#UpperClass

[podcastgemist]

#294.2 - Reservaat voor rijke mensen? - JACK&JOZEF

Op 29 maart 2025 staan JACK&JOZEF in het Theater https://theateraandeschie.nl/voorstelling/jack-jozef

[kkatastrophic]

GUYS, PLEASE HELP, when I was younger I was an avid reader (for example, I don't know what the word avid means and yet I'm using it in a sentence because I know the context), and I would read alot especially when I was 8 - 11 years old, and my school library had this book series that I LOVED SO MUCH but I can't for the life of me remember the name of the book, or much about it, so if any of you know what I'm talking about please tell meeeee!

. The book was about 2 girls, they were sisters one was around 5 - 9 and the other was around 9 - 12 years of age.

. It was set in england/australia possibly, 1900s because I remember they used horses with coaches and stuff.

. The younger sibling was a troublemaker and always got into mischief, the series revolved around her. She would always try and pin the blame on her older sister.

. The older sibling would tattle on the younger one often.

. I think at one point they had a garden party or something???

. The 2 covers I remember I'm pretty sure where light pink, and light green with a black and white stencil kind of image on it.

. The moment I remember specifically is when the girls younger cousin came to visit with the siblings aunty, and they were out exploring and the cousin (I think her name started with M) got bitten by a rabid dog. After these events, they went to tell the siblings mother, who kept it a secret from their aunty because they didn't want her to worry. A week or so later the cousin (Margot, Margret, smth like that) told them mum and I remember specifically "Mama, I got bitten by a rabid dog (period of time) ago!" and showed the bite mark on her hand/arm and the mum got really worried.

. I also think that the youngest daughter in the first book broke a vase or something.

. Everybody in the story was upperclass kind of rich, and I think the MC used to wear a pink frilly dress.

I know that isn't much to go off of, and the details are brief, but if you know the book/series please tell me because I really want to re-read it! Re-blog to spread this further pleaseee!!!

[thingsfromthehead]

[inkskinned]

one of the things that i think we should pay attention to, socially, about the disney v. desantis thing is that it is really highlighting the importance of remembering nuance.

in a purely neutral sense, if you engage in something problematic, that does not mean you are necessarily agreeing with what makes it problematic. and i am worried that we have become... so afraid of any form of nuance.

disney isn't my friend, they're a corporate monopoly that bastardized copyright laws for their own benefit, ruin the environment, and abuse their workers (... and many other things). this isn't a hypothetical for me - i grew up in florida. i also worked for the actual Walt Disney World; like, in the parks. i am keenly aware of the ways they hurt people, because they hurt me. i fully believe that part of the reason florida is so conservative is because it's been an "open secret" for years now that disney lobbies the government to keep minimum wage down, and i know they worked hard to keep the parks unmasked and open during the worst parts of Covid. they purposefully keep their employees in poverty. they are in part responsible for the way the floridian government works.

desantis is still, by a margin that is frankly daunting, way worse. the alternative here isn't just "republicans win", it's actual fascism.

in a case like this, where the alternative is to allow actual fascism into united states legislation - where, if desantis wins, there are huge and legal ramifications - it's tempting to minimize the harm disney is also doing, because... well, it's not fascism. but disney isn't the good guy, either, which means republicans are having a field day asking activists oh, so you think their treatment of their employees is okay?

we have been trained there is a right answer. you're right! you're in the good group, and you're winning at having an opinion.

except i have the Internet Prophecy that in 2-3 months, even left-wing people will be ripping apart activists for having "taken disney's side". aren't i an anti-capitalist? aren't i pro-union? aren't i one of the good ones? removed from context and nuance (that in this particular situation i am forced to side with disney, until an other option reveals itself), my act of being like "i hope they have goofy rip his throat out onstage, shaking his lifeless body like a dog toy" - how quickly does that seem like i actually do support disney?

and what about you! at home, reading this. are you experiencing the Thought Crime of... actually liking some of the things disney has made? your memories of days at the parks, or of good movies, or of your favorite show growing up. maybe you are also evil, if you ever enjoyed anything, ever, at all.

to some degree, the binary idealization/vilification of individual motive and meaning already exists in the desantis case. i have seen people saying not to go to the disney pride events because they're cash grabs (they are). i've seen people saying you have to go because they're a way to protest. there isn't a lot of internet understanding of nuance. instead it's just "good show of support" or "evil bootlicking."

this binary understanding is how you can become radicalized. when we fear nuance and disorder, we're allowing ourselves the safety of assuming that the world must exist in binary - good or bad, problematic or "not" problematic. and unfortunately, bigots want you to see the world in this binary ideal. they want you to get mad at me because "disney is taking a risk for our community but you won't sing their praises" and they want me to get mad at you for not respecting the legit personal trauma that disney forced me through.

in a grander scheme outside of disney: what happens is a horrific splintering within activist groups. we bicker with each other about minimal-harm minimal-impact ideologies, like which depiction of bisexuality is the most-true. we gratuitously analyze the personal lives of activists for any sign they might be "problematic". we get spooked because someone was in a dog collar at pride. we wring our hands about setting an empty shopping mall on fire. we tell each other what words we may identify ourselves by. we get fuckin steven universe disk horse when in reality it is a waste of our collective time.

the bigots want you to spend all your time focusing on how pristine and pretty you and your interests are. they want us at each other's throats instead of hand in hand. they want to say see? nothing is ever fucking good enough for these people.

and they want their followers to think in binary as well - a binary that's much easier to follow. see, in our spaces, we attack each other over "proper" behavior. but in bigoted groups? they attack outwards. they have someone they hate, and it is us. they hate you, specifically, and you are why they have problems - not the other people in their group. and that's a part of how they fucking keep winning.

some of the things that are beloved to you have a backbone in something terrible. the music industry is a wasteland. the publishing industry is a bastion of white supremacy. video games run off of unpaid labor and abuse.

the point of activism was always to bring to light that abuse and try to stop it from happening, not to condemn those who engage in the content that comes from those industries. "there is no ethical consumption under late capitalism" also applies to media. your childhood (and maybe current!) love of the little mermaid isn't something you should now flinch from, worried you'll be a "disney adult". wanting the music industry to change for the better does not require that you reject all popular music until that change occurs. you can acknowledge the harm something might cause - and celebrate the love that it has brought into your life.

we must detach an acknowledgment of nuance from a sense of shame and disgust. we must. punishing individual people for their harmless passions is not doing good work. encouraging more thoughtful, empathetic consumption does not mean people should feel ashamed of their basic human capacities and desires. it should never have even been about the individual when the corporation is so obviously the actual evil. this sense that we must live in shame and dread of our personal nuances - it just makes people bitter and hopeless. do you have any idea how scared i am to post this? to just acknowledge the idea of nuance? that i might like something nuanced, and engage in it joyfully? and, at the same time, that i'm brutally aware of the harm that they're doing?

"so what do i do?" ... well, often there isn't a right answer. i mean in this case, i hope mickey chops off ron's head and then does a little giggle. but truth be told, often our opinions on nuanced subjects will differ. you might be able to engage in things that i can't because the nuance doesn't sit right with me. i might think taylor swift is a great performer and a lot of fun, and you might be like "raquel, the jet fuel emissions". we are both correct; neither of us have any actual sway in this. and i think it's important to remember that - the actual scope of individual responsibility. like, i also love going to the parks. Thunder Mountain is so fun. you (just a person) are not responsible for the harm that Disney (the billion dollar corporation) caused me. i don't know. i think it's possible to both enjoy your memories and interrogate the current state of their employment policies.

there is no right way to interrogate or engage with nuance - i just hope you embrace it readily.

[arliedraws]

It’s been a hot sec since we talked about why there are so many single-child pureblood families in HP. With the notable exceptions of the Weasleys, the Blacks, and the Gaunts, most of the families in the magical world have only one child. While I understand that upper class folks likely don’t want to split assets between their children, I do think it’s silly that they would complain about pureblood lineages dying out and then refuse to reproduce. (Then again, it does seem very privileged to declare that Muggleborns are the problem, not purebloods, which I suppose would make sense.)

I like to think that magical families struggle with infertility. It took years for the Potters to have James, and they’d almost given up when Mrs. Potter finally became pregnant. This, I think, would really propel a great fear amongst pure-blood families that they were dying out because they just weren’t reproducing quickly enough.

Two notable families, however were having children: The Blacks and the Weasleys. For the Blacks, this would definitely add to their superiority complex. While other pureblood families are struggling to produce children, they have plenty (but the wrong gender or they die before having children). Then you have the Weasleys—they’re spitting out child after child. I would imagine the pureblood community hates them because not only are they reproducing, they’re not the RIGHT type of pureblood.

This is partially why I see the Blacks fawning over their children and expecting the most out of them. And why Sirius’s “disloyalty” is a horrific betrayal—but also, this is why he is never fully disowned. They just cannot afford to lose him.

Yet I like to think that Muggle-borns and half-bloods can have children at a typical rate. This is why Ron and Hermione have their two and Harry and Ginny have their trio. Do I think this theory holds up in court? No. But I think it would add a layer to the pureblood panic.

[lainalit]

you know, you say we should feel like we're all one people, but whenever it rains, we're the ones that get wet. - Ekko from Arcane season 2 episode 3

A perfect summary of Rhysand's performative progressive reign over the Night Court, where he talks about unity and whatnot, but in the end, the Illyrians and Hewn City citizens are always the ones who have to sacrifice themselves for his utopian city 

[drewpicturesani]

The Traveller

So Chants of Sennaar is a good game-

[supersoftly]

you can simultaneously dislike your country and the CCP btw, you don't have to shill for one if you dislike the other js

[wishchip106]

that feeling when you find an old english pub in the exact location you need it

[oifaaa]

the canon relationship of Jason and Alfred, is it a bit, idk what the word it, but antagonistic? I’ve seen panels of, post-Jason’s death when the bats are rewriting Jason’s narrative, yk where they’re claiming he was always angry or bad and that Bruce saved him from a life of crime, where Alfred is 100% on board the shit on Jason train. And pre-death Jason panels, I don’t remember seeing much of Alfred ones, just ones of dick and Jason and Jason and Bruce. Was Alfred’s opinion of Jason more or less the same? Fanon rlly warped Alfred&Jason into something near unrecognizable huh 😂

See the issue with Alfred and I've mentioned this before is that he's really just there to be what ever the current writer wants him to be so the way he acts can change drastically depending on who's writing him which means at times he can be nice to Jason even in canon we'll see the two of them bond or there's one time where alfred goes out of his way to save jason but then other times he's talking about jason being horrible and not worth bruces time and it's funny bc it just makes Alfred look worse imo like he's really two faced being nice to Jason's face but then instantly turning around and going ugh disgusting poor person

[girl4music]

Speaking of parallels between Powder/Jinx and Caitlyn, has anyone picked up on the inexperienced at parkour one yet? Not that it means very much. I just thought it was an obvious one. Showing Vi going full rough and tumble Assassin’s Creed leaping and acrobating over those rooftops and then just immediately cutting to Powder/Jinx and Caitlyn attempting to not fall and die.

[goddessofroyalty]

I've been rotating the omegaverse AGSZC pack idea I had recently where Genesis is the Head Omega and Sephiroth the Head Alpha but mated pairs are Genesis-Angeal and Sephiroth-Cloud. Specifically how Genesis and Cloud's relationship would have developed over time and I've decided Genesis' opinion about Cloud basically goes:

When Genesis is first introduced to Cloud and assumes Cloud is going to end up Zack's mate: What an adorable little omega Zack has found, so cute and naive, how fun.

When he realises that Cloud's actually going to end up Sephiroth's mate: That is a Threat to my position and I will get rid of him through whatever means if necessary.

After he actually gets to know Cloud: Unfortunately I like him and understand what Sephiroth sees in him. He can stick around.

[good-to-drive]

Sometimes I don't understand how people can not understand George and then I remember not everyone grew up Catholic

[laurasimonsdaughter]

Ironically, I think one fairy tale antagonist (namely, the bad sister from Diamonds and Toads) could actually have benefitted from one of the Terrible Tales morals (specifically that of Rapunzel, which is, "If envy makes you a nasty thug, your only friend will be a slug.").

Hahaha, that is certainly more to the point than the (second) moral Perrault gave for The Fairies/Diamonds and Toads:

Though -- when otherwise inclined -- It's a trouble to be kind, Often it will bring you good When you least believed it could.

But then Perrault's fairy tales are a meant to be flowery, and so are his morals. I think if you tried to add a moral to some of the Grimms' more overtly moral tales, it would end up like:

"Do you understand?? The kind, hardworking girl was showered with GOLD and the mean, lazy girl was showered with TAR. This is symbolism. Those who are GOOD will be REWARDED and those who are BAD will be PUNISHED. What do you mean this has to rhyme? Rhyming would obfuscate the Important Lesson."

[ningningkittie]