

I spent part of my weekend listening to a mother weep over the vile things that were snapchatted to her son over Memorial Day weekend. Anti-semitic, homophobic slurs sent by his teammates. It’s not the first time. And he is certainly not alone. And neither is she.

We know that children are subjected to the pain of bullying, racism, religious bigotry, homophobia and all garden variety forms of cruelty. And we—the grown ups—bemoan all of that, blaming the parents for their children’s ways and the schools for not doing enough.

But what is also right in front of us is that we exist every day in a country whose president, some elected officials, and other high profile folks demean their opponents and critics over their race, their religious beliefs, their nation of origin, and their appearance. Television and radio are riddled with personalities who are paid millions of dollars to insult whole swaths of Americans for their religious beliefs—or lack thereof—or their opinions about everything from police brutality, to patriotism to healthcare.

Hollywood types and White House correspondent dinner invitees love to take sanctimonious swipes at the unenlightened and ordinary but struggle to look in the mirror when they are complicit in protecting—and even celebrating—big time bullies and sexual predators.

No matter how hard we work to shield them, our children are surrounded by influences that mock and disrespect others, social media posts by renown influencers who say and do terrible things, and a culture that is increasingly petty and cruel.

Perhaps in this moment, at least, we as parents can use the example of Roseanne to finally show our children that, yes, there are consequences for the things we say and the way we treat others.

Every single person in media has the ability and opportunity to elevate those who, in addition to their talents, can and will improve the tone and substance of our national dialogue.

Let’s hope they finally do it.

Photo courtesy of ABC.

Roseanne Isn’t the Only One Who Needs to Be Cancelled syndicated from https://sapsnkraguide.wordpress.com

[johnnybadger-blog1]

“White Fragility” and why I think the concept (as written and used) is bad

This is my latest response in a Facebook comment thread between myself and Solomon. The initial post itself links to an interview on the topic of “White Fragility”. I did this in tumblr, because as I wrote my response, it became clear it was too long to be easily read in a Facebook comment.

Why this particular article matters

'Even though your probably right, this one article about it is super weak so yeah, nah'

The implication seems to be that a random weak article was cherry picked to discredit what is otherwise a sound idea; and I don’t consider this a fair portrayal. The particular article I linked is the defining source of “White Fragility” so future sources of work which build themselves upon that term (like the posted interview) do so on the foundations it has laid (weak definitions and no burden of proof).

Why I think the ‘White Fragility’ article is bad

My main issue with the article is that it doesn’t actually have any diagnostic utility to differentiate any of the results of ‘White Fragility’ from any other opinions of a white person which may be legitimate.

It outlines any potential disagreements as a potential result of ‘White Fragility’. The definitions of it’s causes and effects it has are very broad and open to interpretation, and because of this, ‘White Fragility’ can be applied to discredit any differing opinion somebody might have to the user of the term.

This means you get to dismiss any opinion you don’t like as a consequence of White Fragility. Nobody gets to escape a loose definition when there is no definition to argue against.

I’m not against the idea that there is a bias that white people are going to have on these issues, as they may not relate to the perspective of another ethnic minority. However, I don’t see that as a valid basis for their viewpoints being ignored over others, because every ethnic group, and every individual is going to have their own biases in their points of view. Even if you were to suppose that white people’s views on the matter were just ‘wrong’ and all others were somehow ‘correct’, how would you ever go about trying to correct somebody’s views if you never listened to them in the first place?

In addition, the article is against the concept of Individualism (at least when applied to White people) and is a proponent of Collective Responsibility/Guilt (which I think is basically the same as racism when applied to race).

Quoted from the “White Fragility” article:

Racial stress results from an interruption to what is racially familiar. These interruptions can take a variety of forms and come from a range of sources, including:

...  • Suggesting that group membership is significant (challenge to individualism)

Given the ideology of individualism, whites often respond defensively when linked to other whites as a group or “accused” of collectively benefiting from racism, because as individuals, each white person is “different” from any other white person and expects to be seen as such. This narcissism is not necessarily the result of a consciously held belief that whites are superior to others (although that may play a role), but a result of the white racial insulation ubiquitous in dominant culture (Dawkins, 2004; Frankenberg, Lee & Orfield, 2003); a general white inability to see non-white perspectives as significant, except in sporadic and impotent reflexes, which have little or no long-term momentum or political usefulness (Rich, 1979).

Previous comments in the Facebook thread made by Cameron basically argued this point, and his view point of Individualism vs Collective Responsibility/Guilt was dismissed as a result of White Fragility (as predicted and covered for by the article). 

I don’t think that’s an appropriate conclusion, as there are plenty of non-racist, and even anti-racist reasons to be against the concept of Collective Responsibility/Guilt. In fact, many would consider the idea of Collective Guilt as a form of racism; the most classic example of Collective Guilt is Christians blaming Jewish people as a whole for the death of Jesus, and this is generally considered Antisemitism. Do I think that sentiment is fair to all Jews? No. Do I think that guilt should be carried by all Christians, even if they didn’t individually believe that? No.

Somewhat ironically, ‘White Fragility’ was apparently also the cause of my dislike of the paper (even though I don’t consider my arguments race-related in nature, nor do I think have white privilege, for obvious reasons).

Just within the thread alone, I think it’s fairly evident that the term can and will be used to label and dismiss contrary opinions as a result of indirect or direct racism, even though there is nothing inherently race related about Individualism or holding a paper to burden of proof.

Don’t think this was an intended or likely result of the terminology? In the conclusion of the ‘White Fragility’ article:

Talking directly about white power and privilege, in addition to providing much needed information and shared definitions, is also in itself a powerful interruption of common (and oppressive) discursive patterns around race.

And from the interview:

We have to build our stamina to just be humble and bear witness to the pain we’ve caused.

How the conversation should go

Ideally when someone brings up a racial issue, people will acknowledge it and discuss solutions/self reflect/offer support but instead most white people will instantly jump to 'not me!', 'you are being racist towards white people!', 'Prove it!' or 'Even though your probably right, this one article about it is super weak so yeah, nah' (ok that last one is a bit tongue in cheek but you get the idea :P)

I have to disagree here (or at least, call this incomplete). Firstly, I believe when somebody brings up a racial issue, you first get them to specify what the issue is, then understand it (and if it is indeed racist in nature) before acknowledging it, then you can come up with a solution after identifying causes/effects.

People prematurely jump to conclusions of racism a lot, and every viewpoint should be heard and held to scrutiny, regardless of the race of the person it’s coming from.

Rushing to conclusions

What is generally unhelpful, and often counterproductive is rushing to diagnoses and solutions without the proper leg work, and this isn’t uncommon. 

The ‘Driving While Black’ example in New Jersey had a federal case around racial profiling where they found black and Hispanic drivers were pulled over for speeding more than white drivers, and rushed to the assumption that the cause was racial bias with the police. The police underwent diversity training at this time. 

Eventually. a further study showed using speeding cameras that black drivers in New Jersey were indeed more likely to speed than white drivers, and in fact, the police had been under-profiling the black and Hispanic drivers, meaning if anything they were biased against white drivers. The evidence coming out more recently is also suggesting diversity training had the opposite effects of what was intended. Not only did they get the problem wrong, but they may have made things worse with the wrong solution. 

This is just one example, there’s a *lot* of stats which people read and rush to conclusions of racism without doing the proper legwork. A lot of the Implicit Association Tests done to measure police racism are generally criticized for their methodology being extremely unscientific, and have generally been shown to fail reliability and validity tests (i.e, there’s no proof they even measure racism, or that you would get consistent measurement results if you repeated them multiple times).

Misdiagnosis of race-related issues is one of the worst things to do if you’re actually attempting to resolve them, so I think holding them to scrutiny is very important. ‘Prove it!’ is a very reasonable counter-point when dealing with any specific instance of accused racism. The fact that racism has existed does not prove that a specific grievance was racist in nature, yet people often rush to this conclusion.

I also disagree with classifying the counterpoints/opinions as unhelpful/non-progressive/derailing-the-conversation. When the counterpoint is if the racial issues exist on an Individual level or on a Collective level, that’s not denying the issue exists, it’s a challenge on your framework of understanding the issue. When the counterpoint to “White people should just sit back and listen passively” is “No, I think they should have a voice as well”, that’s very much on topic.

Yes, it’d be great if people would just listen to the other side more and developed more informed opinions and ultimately came up with solutions, but I don’t see how creating a term you can use to invalidate the another side’s opinion is at all helpful for that, and it just seems like one of the biggest things you can do to increase racial tension.

Sources

‘White Fragility’ by Robin DiAngelo

http://libjournal.uncg.edu/ijcp/article/view/249/116

Implicit-Association Tests determining racial bias in police: 

http://time.com/4398505/implicit-association-racism-test/

https://www.wired.com/2015/01/implicit-bias-police-racism-science/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Implicit-association_test

Diversity Training:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diversity_training

https://ethics.harvard.edu/blog/why-diversity-management-backfires-and-how-firms-can-make-it-work

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/on-leadership/wp/2016/07/01/to-improve-diversity-dont-make-people-go-to-diversity-training-really-2/?utm_term=.9ab89db6d0a5

‘Driving While Black’ New Jersey speeding and racial profiling:

https://courses2.cit.cornell.edu/sociallaw/student_projects/DrivingWhileBlack.htm

https://www.aclu.org/news/new-jerseys-victims-racial-profiling-call-justice-and-closure-enough-already-say-advocate

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/21/nyregion/study-suggests-racial-gap-in-speeding-in-new-jersey.html?mcubz=0

[thenightling]

The word Ableist is being used too casually now

A little background.  I am visually impaired.  I have very poor eyesight.  It is considered borderline legally blind.  It’s optic nerve based, glasses will not help.  I can read, can detect color very well.  I just can’t read fine print or see distance very well.  I’m very, very near sighted.   I will never be allowed to drive.   

As a child I dealt with some very real ableism.  In Kindergarten I was allowed on the old rusty jungle gym on the playground but for some reason they thought I would fall off the nice wooden one that all my friends played on.    

My name is Amanda Pike so the song “Three blind Pikes” sung by other kids became a thing.   And “Oh, say can Amanda See...” (to the National Anthem).  At one point my bookbag was stolen and turned up later with the word “Cyclops” sprawled across it in permanent marker.    THIS is Ableism.

Now for what Tumblr does to the term:  

So when I see Tumblr posts ranting that Daredevil (Matt Murdock) is Ableist for calling Punisher crazy I get a little annoyed.   If a blind man calls another man crazy for killing people that’s NOT the blind man being ableist!  “But... But ‘Crazy is an offensive word!”  Pardon the guy being chained up by a killer for not being sensitive enough to gently say “mentally ill.”

Here on Tumblr I was calling Ableist for saying that Rumplestiltskin (who walks with a limp and a cane) in the TV show Once Upon a Time, has a disability.  The reason?   Apparently it’s because the character smashed his own ankle and since he did it to himself that means the character forfeits the right to be considered as having a disability.  And so it’s Ableist to say he has a disability.  

Neil Gaiman was called Ableist on here for correcting the typo of an antisemite who sent him an anti-Jewish rant, somehow unware that Neil Gaiman is Jewish.   HOW the Hell does it count as ableist to correct the typo of an anti-semite?   It’s not just the disabled who make typos and many (with eyesight problems or dyslexia or even learning disabilities) prefer to be corrected, they don’t want mistakes left alone. It’s embarrassing, more embarrassing than being corrected, for most of us. 

Guillermo del Toro was called ableist for having the mute character in The Shape of Water end up with the aquatic man (even though he turns out to be a God...)

He was also called ableist for not casting a real deaf girl in the role, even though the character is mute, not deaf, and finding a mute actress who can dance, swim, and has no modern accoutrements to compensate, uses ASL (American Sign language specifically), and fits the physical body type Guillermo del Toro wanted, is pretty rare.  And I have yet to come across an actual mute person complain about this.  Just able-bodied people bitching in self-righteousness on behalf of those who never asked for it and often LIKE the movie.

“But the disabled girl ended up with a monster!”  No, the woman with a disability ended up with a God.   She had no interest in human men.  And it had nothing to do with her disability.    

Jeremy Renner is being called ableist for a stupid “What?  Speak up?” comment when someone asked him about Hawkeye’s hearing disability.  Was it a bad choice?  Probably, but I don’t think it was done with malicious intent.

My point is when you throw around the term this loosely (and it’s usually perfectly able bodied people doing it, thinking they’re doing a favor to those with disabilities) the term starts to get diminished and lose meaning.